Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 120 (8783 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 08-23-2017 9:57 AM
372 online now:
Aussie, DrJones*, herebedragons, jar, kjsimons, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat), RAZD, Stile (10 members, 362 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: evilsorcerer1
Post Volume:
Total: 816,800 Year: 21,406/21,208 Month: 1,839/2,326 Week: 294/881 Day: 12/107 Hour: 3/5

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23456
...
24NextFF
Author Topic:   Key points of Evolution
platypus
Member (Idle past 3254 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 11-12-2006


Message 1 of 356 (368927)
12-11-2006 2:41 AM


I have recently been reading a book written by Dr. Joan Roughgarden. (http://www.stanford.edu/group/roughlab/rough.html) What I would like to focus on are some comments made by Joan in her recent book "Evolution and Christian Faith." (http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Christian-Faith-Reflections-Evolutionary/dp/1597260983)

This book is all about presenting Evolution in a Christian friendly manner. Joan breaks down Evolution into two key ideas that need to be taught as an integral part of Biology (p.24):

1) One Family Tree unites all of life and
2) Species change through time and place

On the first point, she says the following:

quote:
You hear evolutionist says we are descedant from apes and monkees. Sure, but that's not the point. All of life is related, not just human's with monkees. If you hug a tree, you're hugging a relative, a very distant relative, but a relative nonetheless.

Maybe nothing new to the debate added there, but a nice source of imagery.

Of these two points of evolution, Dr. Roughgarden makes two claims.

1) These two ideas must be taught in every science curriculum.
2) Neither of these ideas are directly in conflict with the Bible.

I tend to agree with this sentiment. Any objectors?

Not sure where this should go, as this could be taken in any of several directions depending on where people disagree.


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Larni, posted 12-12-2006 4:57 AM platypus has not yet responded
 Message 6 by Archer Opteryx, posted 12-13-2006 5:21 AM platypus has responded
 Message 43 by randman, posted 04-23-2008 1:38 PM platypus has responded
 Message 50 by Deftil, posted 04-23-2008 5:16 PM platypus has responded
 Message 60 by Wumpini, posted 04-28-2008 9:19 PM platypus has not yet responded
 Message 347 by Daniel4140, posted 03-13-2009 11:20 PM platypus has not yet responded

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4753
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 2 of 356 (368965)
12-11-2006 10:04 AM


Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.
Larni
Member
Posts: 3943
From: UK
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 3 of 356 (369236)
12-12-2006 4:57 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by platypus
12-11-2006 2:41 AM


Not quite, but maybe.
I would be very careful about putting any store in some one who claims that 'evolutionists' would agree with the statement:

we are descedant from apes and monkees.

This is simply not true.

But if you believe that the xian god set the whole of reality in motion billions of years ago then the concepts you put forwards have no conflict. If however, you argue for the literal interpretaion of the bible then any form of science is in conflict with the literal interpretation as you need magic to get all the miracles to work the way they are presented.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by platypus, posted 12-11-2006 2:41 AM platypus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-12-2006 4:40 PM Larni has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15948
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 5.9


Message 4 of 356 (369358)
12-12-2006 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by Larni
12-12-2006 4:57 AM


Apes
This is simply not true.

Well, it's a semantic question.

One might reasonably argue for any of the following statements:

* Humans have common ancestry with apes;

* Humans are descended from apes;

* Humans are apes;

--- while meaning exactly the same thing.

I'd go for "humans are apes". (My reasoning: the term "ape" should refer to a clade, this clade includes chimps and gorillas, hence this clade includes us.) But this choice is a decision about the best way to use language, not an opinion about the facts as such.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Larni, posted 12-12-2006 4:57 AM Larni has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Larni, posted 12-13-2006 3:37 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Larni
Member
Posts: 3943
From: UK
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 5 of 356 (369468)
12-13-2006 3:37 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Dr Adequate
12-12-2006 4:40 PM


Re: Apes
You are right in part. I read apes (for that is what we are really I agree) as chimps; and got on my high horse.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Dr Adequate, posted 12-12-2006 4:40 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 1098 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 6 of 356 (369473)
12-13-2006 5:21 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by platypus
12-11-2006 2:41 AM


It strikes me as sad that anyone has to set themselves a task like this:

This book is all about presenting Evolution in a Christian friendly manner.

No one has to present the theory of plate tectonics in a Hindu-friendly manner or the theory of the expanding universe in a Buddhist-friendly manner. The faith of so many professing Christians, though, seems to be made of more fragile stuff.

If Dr Roughgarden can speak to the fragile people in a way that helps them past their fear, more power to her. Darwin's theory has proven itself for 150 years. It's past time the shock was absorbed so society can move on.

___


Archer

All species are transitional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by platypus, posted 12-11-2006 2:41 AM platypus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by platypus, posted 12-13-2006 1:42 PM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

platypus
Member (Idle past 3254 days)
Posts: 139
Joined: 11-12-2006


Message 7 of 356 (369538)
12-13-2006 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by Archer Opteryx
12-13-2006 5:21 AM


I'd like to agree with you on this statement, it is sad that we have to appeal to the Christian faith. Yet at the same time, our public educator Richard Dawkin's shock tactics seem to have been less than successful.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Archer Opteryx, posted 12-13-2006 5:21 AM Archer Opteryx has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by seekingthetruth, posted 04-22-2008 2:58 PM platypus has not yet responded

  
seekingthetruth
Junior Member (Idle past 3316 days)
Posts: 23
From: Austin, Texas
Joined: 04-17-2008


Message 8 of 356 (464001)
04-22-2008 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by platypus
12-13-2006 1:42 PM


I would like to first admit I have neither heard of, or read the book in question. Therefore, I will limit my
responses to the statements made about the book.

platypus writes:

This book is all about presenting Evolution in a Christian friendly manner.

Archer Opterix writes:

No one has to present the theory of plate tectonics in a Hindu-friendly manner or the theory of
the expanding universe in a Buddhist-friendly manner. The faith of so many professing Christians, though, seems to
be made of more fragile stuff.

Evolution in and of itself is very anti "christian". The bible clearly states that "GOD" created the heavens
and the Earth. Evolution states that "nothing" exploded billions and billions of years ago. That is what
ultimately created the heavens and the earth. Evolution tends the completly take God of the equation. I don't see
how anyone could expect a God fearing christian to believe "nothing" took the place of "God" creating the universe.

I don't know how Hindus belive, but I bet if you told them their god didn't create the universe they would be pretty
upset as well.

platypus writes:

If you hug a tree, you're hugging a relative, a very distant relative, but a relative nonetheless.

How exactly am I related to a tree? The bible states God created plants first, then animals, then Man. Nowhere in
there does it state we all came from some type of primordial good that miracously transmuted into trees, monkees
and then man. If you ask me, evolution takes a whole lot more faith to believe in than the bible.

platypus writes:

1) These two ideas must be taught in every science curriculum.

I have just one question to this statement. Where is the proof? If evolution and science is all about proof, where
is it? There is nothing you or anyone can produce showing a genetic link between a man and a tree. There is nothing
out there proving we all came from "nothing". If we are going to expect our children to believe in this there
should at the very least be some type of proof to back it up.

platypus writes:

2) Neither of these ideas are directly in conflict with the Bible.

Seriously? Do I really need to say anything?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by platypus, posted 12-13-2006 1:42 PM platypus has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by teen4christ, posted 04-22-2008 3:04 PM seekingthetruth has responded
 Message 10 by reiverix, posted 04-22-2008 3:11 PM seekingthetruth has not yet responded
 Message 11 by Rahvin, posted 04-22-2008 3:21 PM seekingthetruth has not yet responded
 Message 13 by Chiroptera, posted 04-22-2008 3:28 PM seekingthetruth has not yet responded
 Message 22 by RAZD, posted 04-22-2008 9:14 PM seekingthetruth has not yet responded
 Message 296 by RCS, posted 03-01-2009 2:52 AM seekingthetruth has not yet responded

  
teen4christ
Member (Idle past 3299 days)
Posts: 238
Joined: 01-15-2008


Message 9 of 356 (464002)
04-22-2008 3:04 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by seekingthetruth
04-22-2008 2:58 PM


seekingthetruth writes
quote:
Evolution in and of itself is very anti "christian". The bible clearly states that "GOD" created the heavens
and the Earth. Evolution states that "nothing" exploded billions and billions of years ago. That is what
ultimately created the heavens and the earth. Evolution tends the completly take God of the equation. I don't see
how anyone could expect a God fearing christian to believe "nothing" took the place of "God" creating the universe.

For someone that claims to be seeking the truth, you sure have a lot of falsehoods about evolution. Apparently, you also can't use the keyboard properly.

quote:
How exactly am I related to a tree? The bible states God created plants first, then animals, then Man. Nowhere in
there does it state we all came from some type of primordial good that miracously transmuted into trees, monkees
and then man. If you ask me, evolution takes a whole lot more faith to believe in than the bible.

At this point, I would like to ask for your credentials in biological science. After all, in order to claim that evolution takes a lot of faith, you must have studied it rigorously, correct? Coiuld you give us an insight into your years of hardwork in biological research programs?

quote:
I have just one question to this statement. Where is the proof? If evolution and science is all about proof, where
is it? There is nothing you or anyone can produce showing a genetic link between a man and a tree. There is nothing
out there proving we all came from "nothing". If we are going to expect our children to believe in this there
should at the very least be some type of proof to back it up.

For someone that claims a lot of non-facts, you sure have a lot of strawman arguments to make.

quote:
Seriously? Do I really need to say anything?

Actually, yes you do need to say something.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by seekingthetruth, posted 04-22-2008 2:58 PM seekingthetruth has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by 1071, posted 04-22-2008 3:23 PM teen4christ has responded
 Message 15 by seekingthetruth, posted 04-22-2008 3:42 PM teen4christ has not yet responded

reiverix
Member (Idle past 3319 days)
Posts: 80
From: Central Ohio
Joined: 10-18-2007


Message 10 of 356 (464003)
04-22-2008 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by seekingthetruth
04-22-2008 2:58 PM


Evolution states that "nothing" exploded billions and billions of years ago.

No it does not. Great stuff starting out with a typical strawman.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by seekingthetruth, posted 04-22-2008 2:58 PM seekingthetruth has not yet responded

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 687 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 11 of 356 (464005)
04-22-2008 3:21 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by seekingthetruth
04-22-2008 2:58 PM


Evolution in and of itself is very anti "christian". The bible clearly states that "GOD" created the heavens
and the Earth.

Evolution is allele frequency change over time in living populations. It's a mechanism. It makes no statement regarding an intelligent force guiding the process (though it does not require one, either, and parsimony takes care of the rest), and it certainly makes no statements regarding the "heavens and the Earth."

Evolution states that "nothing" exploded billions and billions of years ago. That is what
ultimately created the heavens and the earth.

Evolution says nothing of the sort. You're confusing a strawman version of Big Bang cosmology for evolution. The two are not related except that they are both highly accurate scientific models.

Evolution tends the completly take God of the equation.

As does the Theory of Gravity, but very few Christians have a problem leaving god out of gravitational attraction.

I don't see
how anyone could expect a God fearing christian to believe "nothing" took the place of "God" creating the universe.

Those Christians who accept evolution see evolution as the process by which god did his creating. The two are not mutually exclusive except when one insists on taking the entire Bible literally...which is a fools errand for a multitude of reasons in itself.

I don't know how Hindus belive, but I bet if you told them their god didn't create the universe they would be pretty
upset as well.

Science does not say that any god did or did not create the Universe. It remaine mute on the subject becasue it cannot be tested. Unfalsifiable possibilities like god, gods, ghosts, fairies, and other things people truly believe in but for which there is no objective evidence are not the purview of science. Science is the study of the observable Universe; if we cannot observe it, it has nothing to do with science.

How exactly am I related to a tree?

You both utilize genetic information and are based on a system of cells that have significant similarities. Biologically, you are very distantly related to plants, though the degree of seperation is greater than your relation to any animal.

The bible states God created plants first, then animals, then Man. Nowhere in there does it state we all came from some type of primordial good that miracously transmuted into trees, monkees
and then man. If you ask me, evolution takes a whole lot more faith to believe in than the bible.

That's not what the Theory of Evolution states, though. Evolution is not based on faith at all. It's based on observable evidence, and its predictions have been rigorously tested and shown to be highly accurate. Evolution takes no fith whatsoever to believe - it takes education. But learning involves effort, so it's "easier" to say "goddidit."

Of course, "goddidit" explains absolutely nothing, which is why scientific inquiry exists in the first place.

I have just one question to this statement. Where is the proof?

Are you serious? There is roughly as much evidence in favor of evolution as there is for the Theory of Gravity, including direct observation of the process in action.

If evolution and science is all about proof, where
is it? There is nothing you or anyone can produce showing a genetic link between a man and a tree.

They both use deoxyribonucleic acid to store inheritable traits, as opposed to alternatives like RNA. They both consist of cells, which have similar organnelles (as well as many different ones). There are far more similarities than you seem to think. Both humans and all species of plants have a common ancestor in the incredibly distant past.

There is nothing out there proving we all came from "nothing".

Nobody ever said we did. The Big Bang theory does not state "nothing" exploded. If you'd like to discuss the Big Bang theory, we have a few open threads on the subject, and it would seem you have some serious misconceptions about what it does and does not state.

If we are going to expect our children to believe in this there
should at the very least be some type of proof to back it up.

Perhaps you should try doing some research yourself. There is more than ample evidence for evolution and the Big Bang model, and there is promising research going on even now regarding abiogenesis. But from your comments here it is quite plain that you don't know what the Theory of Evolution states, you don't know what the Big bang theory states, and you seem to believe that what you see on TV in dumbed-down "science" documentaries somehow actually represents the real scientific theories that require years of study to properly comprehend.

Seriously? Do I really need to say anything?

You're right only if you insist that the Bible is 100% literally true. This is, of course, demonstrably false, so I hope you don't really believe that.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by seekingthetruth, posted 04-22-2008 2:58 PM seekingthetruth has not yet responded

1071
Member (Idle past 3312 days)
Posts: 61
From: AUSTIN, TX, USA
Joined: 04-17-2008


Message 12 of 356 (464006)
04-22-2008 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by teen4christ
04-22-2008 3:04 PM


teen4christ
writes:

At this point, I would like to ask for your credentials in biological science. After all, in order to claim that evolution takes a lot of faith, you must have studied it rigorously, correct? Coiuld you give us an insight into your years of hardwork in biological research programs?


lol... like that matters, you all try to hide behind empty credentials and self absorbed titles. They mean nothing. Trying to tear down a person does not prove your point.. stay on topic please.


Agent antiLIE of the AGDT
7x153=1071 [Ρωμαιους IIX:XXIV]
I klinamaksa exei afypnistei
This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by teen4christ, posted 04-22-2008 3:04 PM teen4christ has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Rahvin, posted 04-22-2008 3:32 PM 1071 has responded
 Message 18 by teen4christ, posted 04-22-2008 4:03 PM 1071 has responded

Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6393
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 6.2


Message 13 of 356 (464008)
04-22-2008 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by seekingthetruth
04-22-2008 2:58 PM


Welcome to EvC, seeking.

Therefore, I will limit my
responses to the statements made about the book.

The moderators on this board try to keep the threads focused on the topic of the opening post. I think that whether or not the theory of evolution is in conflict with Christian beliefs would be on topic. Questions about whether the theory of evolution is or is not accurate wouldn't be on topic, but since some of those questions might be interesting, I'm going to try to direct you to other threads.

-

Evolution states that "nothing" exploded billions and billions of years ago.

Big Bang doesn't say anything about an explosion. Here is a link to a thread to discuss problems with the Big Bang theory. (Added by edit: This thread might be a better venue for a discussion on Big Bang; it already has a bit of information that might be interesting.)

-

If evolution and science is all about proof, where
is it?

To be more precise, science is all about constructing explanatory theories for observed phenomena, and then testing those theories by looking for phenomena that the theory says we should observe but haven't yet.

My favorite evidence for the theory of evolution is the pattern of nested hierarchies that we see in taxonomy. We also have a thread to discuss that as well.

-

This thread is concerned with whether evolution conflicts with Christian beliefs. Not being a Christian myself, I'm not particularly interested in this. I do hope to see you in some of the science threads, though.

Edited by Chiroptera, : No reason given.


Speaking personally, I find few things more awesome than contemplating this vast and majestic process of evolution, the ebb and flow of successive biotas through geological time. Creationists and others who cannot for ideological or religious reasons accept the fact of evolution miss out a great deal, and are left with a claustrophobic little universe in which nothing happens and nothing changes.
-- M. Alan Kazlev
This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by seekingthetruth, posted 04-22-2008 2:58 PM seekingthetruth has not yet responded

Rahvin
Member (Idle past 687 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 14 of 356 (464009)
04-22-2008 3:32 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by 1071
04-22-2008 3:23 PM


ol... like that matters, you all try to hide behind empty credentials and self absorbed titles. They mean nothing.

The credentials are not the point. The time spent researching the topic of discussion is, and the credentials directly signify that at least some amount of research was done.

I'm not a PhD. I don't even have a Bachelor's degree. I have spent time learning about evolution and science, so I don't make the same strawman remarks our Creationist posters tend to. Nobody ever asks me for my credentials.

Nobody is hiding behind anything. What is being said is that those who are completely ignorant of a topic cannot effectively make statements regarding that topic with any degree of accuracy. Those who say "there is no evidence for evolution" are quite obviously arguing from positions of total ignorance.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by 1071, posted 04-22-2008 3:23 PM 1071 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by 1071, posted 04-22-2008 3:42 PM Rahvin has responded

seekingthetruth
Junior Member (Idle past 3316 days)
Posts: 23
From: Austin, Texas
Joined: 04-17-2008


Message 15 of 356 (464010)
04-22-2008 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by teen4christ
04-22-2008 3:04 PM


teen4christ writes:

Apparently, you also can't use the keyboard properly.

Nice. Could you possibly be anymore immature than that?

teen4christ writes:

At this point, I would like to ask for your credentials in biological science. After all, in order
to claim that evolution takes a lot of faith, you must have studied it rigorously, correct? Coiuld you give us an
insight into your years of hardwork in biological research programs?

I don't need a doctorate and years of study to know that humans and trees did not come from the same material. If you
have proof to the contrary please let us know.

teen4christ writes:

For someone that claims a lot of non-facts, you sure have a lot of strawman arguments to make.

Really? Show me one piece of evidence that supports the claim made in this book and I will shutup.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by teen4christ, posted 04-22-2008 3:04 PM teen4christ has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by platypus, posted 04-22-2008 9:32 PM seekingthetruth has not yet responded

  
1
23456
...
24NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017