More than 2/3 of Republicans Don't Believe in Evolution

For those that believe in evolution, tell us where is the ape to human link?
It has not been found.
You can't cross apes with humans just as you can't cross dogs to cats or any other species.
 
Republicans as a political party have not evolved. In fact, they have moved backward

Why should they believe in it?

Democrats have moved us back into the tyrannical government that we fought the Revolutionary War over, they are the ones who are moving backyards.

So, democrats ARE NOT actually "progressives?"

:badgrin:

Sure the are :)
Progressivism - progressing and moving beyond the political principles of the American founders (tyrannical gov.) :badgrin:
 
For those that believe in evolution, tell us where is the ape to human link?
It has not been found.
You can't cross apes with humans just as you can't cross dogs to cats or any other species.

Yeah, no shit. Cross-specie breeding is not the theory of evolution. What is the root word of evolution?
 
Republicans as a political party have not evolved. In fact, they have moved backward

Why should they believe in it?

Democrats have moved us back into the tyrannical government that we fought the Revolutionary War over, they are the ones who are moving backyards.

True that!

Taxation without Representation is the equivalent of Healthcare for all

The tyrants!
 
For those that believe in evolution, tell us where is the ape to human link?
It has not been found.
You can't cross apes with humans just as you can't cross dogs to cats or any other species.

Some of these questions that are being asked, make almost no sense at all. There are many, many steps between humans and simians.

There is no "direct" link.

image089.jpg
 
Last edited:
For those that believe in evolution, tell us where is the ape to human link?
It has not been found.
You can't cross apes with humans just as you can't cross dogs to cats or any other species.

Yeah, no shit. Cross-specie breeding is not the theory of evolution. What is the root word of evolution?

Ida - missing link to primate evolution took 47 million years.
Humans go back 2.2 million years and Homo sapiens was 250,000 years.
There is not enough time between the cross that they claim.
Not to mention the big gap in the fossil record from this time period.
Researchers are unsure when and where the primate group that includes monkeys, apes, and humans split ( missing link) from the other group of primates that includes lemurs (Ida)

We can't just evolve from ape to human in less than 2.2 million years, it had to be millions and millions of years and we have not found any proof yet.
Humans evolved from humans and apes evolved from apes.
 
For those that believe in evolution, tell us where is the ape to human link?
It has not been found.
You can't cross apes with humans just as you can't cross dogs to cats or any other species.

Yeah, no shit. Cross-specie breeding is not the theory of evolution. What is the root word of evolution?

Ida - missing link to primate evolution took 47 million years.
Humans go back 2.2 million years and Homo sapiens was 250,000 years.
There is not enough time between the cross that they claim.
Not to mention the big gap in the fossil record from this time period.
Researchers are unsure when and where the primate group that includes monkeys, apes, and humans split ( missing link) from the other group of primates that includes lemurs (Ida)

We can't just evolve from ape to human in less than 2.2 million years, it had to be millions and millions of years and we have not found any proof yet.
Humans evolved from humans and apes evolved from apes.

It did not move directly from apes to humans in 2.2 million years. You are forgetting Australopithecus.

EQ%2Bof%2Bextant%2Band%2Bfossil%2Bhominids.png
 
Last edited:
Yeah, no shit. Cross-specie breeding is not the theory of evolution. What is the root word of evolution?

Ida - missing link to primate evolution took 47 million years.
Humans go back 2.2 million years and Homo sapiens was 250,000 years.
There is not enough time between the cross that they claim.
Not to mention the big gap in the fossil record from this time period.
Researchers are unsure when and where the primate group that includes monkeys, apes, and humans split ( missing link) from the other group of primates that includes lemurs (Ida)

We can't just evolve from ape to human in less than 2.2 million years, it had to be millions and millions of years and we have not found any proof yet.
Humans evolved from humans and apes evolved from apes.

It did not move directly from apes to humans in 2.2 million years. You are forgetting Australopithecus.

EQ%2Bof%2Bextant%2Band%2Bfossil%2Bhominids.png

Australopithecus - 4 million years ago. Still not enough time.
 
^^^^ Prof positive right here.



Birds are believed to be descendants of theropod dinosaurs.

birdcompl.gif




Archaeopteryx?s Evolutionary Humiliation Continues ? Phenomena: The Loom





.

I thought everyone knew that birds evolved from dinosaurs! That doesn't make the dinosaur a different species though. It makes those dinosaurs that evolved into birds an earlier version of bird not a separate species.

No, that would be incorrect. In fact you would be way off base with this.

Avian's are an entire "class" a robin would be a species. A Tyrannosaurus would be also a species, belonging to the class - Sauropsida.

Bird Classifications/Families

Here it is.

Species


Definition

noun, singular or plural: species

(taxonomy)

(1) The lowest taxonomic rank, and the most basic unit or category of biological classification.

(2) An individual belonging to a group of organisms (or the entire group itself) having common characteristics and (usually) are capable of mating with one another to produce fertile offspring. Failing that (for example the Liger) It has to be ecologically and recognisably the same.

Species - definition from Biology-Online.org

There might be different classes of birds, for instance birds that fly and birds that don't fly, that's a class. Both are of the bird species.

What you might be thinking of is genus.
Definition of genus (n)

Bing Dictionary
ge·nus
[ jéenəss ]


1.set of closely related species: a category in the taxonomic classification of related organisms, comprising one or more species.
2.broader term for something: the more general class or kind in which something is included, e.g. the species "dog" is included in the genus "animal"
3.group: a class or group of any kind

The tyrannosaurus did not become a bird. It did not change species. Species either evolve or become extinct. It is not rocket science to have figured this out. What do schools teach nowadays? This should be in every basic science class.
 
The same "study" found that more than half of democrats aren't aware that the earth revolves around the sun. Maybe there is a connection to the same percentage of democrats who believe in man-made global warming. Hillary claims that unemployment "liberating" and the democrat elites probably think the same way about ignorance.
 
Science study: Republicans struggle with evolution, Democrats struggle with the Earth going around the Sun

Question: Human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals.

About 39 percent considered the statement false and 13 percent said that they don’t know.
The Republican and conservative refusal to recognize evolution is well known, but the extent of it may not be. As if the numbers for all adults (48 percent) aren’t depressing enough, only 28 percent of conservative Republicans believe that humans evolved from earlier species. In the next three spots are 32 percent of Republicans believing in evolution, 34 percent of conservative Democrats, and 37 percent of conservatives. (For comparison, 28 percent of fundamentalist Protestants believe in evolution, as do 27 percent of those who believe that the Bible is the literal word of God.)

The fact (according to the study) that 50% of Democrats don't know that the earth revolves around the sun is about 50x more troubling, lol.
 
I thought everyone knew that birds evolved from dinosaurs! That doesn't make the dinosaur a different species though. It makes those dinosaurs that evolved into birds an earlier version of bird not a separate species.

No, that would be incorrect. In fact you would be way off base with this.

Avian's are an entire "class" a robin would be a species. A Tyrannosaurus would be also a species, belonging to the class - Sauropsida.

Bird Classifications/Families

Here it is.

Species


Definition

noun, singular or plural: species

(taxonomy)

(1) The lowest taxonomic rank, and the most basic unit or category of biological classification.

(2) An individual belonging to a group of organisms (or the entire group itself) having common characteristics and (usually) are capable of mating with one another to produce fertile offspring. Failing that (for example the Liger) It has to be ecologically and recognisably the same.

Species - definition from Biology-Online.org

There might be different classes of birds, for instance birds that fly and birds that don't fly, that's a class. Both are of the bird species.

What you might be thinking of is genus.
Definition of genus (n)

Bing Dictionary
ge·nus
[ jéenəss ]


1.set of closely related species: a category in the taxonomic classification of related organisms, comprising one or more species.
2.broader term for something: the more general class or kind in which something is included, e.g. the species "dog" is included in the genus "animal"
3.group: a class or group of any kind

The tyrannosaurus did not become a bird. It did not change species. Species either evolve or become extinct. It is not rocket science to have figured this out. What do schools teach nowadays? This should be in every basic science class.

Accusing me of needing to better educate myself when I have been answering very stupid, pointless, questions and making request for others to use patience is somehow a call for you to act high and mighty in matters of science?

Look, dumb-ass - a dinosaur is not the same species as a bird ... period.


You said that a dinosaur was not a different species than a bird, that a dinosaur was just an "earlier version of a bird." That is one of the stupidest arguments that I have ever heard.
 
Last edited:
So, it isn't real - its just a theory.
You might fall off the planet.

For your scientific edification. Learn it. Live it.

Text : Is Gravity a Theory or a Law? | The Happy Scientist

Why Isn't Evolution Considered a Law? | Evolution FAQ

So gravity is a theory, eh? Exactly what I said.

And a law. Exactly what you didn't say. Tell us, is evolution a law or a theory? Then use the lesson I provided to tell us the difference between a law and a theory.
 
"Gravity" is a theory....

Yep.

So, it isn't real - its just a theory.
You might fall off the planet.

We all know that gravity exists, but scientists still dispute the how and the why.

Theories are one of the pinnacles of science and are widely accepted in the scientific community as being true. To remain a theory, it must never be shown to be wrong; if it is, the theory is disproven (this also happens).
 

So gravity is a theory, eh? Exactly what I said.

And a law. Exactly what you didn't say. Tell us, is evolution a law or a theory? Then use the lesson I provided to tell us the difference between a law and a theory.

I tried to impart to you how completely ignorant you are about the word "theory" - you proved yourself a very easy example. Quibbling about the definition of the word "theory" is your way to prove you know something.

You don't know Jack.
 

So gravity is a theory, eh? Exactly what I said.

And a law. Exactly what you didn't say. Tell us, is evolution a law or a theory? Then use the lesson I provided to tell us the difference between a law and a theory.

A scientific theory consists of one or more hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. Theories are one of the pinnacles of science and are widely accepted in the scientific community as being true. To remain a theory, it must never be shown to be wrong; if it is, the theory is disproven (this also happens). Theories can also evolve. This means the old theory wasn’t wrong, but it wasn’t complete either.

A law is used to describe an action under certain circumstances (Evolution is a law – it happens but the law doesn’t describe how). A theory describes how and why something happens (Evolution by natural selection, in which there are a host of descriptions for various mechanisms, describes the method in which evolution works)

The fact that evolution is considered a law by the scientific community does not require me to accept it as fact. I always ask the question, if we evolved from apes, why are there still apes walking around?
 

Forum List

Back
Top