Ahhh. . . The most common and controversial debate out there today.  Science (creationism) vs. Evolution..... Evolution vs. Religion....Whatever you want to call it.  It seems that every time this debate comes to the surface that someone or another tends to go off the deep end in a very aggressive and/or violent manner.  Whether you have chosen your beliefs based on faith, experience, teachings, education, or force, there are many arguments that have been presented for both sides of the spectrum.  It seems to me however that one side tends to outweigh the other when it comes to factual representation and sheer sufficient supporting evidence.  I guess that’s why they call it faith though huh?  Is that what faith is really supposed to be though?  Blindly believing in something that makes no logical sense and presents absolutely zero proof other than an age old book?


Now before we get started, if you are an absolute fanatic for either side, please don’t leave any ignorant comments.  If you actually have something relatively intelligent that you are thinking about writing, please feel free to do so.  If you know already that you are going to fall off the deep end and begin throwing words of ignorant hate around as I begin to represent evolutionary supporting evidence, please just go on and read something else.  Let your blind ignorance be shown elsewhere.


Science Vs. Religion:  Evidence Vs. IgnoranceCredit: oxtc.com



Having studied both the religious aspect and the biological sciences, it seems that one of the sides tends to hold much more logical evidence when it comes to the origin of species of our planet today.  It seems that when reading through any one of the books dealing with the Abrahamic religions that there are many points which directly contradict one another in their sayings or teachings.  I also find it very difficult and illogical to believe that someone or something just magically created everything we know and see today from absolutely nothing over a period of 7 days.


Perhaps creationism is true.  Perhaps there is out there an omnipotent being capable of simply creating the heavens, the earth, the oceans, and all creatures great and small.  Perhaps religion vs. science is favored to the left.  I admittedly have absolutely no evidence to support the lack of such a being existing in our world today.  I do know however that I see vast amounts of undeniable evidence and data that shows the changing and differentiation of various species over extended periods of time.  I see evidence for evolution on an unarguable scale.  Created evolution maybe?  I am not sure.  I cannot just simply believe one side over the other at the snap of a finger. 


Science Vs. Religion:  Evidence Vs. IgnoranceCredit: dimasokantinatalism.com

Instead I look to the evidence discovered by humanity during their relatively short time they have spent on this planet thus far.  While humanity combined with the power of science and technology cannot yet go about answering every question there is to be answered, scientists have gone about discovering, theorizing, and making vary strong educated guesses based on observation and factual evidence that they have discovered through time.  It is through science that we are able to show evidence supporting the apparent age of the earth being roughly 3.8 billion years old through things like carbon dating. (this is just one example)    


It is because of this long history of earth that scientists such as Darwin were able to make theories other than that of creationism.  It was proposed that instead of an earth that is unchanging, species on earth do in fact change over time.  It was also proposed that species are derived not independently, but from a common ancestor.  It was also later stated that species on earth are not independent of each other, but have common ancestors.  All of these proposed theories can be supported through multiple examples from different species. 


Science Vs. Religion:  Evidence Vs. IgnoranceCredit: evolutioninschools.com

Strong evidence also lies among traits such as vestigial organs, fossil records, and transitional species forms.  One example of a species changing in time can be seen in the simple looking soapberry bug of the southern United States.  This soapberry bug is equipped with a long beak like structure that allows it to bury deep into its food source, which is the balloon vine fruit.  This insect emulsifies the contents of the inner seed, and extracts it much like a needle.  Through time, residents began to cultivate a new type of fruit.  Instead of having a swollen balloon like design, this newly introduced fruit had a much flatter shape.  A population increase of Soapberry bugs was observed with this newly introduced fruit with startling observations.  It was observed that those soapberry bugs feeding on the flattened rain tree fruit had significantly shorter structures for extracting the contents of the seed.  Upon further review, it was shown that this new, short version of the soapberry bug was a direct descendent of the long beaked bug.  After disproving the fact that a soapberry bug does not grow its beak length to minimum requirements based on its food source, this example is shown that a population has the capability of changing substantially over time.


Science Vs. Religion:  Evidence Vs. IgnoranceCredit: soapberrybug.com

            Vestigial structures are another compelling example of species changing over vast amounts of time.  A vestigial structure can be any useless structure or body part found on a species that has a profound role in another, often closely related species.  Vestigial organs can be found in many species throughout the world.  Humans themselves have a good example of a vestigial organ in their tailbones.  Humans have no need for a tail, so why would we have a tailbone?  This piece of evidence suggests that humans have evolved from an ancestor with a tail.  Other species such as kiwis and rubber boa snakes have similar vestigial organs.  While the kiwi has stubby wings that show no significant use, the boa snake shows structures resembling hind limbs and hip bones.  These vestigial structures suggest not only that species change significantly over time, but have evolved from common ancestors.  It is not completely understood exactly why this event occurs.  One theory suggests that when a species forms a niche in its habitat, it develops traits in order to better suit itself for that niche.  This divergence can either be sympatric or allopatric.  When a species niche development becomes more and more specific over time, the species have the ability to become very different from each other.  This can lead to the complete separation of the species into two independent species with very different roles in their environment.


Science Vs. Religion:  Evidence Vs. IgnoranceCredit: science.howstuffworks.com

  Perhaps the strongest piece of evidence, not only supporting the change in species over time but also the role of common ancestors, is the fossil records.  Simply put, species found in fossil records ARE NOT identical to the species that are found on the earth today.  Also, when observing fossil records, it is common to find many types of transitional species.  While two species are beginning to diverge, before complete divergence, they often have what is called a transitional species.  A transitional species is a species showing mixed features that are often found in several independent species in descendents later in time.  All of this evidence above not only suggests, but blatantly points toward the FACT that the earth and its species are constantly changing with no limitations in sight. 

Science Vs. Religion:  Evidence Vs. IgnoranceCredit: heatherdhawkins.com

The science vs. religion debate will probably never be completely solved in all honesty.  It is something that will probably outlive man itself.   


Possible transitional species in the flesh

Just to lighten the mood a bit for all those heated minds out there