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.

[Abe Froman]

Your "evidence" exists in far less robust form than the theory itself claims would result. The supposed lineage of the elephant is quite laughable.

[Abe Froman]

Except for your incorrect understanding of hyperbole you got the sentence right.

[VadeRetro]

I have seen this kind of evidence. Drawings and lineups of partial skulls finished off with plaster of paris masquerading as the "missing link" may look good but it doesn't prove anything.

No. Your deliberate, willful ignorance doesn't prove anything except that you are deliberately, willfully ignorant. There will never be any evidence for you because nobody can beat any amount whatsoever of real fossil data into your skull with a softball bat. When you run around telling people that there is no evidence, it does not mean what you invite people to think it means. Creation Science is ignorant and deceitful, "Cretin Science."

[whattajoke]

The supposed lineage of the elephant is quite laughable.

Surely you do then realize that any extinct elephant relative or precursor could then be construed as a "mistake" that the omnipotent and perfect christian god made in his animal creation factory, right?

[VadeRetro]

Give me the mountain of skeletons that should be available to be lined up to show the origin of the whale, the elephant, the ostrich, the anteater. You can't.

I believe Ichneumon already posted a "fish-to-elephant" transitional sequence on this thread as a mere example of what can be shown. I saw no credible reply to that post.

[whattajoke]

Except for your incorrect understanding of hyperbole you got the sentence right

From a guy who apparently takes allegory, symbolism, and mythology as literal fact, I do find that funny.

[Abe Froman]

"In Vade's defense (not that he needs me), there is nothing funny about willful ignorance."

"Humor requires communication between intellectual equals. The jokes you thought were funny in the third grade just aren't getting belly laughs among adults these days."

Typical of elitist blowhards overconfident in their own knowledge to need to gang up for the ad homeneim attack.

[VadeRetro]

The supposed lineage of the elephant is quite laughable.

Did you go to the ICR website, search on "laughable" and "lineage?" Did it come back with "elephant?" What is the scientific basis of your statement?

[metacognative]

Let's put the fossils on the table. Describe the bones that are in between one species and another. No vague second source references. No religion bashing necessary.

[TigerTale]

We have never observed life springing from non-life in the natural world nor the laboratory.

Not yet. But we can now build copies of exisiting virii in the lab. Science is closing in on producing life in a test-tube.

[Abe Froman]

You can construe it any way you want. I fail to see why it must be a "mistake" or why similarity needs to neccessarily mean relation.

[whattajoke]

Let's put the fossils on the table. Describe the bones that are in between one species and another

This excercise is done at your nearest natural history museum. However, it still won't work with you because If transitional species 1 and 5 are there, you'll demand # 3. when they pull that our, you'll demand 2 and 4. When they pull them out, you'll demand 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, and 4.5, etc, ad infinitum.

No religion bashing necessary, I agree... just acceptance of reality, that's all.

[Abe Froman]

Let's put the fossils on the table. Describe the bones that are in between one species and another. No vague second source references. No religion bashing necessary.

I would be perfectly comfortable with that. The great thing about paleontology is that it is not totally out of the grasp of the layman. We can sit and discuss and argue about features and the reasoning to believe that this came from that and the other.

[Abe Froman]

You can impugn my intelligence all you want. Your Inquisitionistic desire to "beat any amount whatsoever of real fossil data into your skull with a softball bat" is the exact problem these medical students have with evolutionists and indicative of further problems.

I don't claim to show that belief in creation is entirely scientific.

You, however, claim that evolution is scientific pursuit. It is not. Science is testable, verifiable, and repeatable. The devices and proofs of evolution fit none of those criteria. If you will utterly dismiss the doubt expressed by some respected phD's in the field than you are just as guilty of ignorance and deceit.

[Last Visible Dog]

Whereas creationism insists a magic being whipped up the universe from nothing in six days. What's their point again?

The point would be your point is absolutely irrelevant. Attacking creationism does not in any way support the theory of evolution.

[Abe Froman]

This excercise is done at your nearest natural history museum. However, it still won't work with you because If transitional species 1 and 5 are there, you'll demand # 3. when they pull that our, you'll demand 2 and 4. When they pull them out, you'll demand 1.5, 2.5, 3.5, and 4.5, etc, ad infinitum.

Unfortunately, your theory requires it, since we do not observe species #5 being born of species #1 in the natural world, therefore until proved it is unadulterated speculation. Nor do we see species #5 being born of species #4.5 for that matter.

[Last Visible Dog]

In a related development, other students ask to teach Tibetan medicine and zen shiatsu therapy as well. ``Western medicin has only lead to more suffering. It is time for non-racist ...''

I find this absolutely amazing – medical school students want ALL the information about evolution exposed (including its weaknesses) and this makes the evolutionists apoplectic! Everyday evolution is looking more and more like a secular religion. The funny point is: 100 years ago the freethinkers embraced evolution and the closed minded people tried to ban thought and teaching related to evolution – today freethinkers see the problems with the evolution and the closed minded people fight to ban all intellectual questioning of evolution.

[js1138]

Typical of elitist blowhards overconfident in their own knowledge to need to gang up for the ad homeneim attack.

Can't take a joke?

[VadeRetro]

Let's put the fossils on the table. Describe the bones that are in between one species and another. No vague second source references. No religion bashing necessary.

Please let me know what of the information I have already linkied you are discarding and why.

[Last Visible Dog]

Because science isn't decided by debate or popularity.

So how does science "decide" the origin of life? We know it is not from supporting evidence.