• DaughterOfMars@lemmy.worldM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      44
      ·
      1 year ago

      Oh, you can, surely. But have you? As Mac says, “Have you seen these fossil records? Have you poured through the data yourself? The numbers, the figures?”

      Confidently denying something because you haven’t personally seen the evidence makes you look as much an idiot as confidently accepting it without evidence.

      • Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        Have you ever seen your brain? I didn’t. Can I assume that you have a pile of racoon vomit instead of it? Of course I can, and actually I will, and I will not allow for any other information until you personally show me the entirety of your brain.

      • Mike@universeodon.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        @DaughterOfMars Are you asking if I was “boots on the ground” with archeologists? Nope. However, considering humans, I consider people admitting they might be wrong and adopting better concepts as evolution. Evolution is not about intelligence, but, adaptation to survive. I would say I have seen evolution, personally, in my life.

        • ngdev@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Bit of a nitpick, but adaptation is not evolution. I was about to say that you cannot observe capital E Evolution in your own lifetime but then I remembered stuff on the bacterial scale that reproduces at break neck pace and is absolutely observable. HIV is one of these examples.

          • DaughterOfMars@lemmy.worldM
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Indeed, micro-evolution is quite fast because the rate of mutation is relatively high and generations are short. Macro-evolution is actually not generally well-understood by lay-people, primarily because it involves thinking on a scale that is so far outside of our short lifetimes. Not many people are capable of thinking on a scale outside of their own asses let alone across thousands of generations, hence the severe level of closed-mindedness in this thread alone…

            • ngdev@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think the idea I was referencing when I mentioned evolution not being observable in one’s lifetime is actually better stated as:

              Evolution cannot be observed in the lifetime of an individual of the species in question. I.E. A HIV “cell” won’t live to see the evolved, drug-resistant ones down the line

            • Strawberry@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              There’s no such thing as micro- and macro-evolution, those are terms made up by creationists to try to deny the existence of evolution in the face of direct observation of evolution

        • Mike@universeodon.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          @DaughterOfMars Funny thing…our “intelligence” went only so far. Now, it seems that all the people who piggybacked the science and don’t truly understand it are going to kill us.

        • DaughterOfMars@lemmy.worldM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          17
          ·
          1 year ago

          Here’s my point: Your reasons for believing in Evolution are your own, but don’t pretend that you know it for a fact. We all have to accept things we cannot personally verify to make progress as a society and that very progress should be your driving force, NOT your own biases.

          • Mike@universeodon.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            @DaughterOfMars If that is the answer, why ask the question? Science is not my “bias.” We can choose to teust the professionals or not. I just gave you my reason for my belief that evolution is real and how I have seen it. I left Twitter for this type of ridicule from religious nuts and flat earthers. I take it you saw my profile. Regardless, make peace with yourself and have humility.

            • DaughterOfMars@lemmy.worldM
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              1 year ago

              😂 Why on earth would you think I give a shit about you enough to read your profile? How self-centered can you be…unbelievable. Maybe you should ask yourself why you’re spending time in a community about UFOs if you’re not willing to accept the possibility that they exist. You realize that makes you one of those trolls you mention, don’t you? Don’t you??

      • Fushuan [he/him]@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        I get what you are trying to say, but one thing is a completely belief system while the other can be verified and ha been verified by several people that have studied it. Like, yeah you can “study” theism but you will never be able to see the evidence, while in the other case, you can.

        I decide to trust people that have shown images and data about the evidence, that are way more prepared than me to research that field. I don’t have enough interest to actually do all the groundwork myself, so I decide to trust the people that are authorities in that field, whom have the proven experience and studies that validate their authority.

        As I said, I cannot do the same thing with religious facts, it’s all “he said, she said, it’s in the book, the Lord commanded”… There’s no evidence, no real infraestructure of proof and validation, it’s a complete belief system, and that’s why I don’t consider those people and organizations authorities in these kind of topics.

        It’s really simple tbh.