Christian medical students want anti-evolution lectures

Aftenposten (Norway News) ^ | 19 Nov 2003 | Jonathan Tisdall

[yonif]

Medical student John David Johannessen and the leader of the Christian Medical Students Circle have petitioned the medical faculty at the University of Oslo for lectures "that not only argue the cause for evolution, but also the evidence against", student newspaper Universitas reports.

"The theory of evolution doesn't stand up and does not present enough convincing facts. It is one theory among many, but in education it is discussed as if it is accepted by everyone," Johannessen said.

Johannessen is a believer in creationism, based on the biblical account.

"Of course one has to know the theory of evolution, it is after all part of the curriculum. But certain lecturers demand that one believe it as well. Then it becomes a question of faith and not subject," Johannessen said.

Johannessen told the newspaper that he and his fellows are often compared to American extremists. Besides not being taken seriously or being able to debate the topic relevantly, Johannessen said that 'evolutionists' practically harass those who do not agree with them.

Dean Per Brodal said it was regrettable if any university staff were disparaging to creationists, but that there was no reason to complain about a lack of relevant evidence. Brodal also felt that evolution had a rather minor spot in medical education.

Biology professor Nils Christian Stenseth argued that instead of indulging an 'off-topic' debate the medical faculty should offer a course in fundamental evolutionary biology, saying that nothing in biology could be understood out of an evolutionary context.

The Christian Medical Students Circle want three basic points to be included in the curriculum:

1 According to the theory of evolution a mutation must be immediately beneficial to survive through selection. But many phenomena explained by evolution (for example the eye) involve so many, small immediately detrimental mutations that only give a long-term beneficial effect.

2 There is no fossil evidence to indicate transitional forms between, for example, fish and land animals or apes and humans.

3 Evolution assumes too many extremely improbably events occurring over too short a span of time.

[Last Visible Dog]

I get the impression that they really, really need this strawman. If 'atheism' doesn't mean what they want it to mean they cannot point with their fingers and shout: "neener, neener, irrational too!" Well, if it makes them happy...

That is a rather odd statement when the definition of atheism has been posted thus rendering your impliesd definition the one that the word "doesn't mean". Seems your statement is the strawman (not to mention the some old, some old victory dance)

[Last Visible Dog]

Donno. The same objection might be raised as to et ux., short for et uxor, meaning "and wife."

So does "Et to, Brute" = et t. br.

[PatrickHenry]

That's Et tu, Brute, (Brute being Brutus in the vocative case.)

[Last Visible Dog]

That's Et tu, Brute, (Brute being Brutus in the vocative case.)

impello impuli impulsum, PatrickHenre

[Dimensio]

You just skewered yourself with your own words!!! In your third sentence you admit your atheism is a belief system.

Let us take a look at my comment again, I'll go ahead and leave your underlining in, but I'll boldface the part of the sentence that you ignored.

I know what I believe and what I don't believe.

Oooh, so close. If only you hadn't stopped reading when you wanted to stop reading, you might have seen the full context and not made an ass of yourself.

[Dimensio]

Are you not certain there is or is not a god and don’t have enough evidence to prove it one way or another?

Let me spell this out One More Time. After that, if you still don't get it, then it's obvious that you're just trolling for replies and being deliberately dishonest, or you're just incredibly thick-headed.

I lack belief in gods -- ALL gods. That is to say, I am without belief in gods. A theist is one who has a belief in a god or gods. The prefix "a" means "without". I am "without belief in a god or gods". This means that I am an atheist. An agnostic is one who believes that it is ultimately unknowable whether or not gods exist. Agnosticism is orthagonal to atheism/theism -- an agonostic could refuse to accept that which he or she believes can never be known, and be an atheist, or an agnostic could accept a deity "on faith" and be a theist.

[general_re]

I could go on, ad nausiam...

Or even "ad nauseam", I suspect ;)

[PatrickHenry]

ARRRRRGHHHHH!

[general_re]

"Viz. a viz., apropos, concordantly...."

Sorry, just having a Will Ferrell moment ;)

[Dimensio]

ERGO!

[general_re]

"I don't usually like to use my big voice..." ;)

[Last Visible Dog]

Oooh, so close. If only you hadn't stopped reading when you wanted to stop reading, you might have seen the full context and not made an ass of yourself.

Jeepers, you seemed brighter than that. Not believing in something is just as much a belief as believing in something. Opps!

I will try to illustrate this as simply as possible:

I believe is God – a belief

I don’t believe in God – still a belief.

I have proof God does not exist – not a belief (unfortunately for you, there is no evidence that God does not exist AND it is logically impossible to prove a negative – sorry)

If you can't prove God does not exist - it is a belief.

If you claim certainty related to the nature of God - that is a belief system.

[Last Visible Dog]

I lack belief in gods -- ALL gods. That is to say, I am without belief in gods.

You BELIEVE in no Gods.

That is a belief system.

Unless you can say "I have proof no Gods exist" - it is a belief system.

No amount of tap-dancing or spewing of insults will change the reality of this issue:

Dimensio believes no Gods exist

Unless Dimensio can prove his position, it is a belief.

[PatrickHenry]

If it's any help in this trivial tangle in which you find yourself, here's a link to somebody's class notes, making a distinction between belief, disbelief, and nonbelief:

+ Belief: to hold an idea as true
- disbelief - a belief that an idea is not true
- nonbelief - state of suspended belief, agnosticism, absence of opinion
- Belief doesn't necessarily constitute knowing, unless what is believed is true.
- Truth is a property of beliefs that are grounded in fact (i.e., beliefs that can be rightly affirmed).
- Intensity of belief is not an index of truth of that belief.

[balrog666]

- Intensity of belief is not an index of truth of that belief.

Echo.

[bluejay]

You were discussing logical arguements for the existence of God. I'm curious why you attempt to prove/disprove God's existence, using logic?

I am sorry, I am not trying to be facetious, but I do not fully understand - should I not be using logical arguments?

[stuartcr]

I don't believe that God, the creator of all, can be explained by logic, or any other human means. Myself, I just believe that God exists, with no way, or need, of substantiating it. It's just faith.

[js1138]

I personally consider myself an ag nausium.

[js1138]

Make that ag nauseam.

[PatrickHenry]

600 ad infinitum.