Evolution

[Guest 2smart4u]

No it doesn't. If a person could be "possessed" by an evil entity, that would make a better case for a god who is either incompetent or depraved.

So you're with "Kearny Christian" when he says the existence of evil lends support for the existence of God. Interesting comment from

a committed loony atheist.

[Guest Guest]

So you're with "Kearny Christian" when he says the existence of evil lends support for the existence of God. Interesting comment from

a committed loony atheist.

Too bad there's no proof of the existence of evil as an entity unto itself.

[Guest Guest]

So you're with "Kearny Christian" when he says the existence of evil lends support for the existence of God. Interesting comment from

a committed loony atheist.

That's not what he said. The argument is purely hypothetical. To follow it, you have to be able to think. So naturally, you didn't understand it.

[Guest Guest]

So you're with "Kearny Christian" when he says the existence of evil lends support for the existence of God. Interesting comment from

a committed loony atheist.

No, Dumbo. The point is that IF there WAS a god who allowed possession by evil spirits, such a god would have to be either impotent or depraved. Why is that true?

For example, the god of Christian mythology is said to be unwilling to interfere with "free will." According to Christian myth-tellers, this so-called god is more willing to allow people to suffer in torment forever than he is to interfere with their "free will."

Yet here we have this other myth about evil spirits "possessing" someone. Obviously, that would negate the person's "free will."

So Christian myth-tellers have to believe that their mythical god is unwilling to interfere with free will because they have no other way to explain what they call "sin." As a result of his supposed unwillingness to interfere with "free will," this mythical god cannot eliminate suffering - even for the best of reasons.

Yet at the same time, this same mythical god allows possession by evil spirits, and thereby the negation of "free will," for no reason at all. A complete contradiction to this so-called theology.

Such a god would have to be either impotent or depraved, IF he existed.

More likely and quite obviously, the story is just that - it's a story and that's all it ever was or ever will be. It doesn't prove the existence of "evil" or gods or spirits or demons or demonic possession. But if you follow its internal "logic" (if you call it that), you see it doesn't make any sense.

Q.E.D.

[Guest Kearny Christian]

Interesting post. Of couse the atheist Kool-Aiders didn't like it because it suggests there's more to life than cold evolution. If evil exists as

many believe, then a Godless evolutionary theory goes out the window.

[KHS81]

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.

Evolution does not in fact contradict religion, Evolution is nothing more than scientific principal like gravity or electricty.To scientifically test a religous belief one must first find a some type of Empirical test to determine whether the belief is true or false with the test results being predicted beforehand and not after the fact. Does Evolution contradict creationism, well creationism is two fold the first part. Evolution specifically common decent tells us how life came to where it is but does not say why. If the first part underlies the theme of Genesis That God created the world and the life in it Then evolution cannot explain why common decent chose the path that it did. While the second part if Evolution contradicts the literal interpretaion of the first book of Genesis This for the most part is where the conflict between creationist and evolutionists persist.

So did Evolution create the world or did God. If evolution is correct does that mean the bible is wrong well cosidering that the first book of Genesis cannot be proven or disproven scientifically. And since no scientific test has ever been created to to tell the difference between a world created by God or a world that appeared without him. Who's to say that God did not create Evolution, Science is mere theory that is constantly updating it's self. The only thing proven is mathmatics. I belive that there is a higher power. Since science can niether prove or disprove I'll stick with God

[WilliamK]

Cat got your tongue?

[Guest Paul]

Evolution does not in fact contradict religion, Evolution is nothing more than scientific principal like gravity or electricty.To scientifically test a religous belief one must first find a some type of Empirical test to determine whether the belief is true or false with the test results being predicted beforehand and not after the fact. Does Evolution contradict creationism, well creationism is two fold the first part. Evolution specifically common decent tells us how life came to where it is but does not say why. If the first part underlies the theme of Genesis That God created the world and the life in it Then evolution cannot explain why common decent chose the path that it did. While the second part if Evolution contradicts the literal interpretaion of the first book of Genesis This for the most part is where the conflict between creationist and evolutionists persist.

So did Evolution create the world or did God. If evolution is correct does that mean the bible is wrong well cosidering that the first book of Genesis cannot be proven or disproven scientifically. And since no scientific test has ever been created to to tell the difference between a world created by God or a world that appeared without him. Who's to say that God did not create Evolution, Science is mere theory that is constantly updating it's self. The only thing proven is mathmatics. I belive that there is a higher power. Since science can niether prove or disprove I'll stick with God

I feel liking giving you a medal just for having the integrity to engage the discussion. If I had the energy, I'd look up your name since you did publish a letter in the Observer last year. Or you could just tell us.

I don't agree with your argument as a whole, though I agree with parts of it taken in isolation. Here's my explanation.

You're right about the internal logic of the relationship between a hypothetical creator-god and evolution. There is no necessary contradiction between evolution and creation by a supreme being or otherwise. To that extent, we have no quarrel at all. As an interesting footnote, I argued that case in my history class as a junior in high school. It was my term project, and its reference point was the Scopes trial. I have changed my views considerably since then.

Where we part company today is in your implicit assumption that the two (god-creation and evolution) can be addressed in the same way. We know evolution is true, the data are overwhelming. So in a sense, you're not really addressing the nine points I made, you're just moving past them without disagreeing. That's a little disappointing, because this subject matter merits more attention than just moving past it with the comment that its "nothing more than a scientific principal (sic: principle) like gravity or electricity."

Nothing of the kind can reasonably be said about a creator-god. You can stick with anything you like, but in the manner you're doing it, it's strictly a personal choice based on a bias. You can suggest, as you seem to have done that your religion explains the "why," but it really doesn't because it's just a guess on your part. An sound explanation requires a sound and objective foundation, and your belief system doesn't have one.

The fact is, evolution does contradict some religions, but - taking you at your word - not yours. Kenneth Miller, who spoke about evolution at Kearny High, is a practicing Catholic who frequently makes the point that he sees no contradiction between evolution and his religion. But for someone like David Paszkiewicz, and the millions of other radical biblical fundamentalists who share his views, evolution and "God" are incompatible.

I wish it was simpler than that, but it's not.

[KHS81]

I feel liking giving you a medal just for having the integrity to engage the discussion. If I had the energy, I'd look up your name since you did publish a letter in the Observer last year. Or you could just tell us.

I don't agree with your argument as a whole, though I agree with parts of it taken in isolation. Here's my explanation.

You're right about the internal logic of the relationship between a hypothetical creator-god and evolution. There is no necessary contradiction between evolution and creation by a supreme being or otherwise. To that extent, we have no quarrel at all. As an interesting footnote, I argued that case in my history class as a junior in high school. It was my term project, and its reference point was the Scopes trial. I have changed my views considerably since then.

Where we part company today is in your implicit assumption that the two (god-creation and evolution) can be addressed in the same way. We know evolution is true, the data are overwhelming. So in a sense, you're not really addressing the nine points I made, you're just moving past them without disagreeing. That's a little disappointing, because this subject matter merits more attention than just moving past it with the comment that its "nothing more than a scientific principal (sic: principle) like gravity or electricity."

Nothing of the kind can reasonably be said about a creator-god. You can stick with anything you like, but in the manner you're doing it, it's strictly a personal choice based on a bias. You can suggest, as you seem to have done that your religion explains the "why," but it really doesn't because it's just a guess on your part. An sound explanation requires a sound and objective foundation, and your belief system doesn't have one.

The fact is, evolution does contradict some religions, but - taking you at your word - not yours. Kenneth Miller, who spoke about evolution at Kearny High, is a practicing Catholic who frequently makes the point that he sees no contradiction between evolution and his religion. But for someone like David Paszkiewicz, and the millions of other radical biblical fundamentalists who share his views, evolution and "God" are incompatible.

I wish it was simpler than that, but it's not.

In response to your inquiry " Letter to the Editor" Yes. School impact is also another of mine. The mayor has even called me a dedicated pain in his ass.As for Paskiewicz he's in serious need of mental health help, dinosaurs on Noahs Ark come on. I'm not disagreeing with you on Evolution it happened. I've been to the Museum of natural history in NYC, as I am a avid fossil and mineral collector. However my belief is that a higher power whether he be God,Buddha,Allah or as I commonly call him/her Bob. My belief is that this higher power created Evolution and the planet as a whole, Not in 7 days but rather in over a millenia. What I require is the scientific data that tells me without any doubt that evolution is behind the whole shooting match from big bang to today,As far as I know there is no such test. Why did I skip the other points I'm not denying that man evolved from a primative being, I never bought into the hype that man is created in gods image. I've always had issue with mainstream chrisianity such as how do you explain if you have Adam & Eve in the garden of eden then where do the dinosaurs fit in. You presume that I'm Christian I'm not nor am I Jew,Hindu.Buddhist,Islamic or Sikh. I am what I have been for the past 20 years a practicing Pagan.

[Guest Guest]

In response to your inquiry " Letter to the Editor" Yes. School impact is also another of mine. The mayor has even called me a dedicated pain in his ass.As for Paskiewicz he's in serious need of mental health help, dinosaurs on Noahs Ark come on. I'm not disagreeing with you on Evolution it happened. I've been to the Museum of natural history in NYC, as I am a avid fossil and mineral collector. However my belief is that a higher power whether he be God,Buddha,Allah or as I commonly call him/her Bob. My belief is that this higher power created Evolution and the planet as a whole, Not in 7 days but rather in over a millenia. What I require is the scientific data that tells me without any doubt that evolution is behind the whole shooting match from big bang to today,As far as I know there is no such test. Why did I skip the other points I'm not denying that man evolved from a primative being, I never bought into the hype that man is created in gods image. I've always had issue with mainstream chrisianity such as how do you explain if you have Adam & Eve in the garden of eden then where do the dinosaurs fit in. You presume that I'm Christian I'm not nor am I Jew,Hindu.Buddhist,Islamic or Sikh. I am what I have been for the past 20 years a practicing Pagan.

In other words, you require absolute proof for science and no proof at all for "God." You have two standards. That's not a judgment of you, just a statement of fact.

The question is, if you had to justify it rationally, could you do it?

[Guest TheoryCat]

In response to your inquiry " Letter to the Editor" Yes. School impact is also another of mine. The mayor has even called me a dedicated pain in his ass.As for Paskiewicz he's in serious need of mental health help, dinosaurs on Noahs Ark come on. I'm not disagreeing with you on Evolution it happened. I've been to the Museum of natural history in NYC, as I am a avid fossil and mineral collector. However my belief is that a higher power whether he be God,Buddha,Allah or as I commonly call him/her Bob. My belief is that this higher power created Evolution and the planet as a whole, Not in 7 days but rather in over a millenia. What I require is the scientific data that tells me without any doubt that evolution is behind the whole shooting match from big bang to today,As far as I know there is no such test.

Biological evolution has nothing to do with the Big Bang or anything else until life exists. It only addresses how life forms change over time. I don't mind people believing that God is behind evolution as long as they don't try to get it taught as science. It is a perfectly valid philosophy. The problem with Intelligent Design is that it says that God is neccesary for evolutionary theory to work. If they can provide evidence of that (a tall order) then ID will be science. Until then it is only philosophy. Or a hypothesis perhaps.

Why did I skip the other points I'm not denying that man evolved from a primative being, I never bought into the hype that man is created in gods image. I've always had issue with mainstream chrisianity such as how do you explain if you have Adam & Eve in the garden of eden then where do the dinosaurs fit in. You presume that I'm Christian I'm not nor am I Jew,Hindu.Buddhist,Islamic or Sikh. I am what I have been for the past 20 years a practicing Pagan.

So are my adoptive parents. My sister is Southern Baptist, my husband is an atheist, and I'm agnostic. Makes for interesting holidays.

[Guest Guest]

In response to your inquiry " Letter to the Editor" Yes. School impact is also another of mine. The mayor has even called me a dedicated pain in his ass.As for Paskiewicz he's in serious need of mental health help, dinosaurs on Noahs Ark come on. I'm not disagreeing with you on Evolution it happened. I've been to the Museum of natural history in NYC, as I am a avid fossil and mineral collector. However my belief is that a higher power whether he be God,Buddha,Allah or as I commonly call him/her Bob. My belief is that this higher power created Evolution and the planet as a whole, Not in 7 days but rather in over a millenia. What I require is the scientific data that tells me without any doubt that evolution is behind the whole shooting match from big bang to today,As far as I know there is no such test. Why did I skip the other points I'm not denying that man evolved from a primative being, I never bought into the hype that man is created in gods image. I've always had issue with mainstream chrisianity such as how do you explain if you have Adam & Eve in the garden of eden then where do the dinosaurs fit in. You presume that I'm Christian I'm not nor am I Jew,Hindu.Buddhist,Islamic or Sikh. I am what I have been for the past 20 years a practicing Pagan.

How does one practice being a Pagan ? Sit around in Halloween masks smoking pot ?

[Guest Keith]

How does one practice being a Pagan ? Sit around in Halloween masks smoking pot ?

Well, you are obviously an idiot.

[KHS81]

In other words, you require absolute proof for science and no proof at all for "God." You have two standards. That's not a judgment of you, just a statement of fact.

The question is, if you had to justify it rationally, could you do it?

No what I think I was trying to say is that I belive in a higher power creating evolution,the planet stars and universe. but if science could prove without any lingering doubt that they have the answer to how evolution began or how the planet,stars and universe were created, than I'd be more than willing to say that I was wrong in my thinking.

[KHS81]

How does one practice being a Pagan ? Sit around in Halloween masks smoking pot ?

Quit being ignorant and look it up. apparently you know how to use a computer

[Guest Guest]

How does one practice being a Pagan ? Sit around in Halloween masks smoking pot ?

You just showed us how to practice being ignorant.

[Guest Guest]

In response to your inquiry " Letter to the Editor" Yes. School impact is also another of mine. The mayor has even called me a dedicated pain in his ass.As for Paskiewicz he's in serious need of mental health help, dinosaurs on Noahs Ark come on. I'm not disagreeing with you on Evolution it happened. I've been to the Museum of natural history in NYC, as I am a avid fossil and mineral collector. However my belief is that a higher power whether he be God,Buddha,Allah or as I commonly call him/her Bob. My belief is that this higher power created Evolution and the planet as a whole, Not in 7 days but rather in over a millenia. What I require is the scientific data that tells me without any doubt that evolution is behind the whole shooting match from big bang to today,As far as I know there is no such test. Why did I skip the other points I'm not denying that man evolved from a primative being, I never bought into the hype that man is created in gods image. I've always had issue with mainstream chrisianity such as how do you explain if you have Adam & Eve in the garden of eden then where do the dinosaurs fit in. You presume that I'm Christian I'm not nor am I Jew,Hindu.Buddhist,Islamic or Sikh. I am what I have been for the past 20 years a practicing Pagan.

OK, but what is your belief in a "higher power" based on? What properties does this "higher power" have, if any? Could it be nature itself?

Or are you saying that a conscious force created the universe? If so, what would be the basis for saying that?

Or is this just something that makes you feel good? If that's your foundation, do you think that is a responsible basis for a belief, and in particular a belief about the origins of everything?

[Guest Guest]

did Evolution create the world or did God.

Huh? Evolution is just our theory for how life develops (not even how it originated). Asking if evolution "created the world" is as silly as asking if calculus created the world, or if gravity created the world.

Planet formation is another field of science altogether.

If evolution is correct does that mean the bible is wrong well cosidering that the first book of Genesis cannot be proven or disproven scientifically.

Sure it can, if you take Genesis literally. The evidence directly contradicts a literal interpretation of Genesis. And it's not just evolution that does so--our findings in science in general contradict it all over. People living for 900+ years, humanity being created fully-formed separate from other creatures, a global flood...all things that have no evidence, and are directly contradicted by the existing evidence.

And since no scientific test has ever been created to to tell the difference between a world created by God or a world that appeared without him. Who's to say that God did not create Evolution, Science is mere theory that is constantly updating it's self. The only thing proven is mathmatics.

Nothing is "proven" to humans, technically. Since we have limited perception, it's literally impossible for us to prove ANYTHING 100%. But we can form theories based on the evidence.

I belive that there is a higher power. Since science can niether prove or disprove I'll stick with God

So you're going to pretend you're sure of something you know you can't be sure of? Remember:

"Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd." --Voltaire

[Guest Guest]

What I require is the scientific data that tells me without any doubt that evolution is behind the whole shooting match from big bang to today,As far as I know there is no such test.

There's also no such claim, you know. Evolution deals with a specific subset of biology: life after the origin of life. Nothing else. Evolution doesn't even BEGIN to apply until life begins, so it would be a huge waste of time to go looking for evidence of a claim nobody is making on either side.

[Guest FD5EAD]

How does one practice being a Pagan ? Sit around in Halloween masks smoking pot ?

No.

[Guest Paul]

No what I think I was trying to say is that I belive in a higher power creating evolution,the planet stars and universe. but if science could prove without any lingering doubt that they have the answer to how evolution began or how the planet,stars and universe were created, than I'd be more than willing to say that I was wrong in my thinking.

I’ve been trying a case, haven’t meant to ignore you. (You’re Jim?)

It’s interesting how you set things up, i.e., how you organize your ideas. Interesting, though, in the sense that I have a hard time defending much of what you’re saying. I think the observation in post 110 about two standards is well-taken, as are the observations in posts 118 and 119. I could also criticize some of your specific comments (e.g., there is no such thing as “a millennia,” there are always lingering doubts in science), but choose instead to interpret your remarks somewhat loosely. Mainly, though, I’d be interested in your answers to the questions in post 117.

In one very important way, I never got past my Catholic upbringing, and I’m very glad of it. The Catholicism I was taught said that I don’t just belong to myself; I owe a duty to other people. It’s an ethic of service. That may sound like an odd statement coming from someone with a streak of independence that prompts vigorous opposition to school uniforms and a willingness to sit out the Pledge of Allegiance, but in my view there is no contradiction. What we owe to others is not blind agreement or conformity, but our best efforts; allegiance is not necessarily doing what others want us to do, but honestly doing our best.

In the field of ideas, that translates into a moral and ethical responsibility to reason cogently and objectively. When you hold science to a standard of absolute proof, but your theology to no apparent standard at all, I can’t justify that. It’s why I left the church myself, and why I argue this point to people who will listen, even though they may not agree with it or even like it.

[Guest Guest]

Well, you are obviously an idiot.

Ok, the world wants to know. How does one "practice" Paganism.

[Guest Guest]

Ok, the world wants to know. How does one "practice" Paganism.

Why does the idea of practicing paganism draw a reaction like this? People have no problem with the idea of practicing Catholicism or Buddhism or other religions. Why should paganism be any different? It has rituals and practices. What's the problem?

If you really want to know the answer, Google "practicing paganism" or get a good book on paganism. When you make it sound foreign, all you're really saying is that it's foreign to you, but that's because you're not familiar with it and don't understand it.

[Guest Guest]

Ok, the world wants to know. How does one "practice" Paganism.

The world knows: look.

[Guest Guest]

Why does the idea of practicing paganism draw a reaction like this? People have no problem with the idea of practicing Catholicism or Buddhism or other religions. Why should paganism be any different? It has rituals and practices. What's the problem?

If you really want to know the answer, Google "practicing paganism" or get a good book on paganism. When you make it sound foreign, all you're really saying is that it's foreign to you, but that's because you're not familiar with it and don't understand it.

There's no such thing as "practicing paganism". That's like saying I practice Halloween or I practice getting high.