Evolution. Only 40% of Americans believe in evolution. Less than any other industrialized nation. 75% of Italians believe in evolution and the pope lives there. science Religion evolution
Upload
Login or register
Hide Comments
Leave a comment Refresh Comments (621)
[ 621 comments ]
> hey anon, wanna give your opinion?
asd
#10 - karlossacramento
Reply +376 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
>believe
>evolution

implying that evolution is a form of faith...
#58 to #10 - anon id: cfc7bd87
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
unless you can describe the evolution of wings you are no more informed than the person following a preacher.
#79 to #10 - anon id: 788ff30f
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Noone said it was.
#416 to #10 - merrymarvelite
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I can hold up a pen and say that it's blue.

A person might not believe me.

Then I'd have to ******* slap them because some things are just true.
#580 to #10 - kingkaga
Reply -5 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
implying its not.
User avatar #78 to #10 - smittywrbmnjnsn
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Well, technically, it is.

You have not seen evolution first hand, so you have FAITH that the scientists, are telling you the truth.
User avatar #88 to #78 - wiredgal
Reply +5 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
We can observe microevolution first hand in shorter lived organisms and domestic animals.
All modern pet dogs are descended from wolves, it only took about ten thousand years to get from wolves to both chihuahuas and German shepherds.

And the evidence for macroevolution is pretty much undeniable.
And there's far more likely fallible proof for most of astrophysics than for macroevolution.
User avatar #799 to #88 - coolcalx
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
the reason macroevolution is 'pretty much undeniable' is because it's the exact same process as microevolution. the only difference is the time involved.
User avatar #800 to #799 - wiredgal
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I was thinking more of fossils and things, but very true.
Microevolution is 100% undeniable, but still lots of people manage to say macroevolution is wrong. I don't really know how they manage it.
User avatar #801 to #800 - coolcalx
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
typically, it's because they genuinely don't understand it.

a lot of people really do think evolution involves monkeys turning into humans, but that isn't correct.

the easiest way to gain a more widespread acceptance of evolution is to explain to people what evolution actually is
User avatar #737 to #88 - smeagoldor
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
It's interesting when you look at the differences though in the variety of domesticated dogs compared to that of domesticated cats.
User avatar #741 to #737 - wiredgal
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
That's true.

I think it may have something to do with how we can actually use dogs as tools.
Sheep dogs, search dogs, dogs which would need to do similar jobs but under a different environment.
#698 to #88 - anon id: e0ff6a85
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
"It's pretty much undeniable"

Seems like a pretty scientific analysis to me.
User avatar #702 to #698 - wiredgal
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I'm not gonna sit here and write a paper on the proof for evolution.
Go read a professional one if you want to, I've read a lot of the Bible and even attended a religious Bible analysis club, I think it's only fair.
#776 to #702 - anon id: e0ff6a85
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I'm just pointing out that groupthink works both ways.
User avatar #92 to #88 - smittywrbmnjnsn
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
YOU, specifically, have observed this?
User avatar #98 to #92 - wiredgal
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Yes, actually, I have.
Most people haven't though, so I see where you're coming from.

But taking this view to every aspect of life, has a name.
That name is paranoia.
The belief that everyone, everywhere is lying to you.

Have YOU, specifically, observed definite proof that you aren't an alien from the planet *******************?
You might be a sleeper cell.
You may have come to Earth to mind control all the black people into inserting their tongues into your anal cavity.
THERE'S NO REASON YOU CAN'T BELIEVE MAAN, YOU CAN'T PROVE ME WRONG
*dons a tin hat*
User avatar #103 to #98 - smittywrbmnjnsn
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Oh, no I completely understand.
I understand evolution.
I'm not religious.
I was just trying to point out that, believing in a religion, and believing what scientists say, have the same sort of FAITH involved.
User avatar #106 to #103 - wiredgal
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Not really, I don't think.

"Hey Mr Generic Religious Leader, why does God choose-"
"GOD MOVES IN MYSTERIOUS WAYS MY SON, DO NOT QUESTION HIS MIGHT OR YOU'LL GO TO HELL"

Religion is blind faith based on threats and excuses.
Science only relies on the faith that you aren't being directly and maliciously lied to, which is a fairly healthy kind of faith to have :/
User avatar #109 to #106 - smittywrbmnjnsn
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
There are religious who say "god loves all his children" and "he wants you to question him, but one day, you'll believe".
There are evolutionists who say "you don't believe in evolution? You're a ******* retard".

You're making blanket statements.
You don't have to fear a creator in order to be religious.
Essentially, faith in science, and faith in religion are the same.
The bible seems like a load of **** to me, but not the religious.
Evolution seems like a load of **** to some, but not us.
You can think pretty much equally from both sides.
User avatar #116 to #109 - wiredgal
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
If there's anything I'm good at, it's blanket statements.
Leave me and my incredible hypocrisy alone.

But in seriousness, I wasn't trying to make a statement about how religious and non-religious-scientific people speak, I was making a statement about how far the proof and logic goes for each side, through the use of DRAMATIC CHARACTERISATION.
See?

But yeah.
In honesty.
I wish I could be religious.
I just can't force my brain into believing it's true.
I'm too linear, too much of a scientist :/
Too.... Narcissistic not to follow the generally accepted path of intelligence.
Hell, I'm one of those people who took a professional IQ test it went well, but I won't bore you.
Also notice how I spent the last 6 or 7 lines talking about myself, heh.

So what about YOU?
You seem to quite ardently protect the word of fairness and equality in opinion, yet sit on the side of atheism.
A rare mixture.
User avatar #119 to #116 - smittywrbmnjnsn
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Oh, you'd be surprised.
This is probably the first time I've ever argued in favor of religion. And how vaguely I'm doing so...
Usually, I'm arguing that the religious are insolent morons that deserve to have information beaten into them.
Not only that, I label people quickly.
As soon as I saw that your profile picture was a pony, lowered you status of intelligence in my mind.
You have proven to be extraordinarily well spirited and logical.
User avatar #127 to #119 - wiredgal
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Hah, indeed.
And good for you for it!
I take that same stand at heart too, it's just generally a good idea not to voice it, because it does make you a bit of a knob ^^"

Trying to take a debate from the point of view of someone you disagree with can be a very refreshing exercise and if anything will help you gain a few points to use or drop in your own favour.
I'd just recommend against doing it too publicly if you have gay rights or racial equality in mind, haha.

Oh, hah, eh. I'm not too bothered, people can think what they will about my tastes in entertainment, the day they get in a car crash and I'm patching their limbs back together should provide ample proof to the alter.
Actually I'm a classified genius.
****. You see? Told you I was a narcissist, ******* IQ test didn't help anything.


Why thank you, and yourself!
If somewhat prone to paranoia.

And there we go with another red thumb, hm, fixed that.
Not that it honestly matters :P
User avatar #110 to #106 - smittywrbmnjnsn
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Also, I did not thumb you either way, nor do I know how I got a sudden spike of green thumbs, then drop back to neutral.
User avatar #117 to #110 - wiredgal
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
FJ MOVES IN MYSTERIOUS WAYS SON
User avatar #99 to #92 - wiredgal
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Oh and for the record, you were on -2, I thumbed you up.
Just in case you thought I was being rude ^^
#441 to #78 - anon id: 357a759f
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Strictly speaking faith is "belief that is not based on proof," (dictionary.com)
And this research is available, quite published, and widely accepted by people capable of logical thinking.
User avatar #831 to #441 - smittywrbmnjnsn
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
We all know, that just because there are books written about something, a large amount of people who believe it, does not make it real.
You have faith that all the science books are true, just as the religious have faith that their bible is true.
I believe/know evolution is true, I'm just making a point.
#87 to #78 - anon id: 58115041
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Or you could just look at Chernobyl and Fukushima for about 5 seconds and see the results of years of evolution in Chernobyl and a year of radiative evolution starting in Fukushima.
User avatar #90 to #87 - smittywrbmnjnsn
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
And you have faith that those photos were not doctored in any way.
Just as the religious have faith that the bible was not doctored in any way.
#91 to #90 - anon id: 58115041
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
You can literally visit Chernobyl every year to see the results.
User avatar #94 to #91 - smittywrbmnjnsn
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
And have you?
Have you seen the mutations first hand?
#130 to #10 - huehuehueone
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
User avatar #541 to #10 - arrisarrad
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Depends on the theory. Micro evolution is a scientifically proven phenomenon, whereas traditionally accepted macro evolutionary theory is an untestable theory that is promoted based on circumstantial and tautological evidence, which does not constitute concrete proof. I don't think we'll be able to prove or disprove it for a long time if ever. So a lot of it is based on belief, especially since many children who are taught evolution in school simply accept it blindly without fully understanding it, much like conventional religious teachings.
#777 to #541 - kerplunking
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Macro-evolution is micro-evolution over a longer period of time, dumbass.
User avatar #804 to #777 - arrisarrad
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
No, Macro-evolutionary theory supports the possibility of drastic change over a long period of time, whereas micro-evolutionary theory, even applied over a long duration, only allows for limited change from the original. Don't condescend to me you arrogant, ignorant asshole.
#805 to #804 - kerplunking
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Care to provide an example of a peer-reviewed paper that uses the terms "macro-evolutionary theory" and "micro-evolutionary theory"?
#808 to #807 - kerplunking
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
>1977
User avatar #811 to #808 - arrisarrad
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I know, that's how you know the term isn't some new-fangled thing made up by creationists. The terminology has been around since the 60's. It's just not often used because most evolutionary scientists just use the term "evolution" as a catchall since Macro-evolutionary theory includes most of the aspects of micro-evolutionary theory. However, if you're open to considering other plausible evolutionary scenarios, micro-evolutionary theory can certainly apply to many events. I'm not saying Macro-evolutionary theory is false, but we often use examples of micro-evolution as evidence of macro-evolution, which I consider a logical fallacy. Since we can prove micro-evolution's existence, then we should accept that in lew of macro-evolutionary theory until we can find conclusive, non-circumstantial, evidence of macro-evolutionary theory. I don't like how most evolutionary scientists seem to break from established scientific method in pushing things like the extremely flawed fossil record and tautological theory of evolutionary inheritance of genetic traits in large populations.
#814 to #811 - kerplunking
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Wow. You clearly have no ******* idea what you're talking about. I'm not even going to bother.
User avatar #817 to #814 - arrisarrad
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
What do you mean I have no idea what I'm talking about? If you want to make a counter-argument or point out a flaw in my logic, I'll definitely consider it. Don't presume that your blind, some could religious, acceptance of an inconclusive theory is any substitute for logic and intelligence. Fanaticism is a trait just as easily found in those who don't claim to be religious as it is in someone who does follow a religious doctrine.
#706 to #10 - anon id: ac79d8ce
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
It's a theory, not a fact. Therefore you BELIEVE, since it's not a fact.
#803 to #706 - skumbaner
-1 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #815 to #803 - arrisarrad
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
That is complete ********. Who taught you scientific method? A theory is not fact. Even if your conclusion supports your hypothesis, and you create an established theory, it is not fact until you have proof, not evidence, of it.
User avatar #818 to #815 - skumbaner
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Do you even know what biology is?
User avatar #261 to #10 - dharkmoswen
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Do you believe in air? Belief/believe does not denote faith in any form
User avatar #488 to #10 - bronybox
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
No, it's implying that somebody believes factual information that they're given and accept that they are indeed fact.

I could very well say that I don't believe in gravity, even if it is a scientific fact.
#575 to #10 - moosecream
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
User avatar #517 to #10 - benighted
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
thats alot of ******* children...
User avatar #646 to #10 - anonionbagel
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Thank you, thank you so much for saying this. I hate when people say "believe" for a scientific fact.
User avatar #699 to #646 - WakaTakaBang
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
The definition of the word "believe" has nothing to do with religion.
dictionary.reference.com/browse/believe?s=t

I can say I don't believe in gravity, as it's only a (albeit, widely accepted) theoretical concept. I'd be ******* wrong, but that wouldn't change the definition of the word "believe". To believe is to wholeheartedly accept something as a personal truth.
User avatar #816 to #646 - arrisarrad
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Actually, evolution is not a scientific fact according to the scientific method. It is simply taught as a fact because it provides a secular explanation to our origins in a society that doesn't want people teaching religious beliefs in school, a position I support, but that does not make macro-evolutionary theory fact. I suggest you take a few courses on evolution and origins of science.
User avatar #826 to #816 - anonionbagel
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
With the extreme amount of evidence, and us actually witnessing it taking place, it's pretty much a fact.
User avatar #828 to #826 - arrisarrad
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Only micro-evolution has actually been witnessed. To extend the physical evidence of micro-evolution to the much broader and experimentally ambiguous theory(s) of macro-evolution is a breach of scientific method. Therefore, while we can conclude the basic changes in organisms through inheritance, the level of change required for one organism to be so severely altered as to account for the variety in separate species in evidence today has yet to be statistically proven with anything other than tautological or circumstantial evidence. Which means, according to scientific method, the commonly accepted variation of macro-evolutionary theory is exactly that, a theory. Yet to be conclusively proven. So there is some clout in the arguments against traditional evolutionary theory being taught as fact.
#50 to #10 - Xepheros
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Exactly. It should say "...lives within the confinements of reality and understands that evolution is fact."
#20 to #10 - anon id: 8ee5965a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Evolution is a theory, dumbass...
#26 to #20 - alexusapi
Reply +15 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
so is gravity, go to the top of a giant building and test it out.
#114 to #26 - recio **User deleted account**
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #132 to #114 - alexusapi
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
but i would still like to point out that he/she called the other person a dumbass so maybe unconsciously i got down to his/her level. :)
User avatar #128 to #114 - alexusapi
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Yes you're right, i guess this site got to me. i really didn't mean to be an asshole. but the "theory" is scientifically accurate and saying you don't "believe it" is quite annoying for people in that field of study who can as you mentioned back it up by facts. when the facts build up you start to create a rational model of how the world works, like with gravity. if you drop a book you can precisely know when it will fall to the ground if you know the measurements. Evolution is a bit trickier because contrary to what some people think it is, it does not have a path, evolution is not making us smarter by time or make horses necks longer to reach the top of a tree. evolution makes the horses with the long necks survive and therefore mate to make more horses with long necks until one day in the far future you have a giraffe, evolution didn't decide that the horse would be better of with a long neck, natural selection did.
#245 to #128 - recio **User deleted account**
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#28 to #26 - anon id: cb9c3cac
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
I see that reply WAY too often.
Gravity is a theory. But it's simply a theory, that explains the FACT that you fall towards ground.

It's simply an explanation on the fact, that we do indeed fall down.
User avatar #396 to #28 - coolcalx
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
evolution is the name of both the theory and the scientific fact of which it is based.

there is the "theory of evolution," and there is also the scientific fact called "evolution."

just like the Big Bang is a theory based on the scientific fact called expansion.

for future reference, a scientific fact is an observable phenomenon
#30 to #28 - anon id: 1c09cf83
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Then wouldn't the theory of evolution be the explanation of the fact that things evolve?
#31 to #30 - kdeastab
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
I'm the second anonymous, but I'm mostly posting this as a way to get back to this for a potential response. However, as an extension, you probably see that response way too often because it's a perfect way to show how saying something is wrong because it's a theory only shows how little you understand of science, and the way that it works.
User avatar #46 to #20 - drastronomy
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
a theory


with a ******* of evidence

theory+******* of evidence=truth nearly every time
#607 to #10 - anon id: 55849f9b
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Perhaps a better word would be accept.
User avatar #138 to #10 - Shramin
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Implying that some beliefs cause barriers so people do not believe in things like Evolution or other scientific studies.
#554 to #10 - anon id: 5c9749bd
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Evolution is a form of faith.

Id rather quote albert Einstein, than charles darwin.
Somebody who actually USED science. Even he said that it is a form of faith.
User avatar #806 to #554 - arrisarrad
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Why does anybody who says anything other than something along the lines of "Evolution is vastly superior to anything else and to even question the nature of our new fancy modern interpretation of our existence is ignorant and close-minded." gets thumbed down on this site? It seems as though there are people just as fanatical about accepted theory as there are about religion. Science is about questioning established theory, not blindly accepted the first thing presented that contradicts religion.
User avatar #170 to #10 - Ruspanic
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
All knowledge is belief. Belief is what separates knowledge from objective truth. It is possible to either believe or not believe in things regardless of whether or not they are true.
Don't be a cunt.
#413 to #10 - anon id: 968b9977
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
One can BELIEVE in a theory, which is what evolution is however widely accepted and almost certainly correct us may be
User avatar #797 to #413 - coolcalx
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
evolution is the name for both a theory and a scientific fact.

a theory is an explanation, a scientific fact is an observable phenomenon.

not believing in evolution is analogous to not believing in ocean currents. both exist, and both can be observed.
#767 to #10 - bauser
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
It is a kind of faith i suppose, science is a philosophy and thus you're placing your faith in the philosophy of science and the morals associated with it, such as using good scientific method.
User avatar #796 to #767 - Maroon
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Science is not a philosophy. Philosophy is philosophy, science is science. They are completely separate.
#810 to #796 - bauser
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Geez. Okay, you've obviously not gotten out of high school yet. You have much to learn. Science can't exist without philosophy, otherwise why do we find out about the world? There has to be a philosophy behind it, there is philosophy behind everything in this universe. I will take these red thumbs if it means I've at least planted an education seed.
User avatar #813 to #796 - arrisarrad
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Science is simply the application of experimental procedure to philosophy. They are more closely tied than any other subjects, even history and literature.
#267 to #10 - anon id: b9b2232d
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
not implying that at all, technically we "believe" in any theories. Gravity is only a theory, not a law. We BELIEVE in gravity.
User avatar #561 to #267 - uuuuuu
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
In gravity we trust...
User avatar #809 to #267 - Visual
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Gravity is a fact, moron.
#192 to #10 - UnoSkullmanx
Reply -5 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
It is, *******. You can't prove that anything is true. You have to believe. The only thing you can know for sure is that you yourself exist.
#812 to #192 - Visual
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Anybody can prove you're a massive faggot.
#610 to #192 - slyve
Reply -5 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
This image has expired
No. Just... No.

If you want to know a reason why you are wrong, please slap yourself in the face. You will then KNOW that it hurts. You won't have to believe anything, because you have proof.
#237 to #10 - anon id: 4063ff9d
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
kill yourself
User avatar #16 to #10 - Faz
Reply +54 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
>Implying believe can only be used for faith
>Implying believe isn't simply "Accept as truth"
#66 - lupislord
Reply +295 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
I watched my Charmander turn into a Charizard

Evolution must be real
#709 to #66 - jellybaby
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I apologise, but this is the first thing that popped into my head.
#281 to #66 - anon id: 8cc7bc0f
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
charmander doesnt turn into a charizard,it turns into a charmillian
#681 to #66 - jakim
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #748 to #66 - blitzzomsu
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Interestingly enough the evolution of Pokemon is more based on Lamarck's theory than Darwin's. Darwin's evolutionary theory is more like the breeding thing in Pokemon. The more you know.jpg.
#137 to #66 - blankyyy
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#328 to #137 - lupislord
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #385 to #66 - Charmeleon
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Shut the hell up. No you didn't.
User avatar #180 to #66 - theqsk
Reply +28 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
So you completely skipped charmeleon?
User avatar #386 to #180 - Charmeleon
Reply +22 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Thank you for defending my honor.
#330 to #180 - lupislord
Reply +11 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
He was a very good charmander
He was a very good charmander
#38 - mattdoggy
Reply +241 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
the majority of all popular Christian groups, including the Catholics, Baptists, and Methodist accept Evolution.
#361 to #38 - deadlyambitions
Reply -4 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
so then they dont believe in god creation of mankind
User avatar #353 to #38 - xxoutcastxx
Reply -3 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
i hope thats sarcasm..
User avatar #178 to #38 - gildemoono
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
and a lutheran named gildemoono...
#409 to #38 - anon id: 968b9977
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I sincerely hope you are being sarcastic. If not, your ignorance has killed my faith in humanity
#458 to #38 - anon id: ca6ce97a
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I'm a baptist and my whole faith and substantial evidence has led me to believe evolution is fake and there's a museum on creationism in Cincinnati it cool
#553 to #458 - pxthreezerothree
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Do not associate that abomination and offence to the name museum with my fine city. It is located well away from Cincinnati near the border of Indiana where the area turns extra Deliverance-y.
#584 to #553 - kingkaga
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
>Believes in something you don't
>SICK ABOMINATION
grow up.
User avatar #516 to #38 - pawtucketpanda
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
***** have ya read tha Christian Bible?
#579 to #38 - kingkaga
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
No they don't, what the heck are you talking about?

I live in the south, and have been to countless Baptist churches. Not a single one has taken any shine to evolution, stop making stuff up.
User avatar #750 to #38 - armflailingtubeman
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Wouldn't evolution go against the whole Earth was created in 7 days and has only been around for like 4 thousand years that the bible says?
User avatar #781 to #38 - mattdoggy
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
To readdress my post because everyone seems confused, the major denominations of Christianities leadership has decided to accept Evolution as a form of creation. Basically God made the earth and shaped the beings over time, with mankind being a special creation shaped into God's own image. It doesn't interfere with anything in the bible. In fact the bible agrees with it, with each day of creation being seen as a different stage of the earth being formed and the evolution of life from simple plants to complex land animals. As someone mentioned "wouldn't it go against the earth in 7 days thing", very often in text periods of time are mentioned, the seven days being a good one, and they are used as teaching stories, like you would tell a child. It was something easy for the primitive people to understand. Later verses clarify that the time is not to be literal because days are like centuries and centuries are like days. As far as the Earth is 4000 or 6000 years old, that is a estimation someone made by adding up the life spans of the lineage of people in the bible. The earth is said to be much older, that is just the lineage of modern man as far as the bible is concerned which could be off by ten thousand years depending on how you add it. The educated and well informed leadership of the church accept science, it is just people trying to understand creation. The church just believes there is a hand behind creation is the only difference. As far as the crazy housewives and all go i can't speak for them, the majority of Christians in America are ill informed old folks and unopen to compromise or understanding things they don't comprehend. As far as the leadership and official position though, the church is up to date with evolution and even the big bang
#695 to #38 - biggietalls
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Sir, I live in Arkansas and if you go to the Baptist church down the street and say evolution is real they will tell you alllll about how you're going to hell.
User avatar #86 to #38 - someoneforamoment
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Internationally, at least.
User avatar #13 - dafunkad
Reply +122 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
>implying that the pope doesn't believe in evolution ....

seriously i'm catholic, and i believe in evolution my priest believes in evolution and sometimes talks about it.
#37 to #13 - xxxgnipsxxx
Reply -6 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Honestly "christian" denominations shouldn't be categorized with Catholics, we are the more enlightened form of christianity. Even though now I'm pretty much agnostic I still defend Catholicism since it supports science.
User avatar #359 to #13 - hitlersoneballsack
Reply -1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I hope this does not offend you but can the evolution theory not coexist with catholic beliefs or does your beliefs try to morph god ad evolution.
User avatar #631 to #359 - dafunkad
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I'm not offended at all, mainly because I didn't understand what you asked ^^,

But catcholicism doesn't claim to know everything, we believe in evolution because we can't deny evolution when it's that obvious.

I' really didn't understand what you asked, but I hope I answered
User avatar #784 to #631 - hitlersoneballsack
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
oh ok sorry I couldnt really make my question sound any better but that is sorta the answer I am looking for
User avatar #819 to #784 - dafunkad
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
ok, ^^
#84 - HomerSimpson
Reply +75 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
I like how you repeated the content in your description
I thought it was so funny, I'm glad I could read it again
#113 to #84 - ishalltroll
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
My thoughts exactly.
My thoughts exactly.
#240 to #84 - itsmypenis **User deleted account**
+3 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#8 - anon id: 67cbc1e3
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Actually, even the pope believes in evolution.
User avatar #49 to #8 - Crusader
Reply -41 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
The pope was also part of the Hitler Youth, so I'm not going to use him as a role model.

I believe in evolution, but not the pope.
User avatar #72 to #49 - diablojoe
Reply +72 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
To be fair though, nobody in Germany at that time really had a choice whether or not they went into the Hitler Youth, it was pretty much mandatory.
#188 to #72 - casadue
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
mfw your reply
mfw your reply
User avatar #345 to #49 - foelkera
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I'd rather be in the mandatory Nazi Boyscouts than get gassed to death
#258 to #49 - xatrainx
Reply +6 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Ya see, I can understand not believing in god, the sanctity of the church, or the Judeo-Christian morals and ideals that are propagated by the church, but the the pope is an actual, tangible person. You can't simply not believe in him. That's like saying that you don't believe in the existence of apples.
User avatar #286 to #258 - hydraetis
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
But apples DON'T exist. Apples are just a conspiracy theory to distract us from wanting to get to the cake.
#102 to #49 - andalitemadness
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#714 to #8 - takesomemorewater
-25 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #754 to #714 - isomeras
Reply +9 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
xDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD LEL
User avatar #766 to #754 - bagguhsleep
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
le xd face
#791 to #766 - notstill
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
#783 to #714 - pepemex
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
User avatar #468 to #8 - koombine
Reply -17 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I never understood this. How can religious people believe in evolution? It totally contradicts their beliefs.
#519 to #468 - kingpongthedon
Reply +13 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
How? If you take the Bible literally, sure, but very few people are literalists. Religion, at its very core, sets out to answer the question "How should I live my life?". This is the defining trait of religion, and it's what most people care about. Does how you were made (accidentally, in the backseat of a GTO, for me, thanks for sharing Dad) really affect what constitutes me being a good person (spreading kindness, charity, etc.)? The two have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

Does the Bible "answer" where we came from? Yeah, but it was also written 3000 years ago by people who didn't understand the concept of not ******** onto the street. Most people accept that they didn't exactly have the hang of this whole science thing and move on with trying to be a better person.
#499 to #468 - thenamecreator
Reply +10 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Well, the way that I see it in my religious belift... Its like...

God created the first creature, and gave it the ability to evolve.
The creature gradually used the ability and became man, with the help of god.
I could be more in-depth if needed.

Also, I would love to hear some other peoples beliefs, and see their explanations on it...
(Just made this photo in MS paint. Mind the paint skills, they're off the charts.)
#756 to #499 - anon id: 47a57bff
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
you.. I like you.
#615 to #499 - anon id: 7c274d6d
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
I believe god started big bang, because i simply cannot everything came from nothing. That contradicts every single law of physics. Therefore i believe god created the big bang, and guided the universe until the point where humans were made.
User avatar #661 to #615 - thenamecreator
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Yeah, its the same way with me.
User avatar #790 to #468 - tomhefailin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
god gave us common sense for a reason
#492 to #468 - thenamecreator
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#675 to #8 - shatt
Reply -12 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
why the **** does everyone have so many thumbs
this anon has 483
User avatar #688 to #8 - benasbenas
Reply -12 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
how the **** did an anon get 480+ thumbs?
User avatar #524 to #8 - chillinwithbears
Reply -11 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
lol damn who knew anon could get so many votes up good job sir you've changed the game
#11 to #8 - anon id: 6be61402
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Lot of people doesn't know that, i was quite surprised my self when I found out.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution

I't not like they accept any possible ethic consequence of it anyway.
User avatar #259 to #11 - dsgbiohazard
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
That's a long name.
User avatar #283 to #8 - hydraetis
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
That's impressive.
#592 to #8 - anon id: e9a5e6df
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
to bad you were me or you would have gotten so much thumbs
#473 to #8 - zzombiee
Reply +3 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
User avatar #371 to #8 - baditch
Reply +8 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
You'd be surprised how many Christians believe in evolution. I'm one of them.
#104 - Wumbologist
Reply +67 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
The Catholic Church actually accepts evolution as fact.   
Just sayin'
The Catholic Church actually accepts evolution as fact.
Just sayin'
#125 to #104 - kennyroks
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
source? just curious on this matter
User avatar #171 to #125 - Wumbologist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia

Also, there's a magical thing called a "reverse image search." It's on google images; really easy to do.
#174 to #171 - kennyroks
Reply +4 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
was not referring to the .gif but thank you for your passive douchebaggery
User avatar #177 to #174 - Wumbologist
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Oh, you meant the source for the fact? I go to a Catholic school and the priests and priests-in-training acknowledge the fact, and I learned all about it in Biology.
I mean honestly, how hard is it to google anyway?
#1 - anon id: a68e23ac
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Sorry... Can't hear you over my freedom
#47 to #1 - yourlifeisalie
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
User avatar #6 to #1 - digeredoo
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Please sir.
Don't make us look bad.
User avatar #2 to #1 - enpootis
Reply +51 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
are you from New Zealand?
User avatar #29 to #2 - doctorhorrible
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Actually it has changed,

www.heritage.org/index/ranking
User avatar #54 to #29 - hasanaat
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
That's economic freedom, we're discussing personal freedom.
User avatar #61 to #54 - doctorhorrible
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
http://www.prosperity.com/Subindexes-7.aspx

my mistake
#75 - pornoranger
Reply +47 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
there is no such thing.
believing in evolution is like believing in electrical power or believing in combustable gasoline.
i'm offended.
User avatar #233 to #75 - finni
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
So what would you say? People that deny/accept evolution?

I accept evolution, but I still think that the science is never settled when it comes to these things.
#716 to #233 - teranin
Reply +1 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
There is more empirical and quantifiable evidence for evolution than there is for Gravity. Both are theories. Anyone who says evolution is "just a theory" and they "don't believe it" you need only point out them that Heliocentricity, Gravity, Special Relativity, Cell theory, Germ theory, molecular theory, atomic theory (you know, the **** we built a bomb out of), and plate tectonic theory are all scientific theories as well, so feel free to fall up off the earth, never get sick, lose your sense of relative distance and time, deny the existence of nuclear weapons, pretend earthquakes don't exist, and pretend that a year isn't a rotation of the earth around the sun.

After you do that, you'll see just how deep the rabbit hole goes on their insanity.
User avatar #770 to #716 - finni
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
You can't really say that for one theory to be wrong, all others theories needs to be wrong too. I don't disagree with what you're saying when you say that people saying "it's just a theory" is a bad argument, I agree with you on that. Everything in science is a theory, however, saying that if you're going to disprove Evolution that you also have to disprove everything else, I disagree with.

But don't get me wrong, I too accept Evolution as a natural process, but that was not my question, really. I asked, what would you call it instead of saying "they don't believe"? That they deny? I'm just asking for what words to use instead of saying "believe in" or "don't believe
#772 to #770 - teranin
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Ohh! my bad, I misread you. Yeah I would say calling them deniers would be a feasable approach.
Ohh! my bad, I misread you. Yeah I would say calling them deniers would be a feasable approach.
#562 to #233 - elgringogordo **User deleted account**
0 123456789123345869
has deleted their comment [-]
#638 to #562 - pornoranger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
well, it doesn't if it's really proven
User avatar #717 to #638 - milthyfoustache
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Thing is it hasn't been proven. It's a theory.
#732 to #717 - pornoranger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
so is the theory of ralativity. no sane person would dare to doubt it.
look, i don't want to argue. accept it, or leave it be.
#734 to #732 - pornoranger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
sorry for the mistakes. yes, i noticed them.
User avatar #738 to #734 - milthyfoustache
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
It still hasn't been 1005 proven though so claiming it to be fact and rubbing it in the faces of people who believe otherwise is just dickish behaviour.
User avatar #739 to #738 - milthyfoustache
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
*100%
#744 to #739 - pornoranger
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
read comment #716
User avatar #820 to #744 - milthyfoustache
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Thing is I do believe it but it is still a theory everyone is entitled to believe what they want.
#52 - mattmanhemi
Reply +45 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
just looked it up. 55% of Americans accept evolution. only 20% of southerners accept evolution. 80% of northerners accept evolution.could not find anything about west coast. GO SOUTH!
User avatar #254 to #52 - colegaleener
Reply -2 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
What? I think you meant to say that 20% of people who accept evolution live in the south, and 80% of people who accept evolution live in the north, you dumb ******* hick.
User avatar #337 to #254 - mattmanhemi
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
how am i a hick, i live in new york
#264 to #52 - dsgbiohazard
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
You don't believe in evolution...?
You don't believe in evolution...?
User avatar #336 to #264 - mattmanhemi
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
you are not supposed to believe in it, you are supposed to accept it
#356 to #336 - dsgbiohazard
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
You don't accept* evolution?
You don't accept* evolution?
User avatar #366 to #356 - mattmanhemi
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
i do! i live in new york. most people accept it here
User avatar #93 to #52 - cullenatorguy
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/14/2013) [-]
Roll god damn Tide
#238 to #52 - komradkthulu
Reply +2 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
That's what we get for burning it down and leaving it poor and destitute and then mocking it for generations, eh?
That's what we get for burning it down and leaving it poor and destitute and then mocking it for generations, eh?
User avatar #321 to #238 - hanabro
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
We wouldn't mock it if it didn't deserve it.
User avatar #795 to #321 - techketzer
Reply 0 123456789123345869
(01/15/2013) [-]
Yes. Yes, you would.