26th August 2010
“The ideas that made Darwin's theory [of evolution by natural selection] so revolutionary are precisely the ones that repel much of religious America, for they imply that, far from having a divinely scripted role in the drama of life, our species is the accidental and contingent result of a purely natural process.”
Jerry A. Coyne
August 26th, 2010 at 3:14
Evolution shows that life on this planet is interconnected. I like that. In contrast, the book of Genesis in the Old testament says we are made from dirt, and we have dominion over the animals, the same way god has domininon over the human race. Might makes right, brute force, no real concern for animals, other than how we can use them (meat, eggs, fur, draft animal, blood sacrifices, etc.) Pehaps religious people don’t want to acknowledge the common lineage we have with all life on this planet because a magical creator god story is about power and ego, not about appreciating what is here. Every life form on this earth earned its niche on the tree of life. Humans are just another branch on the tree of life. This may seem like a demotion to those who want to believe that only humans matter. It is short-sighted human ego that rejects a real planet full of interconnected life in favor of a mythical creator god.
August 26th, 2010 at 3:19
I agree with Margaret strongly when she says that
“Evolution shows that life on this planet is interconnected.” and “a magical creator god story is about power and ego, not about appreciating what is here. ”
The whole goddidit excuse creates a schism between the human and natural experience. It de-emphasizes our cosmic placement by saying that we have free control over all other life, sans the responsibility.
August 26th, 2010 at 3:22
In Islam not only human that matters, everything matters.
After many times refuted, evolution mainly talks about life processes. What evolution can’t prove is what makes everything created? Who creates the 1st. design?
August 26th, 2010 at 4:34
I second both MikeG’s support for Margaret and Margaret’s post. That this magical deity created the “other” animals gets overlooked with this paradigm – because we have “dominion” over them? Rubbish – it shows what a poor philosophy religion it is if this type of dominion does not compel appropriate measures of respectful husbandry and benign neglect.
Directly to the quote: yeppers, pure accident. A benevolent deity creating Mankind in his/her/its image should be damned to !!!hell!!! for what we have done to this planet and its inhabitants… Maybe deities are masochistic?
YSG
August 26th, 2010 at 4:44
… and sadistic? But, in a loving way.
YSG
August 26th, 2010 at 9:34
Evolution makes no claims on the origins of life. To suggest that life needed a “causer” is a fatuos statement. Just as you can ask “why”, this is again a begging the answer question.
August 26th, 2010 at 10:11
Brilliant Margaret, thank you
August 26th, 2010 at 13:56
Very well-put indeed Margaret.
August 26th, 2010 at 16:44
Solomon, the premise of your argument. “everything has a designer” is contradicted by the conclusion “God did not have a designer”.
August 26th, 2010 at 16:59
The argument seems to be “How the universe began is a mystery so god must have created it.” But isn’t a god that exists outside of time and space (by definition) a much larger mystery? Especially given that there is zero evidence of the existence of such a creature? By Occam’s Razor, a god cannot exist. Compounding one mystery with a far greater one, on nothing but the say-so of iron age primitives is, well, silly. Even if we eventually understand the mechanism by which the universe began fully, there will always be that invisible door behind which lurks their god. I guess that’s why they call if faith: because reason is incompatible.
August 26th, 2010 at 17:54
You all can say anything you want but you all still can’t ran away with the question how come all the complicated & magnificent creations around us have no designer & governor.
The only answer that will perfectly fit is there must be a creator & nobody can refute that doctrine.
August 26th, 2010 at 18:01
That argument falls on it’s face because if functional complexity requires a designer, how do you account for the funcitional complexity of the mind of the designer?
August 26th, 2010 at 18:08
Genesis 3:22-24 ESV
Then the Lord God said, “Behold, the man has become like one of us in knowing good and evil. Now, lest he reach out his hand and take also of the TREE OF LIFE and eat, and live forever—” therefore the Lord God sent him out from the garden of Eden to work the ground from which he was taken. He drove out the man, and at the east of the garden of Eden he placed the cherubim and a flaming sword that turned every way to guard the way to the TREE OF LIFE.
Ironically, humanity was condemned in order to keep us away from the tree of life. Adam and Eve took the forbidden fruit before they knew right from wrong, (the fruit was the souce of that knowledge, not god) and because of this, all their descendants (us) are also condemned. Another interesting point in the Genesis story is that eternal life was never intended for mankind, and neither was the ability to tell right from wrong–we took that without permission. So much for the “divinely scripted role” for mankind by a loving diety. Yet, believers tell us we are guilty just for being born and we should look to god for moral standards and eternal life.
I am happier with our evolutionary tree of life.
August 26th, 2010 at 19:35
Margaret,
A creation have to be obedient & thats the way it is, God is testing Adam of human obedience. Adam’s decendants are not condemn. They condemned themselves. Are’nt they being told what is right & what is wrong.
August 26th, 2010 at 19:38
The functional complexity of the mind of the designer will be much more or most complex as ever.
August 26th, 2010 at 19:45
Braathwaat ,
“God did have a designer”
The designer is himself….
August 26th, 2010 at 20:36
Well I’ve been around for a little while now and more and more I find that there seems to be more Questions than Answers. Yep thats my feelings on the whole matter. Bless you all.
August 26th, 2010 at 21:28
Questions shouldn’t bother you. It’s those who know the answers that should terrify you.
August 26th, 2010 at 21:38
Yes, Tech. What is wrong with questions? What is wrong with not knowing? There are many people that claim to have all the answers but it is, emphatically, NOT science that makes that claim. People that make that claim are charlatans or nuts. Jim Jones, Heaven’s Gate, Charles Manson, Joseph Smith…etc. That’s what people with all the answers look like. If you KNOW then you do not SEEK and that leads to stagnation.
August 27th, 2010 at 6:55
Olivia Judson of the NY Times had an excellent prebuttal to solomon the troll here: Why I’m Happy I Evolved:
“When I was in school, Biology was a subject that seemed as exciting as a clump of cotton wool. It was a dreary exercise in the memorization and regurgitation of apparently unconnected facts. Only later did I learn about evolution and how it transforms biology from that mass of cotton wool into a magnificent tapestry, a tapestry we can contemplate and begin to understand. Some people want to think of humans as the product of a special creation, separate from other living things. I am not among them; I am glad it is not so. I am proud to be part of the riot of nature, to know that the same forces that produced me also produced bees, giant ferns and microbes that live at the bottom of the sea. For me, the knowledge that we evolved is a source of solace and hope. I find it a relief that plagues and cancers and wasp larvae that eat caterpillars alive are the result of the impartial – and comprehensible – forces of evolution rather than the caprices of a deity. More than that, I find that in viewing ourselves as one species out of hundreds of millions, we become more remarkable, not less so. No other animal that I have heard of can live so peaceably in such close quarters with so many individuals that are unrelated. No other animal routinely bothers to help the sick and the dying, or tries to save those hurt in an earthquake or flood. Which is not to say that we are all we might wish to be. But in putting ourselves into our place in nature, in comparing ourselves with other species, we have a real hope of reaching a better understanding, and appreciation, of ourselves.”
August 27th, 2010 at 8:23
Dan,
So much say without proof is equivalent to nothing. I bet they can’t proof a thing. Take the basic men & apes originate from a common ancestors for example. Provide a single fossil proofs of the gradual transformation from common ancestors to men.
August 27th, 2010 at 10:09
Solomon,
“Provide a single fossil proofs of the gradual transformation from common ancestors to men.”
Fossil Hominids:
Sahelanthropus tchadensis
Orrorin tugenensis
Ardipithecus ramidus
Australopithecus anamensis
Australopithecus afarensis
Kenyanthropus platyops
Australopithecus africanus
Australopithecus garhi
Australopithecus sediba
Australopithecus aethiopicus
Australopithecus robustus
Australopithecus boisei
Homo habilis
Homo georgicus
Homo erectus
Homo ergaster
Homo antecessor
Homo heidelbergensis
Homo neanderthalensis
Homo floresiensis
Homo sapiens sapiens
There you go: 21 hominid species in the fossil record detailing gradual transformation from common ancestors to Homo sapiens.
August 27th, 2010 at 14:15
Solomon,
If you call substantial, peer-reviewed scientific evidence “fake” without any reasoning to support it I will block your comments. This is called trolling.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29
August 27th, 2010 at 15:26
Thursday, October 1, 2009
Claim: Discovery Institute denies evolution, declaring there are no transitional fossils between tree-dwelling primates and bidepdal proto-humans. These gaps in the fossil record disprove evolution.
Finding: Scientists confirm transitional fossil of Ardipithecus ramidus who was halfway between tree-dwelling primates and bipedal proto-humans like Australopithecus afarensis.
Prediction: Discovery Institute will deny evolution, saying there are no transitional fossils between tree-dwelling primates and Ardipithecus ramidus and, further, there are no transitional fossils between Ardipithecus ramidus and Australopithecus afarensis.
Everytime you find a transitional fossil, it doubles the number of “gaps” in the fossil record.
I took this from a site. Now admin…do I sound like a troll?
August 27th, 2010 at 15:41
Solomon,
Correct, creationism can exist only in the refuge of ignorance.
August 27th, 2010 at 15:46
And yes, you’ve sounded like a troll solomon. Except in this last quote, where you (presumably not intentionally) point out that the Discovery Institute will gladly stoop to nonsense to maintain the argument.