Your thoughts on evolution
Researchers found hand bones of an adult female Australopithecus sediba in Malapa, South Africa.
September 12th, 2011
12:56 PM ET

Your thoughts on evolution

We knew our story on a possible human ancestor called Australopithecus sediba would be controversial, but never expected more than 1,900 comments to come in.

The post generated some pretty intense discussions involving readers who do not believe these new findings - or any evidence of human evolution, for that matter - because of their religious beliefs.

blake

Maybe your ancestor, not mine. I was created in the image of God, not evolved from from some lifeless goo over billions of years. The accident of time and chance. I don't have enough faith to believe those kind of fantastical fairy tales.

Religious sentiments such as this received a lot of backlash from readers such as gary, who writes:

Evolution is fact. Deities and demons are pretend. Bible is folklore, myth, superstition and legend.

There's also a large contingent of readers who don't see a contradiction between accepting the facts of science and having religious faith. Judas Priest writes:

Excuse me, but why does believing in god mean denying the wonders of creation that you can see and touch and evaluate? How does accepting that the world is billions of years old, and the universe billions of years older still, deny god? How does observing that things change over time refute god in any way? Why must god, and god's creation, be small enough to be encompassed by your tiny little mind and your tiny little book?

The hundreds of comments that formed these discussions annoyed readers like Pav, who thinks people with religious reasons for denying evolution should take their beliefs elsewhere.

Mathematicians don't have to justify the Pythagorean theorem every time they apply it to a new proof, and scientists don't need to justify evolution every time they talk about a new fossil. So, stop it!

Of course, not everyone sees it this way - earth2loons feels that evolution is a lot more controversial than the Pythagorean theorem, writing:

"...when you must eliminate the possibility of a creator from your interpretation of the data because of your own agnostic or atheistic biases, you will see what you want and need to see."

It's obvious that a lot of people have very passionate views on this topic but, this being a science blog, we are going to report with the assumption that the prevailing, tested theory with the most rigorous evidence - evolution - is true. And CNN has a Belief Blog that fosters conversations about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives.

And there's a lot of misunderstanding about evolution; it's really not as clear cut as you might think. Reader John Hanson writes:

There is always controversy surrounding the "discovery" of fossils that are supposed to bridge apes to humans because they're always plagued by assumptions made by paleontologists. They touted "Peking Man" as the "link" in the fossil chain proving evolution, then came to discover bones of homo sapiens in the same pit. There are too many assumptions and too little PROOF.

The truth is that there is no simple chain of ancestry with a "missing link" that scientists are trying to find. When we talk about the lineage of Homo sapiens, we acknowledge that there were a whole bunch of ancient relatives of various anatomical forms, some of which are more closely related to us than others. Check out this piece from Science 2.0 on the "missing link fallacy" to learn more about the complexity of tracing the evolution of our species.

Follow @CNNLightYears on Twitter

Post by:
Filed under: Human ancestors • On Earth
soundoff (3,534 Responses)
  1. Rick

    Why do we have a tail bone?

    September 12, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
    • JW

      I think the Christian response is "Don't ask, don't tell."

      September 12, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
      • JW

        or "don't tail."

        September 12, 2011 at 4:59 pm |
    • Questionable

      So God can punish you by making you fall on it.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
    • Kool Aid

      And why do our embyos have gill slits at a certain stage of development? Oh, wait...this is evidence...I should probably shut up...

      September 12, 2011 at 5:45 pm |
      • Humanoid

        I'll answer your question if you tell me what an EMBYO is!

        September 12, 2011 at 11:37 pm |
    • eric calderone

      Christianity is all about affirming that there is a One God who is the Creator of everything. How we got a tail bone is not a subject within Christianity's purview. That is why Christianity, though this may surprise many who profess to be Christians, does not speak to the PROCESS by which life on this world developed. What is speaks to is that however life developed, GOD is the Creator.

      September 13, 2011 at 8:37 am |
  2. Rob

    Holy smokes, so many people intent on proving others wrong. What difference does it make, really? I am here, how I got here is not going to change the fact I exist. If you wish to know things like the origen of your species, or the origen of any species, you are on a quest for Knowledge. Undisputedly, our most powerful tool for obtaining knowledge is the methodology of Science. Maybe one day Science will discover that God DID fake the fosil record just to mess with our heads. You never know....

    September 12, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
    • DrMark

      The difference is that these people VOTE! And pass laws. And stop science. And elect like minded (or mindless) people. And change the supreme court. And start wars. IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE.

      September 12, 2011 at 5:05 pm |
      • Kool Aid

        If not properly controlled, fundamentalism will be the end of humanity. That's as good a reason as anyone can think of.

        September 12, 2011 at 5:41 pm |
    • Answer

      Rob,

      Obviously you have never went on any level above and beyond yourself.
      Being selfish is a good trait at some point. Not when it comes into who will affect our future.
      You don't want to affect the world as others that want power and see what power in their hands are capable of. That's very gracious. Understandable, but unrealistic.

      What is politics? Well at the most precious – these are people who we entrust with authority.
      You don't want to live their set of authority – you vote them out. Or vote others in – however you want to look at it.
      What kind of people are in the world? There are all kinds.

      So if you consider the importance of "all kinds of people" you will see the value of presenting a concise viewpoint of why it matters. If you do not want to be a part of the human race and want to live alone – you can't.

      You will either a) die alone – well look at that, or b) die ignorant.

      So religious people want to die alone? Or is it the atheists who choose to not fight? Either way there are numerous justifications.

      September 12, 2011 at 6:13 pm |
    • eric calderone

      The scientific methodology is a good method for validating hypotheses about whether this theory or that theory is more likely to be consistent with other variables. Unfortunately, many individuals with political agendas misuse or misapprehend just what the scientiific methodology is. For example, those who express skepticism about God make assertions to the effect that God cannot be proved. True, but what they are unaware of, or shy away from, is that the hypothesis of a superhuman entity being responsible for creation, is a great deal more convincing than any other hypothesis that has been expressed. And, secondly, not being able to definitively prove a hypothesis is not by any measure tantamount to disproving it.

      September 13, 2011 at 8:57 am |
  3. JW

    Really? God made it a requirement to believe in creation over evolution in order to get to heaven? He could have given us a little more details, as well as make the two accounts of creation a little less confusing.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
    • eric calderone

      You are accepting the misapprehension of those who mistakenly believe that "creation" theory is Christian. Christianity makes no claims on HOW life evolved. What it does affirm is that however life evolved, God is the Prime, Unmoved, Creator.

      September 13, 2011 at 9:22 am |
  4. Brian

    Interesting observation I have been making over the last while: I understand the theory that we evolved from rodent like animals that lived in the footsteps of dinosaurs. Not intentionally trying to wait for their extinction but willing to take advantage of it when it eventually happened. Ultimately evolving into many new animals and eventually the latest dominant species, us. Now for the observation: If we became extinct I think the most likely candidate to take advantage of it would be the raccoon. Very cunning animal that does spend time teaching their young. Good ability to problem solve, and manipulate objects. Demonstrated strong ability to adapt to many environements. They are also successfully spreading from North America around Asia and Europe under the "feet" of man. SO the next time one comes to your back door for some cat food, you my be looking at the future heirs of earth.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
    • Brian

      Maybe I should have asked the question...what animal do you think is most likely able to evolve and take the throne from us in the event of our extinction?

      September 12, 2011 at 4:58 pm |
  5. Kamish

    Today's Monkeys, Yesterdays Monkeys, it's still a much lesser creature than us, and that's why folks don't buy it...

    September 12, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  6. Perplexed

    As I have no religious preference I still have some scientific questions...1) Why have we stopped evolving from ape to man and man to whatever? 2) With there being 1000s of full bone fossils of dinosaurs why aren't there 1000's of full caveman skeletons...and not just a hand of an old woman? 3) How come, to this day, there's not one "inter-species" fossil showing a cat becoming a dog or a alligator becoming a turtle? Just questions that I'm perplexed about.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
    • pugowner

      Perplexed,

      These are good questions for a young student or someone who did not have an introduction to evolution while in school. I applaud your curiosity and your desire to learn. There are introductory books as well as numerous on-line resources which can help you learn about the basic principles of evolution.

      September 12, 2011 at 5:00 pm |
    • Brian

      Here is my basic understanding. A group of a species live together and evolve together over time. With each generation comes differences that are very small. Random differences. Some are positive to helping reproduction and some are negative. Through a simple simulation a friend of mine found that negative differences disappear from a population very quickly even though the negative is small. While positive differences spread through the population until every future person has that positive trait. It's basic statistics. Now the population seperate and go to different parts of the world. If they are not best suited for that environment they will evolve until they are while competing with other species. If the two populations are seperate and cannot interbreed the positives will stay localized and not spread between the populations. They will evolve seperately until they reach a point when they can no longer breed. The differences are too great. They are now seperate species. They continue to evolve slowly over millions more years branching off more species that move to new habitats. Remember, for them to seperate themselves in evolutionary paths they must not interbreed. So ice ages, new islands, climate changes are great ways to seperate populations over distance long enough to do this. At the end you have many new species. When scientists dig up some fossils they find say 20 fossils out of millions and millions of animals that lived at one time. If each animal was numbered sequentially based on their time of birth, they may have found fossil #3998, #68,908, #267,934, and # 3,587,008. To the scientists this is all they see. So they name each one like it is in it's perfect state of evolution, complete. But in reality every numbered animal was perfect in it's own mind as you and everyone else does. But you may not be if you died because your environment recently changed. You were perfect in the desert but you crawled into a swamp. If every enimal skeliton existed today you would see the full tree and all of it's variations. One animal that today could split into seperate species is the raccoon. They were isolated to the wild. But now many have moved to urban environments. These urban raccoons may not ever breed with wilderness raccoons again. And if given enough time, they could evolve to suit urban environments and leave the others behind. They also moved to Japan and Europe because of man. They may evolve there differently than North America now unless cross breeding is done. Remember that positive traits spread to all in a population. So does that mean all humans will eventually become one color? Given enough time, it's likely. Unless our cultural differences prevent it.

      September 13, 2011 at 2:25 am |
  7. pugowner

    I haven't read all of the earlier posts, but the point should be obvious: science reporters and bloggers should communicate clearly. Language can be confusing when the same word has a different meaning in a specific field as compared to general usage. Evolution is not a theory as the word is commonly used, so don't use the word "theory" when discussing evolution with the general public. The details of evolution are uncertain, evolution itself is not. We don't refer to atoms as a theory when discussing the Large Hadron Collider, even as we search and debate the nature of particle physics. We know that human origins is one outcome of a complex family tree, even as we research the details. If people object to science, so be it. Our responsibility is to communicate the science in clear terms.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  8. Bob from Bellingham Ma

    There is no more provable fact to evolution than the Bible. Evolution is as much a "faith" based religion as Christianity.
    I choose to base my faith in the Bible. If you choose evolution God bless you. if you are right we are both in the same boat. If I am right, you in a tight place.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
  9. unknown11

    I don't recall anything from the scientific method that states that anything that cannot currently be proven does not exist. On the contrary, the scientific method is based on observation, hypothosis, testing, and theory. There is no place in science that demands that what cannot be explained must be disbelieved. Those here who insist that because we have science, we cannot have religion are misunderstanding both. They are no more intelligent or helpful than those polar opposites who insist that all knowledge is contained in one book. Both of these polar opposites positions are held by small minded people who have trouble with a world bigger than what they understand in their little mind.

    That is what I think. Have a good day.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
    • ReasonableXX

      Science does say that we don't make unfounded claims and unrelentingly believe them in the face of a total and absolute void of proof. Do not equate science and religion. Scientic ideas and theories are based on massive amounts of collected data and facts. Then a theory is formed after the data is collected. Then that theory is tested and adjusted if needed when new data arises. In science, that data and facts precede the theory. Religion starts with the baseless assumption that there is a god. This is based on no information or data. Then all data that is collected is forced into the framework of the assumption that there is a god. Everything is attributed to this god (the original unfounded assumption). With religion, the theory precedes the data and facts...very different from science.

      September 12, 2011 at 5:00 pm |
  10. Tom

    My friend who is so deeply religious he doesn't believe in any type of science, unless it can be proven in simple terms, uses the argument that: "If man evolved from apes why are there still apes?". The simplest answer I could give him is we know modern dogs came from Wolves and in some cases Foxes but there are still Wolves and Foxes. This is because the new genus was separated from the old. This isn't a perfect analogy I'll admit but if say there were once Chimpanzees on two different continents and conditions changed on one of those continents. The Chimps on that continent would either have to evolve or face extinction while the Chimps on the unchanged continent would continue their natural cycle. Evolution doesn't disprove your belief in God just as jour belief in God doesn't disprove Evolution.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
  11. dark ages

    I can't believe I live on a planet with so many people who believe in ancient fairy tales as truth!

    September 12, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
    • JW

      Well, be glad you didn't live on the earth 100 years ago, you'd be surrounded by even more.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
    • DrMark

      Billions of them. Time to bring humanity out of the Iron Age. Do what you can to save mankind by spreading reason by any means necessary before these ancient fairly tales kill us all. People who believe in magical thinking and that the creator of the universe wrote a book have nuclear weapons at their disposal, and I aint just talking Muslims folks.

      September 12, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
    • Bibletruth

      Which side is the side of fairytales?...the evolution side. Obvious.

      September 12, 2011 at 5:14 pm |
  12. rvanderwal

    Evolution is nothing more than one idea leading into the next idea – since God is creator of all IDEAS it stands to reason that over time all of God's IDEAS will get expressed. Being Infinite in capacity -( hold on to your hats) it means alot of IDEAS are going to get expressed over a very long time.....

    Each previous idea supports the idea that comes after it either directly or in a parallel fashion – each has its moment each has its time to be expressed. Then its time for the next IDEA to come and the old IDEA to retire....my belief in God.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
    • Bibletruth

      God is the creator of all ideas???????????????? Only one who has not read the bible could say that.

      September 12, 2011 at 5:17 pm |
      • rvanderwal

        Hey Bibletruth
        Read the bible several times over – including other texts from other view points/religions
        Basically all I'm saying is I believe GOD( or whatever name you want) Infinite Conciousness as the Creator of all IDEAS. Thus this Universe is nothing more than a sandbox in which we can demonstrate those IDEAS or have those IDEAS demonstrated to us – and marvel at the beauty and the complex, intricate nature they represent. Eventually we will learn the Truth but its like looking on the surface of a balloon as we are ants and describing a flat surface when in fact its round. We don't get to see the whole picture. But we get to have fun discovering it. Hope your day goes well.....

        September 12, 2011 at 8:24 pm |
  13. Billy

    Boy, are you guys gonna be sorry when that there rapture comes!

    September 12, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
    • Bob from Bellingham Ma

      The rapture is no more biblical than evolution.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
      • Bibletruth

        Amen. It is pretty entrenched in certain groups of Christians, but is wholly unbiblical, with its second chance theory, Israel /temple resoration, Antiochus Epiphanies (spelling?) as a major power, splitting off the 70th week of a 70 weeks time prohecy into 69 weeks with the 70th week thrown out 2000+ years future from the 69th week, claiming that which refers to "messiah" (yes the word is actually in the verse) to refer to anti-christ, having no clue about anti-christ, etc., etc., etc.

        The people are wholly deceived in general about end time events. Sad, because the bible is straight forward about the events. Why the deception and why the lack of serious study concerning the end time events? The implications are unwelcome to the vast majority of Christians. The main implication: Yes, you actually have to stop sinning, here, on your own two feet. This gets really close. It requires Christ actually to be within, through the Holy Spirit. Everybody-when someone asks you "are you saved" , read the true meaning of that question (which the questioner almost never knows or believes) and reply " your asking me if the power of sin has been broken in my life, correct?" You have no idea what a favour you are doing to the one you have replied to with those words, and yourself too.

        September 12, 2011 at 5:34 pm |
    • Tom

      If the rapture comes I will gladly join you for tea in hell. "judge not lest you be judged".

      September 12, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
  14. Mike Flannery

    it's never never never been proven that one species evolved from another species! Scientists say it's impossible to test because it takes millions of years to test or prove. Science is being able to test and prove and since evolution can't be tested or proven...evolution isn't science. evolution is for people that don't want to believe in God. I believe in God because of my experiences not because of creation but because of my experiences, I beliieve in creation.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
    • JW

      There has been research that showed that modern man has neanderthal DNA in his/her genome.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
    • Daniel H.

      WRONG!! Using time dilation we can prove evolution.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:56 pm |
    • Timetraveler

      Wrong. It's obvious you have never formally studied science. Proofs only exist in mathematics. There is no such thing as a "proof" in science, only verification of the latest and best theory. It's amazing how many people can't seem to grasp this concept. It's a commentary on the level of education in this country.

      September 12, 2011 at 5:01 pm |
  15. Why all the worry?

    While humans will almost certainly never be able to state with 100% certainty exactly how we evolved, it equally makes little sense to posit the existence of something (a creator) that there is no evidence for. Why are people so scared to just say "I don't know?" Not only in terms of evolution, but in terms of many facets of life. I guess it is that instinctual human fear of the unknown that causes us to constantly be looking for meaning in everything. Once humans learn how to manage that instinctual fear and just RELAX, a new general way of living life may emerge. Until then, innumerable resources will go towards instilling "meaning" for life (churches, research foundations, etc.)

    September 12, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
  16. Ed

    It never ceases to amaze me that folks like Blake call evolution "fantastical fairy tales." The evidence is overwhelming when one takes the time to actually look at it. We see it in the fossil record, DNA, primitive tools fasioned by early humans, and we even see it at work in species like the pepper moth. We can see these things with our own eyes. What evidence of creation is so compelling for Blake? A very short story that was passed on verbally for thousands of years before writing, written by unknown and unenlightened authors in an age of superstition and darkness. Which is the fantasicial fairytale again?!

    September 12, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
    • Mike

      What you see in DNA is stored information and communication that could only come from a designer!!!!

      September 12, 2011 at 4:53 pm |
      • Daniel H.

        Was the percentage? 93% of DNA we have no cracked? Right?

        September 12, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
      • Terry

        Justify at all costs! Use all scientific evidence, twist it, make it work in religion's favor. You can't ever reason with a true believer. They're brainwashed and now incapable of making informed decisions for themselves. They *MUST* obey their masters, even at the cost of sounding foolish (which they know deep down they are). I pity them.

        September 12, 2011 at 4:59 pm |
  17. Daniel H.

    Layman's should not argue about these sorts of questions, leave it to the lab coats and the clergy men to duke it out.
    As far as we know, life has NOT been proven to have evolved from a primordial soup. But adaptation and evolution are fact. This can open questions about who turned the "soup" into a single celled organism and so on.... The bible is NOT fact, its just a nice story with Basic.Instructions.Before.Leaving.Earth.. Call "God" divine if you want, with the right technology and energy source, we can make planets from nebulas & life from the right chemicals and DNA that we code. & if god created man in his own image than your "God" is black so why does jesus look like a hippie?

    September 12, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
  18. Christopher Frank

    It seems to me that one must have as much faith to believe in science, as to believe in God....Whichever you believe in there is no way any one person can research ALL the information in both the Bible and the science books. Either way, you are believing (or not believing) what someone else tells you...You must have faith to believe what someone else tells you, that you cannot prove for yourself.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
    • Timetraveler

      No, sorry. Only to people who have turned off their brains it seems that way, because all they understand is faith. You see, believe it or not, it actually takes some brain power to study science, unlike simply accepting religion.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:53 pm |
    • Questionable

      Except that most scientists have to go through school, grad school, phd ex.... Also research has a set of standards. Honestly if you have to have faith in the statistics in most situations, this is why most exceptional research is peer reviewed.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:53 pm |
    • Why all the worry?

      Nice point. I find it depressing that people are always trying to make arguments pertaining to things that they know NOTHING (or extremely little) about. It's OK to not know. Scary, but you have to accept it if you want to maintain a realistic conception of your own knowledge.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  19. JOE

    Science continues to prove every bit the equal of religion in the ability to "almost" explain evolution/creation. Both put their faith in cosmic forces that are invisible or sound crazy.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  20. Why can't we all get along?

    So while I personally think ID is simply a way for those of us who hold certain beliefs to feel more comfortable in those beliefs without having to engage in critical thought, I never the less believe that it is highly arogant for creationist or scientist to state categorically they have the answer. Who can know the mind or method of an omniscient, omnipresent being? I mean really? Explain to me why evolution is not the method God (or whatever name you choose to give this being) chose to create the universe. Why must we all choose sides and bash the other as being ignorant or foolish or hellbound? Seems to be a dangerous trend we have all ventured down not just here but in other areas of social disgreement as well and most decidely seems unAmerican. Remember, we respect, fight and die for the freedom to exprese our views.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:47 pm |
  21. Dick

    To my many religious friends out there. I'm a firm believer in evolution but have no problem with your right to believe God used evolution as his method of creation. No reason the two sides can't be civil as each person has to decide this for themselves.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:47 pm |
    • Terry

      The problem I have with all of this is that people who believe in fairy tales want to make rules for me.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:55 pm |
  22. Robert

    Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, in our likeness, and let them rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of the air, over the livestock, over all the earth, and over all the creatures that move along the ground. The fool has said in his heart there is no God."

    September 12, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
    • JW

      According to the same book, he later ordered the Israelites to kill women and babies as they took the "promised land". How do you justify that in light of what Christ taught?

      September 12, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  23. Alex in NJ

    How come science and God must be mutually exclusive? While science can not explain God, why can't God explain science? I totally believe in evolution, just as Darwin and subsequent scientists explained it. I also totally believe in God. Not the God of the Bible or the other Abrahamic religions, nor the God of any religion. I just believe something created all of this. Everything in the Universe is so complex, and works so well, everything from our solar system to our ecosystem to our own bodies seem to be designed just like we design buildings and machines. In studying astronomy you quickly see that what one would assume is impossible is actually somewhere out there in our Universe. This has lead me to believe that nothing is impossible, not even God. I think for anyone to discount the possibility or even probability of a higher power is just as close minded and ignorant as it is to believe the Bible is a word for word telling of history.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
    • Bibletruth

      All true science is of God and in perfect harmony with the bible. False science is not biblical.

      September 12, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
  24. Celthobbes

    Evolutionists have proof without certainty; creationists have certainty without proof. And make sure people have the correct notion of evolution: humans and apes shared a common ancestor. Humans did NOT evolve from apes. To say so is like saying I came from my older sister and not my sister and I coming from my parents. Do you see the difference there?
    And who really knows? Maybe there is one God; something we probably couldn't comprehend anyway. But if there is, maybe evolution is how this god operates on our planet? Who can really say? Maybe on other planets life has formed differently. It's a pretty sure bet it has.
    If you look at any of the recent photos from our space based telescopes and look in wonder at it all, it's a pretty scary thought to realize we humans don't really know much at all in comparison with what's out there. So to those who are so certain in their religion; I'll guess it gives you certainty or comfort and that is fine. You can believe when you die your soul goes to a garage in Buffalo for all I care. Just don't act so certain about things we really don't know anything about, no matter how scary that might be. Because to believe any religion is the only "right" one or closer to some divine "truth," is vanity not faith.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
  25. Ken

    No scientist has ever said the we have evolved from monkeys. We are not monkeys, we are apes, plain and simple. We haven't evolved from gorillas or chimpanzees, and not a single scientist on this planet thinks we have. There are five types of ape in this world; Gorilla's, Chimpanzee's, Orangutan's Gibbons and Humans. Not only did we evolve from apes, we are currently apes! Look it up.

    You must know that we are animals, (since we are not vegetables or minerals) and I am sure that you know that we are mammals, (since we are warm blooded, have hair and feed our children milk) but so many people have trouble accepting that we are also primates and ultimately apes. We are, I promise you.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
    • Bibletruth

      Look it up..lol

      September 12, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  26. mikey

    Belief that an omnipotent boogerman in the sky snapped his fingers and created the universe is the lot of imbeciles.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
  27. jeric

    Check out the first chapters of Genesis. You'll find that each step of evolution is mentioned in order. For instance, check out the fact that the sun was not created "on the first day." Therefore, there is NO way of measuring time, and no support for a six-24-hour-day creation. That doesn't mean that God did not create, using evolution as the tool. But it does mean that we have to rethink how we think.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
    • Questionable

      Where does it mention Neanderthals living at the same time as humans?

      September 12, 2011 at 4:47 pm |
      • CharlesD

        Right before the chapters on nuclear fission, inorganic chemistry and the radio spectrum.

        September 12, 2011 at 4:57 pm |
  28. Questionable

    Anyone know this answer? How do christans explain neanderthals, homo erectus, and homo heidelbergensis? And dont say we evolved from neanderthals because homo sapiens and neanderthals existed at the same time, so at one point in time there were two distinctly different very intelligent primates on earth. Oopps must have forgoten to put that in the Bible.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:44 pm |
    • JW

      I've heard some say that those were "works of the devil" while he was on earth destroying it after his "fall", and as he tried to create creatures that would worship him, or something like that. But recent studies that show modern man mated with neanderthals probably disputes that.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
  29. Skrotnik

    Social Darwinism at work. Those who refuse to acknowledge science will pass their ignorance on to their children. Their children will adhere to archaic beliefs and fall behind in a society increasingly ruled by scientific fact. Those children will have fewer and fewer breeding options as intelligence becomes more and more of a survival asset, eventually leading them to breed with whatever close relatives have chosen not to stray more than a mile from the farm. This sub-race of zealots will then be hunted as a food source for those who have learned through scientific knowledge how to control the fears of the ignorant. Nom.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:44 pm |
    • Bibletruth

      Wishful thinking abounds...lol

      September 12, 2011 at 5:56 pm |
  30. DrMark

    Why are 99% of the animal species that ever lived on the earth now extinct? Was God just practicing? Poor planning? Took him a while to get it right? Just wanted us to have a lot of pretty fossils to look at? Or maybe evolution explains everything. And rather nicely.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:44 pm |
  31. DD

    Evolution does in fact exist. Irrefutable proof of HUMAN evolution does not in fact exist, YET, despite all the attempts at linkage. This planet has had innumerable more unique lifeforms than we will ever know about or catalog. FACT. I believe attempts to try & link them up is merely wishful thinking.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:44 pm |
  32. Mike in NYC

    HEY ..... where did the entire thread go with my discussion of Homonid evolutionary timelines????

    September 12, 2011 at 4:43 pm |
  33. Dave

    Ok. You win. Your a Monkey's Uncle all right.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
  34. Heinze

    I can't read all this. Too annoying. I believe in evolution. It has a scientific basis. But given the considerable stupidity of man and the VAST ignorance, would any intelligent God try to tell us about creating a world over a billion years including such details as the movements of the continents, DNA, mutation and things way beyond what we could comprehend at the time. Don't some people tell their children about the stork? Don't we often talk in simple terms to impart a piece of a larger concept to someone who might not grasp that larger concept?

    If God is involved, and so 'evolved' him/her self to create a world and all the species in it, would that God not be smart enough to tell us a simple story, and then let us grow and learn the larger truth for ourselves? The complexity of the truth should give the creationists more pride than adherence to the simplistic parable of creation that can be found in the bible.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
    • Bibletruth

      I think He has...lol

      September 12, 2011 at 5:58 pm |
  35. phew

    How would ancient astronaut theory play into evolution? Could it be that we were created in "that" higher power's image? I think this whole debate is beyond religion. Religion and science will forever be at odds. There is no room for science in the eyes of those who cannot see it. Science is on the brink of some major discoveries that could in turn confuse faith further. That is not to say that the faithful cannot follow scientific laws and theories. This just means it will be more difficult to argue the authenticity of such works as the Koran and Bible.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
    • JW

      I'm no expert, but I believe the argument goes that some mutations and alterations came from external sources, and sometimes even intelligent sources . . .

      September 12, 2011 at 4:44 pm |
  36. JW

    What if what we thought was God and prophets and angels and such, were really just aliens coming to us for various reasons? And our simple minds couldn't comprehend it, so that is what we put together?

    September 12, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
  37. Bostic

    God and evolution are true. Science proves evolution,, personal experiences will prove god if you give him a chance. I do not believe in god because my parents or a friend told me to nor because some book told me to. I gave god a chance and he proved through personal experiences that he is real and definitely in my life.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
  38. Jack

    I have kleptomania, so when it gets bad, I take something for it. Once I took a bottle of holy water. The devil made me do it. I springled the water on the devil. He turned into an Iphone.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
  39. RC

    Books and studies on this matter are written by MAN. Man re-writes these studies and books. How many times have they been re hashed over and over and over.... Make your own assumption and then keep it to yourself. No one here is intelligent enough to understand the full magnitude of the truth and that simple truth is we just are.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:40 pm |
  40. Rick

    If God knows what we are going to do in life than we are just acting out his play, so why would he throw anyone in hell? Because he is not real thats why. People just need to know there is something after this life, well folks this is your only chance so quit wasting your time praying to the invisible god in the sky!

    September 12, 2011 at 4:39 pm |
    • Filmman

      One chooses hell for his/herself by rejecting His love. If we assume that God is all things good, and you reject God, then God eventually honors your free will to choose, and removes himself from you. The lasting result is the absence of anything and everything that has any ounce of good in it, yielding what our simple minds could only conceive by assigning it the term "hell."

      September 12, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
      • Answer

        So then Filmman why preach hell?

        It's a personal view after all. Why preach heaven for that matter?
        Yes ultimately it is in your own imagination. No one has come back from the dead. It is just another mess of garbage to take someone into control.

        September 12, 2011 at 5:49 pm |
      • Rick

        I have children if they didn't do what I said I would never throw them in a eternal fire pit!

        September 12, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
      • Bibletruth

        God spoke to Satan ....Your destiny is the lake of fire. Your time to that event is short. You may go around like a roaring lion all you want, but your time to that event is short. There, in the lake of fire, I shall bring thee to ashes and never shalt thou be anymore.

        By the way, God says the same thing (that last sentance) to unrepentant sinners.

        September 12, 2011 at 6:03 pm |
  41. Filmman

    How about this: the book of Genesis indicates that God created Man from the "dust of the earth," and Woman from the "rib" of the Man. Curious if the "dust of the earth" phrase in any way supports the theory of evolution, which suggests we in fact evolved from small molecules in the earth. But just because we may have a notion of HOW God did something doesn't mean He didn't do it. If I warm up my bowl of chicken noodle soup in the microwave, you might say that I in fact did not warm up my soup, but rather the radiological process of increased heat caused by the microwave itself warmed up my soup. Does this mean I can no longer claim that "I warmed up my soup?"

    September 12, 2011 at 4:38 pm |
  42. Boomer in Mo

    God's days are not our days. His are eons long and evolution is his work. It just takes forever in short, limited human days and only an instant in God's.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:38 pm |
    • Rick

      This makes no since, I read a lot of people say gods days are not like our days.... how do you know, this makes more since to me, if i'm talking to a american i'm not going to speak chinese to him b/c he or she will not understand , if there was a god he would speak to us so that we would understand. He wouldn't say a day if he meant a year or a year if he meant a month! Its nuts!

      September 12, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
      • Answer

        @Rick

        It does make sense. I'll explain it to you by asking you some questions.

        What is time firstly? It is very simply – a moment to the next moment. If you agree to that? This is the very most basic definition.

        So you can then explain it like this: if you live from moment to moment then you are living in the flow of time.
        So then how many units of moment are you concerned about? Let's say one week.

        Then you reply with – one week equals seven days. One day has 24 hours. So you do the math. And so on.
        Then you have to ask yourself – who came up with the divisions of these units of seconds .. minutes .. hours and days.. month .. etc. Well man did. WE had people who agree to set a standard on the way we use these units and how big they were to be defined. We use the rising and setting of the sun to help us. It's in history – you can read it.

        With that in mind you know that there can be other standards where -if we were living on another planet for instance-
        we would have different definitions of these moments/units.

        September 12, 2011 at 5:35 pm |
    • Answer

      Boomer...

      You can immediately tell that the bible was wrong.
      It was an assumption of man in the first place -living in the dark ages- to specify that it took seven days.
      They didn't even have properly defined specifications to deal with their inconsistencies that would be science in the future to discount logic and truth. That is why man is so afraid of knowledge. At least those of the religious mindset.

      September 12, 2011 at 5:42 pm |
    • Bibletruth

      The creation account speaks of seven 24 hour days, six days creating and the seventh day of rest. And all that God created was very good. Later, the entrance of sin marred creation.

      September 12, 2011 at 6:07 pm |
  43. Farmer 0441

    I believe a flaw in the theory of evolution is based on the concept of looking at the past from the modern perspective and trying to describe how things in the past got to the point they are now. It is not unlike how our ancestors found the skulls of large mammoths, with a single hole in the front of their head (which we now know is where their trunk was attached) and determined them to have come from the large one-eyed Cyclops’s. Evolution is a guessing game. Many mythical creatures were the results of ancient attempts to reconcile archeological findings with then current understandings. (And yes, our ancient ancestors also found the archeological remains of long dead creatures.) The theory of evolution is a more modern version of the same attempt with more profound assumptions and still incorrect findings. We are still trying to understand what we find in terms of what we know. Unfortunately there is a lot we do not know and our conclusions are only as good as our knowledge.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:38 pm |
  44. Lila

    It's annoying and offensive that the religious fanatics go on and on about evolution and ruin great articles with their none sense. It has never occurred to me to go on a religious article and start ripping apart the Bible. I simply don't care enough to comment about that subject. The ones that ruin science articles must be very insecure about their religious beliefs to do so. Plus many of them are so uneducated, it's hard to find the intelligent comments that are getting lost.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:38 pm |
    • Dave

      Apparently you have never read any of the Religious articles comments on CNN. I would say the non believers are treating the Christians with kid gloves.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:40 pm |
    • Answer

      @Dave

      A point of contest.
      Religion is to you – 'a law moderated by strict faith'.
      Science is testable facts. The atheist in myself will glad tear apart the bible to bring you up to speed and educate you for real. With logic.

      Atheists help their fellow man, we educate and give out facts. Religion does not help the world.
      When you want to defend religion in your belief blogs I will be there to present you with facts. Logic will tear you apart.
      You will always retreat with blindly faith to protect you. That is all you have.

      So when Lila is typing her sentiment, she is vetoing for science because she fully well has accepted life for what it is. Harsh but fun, cruel but ever liveable. Free and unfettered thanks to science – for letting us think properly.

      Religion closes off all avenues of deep thought. Makes you conform to a dogma. That is not living.

      September 12, 2011 at 5:19 pm |
  45. Geoff

    Anyone ever think that maybe God did create humans in His own image, only He did so gradually over the course of billions of years, through the process of evolution? If He created all the Universe and the laws of physics and chemistry and biology and other sciences that we observe interacting in the physical world around us every day, then belief in evolution as the science that hHe created in order to create us is hardly inconsistent with a belief in God. Just something to mull over.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:37 pm |
    • Terry

      I'm not picking on you personally, but your post highlights something that religion does. It takes current scientific theory, and fact, when it becomes compelling enough and molds it into something that still allows the religion to save face. I hope the day when people open their eyes and truly see how they are being manipulated happens in my lifetime. Who benefits most from religion? The leaders, that's who. The Vatican is sitting on a sh**load of cash and uses it to push their agenda. In the meantime the *faithful* must tithe to keep this machine running. Pathetic.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:48 pm |
  46. ApeMan

    If I leave my black and white 35 mm camera outside and the conditions are just right, will it become a high def color video cam in 55 billion years?

    Of course not, but what evolutionists are proposing is the same thing.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:37 pm |
    • Filmman

      Well, the key difference between a camera and a human is that the human possesses LIFE. Life is a process, as is evident all over God's beautiful and patiently-evolving creation.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
    • Terry

      You are truly living up to your screen name.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
    • palintwit

      Don't look now Jethro, but someone is trying to hotwire your tractor.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:50 pm |
    • SarcasmIncarnate

      they should build monuments to your ignorance!

      September 12, 2011 at 4:53 pm |
  47. Ken

    Wikipedia: "A scientific theory comprises a collection of concepts, including abstractions of observable phenomena expressed as quantifiable properties, together with rules (called scientific laws) that express relationships between observations of such concepts. A scientific theory is constructed to conform to available empirical data about such observations, and is put forth as a principle or body of principles for explaining a class of phenomena.[1]"

    So...Intelligent Design doesn't meet that standard. It doesn't have any empirical data supporting it, other than trying to prove a negative. This "x" is soooo complicated (and you can't prove me wrong) so therefore it was intelligent design. That is not a competing theory that deserves merit.

    Furthermore, to believe that Adam and Eve, who had two sons, Cain and Abel, populated the entire earth is self-evidently ludicrous But, to be a good sport let's say they did. Now we have Blacks, Asians, and Whites. This would obviously indicate the proof of evolution.

    To deny the facts that our best and brightest scientists can derive – in favor of believing an entity that no one can see, who can read your mind, and gives you eternal life if he likes you ......well........lets just say the organizations pushing that agenda are taking in a lot of your money.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:37 pm |
  48. Martin

    Actually you can see the 9 month edition of a few hundred million years of evolution in human gestation. From a single cell then a ball of cells, to a primitive gut, to a tail and gill slits, and fromfin-like appendages to arms and legs. Deep inside our cells are mitochondria that provide energy..an evolved chloroplast, the hemoglobin in our blood, so similar the chlorophyll, but with iron instead of magnesium at its center. evolution

    September 12, 2011 at 4:36 pm |
    • Humanoid

      Wrong. That single cell holds 23 pairs of chromosomes [DNA] in which are the colour of eyes, hair colour and texture;
      height; weight; propensity for future adult diseases; personality; skin colour; Everything.

      In ,what you describe, a single cell, eg the amoeba, that's all you've got. A single cell. Normal development is not evolution.

      September 12, 2011 at 11:50 pm |
  49. Dave

    Your are so smart. Where are you going when you bite the dust?

    September 12, 2011 at 4:36 pm |
    • Robert

      Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me."

      September 12, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
  50. Jon Trott (Chicago)

    As an Evangelical Christian, I am saddened by folks on both extreme ends of this discussion. Evolution is on one hand used as a cudgel to suggest God did not create the Universe... an assertion that evolutionary theory properly understood does *not* make nor even suggest. Conversely, Evolution is demonized as a plot to undermine the biblical narrative. Again, this is not what evolutionary theory says.

    Many thoughtful Evangelical scientists hold to a "high" view of the biblical narrative yet also affirm the scientific basis for Evolution. I am only a lay person, but must say that almost all the data on genetic mapping seems to heavily underscore the likelihood that evolutionary theory is indeed correct. So... God used evolution, maybe?

    Just sayin'...

    September 12, 2011 at 4:36 pm |
  51. Nick

    Evolution is the only thing that explains different races. So, we've evolved to this point to be different based on genes and geography, but the "first" people magically appeared on earth. Right. What color were Adam and Eve? Oh, I forgot. They were blonde with blue eyes....Just like Jesus!

    September 12, 2011 at 4:35 pm |
    • Nash

      Your ignorance and arrogance will just take you in circles..

      September 12, 2011 at 4:39 pm |
      • Nick

        LOL

        September 12, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
  52. AB12

    As a religious person, I find it both logical and comforting to accept the separation of religion and science into two separate domains. Science doesn't have anything to say about morality, for example. And the Bible can't be viewed as an entirely accurate scientific or historical document. Even the order of creation in Genesis 1: 20-27 contradicts the order in Genesis 2: 18-19. If you don't accept this separation, then you are in the uncomfortable position of having the conceptual domain that religion occupies for you shrinking over time, as science explains more and more things. Why would you want to relegate your religious beliefs to the margins?

    September 12, 2011 at 4:35 pm |
  53. watchman5

    All theory about the logistics of how we were created, is just that.....theory! Even biblical scholars only know that there was a Genesis pattern of a certain order, but not enough details were given for a full truth. Science also has not proven their theories either. Even carbon dating is not accurate....how can you test its accuracy beyond a certain point. This is not something that can ever be 100% proven. So lets all just call these things theories, teach them as ONLY theories, and not fight about it. How we got here isn't as important as how we live our lives here.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:35 pm |
  54. Rob

    Fossils are perhaps one the least important proofs of evolution. Fossils are simply what many people focus on since they can be seen and touched, whereas the far more convincing evidence of evolution takes thinking, reading and some basic thought to understand.

    Evolution can easily be shown even if we did not have a single fossil to point at...

    September 12, 2011 at 4:34 pm |
  55. George

    It is interesting how creationists pick and choose what scientific facts they believe and what facts they don't, as if it were a shopping trip to the local supermarket. What puts anyone who isn't a scientist in a position to judge what's "true" and what's "false"? So (most) creationists believe, for instance, that there are atoms and electrons, that the earth revolves around the sun (I hope), etc. Why? Have they ever seen an atom or an electron or gone to space and set foot on Mercury? Being the devil's advocate, one may claim these things are also fabrications or falsehoods. So you do not believe in science, do not study science, yet have the chutzpah to make scientific statements, as if science is decided by referendum or by public opinion.

    Creationists can believe what they wish to believe. It is their constitutional right. Do not forget, however, that the church, the very same church who does not like the whole evolution theory idea, also had us believe until quite recently that the sun was revolving around the earth. Science is not here to please or displease anyone. It doesn't make moral or cultural judgments, it just tells the story how it is. People who do not like the news are welcome to stick their head in the sand.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:34 pm |
  56. unknown11

    What if science and religion are both systems made up by humans to try to explain things that humans cannot grasp? Both might use small amounts of evidence that can be interpreted multiple ways to explain whatever the human wants to explain. Both might be affected by a human's preconceived notions about the final answer. Both can and have been used to manipulate people and cause wars. Both have ardent followers who know little or nothing about that that which they follow.

    It seems to me as if the 'thing' called science by the masses has way too much in common with the 'thing' called religion by the masses.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:34 pm |
  57. Dale

    Give God some credit.......don't you think he is smart enough to create something that has the abililty to evolve?consider the earth itself......I don't think anyone could dispute an evolutionary process there! Right?

    September 12, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
    • Timetraveler

      Pssst.... there is no god. Not outside your head anyway.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:40 pm |
  58. Jeff

    For Blake who says he doesn't believe in "fantastical fairy tales" like evolution, I guess believing that a snake and a talking donkey, a man living three days in the stomach of a big fish, and that Jacob took fresh-cut branches from poplar, almond, and plane trees and made white stripes on them by peeling the bark and exposing the white inner wood of the branches, and then put them in the water troughs so the goats would mate in front of them and their offspring would be streaked and speckled, are not fantastical fairy tales; sounds to me like he is a little confused. You will believe any fantastical event in Bible, written by man, with your interpretation of it, but not hard core scientific facts which also comes from man. Faith can be very very scary indeed! As Martin Luther said "Reason is the bibles number one enemy" Sorry for the paraphrase but you get the idea!

    September 12, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
  59. DrMark

    Religio's out there, please learn this: "Theory" in science means "explanation" not "hypothesis". So the Theory of Evolution should be read as "The Explanation of Evolution". Germ "Theory" has been proven to be true. The "Theory" of Gravity has been proven to be true. The Theory of Evolution has been proven to be true. All are just as well documented and accepted as fact. Do you deny that germs cause disease? Do you deny gravity? Denying evolution is just as stupid.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
    • ApeMan

      LOL, try again. A theory is NOT a scientific law. It has not been proven as a law. It is an accepted hypothesis, but nothing else.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:35 pm |
      • DrMark

        Simple question fer ya; do you think Germ Theory has been proven or not? Its "just a theory" too. Dont believe in antibiotics?
        The Theory of Evolution is on just as firm ground scientifically. Of course you need to know the basics of science to see that. Like 5th grade level maybe.

        September 12, 2011 at 4:52 pm |
    • Nash

      There is no proof to evolution. evolution is sciences desperate attempt to make sense of how it all began. It will always be just a THEORY!!!

      September 12, 2011 at 4:35 pm |
      • Timetraveler

        You've never actually studied science, have you? Formally, I mean. And at a real university, not Jim Bob's Jesus University.

        September 12, 2011 at 4:42 pm |
  60. Elvill

    Micro-Evolution is fact: Diversification of species (say 14 different variations of plumage among finches Darwin observed) happens everyday, exampled in our pets {dogs & cats}. Macro-Evolution is a myth [evolution via a common ancestor] and is not supported by paleontological records. Fossil records simply do not support intermediate and transitional life forms between all major life groups i.e. no single fossil group can claim to belong to the ancestor of another major group (required for Macro).

    September 12, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
  61. Rick

    If God exist he did a terrible job! if I had his powers we would be living in a much better world!

    September 12, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
  62. Nash

    Carbon dating is a flawed science and the scientists are aware of that. The fact is that they have nothing else to prove the correct age of bones. http://jubilationlee.blogspot.com/2007/09/flaws-of-carbon-dating-science-and.html
    As for the bones, they are species that just died like the dinosaurs.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
    • ApeMan

      How dare you speak the truth!!!
      How will scientists keep getting funding for "research" if what you say is true?!?

      September 12, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
    • Rick

      From your article

      "I have since rejected that creationsim as scientific, but I choose to keep this post in its original form to remind myself of how ignorant I once was"

      The basis for carbon dating is solid, the point he is making is in a question of statistical accuracy. No, carbon dating is not exact down to the year over 2000 years but it is accurate.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:36 pm |
  63. Answer

    The sole reason most people will not accept facts or real truths is that they can not justify any information that is against them.

    Religious people will always find another mean to justify their continued position.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
  64. Capt'n Crunch

    Evolution? What's that? I thought man was created by spontaneous combustion. Poof! There he stood in the Garden of Eden. He went to sleep and POOF! when he awoke, there was a woman present. Hey, isn't this what those religious nuts teach?

    September 12, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
  65. pensimmon

    Personally, I think the evidence is absolutely conclusive that evolution is a fact. However I also think that evolution and the whole universe system and beyond is utterly miraculous, and contributes far more to my beleif in a deity, than some old geezer on a cloud waving a wand and saying "Let there be light" etc.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:30 pm |
  66. Ashrakay

    This is pretty ridiculous. My 2-year old daughter thinks her stuffed animal is real. And if she could type, I'm sure she'd be able to come up with all kinds of great reasons why it's true. To believe in religion and creation, at some point, you must suspend belief in reality. We have a word for people who in the face of reality deny its existence. Insanity.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:30 pm |
  67. ApeMan

    The "intelligent" people are removing God, prayer and the Bible from schools. Yet teenage suicide has never been higher. I guess the realization that we evolved from slime and this life is all there is, is pretty depressing.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:29 pm |
    • Answer

      If you're religious then why does that matter to you? You're secured in your route to heaven anyways. Go off yourself like those that do not accept that life is hard. Life is about facts. Get used it.

      Life is fun if you accepted death. Life is hilarious when you can take a joke. If you wanna live in a hovel and blame someone – blame yourself for not accepting change.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:35 pm |
  68. Martin

    Life evolves. Beyond this argument about human ancestors lies the reality that humans and human-like descendents of humans may not, in fact most certainly will not be, the apex of evolution / creation. In a hundred million years from now, this entire discussion will not be important, as our descendents will marvel at our primitiveness..

    September 12, 2011 at 4:29 pm |
  69. GOD

    SCIENCE HURT GOD. SCIENCE, SMASH!

    September 12, 2011 at 4:29 pm |
  70. d

    The skeletal and dinosaur findings can also be explained easily by scripture. In Genesis 6:4 it says that "there were giants in the earth in those days," that is the days before the flood. Furthermore, this applies to both humans and animals that lived longer and got larger. When the flood came and killed every living thing that moved except Noah and his family, and the animals on board the ark, everything got buried underneath the earth. In fact, that is part of the reason we have oil deposits in so many places across the earth. When scientists find skeletons of huge animals, all of these are simply the remains of huge animals that existed before the flood, or immediately after the flood.
    On another note, the question of suffering in the world is a tough question, but it is also answerable. The answer is a three letter word called "sin." God never took away man's power to choose because He is a God of love. Furthermore, when we make wrong choices that affect not only us but others, why should we expect God to always step in and fix things? A person smokes cigarettes all his life, and then he gets lung cancer. Should God be blamed for the man's lifestyle choices which put him in that condition. A person sleeps around with numerous people, and then he contracts HIV, and then he passes it on to his child. Should God be held responsible for this man's decisions? Of course, not. Many times people things on God that have nothing to do with whether or not God is a loving God or not. It was the love of God that moved on a friend of the cigarette smoker to plead with him to stop smoking but he would not. It was the love of God that moved on a father to warn his son to stop sleeping around or else he might contract a disease. A great portion of the suffering in the world is simply OUR OWN FAULT. Furthermore, even the starving people in Africa, Southeast Asia, Europe, and the USA could be fed by the money that God gave to some of the wealthier people in America, but they are TOO SELFISH to unlock their hands and relieve the sufferings of those around them. Then those same rich people turn around and say, "I don't believe in God because if He was real than why is their so much suffering in the world." It's not God's fault, it's OUR FAULT. God gave you hands to feet to go and help somebody, hands to hug and hold somebody, and a mouth to comfort and console body. We must start using it.
    Evolution is a theory concocted by demented men whose desire was to push God out of society, Furthermore, it was not Christianity, but the eugenics and social darwinism spawned from evolution that reinforced RACISM and even served as a foundation for the wicked system of Nazism that led to WWII. So it actually seems like evolution is not as good as it's cracked up to be after all. B

    September 12, 2011 at 4:29 pm |
    • The Jackdaw

      I don’t think the Jewish people from 4,000BC were fighting off T-Rexes.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:30 pm |
    • Nix68

      Adolf Hitler was a Roman Catholic who was never excommunicated. Nazi soldiers wore the words “God with us” on their belt buckles.]

      Adolf Hitler, in his book Mein Kampf said: “I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: By defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.”

      For you to say of Nazism that it was the implementation of the work of Charles Darwin is a filthy slander, undeserving of you and an insult to this audience.
      Christopher Hitchens, debating David Berlinski in Birmingham, Ala.
      UAB Kaleidoscope, 9-13-10

      September 12, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
      • Humanoid

        Hitler may have been born a Catholic but he was NOT practising; he was heavily into the Occult. He used Catholicism as a cynical attempt to obtain respectability.
        He wasn't excommunicated because you actually have to excommunicate yourself – then the Church makes it official.

        Stalin was born a Catholic too. They both turned bad. It happens. Get over it.

        September 13, 2011 at 12:00 am |
    • Kool Aid

      The problem with scripture is that you can find a passage in the ramblings of each 'holy' book to justify, reconcile, or explain away almost ANYthing...including some of the most dastardly acts ever committed by one human on another. I posit to you that the book you read from was written by dubious sources, has undergone too many revisions and translations to be useful, and speaks of a being (God) who has failed to intervene in any meaningful way in the affairs of human-kind for two millennia.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
    • Ashrakay

      God has no place in society. If he wants a place, he needs to pay taxes and get a job like the rest of us.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:46 pm |
    • NOT MY CHAIR

      In creationism and religion, why is there so much incest? take Adam and Eve who did their children impregnate? same goes for Noah and his family?

      September 12, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
    • Randy S

      Far be it from me to try to convince you that your belief system is wrong. But please allow the rest of us to have our own belief system founded on scientific theory, evidence and fact without the constant nagging.

      September 12, 2011 at 6:19 pm |
    • eric calderone

      Hitler as an adult was a confirmed atheist who persecuted the main Catholic and Lutheran Churches in Germany. Stalin was born an Eastern Orthodox, not a Catholic. You guys need to get your facts straight. Afterall, aren't atheists and skeptics always talking about "facts"?

      September 13, 2011 at 11:22 am |
  71. Rick

    Wow, I am surprised how many people actually believe in creation. Christianity has been rolling back its beliefs in the face of indisputable science for as long as its been around, say hi to Galileo for me. You nut jobs keep holding on because educated Christians accept evolution as fact, because it is. The problem with Christianity is that you have been brainwashed to accept things as fact based on faith with no evidence, and you've been on the wrong track for over 2000 years.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:28 pm |
    • Ashrakay

      Yes. As I get older I realize there are many levels of crazy.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
    • eric calderone

      Wow, I can't believe how disdainful atheists and skeptics are regarding simple facts. Galileo was called before an Inquisition because he broke an earlier promise not to teach that the universe revolves around our sun-heliocentrism, until he could prove it. He was not persecuted; when he recanted he was sent on his way. Of course, you guys who weep over Galileo, don't comment about the fallacy of heliocentrism, or that Galileo himself was a believing Catholic. Nor do you discuss the fact that since around the time of Aristotle, most educated people, and that includes the senior Church hierarchy (who were educated) were well acquainted with the theory that the earth was a rotating sphere.

      Got news for you: the Dark Ages in some fundamental ways were more enlightened than our times!

      September 13, 2011 at 11:33 am |
  72. Kool Aid

    To those of you who continue to prefer pie in the sky over scientific evidence, your beliefs are harmful to everyone around you and will eventually lead to the death of us all. To be more clear, though most relgions tend to agree that evolution is a myth (bewildering stance to take viewed by those of us who understand the evidence you are up against), what NONE of you agree on is the true nature of God, especially the Abrahamic faiths (Judaism, Christianity and Islam). This has led to near constant violence and subjugation and, in an atomic age, will inevitably lead to a complete downfall of humanity.

    Please wake yourselves from this delusion and face reason...before it is too late.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:28 pm |
  73. Incredulous

    It's astounding that so many Americans are ignorant (and proud of it) when it comes to science and even simple, general awareness about the world. You're free to believe and teach in non-government venues [i.e., your church] your religious beliefs. You are not free to call them 'science' and insist that they be taught in government venues [i.e., our public schools].
    Evolution is a testable theory that repeatedly produces results that bear out the hypothesis–one of the keystones of the scientific method. This cannot be claimed for any version of religious creation myths, or for "Creationism." Creationists: why are you not insisting that the Hindu myths also be taught, or those of the Native Americans or ancient Egyptians? Using your own logic they are just as scientifically valid as your modified Judeo-Christian version–so shouldn't those be taught in your "science" class, too? What's that–they're "wrong" because you "don't believe in them?" Too bad, you don't get to pick and choose, you have to apply the same logic and standards–remember, it's "science."
    Do the rest of us a favor–stop dragging this country down with your fear and backwardness. US children are already more poorly educated in science and math than in other developed countries, you don't need to validate that by dumbing down every child's education to fit your world view; chances are your own kids will turn out dumb enough.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:28 pm |
  74. Rick

    Remember this, you also believed in Santa Clause untile someone finally told you he didn't exist, God is Fiction, it is taught, based on you upbring determines what reliegion you will be.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:28 pm |
  75. paxloki

    still have much room for improvement

    September 12, 2011 at 4:27 pm |
  76. JC

    I was born a Neanderthal, and I'll die a Neanderthal.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:27 pm |
  77. Paul

    I am still waiting for proof that something has gone from a less complex structure to a more complex structure. (Basic Tennet of evolution) I have only found Proof of more complex becoming less complex. Also where is there a difinative change in species like say from a fish to mammal. I see interfamily difference but never across species evidence. This has been a great hurdle for me to even consider that evolution is possible. Take a hard look at the world around you and realize the statistical probability that would have to occur for this to just become from random premodial gue.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:27 pm |
    • Answer

      Look at proteins. Thank you.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:40 pm |
    • Ashrakay

      Cellular mytosis... a fetus... don't you even know where babies come from? Cancer... Is that proof enough for you? I doubt it. Something so obvious could be staring you right in the face and you'd still refuse to see it. You're either a child or you lack the mental wherewithal to accept reality.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:51 pm |
  78. eric calderone

    I am a religous Christian. I have for a long time now been dumbfounded as to why so many who profess to be Christian find the theory of evolution to be counter to their beliefs. Evolution hypothesizes as to HOW life developed on earth. It makes no claims regarding God. Evolution as a field is quite separate from Who or What is responsible for life.

    Christianity postulates that God created all matter, including Man and Woman, and that God endowed us with His spirit into our soul. The human soul, according to Christianity, is what separates us from our fellow animals, on this planet. How the creation story in Genesis is interpreted certainly can vary. Christians are free to literally interpret it; eg., that God created the world in 6 days. Christians are free to read the Book of Genesis as an allegory, written by those who were struggling to understand their Divine inspiration from God. But the bare essentials are: God created ALL creation, and endowed us with our Souls.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
    • Rick

      The problem with your Religion is who defines the interpretation, one mans parable is another mans fictional account. Therein lies the problem. Scientists can disagree and present evidence to diagreements over evolution and actually resolve their issue, but religious nuts will always hijack your beliefs to maintain their boneheaded beliefs and you have no recourse.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:32 pm |
      • eric calderone

        No, it is not a problem because the Holy Father, the Pope, is the final arbiter on matters of faith and morals. However, there as been no final pronouncement on whether the Book of Genesis should be read literally or not, because whether one believes that God created the world in 6 days or whether God created the world using evolution as an instrument, ultimately has no bearing on whether one accepts that GOD is the creator. In other words, the issue of whether the creation story should be literally interpreted does not affect the content of a Christian's faith.

        September 12, 2011 at 6:01 pm |
  79. Guy

    Denying evolution is like denying the theories of gravity or plate tectonics. Denying evolution spits on all of biology. Denying evolution is asinine and stupid. Evolution is one of the most robust scientific theories around. It's unbelievable to me that in this day and age so many people can be so ignorant on one of the most established scientific theories out there.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
  80. DaMonkeys

    If monkeys are our ancestors, why are there still monkey's?

    September 12, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
    • SarcasmIncarnate

      the theory of evolution states that humans and monkeys have a common ancestor, not that one evolved from the other. hope this a troll.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:34 pm |
  81. EnergyBeing3

    With Religion, the dead still control the living. What someone wrote several thousand years ago, simply doesn't work for today's modern society with it's EVOLVED advancements. The Bible has tried to evolve through various translations and revisions (I think it's over 20 revisions now) but it still fails, miserably, unless it can live through those who are indoctrinated and brainwashed into supporting it's outlandish stories and lies. We've hit the tipping point now in our human evolution to where we have discovered reality that simply doesn't line up with the ancients texts of those with over active imaginations of a primitive man. Christianity will soon become a dead religion, just as Latin is a dead language. One can study it and learn it but it won't be used in modern society. Even the Pope is a hypocrite because he nor any Christian of day and age can live by ALL the rules of the outdated rule book.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
  82. André

    What does the word THEORY mean in "Theory of Evolution" ?
    What is a THEORY in a scientific context ? I am asking the question because you so often hear people saying
    "Evolution is just a theory".....they think it means "I have a theory about this" or "I have a hunch about this".

    Here's the answer:
    The word THEORY is one of these words that has different meanings depending in which context or field you use it.
    In Science, a THEORY is simply the most accurate and certain statement you can make. It is something based on a huge amount of evidences and something that has been proven again and again, to the point it doesn't mean to be proven again. It is stronger that a theorem or even a LAW.

    It does NOT mean an "hypothesis".

    September 12, 2011 at 4:25 pm |
    • ApeMan

      LOL, check again. A Theory can be disproved, that is why it is not a law...

      September 12, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
    • André

      I think you're the one who should check again. All scientific statements can be disproved, including a law.
      No one (including me) ever said that a theory is 100% certain.
      The point of my post is that a THEORY in science is completely different than a theory in regular (non-scientific) talk where it means an hypothesis.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
  83. RodRoderick

    God created evolution.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:24 pm |
    • Answer

      Who said that? Oh you did!

      I am so glad you are aware of this fact. Can you prove it?

      September 12, 2011 at 5:52 pm |
  84. imthankfulimachristian

    A College Professor stood on his chair and said, "If GOD really exists, knock me off my chair." Nothing happened. The class was quiet. He said "See? I'll give it a couple more minutes". A Marine Vet stood up, punched him in the face knocking him out and off the chair, then sat back down. As the Professor came to he looked at his student and said, "WHY'D YOU DO THAT?" He said, "GOD was busy protecting my buddies still fighting for your right to say and do stupid shit like this, so HE SENT ME"..

    September 12, 2011 at 4:24 pm |
    • ApeMan

      LOL! Love it!

      September 12, 2011 at 4:27 pm |
    • Rick

      Yeah that pretty much is how the Crusades worked. Idiots believing they had a "divine right" to rape and pillage.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
    • Answer

      Therefore anyone who can claim that their viewpoint and direction came from God.

      When will you ever learn?

      September 12, 2011 at 4:45 pm |
    • Answer

      A policeman comes upon a man making his way out of a window.

      He says to the man, "What are you doing?"

      The man holding a large sack says, "I came to take a few things for God's children."

      "Oh is that so? Then why hasn't God told me himself that you were coming to my house?"

      September 12, 2011 at 4:49 pm |
    • Ashrakay

      Juvenile.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:54 pm |
  85. ReasonableXX

    You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. When did being stupid and ignorant become so cool and fashionable? When did we decide that we didn't want the best and brightest to lead us (see the majoriy of the GOP candidates)? When did being knowledgable and reasonable become negative character traits? Ones views on evolution may not impact their everyday life but they are a true litmus test into the type of person you are and the mental limits you have placed on yourself which will undoubtedly translate into many other areas of your life.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:24 pm |
    • RodRoderick

      as does humbling one's self and understanding the complexities that come from a society that has nothing to fear.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:26 pm |
      • ReasonableXX

        Just because something is comfortable or easy to believe (for some) doesn't make it so. That is the basis for the entire arguement between faith and science. Do I think it would be cool if everyone got to go to eternal paradise when they died? Sure. Sounds awesome. But that doesn't make it so. Just because it would be nice if something was true doesn't mean it is.

        September 12, 2011 at 4:39 pm |
  86. Copper's Donut Shoppe

    Having an "invisible" man up in the sky that can punish you "forever" after you die is the most cost-effective method to control the population that was ever devised. You don't even need a massive standing army. It can be accomplished with minimum presence over long distances. And "god" even knows your bad thoughts before you convert them to deeds.
    When nations, countries, ect. finally won control away from the various god peddlers it was at a huge cost. Massive government agencies were required along with huge standing armies that cost much in resources even when they were not busy kill!ng folks.
    In this day and age when many folks do not fear instant vaporization all the control at city, county, state and federal level burns thru huge outlays of capital.
    To believe that the huge reptlles, adam and eve, noah and all, lived just 3k years ago and within a couple humdred years of each other is beyond the pale.
    But then ~ look at the support for "creation science", palin and bachmann ~ not to mention parry.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
    • RodRoderick

      China is feeling the effects of a Nation that has "nothing to fear" after it made religion illegal. America was never founded on the principle of "freedom of religion" – the constitution clearly reads "freedom OF religion".

      September 12, 2011 at 4:28 pm |
      • Dufusuni

        AND....there is no such things as "Separation of Church and State." Not in ONE founding document. Before you go there...RR has it right...you've turned the first amendment on it's head!

        September 12, 2011 at 4:33 pm |
  87. Ken Bynum

    "Well, I might of sprung from a ape, and you might of sprung from a ape, but General Lee, he didn't spring from no ape." Paraphrased from Michael Shaara, "The Killer Angels".

    September 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
  88. seriously226

    Betty, it isn't so unlikely that modern humans came out of Africa and this killed off Neanderthals. Look at invasive species like plants that end up in an area and kill off the local fawna. What about Europeans coming to N. America and Mexico, how many Native Americans were killed and their societies wiped out by the "white man's" diseases and the white man himself? Also, Neanderthals may not have been the best solution to the problem, survival of the fittest.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
  89. PInndaddy

    I often wonder how much further civilization would have progressed if the enlightened thoughts of learned men and women had not been vilified by the religious zealots as heresy during the Dark Ages. But since it appears that 'The Word of God' was then – and seems to be again – THE irrefutable evidence for which the religious community stands firmly entrenched as being THE ONLY story explaining the world and surrounding universe, then there is no point in pointing out the abundant conflicting facts and the civilized world must either continue to ignore the religious community and progress into further scientific/human achievement or cling vehemently to religious convictions and crush out any thoughts which do not agree with religious dogma. You choose...

    September 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
  90. Nicarobwa

    Why does God have a belly button (since we were created in his image and all)? Clearly God had a mother and whether she believes in evolution or not is the bigger question here.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
    • Dufusuni

      In his image (i.e. "likeness")...not a copy..LOL

      September 12, 2011 at 4:31 pm |
  91. jojo

    I like turtles

    September 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
  92. InherittheWind

    Unfortunately, in this debate, those with a fanatical belief that God created humans and discount evolution will never open themselves to really hearing the scientific view. They limit thoughtful discussion on the topic. There are so many wonderful ways we can understand our existence better with science that they are missing out on.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
  93. unknown11

    I am not sure which is more amusing/frustrating; Idiot believers in religion who cannot grasp science, idiot believers in religion who cannot grasp their own religion, idiot believers in science who cannot grasp science, or idiot believers in science who cannot grasp religion. And who is the idiot who thought it was a good idea to teach them all to type? That is they guy we need to find and stop.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
  94. BL

    First, natural selection (evolution) doesn't state that man evolved from apes. It postulates that man and apes evolved from a common ancestor. Secondly, I never understood why faith and science were not compatible. If anything, science points to the likely hood of a creative intelligence. Lastly, if one believes in "creationism," why must it always be Christian cosmology? Why is that any more inherently valid than Hindu, Navaho, or any tribal version of creation?

    September 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
  95. Lonnie Mings

    No one doubts micro-evolution. Variations within species are common. Mutations of bacteria, viruses, etc. have been proved. Macro-evolution, where one species turns into another, is something else. No one has observed it. It can only be surmised, from bones and skeletons, etc. In other words the evidence for it is mainly anecdotal. When and if it is absolutely proved, then I think even "stupid" laymen will accept it.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:23 pm |
    • seriously226

      No, they won't. Because, like you, they fail to see the evidence that has been presented for OTHER animals. So we don't have all the links for humans, that doesn't mean that we don't have all the links for other animals. And evolution is a compilation of the micro changes that eventually result in macro changes over hundreds of thousands of years. It doesn't happen overnight.

      September 12, 2011 at 4:28 pm |
      • Dufusuni

        You do not have evidence for "OTHER" animals either. When you factor in SCIENCE, such as physics and laws regarding energy and biology and irreducible complexity, "evolution" fails. Only a creation explanation makes sense and can transcend "law."

        September 12, 2011 at 4:38 pm |
  96. Eric

    Like many have said above the existence of God and the evolution of life on our planet are not mutually exclusive belief systems (this coming from someone who believes in BOTH). Could it be possible that the driving force behind evolution IS God and that since time is relative....the time that it took God to create the Earth (6 days + 1 to rest) could have in fact been millions/billions of years? Just a thought.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:22 pm |
  97. Rick

    People name one animal that could draw pictures on walls, make clothing, make tools, control fire.....that was man! Besides why can't we find anyone who looks like us in that time period!

    September 12, 2011 at 4:22 pm |
  98. My God Can Kick Your God's Ass ANY DAY

    COME ON! BRING IT!!! What da ya got? Jesus? Yahwe? Allah? You call those puny things GODS?? My God is the ONLY GOD. I know it in my heart of hearts. And he tells me every day.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:22 pm |
    • Dufusuni

      You are a "brave" man. Best look out for lightening 🙂

      September 12, 2011 at 4:35 pm |
  99. Johnny 5

    CNN loves to stir up the bee hive with subjects like evolution and religion. Our planet is in a cosmic shooting gallery so the building blocks of life could have come from anywhere or a combination of places in the universe. A supernatural being or force needs not apply. We live, we die and the world continues to turn.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:22 pm |
  100. MDCambridge

    "Intelligent Design" is just a repackaging campaign by Creationists: find the objection with the first name (ignorance) and counter it by adding something to defuse or confuse; much like renaming "Nuclear Magnetic Resonance (NMR)" to "Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI)," or renaming the "Patagonian Tooth Fish" to "Sea Bass." Shakespeare had similar musings about the biological family Rosaceae.

    September 12, 2011 at 4:21 pm |
    • seriously226

      Except that it isn't so new...considering that Socrates argued for "intelligent design"

      September 12, 2011 at 4:30 pm |
      • Ashrakay

        That's about the dumbest thing I've ever heard. First of all Socrates probably couldn't find his way around my iphone. So even if he did believe in intelligent design, I'm not about to start taking my science lessons from someone who lived 2500 years ago.

        September 12, 2011 at 4:41 pm |
      • seriously226

        Intelligent design isn't a science lesson, its a philosophy lesson and doesn't belong in SCIENCE class. Socrates was a philosopher and all I am saying is that Intelligent design isn't a new concept – its been around for 2500 years.

        September 12, 2011 at 5:00 pm |
      • Ashrakay

        You also happen to be saying something completely unsupported by fact. Where's your evidence? Anyway, by that logic, the concept of god isn't new either. There have been god's long before abraham's god was fantasized about. does that make you want to believe in the giant rainbow snake that gave birth to the world?

        September 12, 2011 at 5:04 pm |
      • Answer

        Seriously ..

        My dog argues for science. That sums up everything.

        September 12, 2011 at 5:10 pm |
      • seriously226

        See, now you are assuming that I don't believe in evolution. Thank you. I was just trying to shed light on the argument that "Intelligent design" is a modern repackaging of "Creationism". Which it isn't. My statements are supported by facts that Socrates was an ancient philosopher who came up with an argument for intelligent design. Look up Socrates and Intelligent design and you will see that this is a true statement. Intelligent design basically says that because natural things are complex they were designed – it doesn't specify who or what designed them, but that they were designed – much like an engineer designs the structure of a bridge. Creationism says that an all powerful, all knowing being created life. Intelligent design DOES NOT make that distinction and it does not ignore science.

        September 12, 2011 at 5:11 pm |
      • Ashrakay

        Yup, looked it up and a bunch of websites, primarily the Center for Science and Culture promote this idea. Upon further investigation you find that they, and Discovery Institute are Christian think tanks and hardly credible sources. Maybe you can point to a real university are a reputable source so I can confirm your belief. Otherwise, I'm going to put it down to propaganda hogwash.

        September 12, 2011 at 5:40 pm |
      • Answer

        Seriously ...

        The best way for you to help others support your idea is for you to name your sources of information herein. You know why do you not?

        It would go into the cycle of "you didn't read the right article" argument. Hmm you say? I know you'll get all touchy when people call on your hogwash when – well look at Ashrakay – he went and found various links. Your next move would be then to condemn his sources as anti-to-your viewpoint. So why don't you list out the books your read, the sources on the internet you have visited that coincide to the point where you reached that conclusion.

        Be a man and let others see where your source of conclusion came from.

        September 12, 2011 at 5:59 pm |
      • Ashrakay

        It's not my job to prove your postulation correct. The burden of evidence rests on you. You're talking a lot, but you're still not presenting any evidence.

        September 12, 2011 at 6:17 pm |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Contributors

  • Elizabeth Landau
    Writer/Producer
  • Sophia Dengo
    Senior Designer