Darwin's Debt to Christianity

The similarity between xian belief and evolution are easy to see after the fact.You could do the same with a virus: seeing xian thought as a virus that spreads via a host (and indead needs a host to carry on) would seem to cover all the bases.I think if you look hard enough you can see anything in anything.I remember hearing about a film once that cut from colour to black and white half way through: it was praised for it's avante guarde approach to film making and critics drew rich parallels with this and that only to find that the director ran out of cash and had to film in on cheaper b/w film.The moral? We see what we want to see.Science is not like that (or at least it has stringent checks that eventually weed out wishfull thinking).

So, you are no longer interested in your OP and now your beef with evolution is that it's too plausible?What kind of position is that?

What you seem to forget is that Jesus did not breed and pass on his wonderful genes: no evolution.

Tesla, this has nothing to do with the OP and it's a science topic so I don't know what your point is.

So now Darwin used xianty as frame work for his ideas because only xianity could provide that frame work? And that the frame work of xianty is just as distorted as any human perception (unless you give it a free pass).You honesty are proposing that he could not generate a hypothesis without xianity? And thast xianty was his direct inpiration?I bet you love C.S. Lewis, neh?Edited by Larni, : No reason given.

Dude, using quote boxes will help make your post easier to read.Just press peek (lower right of the dialogue box)

No one must not: is a naked mole rat beauty? Is a toad beauty? It's a good job evolution is not random then. No it does not. It implies that we have evolved a sufficiently complex sensory system to lable something as beautiful. The lack of an observer role indicates that evolution operates without intelligence.