If you think evolution is incorrect as a theory, why complain about it on an obscure web forum? Earn a science degree, get a university position and work to change things. 100,000 biologists and allied scientists use evolution every day, and the theory just gets stronger and stronger and stronger. If you think all these thousands of scientists are wrong, start proving how they are wrong!
If Moses “got it right” why has evolution become stronger and stronger since 1859, until today it is the only game in town? Moses’ worldview is completely irrelevant to scientists, even to Catholic scientists. If Moses were right, shouldn’t we expect God to assist in furthering the Mosaic view?
Not only that—but ‘the Galileo thing’ has been largely mis-represented by the very same media who tells us unborn babies are just a conglomeration of cells, but fish and trees deserve our protection.
Not at all. This is the world’s own iniquity at work, for which God gives us as much leeway as we dare to take.
That’s very convenient for you to say. So if you think Moses’ view of the world is scientifically correct, why is it not evident to anyone else? Where are the pillars that support the corners of the earth? Is one of them in Tennessee? Where did the water drain to after the great flood? Was it magically removed into outer space? How did Noah’s ark hold twenty million species, and how did it get them all back to their appropriate continents after the flood? If the earth is only 6,000 to 10,000 years old, how is it we can find 160,000 years documented in ice cores?
When Darwin got to the Galapagos he was most likely excited, ready to see something new and worthwhile after sailing for many months risking his life at sea. In his first observations he saw that it’s life was uniquely wild and uninhabited by man, it was quite the opposite of the tamed world he was probably used to. In his journals he states he observed everything very closely paying close attention to the finches, which later explained his theory of evolution. He said the suttle differences he observed in the birds from island to island, were the same suttle differences must have occured overtime to make such complex life forms. Today, science searches for more evidence, but finds that the further they go back in the fossil record, the less things seem to be evolving, so they find other species that look similar and conclude they must be the same. Fossils are rare and are not easily discovered, yet you think their would be some concrete evidence for Darwins theory but their is not. After a few hundred years of this theory being accepted by many, science has dicovered something new about this old idea of finch evolution called “cylical variation” which is the ability for birds to adapt to climate and other conditions. When the birds with larger beaks bread with those of smaller beaks they reproduce, instead of dying from not being specialized, they develop their own niche. The fact is that all life on earth is different and has different abilities to adapt. These finches under close observation are not evolving at all, but adapting, cross-breeding, and readapting, so Darwin’s biggest dicovery was actually no different that Mendels. Moses does not make claims such as birds use to be lizards or humans-monkeys, but plays it safe and gives a general explanation of how the earth was formed and how life came from the dust of the earth by a supernatural power, every creature being created in its own form and having a purpose. This occurence of life may be the spark of lightning that science has been trying to recreate or explain, or it may be some other ‘super’-natural power, beyond our explanation.
Well think about all the possible reasons why Dawkins may have said this:
My, you have a vivid imagination; either that or you are eager to bear false witness against your neighbor! I said nothing of the sort in post # 120.St Anastastia’s comments were discussing how George Bush does not believe in evolution, trying to make an attack on those who disagree with the current mainstream theories of evolution, which basically is what the movie expelled was all about. Not sure if you saw it but it discussed both Darwin and Genesis, though I am not sure if they talked about Bush. Just trying to enlighten the topic of discussion with a little more insight on what the movie was about.
Do you have any evidence for this allegation that evolutionary scientists are eugenicists?
How does that work? The movie was all about those debates being stifled in the academic/scientific world.
Those debates have not been stifled. They just took place long ago. Academic careers are short, and conference time is precious. Just as physicists no longer waste time on arguing whether gravity is a coherent theory, biologist don’t waste time on arguing whether evolution is a coherent theory. At one time it made sense to debate whether gravity and evolution exist; now it no longer makes sense.How does that work? The movie was all about those debates being stifled in the academic/scientific world.
I would like to make a retraction to my previous comment. My apologize to StAnastasia, who was merely posing the question, If Bush was against evolution. It was actually Sailor Kenshin, who said that the movie should have been called, “It’s Bush’s Fault,” though sarcastically. I believe this is why the Forum Administrator has been posting warnings to stay on topic, to avoid such situations of bad communication.
Thank you, Liberalcatholic! I was indeed merely replying to Sailor Kenshin, wondering what he meant by drawing George Bush into the discussion.
I don’t know anything about a “hateful and hole-filled logic legacy of Darwin,” but I do know a number of Catholic priests who teach evolutionary biology. And I know that the makers of Expelled are liars, because they lied to my organization when they invited us to be interviewed for making this film. They said it was about something quite different than it turned out to be, so we pulled the plug on the interview.