Do you believe in evolution?

[CyberCubed]

Spoiler for Large Image:

Modern homosapiens evolved from a common ancestor with homo erectus and homo habilis as we split on an evolutionary scale with the great ape.

[neatoman]

Uh... Yes? I doubt there are many creationists here, so unless they're trolls, I don't think you'll get a lot of people saying no.

Anyway, pretending this is a serious question and that there wouldn't be a consensus here, Darwinian evolution is absolutely a natural phenomenon. Not only have genetic links and transitional fossils proven that, it's also been demonstrated in a laboratory environment with fruit flies.
https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolu...or-speciation/

[IndigoErth]

Yup. Were it not true I imagine species would be a lot more randomly different than they are. But some specific individual adaptations aside, the basic body plan of most vertebrates (esp the land-dwelling ones) are largely the same. Most vertebrates didn't all just randomly independently decide that 5 digits on each foot/hand was best, that a rib cage, spine, and pelvis were a good idea, etc... We're all descended from creatures that evolved that way and we all kept it because it still works for us. (Then felines and canines and some select others decided that fewer toes worked for them, but five is still the common number for most species.) Even a turtle has a no-longer-flexible spine still fused to the inside of that shell, because great-grandma and grandpa proto-turtle were once regular shell-less vertebrates.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

No I don't, because one type of animal changing into another cannot be witnessed by the naked eye. It may be speculation with a lot of natural phenomena used as supporting evidence (fossil record, genetic similarities), but in the end it is still mere speculation.

[Bahamut810]

Considering we see it every year when we have to get new flu shots, when we have to have conversations about how bacteria is becoming resistant to anti-biotics and use it constantly to make better yields in our crops and domestic animals...

Yes. Yes I do.

[CyberCubed]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

No I don't, because one type of animal changing into another cannot be witnessed by the naked eye.

[Monty Mole]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

No I don't, because one type of animal changing into another cannot be witnessed by the naked eye. It may be speculation with a lot of natural phenomena used as supporting evidence (fossil record, genetic similarities), but in the end it is still mere speculation.

Do you believe the earth is flat too?

[Bahamut810]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

No I don't, because one type of animal changing into another cannot be witnessed by the naked eye. It may be speculation with a lot of natural phenomena used as supporting evidence (fossil record, genetic similarities), but in the end it is still mere speculation.

Genuine question: How do you justify that statement when there is witnessed and documented controlled evolution (selective breeding). You can get on google and look up pictures of Pugs for instance and see pictures of the steps of the progress that we put them through to their current state with the flat noses. There are a countless other examples where we put evolution on the fast path, mostly for the reason of feeding people (like my prior statement of bacterial resistance)

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Originally Posted by Monty Mole

Do you believe the earth is flat too?

Na.

Originally Posted by Bahamut810

Genuine question: How do you justify that statement when there is witnessed and documented controlled evolution (selective breeding). You can get on google and look up pictures of Pugs for instance and see pictures of the steps of the progress that we put them through to their current state with the flat noses. There are a countless other examples where we put evolution on the fast path, mostly for the reason of feeding people (like my prior statement of bacterial resistance)

The dogs achieved through controlled breeding are still dogs, we don't see them evolve into a different type of animal.

[ChosenOne]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

No I don't, because one type of animal changing into another cannot be witnessed by the naked eye. It may be speculation with a lot of natural phenomena used as supporting evidence (fossil record, genetic similarities), but in the end it is still mere speculation.

My goodness, this is... Something else.

To answer the question: yes, I do, but it's not so much a matter of belief as it is of cold, hard facts. Evolution is still there whether the ignorant believe it or not. And their existence in turn proves that it's not an overnight process.

[neatoman]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

No I don't, because one type of animal changing into another cannot be witnessed by the naked eye. It may be speculation with a lot of natural phenomena used as supporting evidence (fossil record, genetic similarities), but in the end it is still mere speculation.

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

The dogs achieved through controlled breeding are still dogs, we don't see them evolve into a different type of animal.

Well, a creationist is indeed here... Interesting.

Well, as I have already noted, speciation has actually been observed in fruit flies in laboratory tests, so it is not mere speculation. And by the way, all it would take for a dog breed to qualify as a new species would be for it to be unable to procreate outside of its breed, the same as with the fruit flies.

[Cowabung-Gal]

Nope. Don’t believe it.

If it is true that we evolved from apes, then not much has changed:

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Originally Posted by Cowabung-Gal

Nope. Don’t believe it.

If it is true that we evolved from apes, then not much has changed:

https://ww2.kqed.org/app/uploads/sit...6-1020x566.jpg

https://content.api.news/v3/images/b...317?width=1024

https://intellectualtakeout.org/wp-c...s-1024x768.jpg

That comparison is insulting to actual apes

[Bahamut810]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

Na.



The dogs achieved through controlled breeding are still dogs, we don't see them evolve into a different type of animal.

So does that mean that you reject all supporting evidence or just this specifically?

For example...you part on the street. Overnight someone sideswipes your car. The next morning you wake up and see it...you see a different color paint scraped into the car and all the normal stuff you would see. You go for a walk and the next street over you find a car the same color with scrapes down the side that indicate that they sideswiped a car. Would you not believe that that was the culprit because no one was there to see it?

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Originally Posted by Bahamut810

So does that mean that you reject all supporting evidence or just this specifically?

For example...you part on the street. Overnight someone sideswipes your car. The next morning you wake up and see it...you see a different color paint scraped into the car and all the normal stuff you would see. You go for a walk and the next street over you find a car the same color with scrapes down the side that indicate that they sideswiped a car. Would you not believe that that was the culprit because no one was there to see it?

The difference between your example and the example of evolution of one type of animal to another is a difference of millions of years.

Making guesses about events that happened the night before is far more reliable, but even those can be wrong.

[Sumac]

Obviously.

People who don't believe in evolution are strange. If they can't accept it, they need to look at evolution of dogs or hybridization of plants. Neither would have been possible without evolutionary mechanism. But, I guess, in their weird mins, dogs can evolve from wolves, but humans can't evolve from apes, even though mechanism is the same?

Oh, well, we still have lunatics who believe that Erath is flat, so...fools will always exist on this planet.

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

No I don't, because one type of animal changing into another cannot be witnessed by the naked eye. It may be speculation with a lot of natural phenomena used as supporting evidence (fossil record, genetic similarities), but in the end it is still mere speculation.

Its not like people were able to create new breeds of dogs and horses during one human's lifetime. Its not like there are various experiments on insects and rats, which show inheritance of genes.
Being ignorant is forgivable, being willfully stupid is not.

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

The dogs achieved through controlled breeding are still dogs, we don't see them evolve into a different type of animal.

This would not have been possible without evolutionary mechanisms.
Besides, there are plenty of "transitional" lifeforms in nature or their "cousins", which showcase how evolution had occurred.

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

Making guesses about events that happened the night before is far more reliable, but even those can be wrong.

Senseless words of a zealot.

[Andrew NDB]

We have literally documented and watched evolution in our time. This is a non question.

[FredWolfLeonardo]

Originally Posted by Sumac

Its not like people were able to create new breeds of dogs and horses during one human's lifetime. Its not like there are various experiments on insects and rats, which show inheritance of genes.
Being ignorant is forgivable, being willfully stupid is not.

None of that proves one type of animal turning into another. A new breed of dog is still a dog, and new breed of horse is still a horse.

We have seen horses and dogs bred for specific traits. No one has seen humans and chimpanzees descend from a common ancestor.

[ZariusTwo]

[Sumac]

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

None of that proves one type of animal turning into another. A new breed of dog is still a dog, and new breed of horse is still a horse.

Let me assume that you are 5 year old kid raised in community of Mormons and put it accordingly:
- if there were not evolutionary mechanism, you won't be able to breed or hybridize species, since traits won't be inherited by their descendants.

This alone proves evolution exists. As for "one species turning in another" - it takes millions of years, so obviously you won't be able to observe it.

There are however enough prove about how those changes occurred and why.

Originally Posted by FredWolfLeonardo

No one has seen humans and chimpanzees descend from a common ancestor.

Because, it is much more complex process, which takes more than several millions years. There are plenty of conclusive prove that it had occurred, however. More than your fairy tails can provide, so there, case closed.