Ha! Religion!. . DOES, DMD 'iii! I-’ QUEEN HELLING PROOF i' aintel! Pu '! PROBLEM ME SEE '. why does everyone think evolution is a belief? no amount of belief makes something a fact, truth is truth, denying evolution is denying said truth
x

Comments(89):

[ 89 comments ]
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
User avatar #27 - cheesymondo (10/24/2012) [-]
why does everyone think evolution is a belief? no amount of belief makes something a fact, truth is truth, denying evolution is denying said truth
#33 to #27 - arkfire (10/24/2012) [-]
Evolution is not fact. The probability of evolution is extremely low it's actually 10 over 10 to the 152 power.
User avatar #51 to #33 - dirigiblequixote (10/24/2012) [-]
Look up "robert lenski e. coli".

Guy did a 30-year study that proved evolution as scientific fact.
#92 to #51 - arkfire (10/24/2012) [-]
Actually I only could give the probability of the simplest protein since no animal could exist without proteins so it's a huge problem for people think evolution exists.
#39 to #33 - icefall (10/24/2012) [-]
Evolution is a fact. Whether the changes are gradual or sudden moments is what is in question.
0
#37 to #33 - shadesofbacon has deleted their comment [-]
-6
#40 to #27 - pamelamadingdong **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #65 to #27 - GoReMoTe (10/24/2012) [-]
"why does everyone think evolution Christianity is a belief? no amount of belief makes something a fact, truth is truth, denying evolution Christianity is denying said truth"

yeah, why believe something that's so obviously untrue? surely people can't be stupid enough to think anything else is true.
inb4 massive downvotes for playing devil's advocate
#66 to #65 - kerplunking (10/24/2012) [-]
There is lots of evidence for evolution.

There is absolutely no evidence for Christianity.
User avatar #69 to #66 - GoReMoTe (10/24/2012) [-]
Very true. I just find it ironic that just a couple hundred years ago, a priest might've said exactly what I had in quotes.

My point is that truth is relative, dependent on what the most people believe or can be convinced to believe. I wouldn't be surprised at all if evolution was disproved in the next 200 years (though I would be very disappointed in science, I admit) due to some new theory that makes more sense to the masses.
+1
#81 to #69 - tweetyftw **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #94 to #81 - GoReMoTe (10/24/2012) [-]
A Christian might say the same thing about the miracles of God. Really, the whole "seeing is believing" argument is actually very weak, since eyes are very easily fooled.

The fact that you believe that some things cannot be disproved is in direct contradiction to scientific thought. I like what itrooztrooperdown said in #48:

"Well because science is no religion. The THEORY of evolution is a great theory that fits in to explain some stuff, until a new theory that fis better declines it. A theory can't be the absolute truth, and if you were a man of science you would know that if somebody came up with a better explanation everybody would accept it, because it is better. So science has no dogmas, it is always changing to help us to explain this world and eventually understand our purpose, if there is any."

In short, you have to approach our world and the way it works with an open mind, and expect to be wrong in just about everything you assume.
0
#95 to #94 - tweetyftw **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #97 to #95 - GoReMoTe (10/24/2012) [-]
"cannot be disproven because it is fact"

This is exactly what's wrong with your argument -- circular logic. See, I'd like to agree with everything you're saying and know that evolution is, in every aspect, a correct observation of life on our planet. But, knowing that truth and fact have a tendency to change over the years, I just can't completely believe the idea.

Also, you say that theories are, by definition, incomplete explanations and may change. You then go on to say "we just don't know yet the whole order" of evolution, yet assert that evolution is fact, not a theory. This is called a contradiction.

And no, I haven't "studies" evolution beyond Biology 101, so please, tell me more about these animals that "evolve and adapt before our eyes." I'm very interested in animals that can evolve during their own lifetime.
0
#99 to #97 - tweetyftw **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #102 to #99 - GoReMoTe (10/24/2012) [-]
It seems that I misinterpreted what you define a fact to be, then. Would I be correct in assuming that you liken fact to empirical data, i.e. "Event X occurred and produced Y joules of energy" or "I went to McDonald's and ate exactly 54 french fries"? With such a definition of a fact, it is still possible to misinterpret empirical data, and the theory will show that misinterpretation eventually. I thought that you had taken the masses' definition of 'fact' as "an idea that must be true".

While I agree that species of organisms do change over the course of generations, I still take issue with *why* these organisms change. If evolution is divergent in nature, then it would require a huge population of a certain organism in order for the correct adaptation to properly manifest itself purely on chance. For insects and smaller organisms, this obviously isn't a problem, but what about organisms with a longer lifespan and smaller population cap for their environment?
0
#101 to #99 - tweetyftw **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
0
#96 to #95 - tweetyftw **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #98 to #96 - GoReMoTe (10/24/2012) [-]
You're reading things out of my comments that aren't there. I'm deliberately trying to keep God out of the argument, so why would you bring him up? I'm not even trying to defend Christianity, or any religion for that matter; what I'm saying is that religious leaders and leading scientific minds thought (and, in some areas, still think) that what they knew was unshakable, only to be proven incorrect years later. For the record, yes, I do believe that a replacement to gravitational theory exists, but I also highly doubt that it will be discovered, much less understood, within our lifetime.

And you have another contradiction: "the theory [...] it's the backbone of all human life and has no alternative period." & "...but unlike you i actually look at everything with an open mind..."
How can you keep an open mind, yet fail to acknowledge the possibility of an alternative to evolution?
0
#100 to #98 - tweetyftw **User deleted account** has deleted their comment [-]
User avatar #48 to #27 - itrooztrooperdown (10/24/2012) [-]
Well because science is no religion. The THEORY of evolution is a great theory that fits in to explain some stuff, until a new theory that fis better declines it. A theory can't be the absolute truth, and if you were a man of science you would know that if somebody came up with a better explanation everybody would accept it, because it is better. So science has no dogmas, it is always changing to help us to explain this world and eventually understand our purpose, if there is any.
#59 - brewbs (10/24/2012) [-]
I firmly believe that we are in the Matrix.
User avatar #90 to #59 - smokingman (10/24/2012) [-]
No. This is another training program designed to teach you one thing: if you are not one of us, you are one of them.
#1 - whatamidoingwithme (10/23/2012) [-]
If you are going to post an old comic and try to start a bible fight. At least give credit.
If you are going to post an old comic and try to start a bible fight. At least give credit.
#3 to #1 - realvegzillar (10/23/2012) [-]
It wouldn't be a Bible fight. A fight implies there's an equal chance of winning.
It wouldn't be a Bible fight. A fight implies there's an equal chance of winning.
User avatar #9 to #3 - thatawesomekid (10/24/2012) [-]
I suggest you acquire a dictionary to look up the word "fight".
User avatar #11 to #9 - realvegzillar (10/24/2012) [-]
I'm not going off dictionary definitions, I'm looking at the connotations which (to me) certainly point towards a fair-fight.
#4 to #3 - whatamidoingwithme (10/23/2012) [-]
A fight doesn't imply equal chance of winning. It means conflict between two or more sides.

"Let them worship as they will, every man can follow his own conscience provided it does not interfere with sane reason or bid him act against the liberty of his fellow men.”

A quote for you.
User avatar #5 to #4 - realvegzillar (10/23/2012) [-]
It kinda does, normally fights are against equal sides. A 'fight' between the bible and science would be over before it started.
#6 to #5 - whatamidoingwithme (10/23/2012) [-]
I don't know where you got the impression, but fight doesn't suggest equal sides.

#7 to #6 - RageGuyyourmom (10/24/2012) [-]
The connotation could imply equal sides, If he used a word such as "slaughter" instead then it could imply a less of a chance of winning, fight implies two parties that scrimmage, connotation wise, it seems neutral as both parties are equal.
#12 to #7 - anon (10/24/2012) [-]
well some people may see it as that, but that is not the definition.

imagine you got your ass handed to you, you wouldn't tell your friends you got slaughtered, but would more likely just say you got into a fight.
User avatar #47 to #3 - theshadowed (10/24/2012) [-]
Ok, disprove the existence of God.
User avatar #53 to #47 - realvegzillar (10/24/2012) [-]
I'm going to answer your question with a question, Can you disprove anything, say leprechauns
0
#56 to #53 - realvegzillar Comment deleted by realvegzillar [-]
User avatar #54 to #53 - theshadowed (10/24/2012) [-]
Nope. So I'm happy to let those who believe, believe. Why can't you be?
User avatar #57 to #54 - realvegzillar (10/24/2012) [-]
Who said i'm not? I just don't want legislation put in place for personal beliefs (now you're making yourself look silly)
User avatar #58 to #57 - theshadowed (10/24/2012) [-]
No, you made a bad joke about the idea of God being ******** . I had no idea about your retarded idea that legislation is being put in place for personal beliefs. My psychic powers weren't working today, sorry
User avatar #63 to #58 - realvegzillar (10/24/2012) [-]
whether you accept it or not, laws and legislation have been and are being put in place because the people in charge believe a certain book. You statement saying that there wasn't, actually made me lol for the first time on funnyjunk today, well done.
User avatar #70 to #63 - theshadowed (10/24/2012) [-]
No, it isn't! 1st World Countries are no longer.
User avatar #93 to #73 - theshadowed (10/24/2012) [-]
You're so ******* stupid.
#42 - anon (10/24/2012) [-]
As a completely non religious person I am disappointed that you are not aware that there is no such thing as proof in science, only evidence.
User avatar #43 to #42 - realvegzillar (10/24/2012) [-]
I'm sorry i've disappointed you, cuntnugget
#8 - anon (10/24/2012) [-]
The stupidest tend to be the loudest. Keep that in mind.
#19 - johnshepherd (10/24/2012) [-]
Actually it went more like this:

Scientist: I discovered evolution, it disproves God.

Priest: No it doesn't.

Scientist: I have more proof for evolution, it disproves God.

Priest: No, it doesn't.

Scientist: Lots of people are starting to believe in evolution. It disproves God.

Priest: No, it's just a way He might have done it.


Evolutionary Creationism: The belief that God made the world, by detonating a universe-grenade.
#21 to #19 - Cloudxhigh (10/24/2012) [-]
Evolution doesn't disprove God, and there is no "it's just a way he might have done it."
Going along the bible's lines, God created Adam out of dust/dirt if memory serves.

Saying that evolution disproves God is quite ignorant, and more power to the people who believe in evolution.
If someone wants to believe that we (as human beings) were created by sheer randomness, then be my guest. But don't bother me while i choose to believe that Human beings were created for a purpose rather than just randomly created by the cosmos.
User avatar #46 to #19 - theshadowed (10/24/2012) [-]
Thats an awesome idea!
User avatar #20 to #19 - eonsmashface (10/24/2012) [-]
I like that belief. you had me at Universe-Grenade.
User avatar #28 to #19 - techketzer (10/24/2012) [-]
Don't blame the scientists for how the uneducated masses misinterpret their work.
User avatar #52 to #19 - dirigiblequixote (10/24/2012) [-]
That's deism, not evolutionary creationism.
#60 to #52 - johnshepherd (10/24/2012) [-]
No, deism is the belief that God made us and then went minecraft on our asses and left.
User avatar #61 to #60 - dirigiblequixote (10/24/2012) [-]
Which is different how, precisely?
#62 to #61 - johnshepherd (10/24/2012) [-]
Well, for one part, Christianity believes the exact opposite and deism believes that, since God doesn't give a crap, Jesus wouldn't have been sent.
User avatar #26 to #19 - supamonkey (10/24/2012) [-]
Evolution does not disprove the existence of God, it merely proves that some parts of the Bible are false, particularly those that deal with the creation of man and other organisms.
#31 to #26 - johnshepherd (10/24/2012) [-]
Or, as most people take it, the creation story is primarily allegory, with the only core being that God made us.
#34 to #26 - anon (10/24/2012) [-]
Not necessarily disproving it. The Bible doesn't say "Then God created all animals as they appear in the present day." If you take into account the flood, it's far more likely that God made the animals, but a much smaller number, and then evolution allowed different breeds among species to emerge after the flood.
#50 - snaresinger (10/24/2012) [-]
Very good comic OP! Humorous! I enjoyed its wit!

What's that Lassy? OP stole this copyrighted, original content from SMBC, and he's the exact reason people hate FJ? Speak up, girl! OP is a douchenugget, you say?

Cut this **** out.
User avatar #2 - imadethistopost ONLINE (10/23/2012) [-]
that's how it was, most theists don't deny science anymore than the next person.
#64 - PredatorGoblin (10/24/2012) [-]
And that's one of the many reasons I don't believe in any type of god.
User avatar #10 - kairuzesu (10/24/2012) [-]
it's a shame how I want to share this...but I know too many overly religious people
#13 to #10 - klutzyspy (10/24/2012) [-]
grow a pair and stop respecting lunatics
User avatar #29 to #13 - kairuzesu (10/24/2012) [-]
you know what, that's fair
User avatar #76 to #29 - aiwendel (10/24/2012) [-]
What happened?
User avatar #14 - MegaAwesomeSauce (10/24/2012) [-]
You are preaching to the choir on this one buddy, although, that saying doesn't befit this post much at all.
#16 - SILENCEnight (10/24/2012) [-]
**SILENCEnight rolled a random image posted in comment #14984 at Drawing & Art ** religions...
User avatar #35 to #16 - fiocinelli (10/24/2012) [-]
Outstanding drawing skills
User avatar #41 - umaya (10/24/2012) [-]
religion is just nonsense, there really isn't even an argument, It just is, but belief in God is a separate argument. Religion was a way to make people behave before there were police, and it worked mostly, but it's now time to put it away as it's time was in the past and we won't advance very mush if people aren't going to ignore science and claim religion is the answer to everything (creationism for example) ,we could have no religion and replace it with an ethical and moral contract type thing that just meant children are brought up to believe in not killing, stealing, being selfish, just the basic things without the you will burn in hell forever part. This would do the same thing as religion but no God, and people that believe in God would be fine as it's the same rules but not out of date, in a modern language and way of life. religion only really works if everyone everywhere follows the same religion otherwise you get these silly conflicts (and anyone that takes part in these conflicts is disregarding their religion (unless they are Satanists)). So maybe in a hundred years when atheists are dominant (if they aren't already) we shall have a human contract, a list of rules, like the prime directive.
User avatar #44 to #41 - theshadowed (10/24/2012) [-]
If you believe in a God, that means your religious. You just don't have to follow organised religion. Also, no. Just Atheists won't make everyone band together. People like independence. Different cultures, governments, racial prejudice, old hatred
#17 - merrymarvelite (10/24/2012) [-]
HA HA.

RELIGION.
User avatar #36 - dmagen (10/24/2012) [-]
is it just me or that every time where someone post a comment that says science is better than religion a mob of angry religious dick heads are thumbing it down and don't even start to explain why?
**** you dick heads, jesus and muhammad blow op dick.
#38 - sekundab (10/24/2012) [-]
**sekundab rolls 20** HA HA OP, JUST HA HA
User avatar #55 to #38 - animedudej (10/24/2012) [-]
**animedudej rolls 76**
-1
#45 - Rukioish has deleted their comment [-]
#49 to #45 - arandomanon (10/24/2012) [-]
MFW most of fathers of sciences like Newton were religious and you're a total dumbass
#80 to #49 - anon (10/24/2012) [-]
Your face when most of those fathers lived in a society dominated by science, and not being a christian could socially isolate you or worst?
#89 to #80 - anon (10/24/2012) [-]
or worst?
User avatar #72 - stanislaw (10/24/2012) [-]
******* atheists...
#15 - cheeezecake (10/24/2012) [-]
you cant "proove" anything, its all theories, im atheist but you cant go saiyin **** dat aint true.
User avatar #75 to #15 - realvegzillar (10/24/2012) [-]
please educate yourself, youtube the atheist experience or listen to Sam Harris' lectures
#91 - gidmp (10/24/2012) [-]
This **** will never stop isn't it?

From: a person that believes in science and religion

*Unrelated picture inbound*
[ 89 comments ]
Leave a comment
 Friends (0)