Savanna or Aquatic?

[shrewsbury]

for those that are into evolution/science, which hypothesis do you believe in?

I know it is hard to have to believe in something without the backing of hard science, but I am curious as to what theory of human evolution you would go with.

The two main stream hypothesis are the Savanna and the Aquatic

if you are unfamiliar with them, I will guess you don't know about evolution, you are just anti creation.

personally there is no doubt the Aquatic Hypothesis (though less accepted) is the most logical. I will explain why if others care to know.

what is your choice and why?


and as you research or write, keep in mind this is a belief, not fact based as people of science would like us to think, otherwise facts would not lead us to two different theories.

[Star_Cards]

I think for me I see value and interest in both theories. I do know that they are theories and honestly doubt that we'll ever know for sure how life was created at the very start. That said I just lean towards scientific theories over religious type theories based off of my personal experiences as well as different scientific theories that have been proven but not necessarily in the evolution realm. To me religion theories of how we were created are typically presented with bias or ones own personal investment. Yes, I get that a specific scientist doing research on a theory is invested and can also be biased, but the scientific community usually has multiple groups working on similar theories that can play off of each other when it comes to actual legitimacy. I feel that scientific theories have more of a desire to find things out no matter what they are where religious theories are desired to be right so that one specific religion can say they have the correct story.

Creationism just doesn't fit my thought process. Saying that god created something just seems way too easy of an explanation. I also see it to similar instances when someone sees a beautiful mountain and says "That's proof that god exists" or "god created that" when actually we know exactly how mountains are created. I guess then it all goes back to who created the conditions for a mountain to be formed by two plates pushing together, but that's probably something we'll never know. While I'm a person that feels it's way more plausible that chance conditions allowed for life to blossom here on earth I don't have an investment like creationists do. If it came out tomorrow that we knew 100% how it was all created, I'd have no problem accepting that... people who think it's creationism would still believe their religions way of how it's said to have happened. Knowing that would be a lot of creationists reaction, it's hard for me to take any creationist theory seriously.

I also can live my life perfectly happy having no idea how life was created. I don't need to think we know 100% to live.

[shrewsbury]

great post

I can agree with nearly all you wrote.

I believe some who are religious will accept it without any thought, but there are plenty of us who do think, re evaluate, and research.

I also think it is important to try and figure out how human life began, so I can understand myself better.

[Star_Cards]

true. I get the drive to want to know. It's something I spend time thinking about although not obsessed. To be honest I don't think my life would change much if we did find a certain way that life was brought about, but you never know I suppose.

[Wickabee]

Personally, I don't think it matters how we started. It won't change anything. We're here, we know what we know, let's move on. You can't go forward if you're always looking back.

[shrewsbury]

so none of the usual anti god people replied,funny how science is so important and has all the answers, but yet no one can debate science.

[Wickabee]

That tends to happen on both sides around here.

[maccards44]

so none of the usual anti god people replied,funny how science is so important and has all the answers, but yet no one can debate science.

OR they saw through your trolling... which is not hard to do...and decided to not waste their time.

[Wickabee]

OR they saw through your trolling... which is not hard to do...and decided to not waste their time.

He's not trolling. I accuse Jay of a lot of thing, but not trolling.

[JustAlex]

What is the point of this?

Let's say I reject both theories.....it still wouldn't discount evolution.

If I pick one over the other, it's like picking door A over door B but they both lead you to the same room.


I just want to point out (again) that 99.9% of Life Scientists accept the theory of evolution.

There is no debate, and the only people still arguing is the "other side" which has zero evidence for their assertions.