Do those that don't believe in Evolution believe that only Homo Sapiens

[Bandit]

have never evolved or do they believe that no animal has ever evolved into anything? How about bacteria, has it ever evolved? Did Mammoths evolve into elephants or saber tooth tigers into modern day cats. Is there any relationships between animal life? I understand their belief comes entirely from the Bible, but does it say anything about animals never evolving? I guess what I am asking is do they believe the entiore theoy of evolution is bogas or just the part about humans evolving (coming from monkeys)?

[Vincardog]

1. Excuse me but humans did not evolve from monkeys. They both evolved from a common ancestor

quit feeding the pigs

[Greyhound]

18. Thank you for posting the correct answer. They propagate this lie on purpose. n/t

[gimberly]

25. Monkeys and apes and humans all evolved from Prosimians

[Celeborn Skywalker]

26. Yes.

From a common ape ancestor. It's semantics.

[TexasObserver]

2. Hard cores believe the earth is 6000 years old, and everything is as made by God

There's another brand that believes science, generally, except the part about humans evolving from less developed simians.

[Tindalos]

3. Interesting question

My (limited) understanding of Creationist thinking is that they believe the world was created as is, and it has always been that way and always will be. If so, than the anti-evolution crowd probably wouldn't be open to the suggestion of anything evolving. After all, that would open the door to arguing that humans evolved. I'm curious to know how others answer your question.

[cobalt1999]

4. They are all over the place

Some don't believe in any evolution in any species, some believe in evolution of a type after the "Noah Flood", some believe in evolution except for humans, some believe in a God directed evolution, etc.

You're dealing with folks who don't even understand the principles of evolution, so they are all over the map.

[ColbertWatcher]

31. Technically...

...it only appears they are "all over the map", that's because that's the only way they can sneak religion into public schools.

[Vanje]

33. My ex-sister-in-law believes in creationism AND evolution.

According to her theory, White people were created by God in the Garden of Eden.
The other races evolved from monkeys.

[pansypoo53219]

5. have we evolved anything NEW lately?

i may not believe in 'evolution'. adaptation yes, and shit, but so far i am still waiting for humans to EVOLVE. so far all i see is devolution.

[uberllama42]

16. You won't see any noticable changes in humans in your lifetime

Large changes take hundreds of thousands of years, at least. "Devolution" is not a scientific term. The opposite of evolution would be a species becoming less fit to reproduce in its environment. If the human species is being debased, that does not mean we are not evolving. Evolution is not about value judgments- it is about reproduction.

For the same reason that evolution does not mean that one race is superior to another, it does not mean that any species must become progressively "better" over time. A subjective assessment of human progress has nothing to do with what traits lead to high birth rates in a certain population.

[gimberly]

27. Populations evolve, not individuals. Individuals develop.

The human population IS changing rapidly. The human gene pool is always changing (mutation, sexual recombination, selection and pure chance guide the process). The fact that we reproduce slowly makes it difficult to see major human changes in your lifetime, but evidence of evolution is clearly everywhere.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

6. One common mistake is that they think that evolution has a specific purpose.

Which it doesn't. It's random, has no direction, and "mistakes" are what drives it.

We, as are all other species, exist largely (if not entirely) by chance.

We congratulate ourselves by thinking that we are the epitome of evolution. When there is no epitome.

The common cockroach is more "successful" in evolutionary terms.

We're only important because evolution has given us (by chance)brains that tell us we are.

[cobalt1999]

8. Yes, they also think of humans as the "epitome" of evolution

We are no more "evolved" than a snake, worm, shark, fish. Each species has adapted to their environmental challenges and works to pass their genes successfully. Beyond that, no species is "more evolved", including humans.

[Mrs. Overall]

7. They are hard at work studying this scientific chart:

[Fire Walk With Me]

9. I see no reason that physical evolution as understood by science cannot coexist

with the spiritual principles describing the bigger picture. Spirit/Matter.

[Allyoop]

10. Noah's Ark

I've always wondered how God got everything from tsetse flies to dinosaurs on board the ark????? In pairs, no less!

[HysteryDiagnosis]

11. Dinos were before Noah.... and their bones were just a clever

rouse to make you believe they actually existed. Such a playful God.. gotta love her.

[ColbertWatcher]

30. The esteemed Doctor of Fine Arts, Dr. Colbert has revealed...

...that it was Jesus who buried the dinosaur bones to confuse us.

[cobalt1999]

12. ...and then dropping of Kangaroos in Australia,

Pandas in China, Komodo Dragons in the islands, and Buffalo in North America. Must have been quite a departure schedule.

Once you leave common sense behind, everything is possible.

[timtom]

14. Good thing you didn't hint at continental shift.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

15. Pahhnnnngeeeeehyah, or so it was thought. You really should

look at this and think about the possibilities.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7kL7qDeI05U&feature=related

[cobalt1999]

21. Wow, someone needs to take a geology class

That's some intense crazy from people that don't understand what they are talking about. When there are so many things wrong with that and they are so fundamental, it'd take a year of education just to get that person to be considered ignorant.

[alfredo]

19. But as they always say, God invented the Platypus right after he invented

LSD.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

13. You may, I say may want to check out this outlandish theory,

I don't think the sweepers will pass through here too soon. I may look into this myself as it agrees with a few of my own ideas on the subject.

http://www.humandevolution.com/

Forbidden Archeology documented a massive amount of evidence showing that humans have existed on
earth for hundreds of millions of years. Such anomalous evidence, contradicting Darwinian evolution,
catalyzed a global inquiry, "If we did not evolve from apes, then where did we come from?" Human
Devolution is author Michael A. Cremo's definitive answer to this question.

"We did not evolve up from matter; instead we devolved, or came down, from the realm of pure
consciousness, spirit," says Cremo. He bases his response on modern science and the world's
great wisdom traditions, including the Vedic philosophy of ancient India. Cremo proposes that
before we ask the question, "Where did human beings come from? we should first contemplate,
"What is a human being?" Cremo asserts that humans are a combination of matter, mind, and
consciousness (or spirit).

Human Devolution contains solid scientific evidence showing how a subtle mind element and a
conscious self that can exist apart from the body have been systematically eliminated from
mainstream science by a process of knowledge filtration. "Any time knowledge filtration takes
place you can expect a great deal of resistance, criticism, and ridicule when it is exposed and
challenged," says Cremo.

Michael Cremo is no stranger to resistance. In 1993 when Forbidden Archeology was released
there was a vast array of response. From anthropologist Richard Leakey calling it "...pure humbug"
to Fingerprints of the Gods author Graham Hancock referring to it as "One of the landmark
intellectual achievements of the late 20th century," it has received both positive and negative
international attention. In addition, in 1996 when NBC aired its special The Mysterious Origins
of Man, hosted by Charlton Heston, and featured the book, establishment scientists felt so
threatened by this program that they lobbied the Federal Communications Commission to
censure and fine NBC for airing it (read the complete story in Forbidden Archeology's Impact).

Despite the criticism surrounding it, Forbidden Archeology is a huge success. Both it and Human
Devolution present human origins in a new perspective. The two books are the culmination of
eighteen years of research. The result, unlike the early creationist perspective, offers a new
scientifically based take on human origins. Forbidden Archeology gave us the cover-up and now
Human Devolution brings us the true story.

[cobalt1999]

23. Off the scale woo-woo

So woo-woo, it'll now be my gold-standard on woo-woo sites.

[tkmorris]

24. That guy has some imagination

Unfortunately, that's all it is. Imagination.

[HysteryDiagnosis]

28. Einstein would be proud of him... methinks. n/t

[Occulus]

32. WOO alert n/t

[krispos42]

17. Evolution Is a Blind Watchmaker

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mcAq9bmCeR0


Interesting video indeed.

(not a rickroll)

[cobalt1999]

22. Great video.

Thanks.

[sakura]

20. One doesn't "believe" or "not believe" in the theory of evolution.

Just as one doesn't "believe" or "not believe" in the theory of Gravity. Theories are based on evidence. That is, they are explanations of the world around us that are supported by a mountain of observations and data. Do you "believe" that the clouds far above you are water vapor, or do you accept it as a reasonable conclusion based on your experiences with water, ice and steam? Now imagine that you have a mountain of data as support. That is what a theory is. It's completely different than a simple belief.

Please use the correct terminology when talking about evolution. The "believe" canard is a tool of creationists.

[Bandit]

29. I beg to differ, there are very many people that "believe" in creationism

those same people "believe" science is incorrect in establishing such "theory". Just because you "know" something to be true does not mean everybody "knows" the same thing. Many people run their entire lives upon "belief" No where did I suggest I was one of those people but you seem to suggest those people do not exist at all.

[sakura]

34. I am suggesting no such thing.

I have no opinion whether or not you are one of those people, and it's not central to anything I was stating. My point was that you are using the term "believe" incorrectly. You are using it in the everyday sense-- as in, "My theory is that it was Miss Scarlet, in the library, with the candlestick." Using the term theory in that way is perfectly fine in everyday conversation, but when you are talking about science, the term theory has a completely different meaning. As I said before, in science, a theory is an explanation one accepts based on the evidence. Scientific theories, by definition, are supported by a mountain of evidence. Therefore the sentence above about Miss Scarlet is not a scientific theory-- because (as I'm talking about the game, Clue) there's no mountain of evidence to support it. At best, it's a hypothesis. And maybe it's just a wild-ass guess-- depending on the data.

Certainly, whether or not creationists call it a theory or not, creationism (and intelligent design) does not qualify for the scientific definition of theory. It is entirely possible for a theory to change when new evidence appears. Evidence, or lack of evidence, has no bearing on belief. If you really believe something, no one has to prove it to you. For science, though, one does have to prove it. It's the point of science, actually, to draw the best possible conclusions about the natural world, based on the existing data. And as the data may improve over time, the conclusions may, as well. But there's absolutely no belief involved. Furthermore, any theory can be disproved-- if the right data comes along. That's not possible for creationism, whether it's labelled a theory or not.

Your post talked about people "believing" in evolution. But one believes in things for which there is no proof. Science doesn't depend on belief, religion does. That's the central difference between science and religion-- it's reason versus faith. I agree with you that people "believe" in creationism, but as it is not a scientific theory, it does nothing to further your point. And the fact that creationists are ignorant (willfully or otherwise) about the way science is done, lends no validity to their argument that they "believe" the theory of evolution to be incorrect, or to yours. They can believe whatever they like-- it has no bearing on whether or not evolution is a valid theory or not. It's the facts that make it an accepted theory, not an opinion poll. The term theory as used by scientists is very much misunderstood by the media, by everyday folk, and certainly by creationists. Apparently you misunderstand the term as well-- that's all I was pointing out.

:)