What happens if you "don't believe in evolution"?

[jasonlee3071]

When you don't believe in evolution, you have what's called "faith."

Actually it's called skepticism. I'm not totally sure about evolution itself. It may have happened or it may not have happened. I have no firm convictions regarding this. I don't have faith in anything and as far as various religions go I believe in them even less than I believe in evolution.
At least with evolution those who believe it try to prove it with some scientific data or facts (maybe distorted or contorted), but those trying to prove to me that there is some supernatural being or beings, doing miraculous things like raising someone from the dead or something more unbelievable is just asking for you to throw your commonsense/ logic out the door.
Which is why I don't trust in faith or have it.

 

[Questioner]

Do you get raped by the Flying Spaghetti Monster and his gang of pirates? Discuss.

If not, then there's no reason to not believe in it, (assuming that elective belief is a thing).

In fact, it's probably one of the ugliest theories to be particularly invested in to begin with, with one's level of enthusiasm for evolutionary theory often being "inversely" proportional to their actual mating success, making one even wonder if it would better to "not" believe in it than to do so, as superstitious as the notion of "believing" in any body of theory or abstraction is to begin with.

I'd much rather study music theory, than evolutionary theory, to be honest, even as a scientific theory, it's entirely overrated, physics being much more fundamental than biology, and a hell of a lot cooler (in physics, you get to learn about black holes, in evolution you get to learn about cows humping each other).

And it seems to be common knowledge that musicians, whether Bach or Rock tend to do a lot more actual sexual reproduction than the average, overweight, white, male evolution fetishist on the internet does, likely having more in common with the mating and hygiene habits of a lesser ape than the average non-socially maladjusted person does, and much like an animal, likely isn't able to tell the difference between a Waifu and and actual woman, other than maybe when she pulls out the pepper spray - which a Waifu, of course can't do.

Hehehe

Evolution? My ass. More like devolution? Science? Nah, more like a failed HS science experiment come to life.

I don't think this strapping young fellow is particularly concerned about regurgitating ugly, banal factoids about evolution, and if anything he and his lovers are evolutionarily speaking, the better for it. Seems to work in reverse - the less you know about evolution, the more actual evolution you and the ladies end up doing. Mhmm.

Pathetic.

Nothing.

Evolution doesn't care how stupid you are.

And indeed evolution has a way of dealing with those who are stupid.

How rather superstitious.

Seems rather to care more for beauty than stupidity, more often than not (though the notion of mutual exclusivity between the two is rather false, superflulous, and dichtomic to begin with; as one couldn't argue that a work of art like Michelangelo's "Birth of Venus" didn't require a lot of intelligence and mathematical prodigiousness.

Regardless, let me put it to you this way - "evolution" in popular jargon, isn't a "sky daddy" who cares about your patronage thereof, it's not going to "deal" with people who are stupid, nor people whos knowledge of the subject, or science in general stunted at the 6th grade level, coming more from TV, mass media, or rote memorization, such as those silly and barely educated individuals who don't even know the difference between simplistic, K-12 grading methodologies, or rote memorization and indoctrination, and reading for actual comprehension or depth.

Or simply an unremarkable, dime-a-dozen job in one of the industries which uses evolutionary knowledge or information, being therefore more predicated on a lack of well-roundedness in knowledge or mere industry bias than anything else.

If anything, assuming your superstitious about evolution "dealing" with some people or not, in reality, it seems to be the opposite, and those, overwhelmingly single, overweight men, with a disproportionate interest in the subject, who often frequent internet forums related to "incels", groping women, being miserably married, or things of that nature, seem to be the ones who evolution has selected against, rather than for.

In contrast, none of the beautiful women I've dated while I was working on my entreprenurial endeavors seemed to be bothered at all about my knowledge, or supposed lack thereof about "evolution", much has been the case for most of human history, prior to Darwin and those who superstitiously revere him and his mythical status in history, inventing his theory which merely extrapolated on what had, to some extent or another, been folk knowledge or wisdom in cultures of yore, dating as far back as the pre-Socratic Greek philosophers.

And no, it's not going to deal with me, it's not going to deal with me, it's not going to make that ugly little thing known as the Flying Spaghetti Monster, of which a socially maladjusted 13-year old doodling on the wall of a public restroom could have come up with something requiring more creativity and intelligence - smite me, send me to non-hell, have me gang-raped by pirates, force me to eat rotten spaghetti for eternity, or so on.

Much as evolution does not care for whimsical traits such as intelligence (of which the average evolution or IQ fetishist would be lucky to have one of 105, if even 100, assuming that free, online IQ tests or childish clichés meaning anything), intelligence, whether of the standard or the emotional variety, of which many an average person is lacking in either or, if not both, is merely a tool, "evolution", of course would only care about it in so much as to what or how it is used for, whereas fetishizing it as some "end in and of itself" would be the opposite, an evolutionary maladaption which serves no purpose other than in superstitious fantasy.

If a picture is worth a 1000 words, then yes, I'd argue it's clear who and what evolution actually favors, in practice, as opposed to childish theory and abstraction:

On a slightly more serious note, I find that there is more beauty of lasting depth in mastery of any craft or trade, whether athletic, scientific, artistic, or mathematical (which is ultimately what theories, scientific or otherwise are to begin with, an aesthetic end in and of themselves), then on the purely physical or sensory (though this is something that, ironically would be lost on the evolution fetishists themselves and their affinity for the hideouts, inside and out).

I find that evolutionary theory and information, such as the writings of Steven Pinker is useful and helpful, as is information contained in the other natural sciences, but that's about it, it's more the superstitions, misinformation, and popular fetishization surrounding them that I find stupid and silly, as well as frequently contradictory and conflationary, informed more by dishonesty, archaism, qusasi-authoritarian idol worship and superstitions surrounding "science" or scientists themselves, and the fictitious job titles surrounding said terminology, and the reality as opposed to the cartoonish fantasy of a guy in a white lab coat holding a beaker, and general denial and ineptitude of reality, from history, to the mathematical approximations from which said theories are created to begin with, such as the stupid at best, dishonest at worst conflation of philosophies with science, or other dishonest or idiotic dolts, some of whom don't even know the difference between something such as "conspiracy theory" and a scientific theory, as if their intelligence or reasoning abilty stunted at 6th grade, or they are more informed by propaganda mass media designed primarily, if not exclusively for those at that low level of intelligence or education, than anything in the real world to begin with, such as pretty much any books of depth or study written at a reading level above that (such as legal and moral or ethical philosophy, which is a subject.which I have a keen interest in as of late).

 

[Crepitus]

Nothing.

Evolution doesn't care how stupid you are.

Hopefully, it will help your (at least your offspring) get smarter.

Who knows?


Didn't work for you though.

 

[Crepitus]

Do you get raped by the Flying Spaghetti Monster and his gang of pirates? Discuss.

If not, then there's no reason to not believe in it, (assuming that elective belief is a thing).

In fact, it's probably one of the ugliest theories to be particularly invested in to begin with, with one's level of enthusiasm for evolutionary theory often being "inversely" proportional to their actual mating success, making one even wonder if it would better to "not" believe in it than to do so, as superstitious as the notion of "believing" in any body of theory or abstraction is to begin with.

I'd much rather study music theory, than evolutionary theory, to be honest, even as a scientific theory, it's entirely overrated, physics being much more fundamental than biology, and a hell of a lot cooler (in physics, you get to learn about black holes, in evolution you get to learn about cows humping each other).

And it seems to be common knowledge that musicians, whether Bach or Rock tend to do a lot more actual sexual reproduction than the average, overweight, white, male evolution fetishist on the internet does, likely having more in common with the mating and hygiene habits of a lesser ape than the average non-socially maladjusted person does, and much like an animal, likely isn't able to tell the difference between a Waifu and and actual woman, other than maybe when she pulls out the pepper spray - which a Waifu, of course can't do.

Hehehe

Evolution? My ass. More like devolution? Science? Nah, more like a failed HS science experiment come to life.

I don't think this strapping young fellow is particularly concerned about regurgitating ugly, banal factoids about evolution, and if anything he and his lovers are evolutionarily speaking, the better for it. Seems to work in reverse - the less you know about evolution, the more actual evolution you and the ladies end up doing. Mhmm.

Pathetic.

Nothing.

Evolution doesn't care how stupid you are.

And indeed evolution has a way of dealing with those who are stupid.

Sadly we have kinda bent those rules for the last few hundred years. Probably wasn't a great idea.

You can see the results today in tRump's followers

 

[Crepitus]

How rather superstitious

There's nothing superstitious about it. Darwinism is an observable fact.

 

[Questioner]

How rather superstitious

There's nothing superstitious about it.

Yes, it most certainly is.

Darwinism is an observable fact.

"Darwinism" and "evolution" aren't exactly the same thing.

And yes, you are conflating your faith in others having told you, or allegedly observed it themselves, with having done so yourself, or approximated a theory from it, not the same thing at all.

And no, again, it's not "a fact", it's a theory or approximation from mathematics, built from facts, or pieces of information.

 

[Crepitus]

How rather superstitious

There's nothing superstitious about it.

Yes, it most certainly is.

Darwinism is an observable fact.

"Darwinism" and "evolution" aren't exactly the same thing.

And yes, you are conflating your faith in others having told you, or allegedly observed it themselves, with having done so yourself, or approximated a theory from it, not the same thing at all.

And no, again, it's not "a fact", it's a theory or approximation from mathematics, built from facts, or pieces of information.

Lol, no.

Not faith, Son. Science.

 

[fncceo]

If only there were some sort of consensus on the topic ... then it would be settled, we wouldn't need the science.

 

[Questioner]

How rather superstitious

There's nothing superstitious about it.

Yes, it most certainly is.

Darwinism is an observable fact.

"Darwinism" and "evolution" aren't exactly the same thing.

And yes, you are conflating your faith in others having told you, or allegedly observed it themselves, with having done so yourself, or approximated a theory from it, not the same thing at all.

And no, again, it's not "a fact", it's a theory or approximation from mathematics, built from facts, or pieces of information.

Lol, no.

Not faith, Son. Science.

Just another silly axiom yes.

You're placing faith in "science", (or Francis Bacon's specific method of science in specific), not on the basis of having discovered, researched, invented, tested or developed any of the theories in question yourself, no.

 

[Questioner]

If only there were some sort of consensus on the topic ... then it would be settled, we wouldn't need the science.

Settled until the consensus changes, yes.

 

[dblack]

You get to wear a dunce cap.

So hypothetically, if you had the choice between not wearing a dunce cap, but remaining a virgin for life... or getting to do some "evolving" with 100 beautiful women, but had to wear a dunce cap while you did it? Which would you choose?

You are daydreaming again dunce

The dunce cap comment seemed appropriate. Why was it deleted?

 

[Crepitus]

How rather superstitious

There's nothing superstitious about it.

Yes, it most certainly is.

Darwinism is an observable fact.

"Darwinism" and "evolution" aren't exactly the same thing.

And yes, you are conflating your faith in others having told you, or allegedly observed it themselves, with having done so yourself, or approximated a theory from it, not the same thing at all.

And no, again, it's not "a fact", it's a theory or approximation from mathematics, built from facts, or pieces of information.

Lol, no.

Not faith, Son. Science.

Just another silly axiom yes.

You're placing faith in "science", (or Francis Bacon's specific method of science in specific), not on the basis of having discovered, researched, invented, tested or developed any of the theories in question yourself, no.

Lol, so it's not believable if each person doesn't do it themselves?

WTF are you talking about?

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

You get to wear a dunce cap.

So hypothetically, if you had the choice between not wearing a dunce cap, but remaining a virgin for life... or getting to do some "evolving" with 100 beautiful women, but had to wear a dunce cap while you did it? Which would you choose?

You are daydreaming again dunce

The dunce cap comment seemed appropriate. Why was it deleted?

Just about everyone in MENSA believes in evolution.

People who don't believe in evolution should form their own group called DENSA.

 

[luchitociencia]

You review a theory according to its doctrines, not so by its claims,

The theory of evolution doctrines are the whole invalid, regardless of how much effort evolutionists do in order to claim is valid.

You just can't affirm that God exists because miracles happen, same as well, the theory of evolution is nothing but propaganda.

A scrutiny made reviewing its base foundation reveals the theory of evolution is not science but a belief.

 

[rightwinger]

Evolution is a FACT
God is a theory

 

[dblack]

"If evolution is outlawed, only outlaws will evolve."

 

[james bond]

Well, if monkeys walked today, then that would be something. Or an alien showed up at my door instead of JW. The atheists just believe in bad science nowadays.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Settled until the consensus changes, yes.

Wrong, it's settled until the overwhelming preponderance of evidence changes. Get it right, shaman.

 

[Questioner]

Settled until the consensus changes, yes.

Wrong, it's settled until the overwhelming preponderance of evidence changes. Get it right, shaman.

Yawn.. that's a simplistic argument from authority fallacy as well as an ad populum fallacy, so not only is it appealing to the authority of Bacon's method based on faith, but it's also entirely misinformed and confused as to how research in the natural sciences actually works, in which the validity of research and researchers is not predicated on any notion of "overwhelming preponderance" to begin with.

If anything, it sounds like that term "overwhelming preponderance" comes from jargon in the legal system, not institutions of scientific research, making me think you don't even know a difference as basic as that - having watched too much TV, and not read enough books, I presume?


So no, it isn't settled - I deny evolution, simply because I can, nor am I superstitious or unevolved enough to childishly believe their is any silly notion of "worth" in believing in it to begin with in almost a theistic-like fashion... whatever that means, particularly when it doesn't seem to serve my own evolutionary interests to do so, nor the majority of freaks disproportionately obsessed with "evolution" at the expense of their own consensual mating and reproduction. Mhmm.

 

[james bond]

Evolution is a FACT
God is a theory

Evolution isn't a FACT or else all of us could use it. God is a great theory. Evolution is a false theory.