Posted on 07/14/2007 10:33:34 AM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Madonna and Bon Jovi are no match for Hawaiian flies when it comes to karaoke hits at the University of Nebraska State Museum in Lincoln. In a popular exhibit activity, visitors attempt to mimic the unique courtship calls of different species of Hawaiian Drosophila, a group of 800 different flies that may have evolved from a single species.
Fly karaoke is part of "Explore Evolution," a permanent exhibit currently at Nebraska and five other museums in the Midwest and Southwest...that explores evolutionary concepts in new ways. Such an activity is a far cry from the traditional way science museums have presented evolution, which usually included charts called phylogenies depicting ancestral relationships or a static set of fossils arranged chronologically. "Explore Evolution'' has those, too—and then some, because museum curators came to realize that they needed better ways to counter growing attacks on their integrity.
...
Under pressure from these kinds of groups, the Kansas State Board of Education in 2005 approved a curriculum that allowed the public schools to include completely unfounded challenges to the theory of evolution.
In an effort to make their case to the public, creationists raised $26 million in private donations to build the 50,000-square-foot Creation Museum in Petersburg, Ky., which opened in late May. The institution presents the biblical history of the universe. Visitors learn that biblically, dinosaurs are best explained as creatures that roamed Earth with humans. In its first month of existence, the museum drew over 49,000 visitors, according to its Web site.
"Explore Evolution," funded by a $2.8 million grant from the National Science Foundation, is one of many recent efforts by science museums to counter such resistance to evolution...
(Excerpt) Read more at sciam.com ...
You cherry-pick those quotes that you find the most objectionable, but you have a tendency to ignore the bigger questions, or the more coherent statements.
For instance, what is the origin of life, from which all other life sprang?
Did only one organism start all present forms of life, from amoebae to whales? Or did several different primordial organisms form around the same time, spawning the diversity that is the hallmark of our world?
Is life still being spontaneously generated, or was that only possible a couple of billion years ago?
When most of life was extinguished during one or another extinction episode, did it all start over again from another primordial ooze, or did the few life-forms left over become the ancestors of all present life?
What type of evolution is responsible for the presence of non-living matter? Of energy? Of cosmic forces, etc?
Is it really possible for a species to become suited to its environment through a random process of mutation?
Etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum. To believe that all that exists merely came about through some random process more than strains credulity, it rips it to shreds.
Betty..Hence the necessity of “ending history,” of erasing the past, in order to advance such propositions
Irish...The only past they seek to erase is the more recent past, specifically that of the rise of Christianity. In reality though, evolutionary humanists are taking us back in time to pre-Biblical paganism; the days of human-gods, witches, mysticism, divinations, gross superstition. In those days of hylozoism, ‘mind’ and ‘life’ were imprisoned within ‘nature” (matter). The higher thinking of Plato, among others,literally released ‘mind’ and “life” from matter. Modern materialism has once again imprisoned mind and life within matter (nature). Because they cannot account for how they “know” they’ve resorted to revamped mysticism, or what they like to speak of as ‘deeper understanding’ or ‘intuition’ (neo-hylozoism/divination/aughery/etc). Neo-hylozoism/divination/augery-—this is what Dawkins “memes” and biosemiotics are really all about.
Solomon tells us that there is nothing new under the sun; all things that have been, will be once again. Truer words were never spoken.
It never ceases to amaze me how quickly evolutionists jump to conclusions about those who oppose their opinions, but it does say something about the thought processes of such secular cheerleaders.
I supplied several examples of posts which cause scientists to assume the poster is not well-trained in science.
Do you have any reactions to what I actually posted, or are we going to jump subjects with each post?
Which logical fallacy are you talking about? You use the term “non sequitur” like it was a mantra. These statements are not non sequiturs, they are a priori truths.
Your pseudo-intellectual nomenclature notwithstanding, there is no logical fallacy in these conclusions. If it is impossible for life to have formed from a random process, a priori it must have been the result of a guided process.
And the fact that you think this necessitates a "theistic evolution" stance demonstrates a lack of understanding of science or theology.
In Genesis 1, Adam is created on the sixth day after everything else. In Genesis 2 (actually about half way through what is denoted as Genesis 2:4), Adam is created before anything else. The text is very clear on this because in the second account, Adam is required to name everything. That's not an invention of "intellectuals" unless by "intellectuals" you mean people who can read.
Since you're such a Bible scholar, you are undoubtedly aware that in the first account, God is referred to simply as Elohim "אלהים", whereas in the second account He becomes Jehovah Elohim "יהוה אלהים". This suggests that the accounts come from two different sources, as the Hebrews were not sloppy with regards to their references to God. They also didn't modify Scripture as it was passed down, so they made no efforts to conceal the dual sources nor to make them fit better. Figuring out the meaning behind Genesis was the purview of Merkabah mystics, not geologists, and that how it should be today.
Yes. It's retarded. There is neither scriptural nor scientific evidence to support it. And finally, speaking of Merkabah mystics:
And Ecclesiastes tends to validate Solomon....
As suggested earlier, I think what you describe in your last is an instance of regression (or devolution), not of human advance (or evolution). And to say it reverts the human race back to paganism is no exaggeration at all. Thus are wiped out a few millennia of spectacular human achievement -- in philosophy, the arts, and sciences not least.
In our time, the wrecking ball of nihilism is literally destroying human souls and minds... not to mention a decent future for the human race.
Thank you so much for writing your insightful essay/post, spirited!
[I supplied several examples of posts which cause scientists to assume the poster is not well-trained in science.]
Yes, you did. There is no lack of people who are poorly trained in science who argue in favor of evolution, or in favor of creationism.
Do most scientists argue in favor of evolution? If so, do most scientists argue in favor of global warming being anthropogenic? What other conclusions have been the accepted norm in the scientific community? I will not be swayed by concensus, only by evidence. The evidence of some aspects of the ToE, such as adaptation, I accept as proven. Other aspects I do not accept, because the evidence is simply either lacking, or ridiculously over-blown.
I was on the fence regarding theistic evolution or whatever until the part in the bible about death entering the world through Adam was brought to my attention.
Therefore, I’ll believe God... there is no evolution.
Time has nothing to do with the second law of thermodynamics. Temperature does.
I disagree with this characterization, but I must thank you for that fact that now I am totally prepared if anyone ever challenges me to use "neo-hylozoism" and "biosemiotics" in a sentence together.
Dmitry: Porterass likes to tell people to “read a book”.. so I gave him a list of books I read in post 34 and challenged him to tell us which ones he’s read... he never answered.
Maybe he needs to read “Miss Manners”
i want to know how the evolutionary changeover occured that resulted in the later organism having a different number of chromosome than the former organism.. and how is it that multiple organisms had the exact same sort of change in number of genes in such a productive manner.
Ditto that. Why, what a strange coincidence. Aren’t these random occurrences remarkable?
The irony is that it is the other way around. The scientists are frantic in their attempt to prove there is no God.
The Darwinists have taken a page from Rick Warren, trying to make their religion more palatable to the masses.
Maybe he needs to read “Miss Manners”
Actually, I think Porterville should start with the basics. I suggest Dick and Jane with their dog spot.
I do not believe that speciation as proposed by the current scientific community can, or does, occur.
Variation within species occurs, has been seen, can be demonstrated in the lab. It has been used for thousands of years with breeding in domestic animals, dogs being a good example.
But for all that, no new species has ever been developed. The best that can be arrived at is variations of the same thing. Fruit flies are the best example. For all the work done on them, and all the variations in legs, anntennae, eyes, etc. all that has been done is that, superficial changes. With their lifespan, there’s certainly been enough generations available to provide ample opportunity to get more change than that.
In the end, you guessed it, they’re STILL fruit flies. And they’d all look the same after I squashed one.
Our answer to the Great Question is the only logical one. Our Science is great. Let us not forget the great Richard Dawkins who finally freed the world of religion long ago. Dawkins knew that logic and reason were the way of the future. But it wasn’t until he met his beautiful wife that he learned using logic and reason isn’t enough. You have to be a dick to everyone who doesn’t think like you. Prepare all the troops! We will level the United Atheist Alliance to the ground!
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.