Posted on 05/08/2007 9:24:03 PM PDT by Chuckmorse
During the May 3 Republican presidential debate, moderator Chris Matthews asked the candidates “How many of you don’t believe in evolution?” Sen. Sam Brownback, Gov. Mike Huckabee, and Rep. Tom Tancredo all raised their hands indicating that they did not believe in it. Rep. Barney Frank raised the same question in 2004 when he accused me, his opponent that year, of questioning the theory of evolution. Liberals are confident that those who question the theory of evolution will be held up for public ridicule and scorn. Many liberals pride themselves on questioning everything in life except when it comes to the theory of evolution, which they accept as bedrock science. But is it?
The theory of evolution is just that, a theory. There is not a shred of evidence to indicate that mankind evolved from the amoeba, which evolved into the fish, which evolved into the bird, which evolved into the mouse, which evolved into the monkey, which evolved into man. While there is evidence of inter-species evolution, there is no proof of the basic thesis presented by Charles Darwin which is that one species evolves into another. In fact, science seems to favor creationism, also just a theory, as recent DNA evidence indicates that mankind is descended from one mother.
It could be therefore argued that the theory of evolution, since it is not science in the sense that there is no documented or empirical evidence to back it up, is based as much on religious belief as is creationism. Both theories are based on faith as opposed to scientific certainty and, I would argue, creationism contains better science. Yet the liberal establishment demands that the federal government mandate by law that only evolution is to be taught in the public school science class.
I would argue that Intelligent design, which is the theory that mankind was created by divine intervention, could be introduced into education in tandem with the theory of evolution without getting into any particular religious scenario, such as the Genesis story in the Bible, and without endorsing any particular religious denomination. If intelligent design were to be given equal time with evolution, the faith of the atheist would be no more compromised than that of the theist. In fact, such a presentation would be more honest and balanced since scientific inquiry is supposed to be open to all plausible theories.
The theory of evolution is a political question in American politics because liberal supporters demand that the federal government mandate it’s teaching and insist on a gag order when it comes to any discussion of intelligent design in the classroom. This is contrary to American traditions of free speech and the free and open expression of ideas. This also violates the right of the taxpaying citizen to have a say in the education of their own children and supplants the ability of local educators and elected local school board officials to determine curriculum.
Teaching intelligent design alongside evolution would open doors to important thought and inquiry. When the young student contemplates the possibility that mankind is more than just an evolving animal, amoral and bound to nature like other animals, than perhaps the student becomes aware of the uniqueness and value of every single human life. Implied in the theory of a divine creator is that there is a larger purpose to life and that there is a moral code. Intelligent design sets the stage for the individual to look to a higher power than the government, which is perhaps why liberals so adamantly oppose it. In these times of rampant school violence and moral relativism, the teaching of intelligent design, in a non sectarian way and alongside the teaching of the theory of evolution, would serve many positive purposes besides a simple striving for truth.
I was talking (face to face) to a European two years ago about the same/very similar issues. His response was, “They are peasants, why would you care?”
So there it is, an outsider’s view of the thing.
That sentiment might come back to haunt us, sometime in the near future, if not already. Robots with voting rights.
Well, I do care because it’s my country and my fellow citizens.
You present your predictions as though they are strong, but infact, they are much less strong than they appear and the follwoing site explains why
http://www.trueorigin.org/therapsd.asp
You said “The fossil evidence is good, and even if we didn’t have that you can actually SEE the relevant bones moving from the jaw into the ear during the embryological development of some mammals. This has been observed specifically in kangaroos”
Yes, but we don’t find this evidence ‘evolving’ in species- nor evolving from one species to another- what we do find however is evidence that this process has always taken place in certain species
to suggest that a species with a perfectly good hearing mechanism should go without while that hearing system migrates to the inner mammalian ear and while the mammal waits around for 4 other ossicle bones to first evolve, and then migrate upward and inward as well kinda goes directly against the ‘needfulness’ hypothesis of evolution- natural selection as we know only works on characteristics that already exist, it doesn’t create something from nothing as in creation.
You say there is a homogoly going on here? I say it’s nothign more than similarly created processes between certain species and possit that there are many differences that can not be overcome when trying to link two similiar , yet obviously different system mechanisms
[You cannot change someone’s belief system with logic or science.]
Well you probably can’t, but remember, God works in mysterious ways, and someday those opposing the science and logic of creationism might see that the impossibilities of evolution were too great to continue believing in- so with that, I’ll keep presenting logic and science in the hopes that a light will one day dawn on those who put their faith in the impossibility of evolution,
Your talents in logic and science seem to be on a par with your talents in grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
oh my, an insult in an attempt to argue against the science- how unpredictable of you (SARCASM!)
Evolutionary biologist William Fix describes the collapse of the evolutionist thesis regarding pentadactylism in this way:
The older textbooks on evolution make much of the idea of homology, pointing out the obvious resemblances between the skeletons of the limbs of different animals. Thus the `pentadactyl’ [five bone] limb pattern is found in the arm of a man, the wing of a bird, and flipper of a whale, and this is held to indicate their common origin. Now if these various structures were transmitted by the same gene couples, varied from time to time by mutations and acted upon by environmental selection, the theory would make good sense. Unfortunately this is not the case. Homologous organs are now known to be produced by totally different gene complexes in the different species. The concept of homology in terms of similar genes handed on from a common ancestor has broken down
There’s more- such as the the fact that when the homogolous label doesn’t fit, it’s then called anogolous- such as in the case of the striking similarities between species such as the thylocine and the north american wolf despite being totally seperate species, the fact that several different classes of animals such as mammals, birds insects and even some dinos have wings which all argue agaisnt common ancestry as outlined by Darwin.
DNA codes are completely different between dissimiliar species, yet dissimiliar species show remarkable resemblances, and DNA coding that is similiar in dissimiliar species contribute to completely different structures. The ‘predictions’ made were based on the hypothesis that certain species shared a common ancestor and that mutations to the same gene codes that made small changes, such as limb changes were shared between species similiar species as well- however, biological evidence has shown that completely different instructions ‘create’ the similiarities that we see amoung both similiar species and dissimiliar species.
Now where is the intermediate critter with this floating bone HALFWAY between it's jaw and it's ear?
But I just got UP this morning - way to early for dessert!
(But I DO have a hankerin’ for the Utah desert. It’s WAY too soggy here in Indiana. [beats the Missouri sogginess though!])
You just shown that we Conservatives are DOOMED!!!
What ELSE can explain all the flip-flopping by Dems except Evolution?
Ya can't 'change' much more than they do!
You’ve just made me want an expensive haircut!
Yeah... who needs some fairy-tale god poking His nose in our business?
Yeah: things are so much better now...
|
Choosey Mothers choose JIF-fy abortions!
 |
We need more 'science' here in Darfur!
 |
Change?
I didn't know we had the option!
 |
This is the 30-35% on BOTH sides of the aisle!
Throughout history blood has been shed by way of religion, by an amount that would easily supercede whatever those pictures attempt to show. More lives have been saved by science than has been lost to its name...
What I can’t imagine is why scientists would want the government to regulate science anyway, and determine what is and is not science.
There’s nothing I trust the government not to screw up once it gets it’s hands on it, science included.
Don’t forget arecheoraptor, and that was only within the last 10 years.
Evolutionists want evolution to be demonstrated to be true so badly, that they are willing to fake it and deceive people.
Just like Einstein did with his calculations for the age of the universe; fudging his calculations to fit the science instead of adjusting the science to fit the evidence. Hubble’s observations decades later, put an end to that.
That's an assumption, and you know what happens when one assumes something.
Making this a political issue based on the argument that evolution should be considered a religion is going to put them in the business of deciding what is and isn't religion.
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.