Does it take faith to accept evolution as truth?

quote:

---

I have another topic about the actual theory itself, called "Proving Evolution in the Age of Genetics," in the Biological Evolution forum. But all I've been hearing now is "We have lots of evidence. We have lots of evidence. We have lots of evidence..." I haven't seen much of a capability to think deeper beyond that.

---

Go to TalkOrigins Archive: Exploring the Creation/Evolution Controversy and you will find the evidence you seek. None of this evidence has to be taken on faith as all of it is available for everyone to look at, even down to the measurements of fossils to the sequences of DNA. If you don't think that a certain sequence of DNA is found in both humans and chimps, guess what, you can find out for yourself using DNA cloning techniques. If you don't believe that australopithecine fossils have pelvises intermediate between humans and apes, then you can go to a museum and do the measurements yourself.And yes, humans are fallible. This is why scientists explain in great detail how they conducted their experiments. This allows anyone to reconstruct the same exact experiment and compare their results with others. You don't have to have anymore faith in the evidence that supports the theory of evolution than you have to have faith in the reported height of the Empire State Building.

quote:

---

Do we accept evolution by comparing it to objective truth, or by comparing it to other theories? The answer is important in determining the role of faith in evolution.

---

Might as well answer so you know where all of us stand.We accept evolution because of how it compares to objective reality. We accept evolution over other theories because evolution is a complete explanation of the objective evidence we have at hand. This acceptance is tentative because not all evidence has yet been discovered.

quote:

---

Yes, and I gave some examples of why dating is debatable.

---

But not in enough detail to either support or falsify any claims.

quote:

---

But then, RAZD called me for being off-topic. If I don't give specifics, I get called for lack of evidence.

---

You were off topic and you did not back up your claims. Do we really have to give you a play by play on how both can be solved? We have already given you links to the appropriate threads so you can back up your claims and stay on topic. Is it really that hard?

quote:

---

It feels like the rules are being twisted so I can't accomplish much at all without being called for something.

---

Which rules are we twisting? The rules state that threads should stay on topic and that assertions should be supported by evidence. Both can be accomplished if you participate in one of the dating threads already given to you. Either back up your claims or retract them.

quote:

---

Have you not been paying any attention to what I'm getting at? These claims are supposed to show to support and falsify claims. They merely show that evolutin isn't as "true" as we may think. It too has complications. To consider evolution to be on the right track, you need to put faith in this theory

---

What you claimed in mssg 139 is: How am I supposed to judge the veracity of these claims with this level of detail?RAZD, in mssg 145, said: So will we see you at the {{Age Correlations and an Old Earth: Part II.}} thread? I doubt it, but if you really think that dating techniques you need to go to that thread and learn that they have been debated and found to be reliable.

quote:

---

Well, if you want to get other topics involved in this topic, then I'll take that step.

---

I don't want to bring dating into this topic. I explicitly said "We have already given you links to the appropriate threads so you can back up your claims and stay on topic." So, see you at the age correlations thread?

quote:

---

The fact that so many claims about evolution have been debatable and unsure (as demonstrated by many of these topics) offers evidence that it takes faith to believe in evolution.

---

The only people I have seen claiming that evolution is "unsure" are fundamentalist christians who have an axe to grind. The actual world of science and scientists have no problems with the theory as it stands. So I guess the only problems that evolution has is that it conflicts with some people's religious convictions.Unless you can demonstrate that a majority, or even a significant minority, of biologists are apprehensive with the theory of evolution then your claims are not supported.