Denying Evolution Is Denying Biology

NY Times ^ | 2/2/04

[Always Right]

There are no great minds that can know and understand physics and the mechanism of genetics, accept Creationism and at the same time dismiss evolution as a commie plot.

I have not dismissed evolution or suggested it is a commie plot, but there is absolutely no reason I can understand every aspect of genetics and not believe that man evolved from other speices. If Darwin and evolution had never happened, we would still know all about DNA today.

[Blessed]

>lots of micro events add up to macro events.<

That's where the "faith" part comes into play since you can not create the macro event in the lab or show proof in the fossil record.

[Shryke]

I know there was this guy name Einstein who believed in devine intervention. Maybe you have heard of him

What does that have to do with biology or evolution?

[Doctor Stochastic]

... marx, hitler, and stalin loved darwin's theories.

Hitler never mention Darwin, you made this up. Stalin was very anti-Darwin; in fact, he had the Darwin supporters executed; you should have know this from studying history.

[Dimensio]

It means we are abandoning absolute principles in favor of 'evolving' standards: that we no longer accept unchanging truth as self evident, but that we now believe that what is true today need not be true tomorrow (morally, ethically, legally, politically). This is the end result of accepting evolution as a valid fact and expanding it to encompass all of our life (whether we wish to aknowlege we have done so or not).

Then clearly the problem is not evolution, but people misapplying evolution outside of biology, where it does not apply.

I'm not sure what you're trying to argue. Are you saying that evolution should be rejected not based upon whether it is the best explanation to fit observed evidence, but because some morons don't know when it stops?

[ThinkPlease]

Long winded rant deleted (did you actually read what I wrote?)

You seem to have problems with reading comprehension. I'm aware of misdiagnosis by a few incompetents. That's why I predicated my statement with the adverb rarely.

That being said, your point is still invalid since creationoids have been ranting about three entire fields of science for almost a century now, because of a book. Not work done by an occasional scientist working alone, not by a small group of scientists, but nearly every finding made in three fields of science over the past half-century. That's like saying that I shouldn't listen to any of the mechanics because their body of knowledge ecompasses doesn't agree with my relgious beliefs. --yet they still manage to get the equipment working time after time. That really sounds rational.

Yet here we are, over a century since Darwin, 70 years since Hubble's findings, and people insist upon enforcing their irrational beliefs. No one wants blind obedience, instead just some basic exercising of some critical thinking skills. That seems to be lacking in the creationist crowd.

No sir, your response just doesn't fly.

[ZULU]

Yeah. What's biology good for? Pennicillin? Heart transplants? Genetic information leading to cures for inherited diseases?

Who needs it? Give me the Dark Ages anytime - pain, cold, disease, ignorance, famine, illiteracy - Ahhh for the good old days!!!

[ZULU]

"Some of the greatest biologist and scientist don't believe in evolution."

Name one.

[spunkets]

"If Darwin and evolution had never happened, we would still know all about DNA today."

The search for what was eventually found and called DNA rested on questions arising out of genetics. Evolution happens to be a theory that explains the connections and similarities of life forms. Evolution can't be extracted and dismissed from the body of knowledge accumulated. The appearance of man as a life form can not be understood except by evolution. That means evolution is God's way.

" I have not dismissed evolution or suggested it is a commie plot"

Others have though. It is the prevalent claim by the creationists.

[Dimensio]

But we must remember that Evolution is a theory, not immutable fact--as yet.

True. Just like gravity.

[js1138]

That's where the "faith" part comes into play ...

What you call faith, an ordinary person would call confidence in the regularity of the laws of nature.

I can recall the OJ Simpson trial in which many FReepers ridiculed the OJ jurors for their refusal to make common sense inductions from evidence. It's true that they did not witness the murders, nor apparently did any surviving person. There was no weapon, and the accused was in another city on the evening of the murders.

Still, we expected the jurors to follow a chain of evidence and put a person in prison, possibly in the gas chamber, based on circumstantial evidence.

The evidence for evolution has accumulated for the last several hundred years, collected and analyzed by tens of thousands of researchers. Opposed to the evolutionary interpretation of the evidence you have the Dream Team of Dr. Dino, and a few others who are eloquent and charismatic. They have neither the law nor the evidence on their side, but they are great at pounding the table.

You may feel free to align yourself with the OJ jury, but I would be embarrassed to be in their company.

[templar]

I'm not sure what you're trying to argue.

I'm not arguing, I'm observing results. The mind works by comparisons. Nothing has meaning till it is compared with something in the minds experience (i.e. recently I saw a TV thing on a blind person who had vision restored, What he saw was meaningless since there was no prior experience to compare it to.). This includes concepts as well as experiences. Concepts are rarely kept in a narrow range, they expand into all other areas of cognigive activity (thinking, feeling, perceiving, etc.). This gets a bit off subject though and probably should be left to a more appropriate thread sometime.

[ZULU]

"Liberals always overstate the importance of evolution."

This is NOT a liberal-conservative issue. Its NOT even an atheist - believer issue. An issue between people who choose to interpret the Bible in a literal word for word sense, ignoring all scientific proofs to the contrary and people who choose to reconcile scientific fact with religious doctrine.

The Wahhabis of the Christian world are the only people making an issue of evolution.

[ZULU]

Did he get his Ph.D. from Bob Jones University?

[cyborg]

No he did not. He was not a religious man either.

[templar]

We've achieved enlightenment. Is this correct?

There is a difference between expanding knowelege of the truth and changing what truth is. I believe in absolutes, not changing (evolving) 'truths'. And, as I mentioned in my first post, I expect to be criticized for this.

[Conspiracy Guy]

On some posts the /Sarcasm tag should be assumed and "I hate Biology awas intended as humor. However denying evolution is not denying biology. I do not deny evolution unless someone intends to suggest that it is the origin of life. I can't believe in that much randomness. I am a creavolutionist myself.

But in rebuttal to your post. Mad Cow disease, the black plague, flu, common cold, etc are all caused by biology as well. Just like you and I were caused by biology.

The reason I hate biology is, it's everywhere!

CG

[Dimensio]

I believe in absolutes, not changing (evolving) 'truths'.

The problem is that sometimes what you believe is the absolute "truth" isn't, it just appears that way because conditions have always been right to create the observation. Science is about challenging established "absolute truths" to see if they hold up. If they don't, then they weren't really an "absolute truth" to begin with, and the answer is something that we've yet to discover.

I believe absolute truths exists. I just don't believe that we've discovered most of them yet, and I believe that quite a bit of what people think are "absolute" truths really aren't.

[Always Right]

Name one.

Many scientist believe in Divine intervention (like Einstein), which is contrary to the theory that evolution is the result of a bunch of random events. Certainly most scientists don't completely reject the theory and accept most aspects of it. But accepting the theory of evolution should not be prerequisite to the study biology. I see almost a genocidal mindset in Biology to eliminate all descent, which is not healthy for the advancement of science.

[Blessed]

>The evidence for evolution has accumulated for the last several hundred years, collected and analyzed by tens of thousands of researchers.<

..and in the process they have thrown out and refused to deal with any contradictory evidence.After all it is much easier to call names and bluff your way through than deal with these contradictions.Ah!but we believe in the scientific method.We believe in cause and effect.(when it fits our theory)