Evolution

[Guest Kearny Biology Teacher]

You can assume whatever you like, a prerogative you avail yourself of regularly. However, you can't ignore that we have living examples of the primitive precursors to the eye, and DNA to trace the evolutionary lineage. There's your proof.

I usually don't comment here, but I have to on this one. "Living examples of the primitive precursors

to the eye"? This is nonsense. There's no proof that the eye evolved. DNA? More nonsense, an

evolutionary lineage has never been identified. I hope you weren't one of my students.

[Guest Guest]

It can also be applied to kids at Disneyworld, so what's the point?

The point is, the people at Disneyworld know they're in a fantasy-land.

[Guest Guest]

I usually don't comment here, but I have to on this one. "Living examples of the primitive precursors

to the eye"? This is nonsense. There's no proof that the eye evolved.

And it becomes ridiculously obvious you're not a real biology teacher, at least not at KHS.

It's really pathetic the level of lying that creationists will stoop to. It's just more proof how invalid your stance is, that you have to engage in tactics this low to try and make it sound valid.

[Guest Guest]

I usually don't comment here, but I have to on this one. "Living examples of the primitive precursors

to the eye"? This is nonsense. There's no proof that the eye evolved. DNA? More nonsense, an

evolutionary lineage has never been identified. I hope you weren't one of my students.

And I am deeply grateful you were not my “teacher.”

We know that many living organisms react to light. Photosynthesis, which is exhibited by plants, is an organic reaction to light. Does it mean plants have eyes, or can see? Of course not, but it’s not hard to see how the evolutionary process probably started.

Here are quotations from the first two sources listed in post # 42. I stopped at the second, because the point is so obvious.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/1/l_011_01.html

Biologists use the range of less complex light sensitive structures that exist in living species today to hypothesize the various evolutionary stages eyes may have gone through.

http://ebiomedia.com/gall/eyes/primitive.html

“Eyes” in the broadest sense of the word are not restricted to animals. A good place to discover this is a barnyard occupied by cows, chickens, or pigs or in roadside ponds and puddles. During the spring and summer look for water covered with a greenish scum. Then dip up a fine scum collection with a small jar or turkey baster. Using a compound microscope, examine a drop of the greenish water.

What you will find are euglenids — small single-celled organisms with several interesting features: a flexible cell covering; green chloroplasts inside the cell that harvest light to produce the euglenid’s food; a whip-like flagellum that propels the cell around, and a bright red structure called an "eyespot".

The euglenid eyespot is part of a fascinating system. The red eyespot is actually a pigment-filled shield that lies next to the base of the flagellum. Although the exact mechanism is not known, the eyespot appears to work in concert with the flagellum, allowing the euglenid to move in response to light, and to find optimal light conditions for photosynthesis. In other words, the eyespot (and parts of the flagellum) are a very primitive type of eye that evolved in ancient single-cell organisms — the ancestors of living euglenids.

The reason the specific evolutionary pathway from eyespots in plants to eyes in humans is called a hypothesis instead of a theory, is that no one has yet analyzed the data to trace the evolution of the eye. In general, biologists do not spend their time trying to debunk creationist claims. You can be sure that the analysis will be conducted, and when it is, the evolution will be traced.

I seriously doubt that you are a biology teacher at Kearny High or anywhere else. If you are, I hope you will undertake extensive remedial education in your chosen field.

[Guest Guest]

And I am deeply grateful you were not my “teacher.”

We know that many living organisms react to light. Photosynthesis, which is exhibited by plants, is an organic reaction to light. Does it mean plants have eyes, or can see? Of course not, but it’s not hard to see how the evolutionary process probably started.

Here are quotations from the first two sources listed in post # 42. I stopped at the second, because the point is so obvious.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/1/l_011_01.html

Biologists use the range of less complex light sensitive structures that exist in living species today to hypothesize the various evolutionary stages eyes may have gone through.

http://ebiomedia.com/gall/eyes/primitive.html

“Eyes” in the broadest sense of the word are not restricted to animals. A good place to discover this is a barnyard occupied by cows, chickens, or pigs or in roadside ponds and puddles. During the spring and summer look for water covered with a greenish scum. Then dip up a fine scum collection with a small jar or turkey baster. Using a compound microscope, examine a drop of the greenish water.

What you will find are euglenids — small single-celled organisms with several interesting features: a flexible cell covering; green chloroplasts inside the cell that harvest light to produce the euglenid’s food; a whip-like flagellum that propels the cell around, and a bright red structure called an "eyespot".

The euglenid eyespot is part of a fascinating system. The red eyespot is actually a pigment-filled shield that lies next to the base of the flagellum. Although the exact mechanism is not known, the eyespot appears to work in concert with the flagellum, allowing the euglenid to move in response to light, and to find optimal light conditions for photosynthesis. In other words, the eyespot (and parts of the flagellum) are a very primitive type of eye that evolved in ancient single-cell organisms — the ancestors of living euglenids.

The reason the specific evolutionary pathway from eyespots in plants to eyes in humans is called a hypothesis instead of a theory, is that no one has yet analyzed the data to trace the evolution of the eye. In general, biologists do not spend their time trying to debunk creationist claims. You can be sure that the analysis will be conducted, and when it is, the evolution will be traced.

I seriously doubt that you are a biology teacher at Kearny High or anywhere else. If you are, I hope you will undertake extensive remedial education in your chosen field.

"Exact mechanism is not known", "appears to", "hypothesis", "may have", "no one has yet analyzed .....",

until you atheists can come up with something a little more concrete than that I'll stick with I.D.

[Guest 2smart4u]

They "don't know" only in the same sense that they "don't know" what water is made of. They "only" have a theory backed with evidence. Absolute certainty in ANYTHING by humans is impossible, as human perception is very limited. Therefore, the best we can do is stick with the things we have evidence for.

I'm not surprised someone like you doesn't understand the scientfic method.

"human perception is very limited" ?? How did we get on the subject of Defeatocrats ??

[Guest *Autonomous*]

"Exact mechanism is not known", "appears to", "hypothesis", "may have", "no one has yet analyzed .....",

until you atheists can come up with something a little more concrete than that I'll stick with I.D.

1. You clearly don't understand the Uncertainty Principle. Go read about the scientific method before you make a greater fool of yourself.

2. What has ID said that is concrete? Please, name one thing.

[Guest Guest]

"Exact mechanism is not known", "appears to", "hypothesis", "may have", "no one has yet analyzed .....",

No, definitely nothing out of context there.

until you atheists

Evolution is not atheistic, you bigot.

can come up with something a little more concrete than that I'll stick with I.D.

Oh, you mean the complete guess based on nothing at all? Oh yes, that's definitely more concrete than evolution, which is applied every day in creating vaccines and medicines.

You know how no one gets polio anymore? Guess why. Here's a hint: it wasn't because everyone just assumed "intelligent design" and went home.

With ID, what you get is "Exact mechanism will never be known", "who knows if it appears to because we don't look", "empty speculation", "must have been the way we guess it is", "no one will ever analyze ....."

How many vaccines has intelligent design led to? Oh, that's right, zero. Sorry, but I'm going to stick with results, not pointless speculation.

[Guest 2smart4u]

1. You clearly don't understand the Uncertainty Principle. Go read about the scientific method before you make a greater fool of yourself.

2. What has ID said that is concrete? Please, name one thing.

OK, One thing .......God made Republicans smart and Defeatocrats stupid. if you wany more, just ask.

[Guest *Autonomous*]

OK, One thing .......God made Republicans smart and Defeatocrats stupid. if you wany more, just ask.

Translation from the original IDiot: I can't answer your question.

That's the flaw-any question that evolution can't answer 'disproves' evolution, but there are dozens of questions that the creationists simply can't answer.

[Guest Guest]

OK, One thing .......God made Republicans smart and Defeatocrats stupid.

These quotes from George W. Bush are the kind of thing 2dim considers "smart":

"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." —Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004

"Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?" —Florence, S.C., Jan. 11, 2000

"You're working hard to put food on your family." —Greater Nashua, N.H., Jan. 27, 2000

"Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream." —LaCrosse, Wis., Oct. 18, 2000

[Guest 2smart4u]

These quotes from George W. Bush are the kind of thing 2dim considers "smart":

"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again." —Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002

"Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004

"Rarely is the questioned asked: Is our children learning?" —Florence, S.C., Jan. 11, 2000

"You're working hard to put food on your family." —Greater Nashua, N.H., Jan. 27, 2000

"Families is where our nation finds hope, where wings take dream." —LaCrosse, Wis., Oct. 18, 2000

They can't top this one; "I did not have sexual relations with that woman".

[Guest Mr. T]

Here, in brief form, is a summary of the overwhelming case for evolution.

1. The fossil record proves evolution. If you visit the fourth floor of the American Museum of Natural History at 79th Street and Central Park West in Manhattan, you will see one of the best teaching exhibits in the world. Paleontologists have identified how seemingly minor changes, in a bone in the inner ear or the mobility of the ankle joint - to cite only two examples - conveyed survival advantages, which led to the evolution of new species. As we trace the evolutionary record through fossils, not one piece is out of place.

2. Dating of fossils proves evolution. We do not just have fossils. We have dating methods that tell us how old they are. Every time scientists discover another fossil and date it, they give anyone who doubts the reality of evolution another opportunity to find an example that would prove the theory wrong. If, for example, scientists found human remains that pre-dated any other vertebrate, according to the dating methods, such a discovery would throw evolutionary theory or the science of dating physical objects into complete chaos. In science, this is called falsifiability. The theory makes predictions, and has been tested millions of times. Not once, in all those millions of times, has a fossil been dated in a way that contradicts evolutionary theory. On the contrary, all the dating verifies the functional story we see by looking at the fossil record in gross observation.

3. The genetic record proves evolution. Evolutionary theory leapt ahead by light years with the development of microbiology. We can trace the development of species through DNA, RNA, genes and chromosomes. As with the dating of fossils, a break in the pattern would disprove the theory, but yet again, after millions of genetic samples have been taken, evolutionary theory has a perfect record of verification. Anyone who doubts evolutionary theory should understand the enormous amount of information we now have, and the number of tests, any one of which could have proved the theory false. Just the opposite, all the testing has proved the theory true.

4. Evolution has been replicated. A common canard among those who would dispute evolutionary theory is that no one ever saw a monkey turn into a human. Of course not. Even if humans had descended from monkeys (we have a common ancestor), it doesn’t happen that way. Evolution occurs over many generations. We cannot see evolution happening among complex species like our own because a single generation takes at least fifteen years or so to occur. However, the same evolutionary principle applies to simpler species, and among those, scientists have replicated evolution in the laboratory. The most famous example is the drosophila fruit fly, which is commonly used for research. There are others, and as the science continues to advance, there will be more.

5. Evolutionary theory is so reliable that we use it in practical applications in two of our most important fields of science: biology and its cousin discipline medicine. As a result, life expectancies in the developed world have increased by more than a decade in recent years. Much of this is due to advances in medicine and biology as a direct result of evolutionary theory.

6. Evolutionary theory is the organizing principle for modern biology. That is how important it is. It is the principle that brings together all of biology, to such an extent that biologists are virtually unanimous in saying that modern biology cannot be understood without evolution; or to put it another way, biologists could still do some biology without evolution, but they could not understand it. Because evolutionary theory advances understanding, exponentially, beyond what would be possible without it, most biologists and most scholars of intellectual history say that it is among the greatest discoveries in history. Many say it is the greatest and most important of all, because it profoundly alters what we know about ourselves. Perhaps that is why some people oppose it so vehemently.

7. Evolutionary theory applies to all organic and quasi-organic systems. Every dynamic system that survives by reproduction in any form operates on the evolutionary principle. For example, social interactions are governed by evolutionary principles. All other things being equal, if an aspect of human behavior conveys a disadvantage, it will tend to disappear from the population; if it conveys an advantage, it will tend to spread. That is why political candidates pander and lie, why news media spoon-feed us entertainment instead of presenting real news and why religions tend to offer comforting stories: We reward them for it, and as a result those behaviors thrive and “reproduce.” An entire discipline, called game theory, has been developed from this understanding, has attracted some of the most brilliant minds in the world, and has been applied to everything from simple children’s games to business transactions to arms negotiations.

8. As our fund of knowledge increases, verification of evolutionary theory becomes progressively stronger. Because it makes accurate predictions, evolutionary theory has opened entire disciplines, and brought others from a barely coherent infancy into the realm of genuine science.

9. If we discarded what we have learned from evolutionary theory, our modern standard of living would not be possible. People who argue against evolution simply do not understand it. They assume that we would enjoy the advantages of modern life without it, but the truth is, we would not. No doubt, some of evolution’s critics have benefited from medical advances that evolutionary theory made possible. Fortunately for them, we do not withhold medical care from those who say they reject the very things that made it possible, but if we did, opposition to evolutionary theory would collapse very quickly.

I have used the word theory several times. Most people do not understand what the word means, so they say things like “that’s just a theory, it can’t be proved.” A theory can be proved. A theory may also be a fact. Evolutionary theory is both. It is a proven fact. A “theory” is an organized explanation for a set of phenomena, based on evidence and reason. Newton’s theory of gravity is a theory. If you have read the above with a misunderstanding of what a theory is, I can only invite you to read again with the proper definition in mind.

No doubt we will see the usual litany of smart-aleck remarks and non-responses from those who do not wish to know the truth if it conflicts with what they wish to believe. I can only invite them to have some courage, take a deep breath, read, think and evaluate. It's not going to go away just because you refuse to believe it.

And whether you accept it or not, it is very important to the kind of life we have chosen to live together. Think about how we are bound together socially whether we like it or not. This isn’t possible without evolution.

This is a lengthy exposition for a forum like this, but it barely scratches the surface of this vast and exciting subject. I invite anyone who doubts the truth of evolutionary theory to get out of their comfort zones long enough to study it – not what its most ignorant detractors write about it, but what its practitioners have written about it. Let them read books by Mayr, Gould, Eldridge, and dozens of others. Then let them re-evaluate their views. If they study with an open mind and a modicum of intelligence, they will embrace one of the most well-established and useful principles in all of science.

Notice that no one really addressed this, proving yet again that people like Kearny Christian don't care about truth, only about what they believe.

See the pattern? It's all over this site, and consistently it's coming from the my-way-or-the-highway types on the religious right.

[Guest Guest]

They can't top this one; "I did not have sexual relations with that woman".

You think that tops Bush telling the country that his administration never stops thinking about ways to harm our country? You drink deep from the Kool-Aid well, don't you boy?

[Guest Kearny Christian]

Notice that no one really addressed this, proving yet again that people like Kearny Christian don't care about truth, only about what they believe.

See the pattern? It's all over this site, and consistently it's coming from the my-way-or-the-highway types on the religious right.

I will say this one final time: Evolution is part of God's plan, it's not serendipity, happenstance, random selection or any other excuse the

Loony atheists can come up with. That's why Republicans are smarter than Defeatocrats, we've evolved on a higher plane.

[Guest Guest]

Notice that no one really addressed this, proving yet again that people like Kearny Christian don't care about truth, only about what they believe.

See the pattern? It's all over this site, and consistently it's coming from the my-way-or-the-highway types on the religious right.

2dim and Kearny Christian will be posting intelligent and thoughtful responses to this any day now.

QUOTE (Paul @ Apr 12 2008, 07:08 AM)

Here, in brief form, is a summary of the overwhelming case for evolution.

1. The fossil record proves evolution. If you visit the fourth floor of the American Museum of Natural History at 79th Street and Central Park West in Manhattan, you will see one of the best teaching exhibits in the world. Paleontologists have identified how seemingly minor changes, in a bone in the inner ear or the mobility of the ankle joint - to cite only two examples - conveyed survival advantages, which led to the evolution of new species. As we trace the evolutionary record through fossils, not one piece is out of place.

2. Dating of fossils proves evolution. We do not just have fossils. We have dating methods that tell us how old they are. Every time scientists discover another fossil and date it, they give anyone who doubts the reality of evolution another opportunity to find an example that would prove the theory wrong. If, for example, scientists found human remains that pre-dated any other vertebrate, according to the dating methods, such a discovery would throw evolutionary theory or the science of dating physical objects into complete chaos. In science, this is called falsifiability. The theory makes predictions, and has been tested millions of times. Not once, in all those millions of times, has a fossil been dated in a way that contradicts evolutionary theory. On the contrary, all the dating verifies the functional story we see by looking at the fossil record in gross observation.

3. The genetic record proves evolution. Evolutionary theory leapt ahead by light years with the development of microbiology. We can trace the development of species through DNA, RNA, genes and chromosomes. As with the dating of fossils, a break in the pattern would disprove the theory, but yet again, after millions of genetic samples have been taken, evolutionary theory has a perfect record of verification. Anyone who doubts evolutionary theory should understand the enormous amount of information we now have, and the number of tests, any one of which could have proved the theory false. Just the opposite, all the testing has proved the theory true.

4. Evolution has been replicated. A common canard among those who would dispute evolutionary theory is that no one ever saw a monkey turn into a human. Of course not. Even if humans had descended from monkeys (we have a common ancestor), it doesn’t happen that way. Evolution occurs over many generations. We cannot see evolution happening among complex species like our own because a single generation takes at least fifteen years or so to occur. However, the same evolutionary principle applies to simpler species, and among those, scientists have replicated evolution in the laboratory. The most famous example is the drosophila fruit fly, which is commonly used for research. There are others, and as the science continues to advance, there will be more.

5. Evolutionary theory is so reliable that we use it in practical applications in two of our most important fields of science: biology and its cousin discipline medicine. As a result, life expectancies in the developed world have increased by more than a decade in recent years. Much of this is due to advances in medicine and biology as a direct result of evolutionary theory.

6. Evolutionary theory is the organizing principle for modern biology. That is how important it is. It is the principle that brings together all of biology, to such an extent that biologists are virtually unanimous in saying that modern biology cannot be understood without evolution; or to put it another way, biologists could still do some biology without evolution, but they could not understand it. Because evolutionary theory advances understanding, exponentially, beyond what would be possible without it, most biologists and most scholars of intellectual history say that it is among the greatest discoveries in history. Many say it is the greatest and most important of all, because it profoundly alters what we know about ourselves. Perhaps that is why some people oppose it so vehemently.

7. Evolutionary theory applies to all organic and quasi-organic systems. Every dynamic system that survives by reproduction in any form operates on the evolutionary principle. For example, social interactions are governed by evolutionary principles. All other things being equal, if an aspect of human behavior conveys a disadvantage, it will tend to disappear from the population; if it conveys an advantage, it will tend to spread. That is why political candidates pander and lie, why news media spoon-feed us entertainment instead of presenting real news and why religions tend to offer comforting stories: We reward them for it, and as a result those behaviors thrive and “reproduce.” An entire discipline, called game theory, has been developed from this understanding, has attracted some of the most brilliant minds in the world, and has been applied to everything from simple children’s games to business transactions to arms negotiations.

8. As our fund of knowledge increases, verification of evolutionary theory becomes progressively stronger. Because it makes accurate predictions, evolutionary theory has opened entire disciplines, and brought others from a barely coherent infancy into the realm of genuine science.

9. If we discarded what we have learned from evolutionary theory, our modern standard of living would not be possible. People who argue against evolution simply do not understand it. They assume that we would enjoy the advantages of modern life without it, but the truth is, we would not. No doubt, some of evolution’s critics have benefited from medical advances that evolutionary theory made possible. Fortunately for them, we do not withhold medical care from those who say they reject the very things that made it possible, but if we did, opposition to evolutionary theory would collapse very quickly.

I have used the word theory several times. Most people do not understand what the word means, so they say things like “that’s just a theory, it can’t be proved.” A theory can be proved. A theory may also be a fact. Evolutionary theory is both. It is a proven fact. A “theory” is an organized explanation for a set of phenomena, based on evidence and reason. Newton’s theory of gravity is a theory. If you have read the above with a misunderstanding of what a theory is, I can only invite you to read again with the proper definition in mind.

No doubt we will see the usual litany of smart-aleck remarks and non-responses from those who do not wish to know the truth if it conflicts with what they wish to believe. I can only invite them to have some courage, take a deep breath, read, think and evaluate. It's not going to go away just because you refuse to believe it.

And whether you accept it or not, it is very important to the kind of life we have chosen to live together. Think about how we are bound together socially whether we like it or not. This isn’t possible without evolution.

This is a lengthy exposition for a forum like this, but it barely scratches the surface of this vast and exciting subject. I invite anyone who doubts the truth of evolutionary theory to get out of their comfort zones long enough to study it – not what its most ignorant detractors write about it, but what its practitioners have written about it. Let them read books by Mayr, Gould, Eldridge, and dozens of others. Then let them re-evaluate their views. If they study with an open mind and a modicum of intelligence, they will embrace one of the most well-established and useful principles in all of science.

[Guest Guest]

I will say this one final time: Evolution is part of God's plan, it's not serendipity, happenstance, random selection or any other excuse the

Loony atheists can come up with. That's why Republicans are smarter than Defeatocrats, we've evolved on a higher plane.

What an idiot. This person has no clue of the vital connection between evidence and belief.

[Guest Guest]

I will say this one final time: Evolution is part of God's plan, it's not serendipity, happenstance, random selection or any other excuse the

Loony atheists can come up with. That's why Republicans are smarter than Defeatocrats, we've evolved on a higher plane.

The Loonys apparently have a problem with reading comprehension. Evolution is an accepted theory, as you said. The atheists don't like

you saying that God designed the evolution process . They prefer to think that evolution is just a matter of serendipity (neat word) and life

began from thin air.

The atheists can't prove God didn't design evolution just as we can't prove God did. However, considering the incredibly complicated

DNA, gene pool, eye,cell structure, etc., etc., it sure appears there's Intelligent Design at work here.

[Guest Guest]

I will say this one final time: Evolution is part of God's plan, it's not serendipity, happenstance, random selection or any other excuse the

Loony atheists can come up with.

1. Evolution is not a function of chance, nor is it random, so all of your adjectives make no sense because no evolution scientist claims that evolution is any of those things.

1.5. The fact that you can't even accurately DEFINE evolution means you're definitely in no position to criticize its ACTUAL defintion, since you don't even know what that is.

2. God is the ULTIMATE excuse. If you disagree, let's see the evidence that he exists.

That's why Republicans are smarter than Defeatocrats, we've evolved on a higher plane.

Now that's funny: "<completely wrong statement>. That's why my group is smarter."

You really have no idea how idiotic you are, do you?

[Guest Guest]

The Loonys apparently have a problem with reading comprehension. Evolution is an accepted theory, as you said. The atheists don't like

you saying that God designed the evolution process . They prefer to think that evolution is just a matter of serendipity (neat word) and life

began from thin air.

The atheists can't prove God didn't design evolution just as we can't prove God did. However, considering the incredibly complicated

DNA, gene pool, eye,cell structure, etc., etc., it sure appears there's Intelligent Design at work here.

You can't prove that a giant mushroom didn't "design evolution" either. The point is, why would you entertain such an idea in the first place?

You're also talking out of both sides of your mouth, dismissing the idea of something coming from nothing as absurd. The problem with that is, that exact argument is an equally valid critique of what you call "God."

The idea of God says nothing about anything except how the human mind operates. People assign human agency to things they cannot explain. Human beings have egos. Ergo, God. There's nothing more to it than that. You're wasting your time.

[Guest Guest]

The Loonys apparently have a problem with reading comprehension. Evolution is an accepted theory, as you said. The atheists don't like

you saying that God designed the evolution process . They prefer to think that evolution is just a matter of serendipity (neat word)

Straw man and you know it. Evolution is a natural process. Nature is not random nor serendipitous, and neither is evolution.

Your dishonesty shows that you can't handle arguing the merits.

and life

began from thin air.

The origin of life doesn't have a thing to do with evolution. This statement is just more proof you don't know the first thing about evolution. How about you learn what it IS before you start making declarations about it?

The atheists can't prove God didn't design evolution just as we can't prove God did.

Whether or not a deity is the ultimate source of evolution or any other natural force is completely irrelevant and pointless either way. What is a fact, though, is that the presence of a deity is not NECESSARY for evolution or anything else in nature to make sense, or 'work' in a scientific context. In other words, the theory works, whether or not a god or gods (if it/they exist) had a hand in it.

That's what you can't handle. Even the suggestion that we can explain things without HAVING to invoke your god freaks you out. Well, too bad--it's the truth.

However, considering the incredibly complicated

DNA, gene pool, eye,cell structure, etc., etc., it sure appears there's Intelligent Design at work here.

Argument from personal ignorance, therefore failed. "It's too complicated for me to understand how it evolved" is not evidence that it didn't evolve--it's only evidence that you're willing to jump to conclusions based on your own ignorance.

[Guest Kearny Christian]

The Loonys apparently have a problem with reading comprehension. Evolution is an accepted theory, as you said. The atheists don't like

you saying that God designed the evolution process . They prefer to think that evolution is just a matter of serendipity (neat word) and life

began from thin air.

The atheists can't prove God didn't design evolution just as we can't prove God did. However, considering the incredibly complicated

DNA, gene pool, eye,cell structure, etc., etc., it sure appears there's Intelligent Design at work here.

Thank You . Atheists do cringe at the mention of God and evolution in the same sentence.

[Guest Guest]

Thank You . Atheists do cringe at the mention of God and evolution in the same sentence.

Don't project. People like you cringe at the mere suggestion that evolution works as a theory without NEEDING your god to be a part of it. No scientist would claim that god-driven evolution is impossible, but even the suggestion that the presence of your god isn't NECESSARY for the theory to work makes you freak out.

I don't cringe, but I do laugh when you falsely claim that atheists believe that evolution is some kind of random, throw-the-die event. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about, because that's way, way off the mark.

[Guest Guest]

Thank You . Atheists do cringe at the mention of God and evolution in the same sentence.

You have no idea what you're talking about. You don't understand evolution, and you don't understand the minds of people who do understand it.

[Guest Kearny Christian]

Don't project. People like you cringe at the mere suggestion that evolution works as a theory without NEEDING your god to be a part of it. No scientist would claim that god-driven evolution is impossible, but even the suggestion that the presence of your god isn't NECESSARY for the theory to work makes you freak out.

I don't cringe, but I do laugh when you falsely claim that atheists believe that evolution is some kind of random, throw-the-die event. You clearly have no idea what you're talking about, because that's way, way off the mark.

Right. I forgot to include Mother Nature among serendipity, natural selection, trial and error, happenstance, random selection and hit or miss (just don't

include God in there or the atheists get their panties in a bind).