Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,448 Year: 3,705/9,624 Month: 576/974 Week: 189/276 Day: 29/34 Hour: 10/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution: a red herring?
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 120 (377307)
01-16-2007 1:10 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by limbosis
01-15-2007 7:14 PM


Oh? Is that the case, eh?
Sure, evo's will bark at this. But they always seem to forget that the TOEv is only a theory.
And Creos always seem to forget that a scientific theory is far more than a wild-ass guess in the dark!
Is it a masterful attempt at perpetuating slavery?
SLAVERY!?!? You blame evolution for slavery!? I bet all those southern slave-owners had coppies of The Origin in each of their studies, no?
Who would do such a thing? And, why?
They do it because as far as they are concerned, the facts and evidence have pointed them to that conclusion. If evolution IS wrong and scientists haven't been doing it right, I assure you, it has not been an intentional and malicious attack on God and religion.
If the the claims of creationism were true, specifically that someone or something created man, then what can we make of the theory of evolution?
We could conclude that it were incorrect, as has been the case with scientific theories in the past. They are altered, nudged, changed a little, and sometimes just thrown out all together. I would like to point out, however, that the events you postulate have yet to occur .
J0N

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by limbosis, posted 01-15-2007 7:14 PM limbosis has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by limbosis, posted 01-16-2007 12:58 PM Jon has replied

Jon
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 120 (377319)
01-16-2007 5:35 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by limbosis
01-16-2007 4:11 AM


It's nothing personal. And, I would agree that the TOEvo is given much more attention than it deserves. There is much more science to teach in biology class than evolution. And, contrary to popular scientific opinion, even much of molecular biology and genetics, which is normally posed to rely heavily on evolution, doesn't need to be presented within the context of that process anyway. Much of it stands alone, as it is.
Perhaps that is true, but it all makes MUCH MORE sense when evolution is taught. Evolution helps to tie up all the loose ends, answer all the whys and give meaning to the material.
If I'm not mistaken, this website is intended to serve as an impartial forum for productive conversation.
And what is productive about you starting a thread and only allowing fellow Creos (who will already agree with you) to reply? If it's productive conversation that you want, then you must allow all viewpoints. If not, then you should've really just stayed in bed this morning
J0N

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by limbosis, posted 01-16-2007 4:11 AM limbosis has not replied

Jon
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 120 (377394)
01-16-2007 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by limbosis
01-16-2007 12:58 PM


**Bling--Bling**
Also, remember that the supposed evidence for the origin of species has been readily available to humans, WHEREVER there are animals and plants, since the dawn of time. It is a bit odd that the notion did not present itself until the 19th century. In fact, it's very odd.
Keep in mind that the evidence for a Sun-centred planetary system has been around for just as long. So has the evidence in support of the theory of gravity (notice, that's a theory, wanna reject that too whilst you're at it?). In fact, the evidence for everything we ever will know is sitting out there right now, it has been for a long time, and hopefully will be for a long time after now. Just because we have not discovered it YET, does not mean that when we DO discover it, it will be invalid, just because we missed it durring the first 20,000+ some odd years of our life on this planet.
No, I'm suggesting that the idea of evolution may have been intended as a means of eventually justifying the feeble, state-sponsored notion that one race is in any way superior to another. Eugenics would be another name for it. I blame god for slavery.
Unless you are a member of the KKK, I cannot think of a single person who would use evolutionary theory as a means to justify racial descrimination or to justify a "notion that one race is in any way superior to another." People who claim these things always use the Bible and the word of God to back up their blindly-made, hatefull assertions.
In fact, evolution shows us that one race isn't all that different from another. I know white/black seems a big difference on the outside, but when you rip it all away and look at the genetics underneath, it is really just the same old same old sequence of TGCA...
I would like to point out, however, that the events you postulate have yet to occur.
You'd be surprised.
Yes, I most certainly would!
J0N

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by limbosis, posted 01-16-2007 12:58 PM limbosis has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024