Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login
evolution stamp by Apsaravis evolution stamp by Apsaravis
I'm tired of all those people saying "I don't believe in evolution because [insert random creationist crap here]". (And creationism includes all that "Intelligent Design" stuff, hope it's obvious)
You can't say "I believe/don't believe in evolution", because, well, it's not a matter of belief. :roll:
People who reject evolution most often simply have no idea what it is about and that's rather sad.
_________

[link] - thanks, *SageGoat

_________

Comments are allowed again.
Add a Comment:
 
:iconbrutusstark:
BrutusStark Featured By Owner Dec 10, 2015  New Deviant
With respect, I disagree. But you have every right to post what you believe is the truth as the Christians do the same.
Reply
:iconmelnazar:
Melnazar Featured By Owner Dec 16, 2015
If I may point out, as it is said in the stamp, evolution is not a matter of belief. In biology, it is demonstrable that life do evolves and the scientific theory of evolution is the only model which encompass every single things observed in biology to explain the diversity of life.
Reply
:iconbrutusstark:
BrutusStark Featured By Owner Dec 18, 2015  New Deviant
Yes it is. Biology supports micro, not macro evolution.
Reply
:iconmelnazar:
Melnazar Featured By Owner Dec 18, 2015
Macroevolution is defined as the formation of a new species. It's also called speciation and this has been observed both in lab and in nature.
Reply
:iconbrutusstark:
BrutusStark Featured By Owner Dec 22, 2015  New Deviant
No, no, it's not a new species, it's a breed of the same species. Plus the extreme genetic mutations cannot reproduce.
Reply
:iconmelnazar:
Melnazar Featured By Owner Dec 22, 2015
" it's not a new species, it's a breed of the same species."
1. It is considered a new specie when that population cannot reproduce with other population originating from the same ancestral population.
2. In biology, a new specie never stop being part of the previous group it was part of. As such, homo sapiens (that's us) are part of the homonidae, oh the haplorhini, of the primates, of the placental mammals, of the synapsids, of the amniotes, of the tetrapods, chordates and eukaryotes to name a few.

"Plus the extreme genetic mutations cannot reproduce."
Actually it can since mutations are spreading throughout the population as the selective pressure of an ecosystem select the traits that helps survival until reproduction. If a mutation gives an advantage, it will favour the mutant to have offspring as the generations continues, the populations will have that mutant gene.
Reply
:iconbrutusstark:
BrutusStark Featured By Owner Dec 22, 2015  New Deviant
No, mutations cannot reproduce. Mutations are seldom beneficial. Plus most of these animals that had a common ancestor didn't share the same common ancestor with us.
Reply
:iconmelnazar:
Melnazar Featured By Owner Dec 23, 2015
"No, mutations cannot reproduce."
They can be passed on to the next generation if the one who has the mutation survives until reproduction.

"Plus most of these animals that had a common ancestor didn't share the same common ancestor with us."
Actuall yes, we share these common ancestors with them. Morphology and genetic demonstrate it.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconareksim:
Areksim Featured By Owner Jul 9, 2015   Photographer
I don't believe in evolution because the earth is flat! xD

lol
Reply
:icontidalwave21:
tidalwave21 Featured By Owner Jun 2, 2015
Okay, I want someone to debate me. Why can't the theory of evolution work with Creationism? Really, why not?
Reply
:iconspinozillarex:
SpinozillaRex Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2015
Because creationism suggests that all species were created on one day while evolution suggests that it took animals millions of years to adapt to a specific environment. Creationism dismisses the idea that an animal can adapt to the point where it can be a separate species from it's ancestors, but for some reason excepts the idea of adaptation.
Reply
:icontidalwave21:
tidalwave21 Featured By Owner Dec 8, 2015
Well, the Catholic Church accepts evolution. They also believe that the first eleven chapters of Genesis are mythology with symbolic meaning. 
Reply
:iconspinozillarex:
SpinozillaRex Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2015
Well if you ask me it doesn't seem like people are paying attention to the church. There are still tons of catholic schools that repent the teachings of evolution, not to mention tons of people.
Reply
:icontidalwave21:
tidalwave21 Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2015
That's true, but at the school I go to, they don't shy away from evolution. Honestly, I have only met one person in life who consistently denied evolution. 
Reply
:iconspinozillarex:
SpinozillaRex Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2015
Well mostly in southern parts of america you'll find catholic schools or even ordinary public schools that deny evolution. Like seriously, their sciences tests are literally about creationism, because for some reason people want creationism to be taught in science classes XD
Reply
:icontidalwave21:
tidalwave21 Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2015
What does Creationism have to do with science? WTF? 

Anyway, I go to school in Chicago so that probably explains it.
Reply
:iconmelnazar:
Melnazar Featured By Owner Jun 18, 2015
Does creationism claim life was created as it is today or not?
Reply
:icontidalwave21:
tidalwave21 Featured By Owner Edited Jun 18, 2015
It depends on how you look at the Bible. The first eleven chapters of Genesis aren't meant to be taken literally. They're metaphor. Most of the priests I know tell me that Evolution and Christianity can live in harmony if the Bible is interpreted correctly. The Bible doesn't concern itself with Evolution, and the Evolutionary Theory doesn't concern itself with God at all. It doesn't prove or disprove Him.
Reply
:iconmelnazar:
Melnazar Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2015
However, if you don't take the earlier mythos as real, then you cannot take the whole "original sin" and later one Jesus' "sacrifice" to get "pay for our sin" as real either.

And technically, while evolution do not disproves the idea of a deity, it does disproves those of the mythologies claiming life was created as it is right now. The same way that the model of planet formation disproves the deity of mythos claiming that the earth was created before the sun.
Reply
:icontidalwave21:
tidalwave21 Featured By Owner Jun 20, 2015
That's a really good point. Again, the deep metaphor is that humanity has a fallen nature. Jesus just paid for that fallen nature. That is the message in the Bible. Also, the idea of the Earth being created before the sun and life being created as it is now are simply archaic beliefs.

The Bible isn't supposed to be a scientific textbook. We aren't supposed to take it literally when it says the universe was created in 6 days. Adam and Eve aren't historical people. The Catechism of the Catholic Church says this.  
Reply
:iconmelnazar:
Melnazar Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2015
Wouldn't accepting that Adam and Eve to be fictional character also mean that the god described in that compendium of books is also fictional?
And fallen nature? Sorry, but how would you demonstrate that?
Reply
:icontidalwave21:
tidalwave21 Featured By Owner Jun 21, 2015
Fallen nature means that humans have an inclination to sin. A child is taught not to lie, but lying comes rather naturally. Adam and Eve are metaphors for humans being rebellious against God.

God isn't a metaphor for anything else, and I personally don't see natural processes working without a deity.
Reply
:iconmelnazar:
Melnazar Featured By Owner Jun 30, 2015
It seems you are contradicting yourself here. Adam and Eve are metaphor but not the deity who supposedly created them in the very same chapters you said were fiction?
And again, how would you demonstrate the "inclination to sin" when sin is only a guilt concept invented by the abrahamic religion as a mean to hold it's followers under it's power.

Finally, you not seeing how a natural process works without a deity won't remove the fact that natural processes occurs every single moment without any evidence of deities around them.
Reply
:icongeneralobiwankenobi7:
Generalobiwankenobi7 Featured By Owner May 24, 2015  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Whenever people like that start ranting about "evolution is just a theory" I just want to say "pick up a ball and drop it. See it fall? That's the theory of gravity, it exists." Just because something is called a theory doesn't make it "unproven".
Reply
:iconacitorianscoria:
AcitorianScoria Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2015  Student Writer
The strangest thing is, gravity actually has less evidence that it is a force or physically exists than evolution. Wow, why aren't they making fun of "Newtonists" or something like that.

(By the by, I do think gravity is real, just in case there was any confusion. ;) (Wink) )
Reply
:icongeneralobiwankenobi7:
Generalobiwankenobi7 Featured By Owner Aug 15, 2015  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
I never doubted that!^_^ And you're correct, creationists don't doubt gravity despite it still being referred to as a "theory".
Reply
:iconkoshej:
Koshej Featured By Owner May 1, 2015
It's a matter of ignorance, actually.
Just the other way than what you'd think, lol.
Reply
:iconibottle:
iBottle Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2015
Adam and Eve never happened. 
Reply
:iconkoshej:
Koshej Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2015
iBottle never existed.
Now prove me wrong, you ILLUSION of MY MIND.
Reply
:iconibottle:
iBottle Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2015
Reply
:iconkoshej:
Koshej Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2015
1. I'm Jewish.
2. Sin doesn't go against the *nature* of God, it rather goes against what He *wants* from us - it only applies to human behavior, whereas no other creature can "sin" simply because none of them was *commanded* anything to begin with, nor it has the Free Will to *disobey* that command.
3. What was your point here anyways?
Reply
:iconibottle:
iBottle Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2015
So the ''Sin'' bullshit that Christian have does not apply to Jews? 
Reply
:iconkoshej:
Koshej Featured By Owner Edited Dec 11, 2015
It "being inherent to ALL people from birth, unless the rely on a zombie puppet"?
Of course it's NOT a Jewish concept.
We rather tend to be responsible for *OUR* (conscious) actions - and *OURS ONLY*.

A funny example:
Only the country's citizens can vote - but they are also the only ones responsible for the results.
Reply
:iconibottle:
iBottle Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2015
Why did God create a tree if didn't want them to eat from it? He also punished them harshly for the mistake he did?
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconazgchip:
AZGchip Featured By Owner Apr 22, 2015  Hobbyist Artisan Crafter
Science cannot state absolutes.
Reply
:iconkoshej:
Koshej Featured By Owner May 1, 2015
And THAT is where the word "belief" fits perfectly - evolutionists BELIEVE that all those extrapolations are some kind of an absolute truth, even though there's no way to test them practically whatsoever.
And by "test", I literally mean either seeing a bone being "DNA-transformed" into a live being, OR witnessing a level of evolution on at least the CLASS level or beyond (cab be in a lab, I don't care).
So far, evolution itself HAD been witnessed-but on so much SMALLER scale that it makes no PROOF for anything bigger (and there IS a logical distinction between "smaller" changes and "bigger" ones - mainly that all the bigger ones seem like 9000 details changing AT THE SAME TIME, or they wouldn't happen to begin with).
Reply
:icontheghoulavenue:
TheGhoulAvenue Featured By Owner Jul 31, 2015  Student Digital Artist
You guys have such cringy comments I think I lost some braincells when reading them. Did you come here to "prove" how "correct" you are?
Majority of christians even accept evolution, it's just a bunch of dumdums in the US and a few third world countries that dont accept it.
Reply
:iconazgchip:
AZGchip Featured By Owner May 1, 2015  Hobbyist Artisan Crafter
I agree (:
Reply
:iconkoshej:
Koshej Featured By Owner May 1, 2015
It astonishing, how strong human hypocrisy and arrogance can be, really.
They assault the "believers" for "not having any proof", yet they themselves believe in a "sci-fi" that has as little (if not less) actual scientific proof as well.
And they typically use such ridiculous excuses for their attitude, that it makes me almost believe that THEY actually might be evolved from monkeys, loool.
Reply
:iconazgchip:
AZGchip Featured By Owner May 1, 2015  Hobbyist Artisan Crafter
One thing i find quite amusing is how evolutionists use fossils to back their theory,
which under normal circumstances would not form in the first place. much less continue forming perfectly in layers over time in order.
a fossil needs specific things to form:
1. a quick burial in mud,silt ,etc (very unlikely under normal circumstances)
2. needs specific conditions like acidity, pressure ,temperature.
3. water rich in minerals to replace bones with stone.

given that most animals get eaten after death and are most likely in a waterless area, it is seemingly impossible for them to be quickly buried and have water and specific conditions to be fossilized. but this is explained by the bible and it makes sense.
before the flood, it had never rained before, and all water for plants was provided by either heavy dew or water already in the ground.
Now your probably wondering where the water came from during the flood. but the answer for that is also in genesis, during the creation:

    And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.”  So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so.  God called the vault “sky.”
(Genesis 1:6-8)

It is believed that before the worldwide flood, there was a thick layer of ice surrounding the earth. this would block the sun's harmful rays and would explain why the people during those days lived so long.

now when this flood started, not only was water falling through the atmosphere and likely vaporizing and creating huge clouds of rain ,but there was also large amounts of water coming out of the ground.

during the worst of the flood, the planet's crust was torn apart and these plates smashed into each other. now the animals that were most likely dead by now, would be quickly buried in large numbers. these animals and plants either ended up fossilizing, decaying ,or turning into fossil fuels.

 
Reply
:iconkoshej:
Koshej Featured By Owner May 2, 2015
Are you telling ME about what Bible tells? :lol::lol::lol:
(Hint: I'm one of the biggest Bible-quoters around here, loool.)

I do have another theory based on the Flood event (and some commentaries on that).
It says that "seasons won't stop from now on", which implies that the Flood was MORE than just a big "tsunami" - it was literally a COSMIC cataclysm, which might very well have altered the very PHYSICS of Planet Earth (the story itself supports this idea pretty well, on more than one point).
Which means that all these "millions of years" only apply to the "post-Flood" calculations (as in, about 4000 years) - but we have NO IDEA about how time went before that.
Literally.
OUR physics might be totally different from the pre-Flood one, so there's NO WAY for us to "look beyond" that threshold.
That's a very simple, yet extremely powerful "assumption", that is scripture-compatible, yet destroys the entire "theory" of dinosaurs being "millions of years old".
More over, there are commentaries that say that pre-Flood creatures "used to interbreed extensively", evidently giving birth to all types of "mutants" (which COULD be what we call "dinos" and so on, lol) - and again, after the Flood, "all animals decided to stick to their species from now on", yet AGAIN making OUR scientific knowledge INSUFFICIENT for the pre-Flood understanding.
Sure, ALL of this is based on the single assumption that there WAS a Flood - but with that single assumption (and the adjoining commentaries), each and every "inconsistency" gets resolved in the BIBLE's favor, lol.
And the important part is, that all these commentaries were made centuries ago, when science spoke nothing of the topic yet - thus they definitely aren't "whimsical attempts to reject science", whilst the opposite can't be said with full surety, lol.
Reply
:iconibottle:
iBottle Featured By Owner Nov 23, 2015
What do you think of Jesus? 
Reply
:iconkoshej:
Koshej Featured By Owner Nov 23, 2015
Irrelevant to THIS topic.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:icontabbi1994:
tabbi1994 Featured By Owner Edited Feb 10, 2015  Hobbyist Writer
But evolution is still a theory, we can't go back in time and check out if it was really like this.
When we had evolution in biology, though, a girl in my class raised her hand as the teacher was finished and asked "But, what about god!", and i'm not kidding you right here, the whole class (even the teacher) laughed at her. Just a moment later we found out that she was serious (we all thought that she was kidding). My teacher just said that "This topic is a topic for religion not biology.".
Until today I feel equally bad and not bad for what we did.
Reply
:iconmelnazar:
Melnazar Featured By Owner Feb 15, 2015
Actually, evolution is still ongoing as we speak. The emergence of new species is called speciation and numerous cases as been observed in both animals and plants.
Reply
:iconkoshej:
Koshej Featured By Owner May 1, 2015
Yes, and Flish are invading your backyard right now.
Run for your life!!!
Reply
:iconmelnazar:
Melnazar Featured By Owner May 25, 2015
Or you know..you can simply read about the subject. Speciation is not dangerous.
Reply
:iconspinozillarex:
SpinozillaRex Featured By Owner Feb 11, 2015
Scientific theory is different from societies version of theory

The theory you're talking about is more of a hypothesis, in a way.

Scientific theory is based off of mountains and mountains of evidence. Also evolution has been observed many times, such examples include the peppered moth, and most recently the yellow-bellied three-toed skink.

Also I feel pretty bad for that girl, but the best thing to do is educate her on the difference between science and religion.
Reply
:iconbig-bad-rocket:
Big-bad-Rocket Featured By Owner Feb 2, 2015
Religion aside I still don't think evolution is real. Sorry but it just isn't.
Reply
:iconacitorianscoria:
AcitorianScoria Featured By Owner Aug 4, 2015  Student Writer
Evolution is not exactly instantly changing. There is a transition. Evolution is just when DNA and RNA changes without the genes ability to agree with it, and makes it have a special trait. This trait can be hardly noticeable or staring you in the face. If the gene is a success then the creature survives and is able to continue that trait and in a few thousand years almost every one of the species had breeded with that one flux.

The reason the genes will change is because the genes will move around and snap. Then by instinct, the RNA will repair it. But usually with a different gene part. That is why sometimes polar bears will be brown. Those polar bears usually die. That means the genes are not common...

Now, where is your evidence that evolution doesn't exist?
Reply
Add a Comment:
 
×




Details

Submitted on
February 10, 2009
Image Size
4.9 KB
Resolution
99×56
Thumb

Stats

Views
25,541 (1 today)
Favourites
1,810 (who?)
Comments
2,852
×