For those who believe in evolution...?
355107
Well, there IS a good explanation. The story about creation is a way how simple people explained stuff to themselves. \nYou see, if you read the creation theory, you'll see the things appeared in the similar order than they actually did. \nAt first, there was "light", which of course means the glowing mass of gasses and molten metals in the emptiness of space. When it cooled down and the water condensed, they became earth and water. \nLater on, then plants appeared, after them the animals and as the last one, humans, which are only about thirty thousand years old. \n\nIf you try to represent this to simple people, as the peoples of near east 2000 years ago no doubt were, you'll have trouble making them understand what 65 million years is and how come a dinosaur would evolve from an one-cell creature. So you make up a god and tell them the story happened in 7 days and they go away happy with their own understanding of the process. \n\nIt's basically the same, just VERY simple. \n\nWhat I don't understand, however, is HOW the hell nowadays, in the era of computers and high technology, some EQUALLY simple people can exist. \nWell, for THEM, the theory of evolution CERTAINLY doesn't exist, their mentality remained at the same point of functioning as it was 2000 or even 5000 years ago, I'm afraid.
617128
I think the fossil record is the most convincing evidence we have for evolution.  Granted, it does have a few holes, but the holes aren't nearly as large as the holes in the Bible.  \n\nAnd as far as the comment made by Stand goes - evolution is such a slow process.  Just because we don't see evolution occurring, doesn't mean it's not going on behind the scenes.  I have heard some arguments that evolution of humans has stopped because we don't have the environmental pressures we used to - we use technology to ensure that "everyone" survives.  This is somewhat ludicrous, however, because this theory comes from the point of view of a person living in a first world country.  What about the billions living in third world countries?  Do they have the advantages of technology?  Also, what about the other forms of selection, such as sexual selection?  Truth be told, there are approximately 4.2 "important" amino acid mutations per generation, and since the technical definition of evolution is 'the change in the gene pool of a population over time', we are definitely still evolving - just not in visible ways.  Yet.
1153626
This point is terrific.\n\nIt's why intelligent design is ridiculous and absurd.\n\nWhen I hear people say they believe in theistic evolution I have to say to them grow balls pick one.
805142
Even though I dont subscribe to the whole theory of evolution, I do believe that we do evolve and grow and learn as the human race and become more enlightened over time also. However, we are not very enlightened right now, but might be in a 100 years or 1000 but I'll never see it. For me to toss out my faith and hope for peace in eternity is for me to have to accept that this life, for me, is as good as it gets. My life doesnt truely suck but it's not great.. and I know there are people far more worse off. How could they even survive if they believed "this is all there is... it will get better but you wont ever see it"\n\nThats not "feel good" its downright sad.
289312
>A lot of people,including myself and a lot of scientists don't believe in evolution. Darwin's theory of evolution hasn't been proven,in fact most evidence proves otherwise.I don't see how anyone could believe in evolution.There isn't enough evidence to support it.\n\n>Science itself refutes Darwinism.\n•According to the theory of evolution, at some time in the distant past there was no life in the universe -- just elements and chemical compounds. Somehow, these chemicals combined and came to life.\n\n•However, scientists don't really know how life came to be. Even Stanley Miller, whose experiments are cited in most biology text books, says that the origin of life is still unknown. The idea that dead material can come to life all by itself is not consistent with scientific observation.\n\n•The leading mathematicians in the century met with some evolutionary biologists and confronted them with the fact that, according to mathematical statistics, the probabilities for a cell or a protein molecule coming into existence were nil. They even constructed a model on a large computer and tried to figure out the possibilities of such a cell ever happening. The result was zero possibility! - Wistar Institute\n\n•Professor Edwin Conklin observed, "The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the Unabridged Dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop."\n\n•Under normal circumstances, creatures give birth to the same kind of creatures. It is established scientific fact that like begets like. On rare instances, the DNA in an embryo is damaged, resulting in a mutant child that differs in some respect from its parent. Although a few mutations have been scientifically observed that are beneficial, most mutations produce inferior offspring. For the theory of evolution to be true, there must be a fantastic number of creative mutations that produce new kinds of offspring which are better suited for survival, and therefore are favored by natural selection.\n\n•Darwinists claim that the reptile-to-mammal evolution is well documented. But for reptiles to evolve into mammals at least some of these transformations must have happened: \n• Scales had to have mutated into hair. \n• Breasts had to have evolved from nothing. \n• Externally laid eggs had to evolve into soft-shelled eggs that were nourished by an umbilical cord and placenta in a womb. \n\n•It has never been observed in any laboratory that mutations can cause one species to turn into another. Despite this, evolutionists believe that given enough time, some animals will eventually evolve into other creatures. \n\n•Evolutionists claim that although we have not actually observed these things happening, that does not mean that they are impossible. They say it simply means they are extremely improbable. Evolutionists think the world has been around long enough for all these highly improbable things to happen.\n\n•Sir Fred Hoyle, of Cambridge University stated that statistically the chances of one cell evolving was the same as a tornado passing through a junkyard and giving you a fully functional Boeing 747.\nhttp://www.straight-talk.net/evolution/arguments.shtml\n\n•Scientific evidence casts serious doubts on the theory of evolution, for example:\n\n•The Fossil Record (Updated 3 July, 2005)\nhttp://www.straight-talk.net/evolution/fossil.htm\n\n•Living "Fossils"\nhttp://www.straight-talk.net/evolution/living.htm\n\n•The Cambrian Explosion\nhttp://www.straight-talk.net/evolution/explosion.htm\n\n•New T.Rex Discoveries (Updated 10 June, 2005)\nhttp://www.straight-talk.net/evolution/t-rex.htm\n\n•"Missing Links"\nhttp://www.straight-talk.net/evolution/misslinks.htm
1014083
My God, I'm finally beginning to see the truth.  You have convinced me, despite all of the scientific evidence available and common sense, that evolutionists do indeed have it all wrong.\n\nWe have NOT evolved from apes.\n\nIn fact, based on the number of people who profess to believing in the exact wording the Bible gives for Creation, I now know without a shadow of a doubt that ......\n\n\n WE ARE STILL APES!\n\nI accept the invitation.  What can I bring?  I know of a great place to get apples.
679044
Darwins initial theory of evolution has some truth to it, the part of adaptation is essentially true.. the part of making something out of nothing and having it evolve is false .. only the Creator can do that.. as far at the earth being billions of years old.. that is also false... dinosaurs existed with man.. if you read Job it tells you that the giant animals were in existence and not all dinosaurs were giants.. there is a lot of information out there to research concerning your question.. the first book I would suggest is the Bible... it will essentially answer all of the above question.. if that doesn't satisfy you I would suggest checking in a Christian bookstore on evolution.. Darwin had some good ideas, but his predecessors ran with it in the wrong direction.
924301
These are two good reasons for believing in evolution instead of these silly notions. We come from earlier life, through the familiar process of selection, reproduction, and variation. That earlier life comes from even earlier life. At some point in the distant past there was some primitive first life. It came from inorganic matter. \n\nWhere that matter came from is not clear, but we're making progress on understanding that. The leading contender, I believe, is that it DID simply pop into existence. I think that someday we may even understand how that is possible, but I'm confident that no-one today understands it.
251395
Well, if you really want an answer..\n\nYou can see by the answers of the creationists who responded that they will not believe in evolution, no matter HOW MUCH evidence is in front of them.  It has been my experience that they care little for the truth and only for maintaining what they already believe.\n\nKen Miller wrote an EXCELLENT book on this called "Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search for Common Ground Between God and Evolution."\n\nMiller does a great job of answering your question but the short version may go like this:\n\nCreationists FALSELY believe that if evolution is true, then their religion is necessarily false.\n\nAs long as they continue to decieve themselves with that, no amount of evidence will ever convince them and they will continue to expound that the sun revolves around the Earth.\n\nI should note here that Miller is a Christian who FULLY belives in his religion and is a celluar biologist who FULLY understands evolution.\n\nMy last thought is from comedian Lewis Black: He says he won't even debate evolution's detractors because "we've got the fossils. We win."\n\nWell put, Mr Black but there is far more to rely on than just fossils.
291165
Yes. I am a firm creationist, and speak out against evoulutionists reguarly. \n\nGo to drdino.com for more info on how creation is supported by facts, and how evolution is supported by assumptions.
528044
It does not matter what I believe. The theory of evolution by natural selection is overwhelmingly supported by fact and argument. Intelligent Design is not supported by any facts that I know of and the argument seems to be basically, " a argument from ignorance ".
609132
I believe that the world was created by God.\nNot by germs or mold that transformed into fish and turned into apes that turned into humans. Or whatever that would be.\n\nBut, in a way, there's evolution in every-day life. Such as caterpillers turning into butterflies, tadpoles turning into frogs.\nBut that's not really evolution, it's called life.
859494
how can you believe in evolution when there is no proof?
113540
I also feel that both theories can exist together.  Evolution does NOT answer where and how life began, and where and how our humanity began.  Yet, the physical evidence of evolution is undeniable.  \n\nI'm agnostic, but feel that there is something more than chance that led to our existence.
1157187
Your question is a very reasonable one --and brave, since you'll certainly get answers from religious zealots who have completely closed their minds.  Let me start by saying my *only* personal agenda is a search for the truth, no matter where it leads me.  Unlike many, I'm not here to shove my beliefs down anyone's throat. \n\nThe short answer is that I doubt it's possible in this kind of forum to get into enough details to convince a confirmed *creationist* that humans evolved from simpler life forms.  But I hope to encourage an open-minded person to continue with their own research, and not be tempted by overly "easy" answers.   \n\nThe long answer (most of it written by me, some of it transcribed manually; none of it pasted)...\n\nI, too, was unclear about the evolutionary process for a long time.  While I'm not an expert (and *nobody* has *all* the answers) I think I can help you get to a place where it makes *sense* to you as it now does to me, since you appear to have an open mind.  (Agnosticism is good!)  \n\nAfter hearing people's arguments and questions for many years, I am convinced that there are six huge factors getting in the way of a general acceptance of the *overwhelming* scientific evidence for evolution.  \n\n1 - the common misconception that evolution claims apes or chimpanzees changed to human beings, and the perceived indignity -- and indignation -- that goes along with that idea... or with *any* suggestion that we evolved from a lower form.  It's nothing but ridiculous human arrogance!\n2 - the lack of human conception for the vast time life has had on Earth to evolve\n3 - the human temptation to rush things and jump to ridiculous (and therefore naturally hard to believe) conclusions.  Evolution involves not three or four steps, like fish to amphibian to ape to human!)... not hundreds, or even thousands of big, visible steps... but perhaps hundreds of millions of minute, subtle changes in a life form.  Remember, we have had the time!\n4 - the mistaken notion that creatures evolved because they "decided" to, or "wanted" to.  When we say, for example, that fish needed to absorb oxygen more efficiently from the water, so they evolved gills, that's not to imply it was a choice.  Evolution is about mutations... changes that were random from one generation to the next, over long periods of time.  Those changes that happened to be good for the creature meant that creature survived long enough to reproduce, which meant there would now be lots of little babies with that same feature.\n5 - a fearful and/or stubborn refusal to abandon faith in a Creator, since doing so might condemn the unbeliever to eternal suffering\n6 - It's just *easier* to think about a Creator.\n\nI know you want to see some details of our "life's path" to make sense of it, and I will provide that, below.  Just a bit more, first.\n\nThe central ideas of evolution are that all life shares a common ancestor, and that it has changed over time (obviously, if we are to explain getting from A to B).  While it's hard for many people to imagine the changes that would result in, for example, human beings from lifelessness, the first thing to keep firmly in mind is that we are talking about an *unimagineable* amount of time to play with... the earth having been around for some 4.5 billion years, as you said.\n\nUnderstandably, few people can appreciate how much a billion is.  Do you realize that roughly a billion *seconds* ago, "The Godfather, Part 2" was about to win the Academy Award for Best Picture?... that Richard Nixon was President of the U.S.?... that Hank Aaron had just broken Babe Ruth's record of 714 career home runs?  1974 was drawing to a close -- one billion seconds ago.\n\nIt's a lack of appreciation for this vast amount of time which, I think, makes people skeptical.  They wonder how, in any amount of time they can envision, an ape can c
615396
creation or evolution?
332923
I think it's just a random fact that neither proves nor disproves anything.  I do, however, believe in creationism (intelligent design) based on the fact that believing in evolution is the equivalent of watching a tornado rip through a junkyard and expecting a perfectly assembled 747 ready for takeoff.