Evolution

[PokerKingJim]

Seems to be good discussion around here when the usual right vs left mud throwing is avoided. All of the scientific evidence says that evolution happened. I can not understand why so many people are trying to deny it and not allow it to be taught in schools (at least as the sole idea of how humans came to be). Why not teach our children the truth? Why try to sugarcoat the world? We must always seek to find the truth and let the truth be know, no matter how brutal the truth may be. This applies to many areas of life. Reminds me a lot of the catholic church condemning the briliant men that discovered that the Earth was not the center of the universe (how long was this covered up by the church until it finally became common knowledge?). I would love to hear some ideas as to why you think evolution is a myth as I am sure there are some deeply relgious folks who think this way. I also think there are many that just don't want to believe that it is true so they choose not to believe it.

 

[docmercer]

Granted, it's been a while since I was in public school - well, except to celebrate RightWings graduation from grade 9....5th time's the charm buddy (kidding)

However - it was taught as a THEORY when I went. And a quick perusal of the science textbook of my neice, also indicates that its taught as a scientific theory (ie: still stuff that can't be proven, but a lot that can be quantified and examined)

The debate that comes up is always about this "intelligent design" stuff. The idea that somehow a theory which cannot be proven or disproven belongs alongside scientific research is silly.

Intelligent design on it's surface belongs in a philosophy class. "if father came before son, and his father before...who came before the first father" - that sort of thing. Faith based pseudo-science.

Truth be told...its just a ploy by the creationists to try and weasel their way into public school and eventually present their "the earth is 6000 years old because this book which has been translated a bunch of times and filtered through royalty" says so.

 

[edub69]

"Intelligent Design" is just a slick new marketing campaign for religious dogma, an underhanded way of saying that there is a viable alternative to evolution theory, when in fact intelligent design does not theorize anything other than, "Life is complicated". Sheer brilliance.:drink:

 

[docmercer]

I appreciate that people need answers in life. I had a relative lose a child under the age of 1 to what was then called "crib death". They found comfort in the "god wanted her now" and "it's all part of his plan" type of talk. Who am I to tell them that maybe it was their own lifestyle or crappy luck etc --- they needed to move forward in life - and like so many in our society with dead end jobs, crappy relationships, or strings of bad luck - religion often provides answers where none appear to exist.

That doesn't mean it should be taught in schools alongside theories that can be tested.

 

[TheRightWing]

that 9th grade was a killer cause they threw me off with X-Q= XP4 so I struggled the 4th,5th time around but hell look at me now!!!

 

[blueedwards]

the evidence does not support the theory of evolution. neither do the establish scientific laws of thermodynamics.

 

[docmercer]

the evidence does not support the theory of evolution. neither do the establish scientific laws of thermodynamics.

Can you be more specific on both accounts?

I assume then that we should also stop teaching about the theories regarding economics, the origins of stars, relativity and gravity. All theories, but all at least supported in part by testing and results. Unlike "then he took clay and made man" which is really what the creationists are trying to weasel in with the intelligent design philosophy.

 

[blueedwards]

Can you be more specific on both accounts?

I assume then that we should also stop teaching about the theories regarding economics, the origins of stars, relativity and gravity. All theories, but all at least supported in part by testing and results. Unlike "then he took clay and made man" which is really what the creationists are trying to weasel in with the intelligent design philosophy.

well, it seems that lately much debate is raging about whether or not to teach intelligent design along side evolution since they are the two dominant theories about the origin of life. no one is saying to stop teaching evolution the way you make it sound when you say "i assume we should stop teaching about the theories regarding economics, etc".

i like your quote about testing the theories...how do you test the theory of evolution? do you watch a fish grow legs, crawl out of the ocean, learn to breathe air, grow hair and an opposable thumb, then create the wheel and the internet? how do you test that?

evolution is a theory. a theory with more holes in it than tu-pac-shakur. it is a theory that cannot be tested and is not supported by the evidence. it is a theory that goes against the established scientific laws of thermodynamics. its amazing to me that scientists believe in a theory that does not even follow laws that the same scientists established.

1st law of thermodynamics - matter is not created or destroyed. the amount of matter in the universe is constant.

2nd law of thermodynamics - in a closed system (which our universe is) with only random forces acting (i.e. no intelligent intervention) things tend to go from order to disorder.

evolutionists will tell you that things went from disorder to order. you start with a simple, one-celled organism which evolves into an incredibly complex human being over billions of years. an obvious contradiction to the 2nd law.

most evolutionists also believe that the universe is eternal or that it was the result of a random chaotic collision of gases billions of years ago. in either case, this violates the 1st law.

 

[docmercer]

well, it seems that lately much debate is raging about whether or not to teach intelligent design along side evolution since they are the two dominant theories about the origin of life. no one is saying to stop teaching evolution the way you make it sound when you say "i assume we should stop teaching about the theories regarding economics, etc".

i like your quote about testing the theories...how do you test the theory of evolution? do you watch a fish grow legs, crawl out of the ocean, learn to breathe air, grow hair and an opposable thumb, then create the wheel and the internet? how do you test that?

evolution is a theory. a theory with more holes in it than tu-pac-shakur. it is a theory that cannot be tested and is not supported by the evidence. it is a theory that goes against the established scientific laws of thermodynamics. its amazing to me that scientists believe in a theory that does not even follow laws that the same scientists established.

1st law of thermodynamics - matter is not created or destroyed. the amountof matter in the universe is constant.

2nd law of thermodynamics - in a closed system (which our universe is) with only random forces acting (i.e. no intelligent intervention) things tend to go from order to disorder.

evolutionists will tell you that things went from disorder to order. you start with a simple, one-celled organism which evolves into a human being over billions of years. an obviousl contradiction to the 2nd law.

most evolutionists also believe that the universe is eternal or that it was the result of a random chaotic collision of gases billions of years ago. in either case, this violates the 1st law.

2 dominant theories? Please tell me how you'd teach ID in a science class. You're telling me that fossils and dna maps provide no testing for the theory of evolution?

Please tell us Blue..tell us how ID can be tested (and save the lame dead rapper references since that one is getting as old as Sam Odom).

Tell us about the holes in evolution. Tell us how ID can be tested.

Thanks

 

[edub69]

The theory of evolution's primary intent is not to explain the origin of life. The "theory" of intelligent design is not a theory at all, it is a statement. It would take about 15 seconds to teach the "theory" of intelligent design:


Boys and Girls, living organisms are very complex. Therefore, some intelligent being must have designed every living organism on this planet.



There you have it.

 

[blueedwards]

2 dominant theories? Please tell me how you'd teach ID in a science class. You're telling me that fossils and dna maps provide no testing for the theory of evolution?

Please tell us Blue..tell us how ID can be tested (and save the lame dead rapper references since that one is getting as old as Sam Odom).

Tell us about the holes in evolution. Tell us how ID can be tested.

Thanks

do you know any other theories about the origins of life? i have only heard of those two.

the fossil evidence supports the biblical account of the flood. it does not support evolution.

how would i teach intelligent design? i'd probably use a bible. i dont think its realistic in a public school to teach only intelligent design and ignore evolution. i dont think that is what anyone is even asking for. they are asking for both to be taught side by side and let the students make their own choice on how they believe.

how can you test intelligent design? you can't. you can't test evolution either. what you can do is examine the evidence objectively and see which theory is better supported by the evidence.

 

[edub69]

the fossil evidence supports the biblical account of the flood. it does not support evolution

This is a new one. Please elaborate.

 

[blueedwards]

The theory of evolution's primary intent is not to explain the origin of life. The "theory" of intelligent design is not a theory at all, it is a statement. It would take about 15 seconds to teach the "theory" of intelligent design:


Boys and Girls, living organisms are very complex. Therefore, some intelligent being must have designed every living organism on this planet.



There you have it.

in between your first sentence and last sentence, there would be about a semester's worth of evidence in support of intelligent design to lay out and discuss.

 

[DrunkenHorseplayer]

"Intelligent design" is the religious shitheads' way of admitting that evolution is right and religion is wrong. If you believe religious horseshit then you believe that wearing your lucky shirt will cause you to win all your bets.

 

[blueedwards]

This is a new one. Please elaborate.

actually, its not a new one. it is probably the most compelling reason to believe that the biblical account of the flood really occured in history.

if the biblical flood actually occured, the entire earth was covered with water for months. almost every living thing on the planet was killed in a very short period of time. then, the flood waters receded. if this were true, the following would be the results:

1) there would be millions of dead bodies, carcases of animals, etc in the water

2) when the flood waters receded, these dead things, along with huge amounts of sediment would be plowed into the earth with enormous force.

3) if you went digging in the earth say 5,000 years later, you'd expect to dig down a bit and see a layer of strata or whatever with an inordinate amount of dead things (fossils), then after that a bunch of layers of strata with normal or amounts of dead things.

that is what the fossil record shows.

what it does not show is layers of rock near the surface with complex beings and each subsequent, deeper layer showing fossils of creatures less and less complex until you get down to the single celled organismz. if the fossil record showed that, you can bet your ass that it would be in every text book in america and that very few thinking people would ever attend church. i know i wouldn't

 

[blueedwards]

"Intelligent design" is the religious shitheads' way of admitting that evolution is right and religion is wrong. If you believe religious horseshit then you believe that wearing your lucky shirt will cause you to win all your bets.

interesting...

 

[edub69]

how would i teach intelligent design? i'd probably use a bible.

What about a Quran, or the Tao-te-ching, or the Holy Piby? Why a bible?

 

[edub69]

interesting...

:lolBIG:

 

[blueedwards]

What about a Quran, or the Tao-te-ching, or the Holy Piby? Why a bible?

because i believe it to be the truth. it also has a pretty detailed account of creation. the koran does not. haven't read the other books you mentioned.

 

[edub69]

actually, its not a new one. it is probably the most compelling reason to believe that the biblical account of the flood really occured in history.

if the biblical flood actually occured, the entire earth was covered with water for months. almost every living thing on the planet was killed in a very short period of time. then, the flood waters receded. if this were true, the following would be the results:

1) there would be millions of dead bodies, carcases of animals, etc in the water

2) when the flood waters receded, these dead things, along with huge amounts of sediment would be plowed into the earth with enormous force.

3) if you went digging in the earth say 5,000 years later, you'd expect to dig down a bit and see a layer of strata or whatever with an inordinate amount of dead things (fossils), then after that a bunch of layers of strata with normal or amounts of dead things.

that is what the fossil record shows.

what it does not show is layers of rock near the surface with complex beings and each subsequent, deeper layer showing fossils of creatures less and less complex until you get down to the single celled organismz. if the fossil record showed that, you can bet your ass that it would be in every text book in america and that very few thinking people would ever attend church. i know i wouldn't

When did the flood occur? I know you are aware that we have means of determining the age of all of these fossils that places some of their ages in the billions of years, while in my limited understanding of the theological timeline, the entire life cycle on this planet has taken place within the last ten thousand years.