Posted on 01/04/2009 5:39:47 AM PST by PurpleMountains
All across the country, archeologists, paleontologists and biologists are taking part in what is perhaps the greatest example of political correctness in history – their adherence to Darwinism and their attempts to ostracize any scientist who does not agree with them. In doing so, they are not only ignoring the vast buildup of recent scientific discoveries that seriously undermines the basics of Darwinism, but they are also participating, due to politically correctness, in a belief system that indirectly resulted in the deaths of millions of people – those slaughtered by the Stalins, the Hitlers, the Maos, the Pol Pots and others who took their cue from Darwinism’s tenets.
(Excerpt) Read more at forthegrandchildren.blogspot.com ...
“Human-chimp= 42+28 = 70 DNA differences
Human-gorilla=42+16+42= 100 DNA differences
chimp-gorilla=28+16+42= 86 DNA differences
This is the pattern we see repeated over and over again. Every tree we make based upon data shows that humans and chimps are closer than either is to a gorilla.””
“That is impressive DNA work I will agree, but how does it prove that humans evolved from apes?”
It doesnt ‘prove’ it, but it makes other explanations all the more implausible.
“Is it not entirely possible that each exist on their own and simply share these similarities and always have and always will? “
Define ‘possible’. You can construct many scenarios to explain it, but what makes it ‘possible’ other than your own belief?
Are Gorillas and other apes related? Did they have a common ancestor?
Well, I guess we have substantial agreement. Maybe I misunderstood your reply. You are correct in that my argument is against any idea of original creation that excludes the Creator. I don’t really have a dog in the fight over evolution per se. I don’t think we have any real understanding of time, therefore we are open to all manner of errors with respect to extrapolation, so I consider it mere speculation.
“[[Did it once walk the earth? If so, when? Is it dated correctly?]]”
“You tell me”
I don’t know about Ergaster nor about many of these pre-homo-sapiens fossils. I am asking you for your view.
“[[What do you mean ‘rejects Ergaster’?]]”
“Rejects it as a valid classification- The ‘differences’ are far too small to warrent it’s own classification- I made that clear in my many posts on the subject.”
What differences are ‘too small’? So how should it be classified is my question?
“[[how would YOU classify it, if its not a ‘transitional’?]]”
“You ask a lot of questions, don’t you?”
You are clear on what you dont agree with, but that doesnt say much. how about telling us what your own view on it is.
You can submit that you find that to be a reasonable conclusion if you want, but I certainly wouldn't.
“I’ll hypothesize that science is the study of all God’s works. It is not a scientific hypothesis, but at the same time, it doesn’t seems unreasonable either.”
It’s quite reasonable. It’s how Christians who were scientists, eg like Newton or Copernicus, saw their roles - uncovering the mysteries of God’s creation. If you understand something better, you learn to appreciate it more.
Surely knowing there are billions of galaxies increases ones appreciation for the vastness of God’s creation.
Any scientist who claimed that scientific conclusions are perfect and complete would be looking for another profession.
Correct on both sides. Science does not and cannot claim perfection, proof or total knowledge.
When someone says "the scientific debate is over", like Al Gore says about global warming, it's usually a sign of fraud or political harrassment, not scientifically-grounded reason.
What tends to be settled are things that we know NOT to be true (like 4 elements, flat earth, old theories of disease, bohr model of atom, etc).
“they appear to be related to apes”
Yes, they do.
“but you cannot make any statement of fact as if it were true, written in stone, settled science.”
Nothing is written in stone. One can make the statement that there is good evidence to support the conclusion stated above, just as there is good evidence to support most scientific conclusions.
“The classification of species into taxonomic groups is a man-made construct. “
- So is our definition of the electron. but it seems to help.
“So if you want to consider that you are an ape, by all means, you are free to do so, but don’t go including the rest of us.”
- Classifications came 150 years prior to the theory of evolution. genetics just ties the two together in a reasonable way.
- Are you a member of the Animal Kingdom? The Class Chordata? The Mammals?
Just trying to see how wide this thinking goes.
It’s a scientific concept. Is it not? You’re a scientist; you tell me. By my humble and uninformed comprehension, it is an ever-present obstacle that can be overcome to a greater or lesser extent depending on circumstances, but never entirely. One of the greatest obstacles, I suspect, is to be found in the natural human desire to not see what one does not wish to see.
One of the assertions made repeatedly by scientists in this forum is that eyewitness testimony is thought to be notoriously unreliable. Is this true? Or, is it true merely when it is convenient for it to be true?
I had a rather simple point to make. I must say that the level of resistance to that point is more than a little surprising.
Perhaps I misunderstood. Can you state what it was, simply and succintly?
You didn’t. You just whined about it. You have asked (about four times) what religion has to contribute in a science classroom.
”I’m not aware of any rule against asking for change or against describing the situation as it is.”
Me neither. Help yourself.
see #961
You seemed to be arguing that to say you have seen things you know weren't there is tantamount to declaring that there is no basis to believe anything we see.
What if "reality" is an illusion...
I don't think there is anything called "settled science" because science is always willing to consider new evidence which challenges the generally-accepted conclusions.
Not many people have trouble accepting that lions, tigers, and housecats are all felines, or that coyotes, wolves, and poodles are all canines. But putting humans into the ape family causes nausea among some like you.
I have a revelation for you. All human knowledge is a manmade construct. Even which writings to include in the Bible was a manmade construct. You can argue that decision was inspired, but if the scientists told you their decisions were equally inspired, would that change things?
The fact is that humans have the ability to process and sort information in a logical manner, if they choose to. You may not like being cousins to the chimpanzees, but you can't choose your relatives.
The thread began with a discussion of what is being taught in the classroom. I admit mixing several threads together -- the same people generally post on all evolution threads -- but this thread started with this:
Liberals, who are quite often atheists, have long been in control of our media and our educational institutions, and they fiercely punish anyone who would depart from a vigorous defense of Darwinism...
Since it equates "Darwinists" with atheists, I have to assume that the alternative to evolution is some kind of theistic account.
I think it is reasonable to ask what a theist would teach in biology class that is different from what biologists would teach.
"Last Thursdayism", anyone?
Well, perhaps you can improve your level of comprehension by going to post #1008, which is another illustration of the point. It might be even more enlightening for you if you attempted to ponder and then answer the questions I pose in post #1028.
But, you have not based your reply on #961. You base it on js’ statement that he had seen things that he knew were not there. Post #961 dealt with the issue of eyewitness testimony and its reliability (or lack thereof). Not with js’ self-reported bouts with hallucination, that being cited merely as an example of eyewitness testimony. But, help yourself. Be my guest and wallow in incomprehension to your heart’s content. In the process you validate and confirm all the supporting points I make in several other posts (#966, #991, #1008, #1028). Thanks for your assistance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.