Evolution a hoax??

Question

do u have any evidence which disproves the title to this Q

because:

if u check the reliabilty of the techniques used to verify evolution (ex carbon dating dna etc) you will see that they are faulty at best. the other arguments that supposedly prove evolution, if u can manage to think outside the box with a little knowledge of science, can EASILY be rebutted

So why do i feel evolution is a hoax....GLAD U ASKED

the basis for it is so flimsy that the fact the entire scientific community endorses it means with no alternative competing theories most likely means something is behind this

science as any real scientist will tell u is NEVER absolute regarding anything if u think all scientists around the world haphazardly came to the same conclusions with such dubious evidence then u still have a lot 2 learn about this world

anyone who has conclusive evidence for this theory is welcome to submit it

Answer 1

im totally with you. something cant come from nothing. evolution is completely false and its retareded its taught in schools.

Answer 2

Theories such as evolution by natural selection and gravity may not be absolute but I'll bet you take the elevator down from the 23rd floor rather than stepping out the window.

Likewise, I'm sticking with evolution by natural selection until someone comes up with a theory that makes more sense. Nothing is science is absolute outside of mathematics. That doesn't stop us from using what we know to our benefit.

Answer 3

we are an example of evolution! Extinction is an example of evoultion evolution is the way we adapt to new surrounds

like basically everything in science its a theory which explains things! the composition of an atom to this day is still a theory! and is yet to be proven conclusion becuase there is no possible way to

i think evoultion is a thepry like many other theories that makes sense therefore i believe it

and what benefits do scientists have if they create this hoax?

and why are the church so egar to disregard this theory if it is entirely flimsy?

Answer 4

The entire scientific community supports it because there's a HELLUVA LOT OF EVIDENCE backing it up.

Recovered fossils, prints, DNA traces, and minerals from life forms that have passed all support evolutionary theories.  Branches of different life with analogous features support evolution (i.e. Darwin's Birds on nearby islands with similar traits).

Answer 5

Evolution is not a "hoax". It may not be the right answer, but it's definitely not a hoax.

Do you have a better explanation which also explains all the observations science has made so far (including why carbon-14 data has supposedly misled us)? You'll also need to make predictions as good as those made by the theory of evolution.

The reason we don't have any other competing theories is that none work based on our observations and experiments. Also, no one has come up with anything except creationism, which cannot predict that bacteria will evolve when exposed to antibiotics.* Because evolution can predict such changes as well as explain why they occurred, we currently regard it as the better theory.

Also, scientists did not "haphazardly" come to the same conclusion. We haven't found any evidence that evolution is incorrect as a theory.

You say that the arguments are "EASILY...rebutted"? Maybe you'd like to demonstrate. Or perhaps you should come up with a theory instead of complaining that the current one is bad.

*Of course, if you do not believe that bacteria have really evolved, perhaps you'd like to get exposed to XDR TB? We'll give you regular penicillin and watch you die an excruciating death, because the bacteria have evolved to be resistant to penicillin.

Answer 6

Evolution? What about gravity? What a crock you have there!

Answer 7

I think one of the best pro evolution arguments can be seen in what happens to our best efforts with antibiotics.  The little devils ( the species) adapts by evolving.

Answer 8

Evolution is definitely not a hoax.

It has been OBSERVED.  We've SEEN evolution happen.

Not to mention the fossil record, the genetic evidence, and the anatomical evidence.

For starters, go here - http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

There is more evidence there than you'll ever want.  Plus if you go to the talkorigins search here - http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/searc...

and type in ANYTHING you think contradicts evolution, you'll get everything you need to know.

By the way, carbon dating is extremely reliable.  There are several different kinds of radiological dating and they all give answers that match each other, which also happen to match with non-radiological dating methods like ice cores, geologic and astronomical processes.  It would take a GIANT leap of faith to think carbon dating doesn't work because you'd basically be trying to say that all these correlations with other dating methods are pure coincidence.

"if u think all scientists around the world haphazardly came to the same conclusions with such dubious evidence then u still have a lot 2 learn about this world"

You're right about that part, but guess what?  99.9% of all scientists know that evolution is real.  You know why?  Because the evidence ISN'T 'dubious' it's actually quite clear and concrete.

The guy above me is wrong, there is only one definition for evolution, and that is a change in genetic content over time.  'Microevolution' and 'macroevolution' don't exist, it's all just evolution.  The theory of common descent is an application of the Theory of Evolution which comes from the fact of evolution.  Facts are things that we observe and we know, without a doubt, that they happen.  Evolution is a fact.  Theories are explanations for WHY facts happen.  The theory of evolution is an explanation for WHY things evolve, we KNOW they evolve we're just not sure why.  Although we are about 98% sure.

And Ben Stein is an idiot.  "Darwinism can't explain gravity" - Ben Stein.  Excuse me, what???

Answer 9

>"the basis for it is so flimsy that the fact the entire scientific community endorses it means with no alternative competing theories most likely means something is behind this"

Please tell us!   *What* is behind this?   How many people are involved in this "hoax"?   The entire scientific community?   That is literally *hundreds of thousands* of scientists, for over 150 years.

No hoax in history has ever involved more than a handful of people ... usually just one or two people.

And yet you believe that hundreds of thousands of some of the world's most brilliant people would somehow agree to perpetrate some "hoax" on the general public, and have managed to do so without a single one of those hundreds of thousands divulging the hoax ... for 150 years!

Talk about *paranoid*!

And *WHY*?  What do these hundreds of thousands of scientists all *gain* from this "hoax"?

Answer 10

It think you have a complete misunderstanding of what evolutions is. Put simply, evolution asks a basic question: do things change over time? Its pretty obvious, unless you  live in a cave somewhere, that things do indeed change over time.

Answer 11

Darwin advance the "Theory of Evolution"  to fill in the lack of knowledge.  It is best to remember the meaning of the word "theory"(A) -  Gr, theoria a looking at, contemplation, speculation.  If one proves the theory then we would have the "Law of Evolution"  

is it a hoaxx, not by definition.  Is it true, it has not been proven, so it is a best quess.   As a Christian, it is a question of the beginning and in Darwin's Theory there is a assumption of material in space.  (note: it has been a few years since I read the original paper.)

Answer 12

It's about as absolute as the Theory of Gravity.....that's enough for me!

Answer 13

It depends on which definition of evolution you decide to use

• Evolution #1:

First, evolution can mean that the life forms we see today are different than the life forms that existed in the distant past. Evolution as “change over time” can also refer to minor changes in features of individual species—changes which

take place over a short amount of time. Even skeptics of Darwin’s theory agree that this type of “change over time” takes place.

• Evolution #2:

Some scientists associate the word evolution with the idea that all the organisms we see today are descended from a single common ancestor somewhere in the distant past. The claim became known as the Theory of Universal Common Descent.

• Evolution #3:

Finally, some people use the term evolution to mean the unguided process of DNA randomly mutating with “natural selection,” blindly acting on those changes to gradually produce the variety of all life.

No one in their right mind can argue with the genetic change over time definition (#1 I thnk)  Microevolution can be seen in everything from our breeding of dogs to antibiotic resistance

I disagree with your points though.  I would say DNA evidence is the strongest for evolution  but irreducible complexity is the best arguement against it.