Evolution.. fact or not?

[thegreekdog]

When are people (like karel) going to wake up and realize that the church (which I will refer to as religion now, since the term "church" does not represent all religions), has little to no effect on your daily lives? If you are an atheist or agnostic, how does religion affect you at all? As I've indicated previously in this thread, if you don't like that some Republicans are conservative Christians, don't vote for them. If you say, "Well, they got elected and now we have Christian conservatives representing me," well, that's fine. Except what did GW Bush and his conservative Christian buddies do exactly? Did they mandate that evolution could not be taught in schools? No. Did they overturn Roe v. Wade? Of course not. Religion has become the stick by which the non-religious can demonize people. "Wait, your Catholic? Well then, clearly you're wrong about everything." This has been said to me on numerous occasions, of course I'm paraphrasing.

The point is, religion has no effect on anything really. Demonize the views of a particular person, that's fine. Who gives a flying fart whether the person is Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc.? I can choose to believe in God and also understand science. I can also choose to believe in God and not impose my views on the masses. Believe it or not, it states specifically in the Constitution that we can't do that. Anyway, I'm getting sick and tired of morons blaming religion for the ills in their own lives. It's just ignorant.

[jonesthecurl]

A small extract from the creation research institute:

"The two greatest events in the history of the cosmos were, first of all, its supernatural creation and, secondly, the resurrection of its Creator from the dead. The evidence for each, to one whose mind and heart are open to evidence, is overwhelming. All true science points to creation, and the best-proved fact of history is the resurrection."

I think we can agree that includes special pleading, circular logic, and at least one lie.

[SultanOfSurreal]

FICTION




I am not referring to adaptation because I believe that occurs within species. But the changing from one animal to another animal over time is fiction. There is no proof of this, it is science's attempt at explaining where man originated without God. The FACT is there is no concrete proof of this. If such proof existed there would be no debate. We no longer believe the Earth is flat, that meat spontainiously produces maggots or that the sun revolves around the Earth. Science has proven these to be false. What science has not proven is that man descended from apes.


The age of the Earth: From scripture we see that from Adam and Eve to present day is about 6,000 years. The Earth however,could be much older. We do not know how long each "day" was during the creation week.

i am going to lay the blame for this post at your feet, player

goddammit

[thegreekdog]

A small extract from the creation research institute:

"The two greatest events in the history of the cosmos were, first of all, its supernatural creation and, secondly, the resurrection of its Creator from the dead. The evidence for each, to one whose mind and heart are open to evidence, is overwhelming. All true science points to creation, and the best-proved fact of history is the resurrection."

I think we can agree that includes special pleading, circular logic, and at least one lie.

The Creation Institute... affecting my day-to-day life on a regular basis.

In the words of Peter Griffin, "Who the hell cares?" No offense intended jones.

[jonesthecurl]

Well, I was challenged to provide evidence for my remarks about creation scientists.
So I did.

[pimpdave]

[PLAYER57832]

Just got back on 3 or 4 pages later and i see that Player has opted to ignore my post. My argument remains unanswered. The Bible speaks of each of the six days having "an evening and a morning". You can postulate and theorize all you want about what a day "could be", and ignore what the Bible clearly says was meant by each "day", or you can accept it for what it says. If you decide to ignore what it says and make up your own interpretation you can get the Bible to say anything you want it to, and you can therefore reconcile it with evolution. But if you accept it for what it says you'll see that the Biblical account of creation leaves no room for evolution whatsoever.

I thought I did answer it... and referred you to a more complete answer I already wrote besides.

You are placing limits upon the Bible that don't really exist. In the first place, our day is a human-defined term referring to the rotation of the Earth away from and toward the sun. When there was no Earth, there either was no day or it had a different definition. Even upon Earth, those times vary. Go to the arctic and the "day" is 6 months. I have heard claims (not saying this is your assertion) that God knew what a day would be or that God timed the Earth's rotation to corrospond with his day... etc. I say the Bible is what the Bible is and we are not allowed to add or subtract from it.

Beyond that, the words for "day", "evening", etc. have always had varied meanings. Yes, it can refer to the specific times between sunset and sunrise (not consistant times, I add), BUT it can also refer to the "evening of a man's life", we say "in this day and age" or "in my day" referring not to 24 hours, but to a general time period.

Why did God make specific references to "morning" , etc.? I cannot say for sure, but I would guess that it made it easier for human being to understand and relate. We have a need to break things up, put them in order.

Sorry, I know you have studied the Bible a great deal, but in this, I say you are wrong. Further, while modern Creationists have ceased upon scholarship that refers to "yom" as meaning strictly 24- hours, most scholars have and do assert that "yom" is imprecise, exactly like the English word "day". See, there are reasons for the specific words in the Bible. If God had wanted it to be more precise, he could have. He did not. I don't believe God makes mistakes. I even believe that all so-called "errors" and "inconsistancies" are allowed for some reason.. a reason I don't always understand, but that fits fully into God's plan.

The Bible says clearly that Adam was the first man, and we are all descended from him. It gives the names of his male descendents in the lineage of Jesus, all the way to Jesus. How does this leave room for our descending from apes? Adam was not born, but created. He, according to the Bible could not possibly have come from an ape or any other animal as he wasn't born. How can you possibly construe it otherwise?

I don't have the answer to the list of descendents question. I know there is one, I just don't have the answer right now.

As for the other, The Bible says God created Adam. God created me, he created my son, he created us all. Again, this is a limit some people try to place upon the words of the Bible that is just not there.

I can't prove or disprove evolution. But i can prove that it cannot possibly be correlated with the Biblical account. Perhaps this is why Player has opted to ignore my questions?

Honibaz

No, as I said, I thought I answered them. Perhaps not as completely as you would wish, but I did answer.

Evolution is real, the Bible is real. However, much of what people believe about the Bible and evolution are false. The truthis consistent.

The only way the Earth could be less than millions of years old would be if God made the world to look as if it were old. God could have done that... absolutely, but did he? I would suggest it is completely inconsistent with how God acts.

[PLAYER57832]

OK here's a question:
There are people out there (and in here) listening to and believing what the Creation Science people put out.
But, as Player often points out, the people making this stuff know that they are spreading misinformation. I don't mean that they think their position is wrong, but they DO know that they are slanting the evidence, omitting highly relevant facts, misrepresenting what scientists are actually saying, and sometimes outright lying. Obvious their purpose is to convince others of the "truth" of creationism.
My question is: what do they get out of that? once they start using dodgy tactics, haven't they lost the argument, in their own heads?

Pretty strong allegations there, and pretty vague. Got any specifics? We've already seen the "scientists" do this with Piltdown Man, a proven hoax, but i've yet to see a hoax on the side of the creationists. Player referred to some dinosaur footprints, but didn't provide a link of any kind. Like i said, you've made some strong allegations here - is it idle chatter or do you have facts to back it up?


Honibaz

I can say that I heard Dr Morris interviewed some time ago, about when the center down in Southern California was opening up. His answer? That he was not lying becuase his information was consistant with the Bible.

I believe that a large number of those involved in this movement are honest believers who truly believe what they put forward. They believe everyone's souls rest upon understanding their version of the truth. Given such a strong impetus, it becomes difficult to even see information that disagrees. It is the strongest type of bias there is. People who believe very strongly can literally not see the truth in front of their eyes. (This is of course, why scientists publications and reports go through multiple reviews, why procedures are set and established, etc.)

The problem, though is that this is not, frankly cannot be true for all associated with the movement. For that, I offer only one suggestion.. follow the money, follow the results of these actions.

Who benefits by having everything from global warming to even basic pollution issues, issues of water flow and quality, who benefits if the science behind all that is dismissed? I believe that if you follow that trail, you will find your answer.

Here is one article very critical of the Institute that gets into some more specifics. I will note that while the Institute used to post many such "proofs" on their website, they keep getting removed. You can still hear a lot of it in shows on CBN, etc.

http://timpanogos.wordpress.com/2008/08 ... ese-years/

[PLAYER57832]

I agree.

By the way who found out that the Piltdown man was a hoax? Was it by any chance scientists using scientific methods who discredited another scientist for being unscientific and twatly?

Evolution is a theory.
There are currently no other credible competing theories.
Creationism is a hypothesis.

No, Creationism (the 6000-12,000 year old brand, that is) has been fully and completely disproven. It a lie, not a true hypothesis any more.

Pretty strong allegations there, and pretty vague. Got any specifics? We've already seen the "scientists" do this with Piltdown Man, a proven hoax, but i've yet to see a hoax on the side of the creationists. Player referred to some dinosaur footprints, but didn't provide a link of any kind. Like i said, you've made some strong allegations here - is it idle chatter or do you have facts to back it up?


Honibaz

I believe the reference I made was to an early Creationist claim that there were human footprints from the days of dinosaurs, not a true dinosaur footprint. I don't have a link. I remember the article from high school.. well before the internet (no need to get into how long, thank you!). Anyway, it was relatively quickly discovered to have been a complete hoax. There have been others. The only issue is that occasionally people still try to bring this stuff up as if it were not proven false.

As for the proof -- prints, bones, etc. Are you truly serious? (NOTE -- I wrote this before your post where you clarified that you do believe dinosaurs are real) But, here is some information for anyone interested: Anyone can travel to Dinosaur National Monument.
Link: http://www.nps.gov/dino (I have .. its pretty interesting. When I was there, they had just found a baby stegosaurus skeleton).

If that is too far almost any museum will have some sort of dinosaur remains.

In fact, here is one from New Orleans apparently still on-going:
http://www.neworleans.com/attractions/a ... nture.html

As a matter of fact, I used to have some fossils of early fern-like plants right in my yard. Never was lucky enough to find a dinosaur print, though apparently T-Rex, etc did once roam here.

However, the interesting part is that modern Creationists no longer even deny the existance of dinosaurs. One recent claim is that they died in Noah's flood (or just before). Those ideas, though are plain and simply not consistant with the data. They also claim that dinosaurs and humans co-existed. This, too, is completely contrary to dinosaurs (unless you count modern birds .. and a few possible left-overs from the dinosaur age).

[Timminz]

One of the biggest issues I have with the Christian version of creation, is that it is only one of many, many different creation myths. Forget the question of evolution vs. creation. What makes the creation myth from the bible any more credible than the creation myths from all the other religions?

[PLAYER57832]

In the words of Peter Griffin, "Who the hell cares?" No offense intended jones.

Because this is not just about Evolution, really. It is an attack upon the fundamental basis of ALL science, particularly Earth and biological sciences and that does affect you whether you know it or not.

For more specifics, here is a handy link:
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... opic_id=47

[PLAYER57832]

FICTION




I am not referring to adaptation because I believe that occurs within species. But the changing from one animal to another animal over time is fiction. There is no proof of this, it is science's attempt at explaining where man originated without God. The FACT is there is no concrete proof of this. If such proof existed there would be no debate. We no longer believe the Earth is flat, that meat spontainiously produces maggots or that the sun revolves around the Earth. Science has proven these to be false. What science has not proven is that man descended from apes.


The age of the Earth: From scripture we see that from Adam and Eve to present day is about 6,000 years. The Earth however,could be much older. We do not know how long each "day" was during the creation week.

Blame accepted.

i am going to lay the blame for this post at your feet, player

goddammit

[StiffMittens]

When are people (like karel) going to wake up and realize that the church (which I will refer to as religion now, since the term "church" does not represent all religions), has little to no effect on your daily lives? If you are an atheist or agnostic, how does religion affect you at all? As I've indicated previously in this thread, if you don't like that some Republicans are conservative Christians, don't vote for them. If you say, "Well, they got elected and now we have Christian conservatives representing me," well, that's fine. Except what did GW Bush and his conservative Christian buddies do exactly? Did they mandate that evolution could not be taught in schools? No. Did they overturn Roe v. Wade? Of course not. Religion has become the stick by which the non-religious can demonize people. "Wait, your Catholic? Well then, clearly you're wrong about everything." This has been said to me on numerous occasions, of course I'm paraphrasing.

The point is, religion has no effect on anything really. Demonize the views of a particular person, that's fine. Who gives a flying fart whether the person is Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc.? I can choose to believe in God and also understand science. I can also choose to believe in God and not impose my views on the masses. Believe it or not, it states specifically in the Constitution that we can't do that. Anyway, I'm getting sick and tired of morons blaming religion for the ills in their own lives. It's just ignorant.

Absolute bullshit. Religion has a tremendous affect on everything. Not always in a bad way, although my personal opinion is that the cumulative affect is bad. Religious devotion directs the thinking of a huge number of people, which subsequently directs the actions of a huge number of people. Your assertion about GWB and his conservative christian buddies is misleading. They may not have achieved a vast religious coup, but it was not for lack of trying. You should read through the Whitehouse report published in February of 2008 and entitled "The Quiet Revolution". It's rather disturrbing.

http://www.religionandsocialpolicy.org/docs/policy/TheQuietRevolutionFinal.pdf

[thegreekdog]

In the words of Peter Griffin, "Who the hell cares?" No offense intended jones.

Because this is not just about Evolution, really. It is an attack upon the fundamental basis of ALL science, particularly Earth and biological sciences and that does affect you whether you know it or not.

For more specifics, here is a handy link:
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... opic_id=47

Okay, let's assume that this is "an attack upon the fundamental basis of ALL science." Do you honestly and truly think this attack will make any difference, at all, on the way we live our lives? If you do, you're just as much of a conspiracy theorist as captain crazy. The Creationist Science Institute? Dick Morris? I didn't even know these things existed until I read them here. It has been my experience that the majority of people can separate science from religion and will not impose their religious beliefs on others (such as Player). As I said before, fear of religious fervor is what is driving this more than actual religious fervor. In other words, it just doesn't matter what the Christian Coalition says about science; and it hasn't mattered since the Age of Enlightenment. Just because some whacked-out Christians tell you that evolution is wrong, doesn't mean you have to believe it.

[thegreekdog]

Absolute bullshit. Religion has a tremendous affect on everything. Not always in a bad way, although my personal opinion is that the cumulative affect is bad. Religious devotion directs the thinking of a huge number of people, which subsequently directs the actions of a huge number of people. Your assertion about GWB and his conservative christian buddies is misleading. They may not have achieved a vast religious coup, but it was not for lack of trying. You should read through the Whitehouse report published in February of 2008 and entitled "The Quiet Revolution". It's rather disturrbing.

I've read it. So? Please tell me exactly how the religious fervor of GW Bush (or anyone else for that matter) has effected your life in a negative way. If you can give me some good reasons, I'll back off. I'm not above admitting I'm wrong. I just don't see the problems that you and Player see.

[StiffMittens]

Absolute bullshit. Religion has a tremendous affect on everything. Not always in a bad way, although my personal opinion is that the cumulative affect is bad. Religious devotion directs the thinking of a huge number of people, which subsequently directs the actions of a huge number of people. Your assertion about GWB and his conservative christian buddies is misleading. They may not have achieved a vast religious coup, but it was not for lack of trying. You should read through the Whitehouse report published in February of 2008 and entitled "The Quiet Revolution". It's rather disturrbing.

I've read it. So? Please tell me exactly how the religious fervor of GW Bush (or anyone else for that matter) has effected your life in a negative way. If you can give me some good reasons, I'll back off. I'm not above admitting I'm wrong. I just don't see the problems that you and Player see.

What do you suppose the wife of the doctor who was firebombed by religious zealots because he performed abortions thinks about the affect of religion on her daily life? What about anyone who was affected by the attacks of September 11th (nearly everyone on this planet, directly or indirectly)? Weren't the perpetrators of those crimes drawing upon religious fervor to go through with their plans? 72 virgins in the afterlife for suicide bombers? One of my earliest memories from child hood is listening to my friend from the next street (he happened to come from a very devout Catholic family) tell me how he believed that his oldest brother was possessed by the devil and that he was terrified of running into him on the street. The reason he believed this? - His brother's first marriage ended in divorce.

[PLAYER57832]

In the words of Peter Griffin, "Who the hell cares?" No offense intended jones.

Because this is not just about Evolution, really. It is an attack upon the fundamental basis of ALL science, particularly Earth and biological sciences and that does affect you whether you know it or not.

For more specifics, here is a handy link:
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... opic_id=47

Okay, let's assume that this is "an attack upon the fundamental basis of ALL science." Do you honestly and truly think this attack will make any difference, at all, on the way we live our lives? If you do, you're just as much of a conspiracy theorist as captain crazy. The Creationist Science Institute? Dick Morris? I didn't even know these things existed until I read them here. It has been my experience that the majority of people can separate science from religion and will not impose their religious beliefs on others (such as Player). As I said before, fear of religious fervor is what is driving this more than actual religious fervor. In other words, it just doesn't matter what the Christian Coalition says about science; and it hasn't mattered since the Age of Enlightenment. Just because some whacked-out Christians tell you that evolution is wrong, doesn't mean you have to believe it.

YOu bring up a lot of points.

Does science affect our daily lives? Abosolutely! About Evolution implications specifically, did you follow that link? In one sense, you can go through your daily life without understanding that plants need sun and water to grow, that the air you breath containes oxeygen or you die ... etc. You can also go along life without knowing where your taxes go, where that road in front of your house really ends... etc. Do you wish to live in a box or be able to make intelligent, free choices about things?

It might not see too important, for example, that the farmer bringing you your food is using hybrids (what that means), that virtually all the corn in the US is the same hybrid (might be a little more variation in recent years). Except if you know a little about genetics, diseases, etc, then you realize this means that just one single disease could potentially wipe out the entire crop, for disasterous results. Now, I picked an old and simple example. There are moves to diversify corn, other crops (with varying success), but it is still an issue. This problem if poor genetic divirsity is also one of the big issue with animal invitro fertilization.

You might not need to be an expert in all of these things, but unless you have a basic grounding in science you won't even be able to understand that there is a problem, never mind make choices about solutions, agree to FUND solutions. And, believe me, that funding part is the really and truly critical part.

You are pretty smart... you put it together. Sometimes conspiracies actually do happen, though not always intentionally.

[StiffMittens]

You should read through the Whitehouse report published in February of 2008 and entitled "The Quiet Revolution". It's rather disturrbing.

I've read it. So?

Oh, I see. Congress shall make no law establishing an official religion of the state, but the President can push all the religious BS on the American people he wants.

[PLAYER57832]

Absolute bullshit. Religion has a tremendous affect on everything. Not always in a bad way, although my personal opinion is that the cumulative affect is bad. Religious devotion directs the thinking of a huge number of people, which subsequently directs the actions of a huge number of people. Your assertion about GWB and his conservative christian buddies is misleading. They may not have achieved a vast religious coup, but it was not for lack of trying. You should read through the Whitehouse report published in February of 2008 and entitled "The Quiet Revolution". It's rather disturrbing.

I've read it. So? Please tell me exactly how the religious fervor of GW Bush (or anyone else for that matter) has effected your life in a negative way. If you can give me some good reasons, I'll back off. I'm not above admitting I'm wrong. I just don't see the problems that you and Player see.

Easy one.

George Bush would not have been elected were it not for Conservative Christians wanting an anti-abortionist on the supreme court.

His beliefs, those of many in the administration, have been behind much of the former administration's resistance to global warming.

They are part of why he specifically told EPA and Fish and Wildlife scientists to ignore some of their own scientific conclusions or face reprimands.

That said, I can also name many, many very positive effects of religion. The problem is not religion, it is people. People do good things and bad things and use whatever tools they can to make it happen, including religion, philosophy and yes, science.

[thegreekdog]

Absolute bullshit. Religion has a tremendous affect on everything. Not always in a bad way, although my personal opinion is that the cumulative affect is bad. Religious devotion directs the thinking of a huge number of people, which subsequently directs the actions of a huge number of people. Your assertion about GWB and his conservative christian buddies is misleading. They may not have achieved a vast religious coup, but it was not for lack of trying. You should read through the Whitehouse report published in February of 2008 and entitled "The Quiet Revolution". It's rather disturrbing.

I've read it. So? Please tell me exactly how the religious fervor of GW Bush (or anyone else for that matter) has effected your life in a negative way. If you can give me some good reasons, I'll back off. I'm not above admitting I'm wrong. I just don't see the problems that you and Player see.

What do you suppose the wife of the doctor who was firebombed by religious zealots because he performed abortions thinks about the affect of religion on her daily life? What about anyone who was affected by the attacks of September 11th (nearly everyone on this planet, directly or indirectly)? Weren't the perpetrators of those crimes drawing upon religious fervor to go through with their plans? 72 virgins in the afterlife for suicide bombers? One of my earliest memories from child hood is listening to my friend from the next street (he happened to come from a very devout Catholic family) tell me how he believed that his oldest brother was possessed by the devil and that he was terrified of running into him on the street. The reason he believed this? - His brother's first marriage ended in divorce.

Okay, points taken. And I agree with your points. However, we're talking about the religious effect on science in the US. If we are talking about the religious effect on society in general, religion does have an effect, as do other things. I don't think the effect is necessarily greater or lesser than anything else. I just think the religious effect on science is negligible because no one really thinks that religion is effecting science in this country in a significant manner.

[PLAYER57832]

You should read through the Whitehouse report published in February of 2008 and entitled "The Quiet Revolution". It's rather disturrbing.

Do you have a link?

I can find some discussion but not the actual report. Is it available for free online?

[PLAYER57832]

I just think the religious effect on science is negligible because no one really thinks that religion is effecting science in this country in a significant manner.

Do this, but carefully. Ask people around you what they believe. YOu live in a city. You have said you trained in law, so your experiences are likely with more educated, cosomopolitan individuals. Still, I would almost gaurantee that if you got in a venue where they felt free to speak (a BIG issue!) you would find several who truly accept Creationism.

Look around at the churches in your area. Check out the number that have the word "missionary" or "Nazarene", etc. I cannot give you exact names, because they vary. However a good many of those will be teaching Creationism as reality.

I used to think as you, that it was a small issue, not harmful, that would eventually go away as people studied and learned the truth. Instead, I have watched the movement grow and grow. In our small town, the 5 most active churches, aside from the Roman Catholic, all believe literal Creationism. Many of the local Roman Catholics think that literal Creationism is what their church teaches, that the Roman Catholic church is against Evolution.

[StiffMittens]

You should read through the Whitehouse report published in February of 2008 and entitled "The Quiet Revolution". It's rather disturrbing.

I've read it. So?

Oh, I see. Congress shall make no law establishing an official religion of the state, but the President can push all the religious BS on the American people he wants.

Not as long as free thinking individuals step up and refuse to go along. However, when only 20% of the population votes, only 20% of the population decides who is elected. And religious conservatives (not the ultra, ultra conservatives like the Amish, but basic conservatives) do tend to vote in higher percentages than others.

True, and apathy is big part of the problem - so too is it's opposite. ;-}

The Quiet Revolution is a misnomer because it is a loud minority that is having a large effect (squeaky wheels, etc.). But you're right, of course that there is now and have been in the past, a significant number of people who understand that science and religion are not mutually exclusive (e.g Gregor Mendel, Nicolas Copernicus, etc.). However, that the problem may rest mainly on the apathy of secular people does not mean that it is not a problem.

[thegreekdog]

I agree stiffmittens. My point of view is looking purely at two things: (1) the status quo and (2) current trends. The status quo is that evolution is taught in schools. The current trend is that less people are fervent about religion. No, I don't have links for either of those things. Erego, I think that religion's effect on science is negligible and decreasing. Player's points are that religious are preaching things, but, frankly, that preaching has to have a substantial effect and there is no evidence to suggest that it has had a substantial effect.

[Timminz]

I would consider limiting funding for certain scientific research based on religious views (stem cells, for example) a "substantial effect". Or, how about the teaching of a creation myth in science classes? Couldn't state-sanctioned ignorance be considered a "substantial effect"?