Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Examples of Evolution

Of course the only reason I would post this on a blog about atheism is that some Christians cling to the idea that Christianity (or more accurately, Judaism) explains scientific "mysteries."   These "mysteries" were only mysterious to the bronze age mythology writers, not to modern scientists, but science is hard to read and fairy tales are easy to read.  That's the real reason they cling to their mythology: it's easier to imagine a sky fairy with a magic wand whipping up the universe, planets, and all the species of earth than it is to take the time to learn a little about what people have been deducing from evidence for a few hundred years.

Some of this might be a bit hard to read, but persevere.  It's easier in the end than trying to rationalize that science proves "intelligent design" or throwing out rationality altogether.  After all, if you disagree with evolution through natural selection you have to throw out modern antibiotics and vaccines, and then you die.  We might miss you, though we won't miss your stupidity.

DNA proof of why there are still monkeys!

The Whale evolved from land-dwelling mammals, and there are "transitional" fossils to prove it.

The eye evolved through natural selection.  It is not irreducibly complex or magical.  (There's a video at that site so even the stupidest Christians can understand it)

Humans evolved from other bipedal species, which in turn evolved from other primates.   DNA evidence confirms thisYes, it does!  (This last one's harder to read but it's the source of the cool chart to the right)

If you really want to "teach (yourself) the controversy," check out the responses to creationist claims at Talkorigins.org.  My favorite stupid argument is the "argument from incredulity."  It's the argument that because you can't (or won't) believe something is true therefore it's not true.  Hey, I'd like to believe that I'm the Princess of the Universe and that I can smite anyone who zips into the parking place I have my eye on.  But I don't believe that because I'm not psychotic.  The same argument is put forward by UFOlogists and other believers of utter nonsense.  It's as sophisticated as putting your fingers in your ears and singing "la la la la I can't hear you!"


Infidel753 said...

Cool! So when I next go to the zoo, I can tell them that every chimpanzee they have is a homo!

None of this will convince the really determined know-nothings, but it may clarify things for people who have doubts because they honestly don't know -- and it really is fascinating. Once you know how all these living structures actually got the way they are, you realize how unsatisfying -- and unimaginative -- the various old myths really were.

LadyAtheist said...

Yep, you can't make this stuff up! I'm no scientist but I find it all fascinating and it oddly gives more meaning to the world than to just imagine that I'm at the center of it and an all-powerful being who can create the universe has nothing better to do than to listen in on my thoughts when I've just been cut off in traffic.

L.Long said...

Hey Lady: I was called an unthinking callus asshole with a bad attitude because I called ignorant religious people 'STUPID!!!!'. So I thought I would warn you about doing that.
I now insult their lack of intelligences even worse now, as I call them 'DELUSIONAL' which is purposefully being stupid to maintain a silly belief. Since most people do not know the definition of delusional they now think I am being less harsh.

LadyAtheist said...

I guess "pig-headed" won't work, either. :-(

Never Was An Arrow II said...

IT'S REALLY SAD that there's this amount of technical analysis—but the conclusions are all wrong. All your links are actually good arguments against macro-evolution.

The existence of micro-evolution, which any dolt or sane person would be aware of, I saw it repeatedly with the creation of different types of apples, lead many to jump to conclusions. To conjure up the 'macro' theory.


What works for micro doesn't work for macro.

And sorry, eyes couldn't have evolved from very simple structures to the highly complex and refined structures one sees (pun!) today, just because of need. The time needed to effect these type of macro changes, and the inability to ensure offspring would inherit the mutated evolution—and not just continue within the same parameters boggles the mind.

Now, couple that with the vast differences found between supposedly related species, ALSO just boggles the mind. It remains a mathematical impossibility. Millions, even billions of years just ain't enough time to get the task completed.

I know, I know.

It is hard for you to remove yourself from the community of 'believers' and think for yourself. It is so easy to be spoon-fed a kaleidoscope of evo-theories as science struggles to rise to the occasion and barfs out unsound shoddy scientific garbage. Those folks, like you, are short on facts and long on speculation.

You're so brainwashed you can no longer detect when someone jumps to conclusions.

Any high school kid could pick out the serious flaws in each link you posted.


Waiting for proof, in Canada,


LadyAtheist said...

"Macro" is the result of many "micros"

NWA you just don't like it that your Bible is a patchwork of fairy tales. If you can accept that the Bible got it wrong about the eath being flat then why can't you accept that your precious God wouldn't have told the "truth" about evolution? If modern people like you can't accept evolution naturally bronze age believers wouldn't have either. WOuldn't a fairy tale be the kindest answer for them to the question of where they came from? Now that our species has grown up (mostly) we don't need fairy tales to answer that question.

Robert the Skeptic said...

I would toss some facts into the argument here but I recently learned that facts not only do not change one's point of view, they can actually cause people to become more intrenched in their tightly held beliefs. So I won't waste my time.

Anonymous said...

You can lead a creationist to logic and science, but you can't make him think.

Jeff Sherry

L.Long said...

Gideon...You demonstrate your silly thought processes by calling me a moron.
You can't possibly know my intelligence test results so maybe your projecting yours. Mine are well above 125 and to be classified as a moron they should be below 60.
So since it is most likely projection then I'm sorry for you.

LadyAtheist said...

Note: I have moved Gideon's comments to the Spam folder with all his other idiotic posts. Sorry I didn't catch them before people saw them.

I don't actually read any of his comments but judging from the responses, yeah, he's a troll, and not a very good one. Don't feed him, please!