On Darwin’s 200th birthday, only 39 percent of Americans believe in evolution.
By on Feb 11th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
On Darwin’s 200th birthday, only 39 percent of Americans believe in evolution.
Charles Darwin, who invented the theory of evolution, was born on Feb. 12, 1809. Marking the 200th anniversary of his Darwin’s birth, Gallup has a new poll out showing that “only 39 percent of Americans say they ‘believe in the theory of evolution,’ while a quarter say they do not believe in the theory, and another 36 percent don’t have an opinion either way”:
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Bush
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iraq
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Maddow
McCain
Media
Military
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Public Plan
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Steve King
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Technology
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
OMG! How scary is that? The scientific evidence is there. This does not say much about our education system.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:15 pmsports have been the downfall of education in America.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:16 pmThey really should stop conducting these polls at the Republican National Convention…..
February 11th, 2009 at 3:16 pmTo some, ignorance is not only bliss, but a state of moral superiority to which all right thinking people should aspire.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:16 pmI think the scariest stat is the 36% that have no opinion. Are they agnostic about it or do they just not care?
February 11th, 2009 at 3:16 pmonly in america… really.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:17 pmHoly Eff!
February 11th, 2009 at 3:17 pmToo much time in front of those ‘reality’ shows, Faux NoNooz and pro-resslin’ has burnt the Repugts brains to a crisp.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:19 pmSooooo, only 39% are capable of rational thought?
That’s just stupid…oh, I guess that is the point…
…most of America are uneducated morons.
Just talk to the ‘Dinosaurs walked with man’ types, so stupid it will make you dizzy.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:20 pmWhat a question – do you “believe” in evolution, like it’s a religion. I wonder what would have been the results if the question was “do you accept the scientific theory of evolution?”
February 11th, 2009 at 3:20 pmi’d like to see a poll of people who have never been polled
February 11th, 2009 at 3:21 pmKeltoi Says:
I think the scariest stat is the 36% that have no opinion. Are they agnostic about it or do they just not care?
They are scambling to find a dictionary and figure out what ‘evolution’ means.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:22 pmAmericans would more likely believe that there is some omnipotent, supernatural being living in the sky that cares more about athletes throwing, catching, running and the outcome of those contests, than in ending the starvation, suffering and cruelty so many suffer in the world, than they would in evolution. Cuts to science education at work. Humans are de-volving.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:22 pmline from Inherit the Wind
February 11th, 2009 at 3:22 pmHenry Drummond; READ YOUR DARWIN
This kind of question irks me no end.
How about are you satisfied that evolution is the most satisfactory explanation thus far of the diversity of species?
Or… do you believe that the earth is 6,000 years old and that all dinosaurs were vegetarians and co-existed with humans and can you explain why the dinosaurs then disappeared and when?
Or how about, do you believe that airplanes are supported in flight by angels and that the engines are there just for show?
February 11th, 2009 at 3:23 pmWe should all take note
February 11th, 2009 at 3:23 pmWe don’t all evolve at once
Chimpy types abound
The wording of the poll is poor. One does not ‘believe’ in facts and reason. Belief is faith-based.
I expected better from Gallup.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:23 pmBetter put that funding for education back in the stimulus bill ASAP! What gets me is the 36% who don’t know what they think!
And CheeseFlap, thanks again for another of your great haiku.
PEACE
February 11th, 2009 at 3:25 pmStatistics and polls say whatever the pollers are looking for.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:26 pmKeltoi Says:
I think the scariest stat is the 36% that have no opinion. Are they agnostic about it or do they just not care?
That was my reaction as well. But it’s a stupid question if that’s how it was phrased: belief has nothing to do with it. Belief is what is required to accept Intelligent Design as valid.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:29 pmOn Darwin’s 200th birthday, only 39 percent of Americans believe in evolution.»
- – I’m a minority! I’m a minority!!
February 11th, 2009 at 3:29 pmGeeze, you mean the Flintstones is not a documentary?
Perfect example of not child left behind.
This is truly sad.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:29 pmCheeseFlap says; chimpy types abound.
As evidence, our 43rd president.
The defense rests.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:30 pm5th Estate,
For the sake of my sanity Im going to “believe” that these numbers were the result of a poorly worded poll.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:33 pmIdiots of 2008
Idiot Number One
I am a medical student currently doing a rotation in toxicology at the poison control center. Today, this woman called in very upset because she caught her little daughter eating ants. I quickly reassured her that the ants are not harmful and there would be no need to bring her daughter into the hospital.
She calmed down and at the end of the conversation happened to mention that she gave her daughter some ant poison to eat in order to kill the ants. I told her that she better bring her daughter into the emergency room right away.
Here’s your sign, lady. Wear it with pride.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:33 pmCharles Darwin, who invented the theory of evolution
TP, would it not be more correct to say “Charles Darwin, who discovered the theory of evolution”? Copernicus didn’t invent the sun centered solar system. Newton didn’t invent gravity. Sure, scientists invent language to describe their discoveries, but evolution and gravity et al. existed before they were described.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:33 pmSchool incomes based on sports success and the dumbing down of America.
What is the most money spent on in our education system….sports.
Who were the columbine kids looking for….jocks and cheerleaders.
what is the number one problem aside from not getting an education in American schools today….bullying.
rewarding failure…..
how can you learn even if it is actually being taught when under the constant threat of violence?
All the while, praying before each game…
February 11th, 2009 at 3:33 pmUnlike some spurious, illusory “God,” evolution doesn’t really care if you ‘believe in’ it or not.
Like gravity, thermodynamics, and death, it simply “is.”
February 11th, 2009 at 3:35 pmCheeseFlap says
February 11th, 2009 at 3:35 pmGreat haiku! *polite golf clap applause*
All the while, praying before each game…
LOL. AND they thank the Lord when they win. You never here them dis the Lord when they lose.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:36 pmDon’t forget than Gallup is a very right-wing Republican poll, that always favors right-wingers.
Ever so slightly O/T: not one more penny to these reckless and greedy Wall Street bankers. We need to have them open their books for public examination. We need to see their current balance sheets. No more secrets from Congress and the American people. We need to find out what happened to our first $350,000,000,000.00. If these banks are not lending money to borrowers, then Wall Street banks need to give us our money back now.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:36 pmI think the most significant part of this poll is that only 25% don’t believe in evolution. The startling part is that 36% don’t have an opinion one way or another.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:36 pmIdiot Number Two of 2008
Early this year, some Boeing employees on the airfield decided to steal a life raft from one of the 747s.
They were successful in getting it out of the plane and home. Shortly after they took it for a float on the river, they noticed a Coast Guard helicopter coming toward them.
It turned out that the chopper was homing in on the emergency locator beacon that activated when the raft was inflated.
They are no longer employed at Boeing.
Here’s your sign, guys. Don’t get it wet; the paint might run.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:36 pmWhat we need to find out is how many science teachers skip over evolution to avoid the crazy evangelical parents from showing up and causing problems for them. And then it’s time for normal people to become the squeaky wheel and demand the evolution of species be taught in ALL related science classes.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:37 pmKeltoi Says:
I think the scariest stat is the 36% that have no opinion. Are they agnostic about it or do they just not care?
I think they didn’t care about the poll, not about the subject.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:38 pmI’m not trying to be off topic (really) I just thought we could all use a little LOL time.
I won’t post the other five idiots of 2008 if you guys don’t want me to.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:38 pmWow! I mean, Wow! Are there that many brain-dead people in this country that still don’t believe in the Theory of Evolution?
While we liberals complain about how our federally-elected Republicans keep pushing their faith-based idiocy, the truth is that at the local level, especially on local school boards where they can do the greatest damage, conservative evangelicals have been getting elected. And they are the ones pushing to have their “Intelligent Design” theories presented as equally valid with the Theory of Evolution. These are the people who will ultimately be the downfall of America.
If your local school board has anyone on it who believes that Intelligent Design should be taught “along side Evolution”, it’s time to get rid of them, before they do any more harm to our country. Run against them yourself if you have to.
One way to make the number of Evolution-believers in this country go up is to increase science education funding in this country.
BTW, how do we compare to the rest of the world? It would not surprise me to find a lot of Third World with higher percentages of Evolutionists than we have. Thank you, Republican Party, for dumbing down America.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:38 pmThere’s that 25% with their ignorance based opinions again.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:39 pmThis number has been pretty stable for as long as I can remember regardless of how the question is asked. Pretty scary stuff.
I had a “discusion” with a fundy and after spending an hour or so going over evidence of evolution, fossil record, age of the earth and universe…. the response was, “Well, you have your evidence and you have your facts, but I have my faith.”
And that’s it as far as she was concerned. Equivalent positions.
And we wonder why we have such a hard time reasoning with these people? Where do you start if evidence and facts are ignored?
I believe that women get pregnant by ants who carry little bitty babies into their wombs at night. No, I don’t have any fact to support it. Don’t need any, it’s just what i believe.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:39 pmWe have politicians running around trying to convert everything into an unsettled controversy, whether it’s the Geneva Conventions or climate change. Evolution is no exception. It’s “only a theory” after all!
February 11th, 2009 at 3:39 pmThe latest sign that we are devolving as a race!
Do stupid men get more of the girls or something? I mean, we know that a lot of men just see blond hair and generous chests and say, “That’s the one for me!”, but, is that why we seem to be getting dumber and dumber?
February 11th, 2009 at 3:41 pmlivelongandprosper Says:
TP, would it not be more correct to say “Charles Darwin, who discovered the theory of evolution”? Copernicus didn’t invent the sun centered solar system. Newton didn’t invent gravity. Sure, scientists invent language to describe their discoveries, but evolution and gravity et al. existed before they were described.
It’s correct because they invented the theory explaining the fact. Newton didn’t invent gravity, he invented the theory which explained how gravity works. Same as Darwin and his theory of evolution.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:42 pmI can’t deny that is says something depressing about the state of our educational system.
But I think it says something more about the power of the Christianist movement in this nation.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:42 pmIgnoranceIsNotBliss Says:
She calmed down and at the end of the conversation happened to mention that she gave her daughter some ant poison to eat in order to kill the ants. I told her that she better bring her daughter into the emergency room right away.
Here’s your sign, lady. Wear it with pride.
My God….please tell me you are kidding.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:43 pmnanlichi Says:
This number has been pretty stable for as long as I can remember regardless of how the question is asked. Pretty scary stuff.
I had a “discusion” with a fundy and after spending an hour or so going over evidence of evolution, fossil record, age of the earth and universe…. the response was, “Well, you have your evidence and you have your facts, but I have my faith.”
If you get the opportunity to talk like this with another fundy, and they tell you the same thing, “Well, you have your evidence and you have your facts, but I have my faith,” ask them if they look both ways before crossing the street. After all, if they have their “faith”, then their God should protect them. Since we have our “evidence” and our “facts”, we can tell them how long they’ll live after getting run over.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:43 pmFebruary 11th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
Hey, you didn’t know?
February 11th, 2009 at 3:43 pmPeople burried bones in deserts all over the world to try and fool us that evolution happened… >_>
Idiot Number Three of 2008
A man,wanting to rob a downtown Bank of America, walked into the Branch and wrote this,”Put all your muny in this bag”.
While standing in line, waiting to give his note to the teller, he began to worry that someone had seen him write the note and might call the police before he reached the
teller’s window. So he left the Bank of America and crossed the street to the Wells Fargo Bank.
After waiting a few minutes in line, he handed his note to the Wells Fargo teller. She read it and, surmising from his spelling errors that he wasn’t the brightest light in the harbor, told him that she could not accept his stickup note because it was written on a Bank of America deposit slip and that he would either have to fill out a Wells Fargo deposit slip or go back to Bank of America. Looking somewhat defeated, the man said,’OK’ and left.
He was arrested a few minutes later, as he was waiting in line back at Bank of America .
Don’t bother with this guy’s sign. He probably couldn’t read it anyway.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:44 pmWaa? 61% diss-believe in the process of evolution? Must be because it moves too slow to notice and they have no confidence in science, or they simply choose not to beleive in the world they find themselves in.
Kinda strage statistic though – some religious folk are that way, but all religious folks i know do understand science and the way things work, and they do beleive the theory of evolution is correct. They still hope to transcend their mortal condition one day is all.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:44 pmNow that would be a question! I can imagine an interviewer asking Kurt Warner after losing the Super Bowl, “Why don’t you think Jesus wanted you to win tonight?” or “Do you think God loves the Steelers more since they’ve won 6 Super Bowls?”
February 11th, 2009 at 3:44 pmKeltoi Says: My God….please tell me you are kidding.
As far as I know, these jokes were written in the Jeff Foxworthy style of “Here’s your sign”.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:47 pmDoes this mean that the other 61% have not evolved past being an ape?
February 11th, 2009 at 3:48 pmI’m in agreement with a couple of others on this thread who see this is a flawed poll. If I was asked this question, and I was offered only these choices, I don’t think I could give a response.
I’d want to know — What do you mean by “evolution”? Darwin’s theory? Any other theory based at least in part on scientific evidence? Evolution combined with intelligent design? Or do I believe God created everything on earth but allowed for evolutionary phenomena such as natural selection to allow species to adapt to changing conditions?
There are many people who believe life evolved without the help of any supreme being. There are also many people who accept scientific evidence of evolution, but reconcile it with their religious beliefs by believing God had a hand in it. And still others believe in the 6-day magic wand scenario. And, of course, there are some who frankly don’t know and haven’t formed an opinion one way or another.
But I doubt these numbers give us any kind of useful picture, since the poll was so badly worded.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:51 pmIt got worse Wayne. She looked me with a smug, superior smirk on her face and delivered her crowning argument, “Well, if you are so smart and believe in evolution, where did blacks come from?”
Needless to say, that was the end of that discussion.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:53 pmLuis M Says:
It’s correct because they invented the theory explaining the fact. Newton didn’t invent gravity, he invented the theory which explained how gravity works. Same as Darwin and his theory of evolution.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
_________
There was an interesting episode of Radiolab recently that discussed this exact point. One way of looking at scientific discovery is that the truth was always out there, regardless of whether the scientist discovered it or not. Darwin, in this view, is only the “father of evolution” cause he’s the guy who got there first.
The other way is that the scientist invents the paradigm that frames how future scientists look at what’s being studied. Newton’s concept of gravity was doing just fine at explaining the universe until Einstein came along.
I guess the real question is whether each new theory is a complete paradigm shift, or is each one asymptotically approaching truth?
February 11th, 2009 at 3:55 pmnanlichi, did you tell her that blacks came first?
February 11th, 2009 at 3:56 pmThis is why it is important to stay involved with local politics. It is the local elections that have the more immediate impact on a community.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:59 pmOne, Bill Engval does the sign shtick. Two, I suspect the 36% who answered no opinion couldn’t believe the peoeple asking the question weren’t wearing their sign.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:01 pmSeems fairly straightforward to me…..either you believe we evolved or you don’t.
Who was polled might be questionable.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:01 pmBuckarooBanzai Says:
“Do you think God loves the Steelers more since they’ve won 6 Super Bowls?”
Of Course! Its their planet, monkey-boy :)
February 11th, 2009 at 4:02 pmHoodathunk Says:
——————————————————————————–
One, Bill Engval does the sign shtick. Two, I suspect the 36% who answered no opinion couldn’t believe the peoeple asking the question weren’t wearing their sign.
My bad.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:04 pmmisshusseinmolly Says:
I’m in agreement with a couple of others on this thread who see this is a flawed poll. If I was asked this question, and I was offered only these choices, I don’t think I could give a response.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:51 pm
__________
I agree that it’s not the best-worded poll on the subject, but the results seem to concur with similar polls I saw in 2005 when the science deniers were mucking around in Kansas and Dover. Only about 40% of this country believes in science.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:04 pmnanlichi Says: “Well, if you are so smart and believe in evolution, where did blacks come from?”
Actually, from a biblical standpoint, black people are easy to defend. They are the children of Shem mentioned in Genesis. How they came into being if God created Adam and Eve and no one else is a debatable point.
And if you want to get real technical Adam and Eve had to be Semitic since they are the start of the Jewish people. So we have a start for the Semitic race and the black race by biblical definition so where did caucasion, asian polynesian and amerind people come from.
Just wondering
February 11th, 2009 at 4:09 pmApe-Man Says:
Kinda strage statistic though – some religious folk are that way, but all religious folks i know do understand science and the way things work, and they do beleive the theory of evolution is correct. They still hope to transcend their mortal condition one day is all.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:44 pm
__________
That’s how religion and science should coexist. As Galileo said, “The Bible shows the way to go to heaven, not the way the heavens go.”
February 11th, 2009 at 4:09 pmI wonder what percentage were homeschooled, or went to a parochial or private (religious) school.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:11 pm“sports have been the downfall of education in America.” And we have a winner for today’s award for painting with a Lazy Broad Brush!
Yeah, Title IX really contributed to the downfall of American Education.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:11 pmIgnoranceIsNotBliss Says: Not to worry. All those white redneck comedians look the same to me too. /snark
February 11th, 2009 at 4:12 pmWow- over 60 posts and no science-denying trolls. Are they all asleep?
February 11th, 2009 at 4:12 pmJayDub08; YES,YES,YES !!!
SCIENCE IS NOT FAITH.
THIS IS, AND ALWAYS WILL BE, A RIDICULOUS QUESTION.
It’s like asking if you believe in the theory of gravity. I am so sick of polls that ask this idiotic question!
This is the most widely accepted explanations ever developed.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:12 pmIt encompasses many scientific fields. Keeping the public safe against new pathogens depends on this theory.
Oh boy, we really need those science labs Obama is talking about.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:13 pmnanlichi Says:
It got worse Wayne. She looked me with a smug, superior smirk on her face and delivered her crowning argument, “Well, if you are so smart and believe in evolution, where did blacks come from?”
Needless to say, that was the end of that discussion.
February 11th, 2009 at 3:53 pm
Too bad. You should have pointed out that (in addition to gummitch’s excellent point that blacks probably came first, so the question should be where did white people come from), in all likelihood, Jesus had much darker skin than her (assuming she was white). You could also point out that most people who live along the equatorial regions have more melanin in their skins than people who live closer to the polar regions.
I realize that this would mean introducing more science to the conversation than she might be willing to accept, but she obviously needs to get a frickin’ clue.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:18 pmhussein toasterhead Says:
Wow- over 60 posts and no science-denying trolls. Are they all asleep?
February 11th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
They’re probably out praying for our souls. Should I thank them, or tell them they’re wasting their time praying for me?
February 11th, 2009 at 4:20 pmAccording to this there are only 25% who are troglodytes or knuckle dragging bottom feeders.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:20 pmIdiot Number Four of 2008
A motorist was unknowingly caught in an automated speed trap that measured his speed using radar and photographed his car. He later received in the mail a ticket for $40 and a photo of his car.
Instead of payment, he sent the police department a photograph of $40. Several days later, he received a letter from the police that contained another picture, this time of handcuffs.
He immediately mailed in his $40.
Wise guy……… But you still get a sign
February 11th, 2009 at 4:25 pmMathazar Says:
JayDub08; YES,YES,YES !!!
SCIENCE IS NOT FAITH.
THIS IS, AND ALWAYS WILL BE, A RIDICULOUS QUESTION.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:12 pm
____________
What’s ridiculous is the fact that it needs to be asked. Science is not faith, but there’s still an element of belief involved.
For example. One has to believe in the electron, to a certain extent. We can’t see it, we can’t touch it, we can’t even weigh it except in its absence, we can’t even pinpoint where it is – the best answer we have is “somewhere in a probability cloud.” There are plenty of models and equations that provide evidence of its existence, but one cannot directly observe an electron.
Believing in its existence is prerequisite, however, for understanding chemistry and electricity and particle physics and geology and pretty much everything else that happens between molecules. On a certain level, the scientist must decide to believe in existence of the electron, based on the overwhelming evidence, in spite of a lack of direct observation.
That’s not the same as faith, however. Faith is stating definitively “the electron exists,” and then interpreting every piece of evidence as supporting that faith.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:28 pmIn fact I believe that black people are just a different shade of the same exact race. People who evolved closer to the equator or hotter climates are darker with longer legs and arms for cooling and people living in cooler climates evolved lighter with shorter arms and legs, that’s according to some anthropologists of course.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:29 pmMaybe the most disturbing number is the 36 percent of Americans who have no opinion. I chalk that up to ignorance.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:30 pmIgnoranceIsNotBliss Says:
A motorist was unknowingly caught in an automated speed trap that measured his speed using radar and photographed his car. He later received in the mail a ticket for $40 and a photo of his car.
Instead of payment, he sent the police department a photograph of $40.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
___________
I wouldn’t call this one an idiot. That’s pretty darn funny, actually.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:31 pmAs Richard Dawkins has often pointed out…Evolution is NOT a Theory…it is a FACT proven Indisputably by the fossil Record and Modern Molecular Biology.
The THEORY that Darwin Presented…Natural Selection…relates to the Mechanism that Would Explain HOW Evolution Occurs.
I Agree, the question is Poorly Worded, and show Gallup’s poor grasp of Science.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:31 pm“Against logic there is no armor like ignorance”.
Laurence J. Peter, of The Peter Principle fame
February 11th, 2009 at 4:31 pmTitle IX origianlly had nothing to do with sports and it has nothing at all to do with what I said.
Title IX says:
So, who’s trying to use the broad brush? Maybe you can do better to defend sports in school than that but I don’t see how.
It used to be about charactor building and encouraging otherwise uninterested kids in going to school….now it is about winning at any cost.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:31 pmI cringe every day while living among the deniers of evolution. These are the same people who FERVENTLY believe that The Human Race was doomed by a talking snake convincing a woman ( who came out of a rib )to bite an apple. Literally!!
February 11th, 2009 at 4:34 pmReally ????
krystalviews, you made me think of a question for the literalists. If snakes could talk at one time, but can’t now, isn’t that evidence that the species changed, you know evolved? (Ok, purists, I know it’s not “evidence”)
February 11th, 2009 at 4:41 pmHave to agree hussein toasterhead. It sounds like the snarky thing I would do.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:46 pm25% don’t believe in evolution. oddly enough, the same percent of nuthuggers who believed 43 did a fine job.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:46 pmBadger Says:
As Richard Dawkins has often pointed out…Evolution is NOT a Theory…it is a FACT proven Indisputably by the fossil Record and Modern Molecular Biology.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:31 pm
__________
It’s actually both. It’s a fact, in that it exists. Yes, there is a fossil record that shows generational change over a long term, and we can observe generational change in fruit flies and viruses and bacteria and other organisms.
It’s also a theory that explains why that change came about – prior to Darwin there were other theories that have since been discredited, but Darwin’s theory of natural selection is currently accepted as the best explanation for why this change occurs. And even Darwin’s theory wasn’t perfect. It needed some help from Gregor Mendel, to add genetics to the equation.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:47 pmBuckarooBanzai Says:
“Now that would be a question! I can imagine an interviewer asking Kurt Warner after losing the Super Bowl, “Why don’t you think Jesus wanted you to win tonight?” or “Do you think God loves the Steelers more since they’ve won 6 Super Bowls?””
Warner – The Lord works in mysterious ways.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:48 pmEnd of discussion.
OT but still seems relevant to the issue of REPUG STUPIDITY:
Newsmax just had a piece on Saracuda Palin bailing on being a Speaker at the Conserviative Political Action Conference (CPAC). But look who the other Attendees and Speakers are:
Doesn’t this about sum up the Group Intelligence Quotient (GIQ) of the Repug Party.
No wonder they lost in a landslide in ‘06 and ‘08 and it looks like this “leadership” team will assure that they stay down for a loooong, loooong time.
Heh Heh
February 11th, 2009 at 4:50 pmNo surprise Americans voted in a war criminal the second time around.
Remember, American Idol is America’s top show.
Enough said!
February 11th, 2009 at 4:50 pmBy intriguing coincidence, I started reading “The Invention of Air” at lunch. Steven Johnson’s introduction includes this anecdote:
Actually, I don’t find the line remotely amusing, but rather creepy and anti-intellectual.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:53 pmhussein toasterhead Says:
February 11th, 2009 at 4:47 pm
__________
And this is what’s really scary about how the Christianist science deniers have muddied these waters. They not only have people casting doubt on the theory of evolution, using “Intelligent Design” as a substitute for natural selection, they also have some Young Earthers casting doubt on the fact of evolution.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:54 pmgummitch Says:
By intriguing coincidence, I started reading “The Invention of Air” at lunch.
February 11th, 2009 at 4:53 pm
____________
Ooo – I want to read that. I heard him on NPR a few weeks back and it sounds fascinating.
I think it’s quite interesting that a few centuries ago, there wasn’t such a schism between religion and science. Some of the most important scientific discoveries were made by priests and monks, like Priestly and Mendel. At the time, religious scholars were among the most educated, literate, and well-read people in society.
What happened since then?
February 11th, 2009 at 4:58 pmhussein toasterhead Says:
And this is what’s really scary about how the Christianist science deniers have muddied these waters. They not only have people casting doubt on the theory of evolution, using “Intelligent Design” as a substitute for natural selection, they also have some Young Earthers casting doubt on the fact of evolution.
I had an online argument about this with someone convinced that the Flood was the answer to any questions about fossils, and that there was geological evidence that humans walked the Earth with dinosaurs. I found some great photographs online of cliffs with beautifully defined layers of fossils, with all the very simple stuff clearly on the bottom and an upward progression of complexity of lifeform.
He refused to even acknowledge the photos, no matter how I pressed him on it.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:01 pmctcadguy,
Repubicans stole the 2000 and 2004 elections, so we didn’t really vote for “a war criminal the second time around.” Just wanted to set the record straight on that one.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:03 pmhussein toasterhead @76; I couldn’t agree more. Creationists/ID’rs start with a premise, then pick and choose
February 11th, 2009 at 5:03 pmwhatever purported evidence they think supports their belief.
A sound scientific theory will stand up to the most rigorous
testing and must be disprovable. Faith can never meet those standards.
The same people who don’t believe in this “theory” think that they would fly off the earth if we hadn’t passed the “law of gravity.”
February 11th, 2009 at 5:04 pmI’m guessing the one percent who had no answer are quietly smiling as they escape the karmic wheel.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:07 pmWhat is this continued downward spiral of intelligence among US citizens?
Have there been so many cuts in programs over the years, that kids aren’t educated? It’s like the “civics” classes that were required for graduation – do they still require a basic knowledge of our government, not to mention American history?
Yet, I think young people today are pretty savvy for the most part – is it superficial? Or are we talking about their parents — people who grew up in the 70’s?
Who are these ignorant people? And how did they get that way?
(Or were only religious conservatives polled?)
February 11th, 2009 at 5:07 pmand on the seventh day….he makeith it appear to be very, very old.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:10 pmAs scary as this poll’s results might be (and we should all be very, very frightened of the implications), I don’t believe that we, as a nation, are this friggin’ stupid. (Don’t get me wrong, we do have stupid people here, and I drive with them on the roads every day.)
If anything, I think this poll might actualy help show just how unrealiable and ridiculous polls like this are (and especially political polling).
Polls are bullshit. Period.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:16 pmgummitch Says:
I had an online argument about this with someone convinced that the Flood was the answer to any questions about fossils, and that there was geological evidence that humans walked the Earth with dinosaurs.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:01 pm
Ignorance is infuriating, isn’t it?
Of course, I have my own hypothesis about the Flood – that it’s a bit of racial memory dating back to the Toba eruption 70,000 years ago, which decimated the population of Africans who’d later go on to become almost all of us. It had to be a traumatic experience for the people who survived the event, and after a few thousand generations of re-telling, I can see how the story could turn into a flood instead of an ash cloud.
But it’s kind of a long shot.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:16 pmMarie Says:
“What is this continued downward spiral of intelligence among US citizens?”
I have an inkling it was the rise of a consumer oriented culture following WWII. Americans may have gotten the notion they were on top of the heap, and had attained some sort of civilized perfection. The focus then turned to acquisition of wealth and power, by any means possible. At first by simple hard work, now it has degenerated to the point of anything goes in order to be successful, even to the extent of cheating, lying, undermining ones co-workers, and a total lack of accountability for their products or their work.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:19 pmI work with younger people who have no pride in their work, do only what they are told, and will backstab even their own crew members if it means they can get ahead. They believe advancement and promotion are a given, and that they don’t have to do extra effort to be promoted.
Marie Says:
What is this continued downward spiral of intelligence among US citizens?
Have there been so many cuts in programs over the years, that kids aren’t educated? It’s like the “civics” classes that were required for graduation – do they still require a basic knowledge of our government, not to mention American history?
February 11th, 2009 at 5:07 pm
_____________
I think somewhere along the way, “knowledge” was replaced by “information” in our education system. Education stopped being about giving people critical thinking and problem-solving skills, but filling brains with information to be regurgitated on standardized tests.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:26 pmBut it’s kind of a long shot.
Not as long as “God did it”!
February 11th, 2009 at 5:31 pmAs scary as these numbers are I think the good news here is that while only 39 percent of Americans polled actually do believe in evolution, only 25 percent of those polled, do not.
Which coincidentally enough just happens to coincide with the percentage of people who still support the Bush administration.
Me thinks the two might be related.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:33 pmIt is completely wrong to say that Darwin “invented” the theory of evolution. Naturalists had offered theories of evolution (that living things change over time)for decades. In fact, natural selection, what Darwin is more properly associated with, had also been proposed before Darwin. What Darwin did was not to invent the theory, but to explain it more fully and more richly than previous naturalists had done, and make that work available to a much wider audience than had ever heard of previous theories of evolution.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:35 pmEducation stopped being about giving people critical thinking and problem-solving skills, but filling brains with information to be regurgitated on standardized tests.
Jon Stewart showed a clip of Bill O the other night that clearly shows a lack of critical thinking. In one segment, Bill O has one of his reporters badgering some guy while getting on a city bus. Microphone in his face and camera not far behind. The very next segment, without any interruption, Bill O is moaning the paparazzi hounding some starlit. It’s priceless. And right wingers can’t understand that Bill O and Rush et al are dumbing down America.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:37 pmDarwin worked on refining his theories for 20 years, until he caught wind of another scientist (Alfred Russel Wallace) preparing to publish his version of basically the same concept, whereupon Darwin rushed his signature work to publication.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:42 pmNevar Says:
Darwin worked on refining his theories for 20 years, until he caught wind of another scientist (Alfred Russel Wallace) preparing to publish his version of basically the same concept, whereupon Darwin rushed his signature work to publication.
I recall reading that, although there is truth to what you say, Darwin and Wallace became friends and discussed their work at length.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:46 pmI wasn’t implying any ill will between the two, simply depicting the circumstances. Darwin was incredibly methodical and precise, and seemed to want to find any errors in his theories.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:50 pmHoodathunk Says:
nanlichi Says: “Well, if you are so smart and believe in evolution, where did blacks come from?”
Actually, from a biblical standpoint, black people are easy to defend. They are the children of Shem mentioned in Genesis. How they came into being if God created Adam and Eve and no one else is a debatable point.
And if you want to get real technical Adam and Eve had to be Semitic since they are the start of the Jewish people. So we have a start for the Semitic race and the black race by biblical definition so where did caucasion, asian polynesian and amerind people come from.
Just wondering
February 11th, 2009 at 4:09 pm
Well. You did get the book of the Bible, Genesis, correct. Otherwise, here are the corrections if you’re interested.
Adam and Eve are not the first Jewish people. They, according to the Bible, were the first people.
Believe Jacob is considered the first Jew. That would be Jacob of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; father, son, and grandson; respectively, who were all descendents of Shem. All three were sons of Noah’s son Shem, from whom the word Semite comes.
God made promises to Abraham, and these promises would be fulfilled in Abraham’s descendents. Jacob had twelve sons who became the twelve tribes of Israel. Christ was a member of the tribe of Judah, named from one of Jacob’s sons.
Genesis records that God changed Jacob’s name to Israel, thus his designation as the first Jew.
Noah, who was about 10 generations from Adam, was the father of Shem, Ham, and Japheth. Generally it is considered that Jewish and Arab people, Semitic people, descended from Shem. Northern Europeans descended from Japheth, and everyone else descended from Ham. It appears that Ham’s descendents are the most prolific.
The Bible does suggest that there were more created people that Adam and Eve.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:52 pmSo when it doesn’t ay it we can assume that it suggests things. That is a cool angle. Still I hardly think a book that thinks two of everything fit on a boat and that snakes talk…
February 11th, 2009 at 5:54 pmNevar Says:
I wasn’t implying any ill will between the two
I didn’t take it that way Nevar. There are many examples of scientist making simultaneous discoveries and then feuding for the rest of their life (and people continue after their death). This was a great case where that didn’t happen. I was just pointing that out.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:56 pm“The Bible does suggest that there were more created people that Adam and Eve.”
A whole hell of a lot more people. One by one. Well, perhaps two or three at a time…
February 11th, 2009 at 5:56 pmWhat happned there?
February 11th, 2009 at 5:57 pmDarwin and Wallace were hardly the first to consider the relatedness of species, still they did give the idea a mechanism by introducing the issue of fitness and selection pressure.
The Bible does suggest that there were more created people that Adam and Eve.
Does the Bible suggest which came first, the chicken or the egg?
February 11th, 2009 at 5:59 pmI read a recent book about Darwin’s life, sorry I can’t remember the title or the name. It may have been Origins by Irving Stone, but I’m not certain.
February 11th, 2009 at 5:59 pmWhile Hoodathunk ponders today’s Bible lesson, let’s go with one of bit’s favorite quotes:
http://www.evolutionisdead.com/quotes.php?QID=374&keyword=genius
I See Nothing!
A molecular biologist,
(speaking on condition of anonymity) who identifies genetic controls for diseases. “The Biologist,” interviewed by George Caylor, The Ledger, Lynchburg, Virginia. Feb. 17, 2000.
Quote sort of begs this question: “What good is the theory of evolution?” doesn’t it?
February 11th, 2009 at 5:59 pmA whole hell of a lot more people. One by one. Well, perhaps two or three at a time…
—
February 11th, 2009 at 5:59 pmSeems there must have been a lot of left over dirt and ribs…
Darwin was Indeed methodical and precise….but another MAJOR reason for his delay in publishing the Origin of Species was that he KNEW it would touch off a Religious FIRESTORM.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:00 pmHe was right about that too.
The Controversy has lasted 150 years.
Quote sort of begs this question: “What good is the theory of evolution?” doesn’t it?
No, it begs the question: “Who keeps blowing up that elephant doll?”
February 11th, 2009 at 6:01 pmSeems there must have been a lot of left over dirt and ribs…
….hence the evolution of the barbeque.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:02 pm“What good is the theory of evolution?”
February 11th, 2009 at 6:05 pm– Well mostly it serves as the single best explaination based on the evidences. That seems to be a “good”. What good is any of the multitude of creation stories which can not be supported by any evidences?
Do you accept the notion of intelligent design, bitblt?
February 11th, 2009 at 6:05 pmDiscovery Institute has commissioned a new Zogby poll which shows some significant changes in what people want taught in school.
http://www.evolutionnews.org/2009/02/zogby_poll_shows_dramatic_jump.html#more
Zogby Poll Shows Dramatic Jump in Number of Americans Who Favor Teaching Both Sides of Evolution
DI is also promoting Feb 12 as “Academic Freedom Day.” For those of you who haven’t seen “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed,” you might want to see it so you can get an idea of what happens when one questions the Darwin Orthodoxy presented in the government creation myth.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:06 pmdbadass Says:
“What good is the theory of evolution?”
– Well mostly it serves as the single best explaination based on the evidences. That seems to be a “good”. What good is any of the multitude of creation stories which can not be supported by any evidences?
February 11th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
So you’re saying that since the theory is the “…best explanation…,” it provides a bit of interest in the closing paragraphs of papers on biology? Is that what you’re saying?
What good is a creation story? It provides meaning and purpose. Hadn’t you noticed?
February 11th, 2009 at 6:09 pmbitblt Says: “…a dramatic rise in the number of Americans who agree that when biology teachers teach the scientific evidence for Darwin’s theory of evolution, they also should teach the scientific evidence against it.”
None of us have any difficulty with this, bit. This describes the scientific process.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:10 pmWhat we are not interested in; is religious dogma presented as “evidence”.
What good is the theory of evolution?”
One of the Most Distressing Medical Problems these days, is the emergence of Drug Resistant Pathogenic Microbes.
If you don’t believe that they Evolved…due to Overuse and Poor Use of Antibiotics…then you may as well blame God for Creating them.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:11 pmYour creation story is a man made creation in itself, bit.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:11 pmAnd people wonder why the United States lags so far behind other leading industrialized nations with respect to scientific literacy.
We are hopelessly handicapped by our blind, unquestioning literal acceptance of a popular work of fiction known as the Bible.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:14 pm“If you don’t believe that they Evolved…due to Overuse and Poor Use of Antibiotics…then you may as well blame God for Creating them.”
Give bit a moment, and he will claim it is god’s way of punishing sinners.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:14 pmNevar Says:
Do you accept the notion of intelligent design, bitblt?
February 11th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
bit is going to treat “…accept the notion of …” exactly as “… believe in …,” and not answer.
Obviously since bit is a believer the idea of ID isn’t foreign to bit.
bit finds ID intriguing as if watching the beginnings of a new science, or a new understanding of an old science.
Questions frequently asked by DI include the following.
Has the theory demonstrated the needed degree of “creative” power in the context of what is observed and in the context of the time lines assumed? As an illustrative question: why did some dinosaurs evolve into birds?
What consequences results from a idea like the theory of evolution? DI has had several articles about the influence Darwinism supposedly had on Hitler. Of course, bit thinks the theory is the intellectual impetus that permits people to abort their unborn child.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:20 pmIt provides meaning and purpose. Hadn’t you noticed?
February 11th, 2009 at 6:21 pm—
No I hadn’t. Perhaps that may be true for those that can not find meaning and purpose on their own
Looks like Mike Huckabee’s been more effective than we thought!
February 11th, 2009 at 6:22 pmhttp://democralypsenow.blogspot.com/2009/02/mike-huckabee-loves-god-too-much-to.html
Nevar Says:
“If you don’t believe that they Evolved…due to Overuse and Poor Use of Antibiotics…then you may as well blame God for Creating them.”
Give bit a moment, and he will claim it is god’s way of punishing sinners.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:14 pm
Don’t believe any scientists have proven that there has never been “de-evolution.” Seems the theory just assumes that whatever creative power evolution has, it’s always an improvement. Isn’t that an assumption.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:23 pmIf you don’t believe that they Evolved…due to Overuse and Poor Use of Antibiotics…then you may as well blame God for Creating them.
—-
February 11th, 2009 at 6:23 pmSeems the big cloud hippie must be pissed at the gays again…
Nevar thinks bitblt was created on Monday morning after a weekend bender.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:25 pmdbadass Says:
It provides meaning and purpose. Hadn’t you noticed?
—
No I hadn’t. Perhaps that may be true for those that can not find meaning and purpose on their own
February 11th, 2009 at 6:21 pm
dbadass doesn’t find meaning and purpose in the theory of evolution?
Perhaps that’s why some many citizens find it useless.
bit understands. Even Dawkins calls himself a cultural Christian. He likes to sing Christmas carols.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:26 pmCome bit. Isn’t that beneath you? Do I have to go back and post that in context? I am saddened by the ploy you have resorted to. And to think I once thought you a honorable challenge.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:28 pmID is bunk.
religion is mythical in nature. brave religious people admit that.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:30 pmif meaning and purpose have to be outsourced it only demonstrates a lack of imagination.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:31 pmWhere is your evidence for creation, bit?
February 11th, 2009 at 6:36 pmSeems the theory just assumes that whatever creative power evolution has, it’s always an improvement. Isn’t that an assumption.
From the Point of View of the Drug Resistant Microbes…it IS an Improvement.
Many People, who have MISINTERPRTED Darwin’s theory , believe that Humans are the PINACLE of Evolution. This is SOCIAL DARWINISM…and Spencer and Hitler were Just Wrong about what Darwin said.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:36 pmReligion is also nothing more than theory.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:46 pmAnd the creation myth is nothing more than that. There isn’t even enough evidence to create a theory.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:48 pmProud:
February 11th, 2009 at 6:49 pmDo you understand what the word theory means in a scientific context? I realize it doesn’t matter as you have no real interest in the topic being discussed but still I was curious
Proud…this is for you…
KANSAS CITY, KS—As the debate over the teaching of evolution in public schools continues, a new controversy over the science curriculum arose Monday in this embattled Midwestern state. Scientists from the Evangelical Center For Faith-Based Reasoning are now asserting that the long-held “theory of gravity” is flawed, and they have responded to it with a new theory of Intelligent Falling.
Rev. Gabriel Burdett explains Intelligent Falling.
“Things fall not because they are acted upon by some gravitational force, but because a higher intelligence, ‘God’ if you will, is pushing them down,”
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512
February 11th, 2009 at 6:55 pmI may have gotten ahead of myself dbadass, I assumed he knew.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:57 pmGood catch.
I happen to be one of those who has read Darwin’s Origin of the Species. It is not difficult to understand. And the fact that so many Americans are stupid, we owe to the strong stand we take on science. Heaven forbid that anyone in school could be asked to study what other country’s do. And to easily understand the beautiful simplicity of what is not really a theory, but a fact.
I imagine one day we will have to have the equivalent of the Scopes trial again. We are often the laughing stock of a better educated world. It is like living as a throw back in Kansas.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:59 pmAnyone remember off their headtops the symptoms of Chagas disease
February 11th, 2009 at 7:01 pmThis just shows that the international stereotype of the “stupid, ignorant American” is not so far-fetched after all.
I cannot fathom how people can believe in ridiculous fundamentalist religions invented by ONE person based on his or her own SUBJECTIVE BELIEFS, yet they deny HARD SCIENCE that can be proved. How can they explain the natural evolution of bird wings and vertebrae? Or the evolution of Homo Sapiens?
Furthermore, their pathetic attempts to justify their beliefs is so hilarious. They usually revert to some formulation of this: It is written in X book (Bible, Koran etc), or Holy Person X said it so I believe it. PATHETIC!!!!!!!!!!!!
February 11th, 2009 at 7:02 pmIn a simpler age, humans drew pictures of their deities on rocks and cave walls. When the giant ground sloths and the short-faced cave bears disappeared, they quit praying to them.
February 11th, 2009 at 7:10 pmThen along came portable things to draw and write upon, and voila, transportable religion. By that time, the notion of one all purpose god came along, totally disconnected with any reality based proof of cause and effect.
The ensuing centuries of writing, editing, re-writng and still more editing have brought us to where we are today.
Twelve years of public education.
February 11th, 2009 at 7:11 pmOne of the reasons America is failing.
February 11th, 2009 at 7:20 pmwingnut libs
Heh, heh, heh..
Another political neophyte, trying to mix and match ideological terms; like putting Barbie clothes on a G.I. Joe.
February 11th, 2009 at 7:31 pmThere will be a day when Western civilization will look back and regard the religious right’s opposition to “evolution by natural selection” as absurd as the Church’s denial of the existence of atoms, or the vacuum, or the sun as the center of the solar system in past centuries.
February 11th, 2009 at 7:45 pmHave you noticed, barfly, that it’s the creative liberals who coin the phrases and terminology, which the knuckledraggers soon attempt to corrupt for their own use?
February 11th, 2009 at 7:47 pmIt’s really a win win.
Either the U.S. re-enters the 231st century or slides back into the Dark Ages and dies. Even if the latter occurs, it means that other countries who aren’t ignorant will take the lead.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:05 pmAny thoughts Rapture Ready?
February 11th, 2009 at 8:10 pm“de-evolution.”
Attention flat-earther:
Look up “entropy”.
Now go suck shit through a straw, incurable idiot.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:21 pmdbadass Says: Any thoughts Rapture Ready?
Good one dbadass, that’s the funniest thing I’ve heard all day.
February 11th, 2009 at 8:23 pmDid someone say devolution?
February 11th, 2009 at 8:24 pmhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRguZr0xCOc
“de-evolution.”
Couldn’t resist… hang on to your flower pots…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rxH39QlRuhg
February 11th, 2009 at 8:29 pmI am sort of fond of…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kf4eu5y0418&feature=related
February 11th, 2009 at 8:35 pmGallup framed the question to make evolution a function of faith. it isn’t. You don’t “believe in” evolution any more or less than you “believe in” capillary action or radio waves. If you asked most people how old the world is, they probably wouldn’t say 4,000 to 6,000 years or if even if you asked them how birds evolved, they probably wouldn’t say, “Why, God made ‘em in the Garden of Eden.” It’s only when you present Darwinian thought as a “belief” that some religious people think it is a challenge or alternative to theological systems.
The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com
P.S. Feburary 12, 1809 was an auspicious day on both sides of the pond. Abe Lincoln was born that day, too.
February 11th, 2009 at 9:01 pmThe de-educating of America. Give me 15 minutes with these idiots and I’ll have them not believing in air.
February 11th, 2009 at 9:22 pmI’m stunned. All I can say is holy friggin crap :(
February 11th, 2009 at 9:29 pmDear Proud –
ALL science is theory. Gravitational pull is a theory, too, but that doesn’t mean you’re going to suddenly float away because, after all, gravity is just a theory, & you have a helluva lot of air between your ears. Evolution, tho perhaps not exactly as Darwin THEORIZED, is a fact. A super being did not make the world 6,000 years ago & Fred Flintstone — i.e., a human walking with dinosaurs — is a cartoon, not a theory.
Go back to school, & this time stay awake in science class. Good luck.
The Constant Weader at http://www.RealityChex.com
February 11th, 2009 at 9:58 pmI had hoped this whole discussion might have evolved into somethng. I suppose I might have just been deluding myself by some falsely created fantasy in my mind
February 11th, 2009 at 10:01 pm“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don’t believe, no proof is possible.” — Stuart Chase
Are those who reject science the believers or the non-believers?
February 11th, 2009 at 10:15 pmAre those who reject science the believers or the non-believers?
Good question osage. I am a Christian, and I believe God created an elegant complex world that we struggle to understand. Everything we explain using the scientific method gives us a little glimpse into God’s toolkit. I’ve never been able to understand why so many limit God by bounding him with a human understanding of space and time. How does God measure days? Why do we assume creation ended after the beginning? For me, the Bible does not negate the Big Bang theory or evolution. Those who insist on a literal reading limit the infinite.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:31 pmI’d like to let the record show that 39 + 25 + 36 + 1 = 101%.
February 11th, 2009 at 10:48 pmClearly some of you religious extremists have no clue how science works. Theories are based on the best empirical EVIDENCE available, not PROOF. There is an incredible wealth of evidence–both geological and biochemical–to support evolution by natural selection.
Creationism and ID are faith-based concepts. Their “evidence” consists of the allegories provided in the Bible, nothing more.
I actually have no problem with the idea of discussing the merits of Creationism or ID in the public school classroom. It would make a fine topic in a social studies course on Religions in Society. But this topic has no business in a biology classroom, since science is based on empirical data and testable hypotheses whereas religious beliefs are by definition faith-based.
February 11th, 2009 at 11:03 pmFortunately for the non-”believers”, agreement with or belief in evolution is not a requirement for benifiting from it.
February 11th, 2009 at 11:12 pm25% of Americans don’t believe in evolution.
Didn’t something like 25% of Americans believe that Bush Jr. had a successful presidency?
Am I the only one who recognizes a pattern here? People who don’t believe the facts, even scientific facts, have the right to vote for a complete incompetent moron (Bush) and a corporate criminal (Cheney) and proudly state that the Bush Administration was a success. Incredible.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:05 am“25% of Americans don’t believe in evolution.”?
Is it just me or does anyone else think this poll was conducted in the middle of the day when most people under 50 are out working?
February 12th, 2009 at 12:37 amNevar Says:
________________________________________
“The Bible does suggest that there were more created people that Adam and Eve.”
A whole hell of a lot more people. One by one. Well, perhaps two or three at a time…
February 11th, 2009 at 5:56 pm
It’s not clear to bit what you mean with “…whole … of lot more people.”
One of the more interesting ways to study humanity’s past is to study the rate of population growth.
For instance, if one applies modern population growth formulae to the average number of offspring mentioned in the first ten chapter of Genesis, some very interesting results come about.
If bit remembers correctly, the genealogies mentioned in Genesis show the average number of sons as five.
Adam is a good illustration of what bit means. Genesis mentions Adam’s three sons by name, but comments that Adam had other sons and daughters. This appears to mean that Adam had at least seven children. (Jewish tradition is that Eve gave birth to fifty-nine.)
The interesting results come from an attempt to answer the question: “How many people could have died in the flood of Noah?” ( If you’re interested in an answer, see http://www.ldolphin.org. Go to the library and search on “population.”)
What does this have to do with Darwin’s birthday? Nothing, but id does have something to do with a discussion of the theory. It suggests a question.
If there have been humans for say 100,000 years or more, why are we not up to our knees in their remains?
Worded differently this question is, “What does the current number of people on the earth suggest about the length of time there have been humans on the earth?”
February 12th, 2009 at 4:09 ambitblt Says:
Don’t believe any scientists have proven that there has never been “de-evolution.” Seems the theory just assumes that whatever creative power evolution has, it’s always an improvement. Isn’t that an assumption.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:23 pm
_________
Um, de-evolution happens all the time. It’s called “extinction.” That’s why you don’t see any woolly mammoths or stegosauruses around any more. They did not experience positive genetic mutations that allowed them to adapt to changes in their environment that killed them off. Hence, “de-evolution.”
February 12th, 2009 at 6:35 amHow is it even possible to have no opinion about what you personally believe? This tells me that 36% of Americans are hopeless morons. Oh, wait . . . I didn’t really need Gallup to point that out, did I?
February 12th, 2009 at 7:58 amIMHO, the reason bitblt (and people who think like him) are wrong is because they start with the assumption that there has to be a reason and a purpose to why we are here at all. This assumption (which is all it is) would invariably lead one to believe that some creature of some kind (call it “God”) created us for whatever that reason and purpose was. So a belief in God was necessary to support the assumption that we are here on this planet for some reason or purpose. Otherwise, it would all be pointless.
I disagree with their assumption. I believe that life evolved on this planet (and very probably some others, too), precisely because the conditions necessary for life to evolve existed on this planet and on few others. Sad as it is, there is no reason or purpose why we are here, we just are. If you want to give your own life meaning and purpose, that’s fine. But don’t assume that one has to exist or else you wouldn’t be here. That’s backwards. You exist, so you might as well give your own life meaning and purpose.
I am perfectly comfortable with the idea that we are here, essentialy, by random chance; that there is no overriding purpose or reason why we are here; that there is no “meaning of life” other than what we give ourselves; that we are not alone, though we are very likely far, far away from other life in the Universe; and that God is a fantasy invented by people who can’t accept that we are here by random chance.
February 12th, 2009 at 8:00 ambitblt Says: “If there have been humans for say 100,000 years or more, why are we not up to our knees in their remains?”
Mother Nature is a very efficient housekeeper
February 12th, 2009 at 9:14 amcd Says:
““25% of Americans don’t believe in evolution.”?
Is it just me or does anyone else think this poll was conducted in the middle of the day when most people under 50 are out working?”
Good point. The calls are also likely timed for the commercial breaks.
February 12th, 2009 at 9:18 ambitblt Says: “If there have been humans for say 100,000 years or more, why are we not up to our knees in their remains?”
Did bit really ask such a stupid question? Does bit not reaize that the answer is the same for why we are not “up to our knees” in the remains of all the hundreds of billions of animals that have walked the earth? When they died, their remains decayed. Simple. Except for a simpleton.
February 12th, 2009 at 9:19 ambitblt Says:
A new Zogby poll on the eve of Charles Darwin’s 200th birthday shows a dramatic rise in the number of Americans who agree that when biology teachers teach the scientific evidence for Darwin’s theory of evolution, they also should teach the scientific evidence against it.
February 11th, 2009 at 6:06 pm
Well, that’s just asinine. There is no evidence against it.
February 12th, 2009 at 9:30 am______
Wayne A. Schneider Says:
IMHO, the reason bitblt (and people who think like him) are wrong is because they start with the assumption that there has to be a reason and a purpose to why we are here at all. This assumption (which is all it is) would invariably lead one to believe that some creature of some kind (call it “God”) created us for whatever that reason and purpose was. So a belief in God was necessary to support the assumption that we are here on this planet for some reason or purpose. Otherwise, it would all be pointless.
February 12th, 2009 at 8:00 am
_______
There may be a few for whom your theory is true, but this expresses the view of more Christians:
“…I was able to see faith as more than just a comfort to the weary or a hedge against death; rather, it was an active, palpable agent in the world. In the day-to-day work of the men and women I met in church each day…I could see the Word made manifest.”
Barack Obama
February 12th, 2009 at 9:37 amI suppose bit has little interest in comparative genomes
February 12th, 2009 at 9:52 amHe thinks they are those short little ceramic figures in people’s yards.
February 12th, 2009 at 10:00 amIf you know anything about he scientific theory, you know that its main goal is to disprove something. The Theory of evolution, the theory of gravity, etc. have not been disproven yet. Hence the word “theory”. This is why these theories stand today. This is done so that over time and the greater knowledge, this might be eventually disproved. This is because we as scientists know that we DO NOT know everything. ID is easily disproven. Belief is not a tool of the scientific method.
February 12th, 2009 at 10:35 amI saw a PBS program about Kitzmiller vs Dover, the PA case where the school board tried to add intelligent design to the science curriculum. It was really fascinating and heartening. None of the claims used to deny the validity of evolution held up under scrutiny–on each point (and they have only about 3)there was voluminous evidence to refute it.
Those points are: 1) Stuff is really complicated and couldn’t have formed from mutation and natural selection alone; 2) If you remove one component from a complex system it doesn’t work and serves no purpose so it must have been designed by someone or something; 3) There are species that sprung forth fully formed in the fossil record; 4) No one has produced an evolutionary explanation for the complexity and function of the immune system.
All these points were crushed under an avalanche of scientific data.
I learned that the main reason so many American don’t believe in evolution is that we’re still not teaching the full theory in the schools. The Scopes trial removed evolution from textbooks for generations. It has been replaced by degrees, but not fully and not until recently.
February 12th, 2009 at 10:45 amI wonder what exactly the point of this poll is. ID adherents seem to use this sort of thing to defend their position. “Well if evolution is true how come so many people don’t believe it?”
Well because scientific theory is not validated or refuted by the consensus of laymen. This is “Wikiality” according to Stephen Colbert–ie If enough people believe a thing, it must be true. By this kind of illogic, if enough people believe that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is an authentic document then it becomes truth rather than an anti-Semitic hoax.
February 12th, 2009 at 11:07 amCatullus Ennui Says:
I wonder what exactly the point of this poll is. ID adherents seem to use this sort of thing to defend their position. “Well if evolution is true how come so many people don’t believe it?”
February 12th, 2009 at 11:07 am
__________
Perhaps, but it’s still important for us in the reality-based community to know how far we still have to go in educating the public. Scientific theory may not be refuted by public consensus, but scientific policy can indeed be altered by it. How can we expect the public to understand climate change or disease prevention or agricultural biodiversity or natural resource management if they don’t believe in the basic, fundamental process of evolution that affects all of these?
February 12th, 2009 at 11:28 amI have some lovely nuts for you, Tracy 5, bring a couple of rocks over and we’ll have a party.
February 12th, 2009 at 11:53 amTracy__5 Says:
Evolution absolutely…except for mankind. It’s too far fetched that only one very physically weak species on this planet is so far ahead of every other species in terms of brain power not to mention ruling the planet…fortunately or unfortunately.
February 12th, 2009 at 11:46 am
___________
And your scientific evidence of this is?
February 12th, 2009 at 12:05 pmTracy_5:
February 12th, 2009 at 12:11 pmIt was the very physical weakness you note which provided the pressure for the evolution of a complex brain and culture. Otherwise you are correct. Modern hominids would not have been successful.
Tracy__5 Says:
“And your scientific evidence of this is?”
It’s common sense.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:08 pm
_____________
In other words, “it’s complete conjecture.” You have no basis for the assertion, so you choose to simply ignore the science because it conflicts with your preconceived beliefs.
Real good, moron.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:11 pmTracy__5 Says:
#201
I would like an explaination first of why mankind is the only species that is able to truely “think” and why no other species even comes close in terms of brain power.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:10 pm
_____________
Your assumption is false. How do you know that homo sapiens is and was the only species able to truly “think?” We have no way of determining the internal thought processes of animals – or even other human beings, for that matter. We can only observe behavior, and from behavioral observation we know that creatures from rats to chimpanzees are capable of problem-solving, laughter, and moral reasoning – all qualities once believed to be uniquely human.
Science doesn’t even know what “thinking” is. The process we call “thinking” is still largely a mystery – there is no central brain hub, no seat of consciousness, that calls the shots. Once we understand how thought works, we may indeed discover that humpback whales are thinking about quadratic equations.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:18 pmI would like an explaination first of why mankind is the only species that is able to truely “think” and why no other species even comes close in terms of brain power.
—
February 12th, 2009 at 12:18 pmDo you know anything about the neuroanatomy of the cetaceans? I wouldn’t want to place you at any disadvantage
dbadass Says:
Tracy_5:
It was the very physical weakness you note which provided the pressure for the evolution of a complex brain and culture.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
___________
And these were self-reinforcing mechanisms, if I’m not mistaken. The invention of culture and language caused physical changes in the structure of the brain, allowing it to develop more fully, which then allowed successive generations to develop even more complex cultures and linguistics, and so on.
It’s part of the evolution of humans as a species, though I don’t know if that would be considered evolution in the Darwinian sense, since it’s not a genetic component but a developmental one.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:23 pmdbadass Says:
Do you know anything about the neuroanatomy of the cetaceans? I wouldn’t want to place you at any disadvantage
February 12th, 2009 at 12:18 pm
__________
Not a thing, but I’m quite curious…
February 12th, 2009 at 12:26 pmIs there nothing that a Liberal won’t blame on a Conservative.
The question should have been..”After reading these comments, has the Liberal think process evolved or are they still longing for the trees?”
What a stupid argument to blame on Conservatives. I didn’t see anywhere in the article that mentioned a persons political views.
Liberals are morons. My proof is in the Puddin’. Hey, can I get a 36% consensus on this?
February 12th, 2009 at 12:38 pmTracy__5 Says:
But they haven’t really gotten all the far after millions of years have they? Why? You still haven’t offered a decent explaination as to why only ONE species is so much more advanced in terms of the process of thinking and reasoning.
___________
Define “getting all the far.” Does a species have to have nuclear weapons and Starbucks to be successful? Rats are doing just fine as a species – particularly in the nice urban habitats we’ve created for them. Chimps aren’t doing quite as well, in good part thanks to human activity, but they’re still a surviving species. They haven’t evolved language and culture because they haven’t needed to, and because they don’t have the brain complexity and/or opposable thumbs that are able to do the job.
It’s not to say that there haven’t been other species on the planet who did have the brain capacity and the opposable thumbs to dominate the planet. Homo erectus and homo neanderthalensis both had brain sizes comparable to homo sapiens and had conquered much of Africa, Asia, and Europe at the height of their reins, up till about 30,000 years ago.
However, we figured out how to make better tools and weapons and eventually killed all of them off. If we hadn’t, it’s entirely possible that we WOULDN’T be the only species on the planet that’s this advanced in terms of thinking and processing.
Yeah…sure and untill that happens to suggest that humans evolved from chimps will remain a unprovable mystery.
February 12th, 2009 at 12:56 pm
___________
No, it’s quite provable and not at all mysterious – humans absolutely did not evolve from chimps. The suggestion is ridiculous. Humans and chimps both evolved from the common ancestor nakalipithecus nakayamai, branching off about ten million years ago.
February 12th, 2009 at 1:17 pmTracy__5 Says:
What caused the physical changes of the brain? And again why did this only happen to only one species?
February 12th, 2009 at 1:01 pm
_________
Learning of languages changes the physical development of the language section of the brain, and actually increases brain size. This is biological fact. Feral children who grow up without learning a language have smaller brains than normal children. The very act of developing language allowed our species to prosper.
It wasn’t easy, mind you. It took a good 190,000 years for us to make the transition from nomadic hunter-gatherers to civilization. If humans were somehow divinely inspired, why did it take so long for us to advance? That’s pretty UNintelligent design, isn’t it?
February 12th, 2009 at 1:26 pmMore of bit’s favorite quotes from
http://www.evolutionisdead.com/quotes.php?QID=387
Michael Egnor, M.D., Neurosurgeon,
February 12th, 2009 at 1:51 pmEvolution News and Views Nov 24, 2008
It is a big world bit. I can find all kinds of quotes about all kinds of things. What is your point? How do you feel about the Catholic church’s acceptance of biological evolution or do you just discount that pope…
February 12th, 2009 at 2:03 pmbitblt Says:
Michael Egnor, M.D., Neurosurgeon,
Evolution News and Views Nov 24, 2008
February 12th, 2009 at 1:51 pm
___________
Thank you for this. If I ever need neurosurgery, I know one surgeon I WON’T be going to.
February 12th, 2009 at 2:11 pmdbadass Says:
It is a big world bit. I can find all kinds of quotes about all kinds of things. What is your point? How do you feel about the Catholic church’s acceptance of biological evolution or do you just discount that pope…
February 12th, 2009 at 2:03 pm
Knowing that there all kinds of quotes about all kinds of subjects is not a surprise to bit. Seems to bit in a forum such as TP quotes are a succinct way to summarize thoughts.
bit would be interested in the source of your assertion: “…Catholic church’s acceptance of biological evolution…”
bit is an evangelical, and though bit understands that there are Catholic evangelicals, what the pope says is as irrelevant to bit as what Pat Robertson says.
February 12th, 2009 at 2:38 pmbitblt Says:
Knowing that there all kinds of quotes about all kinds of subjects is not a surprise to bit. Seems to bit in a forum such as TP quotes are a succinct way to summarize thoughts.
February 12th, 2009 at 2:38 pm
__________
Or to contract out higher-level thinking that you’re clearly not capable of on your own.
February 12th, 2009 at 2:51 pmdbadass notices that bits quotes seem to come from an odd source. It matter little though as dbadass has seen the character of bit back in comments 139 and 140. dbadass former respect for bit no longer exists. A dishonest opponent is no opponent at all, now is it bit?
February 12th, 2009 at 2:53 pmWow, blt takes someones words out of context to make his point seem more plausable…..I just can’t believe that from a person who refers to himself in third person all the time as does any rational, sane person.
February 12th, 2009 at 2:59 pmdbadass Says:
dbadass notices that bits quotes seem to come from an odd source. It matter little though as dbadass has seen the character of bit back in comments 139 and 140. dbadass former respect for bit no longer exists. A dishonest opponent is no opponent at all, now is it bit?
February 12th, 2009 at 2:53 pm
Ok. bit’s devastated and dbadass is obscure. So how about the reference to the Catholics accepting biological evolution.
bit isn’t being dishonest. He figures in a discussion like this if he can simply convey the idea that their is not 100% universal agree about the theory, he’s done the best he can do.
Dr. Egnor is a regular poster at http://www.evolutionnews.com.
http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/ shows that many of the those who are skeptical put “PhD” behind their names.
February 12th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
hussein toasterhead:
February 12th, 2009 at 3:03 pmSorry to not get back to you on the cetacean thing. I need to get to my library to get the names of two authors you might want to look into. John Lilly’s stuff is interesting but somewhat problematic based on some of his more controversial stuff
bitblt
Sorry fool. There is short term evidence that back up evolution.
What the hell do you think breeding is all about??????
Do you think there were always herfords with horns and herfords without horns and that one day all the horned ones just died?????
February 12th, 2009 at 3:05 pmbitblt Says:
http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/ shows that many of the those who are skeptical put “PhD” behind their names.
A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism
“We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”
February 12th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
_____________
And these “scientists” are signing on to a philosophy of ignorance. The philosophy of that statement is “we don’t know exactly how life originated, therefore Darwin must be wrong.”
I’m curious as to whether or not these “scientists” would remove their names from this list if more evidence is unearthed that leads to the conclusion that random mutation and natural selection IS capable of creating complex life.
February 12th, 2009 at 3:18 pmhussein toasterhead Says:
And these “scientists” are signing on to a philosophy of ignorance. The philosophy of that statement is “we don’t know exactly how life originated, therefore Darwin must be wrong.”
February 12th, 2009 at 3:18 pm
Believe bit understands where you’re coming from on this one, th.
It reminds bit of this one: “Since there is not God, evolution must have brought about what is observed.”
Of course there are the ever popular variations on a theme: panspermia(exogenesis – life came to earth from outer space) and “the aliens did it” theme.
February 12th, 2009 at 3:50 pmbitblt Says:
It reminds bit of this one: “Since there is not God, evolution must have brought about what is observed.”
February 12th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
____________
Wrong. Evolution and natural selection do not arise from atheism. In fact, Darwin was a devout Christian. The fact is that the science, over the 150 years since Origin was published, leads to the conclusion that what is observed happened via evolution and natural selection. It’s not the scientists who have a political agenda, it’s the religious lunatics at the Discovery Institute.
February 12th, 2009 at 3:55 pmAs a biologist and educator, it infuriates me that the question continues to be framed as what you “believe in.” Teaching evolutionary biology, studying the process of evolution, and accepting the scientific fact of evolution has nothing to do with belief. I do all of the former things but I would NEVER say that I “believe” in evolution. Belief is the realm of metaphysics, superstition, and “spirituality” (religion), not of science. This Gallup poll is garbage in–garbage out; in a cynical moment, I myself may have answered “do not believe.” Stupid question! Move on! Happy Darwin Day!!!
February 12th, 2009 at 4:07 pmHi Tracy_5:
February 12th, 2009 at 4:21 pmMight you articulate these “major flaws” as you understand them so those of us trained in this area might assist you?
Rather than trying to disprove biological evolution why do its opponents never attempt to prove their alternative? Seems sort of chickenshit…
February 12th, 2009 at 4:23 pmFred Says:
bitblt
Sorry fool. There is short term evidence that back up evolution.
What the hell do you think breeding is all about??????
Do you think there were always herfords with horns and herfords without horns and that one day all the horned ones just died?????
February 12th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
bit doesn’t believe that selectively breeding in or out a desirable or an undesirable characteristicsqualifies as evolution. Believe this qualifies for what is called “micro” evolution. Isn’t the type of evolution being discussed called “macro” evolution ( or vice versa ) where one species becomes another species.
As many breeds of dogs as there are, they’re still dogs.
Further, selective breeding is completely based on observation. Wasn’t Medel doing this sort of thing hundreds of years ago without any help from Darwinism?
So the best illustrations of evolution to be presented in this thread are selective breeding and adapting microbes?
February 12th, 2009 at 4:25 pmSo the best illustrations of evolution to be presented in this thread are selective breeding and adapting microbes?
—
February 12th, 2009 at 4:29 pmYet the opposition has yet to offer any tangible evidences of any divine creation. Seems the score then might be considered 2 to 0.
Tracy__5 Says:
Then why is it still called a theory?
February 12th, 2009 at 3:43 pm
_____________
Gravity is still called a theory, too. That doesn’t mean it’s untrue, it just means that the exact mechanisms are still being researched.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:30 pmOh shit, I am sorry Tracy_5. I was working under the assumption that you understood the scientific definition of theory and not the lay definition. I apologize.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:32 pmTracy_5.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:36 pmYou might wish to google punctuated equilibrium as well as cladistics, systematics and related terms. The American Museum of Natural History site also may be helpful to you. I am headed out but will check around midnight when I return. I am sure many others here can help address some of the questions you may have as you research this topic
bitblt Says:
Further, selective breeding is completely based on observation. Wasn’t Medel doing this sort of thing hundreds of years ago without any help from Darwinism?
February 12th, 2009 at 4:25 pm
_________
On the contrary. Mendel started his work after Darwin published Origin, and his genetic theory filled quite a large gap in Darwin’s work on the exact mechanism of inheritance.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:36 pmTracy__5 Says:
We aren’t trying to “prove” anything. Such important things that are missing in fossil history and cannot be explained by science are just accepted on faith that God created it.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:34 pm
_________
Ahh, got it.
So when the fossils are eventually discovered that DO fill in these gaps, do you question your faith or just reject the science?
February 12th, 2009 at 4:38 pmTracy__5 Says:
If you are trained in this “area” I am sure you are quite aware of them….especially the linear part and the absence of fossils that would obviously show more of the progression in many species of today.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
_________
The “linear” part? What a load of crap. Who says human evolution had to be a linear progression? Modern science says that there were many branches on the homo tree over the last two million years, some lasting longer than others. There’s nothing linear about it.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:40 pmTracy__5 Says:
I am not saying it’t true OR untrue…just inconclusive. Gravity is a physically be observed phenonom. Evolution of man is a conclusion based on physical evidence in the past, not an experiment that can be preformed today in a lab.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
________
What are you saying? Skeletal remains that can be dated using radioactive isotopes are not “physical evidence?”
Or do we need to physically recreate the entire biological process of evolution from protocells to Alan Alda in a lab? Interesting idea, but I don’t think anyone’s prepared to fund that experiment for 3.8 billion years.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:49 pmTracy__5 Says:
I am not saying it’t true OR untrue…just inconclusive. Gravity is a physically be observed phenonom. Evolution of man is a conclusion based on physical evidence in the past, not an experiment that can be preformed today in a lab.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:40 pm
_________
And another thing – gravity is NOT necessarily a “physically be observed” phenomenon. Yes, you can drop an apple and watch it hit the ground, but it’s not yet possible to observe whether the apple falls due to a force or the curvature of space-time.
February 12th, 2009 at 4:52 pmThe More the fossil record gets discovered, the more it show that Species Evolved over geological Time…BUT
The Real Startling Evidence for Evolution comes from the Analysis of Molecules in Organisms Living Now.
Some of the Enzymes in Vital Organic systems, like the Krebs cycle in Mitochondria have Virtually the SAME Protein Structure in Men , Mice , and Yeasts.
This is because these Enzymes are So Essential to Life, that any Mutations are Fatal.
So if Life didn’t Evolve from a Common Ancestor, why are these Critical Enzymes Identical???
It will be interesting, if we ever encounter extra terrestrial life forms, to see if they have a similar Enzyme structure…or use DNA like all earthlings do.
February 12th, 2009 at 5:08 pmTracy_5,
On numerous occasions in the past, and here again now, I have invited this God of yours to strike me dead where I sit to prove he exists. So far, I’m still sitting here. I will be again in a few minutes if you would like confirmation that your God is powerless to do anything to stop people like me from saying he doesn’t exist and did not create the Universe.
February 12th, 2009 at 5:12 pmTracy__5 Says:
So when the fossils are eventually discovered that DO fill in these gaps, do you question your faith or just reject the science?”
You mean “if”…right?
February 12th, 2009 at 4:57 pm
_________
Nope. I mean “when.” It’s just a matter of time. “missing links” in the human evolutionary tree are being uncovered all the time, and the gaps will continue to close. The only question is where your God of the Gaps is going to go…
February 12th, 2009 at 5:25 pmHey, what do you know, I’m still alive and well. Gee, if God really did exist, I’m sure I’d be one of the first people he’d want gone. Why am I still alive, Tracy?
February 12th, 2009 at 5:31 pmDon’t despair USA, I did my university in Sydney, Australia and I was shocked by the level of total ignorance displayed by all Australian tertiary students and a few teachers as well!!!
February 12th, 2009 at 10:38 pmI thought Brazil had a bad educational system, but after my experience in Australia, I’m grateful for the Jesuits, who brought education to Brazil during the Portuguese colonization. Up to 1964, we had Latin, French and English in all secondary schools. When the military took over in the US-backed coup, they took away Latin and French from the curriculum. They also closed down all human sciences universities, favoring engineering, maths and medicine.
Although my school was managed by the Jesuits, we were told that the bible had a ’symbolic’ explanation of the world, and science was a very important good thing! Darwin was a hero!
It is shocking to see some people, in the 21th Century, arguing for creation!!!!!!!! It happen here in Australia too!
Domocracy is the freedom of choice. But if you are ignorant, you are not even aware that you have the choice! Like a fish in a fish bowl… going around and around and saying on every cornner: Wow!!!!!
This is what happens when “The Flintstones” trump “Nova.”
February 13th, 2009 at 11:30 pmfine
sikis
April 22nd, 2009 at 3:18 pmporno izle
porno videolar
porn videos