Denying Evolution Is Denying Biology

NY Times ^ | 2/2/04

[js1138]

...we now believe that what is true today need not be true tomorrow (morally, ethically, legally, politically).

Sort of like the laws in Leviticus?

[js1138]

And that contradictory evidence would be...

[ZULU]

Newton's Laws do not apply in all situations. Quantum mechanics and relativity apply on the very small and the very large scale.

[exmarine]

Without it [evolution], students are denied a framework to understand how these different areas are related and interdependent.

They should say, "without it, students are denied a SECULAR HUMANIST ATHEISTIC framework..."

[Always Right]

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.

There are many of those on the evolution side who are just as guilty of treating evolution as religious doctrine. That's what I object to. This belief that believing in evolution is neccessary to understand any aspect of Biology is a religion, IMHO.

[ZULU]

No more than relativity is to astrophysics.

Unless you unerstand the evolution of species you can't reallty comprehend zoogeography, systematics, genetics, or a host of other biological disciplines.

[exmarine]

I think that this theory is better taught and debated as a theory--that makes it stronger and more immediate. And it's not necessary to believe in it to get a good education. It's just not easy to get a good education without even having been exposed to it.

That's the problem...they don't allow debate on it! It's a SACRED COW to the high priests of evolution and it's TABOO to question it.

In fact, there is a veritable atheistic monopoly on origins within our public schools and government. Atheism is the offical religion of the United States of America.

[templar]

Something like that.

[ZULU]

Your comments are so utterly incomprehensible to an educated and intelligent person that I don't even know where to begin to respond.

The continual droning of "Creationists" (better termed Biblical Literalists") about evolution and equating it with atheism, liberalism, and communism is like liberals screaming McCarthyism at people who identified Communist agents in the 1950's.

[AdmSmith]

Darwin Day is approaching

http://www.darwinday.org/

Darwin Day is February 12th, the date of birth of Charles Darwin in the year 1809, at Shrewsbury, England. On this date, and throughout the month, people from all over the world are honoring the life, work and influence of Charles Darwin with events and activities which celebrate science and our shared humanity.

Join in the events and celebrate the adventure of science, and the 'passion to know' that drives us to inquire, explore, and discover what this world is all about.

[Jim Noble]

Evolution is not an isolated concept that can be expediently omitted from a high-school biology syllabus. Rather, it is the single unifying concept of modern biology. It unites all areas of biology, from ecology to physiology to biochemistry and beyond. Without it, students are denied a framework to understand how these different areas are related and interdependent.

Completely, totally false.

I have a B.S. with honors in Biology, and an M.D., and I specialize in Clinical Microbiology.

Biology, like all sciences, is not a catalog of facts or concepts. Biology, like all sciences, is a system of testing facts or concepts.

Microevolution occurs every day, is trivial to test, and withstands any possible challenge.

Macroevolution (Darwinism) has never been demonstrated, is probably untestable, and is subject to many criticisms.

Screeds like this one from the Yale research fellow are expressions of religious belief, not science.

[moonman]

It amazes me that a person with a 'doctorate' degree tries to compare apples to oranges. No one disputes the factual scientific characteristics of gravity. The question is, WHY would he compare a scientic fact with an unproven theory? That crocodille fossil found several years back (whose impression matches exactly of a crocodile of today) which scientists say predates dinosaurs by a couple hundred million years, must not have brought to mind: "Just how long does this evolution thingy take before we have a positive link or a scientific fact?"

[Mother Mary]

The problem is that both creationist and evolutionist accept micro evolution because it is provable.The evolutionist then make the faith leap to macro evolution which has not been proven by history or experiment.I accept evolution as a editing process but it does not involve creation.

I agree. The operative phrase here is LEAP OF FAITH. Macro evolution is being taught as a RELIGION. To question this religion is a mortal sin against this FALSE GOD.

[ZULU]

There are hosts of transitional forms in the geological record.

Is this author by questioning their failure to survive into modern times an indication that evolution didn't occur? Or he is questioning the fact that these transitional forms ever existed? Is he maintaining they are modern forgeries created by imaginative evolutionists?

The fact that this individual studied evolution then assumed that it postulates the non-existance of God demonstrates his total lack of intelligence.

[Always Right]

Screeds like this one from the Yale research fellow are expressions of religious belief, not science.

Yep, but they certainly disguise it as science.

[ZULU]

"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."

God is the origin of all life. Evolution is the mechanics he used to create it.

[donh]

I know there was this guy name Einstein who believed in devine intervention.

Einstein famously said that the more he studied the workings of nature, the more profoundly he was drawn to the idea of God as the Ultimate Cause. This is more like theism than it is like the Hebraic meddling God. Please point me to an Einstein quote that shows he believed in "devine intervention".

[ZULU]

I believe in divine Intervention. God intervened to create a Universe out of nothing and establish the biological, chemical and physical laws which resulted in the world around us, us, and all life.

Belief in evolution does not negate belief in either God or the Bible, although SOME evolutionists would think this way, just as some atheists probably don't believe in evolution either - for reasons having nothing at all to do with the Bible, God, or religion.

You still haven't given me an example of a well known biologist who doesn't believe in evolution. You can't for the simple reason that all serious biologists believe in evolution as all serious physicists believe in Quatum Mechanics, and all serious Chemistists believe in Boyle's Law.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Shryke]

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

You may be right. I'll contend, however, that our ability to comprehend those truths is quite limited. This may explain your observed "changing" truths. Trial and error.