Evolution is real

This is one of those posts where ultimately I agree with OP, evolution is real and we certainly saw it with the COVID-19 pandemic in case anyone was still in doubt. Still, OP is an edge lord and gives this instance a bad look when they post edge lord stuff like this.

Yup. This kind of thing gives a bad name to atheists and is one of the reasons I don't like to bring it up often. We should be more respectful and set a good example, not stoop to the shit-slinging level.
I’m convinced the average age of lemmy is 13
- Converted from dog years or what?
evolution is real and we certainly saw it with the COVID-19 pandemic in case anyone was still in doubt
Did we? Are you referring to the people who didn't wear masks? Because they certainly killed people, but mostly not themselves as 99% of those critically susceptible to it wore a damn mask.
- More like all the new strains of covid that appeared over time.

I had a biology professor in college refuse to teach the evolution lessons because she didn't believe in it.

She wasn't teaching the science of biology at that point. She was teaching her own thoughts and feelings and should have been removed from her position.
- I requested something like that with my dean but nothing changed.
My highschool World Religions teacher told us "he followed one of the religions he was going to teach, but would not tell us which one". Big respect for that, teaching us objectively what was out there.
Where was this?

I may read through that later to see if it's covered but I want to remind everyone there a difference between evolution and evolution by natural selection. I often hear Muslim scholars says Islam is so smart because it talks about evolution, but it's not evolution by natural selection.
- Lucretius was definitely talking about evolution from natural selection (especially look at the last one from book 5 about the intermediate freaks where only what survived to reproduce continued to exist), including what was nearly a Mendelian picture of trait inheritance from each parent.
  As for whether that picture of things was being conveyed by a historical Jesus, it really depends on how one interprets the broader context of the sower parable regarding what survived multiplying (i.e. is canon more accurate or the Naassenes).
  But I'd strongly suggest at least reading through the first part of my comment of the De Rerum Natura quotes. Your mind will be blown (when I was first researching this material I had to keep checking it wasn't a hoax or overly forgiving modern translation, as it was strikingly at odds with the accuracy of what I thought was capable of being theorized in antiquity).
- What is the difference? Evolution as a word can mean a few things but the concept of evolution from a biological perspective is the same as natural selection. There is no difference. Natural selection is the theory by which we explain observed biological evolution.

Not sure if you or op are more annoying. Actually I do, it's you.
Can you please list the reasons you believe in God?
- Reasons that person can give. Actual proof however….
Some of these "Philosophical" points are flat out bullshit
Homosexuality isn't only present in human behavior and there are plenty of explanations, both on an evolutionary and behavioral standpoints, as to why. My favorite is the Gay Uncle Theory.
Who gives a shit? Science is by definition politicized and also by definition it expells myths for obvious reasons
Why? Substantiate that claim
That is not what democracy is founded on. In democracy all men have equal rights and have the same power to vote and be elected. Even in the US when Locke wrote that people disagreed with it, mostly because they liked owning slaves.
6-7 Substanciate that claim.
Skill issue. You can just as easily disprove it with facts.
Anyone is allowed to challenge and contribute to our understanding of the world. Just be prepared to have your claims be rigorously tested.
Bullshit. It has been observed in natural populations since before we even understood it.
- They show a very rudimentary understanding of evolution that doesn't seem to go beyond "survival of the fittest."
Why the fuck people did downvote you?!
Many of evolutionists blame those who are against or suspicious about evolution with zealotry but when they come up with real arguments and questions, you become the zealots. You fucking hypocrites
- Because it's a gish gallop of mostly thin or discredited arguments, with the strongest at the top to make it look more impressive than it is.
  And even the strongest are piss poor and largely discredited by actual science.
  "My list of reasons is long" doesn't make any one of those reasons less shoddy than it already is. "I have used scientific words" doesn't hold water either.
Tree of life is just a way we organize all living things to make things easier for us. And HGT happens only with prokaryotes and certain animals. It really makes things more complicated in some parts of tree of life but that isn't weird, there will always be some thing that we can't fully explain. Just because HGT makes things more complicated doesn't mean that evolution isn't true.
What are you even talking about here?
Please explain how fossil record fails to prove evolution.
Improbability of what? If two organisms live in same or similar environment it isn't odd if they have similar adaptations to same or similar environment even if they aren't closely related. And even if they have similar adaptations that doesn't mean they are same. Wings of bats, birds and insects are all totally different.
Please explain what is wrong with abiogenesis.
Be more specific.
Give at least one example. Who gave inaccurate prediction and for what specific thing?
If you meant that there are no mechanisms for epigenetics than that's just wrong, there are many of them.
I don't know anything about this topic so I can't comment on it.
This is a lie. Most mutations are neutral. And don't ignore the fact that mutation can become beneficial with changes in environment.
I read more about this argument and it is stupid. What if certain information is neutral in terms of evolution? Us knowing about evolution isn't beneficial for survival but it isn't harmful either. Same goes for creationism, belief in it isn't beneficial nor harmful from evolutionary standpoint. And don't forget that evolutionary processes don't always lead to beneficial changes.
Those things are similar to neutral mutations. Again, evolution doesn't always lead to beneficial changes.
Everything is politicized, it doesn't have anything to do with truth.
How? Please explain.
Democracy doesn't have anything to do with evolution or any natural science.
Please explain.
Please explain.
Explain how.
Everyone can critique it but if someone doesn't know anything about the subject, their critique isn't relevant.
That isn't true.

They're myths, right? They can be entertaining, and they once served a function. They can even serve a function today; most of the evils perpetrated by religion were attributable to organized religion.

We no longer depend on meat, hunting, gathering, or religion, for our society. They're vestiges. I think "bullshit" is a bit excessive.