Sentences with phrase «supporting evolution»

In discussion of these projects, panelists will highlight process lessons learned, key partners, goals for building knowledge and aims for supporting the evolution of the federal home visiting program.

The gallery is strongly oriented towards seeking out and supporting the evolution of young creatives.

There was a great balance between the consistency of the presentations and an excitement for welcoming new members while supporting the evolution of longtime members.»

by supporting the evolution of professional learning so that all educators are effectively supported.

Over the next 6 months, Horner opened Schweitzer's eyes to the overwhelming evidence supporting evolution and Earth's antiquity.

If there is a war against christianity, it is between christian extremists and those «who require evidence prior to believing», and seeing as how there is no evidence supporting creation by an almighty whatever, and that there is tons of evidence supporting evolution, the most effective weapon in the «war» is the utter stupidity that keeps emanating from the mouths of christian loudmouths.

In fact the evidence supporting evolution does contradict the special creation, the coexistence of all «kinds» together and their destruction in a single (mythical) global flood.

Where is this overwhelming evidence of biological processes supporting evolution that you say exists?

There is a ton of objective evidence supporting evolution, and none refuting evolution.

There are myriads of facts supporting evolution and none supporting creationism.

Academy of Sciences that provides science advice to the nation, has published several books supporting evolution and denouncing creationism and intelligent design.»

This is particularly true of creationists who effectively require every relevant branch of science supporting evolution (i.e. physics, chemistry, biology, geology, astronomy, etc) to be so flawed as to be worthless.

I can use my «faith» to deny the «theory» of evolution even though there is as much scientific data supporting evolution as there is supporting the «theory» of gravity.

Obviously, there is indisputable scientific evidence supporting evolution and none supporting creationism.

This reminds me of the creationist argument against dog breeding supporting evolution.

The number of observations supporting evolution is overwhelming.

My understanding is that the vast majority of scientists support evolution.

We've all seen athiests and agnostics embracing reason, insulting believers under the pretense that science supports evolution and the Big Bang theory (not the show!)..

I'm a Christian, but I believe the scientific evidence supports evolution.

While evolution can not be confirmed as hard fact... yet, we treat it as fact due to the overwhelming evidence to support evolution.

There is overwhelmingly more evidence to support evolution relatively speaking compared to religion (pick your poison)

Already it claims to support evolution.

Do you support evolution being taught in publicly funded schools?

Something like 50,000 peer reviewed scientific articles support evolution and exactly 0 go against it.

@Eric «Something like 50,000 peer reviewed scientific articles support evolution and exactly 0 go against it.»

Molecular biology, contrary to the article, does not support evolution by natural chance because evolution can not occur without inheritance, inheritance can not occur without DNA and DNA is so complex it could not have evolved by chance unless we are to assume that molecules just happened to arrange themselves into the DNA molecule at the same times as a nucleus formed to hold the DNA, at the same time as the cell membrane just happened to form around it, at the sametime as all the cell maintaining process in the cytoplasm just happened to come into existence to form a single cell and that all these aspects just happened to come together and work harmoniously.

Second, there is pleanty of evidence to support evolution and no evidence that contradicts it.

For example, it is not a sin to have questions about my interpretation of Genesis in light of the science that supports evolution.

For decades religions denied evolution to even speak of it in some places you would be put to death, but as the years went by more and more evidence that supported evolution surfaced, that it got to a point were it could not be denied anymore so what do the religious do, what religion has been so good at doing and its adapt.

There are tons of evidence that supports evolution.

There is plenty of evidence to support evolution, a few highlights include: Fossils such as Ambulocetus, Tiktaalik, Archeoptyrx, etc..

What has that got to do with evolution — all the known facts support evolution and no facts support creationist views

Neither one supports evolution — they may not be fully understood, but to make the leap that it supports evolution?

Those who still cling to pre-scientific religious fictions, ignoring the truths discovered through modern science, should at least take notice when the biology department at the world's most prominent Baptist university, where a statement of faith is a prerequisite for teaching, unequivocally support evolution through the following statement, which you can look up on their web site:

I spoke with a man 2 weeks ago who claimed that the earth is 6500 years old, that dinosaurs are a fraud, and that there is no evidence to support evolution.

THere is so much evidence to support evolution that to call it a thory instead of a fact is ignotant.

Scietist can not make th You sound like Darwin and the 1900 «s scientiest who believed life just exist when they put beef broth on soup and life evolves and int is on this understanding that they supported evolution.

From the progressive order of the fossil record, phylogenetic analyses confirming these relationships, to observable instances of speciation and molecular artifacts like our gene for egg yolk protein, the evidence firmly supports evolution.

Science continues to compile more and more experimental data to support evolution, genetic modification, and the big bang theory of the universe.

Topher: we have more evidence to support Evolution then we do to support gravity.

And, again, it's only called a «theory» because it is theoretically possible to disprove it, but the odds of some proof knocking out the dozen or so different sciences that support evolution is so remote that I wouldn't place any bets on it ever happening.

Pedro --» There is no foundation to support evolution because no explanation is given for the origin of life»

Yet the 90 % of scientists with PhDs that do support evolution are not good enough for you?

Actually, Pedro, there is an overwhelming amount of evidence to support evolution.

There is no foundation to support evolution because no explanation is given for the origin of life

Friendly Atheist: On Tuesday I wrote a post for Relevant Online about Christianity and evolution that generated a lively discussion, particularly over at Friendly Atheist, where Hemant Mehta argues that it's not enough to say that the evidence supports evolution; one must concede that the evidence rules God out completely.

Just look at today — unless you support evolution you don't get published in the «respectable» journals.

WARNING: The teaching of Evolution and the acceptance of the 150 + years and mountains of gathered evidence that supports evolution is hazardous to one's faith (delusion).

@Brian, Science has been victorious in the sense that all the evidence supports evolution rather than a 7 day creation story.

The details will continue to be worked out, but it is very clear that the evidence supports evolution.