"Indisputable Evidence of Evolution"?

[Phroso]

Phew! I'm exhausted.

I've just had an extended debate with a committed Jehovah's Witness.

I should have realised that I was really wasting my time because, among other things, he maintained that the Bible is the absolute truth and justified the need for God to access Adam's rib in the creation of Eve, by saying that God needed Adam's DNA!

Anyway, as you might expect, he is a firm advocate of "Intelligent Design" and refused to accept evolution as a credible alternative.

We parted with him saying that he would see me again and challenging me to present him with some "indisputable evidence" in support of evolution.

Where to begin? Frankly, I don't think anything will shake his faith in the Bible but I came away wondering if there was some way.

Without getting into a long convoluted argument, how can I convince him that Evolution is "indisputable"?

[NakedApe]

You can't.

He is arguing from a position of faith which is non negotiable, so there really is no "debate".

You can spend all day clubbing this guy over the head with reason and logic. It won't make any difference, he's not actually interested in anything you've got to say unless as a platform for him to proselytise from and at the end you'll walk away frustrated and angry and he'll walk away feeling as though he's scored some sort of moral victory.

Debating theists? Just don't do it. ;)

[Loki]

Ask him what he does with his appendix?

It is a problem, how to describe reality assuming no previous contact.

Ask if he can see how the echidna and the kangaroo have many things in common, yet the kangaroo is a progression fron the echidna model. Likewise the step from kangaroo to cow.

Probably not simple enough.

[davo]

Speciation is evolution.

Speciation is The 'Origin of species'. Darwin talks about one mechanism of evolution, natural selection that picks and chooses from genetic drift and gene flow.

There are observed instances of speciation, here is indisputable, observed evidence :

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

This leads us to the huge amount of evidence of evolution at a larger scale that across all major disciplines of science.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc

Thus, to show that speciation and further divergence that the overwhelming evidence shows us does not occur, one must identify what stops speciation from occuring beyond a 'certain point'. We are seeing evolution in action, this is indisputable, ID'ers however are trying to say 'it only happens to a certain point'

Well why? what is it that 'stops' evolution?

[Sir Patrick Crocodile]

Interesting post there.Phew! I'm exhausted.

I've just had an extended debate with a committed Jehovah's Witness.Now remember: STOP REVIVE SURVIVE

I should have realised that I was really wasting my time because, among other things, he maintained that the Bible is the absolute truth and justified the need for God to access Adam's rib in the creation of Eve, by saying that God needed Adam's DNA!Just remember that if God had needed Adam's DNA then he didn't have to rip off an entire rib for that. In fact he could have been a nice god and plucked one of his hairs off or something.

But then again that wouldn't make for much of an Action Sci-fi setting he was trying to achieve. ;)

Anyway, as you might expect, he is a firm advocate of "Intelligent Design" and refused to accept evolution as a credible alternative.I always wondered why it was called "Intelligent Design" as clearly the "designer" is not so intelligent and/or maybe he doesn't keep his documentation up-to-date or something. ;)

We parted with him saying that he would see me again and challenging me to present him with some "indisputable evidence" in support of evolution.One thing you can tell him to do is ask a doctor what happens if you take too little antibiotic. The bacteria will gain resistance. This is not magic and here is a rough summary of the procedure: A colony of bacteria is given too little antibiotic to kill the lot Some bacteria that are weak will die due to antibiotic Some that are strong will reproduce Cycle repeatsAnd there is a fine example of natural selection.

There are many experiments (http://www.google.com/search?hl=xx-pirate&source=hp&q=evolution+experiment&btnG=Google+Searrrch)for evolution including the E. coli long-term evolution experiment (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment) that has confirmed this. This can be used as irrefutable evidence.Where to begin? Frankly, I don't think anything will shake his faith in the Bible but I came away wondering if there was some way.

Without getting into a long convoluted argument, how can I convince him that Evolution is "indisputable"?Don't think I would bother trying to "shake his faith" off. It will probably not work. And why should you care unless you know him that well?

[Dan Gleibitz]

Debating JWs is pointless.

I had a look at Watchtower the other day. Their tune hasn't changed, and it never will. The cover was inviting, perhaps even interesting...

"Do you want to know the truth about _____?"

Inside: "Do you want to know the truth about _____? Here's what the bible says..."

Even worse is that they answer questions about god, jehovah and the bible with the same "Here's what the bible tells us....".

That's not interesting, it's insulting. How can I not be offended when you ask me to switch off my brain? How can the faithful? :confused:

[Loki]

You would need something incontrivertable and totally obvious you could place directly under his nose, there is no such thing. The fact that whale's fins retain the bones of the fingers is too abstract. Antibiotic resistance is good but even that is too complicated for some.

If he actually wanted to know, he would by now.

[zebba]

Best evidence is dogs and cats, IMO. Our domesticated pets bear no resemblance to their original forms.

If he claims that there is no evidence for evolution between "kinds", punch him in the face.

[wolty]

@Phroso, I am not too sure that this approach is good for your mental health. JW's don't come to my door and if they do I am rarely home. I thought it would be good to have a discussion about life, the universe and everything but now I am not so sure. I don't think anything you say will make any difference.
What I will do now is just make one point and leave it at that, along the lines of what Mr Black said once " ask him if his god talks to him" or maybe make the point that he is wasting his life in a one way relationship.

But I would never be able to keep my cool after loads of shite, so one point is all I am ever going to make.

[Godless Ray]

You know the difficulty here isn't finding or presenting evidence, its the ability of him being able to understand the evidence.

Now your an intelligent guy.. You know stuff about evidence? He was in your place selling you on the supernatural how come your the one now defending?

Say your prepared to become one and get the haircut and white shirt, but first its that little matter of evidence..

Godless Ray

[Annie]

I've had the same conundruns with xtian folk where I've been placed in the same position of having to prove my position (atheism) or lose all credibility. It's too big a job and too exhausting when they are die hards. My suggestion is invite him to this forum where we can all share the burden. Ahhh Go on.... It could be a hoot! :D

[Loki]

If that fails sent them around here and my 5 year old will explain it to them, slowly. His is a better version too, it has pirates and dragons in it, and crocodiles, very keen on crocodiles.

[robertkd]

Phew! I'm exhausted.

I've just had an extended debate with a committed Jehovah's Witness.

I should have realised that I was really wasting my time because, among other things, he maintained that the Bible is the absolute truth and justified the need for God to access Adam's rib in the creation of Eve, by saying that God needed Adam's DNA!




You know this one has me lost for words, Ok follow the story

mmm made earth , the stars made the fauna and flora (yep both sexes where required, no less) made man huh!

So able to do all the above, but making a woman stumps god, isn't it just a little convenient to emplane the obvious why the number of ribs are different. Nice camp fire story nice way to enslave women to men but that's about it. Besides what the heck did god take to make the universe and what the heck did he take it from??

And why is he always "saying shyt" let this and let that, let there be,.. what voice control??


Besides if the dude is such a stickler for the bible ask him to emplane some of those dodgy stories like giving up your daughters for sex with the town folk, prostituting (pimping) your wife. Killing your child as a sacrifice for helping you win a battle, great stuff from the wholly holy book,.. :eek:

[Atrax Robustus]

. . . isn't it just a little convenient to emplane the obvious why the number of ribs are different . . .

Been a bad day robertkd? :confused: or have I missed the need to read this on an aircraft? :D

. . . of course you were alluding to the time honoured approach of getting 'them' to agree to the explanation of the differing number of ribs BEFORE you hit them with the earth-shattering realisation that there is no difference - weren't you? ;)

[robertkd]

mmm note to self ,proof read and note what the speel checker changed it to :p

and yes,.. if I'm not mistaken the bible says took a rib form adam,... :cool:

[Atrax Robustus]

@Mr Black. Well, talkorigins (http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB381.html) also has a bit on this as well. Believe it or not, I've actually had a theist tell me that the original text of thee bible was referring to the baculum!:rolleyes:

Brings a whole new meaning to 'sitting down to a good feed of ribs'. :eek:

[robertkd]

Fear not Mr Black

http://biology.clc.uc.edu/courses/BIO105/ribs.htm

[robertkd]

@Mr Black. Well, talkorigins (http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB381.html) also has a bit on this as well. Believe it or not, I've actually had a theist tell me that the original text of thee bible was referring to the baculum!:rolleyes:

Brings a whole new meaning to 'sitting down to a good feed of ribs'. :eek:

bonerfried :eek:

[Annie]

@black: I can vouch there is no difference. I have counted mine (hers) and others (his). This particular penchant for evidence seeking always got me in trouble. I Nor any other woman was not made from any superfluous male bone. All ribs are present and accounted for. Evens Stevens. :D

[Atrax Robustus]

@Annie Fortunately (or gasp - unfortunately) 'he' is missing a baculum! Human libido and posession of this bone could have been hell (or heaven :eek:)I suggest.

@Mr Black Thanks for pointing that out! I will have a totally different word picure in mind whenever I see the appeal to fear in future! :eek:

[Iridescence]

Just on the rib thing. Bear in mind that "god" supposedly took the rib from "adam" after "adam" was a complete human. Adam would no more genetically pass on that missing rib to his children than Tori Spelling would pass on her pert nose or weird boobs....so the idea that men would have one less rib than women is incorrect. Not to say I believe any of the fairy tale. Talking snakes indeed.

[Annie]

@AR: Oh my GAWD! No wonder I couldn't find the missing rib!!!! I was looking for the wrong bone!!!! baculum + libido = "boner" !!! :eek: fark! I even counted my sons ribs when he was but a wee bairn!!!!) I have counted way too many ribs - in hindsight, this is a good thing! :eek:

[DanielV]

Hi Phroso - you are a brave man to try that fight!

I have a quote that may be useful in understanding the position of the true believer:

"I know of no evidence that would convince me otherwise because it was not evidence that convinced me in the first place"

Andrew Sullivan, Blogger, Catholic, in a discussion with Sam Harris.

[Ford]

How about you say: "I've read the bible, so after you have read The God Delusion, God is Not Great and The Greatest show on Earth (choose your own reading list), come back and we can compare notes." :p

[Brad]

Tell him that evolution is backed up by evidence collected, digested, disseminated, written, published, peer reviewed and cross referenced from hundreds of thousands of papers, journals, articles and all other types of scientific literature written by legions of the sharpest and astute minds in modern times all relating to the following:

genetics
comparative anatomy
palaeontology
geographical and chronological distribution
comparative physiology
comparative biochemistry
speciation
interspecies fertility
homological comparisons
cellular and molecular ancestry

Point out that his evidence is from one book that is (quoting Sam Harris): '...the work of sand-strewn men and women who thought the earth was flat and for whom a wheelbarrow would have been a breathtaking example of emerging technology.'

Then tell him to fuck off.

[Sir Patrick Crocodile]

I just got an idea based on the title of the thread. Ask the JW for "indisputable evidence of creation" first, and when he does present his "evidence" then "dispute" it to the extreme!

[Phroso]

Tell him that evolution is backed up by evidence collected, digested, disseminated, written, published, peer reviewed and cross referenced from hundreds of thousands of papers, journals, articles and all other types of scientific literature written by legions of the sharpest and astute minds in modern times all relating to the following:

genetics
comparative anatomy
palaeontology
geographical and chronological distribution
comparative physiology
comparative biochemistry
speciation
interspecies fertility
homological comparisons
cellular and molecular ancestry

Point out that his evidence is from one book that is (quoting Sam Harris): '...the work of sand-strewn men and women who thought the earth was flat and for whom a wheelbarrow would have been a breathtaking example of emerging technology.'

Then tell him to fuck off.

Thanks for the entertaining and informative input from all forum readers and particularly Brads all embracing approach. (above)

Perhaps I should explain that I don't usually suffer JW's at my front door for more than sixty seconds. However, in this case I called to visit an elderly couple who are friends of mine and found that a couple of JW proselytisers had managed to get past their front door.

On my arrival, I found the JW's busily bashing my friends around the head with various fanciful interpretations of the Bible. They then focussed their attention on me and I did my best to deter them politely by making it clear that, "I am not a religious man".

Undeterred, they pressed on and I felt that I had no option but to make it clear that I had already given considerable consideration to the various religious alternatives available and am now a confirmed atheist.

Upon hearing the dreaded word, atheist, they probably thought they had encountered an agent of Satan and must fight the good fight.

So the battle commenced and I believe that I struck many telling blows and emerged unbloodied.

Eventually they urged me not to renounce God and reminded me that I would eventually have to stand before Him and answer for my sins.

I said that I did not believe that to be the case but if I happened to be wrong, I would quote the parable of the Prodigal Son and ask God to kill the fatted calf in honour of my return.

Inevitably, discussion of Creation involved Evolution versus Intelligent Design and I somehow found myself struggling to present evidence of Evolution to a man who doesn't believe that fossils exist!

As has been pointed out by respondents to this thread. I was embarking on an impossible task.

"There are none so blind as those who will not see."

[wearestardust]

I would never recommend anything illegal or violent.

If he claims that there is no evidence for evolution between "kinds", punch him in the face.

So I don't recommend that. I merely note the suggestion is there.

This has merit too:

Then tell him to fuck off.

I just made this post elsewhere on the forum which is quite apropos here too:

The basic problem is that religious beliefs provide inoculation from facts that disagree with the beliefs. I speak from experience in this - not in relation to evolution which I never had a problem with it, given that neither does Holy Mother Church, but in terms of beliefs generally.

The logic goes like this:

1. X is true (in the case we are talking about: a creationist view)
2. Y challenges X
3. Therefore Y must be false no matter what.

From this perspective you can possibly see that debates with creationists happen at the level of 2. and 3., but the problem is with 1 and no amount of arguing is going to fix that. The common way that creationists handle these debates is dogmatically to repeat endlessly the same false assertions. And so discussions on the issue tend to go like this:

Creationist: evolution is impossible because of the 3rd law of thermodynamics. And information can’t increase. And entropy. And stuff.

Evolutionist: that doesn’t apply, the earth is not a closed system.

C: and as well as the problem of thermodynamics, what about eyes? And bacterial flagella? They couldn’t have evolved because they are irreduceably complex.

E: actually they are not irreducibly complex. Here’s why. And didn’t I mention that the earth is not a closed system?

C: and not only eyes, but there is no evidence for evolution in the fossil record, and neither is it demonstrable through experiments.

E: I told why eyes are not irreducibly complex. And I happen to have here a whole bunch of evidence from the fossil record. And here’s evidence from, eg, the e-coli experiment.

C: there is no evidence in the fossil record. And the e-coli experiment was falsified on the same sound stage as the moon landings.

E: I just showed you a bunch of evidence from the fossil record and I’m rustling you up a truckload more. And the e-coli experiment was good science and here’s why.

C: if you have all this evidence from the fossil record, why won’t you show me? And the e-coli experiment is only microevolution.

E: when you’ve finished looking through the truckload of evidence, you can look at the pallets of evidence being parachuted out of the fleet of transport aircraft currently overhead. And you are misusing the micro/macro evolutionary distinction as just a dodge to avoid the evidence.

C: well, ladies and gentlemen, creationism has retained its 100% victory rate. Yet again the evolution-religionists were unable to provide a scrap of evidence for us to even look at, and my interlocutor even admitted that the e-coli experiment is a fraud.
All that said, if you want some reading material I would recommend the following for your own interest:

“Unintelligent design: why god isn’t as smart as she thinks she is” by Robyn Williams (the ABC radio science guy). This is general overview of the arguments in and around ID, and is very readable, chatty and amusing as you would expect from the author.

“The greatest show on earth: the evidence for evolution” by Richard Dawkins does just what it says on the tin. Dawkins is a great science writer and easy for anyone inclined to read that sort of thing. Might be very slightly harder work for people who only read fiction books, for entertainment not information (no criticism intended: just making an observation) but it is still intended as a popular book.

“Tower of babel: the evidence against the new creationism” by Robert Pennock. I’m reading this right now, and have only got as far as the introductory chapters on the history and politics of ID. Very interesting. Not intended as a popular work quite as much as Dawkins, but an easy read all the same. Pennock is a Christian, by the way.

All of these are available at my local library at least.

[Sir Patrick Crocodile]

If all fails, just act as if you are interested and then at the end laugh your head off.
JW: Blah blah etcetera etcetera blah blah YOU: LMAO!/MMORPGOMGLOLWTFBBQ!/ETC! Am I supposed to believe that shit?! That is ridiculous! <Insert any problems with his faith here>
You actually will find you may laugh your head off in many cases any way.

[_RAAF_Stupot]

Lenski's E. Coli experiment is by any reasonable description, evidence of evolution. The problem is that (rightfully) nothing in science is actually indisputable - if it's not disputable it's not scientific.

The other problem is that the faithful are only satisfied by what is (in their mind) indisputable. Thus, the twain will never meet.

Arguments demonstrating the truth of evolution can only succeed in changing the mind of somebody who is having a crisis of faith.

[Dan]

Perhaps we should throw Christians from high bridges, god will save them after all. It seems fitting that Christians would willingly jump at the opportunity prove god's existence?

[AgnoAtheist]

Can I suggest a response.

You asked me to give you indisputable proof of evolution. Whilst I could attempt to persuade you with many facts I will never succeed because your question is unfair.

They will ask why it is unfair.

Because my understanding of the truth of Evolution is based on a large number of scientifically tested facts yet yours is based on a belief I do not hold or understand. Given what I know of the world the idea of a supreme being is extraordinary - since your position proposes the extraordinary it should have an extra ordinary level of evidence - It is you that must prove the case - yet all I expect to hear from you is about belief not evidence.

So there is no value in us discussing this further.

And if you are on a role and vindictive
"Unfortunately it is your ignorance that brings you to my door"

[Sir Patrick Crocodile]

You could ask for some indisputable evidence of the non-existence of Santa Clause while you are at it. Or even such evidence that disproves the Existence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster and use his/her arguments against him/her in this way.

[zebba]

since your position proposes the extraordinary it should have an extra ordinary level of evidence - It is you that must prove the case - yet all I expect to hear from you is about belief not evidence.I've seen it tried hundreds of times. It never works. They will inevitably accuse you of moving the goalposts, being intellectually dishonest, or avoiding the question. They will probably also say something like "The evidence is there, your mind is just closed to it".

The more I wander, the more I think childish namecalling is the best way to go. Sure, you won't make any converts, but you might get a few laughs :)

[NakedApe]

The more I wander, the more I think childish namecalling is the best way to go.

I couldn't agree more. If we all did a bit more name-calling and a lot less pointless debating these idiots wouldn't have such an over-inflated view of their own importance and wouldn't come knocking on our doors in the first place.

My approach is simple. Believe whatever nonsense you want to believe - I couldn't care less - but if you want me to believe it too then provide evidence (the Bible is not evidence) or expect insults and ridicule. Do not expect polite debate.

[DanDare]

I thought "Intelligent Design" actually did accept evolution as indisputably true but had these "bits" that natural selection is not supposed to have been capable of, therefore undisclosed being did it?

For your edification I think you may enjoy comparing your conversation with the one in "Kissing Hanks Ass"

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/fDp7pkEcJVQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/fDp7pkEcJVQ&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

[humantoo]

The churches are way ahead of you. Like telemarketers, their followers already have training in the type of questions that will be posed to them and the way those questions are to be answered.

I remember in the Mormon church, we were told that multiple wives were taken in Brigham Youngs time because there wasn't enough men to go around and the women would have been left to starve if another church member hadn't married them. I saw this as feasible at the time but the adult athiest me now asks, Why couldn't church members support these women as a charitable act without requiring marriage and all the trimmings? and Why couldn't they just marry outside of the church?

Someone who is a regular church goer is constantly brainwashed into the church's point of view and rewarded for compliance. No heathen is going to change their minds with facts and logic.

[Loki]

@humantoo, this is why I prefer the "don't say anything and simply shut the door" method. These people are trained in what to expect and say. If you are going to respond to the lunacy you need a statement of question they aren't expecting like "why is the sky blue"? There have been a few suggested here before, I particularly like "So you've met jesus, what does he look like"? Won't achieve anything except maybe a stunned look and then they will leave, but you will get to feel smug for a short time.

[Phroso]

Phew! I'm exhausted.

I've just had an extended debate with a committed Jehovah's Witness.

I should have realised that I was really wasting my time because, among other things, he maintained that the Bible is the absolute truth and justified the need for God to access Adam's rib in the creation of Eve, by saying that God needed Adam's DNA!

Anyway, as you might expect, he is a firm advocate of "Intelligent Design" and refused to accept evolution as a credible alternative.

We parted with him saying that he would see me again and challenging me to present him with some "indisputable evidence" in support of evolution.

Where to begin? Frankly, I don't think anything will shake his faith in the Bible but I came away wondering if there was some way.

Without getting into a long convoluted argument, how can I convince him that Evolution is "indisputable"?

Thanks to the various members who have responded to this thread.

After some thought, I can't believe that I let the JW proselytiser taunt me with the challenge of finding "indisputable proof of Evolution".

He wants "indisputable proof" of evolution from me! This from a guy who's prepared to accept a series of half baked and frequently contradictory anecdotal Bible stories as absolute truth purely on faith alone! I should have asked him to give me "indisputable proof" that Santa Claus doesn't live at the North Pole.

There he sat at the table, presenting as absolute truth, ideas related to the "end of days" and a great day of Judgement when all the dead emerge from their graves to be judged with those found worthy entering Heaven and the unworthy returning to their graves.

I did ask him why God bothered awakening the unworthy. Being omniscient, he would know in advance who was worthy of Heavenly selection so he might as well just let the unworthy remain undisturbed in their graves for the rest of eternity.

It is all too ridiculous!

And further to "proving" Dawin's theory of Evolution and Natural Selection.
As one respondent, (RAAF_Stupot), pointed out, "The problem is that (rightfully) nothing in science is actually indisputable - if it's not disputable it's not scientific."

Thanks again!

[rolandmckay]

I have just lost a long reply as a message announced that I was not logged in. I won't rewrite it but two books may be helpful to utterly annhilate any believer:
Jerry Coyne's "Why Evolution is True." Penguin Books, 2009.

If you are losing an argument produce questions from Paul discussed in C. Dennis McKinsey "The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy" Prometheus Books, 1995: 385-406.

I have never lost an argument (to date) with any bible scholar as they only read the biblical passages that they find comfortable.