Why Evolution is True and Why Many People Still Don?t Believe It

[cthulhu_waves]

It's a bit long (1 hour) but it's worth it.

Jerry Coyne, professor of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago, reviews the evidence for evolutionary theory and why Americans (in particular) are so resistant to accepting evolution as fact.

[purecane]

life came from the sea..."people" were introduced by extraterrestrials. the "missing link" is our specific DNA code.

[TheSquealer]

Originally Posted by purecane73

life came from the sea..."people" were introduced by extraterrestrials..

Finally, a little common sense in the discussion.

[seeandsee]

i think there are some missing parts in Evolution and chains that follow up to this era...

[Best-In-BC]

no comment

[MaDalton]

Originally Posted by purecane73

life came from the sea..."people" were introduced by extraterrestrials. the "missing link" is our specific DNA code.

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

Finally, a little common sense in the discussion.

[Si]

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

Finally, a little common sense in the discussion.

Cosmological brainfart.

[adendreams]

I am not aware that there is much resistance to the Fact of Evolution - only some small pockets of crazed religious cults like the evangelical christians, they have high voter turnout so the Republican party panders to them and Fox Fake News carries their water - but debate about evolution among thinking intelligent people was over decades ago.

[_Richard_]

the same results as 30 years ago?

something tells me they should be calling more than 1000 people..

[Scott McD]

[RebelR]

Originally Posted by cthulhu_waves

It's a bit long (1 hour) but it's worth it.

Jerry Coyne, professor of Ecology and Evolution at the University of Chicago, reviews the evidence for evolutionary theory and why Americans (in particular) are so resistant to accepting evolution as fact.

Evolution is exactly what your description says.. A Theory. There are many theories as to where we came from, but Theories are just best guesses until something else comes along that discredits the theory and we all take another guess based on the most current evidence.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by RebelR

Evolution is exactly what your description says.. A Theory. There are many theories as to where we came from, but Theories are just best guesses until something else comes along that discredits the theory and we all take another guess based on the most current evidence.

next you're gonna be telling us gravity is just a theory, too

..and the sun runs on nuclear fission, even if the surface is at an estimated 5000 degrees Celsius

[Si]

Originally Posted by RebelR

Evolution is exactly what your description says.. A Theory. There are many theories as to where we came from, but Theories are just best guesses until something else comes along that discredits the theory and we all take another guess based on the most current evidence.

except biology naturally provides you with evidence of evolution ever day of your life.

Anyway, we should be using the term "natural selection" these days. We didn't stricly "evolve" from anything. It wasn't a physical action.

[Si]

Originally Posted by purecane73

life came from the sea..."people" were introduced by extraterrestrials. the "missing link" is our specific DNA code.

Elaborate.

[billbailey]

Originally Posted by RebelR

Evolution is exactly what your description says.. A Theory. There are many theories as to where we came from, but Theories are just best guesses until something else comes along that discredits the theory and we all take another guess based on the most current evidence.

Not sure if you'r trolling/joking but the word theory means something different scientifically than it does when most people use it. It is a theory, it is also a fact.

http://www.notjustatheory.com/

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by billbailey

Not sure if you'r trolling/joking but the word theory means something different scientifically than it does when most people use it. It is a theory, it is also a fact.

http://www.notjustatheory.com/

that.. is a very layman way of going about the explanation of it

and in the end, it's still a theory.

[purecane]

Originally Posted by Si

Elaborate.

A major difference between the two genomes (chimps and humans) is human chromosome 2, which is equivalent to a fusion product of chimpanzee chromosomes 12 and 13 (later renamed to chromosomes 2A and 2B, respectively).

All members of Hominidae except humans, Neanderthals, and Denisovans have 24 pairs of chromosomes. Humans have only 23 pairs of chromosomes. Human chromosome 2 is widely accepted to be a result of an end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes.

why do they keep saying "fusion"??? what exactly was combined with champanzee dna to "create" humans?????

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by purecane73

A major difference between the two genomes (chimps and humans) is human chromosome 2, which is equivalent to a fusion product of chimpanzee chromosomes 12 and 13 (later renamed to chromosomes 2A and 2B, respectively).

All members of Hominidae except humans, Neanderthals, and Denisovans have 24 pairs of chromosomes. Humans have only 23 pairs of chromosomes. Human chromosome 2 is widely accepted to be a result of an end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes.

why do they keep saying "fusion"??? what exactly was combined with champanzee dna to "create" humans?????

nicely done.

[RebelR]

Originally Posted by billbailey

Not sure if you'r trolling/joking but the word theory means something different scientifically than it does when most people use it. It is a theory, it is also a fact.

http://www.notjustatheory.com/

Nope wasn't trolling at all. I regard science as I do religion. Created by man and thus it's fallible. At many different times in history. Scientists have had theories that were hypothesized, tested, and widely accepted as being the most accurate explanation by most of the scientific community, only to be rejected later as new evidence and new forms of testing become available.

Is it possible that we evolved from primordial ooze? Sure. But as of yet they haven't found the definitive missing link between apes and humans. For all we know an alien named "god" decided earth was his 10th grade science project and decided to play legos with DNA. He waited until the last night because he's a procrastinator (which could be the equivalent of 1 Gregorian calendar week to us) and ran out of ideas on what to do with the platypus. Sure .. that's possible too. There's less evidence to support it, but I can't exclude it either because Science cannot definitively say with 100% certainty that Humans evolved from apes.

[rowan]

I noticed the other day that my daughter was given a book called "God Created The Dinosaurs"

Now that's fucked up.

[SilentKnight]

Originally Posted by purecane73

A major difference between the two genomes (chimps and humans) is human chromosome 2, which is equivalent to a fusion product of chimpanzee chromosomes 12 and 13 (later renamed to chromosomes 2A and 2B, respectively).

All members of Hominidae except humans, Neanderthals, and Denisovans have 24 pairs of chromosomes. Humans have only 23 pairs of chromosomes. Human chromosome 2 is widely accepted to be a result of an end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes.

why do they keep saying "fusion"??? what exactly was combined with champanzee dna to "create" humans?????

You'll suddenly 'vanish' if you learn the answer.

[NewNick]

Originally Posted by RebelR

Evolution is exactly what your description says.. A Theory. There are many theories as to where we came from, but Theories are just best guesses until something else comes along that discredits the theory and we all take another guess based on the most current evidence.

FUCK.

You learn a lot about people when they say shit like that.

[Best-In-BC]

Evolution is fact morons.

.
.
.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by NewNick

FUCK.

You learn a lot about people when they say shit like that.

indeed.

who will believe anything if enough people believe it too.

[MaDalton]

i do like platypus.. (whats actually the plural - platypussies? platypusse?)

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by MaDalton

i do like platypus.. (whats actually the plural - platypussies? platypusse?)

it's strongly encouraged to make it up on the spot..

up there with 'onians & ites'

nothing funnier than saying 'Coloradorites' in the middle of a bunch of Coloradoanians

[Si]

Originally Posted by purecane73

A major difference between the two genomes (chimps and humans) is human chromosome 2, which is equivalent to a fusion product of chimpanzee chromosomes 12 and 13 (later renamed to chromosomes 2A and 2B, respectively).

All members of Hominidae except humans, Neanderthals, and Denisovans have 24 pairs of chromosomes. Humans have only 23 pairs of chromosomes. Human chromosome 2 is widely accepted to be a result of an end-to-end fusion of two ancestral chromosomes.

why do they keep saying "fusion"??? what exactly was combined with champanzee dna to "create" humans?????

So if 2 other forms of hominid also have only 23 pairs of chromosomes, what does that then suggest? The "creator" played around with a few other species?

Also, how does something need to be combined with Champanzee DNA? It clearly says 2 genes fused together, not that they were "glued" together or that something was added to make the 2 genes fuse.

I need to dig into this deeper I think, it's certainly interesting.

[Si]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

it's strongly encouraged to make it up on the spot..

up there with 'onians & ites'

nothing funnier than saying 'Coloradorites' in the middle of a bunch of Coloradoanians

They're Coloradans are they not?

Liverpudlians, Mancunians, and Londoners also worth note.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by Si

Liverpudlians, .

just about lost it

[purecane]

Originally Posted by Si

So if 2 other forms of hominid also have only 23 pairs of chromosomes, what does that then suggest? The "creator" played around with a few other species?

Also, how does something need to be combined with Champanzee DNA? It clearly says 2 genes fused together, not that they were "glued" together or that something was added to make the 2 genes fuse.

I need to dig into this deeper I think, it's certainly interesting.

Very interesting indeed. I'm not saying my theory is right, I'm just saying that it seems that even science doesn't have the answer.

[_Richard_]

Originally Posted by purecane73

Very interesting indeed. I'm not saying my theory is right, I'm just saying that it seems that even science doesn't have the answer.

furthermore, the differences in the language centers etc.. hard to say evolution, when there is plenty of other examples of evolution with dna only 2% different than ours

[OneHungLo]

Originally Posted by purecane73

life came from the sea..."people" were introduced by extraterrestrials. the "missing link" is our specific DNA code.

[Si]

Originally Posted by _Richard_

just about lost it

It's great isn't it? That's the PC term for scousers

Originally Posted by purecane73

Very interesting indeed. I'm not saying my theory is right, I'm just saying that it seems that even science doesn't have the answer.

Yeah! It will give me something else interesting to research and read about anyway

I quite like the theory that a mateor (not by design) crashed into Earth, bringing with it some form of life that then led to what we have today via natural selection. It's not the most plausible theory.

That theory above is also another talking point I've heard a bit about recently. That our planet could, and probably has been frequently getting dumped on by asteroids that may carry foreign life and/or foreign material in general.

[nikki99]

book of Genesis, holy bible

[NewbieNudes]

it's just so fucked up that people what ever their beliefs don't do just one simple thing - let their children decide for themselves.

Instead we have children from parents of all beliefs brainwashed into their parents belief!!!

Based on all the available evidence - if a child is allowed to make their own mind up, they will most likely be agnostic - that is to say - they will say I don't know..

[Gerco]

https://youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=-AS6rQtiEh8


Nuff said.

[Jim_Gunn]

Originally Posted by RebelR

Nope wasn't trolling at all. I regard science as I do religion. Created by man and thus it's fallible. At many different times in history. Scientists have had theories that were hypothesized, tested, and widely accepted as being the most accurate explanation by most of the scientific community, only to be rejected later as new evidence and new forms of testing become available.

Is it possible that we evolved from primordial ooze? Sure. But as of yet they haven't found the definitive missing link between apes and humans. For all we know an alien named "god" decided earth was his 10th grade science project and decided to play legos with DNA. He waited until the last night because he's a procrastinator (which could be the equivalent of 1 Gregorian calendar week to us) and ran out of ideas on what to do with the platypus. Sure .. that's possible too. There's less evidence to support it, but I can't exclude it either because Science cannot definitively say with 100% certainty that Humans evolved from apes.

Scientists know for 100% certainty that humans did NOT evolve from apes. Humans and modern day apes both evolved from common ape-like ancestors. And there are numerous skeletons in museums of human ancestors and other related hominids from the recent and not so recent past. Not to mention all the DNA and mountains of other evidence. A quick look at a chimpanzee and of yourself in the mirror and you'd be insane not to think you were related.

[RebelR]

Originally Posted by Jim_Gunn

Scientists know for 100% certainty that humans did NOT evolve from apes. Humans and modern day apes both evolved from common ape-like ancestors. And there are numerous skeletons in museums of human ancestors and other related hominids from the recent and not so recent past. Not to mention all the DNA and mountains of other evidence. A quick look at a chimpanzee and of yourself in the mirror and you'd be insane not to think you were related.

Agreed, I don't doubt that we have a common ancestor, and that similarities in DNA certainly suggest that. My beef is more in how the original statement was presented. Science likes to suggest in absolutes. But theories are not absolute. They are the best suggested explanation based on the current set of evidence. Should it arise that the method or the evidence is flawed, then the theory is either set aside or reworked. And you have to leave room for that possibility. It's healthy to ask questions and be skeptical. These days people are spoon-fed science and asked not to question anything.. much like in the past when religious leaders did the same.. and still do.

[Si]

Originally Posted by RebelR

Agreed, I don't doubt that we have a common ancestor, and that similarities in DNA certainly suggest that. My beef is more in how the original statement was presented. Science likes to suggest in absolutes. But theories are not absolute. They are the best suggested explanation based on the current set of evidence. Should it arise that the method or the evidence is flawed, then the theory is either set aside or reworked. And you have to leave room for that possibility. It's healthy to ask questions and be skeptical. These days people are spoon-fed science and asked not to question anything.. much like in the past when religious leaders did the same.. and still do.

"Science doesn't know everything, if it did, it would stop!"

It's not a hypothesis that evolution and natural selection exist. There is a mountain of evidence for it. Look at the way dog and cat breeders can create new species for an example. This may be a forced method, but it proves the way in which these things can come about.

You say you hate the way science likes to deal in absolutes, I don't think it does until something has been 100% proven. It seems like you're trying to make science sound like religion, "dealing in absolutes" and "spoon feeding people".

Did you ever work on animals during science class? Or work on Kidneys, or see a heart etc in Biology? I'm just curious. It's not as if you have to rely on an old book alone as the reason to believe in a scientific theory. There is no "bible" to Science, is all I'm saying.

If you don't like being "spoon-fed" something, you can always learn things yourself, but it would take you decades to gather the same amount of knowledge.

[purecane]

Originally Posted by nikki99

book of Genesis, holy bible

The first part of the apocryphal Book of Enoch expands and interprets Genesis 6:1. It explains that the "sons of God" were a group of 200 "angels" called "Watchers". Against God's wishes, these Watchers descended to Earth to breed with humans. Their offspring are the Nephilim, "giants" who "consumed all the acquisitions of men". When humans could no longer sustain the Nephilim, they turned against humanity. The Watchers also instructed humans in metallurgy and metalworking, cosmetics, sorcery, astrology, astronomy and meteorology. God then ordered the Watchers to be imprisoned in the ground. He created the Great Flood to rid Earth of the Nephilim and of the humans who had been given knowledge by the Watchers. However, to ensure humanity's survival, Noah is forewarned of the oncoming destruction. Because they disobeyed God, the book also describes the Watchers as "fallen angels".

you were saying?

[NewbieNudes]

That is a great video, especially the analysis in the last 20 minutes

[All1]

Originally Posted by nikki99

book of Genesis, holy bible

Retard tranny, living proof

[Si]

Originally Posted by Gerco

https://youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=-AS6rQtiEh8


Nuff said.

Didn't even take her 10 minutes to start using the same religion and conspiracy theory favourite "ad hominen" defense.

[slapass]

Originally Posted by adendreams

I am not aware that there is much resistance to the Fact of Evolution - only some small pockets of crazed religious cults like the evangelical christians, they have high voter turnout so the Republican party panders to them and Fox Fake News carries their water - but debate about evolution among thinking intelligent people was over decades ago.

This

[Grapesoda]

if average IQ is 100 then 50% of the people around you at any given time have an IQ less than 100.. so you're surprised by this?

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Jim_Gunn

Scientists know for 100% certainty that humans did NOT evolve from apes. Humans and modern day apes both evolved from common ape-like ancestors. And there are numerous skeletons in museums of human ancestors and other related hominids from the recent and not so recent past. Not to mention all the DNA and mountains of other evidence. A quick look at a chimpanzee and of yourself in the mirror and you'd be insane not to think you were related.

here ya go Mr. Gunn

[Si]

Originally Posted by Grapesoda

if average IQ is 100 then 50% of the people around you at any given time have an IQ less than 100.. so you're surprised by this?

Could be more than 50% or Less.

80, 81, 82, 83, 94, 150, 100, 99, 103, 120, 110, 89, 92, 99, 109, 112. average = 100.1875

7 above 100. 9 below 100.

[Ferus]

You are kidding yourself, if you think you can argue with reason and science, to those that believe in creationism.

Let people believe what they want, but make sure the information is out there/available to them, and let them make up their own mind, or change it if they want to.

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Si

Could be more than 50% or Less.

80, 81, 82, 83, 94, 150, 100, 99, 103, 120, 110, 89, 92, 99, 109, 112. average = 100.1875

7 above 100. 9 below 100.

influx of immigrants are lowering the average nationwide..

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Ferus

You are kidding yourself, if you think you can argue with reason and science, to those that believe in creationism.

Let people believe what they want, but make sure the information is out there/available to them, and let them make up their own mind, or change it if they want to.

why argue all? nothing to prove...