Does evolution take faith?

[Nilloc James]

I heard this,

"you use just as much faith to beleive in evolution"

Questions for debate;

Does it take faith to beleive evolution?

Does it take faith to beleive genisis?

Does it take faith to beleive intelligiant design?

Which takes the most faith?

[Intrepidman]

Intrepidman

Well, how do you explain the facts???

Grumpy

Which facts?

[Intrepidman]

I take it you are not familar with William Henry Johnson AKA Zip the Pinhead.

Not WHJ, but somewhat familiar with microcephaly. I stand by my initial statement as a legitimate point at the time, but do accept (and 'preciate) the extra images you've offered help you point out this individual's peculiar characteristics.

No worries, you presented a reasonable concern in a respectful way. I think the photo I posted was a promotional photo from his time as a side-show freak, so of course they would choose a camera angle to maximize the appearance of his features.

I also accept that what fossil skulls we have could very well be deformed (though lack evidence they are). I'm curious to know if each and every known fossil skull is deformed.

I don't know.

I really hope this page does not represent all of the skulls that have been found. If so, it would be quite easy to dismiss them as being deformed people suffering from one malady or another. Or, since many of them are woefully incomplete, where they are filling in the blanks, they are in error(Homo habilis, especially). (A couple could be extinct (possibly deformed) apes as well, like Aegyptopithecus, Australopithecus robustus, or Australopithecus aethiopicus, just a guess)

http://www.archaeologyinfo.com/oh24.htm

Back to the OP, I contend, on a totality of evidence, the ToE is much closer to legitimacy than the Genesis accounts, and require far less "faith", and much, much more science than do Biblical tales.

(edit for tags)

I think the problem with the OP is that it is a poorly worded question.

What is the standard measure of faith? A millifaith? Is it possible to speak intelligently of something requiring more of something without a standard measure of that something and a way to measure that something?

But, if a millifaith has an infinite value (because faith implies that we can't know for certain) then the amount of faith would be equal even if evolution required 1 millifaith and creation required 1000 millifaiths.

[Grumpy]

Intrepidman

Which facts?

The incovienient ones you sidestepped.

Grumpy

[Intrepidman]

Intrepidman

Which facts?

The incovienient ones you sidestepped.

Grumpy

I don't recall intentionally sidestepping any facts. I do recall this post by you:

All that aside, you have only avoided addressing the rest of my post, nice sidestep there.

Which seems to point to this post by you:

Intrepidman

Interesting picture of a Native American, as well as an interesting pose that attenuates the differences in morphology between them and Europeans. But even with those differences, there is much greater differences between ANY modern human and one from, say, even one hundred thousand years ago, as there are even greater differences between that specimen and one from half a million years. There are no humans to be found at all 4 million years ago, but there was at least one species of ape that walked upright and before 8 million years even that ape is nowhere to be seen. No apes at all are found in 20 million year strata, the closest thing found is a lemurlike species. At and before 69 million years ago the only Mammals extant were monotremes(like the duckbill platapus) and ratlike rodents. At 300 million there were only reptiles, amphibians, insects, fish and crabs(plus numerous other small creatures). Before 450 million, only fish and other creatures living in water(but ther MAY have been some insects on land). Before 800 million years, the only life was single celled life existing for almost 3 billion years.

These are the facts, they are not theories. Those of us not afraid to face these facts do have theories to explain these facts. Do you???

Grumpy Cool

Are these the 'facts' you wish for me to address?

[Grumpy]

Intrepidman

Are these the 'facts' you wish for me to address?

Duh.

Grumpy

[Beto]

For years paleontologists thought the coelacanth became extinct about 70 million years ago, since they found no fossil remains of the fish in deposits formed later than the Cretaceous period.

At least they thought that was the case until December 1938, when a fishing trawler captured a living coelacanth off the eastern coast of South Africa. Scientists were stunned.

Perhaps, but not in the way you're implying. Absolutely no part of the theory of evolution is challenged by it.

After all, the discovery was akin to finding a living dinosaur in a remote patch of jungle.

In a manner of speaking. It was akin to finding a living "dinosaur" without an exact genus match in the fossil record, which is the case for the living coelacanths. It's still no contradiction to the Theory of Evolution, it just means we would've missed that modern species. We keep finding new ones, in case you didn't know. Regardless, you have other examples, such as the shark. The Great White is very similar to its supposed ancestor of some 18 million years ago, the Megalodon, which was basically bigger. As far as I'm concerned, finding a coelacanth wasn't "stunning" at all, but that's just me. I understand why the scientists would be excited about it.

I won't go into theories about the "flood" with you... that horse is basically a big pile of mush at this point.

[Tuff]

I heard this,

"you use just as much faith to believe in evolution"

Questions for debate;

Does it take faith to beleive evolution?

Does it take faith to beleive genisis?

Does it take faith to beleive intelligiant design?

Which takes the most faith?

I don't see how it takes faith to believe in Evolution. There's actual proof of evolution. There is not of Genesis, God, Noah's ark, etc.

I guess it would take faith to believe in say, The Big Bang, but not evolution. That's just viewing the evidence, and making a sound call. You could also, to a lesser extent, say it takes faith to believe we all evolved from amino acids or a much simpler lifeform. Those things have some evidence, but are not 100% proven. I do think they have farm more evidence for them than the bible, however. Thus, I think the faith label still belongs on the religious side of things.

[Gonzo]

I don't see how it takes faith to believe in Evolution. There's actual proof of evolution. There is not of Genesis, God, Noah's ark, etc.

I guess it would take faith to believe in say, The Big Bang, but not evolution. That's just viewing the evidence, and making a sound call. You could also, to a lesser extent, say it takes faith to believe we all evolved from amino acids or a much simpler lifeform. Those things have some evidence, but are not 100% proven. I do think they have farm more evidence for them than the bible, however. Thus, I think the faith label still belongs on the religious side of things.

I agree. I don't see why it's so hard to understand natural selection. Traits that increase reproductive fitness in an environment will become more prominent in a population, where as those that hinder such or aren't as beneficial to further reproduction will diminish overtime. Why is that so hard to comprehend?

[Grumpy]

Gonzo

Why is that so hard to comprehend?

It isn't, if you are not actively lying to yourself about what the facts are because it would destroy YOUR INTERPRETATION(not you, but a creationist) of what the Bible means. That your interpretation might be at fault, that you might be wrong about what the Bible means, that what you have been told all your life is a pack of lies, that what you have practiced all your life has been wrong, etc.

Creationists are desperately trying to hold out the world and reality because to acknowledge the facts means to acknowledge that they have been monstrously wrong in their entire world view, it would all come crumbling down. This would not be easy for anyone.

But the creationists only have themselves to blame, the reality of evolution has been known for over 150 years. In the evolution of religious thought they took a wrong turn and, if they continue, are in danger of extinction. There religion is an social evolutionary dead end. They recognize that if they cannot stop the teaching of evolution in the public schools that there will be fewer and fewer people ignorant enough to buy their lies, thus fewer believers in their religious views. That is why the rise in home schooling and Christian schools, dooming their own children to live with the same ignorance of reality they themselves suffer from, and insuring their own children's limited ability to pursue careers in many fields, an evil in and of itself.

Grumpy

[Clownboat]

Which takes the most faith?[/quote]

I don't see how it takes faith to believe in Evolution. There's actual proof of evolution. There is not of Genesis, God, Noah's ark, etc.

I guess it would take faith to believe in say, The Big Bang, but not evolution. That's just viewing the evidence, and making a sound call. You could also, to a lesser extent, say it takes faith to believe we all evolved from amino acids or a much simpler lifeform. Those things have some evidence, but are not 100% proven. I do think they have farm more evidence for them than the bible, however. Thus, I think the faith label still belongs on the religious side of things.[/quote]


Very well put! I believe that this would be hard argument to disagree with logically.