Do You Believe In Darwin's Theory?

by selena costa Posted 2012/06/12 05:58:05

Read More

34 votes
Read all 35 opinions
View Results and Demographics + View Demographics

Loading Demographics... Click an icon to see demographic results Display unknown and private
	yes	25 votes	74%
	no	9 votes	26%

Add a comment above

Jeff Vader 2012/06/12 10:11:21

yes

+5
Most of those who disagree with evolution are ignorant of what Darwin's "On the Origin of Species" actually says. It is estimated that 85% of Christians in America have never read it, and what is worse wouldn't want to read it. America prides itself on free speech, but America is the ONLY democracy in which the book is banned in some of it's schools.

Most of what they have heard about it has been misquoted, misrepresented, or simply lies. For instance, most Christian Americans believe Darwin says we evolved from monkeys, he said no such thing. What's even worse is most cannot even get the title of his book right, so much for studied debate.
>> See Replies

More polls by selena costa

QUIS EVADET 2013/04/10 07:26:16

yes

Belief really is not a factor.
I agree that Darwin's Theory is the best fit for the evidence.
Until, someone is able to provide a better Theory, I am standing by Darwin's Theory of Evolution which so completely fits the mountains of verifiable evidence that continues to roll in supporting it from various fields of Science...
It is highly unlikely that there is another Theory that could replace it.
The God hypothesis is cute, and laughably discarded for the mumbo-jumbo it is.
Reality is so much more magnificent than superstition.

reply
littlebuffalo55TBA 2012/06/14 00:21:11

yes

+1
Yes I do!

reply
jean 2012/06/14 00:17:47

no

+1
And neither does Darwin.

reply
Melody 2012/06/12 22:10:43

yes

+2
Darwin's "theory"? or.. life's reality?

reply
Night 2012/06/12 20:27:20 (edited)

no

+4
I don't "believe" in it, I know it, and it's not a "theory" it's a scientific fact. This question is riddled with fault.

reply
selena ... to Night 2012/06/13 02:45:35 (edited)

this question was on yahoo answers

reply
Night to selena ... 2012/06/13 12:48:54

You could have edited it.

reply
selena ... to Night 2012/06/13 17:01:31

+1
Yeah, I could have. My apologies.

reply
Night to selena ... 2012/06/13 17:07:14

+1
Alright then. Lol.

reply
Miko 2012/06/12 18:38:33

no

+2
No more. I think new researches proved that this theory was wrong due to its based in his conclusion about theoretical hypotheses without clear evidences.

reply
socokid 2012/06/12 18:05:52

yes

+2
I also believe in the 150 years of utterly compounding evidence from dozens of scientific fields that would have dwarfed even Darwin's wildest estimations.

reply
Mr.Steve 2012/06/12 15:56:37
Linkums 2012/06/12 15:39:16

yes

+1
The adaptation and survival of the fittest of living things is an observable fact. It makes sense as an origin of species, as Darwin theorized. But as you might remember from high school biology, "species" is the lowest classification of life, among Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, and finally Species. While I believe evolution accounts for the varieties in species, I have my doubts as to whether it can account for much beyond that.

reply
Sean 2012/06/12 14:45:19

yes

+3
Yes, and will continue unless it's proven wrong.

reply
beach bum 2012/06/12 12:49:11

yes

+3
yes

reply
kidkewlsgirl8888 2012/06/12 12:01:24

yes

+3
there is infact proof

reply
Jeff Vader 2012/06/12 10:11:21

yes

+5
Most of those who disagree with evolution are ignorant of what Darwin's "On the Origin of Species" actually says. It is estimated that 85% of Christians in America have never read it, and what is worse wouldn't want to read it. America prides itself on free speech, but America is the ONLY democracy in which the book is banned in some of it's schools.

Most of what they have heard about it has been misquoted, misrepresented, or simply lies. For instance, most Christian Americans believe Darwin says we evolved from monkeys, he said no such thing. What's even worse is most cannot even get the title of his book right, so much for studied debate.

reply
Radical Ed to Jeff Vader 2012/06/12 11:39:27

+4
seriously? they would ban a science book because of their beliefs....*sigh*, makes me wonder.

reply
Zammo to Jeff Vader 2012/06/12 18:58:22

+1
You made it unnecessary for me to comment except to say well put.

reply
Swan Eshdeh 2012/06/12 09:27:38

no

+2
to me i have no believe in it .

reply
Icarus 2012/06/12 08:30:28

yes

+4
Of course, it's been well-established for about 150 years now. There's no doubt he was right.

reply
Radical Ed 2012/06/12 08:16:32

yes

+4
the amount of evidence supports it to no end.

reply
Catherine-Grace 2012/06/12 07:17:49

no

+2
i for one dont like being compared to monkey....

reply
Icarus to Catheri... 2012/06/12 08:55:43

+7
Strictly speaking you're an ape, not a monkey... but in any case, does the fact that we're related to other apes (and more distantly to monkeys) make us any less human?

reply
Radical Ed to Icarus 2012/06/12 09:08:38

+4
we're also related, distantly, to fish, amphibians, reptiles, worms, and bacteria. i see no one going against those taxa :P.

reply
Icarus to Radical Ed 2012/06/12 11:06:02

+5
How dare anyone suggest I'm related to an amoeba!

:-)

reply
Radical Ed to Icarus 2012/06/12 11:36:59

+3

xD

reply
Catheri... to Icarus 2012/06/12 21:37:14

yes, because being compared to an ape makes it all better...
just because they have aposable (mind my spelling) thumbs that makes them related to us. If god gave turtles aposable thumbs would everyone be saying that we are related to turtles!?!?? HMMMMMMMMMMMMM ;)

reply
Icarus to Catheri... 2012/06/12 22:15:09

It's a bit more than just the opposable thumbs you know :-) You're an ape because you have all the characteristics of an ape -

Your tail is just a stub of bones (the coccyx). Your dentition includes not only vestigial canines, but incisors, cuspids, bicuspids, and distinctive molars that come to five points interrupted by a "Y" shaped crevasse. This, taken together with all of your other traits, like the dramatically increased range of motion in your shoulder, as well as a profound increase in cranial capacity and disposition toward a bipedal gait, gives you a set of characteristics which all apes share, but no other living organisms share.

Added to that of course, your entire physiology, biochemistry and genetics proves that you and the other apes (chimpanzees, gorillas, orangs etc.) have a recent common ancestor.

reply
Catheri... to Icarus 2012/06/13 04:12:14

i no speak smart language

reply
Sean to Catheri... 2012/06/12 14:47:45

+4
Humans share 99% of the same DNA as Gorillas, and Chimpanzees.

reply
Son Of ... to Sean 2012/06/12 17:16:50

+1
96% but we also share 78% of the same DNA as a fly

reply
socokid to Son Of ... 2012/06/12 18:14:41

+2
This divergence, and lack thereof when the forms are more closely related, directly evidence what we should find if evolution is true.

Exactly.

The fact that we have any simliarities at all with another creature that also evolved on this planet should be obvious. From cell structure to how those cells are instructed to form! We have FAR more similarities with other life on this planet, even with plants, than many seem to realize. Looking different on the outside has little mention of how similar we are in many, many areas, and is explained within the theory of evolution soundly.

reply
umapathy Krishnamurthy 2012/06/12 06:13:26

yes

+3
Certainly

reply
Kibbles 2012/06/12 06:01:43

yes

+2
I believe it's a possibility, don't put fill stock in it.

reply