So, who here doesn't believe in evolution?

[miller-time]

so any time genes change it is "evolution"?...no matter what causes it?

At the species level. A random mutation in a particular animal is just a random mutation. But if that mutation propagates throughout the species then that is considered evolution. Why it propagates doesn't really matter, whether it is because of man or nature.

[kNicKz]

I enjoy saying I don't believe in evolution just to see how worked up people who believe in it get . A lot of them are legitimately offended if you don't believe in what they do

[CelticBaller]

I enjoy saying I don't believe in evolution just to see how worked up people who believe in it get . A lot of them are legitimately offended if you don't believe in what they do

It's not that, it's just like me saying gravity isn't real. You know how stupid that sounds?

[-p.tiddy-]

At the species level. A random mutation in a particular animal is just a random mutation. But if that mutation propagates throughout the species then that is considered evolution. Why it propagates doesn't really matter, whether it is because of man or nature.

IMO selective breeding is much closer to "intelligent design" than it is "evolution"

[kNicKz]

It's not that, it's just like me saying gravity isn't real. You know how stupid that sounds?

Why do you care though? I never understood that. If someone told me they don't believe in gravity I would respect their view and not really give a shit . Doesn't effect me. It's a large world and not everyone relies on science for their answers. There is nothing wrong with that

[Inactive]

so any time genes change it is "evolution"?...no matter what causes it?

IMO selective breeding is much closer to "intelligent design" than it is "evolution"

Genes changing is just one part of evolution. Natural selection, sexual selection, breeding, etc. all just alter the particular frequency of a gene, or combination of genes, within a population.

Gene mutations, which are random, provide variation. The mutations which aid in reproduction end up being better represented within the population(i.e are selected), over time. When we breed animals, we're selecting for certain genes. When females copulate with dominant males (sexual selection), they're unwittingly selecting for certain genes. When a slow wildebeest gets pounced on by a lion (natural selection), nature is selecting for certain genes. They're all part of evolution.

[miller-time]

IMO selective breeding is much closer to "intelligent design" than it is "evolution"

Basically you are confusing the issue by thinking that because man is influencing the results it is no longer evolution.

In nature nuclear fusion occurs all of the time in stars that is a natural process. But it is one we can also manufacture. Just because we can mimic something nature does doesn't make it intelligent design. It just means we are using certain forces (either a reactor in the case of fusion or selecting traits in the case of evolution) to do what nature already does.

[CelticBaller]

Why do you care though? I never understood that. If someone told me they don't believe in gravity I would respect their view and not really give a shit . Doesn't effect me

I don't care that much, just find it ignorant sometimes and I would like to see their pov. When someone tells me they don't believe in evolution is usually because of what I posted earlier, if you were to tell me it's because of your religion I would be like ok and keep on, but it's usually the other way around and they try to argue with you.


Oh and if someone were to tell me gravity isn't real i would be like ok, I'll try to see their point, but if you were to argue with me...

[MadeFromDust]

The only thing evolutionists are good at is drawing stick pics and making up stories

[-p.tiddy-]

Basically you are confusing the issue by thinking that because man is influencing the results it is no longer evolution.

In nature nuclear fusion occurs all of the time in stars that is a natural process. But it is one we can also manufacture. Just because we can mimic something nature does doesn't make it intelligent design. It just means we are using certain forces (either a reactor in the case of fusion or selecting traits in the case of evolution) to do what nature already does.

so if "God" influenced the results that would also be "evolution" and not "intelligent design" correct?

[Is He Ill]

The only thing evolutionists are good at is drawing stick pics and making up stories

good point

[Inactive]

so if "God" influenced the results that would also be "evolution" and not "intelligent design" correct?

Intelligent design (at least in some forms) isn't meant to be an alternative to evolution. It's meant to be an alternative mechanism to natural selection, as the primary driver of evolution.

Species being created in their current forms by God, rather than evolving, would be the alternative to evolution.

[miller-time]

so if "God" influenced the results that would also be "evolution" and not "intelligent design" correct?

Yes.

Intelligent design describes a model where certain cellular structures are irreducibly complex. Meaning there was no evolutionary pathway for them to arise, they had to have just appeared. If God is selecting based off of what is already there it is no different to what humans or nature are doing. If God is creating genes and inserting them himself then that would be intelligent design.

[outbreak]

I think one thing that some people don't grasp when it comes to things like evolution is the time frame involved, I've never met someone who denied evolution but on TV when I've seen people struggle with it they don't understand how something can just suddenly change when in reality it happens over a very large time period that is hard for humans to comprehend. Same thing with how it's hard for us to comprehend just how small the time period is that humans have been around for, if our species was wiped out tomorrow we're really just a small footnote in the history of species.

[shlver]

Biological evolution is the change in alleles over time. Artifical and natural selection share the same mechanism, the only difference is the source of selection.