Evidence for Evolution

[dixieagle]

A quote from a young biologist is not the same as Church teaching, an important part of which is missing from biology textbooks.

Peace,
Ed

But you’ve seen posted here quotes from Popes who acknowledge that God may have used evolution in His creative process and that - as long as we believe in ensoulment - there is no problem with our accepting evolution.

It is not necessary for Church teaching to be included in biology books - just as I would not expect biology to be included in the Catholic catechism.

That “young biologist” (my dear SIL) has been a wonderful example of faith in action to the agnostics/atheists in his department, to the point where one is on a path back to the Church, and another is asking thoughtful questions and actually objecting to the knee-jerk anti-Catholicism that can be rampant.

I just do not understand how the mere idea of evolution as the method used by God gets otherwise intelligent, well-meaning folks all a-twitter.

 

[edwest2]

Human origins has been rigorously studied and commented on by the Catholic Church. See Humani Generis and Human Persons Created in the Image of God. The Church has no problem combining scientific knowledge with theology.

“Truth cannot contradict truth.” But truth is not a one-way street, it flows in both directions.

God bless,
Ed

 

[drpmjhess]

That “young biologist” (my dear SIL) has been a wonderful example of faith in action to the agnostics/atheists in his department, to the point where one is on a path back to the Church, and another is asking thoughtful questions and actually objecting to the knee-jerk anti-Catholicism that can be rampant. I just do not understand how the mere idea of evolution as the method used by God gets otherwise intelligent, well-meaning folks all a-twitter.

dixieagle, I quite agree. One of my biologist friends was so stunned by the beauty of creation he studied as an evolutionary biologist that he converted to Catholicism,and then joined the Society of Jesus as was ordained priest. He has been president of our state botanical society, and his quiet Catholic apostolate to those in his profession has been most impressive. I find the “twitter” about evolution of YECs and IDers as bemusing as you do.

Petrus

 

[drpmjhess]

Created, not designed. The only difference between your position, and that of the Church, is that the Church is OK with the way He created things.

Expelled flunks the test

www.ExpelledExposed.com finds new creationist “documentary” lacking accuracy on many levels

Oakland, California, April 15, 2008 * Millions of dollars have been spent promoting Ben Stein’s Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed to fundamentalist church groups, but that money would have been better spent on fact checkers. www.ExpelledExposed.com, a website launched today by the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), reveals the truth behind the creationist movie’s misrepresentations.

“Creationists have been making the same arguments for decades,” says Eugenie C. Scott, executive director of the National Center for Science Education. “They’ve gotten better at marketing these claims, but they’re no more valid now than during the Scopes trial of the 1920s. Creationists have been predicting the death of evolution for over a century, yet it is constantly affirmed by evidence from fields Darwin could never have imagined.” Given the damning assessment at www.ExpelledExposed.com, Scott adds, “Perhaps the filmmakers should have spent more time hitting the books, instead of beating up on hardworking scientists.”

Throughout the movie, Ben Stein claims that “Big Science” represses intelligent design to advance an atheistic agenda, but NCSE doesn’t buy it. “There are many successful evolutionary biologists who are also people of faith, and a host of people of faith who regard intelligent design as a misconceived and harmful rejection of science. In attempting to pit Christianity against science, Expelled misrepresents both.”

“We reviewed public records and reports on the intelligent design promoters who were supposedly discriminated against, and we discovered that the claims that they lost their jobs over intelligent design are unsupported,” explains Josh Rosenau, a biologist at NCSE. “That said, professors who aren’t making advances in their field, editors who disregard their journal’s established practices, and lecturers who repeat creationist falsehoods shouldn’t be surprised if they have trouble holding jobs. These people weren’t expelled; they flunked out.” www.ExpelledExposed.com contains information about the “martyrs” from Expelled, and also of real scientists who successfully challenged established science. “The difference,” NCSE researcher Carrie Sager observes, “is that real scientists back their challenges with experimental results. Results are what changed minds, forced textbook revisions, and earned Nobel Prizes.”

More insidious are the movie’s attempts to link evolution to the Holocaust. Susan Spath, a historian of science at NCSE, comments: “The implication that Darwin led to Nazism and the Holocaust is an irresponsible misrepresentation of a terrible history. Hitler abused many things, including science, and Expelled is wrong to shift blame off his shoulders and onto evolution.” www.ExpelledExposed.com quotes the Anti-Defamation League’s Abe Foxman, who described similar claims in a previous creationist movie as “an outrageous and shoddy attempt … to trivialize the horrors of the Holocaust.”

The National Center for Science Education is a non-profit organization dedicated to defending the teaching of evolution in the public schools. The NCSE maintains its archive of source material on the history of creationism at its Oakland, California, headquarters. On the web at www.ncseweb.org. www.ExpelledExposed.com is a resource for journalists, teachers, and curious moviegoers who want the full story behind Expelled.

Contacts:
Eugenie C. Scott, scott@ncseweb.org, 800-290-6006
Josh Rosenau, rosenau@ncseweb.org, 800-290-6006
Susan Spath, spath@ncseweb.org, 800-290-6006
Carrie Sager, sager@ncseweb.org, 800-290-6006

 

[reggieM]

Ben Stein vs. Sputtering Atheists

by L. Brent Bozell III
April 17, 2008

Evolution is another one of those one-sided debates. We know the concept of Intelligent Design is stifled in academic circles. An entire documentary to state the obvious? You can see my reluctance to view it.

I went into the screening bored. I came out of it stunned.

Ben Stein’s extraordinary presentation documents how the worlds of science and academia not only crush debate on the origins of life, but also crush the careers of professors who dare to question the Darwinian hypothesis of evolution and natural selection.

Stein asks a simple question: What if the universe began with an intelligent designer, a designer named God? He assembles a stable of academics – experts all – who dared to question Darwinist assumptions and found themselves “expelled” from intellectual discourse as a result. They include evolutionary biologist Richard Sternberg (sandbagged at the Smithsonian), biology professor Caroline Crocker (drummed out of George Mason University), and astrophysicist Guillermo Gonzalez (blackballed at Iowa State University).

That’s disturbing enough, but what Stein does next is truly shocking. He allows the principal advocates of Darwinism to speak their minds. These are experts with national reputations, regular welcomed guests on network television and the like. But the public knows them only by their careful seven-second soundbites. Stein engages them in conversation. They speak their minds. They become sputtering ranters, openly championing their sheer hatred of religion.

PC liberalism has showered accolades on atheist author Richard Dawkins’ best-selling book “The God Delusion.” But when Stein suggests to Dawkins that he’s been critical of the Old Testament God, Dawkins protests – not that Stein is wrong, but that he’s being too mild. He then reads from this jaw-dropping paragraph of his book:

“The God of the Old Testament is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, blood-thirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”

Dawkins has a website. Its slogan is “A clear-thinking oasis.”

It’s understood that God had nothing to do with the origins of life on Earth. What, then, is the alternate explanation? Stein asks these experts, and their very serious answers are priceless. One theorizes that life began somehow on the backs of crystals. Another states electric sparks from a lightning storm created organic matter (out of nothing). Another declares that life was brought to Earth by aliens. Anything but God.

The most controversial part of the film follows Stein to the Dachau concentration camp, underlining how Darwin’s theories of natural selection led to the eugenics movement, embraced by Adolf Hitler. If there is no God, but only a planetary lab waiting for scientists to perfect the human race, where can Darwinism lead? Stein insists that he isn’t accusing today’s Darwinists of Nazism. He points out, however, that Hitler’s mad science was inspired by Darwinism.

Now that the film is complete, the evolutionist prophets featured in the film are on the warpath inveighing against it, and the alleged idiots who would lower themselves to watching it. Richard Dawkins laments how the film will solicit “cheap laughs that could only be raised in an audience of scientific ignoramuses.” Minnesota professor and blogger P.Z. Myers predicts the movie is “going to appeal strongly to the religious, the paranoid, the conspiracy theorists, and the ignorant –– which means they’re going to draw in about 90% of the American market.” Myers and Dawkins now both complain they were “duped” into appearing in the movie (for pay).

Everyone should take the opportunity to see “Expelled” – if nothing else, as a bracing antidote to the atheism-friendly culture of PC liberalism. But it’s far more than that. It’s a spotlight on the arrogance of this movement and its leaders, a spotlight on the choking intolerance of academia, and a spotlight on the ignorance of so many who say so much, yet know so very little.

 

[edwest2]

Truth is a two-way street but like the tolerance preached by some, they would rather it be a one-way street. I am against a scientific dictatorship.

Peace,
Ed

 

[drpmjhess]

I am against a scientific dictatorship.
Peace,Ed

I couldn’t agree more.

 

[The_Barbarian]

He points out, however, that Hitler’s mad science was inspired by Darwinism.

Werner von Braun? The Nazi rocket guy? How so? As you know, almost all of the Nazi “science” was warmed-over stuff from the medieval pogoms against the Jews. Luther’s rants and advice about how to handle Jews was essentially Hitler’s solution, minus the gas chambers.

It is pathetic how desperately some people must hate Darwin to make up such accusations.

As usual, when people try to push God away from others, they only manage to remove themselves from God.

 

[drpmjhess]

It is pathetic how desperately some people must hate Darwin to make up such accusations.

Barbarian, Expelled is itself astonishingly pathetic. At my office we’re betting that Zombie Strippers (also opening today) has a better box office take. We were also discussing making a parallel film: * The Passion of the Zombie Strippers Expelled from Narnia*. Audiences would certainly learn more from that film than from Expelled.

 

[reggieM]

Considering that you predicted that Expelled would never have a theatrical release, I wouldn’t say that your guess on its box-office draw will be any more accurate.

Expelled took in $1.2 million in its first night registering in the top ten this weekend. It also has had the widest first night release of any documentary ever. It has the fourth highest per-theater revenue in the country and it will get a wider release in the weeks ahead considering its initial success.

 

[drpmjhess]

Considering that you predicted that Expelled would never have a theatrical release, I wouldn’t say that your guess on its box-office draw will be any more accurate.

Expelled took in $1.2 million in its first night registering in the top ten this weekend. It also has had the widest first night release of any documentary ever. It has the fourth highest per-theater revenue in the country and it will get a wider release in the weeks ahead considering its initial success.

How is Zombie Strippers doing? It opened yesterday as well.

P.

 

[The_Barbarian]

BTW, it’s so bad, they are paying church schools to bus students to the theaters to see the film.

getexpelled.com/schools.php

Oh, wait, it’s a “donation.” Sorry about that.

 

[drpmjhess]

BTW, it’s so bad, they are paying church schools to bus students to the theaters to see the film.
getexpelled.com/schools.php
Oh, wait, it’s a “donation.” Sorry about that.

Barbarian, to see specifics on why the entire film is a cheat and a fraud, see expelledexposed.com/index.php/the-truth

The site details the truth behind Ben Stein’s lies about evolution, Intelligent Design, Hitler & Eugenics, Richard Sternberg, Guillermo Gonzalez, Caroline Crocker, Robert Marks, Pamela Winnick, and Michael Egnor.

Petrus

 

[The_Barbarian]

What’s really funny is that IDers are constantly trying to convince us that it’s not a religion, and then they go marketing it to churches. Not to Catholic churches, though.

Creationism at least had some integrity.

 

[abu_kamoon]

4.6 billion years old. Hahahahah! Are scientists claiming to be infallible? How old will the Earth be in another fifty years? 12.7 billion years old?

These numbers alre pulled out of a hat. They keep changing.

Why do scientists continue to use only carbon 14 to date objects (and then, only when the dates agree with their pre-conceived ideas)? There are a ouple of dozen systems to date artifacts, but they generally give much more recent dates, dates which don’t support the evolution fantasy.

 

[Brian_Millar]

I was amused last night, I was watching the history channel about evolution, they were explaining how the techtonic plates were moving apart at first, then towards the end of the show, they explained how the east coast was going to crash into europe eventually, I’m going, this makes not sense, why would it return from where it came from? Wouldn’t it be the west coast nailing Japan and the other side of the world eventually, isn’t that the direction it’s currently drifting to?

We then get into the ice ages, with these huge numbers in between them, yet we had a little ice age during the middle ages and we are headed into yet another one soon, it’s obvious, look at the current weather patterns, all within the past 10 thousand years, of which is the entirety of civilization. Get this, they blame the ice ages on the land bridge between north and south america, I look to the continents and see how they fit together like two parts of a puzzle, that land bridge has always been there.

I then look to the layer of sedement deposited from the supposed of meteor strike that was blamed on killing the dinosaurs, it’s 1" thick, how can anything could have survived in that regardless of species? That’s alot of debree over a very long period of time, there was nothing to eat during that period at all obviously, nothing survived, it had nothing to survive on, the food chain was descimated on all levels.

Our scientists assume everything moves at a constant, yet volcanic and seismic activity is clearly speradic, this is easily measured during our own time lines. They also do not take into account the constantly changing gravitional forces the planet undergo’s, it’s like a spinning top, observe how it wobbles as it slows down, yet that force is not even taken into account at all. Then the constant debree and mass being added by being bombarded from steller masses, ie. meteor’s, space dust, comets, etc. changing the overall mass of the planet itself as well.

It seems to me like they are assuming way too much, trying to form a picture and write a story without all of the facts.

 

[rossum]

4.6 billion years old.

Yes.

Hahahahah!

Personal incredulity is not an argument. “A talking snake with legs? Hahahahah!” See what I mean?

Are scientists claiming to be infallible?

No. I am not aware of any scientist who has been elected Pope.

How old will the Earth be in another fifty years?

Fifty years older than it is now. The estimated age of the earth will be more accurate then it is now.

12.7 billion years old?

No, that is far too old, closer to the age of the universe.

These numbers alre pulled out of a hat.

That is grossly insulting to many hard working scientists who work very hard to get better and more accurate estimates of the age of the earth. Your remarks just show that you do not know what you are talking about. “It is is better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to open your mouth and remove all possible doubt.”

They keep changing.

Yes. As better estimates come in the older estimates are replaced. That is how science works: good estimates are replaced by better estimates. Observe how the differences between successive estimates decrease as they bocome more accurate.

Why do scientists continue to use only carbon 14 to date objects (and then, only when the dates agree with their pre-conceived ideas)? There are a ouple of dozen systems to date artifacts, but they generally give much more recent dates, dates which don’t support the evolution fantasy.

Carbon dates are used up to 60,000 years ago or so. Nobody uses carbon dating to date the earth. There are indeed many dating systems suitable for different ranges of dates - the appropriate dating systems are used for dating the earth. You are showing your ignorance again here.

rossum

 

[abu_kamoon]

I was amused last night, I was watching the history channel about evolution, they were explaining how the techtonic plates were moving apart at first, then towards the end of the show, they explained how the east coast was going to crash into europe eventually, I’m going, this makes not sense, why would it return from where it came from? Wouldn’t it be the west coast nailing Japan and the other side of the world eventually, isn’t that the direction it’s currently drifting to?

We then get into the ice ages, with these huge numbers in between them, yet we had a little ice age during the middle ages and we are headed into yet another one soon, it’s obvious, look at the current weather patterns, all within the past 10 thousand years, of which is the entirety of civilization. Get this, they blame the ice ages on the land bridge between north and south america, I look to the continents and see how they fit together like two parts of a puzzle, that land bridge has always been there.

I then look to the layer of sedement deposited from the supposed of meteor strike that was blamed on killing the dinosaurs, it’s 1" thick, how can anything could have survived in that regardless of species? That’s alot of debree over a very long period of time, there was nothing to eat during that period at all obviously, nothing survived, it had nothing to survive on, the food chain was descimated on all levels.

Our scientists assume everything moves at a constant, yet volcanic and seismic activity is clearly speradic, this is easily measured during our own time lines. They also do not take into account the constantly changing gravitional forces the planet undergo’s, it’s like a spinning top, observe how it wobbles as it slows down, yet that force is not even taken into account at all. Then the constant debree and mass being added by being bombarded from steller masses, ie. meteor’s, space dust, comets, etc. changing the overall mass of the planet itself as well.

It seems to me like they are assuming way too much, trying to form a picture and write a story without all of the facts.

 

[abu_kamoon]

Let’s look at the evidence in light of Occam’s Razor (the simplest answer is usually correct:

Polystriate fossils:

Creationist view: Plants and animals burried in a catastrophic even, such as a flood.

Evolutionist view: ?

Tropical vegitation found in polar regions:

Creationist view: The climate changed radically after a Global Flood.

Evolutionist view: The poles shifted.

Worldwide references to a world-wide flood in diverse cultures with no known contact:

Creationist view: A common origin in history.

Evolutionist view: ?

The diversication of life:

Creationist view: Special creation of God.

Evolutionist view: All forms of life descending from the simplest single celled life form. The diversity of life is the result of random (Atheist view) or purposeful (religious evolutionist) mutation. In the 1950, fruit flies were exposed to radiation in the laboratory to see what effect inducing mutations would result in. The resutls were disastrous from the point of view of the flies. No superior insects were “evolved”.

The age of the Earth is:

Creationist view: Unknown, but probably measured in the thousands of years (maybe 10,000-15,000)

Evolutioinist view: 6.4 billion years old. God took His time in creating us in His image out of some sort of ape like creature.

Death:

Creationist view: The result of sin on the part of the first two humans.

Evolutionist view: Had been going on for hundreds of millions or billions of years before the first homo sapiens “evolved.”

The various life forms:

Creationist view: All were brought before the first man, according to Genesis.

Evolutionist view: Most were extinct befor the first homo sapien “evolved”.

The human race:

Creationist view: Humans were created in the image of God.

Evolutionist view: We continue to evolve. (What will be become in the future?)

As you can see, there is a wide gulf between what God’s Word says, and what “science” says. Where do you place your trust?

 

[The_Barbarian]

Polystriate fossils:
Creationist view: Plants and animals burried in a catastrophic even, such as a flood.
Evolutionist view: ?

Evidence shows that some were gradually buried. Trees, for example, are forming as polystrate fossils not far from where I live, as sediments accumulate in a grove flooded by a dam some decades ago. Others, such as fish, were buried in anoxic conditions by lamina formed by sediment from a series of deposits such as would be seen in runoff from storms. We see such things happening today, also.

Tropical vegitation found in polar regions:

Creationist view: The climate changed radically after a Global Flood.

Evolutionist view: The poles shifted.

Not the poles. The continents. Magnetic particles in rock, which freeze when the rock is formed, show where a continent was at the time the rock formed. And the data nicely fits with the fossil evidence. Oh, and the movement of the continents is still continuing and measurable, at rates that fit the paleontological data.

Worldwide references to a world-wide flood in diverse cultures with no known contact:

Mostly not “worldwide.” And if they had no contact with each other, they wouldn’t exist. So this means either that most cultures experienced disasterous floods at some time, or the Ark story is literally true. Your claim is like hearing hoofbeats and assuming it’s a unicorn.

The diversication of life:
Creationist view: Special creation of God.

Catholic view (as expressed by Pope Benedict XVI): All forms of life descending from the simplest single celled life form.

The diversity of life is the result of random (Atheist view) or purposeful (religious evolutionist) mutation. In the 1950, fruit flies were exposed to radiation in the laboratory to see what effect inducing mutations would result in. The resutls were disastrous from the point of view of the flies. No superior insects were “evolved”.

Observations of natural and laboratory populations have frequently shown beneficial mutations becoming established. Would you like to learn about some of them?

The age of the Earth is:
Creationist view: Unknown, but probably measured in the thousands of years (maybe 10,000-15,000)

Measured actual age, about 4.5 billion years old. Would you like to learn how we know?

Death:
Creationist view: The Death incurred by Adam was a physical one.

Christian view:
The death was a spiritual one, as described in Genesis.

The various life forms:
Creationist view: All were brought before the first man, according to Genesis.

Christian view:
Many species appeared and died out before man appeared.

The human race:

Creationist view: Humans were created in the image of God.

Christian view: The image of God is in our immortal soul and mind. It does not mean that God has toenails.

We continue to evolve, and from time to time, a favorable mutation appears in the population and spreads.

As you can see, there is a wide gulf between what God’s Word says, and what “science” says.

There’s a wide gulf between what you say and what science says. But you are not God.

Where do you place your trust?

In the real God. You should, too. Let Him be God.