Why do people believe in evolution?

[hedrick]

I believe in evolution because I’ve read books that review the evidence, and it’s convincing. The opposition I’ve seen is either ideology or collections of supposed problems that all have answers. I’ve never seen a coherent presentation that matches the treatments of evolution.

Also, the main advocates seem to be religious conservatives whose Biblical exegesis shows no sign of reflecting what the Bible really is. As a non biologist, the Biblical objection is actually easier for me to evaluate.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Ah, the fruit flies..

There are plenty of others:

Evidence From Observed Speciation
Watching speciation Occur: Observations
Speciation Observed - Again
Speciation in a Lab Flask
Speciation of Wasps Observed
8 Examples of Evolution in Action

 

[QvQ]

I appreciate the clear answer HOWEVER;
I have been researching those

Once again with the unsupported Hawking claim

Many populations cannot be made by selective breeding. Variation is part of evolution and cannot be stopped. Mutations unique to the population will arise in any isolated group of organisms. Longhorns will have mutations in their genome that makes them unique. Man does not isolate well, but we can still tell quite a bit of where the ancestors of specific Americans came from by their individual genomes.

Hawkings " He cites Laplace’s often-quoted claim that if we knew the position and velocity of every object in the universe, we could predict the whole of future events. He then correctly observes that if Newton’s picture is right and complete, free will is necessarily an illusion."
Muddy Waters:
1) There is a small population of Sorraia wild horses in Spain, all saved from one stud and a few mares.
2) Two small herds of Mustangs in North America traced through mitochondrial DNA to Sorraia.
3) Spanish Government funded studies of Iberian horse breeds failed to show much Sorraia heritage however there are very few existing Sorraia mitochondrial lines so the lack is inconclusive.
4) What horses did the Spanish bring to America? Sorraia are overrepresented in American Mustangs considering many other Iberian horse breeds more likely to be imported
5) Did the American Mustangs revert to the lowest denominator, the Sorraia or were the pure Sorraia specifically imported, (unlikely)
So, even trying to determine the genetics and probably history of a herd of feral horses using US Forestry and Spanish Government DNA research is nothing but pure mud.
I had hoped DNA would give answers but mostly it only raises more questions.
Those mustangs, historically, should have been standard Iberian DNA, not some almost extinct herd of Spanish wild horses.
More Questions...

 

[Subduction Zone]

I appreciate the clear answer HOWEVER;
I have been researching those

Hawkings " He cites Laplace’s often-quoted claim that if we knew the position and velocity of every object in the universe, we could predict the whole of future events. He then correctly observes that if Newton’s picture is right and complete, free will is necessarily an illusion."
Muddy Waters:
1) There is a small population of Sorraia wild horses in Spain, all saved from one stud and a few mares.
2) Two small herds of Mustangs in North America traced through mitochondrial DNA to Sorraia.
3) Spanish Government funded studies of Iberian horse breeds failed to show much Sorraia heritage however there are very few existing Sorraia mitochondrial lines so the lack is inconclusive.
4) What horses did the Spanish bring to America? Sorraia are overrepresented in American Mustangs considering many other Iberian horse breeds more likely to be imported
5) Did the American Mustangs revert to the lowest denominator, the Sorraia or were the pure Sorraia specifically imported, (unlikely)
So, even trying to determine the genetics and probably history of a herd of feral horses using US Forestry and Spanish Government DNA research is nothing but pure mud.
I had hoped DNA would give answers but mostly it only raises more questions.
Those mustangs, historically, should have been standard Iberian DNA, not some almost extinct herd of Spanish wild horses.
More Questions...

Okay, I don't see how you get Hawking supporting Newton out of that statement. Didn't you see the "if" in it.

As to tracing the lineage of a population that does not mean that one can rebreed the population. Once again,mutations occur. You have on the order of one hundred mutations in the DNA that you got from your parents. Reproducing the mutations is not possible.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The preponderance of evidence leaves little room for doubt in my mind about the accuracy of the theory of evolution to explain the observations we consistently make in nature. It's simply the best scientific explanation we have, and it consistently produces accurate results in its predictions, it consistently makes coherent sense of all the data we have.

I have no reason not to accept what is a very well attested and consistently observed natural phenomenon and exceptionally well evidenced theory explaining said phenomenon.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[GooFYone]

I find no fault in Gods word. I find God to be perfect in every way.

 

[Astrophile]

Hawkings " He cites Laplace’s often-quoted claim that if we knew the position and velocity of every object in the universe, we could predict the whole of future events. He then correctly observes that if Newton’s picture is right and complete, free will is necessarily an illusion."

First, his surname is Hawking, not Hawkings. Second, where did you get the two sentences in quotation marks from? Third, are you aware that Stephen Hawking died nearly three years ago, in March 2018?

 

[Tinker Grey]

I find no fault in Gods word. I find God to be perfect in every way.

Do you find any fault in your interpretation of God's word? Are you perfect in every way?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I find no fault in Gods word. I find God to be perfect in every way.

Yes,but that is mere prejudice if you cannot support it. Hindus feel the same way about Vishnu. Muslims feel that way about Allah.

 

[Subduction Zone]

First, his surname is Hawking, not Hawkings. Second, where did you get the two sentences in quotation marks from? Third, are you aware that Stephen Hawking died nearly three years ago, in March 2018?

Even if it was an actual quote Hawking his claim about it was a misunderstanding on his part. He had a very important "if" in his quote. At best it was most likely a quote mine where he later explains that quantum mechanics is a real thing.

 

[BrotherJJ]

Evolution: Lets start at the beginning.

First Cause = Intelligent design, then comes space, time, science & EVOLUTION

Genesis 1:1 & Hebrews 11:3 declare that the universe began to exist
(NOTE: The universe began to exist = a required Beginner).

The Bible covers these four characteristics: A singular beginning, cosmic expansion & constant laws of physics including the law of decay.

Also, the bible describes a few key characteristics of the universe that scientists now have the ability to measure:

The constancy of the laws of physics, most explicitly stated in Jeremiah 33:25. Romans 8:18-21 speaks of a pervasive law of decay.

Heaven & Earth clearly point to ""Intelligent Design"". Not PUFF the MAGIC creation.

A thought to non-creationist: Keep up the "Faith" (pun intended), maybe one day (evolutionist) will be able to explain gravity or what holds an atom together. BTW, If you'd take time to read the Bible, it answers the latter. Col 1:16-17

 

[pitabread]

maybe one day (evolutionist) will be able to explain gravity or what holds an atom together.

You mean physicists. Evolution is part of biology.

 

[Speedwell]

Evolution: Lets start at the beginning.

First Cause = Intelligent design, then comes space, time, science & EVOLUTION

Genesis 1:1 & Hebrews 11:3 declare that the universe began to exist
(NOTE: The universe began to exist = a required Beginner).

The Bible covers these four characteristics: A singular beginning, cosmic expansion & constant laws of physics including the law of decay.

Also, the bible describes a few key characteristics of the universe that scientists now have the ability to measure:

The constancy of the laws of physics, most explicitly stated in Jeremiah 33:25. Romans 8:18-21 speaks of a pervasive law of decay.

Heaven & Earth clearly point to ""Intelligent Design"". Not PUFF the MAGIC creation.

A thought to non-creationist: Keep up the "Faith" (pun intended), maybe one day (evolutionist) will be able to explain gravity or what holds an atom together. BTW, If you'd take time to read the Bible, it answers the latter. Col 1:16-17

The trouble is, when you invoke Intelligent Design (with capital letters) you invoke the degenerate radical Calvinism f the Discovery Institute. It puts people off your argument.

 

[dlamberth]

First Cause = Intelligent design, then comes space, time, science & EVOLUTION

First Cause = Creative
No design required.

 

[QvQ]

First, his surname is Hawking, not Hawkings. Second, where did you get the two sentences in quotation marks from? Third, are you aware that Stephen Hawking died nearly three years ago, in March 2018?

Physicist Stephen Hawking quote Feb 17, 2017

 

[QvQ]

Okay, I don't see how you get Hawking supporting Newton out of that statement. Didn't you see the "if" in it.

As to tracing the lineage of a population that does not mean that one can rebreed the population. Once again,mutations occur. You have on the order of one hundred mutations in the DNA that you got from your parents. Reproducing the mutations is not possible.

Not Mutating, In Out Line Breeding, recombining existing genes
I read a while ago that the King Ranch had an exact ratio of several breeds of cattle, shorthorns, brahmas and one other, possibly angus that was used to create the Santa Getrudis.
It is a ratio used to create a set of lines to avoid inbreeding
The Morgan horse was a fluke, as was the Steel Dust but those original horses were in and out bred to various lines to create XMorgan which may or may not resemble the original.
It is not possible to exam the DNA of a Morgan and determine what set of horse genes or breeds created the original.

 

[Tinker Grey]

First, his surname is Hawking, not Hawkings. Second, where did you get the two sentences in quotation marks from? Third, are you aware that Stephen Hawking died nearly three years ago, in March 2018?

He appears to have copied from a blog he fails to cite: “Come On” Stephen Hawking: The Quandary of Free Will In an Apparently Deterministic Universe

The blogger is interpreting Hawking and claims it comes from a TV series Hawking did called Genius. At least that's what I think I can tell.

To be clear, it is NOT a quote of Hawking at all.

 

[QvQ]

Even if it was an actual quote Hawking his claim about it was a misunderstanding on his part. He had a very important "if" in his quote. At best it was most likely a quote mine where he later explains that quantum mechanics is a real thing.

One of the things I like about Physics is there are questions, IF's, constant examination of the truths in quantum mechanics, whether Laplace is correct and Darwin is right.
Even the general public can follow these arguments but evolution is the absolute truth, swallow whatever Professor Nonsense is spouting today about Darwin and don't question anything.
I agree with you about Quantum Mechanics but then..what IF IF IF Laplace and Newton are right?

 

[pitabread]

Even the general public can follow these arguments but evolution is the absolute truth

But that isn't true though. It's simply the best scientific explanation we have until something better comes along.

If you're going to insist on repeating falsehoods like that, it just reinforces that you haven't really dug into the subject very much.

swallow whatever Professor Nonsense is spouting today about Darwin and don't question anything.

Likewise, the above. The science of evolution has moved a long way since Darwin's time and what Darwin wrote. If what Darwin wrote was treated as an "absolute truth" then that wouldn't have been the case.

If you decided to ever research the subject, then you'd find all this out for yourself.

 

[QvQ]

The preponderance of evidence leaves little room for doubt in my mind about the accuracy of the theory of evolution to explain the observations we consistently make in nature. It's simply the best scientific explanation we have, and it consistently produces accurate results in its predictions, it consistently makes coherent sense of all the data we have.

I have no reason not to accept what is a very well attested and consistently observed natural phenomenon and exceptionally well evidenced theory explaining said phenomenon.

-CryptoLutheran

Until the Nuts and Bolts:
Solve this Puzzle...500 years of "evolution" not 500000000000000
Spanish imported horses to America starting in 1493. Spanish were and are renowned for useful and useable horses, Andulasians, Lusitanos, Lippanzer. Also, there is a small herd of primitive horses, Sorraia, which were thought to be extinct (when?) due to meat hunters. The Sorraia are related to Mongollian ponies. Remnant of the Iberian herd was rediscovered in 1920 approx.
The US Forestry conducted DNA test on American feral horses (Mustangs) and concluded the Spanish Mustangs were Sorraia.
The Spanish Government conducted DNA test on Iberian horses. The main lines were Exmore Ponies with a few Sorraia, however so few Sorraia lines exist, the results were inconclusive.
1) Did the Spanish, Cortez, import primitive rare Sorraia or the well bred useful stock? (Did the Spanish equip their expeditions 4 wheel drive vehicles or roller skates?)Historically, good horses were reported to be imported.
2) Did the better bred domestic stock De-Evolve under natural conditions and natural selection into the Original Sorraia without leaving evidence of the more recent breeds in the DNA (My Selection)
3) Could Sorraia have been the original American horse, thought to be extinct, and was in America before the Spanish arrived?
4) Have the Sorraia Mustang evolved or even bred into a different breed than the Sorraia in Spain? If #3 is correct then there should be some evidence of mixing with the later Spanish introduced stock. (? haven't seen any research)
So, can we trace "evolution" of this horse? Do we know anything more about the origin of this "species?"
#2 is serious as it implies that traces of DNA evidence are wiped clean and are not a good record.