Evolution politics; new phrase for sure but a good phrase. I agree why not open the forum and let students learn about evidence for and against.

The Bible is not a source for the answer as to how Planet Earth was formed or populated with plants, creatures and humans. It is a book, written by men, 2000 years ago to promote a new idea for a religion. I certainly would have been upset if the science teacher at my children’s school had fed them Intelligent Design! How “intelligent” is that? There is loads of proof of evolution, where is the proof of so called intelligent design? No where.
If folks want to feed the children intelligent design, do it in church or a church based private school (of course they’d have a problem passing some secular science tests), but not in public school.
Also, how hard would it be, if a Christian, to say that their God was the one who set up evolution as a means of populating his/her earth that he/she plopped into the middle of the vast universe?

The Bible was written by men of a certain time in the past who tried to explain things the way they could understand them. This should be acknowledged and understood.
It is very dangerous to present a “history” where dinosaurs and people co-existed as the “truth”.
What science does is provide evidence to contribute to theories of how the world, the universe life comes about. It understands how different laws of nature work by investigation.
It is fascinating how, for example, the general laws of nature such as gravity… relativity in the larger physical world as we know it did not appear to work in the atomic and subatomic world, and it is only in the last few decades have physicists been able to discover how, and theorise on how, the laws of the subatomic world work.
This has revealed how wonderful and fascinating life itself is, yet there is still a kind of order in this supposed chaotic quantum world.
How is it that the first particles at the big bang would be the ones which would be essential for the creation of life itself over billions of years?
We do not know the full story yet, and we should not be so presumptious as to presume we do.
It also demonstrates that, just because we still do not understand how it all works, it still works according to some wonderful design, and cannot seem so random.
When it comes to interpreting such accounts as the Bible creation story “the world was created in 6 days”, the majority of us now interpret this time span very differently (i.e. in billions of years). We must also be very careful to go back and research the original translations.
How could men 2000 years ago really put down on paper such mindblowing explanations? They simply could not, as they would not have understood. They did not even understand, at that stage, that the world was round and not flat. Let alone, quantum mechanics.
“Science” and “intelligent design” are not mutually exclusive.
I am more and more convinced that, the more we learn about the world, the universe and mankind, the more I wonder at the Creator behind it. To my mind, it simply could not have evolved by accident.

Oh my God!
What next, will they want to teach children that Earth is round and not flat?
I usually welcome all ideas…..however, the fact that some school districts do not teach evolution and that there are others where it is taught as an alternative to creationism just amazes me in 2008.
Peace!

See, what I want to know is, what exactly is “Intelligent Design?” Whenever I read about it, on B-net or elsewhere, it just gives a real quick “life so complex there must be a Creator” explanation. Really, that’s not enough information to really do much to judge things. Since most Americans believe in God, and most Americans believe in evolution, it would seem that most people already _do_ believe in Intelligent Design.
While I do believe in evolution (or perhaps I should say Intelligent Design, again, I need a better definition here!), I do think there is a kind of “evolution politics.” I mean, really think of what the Kansas case from a few years ago was—a one-paragraph statement saying that evolution _might_ not be true, there were _some_ minor holes, and if you’re really interested, you can do _extra homework for no credit_ on it. And that was being compared to Galileo’s trial.
Which is not to say that creationism should be taught in public schools, or anything like that. Just that, if you’re refusing to allow any questioning of evolutionary theory, don’t complain when creationists do the same thing.
God bless.

“I agree why not open the forum and let students learn about evidence for and against.”
There are “problems” in physics. Why not open the forum and let students learn about evidence for and against? There are problems in Christianity. Why not open the church schools to atheists and Jews and others and let the students learn about evidence for (?) and against?
It’s funny that some people want to single out biology for cramming up the semester teaching facts and also teaching made-up quibbles. Could it have to do with the fact that when kids learn real biology it’s a lot harder to force them to believe certain discredited versions of Christianity? That’s my guess; some preachers are getting mighty desperate.
I could see a philosophy class on science and creationism where evidence for and against each could profitably be covered, but there’s no more extra time in biology curricula for nonsense than there is in most of the other curricula.
Understanding evolution is fundamental to understanding biology and biology has become a vital science for business and health and defense. What these creationists want would hamper our capabilities in those and other vital areas, and all so their particular superstitions can persist. Fear of new ideas is really very dangerous.

“There are problems in Christianity. Why not open the church schools to atheists and Jews and others and let the students learn about evidence for (?) and against?”
Because those are private schools; they can teach basically whatever they want. If you don’t think public schools teach Christianity’s negative points, we clearly lived different lives. 0:-)
God bless.

Joey, if it’s good for public school biology students to “study the controversy” surely it’s good for private school religious students to do the same. If a theory (evolution) with immense evidence in support of it needs to have a few “problems” which have been manufactured by critics studied, then surely a hypothesis with no independent evidence being force-fed to millions of defenseless children at great detriment to their reasoning skills needs to have its gaping inadequacies studied by those children. It’s the right thing to do.

The fact is there is no one and especially no one here qualified to say how the earth was formed period. There are things man just cannot do or know. I do put my trust in God regarding things beyond mans capabilities.

Scientists get data and, combining them with physical laws, form hypotheses that sometimes, with physical evidence to support them, become theories and with much more supporting evidence they become well accepted theories bordering on facts. That’s how they arrive at their ideas about how the earth was formed. And if new facts arise that contradict those theories they consider them and may change their theories to include the old and new facts.
cknuck and folks like him put their trust in a hypothesis with zero data (at least outside their heads) to support it. And when new facts turn up that yet again contradict what was written ages ago in their bible they’ll happily ignore those facts.
Pardon me if my money is on the scientists being a lot closer to right than cknuck and folks like him.

One thing for sure, cknuck, is that the earth wasn’t created in 6 days by a creator who rested on #7. There is so much evidence that evolution was a gradual thing, that got us (humans) where we are, but we, IMO and in that of many much smarter than I will ever be, crawled out of the ocean, slime or other watery start and over billions & billions of years and progressing through chimps, apes etc. became what we are now. Fossels have given much evidence of evolution, as have finds of early humans or their ancestors. If a god did indeed “create” this world we live on, I’m sure She created many more as the Universe is beyond huge, and they too are inhabited by some sort of life.

I agree with Catherine J. Gilsenan and nnmns. Too much to quote.
Science and Faith should not be taught side by side. They weren’t when I attended school and college, and they shouldn’t be in 2008. Science works to prove their findings, and they are fascinating and prove reality. Faith does not have to be proven, just believed in according to how he or she understands God. If you don’t believe in God, but have faith in something else, it still doesn’t have to be proven. Science trys to prove what it is teaching, and people who are extreme in their faith should stop wasting everyone’s time in Public Schools and Universities so they can get on with the subjects they need to be beneficial to our society. Young people will seek anything if they are sufficiently interested they don’t have to be taken by the hand and forced to compare apples and oranges, or science and faith. The students aren’t shouting for these classes their parents and clergy are.

We must be in two separate worlds because if that is what nnmns says about faith then I need glasses. nnmns position on faith is that it is complete rubbish, so if you agree with nnmns then that is your stand.
I know there is good in science and it saves lives, I support it in that vein, but it is so overshadowed by God’s wisdom and power.

I could not have said it better Catherine.Finally someone who understands!Thank You!

I think Henrietta was agreeing with Catherine on faith and with me on science.
I don’t think a reasonable amount of faith in oneself or in others is rubbish but I think faith in a religion that has bad impacts on the world and/or the faithful, like for instance some versions of Christianity, is very unfortunate.

Ya know what will really gall some folks – I teach Evolution – IN CHURCH!!
Yes, I am guilty of blurring the line and actually expecting the members of my congregation to think! I know, this must violate somebody’s expectations that science and religion not interbreed. But I’m sorry, faith just does not make any sense from a Creationist standpoint. All that amounts to is mythology and legend. Lovely stories, great poetry, but it soon becomes its own idolatry – a big no-no. The nifty stories only brush the fringe of reality and whisper about God’s place in the cosmos. I am more intrigued by what is, not only our interpretation of we think perceive is. So I am sure some ortho-dog will try to chase me up a tree, but I will not budge.
I think we MUST have evolution in the pews and in the choir, in the church library and the church classroom. I am a heretic, and I admit it. Get over it.

I teach evolution to my 1-3rd graders. I also read a variety of creation stories from around the world. I ask what they know from their own training. They really don’t have a great deal of knowledge on it yet.
I do have only Christian students at this time. I had one muslin student for a day while problems were worked out in another classroom. We do talk about the different holidays being celebrated. I make sure they know about Yule as well as any others that are in the same time frame.
I won’t tolerate religious arguments/comments in the class which say if you don’t do it this way your wrong.. I tell them to take it to their church and that in my class any way is correct. It is not for them to judge. Too bad their parents can’t get the message.

I fail to see how someone can teach something they cannot possibly know. Know God, time lines mean nothing to Him.
In your class “any way is correct” hmmm?

“I fail to see how someone can teach something they cannot possibly know.”
In the face of a total and complete lack of any evidence for the existence of any god, yours included, I fail to see how you could say what’s above and then recommend someone “Know God”. Your god is the flimsiest of hypotheses. Any evidence for it is in your head, no where else.

jestrfyl:
“……I teach Evolution-in CHURCH!!!”
That doesn’t surprise me and I’m glad that you do. The Catholic school I taught in also taught evolution in the school…and that is the RCC!
Why would it be hard to believe, as a Christian, that a god couldn’t have (for lack of a better word) “created” this planet and it’s inhabitants by means of evolution?

Ruairi:
I’d like to be a member of your class of 1-3rd graders. Exposing them to both evolution and the creation stories of different cultures is gerat. I’ve always enjoyed reading how other cultures believe the world was formed etc.
Mystery poster:
I fail to see how someone can teach something they cannot possibly know.” And you do??
“Know God, time lines mean nothing to him.” The bible is just another creation story among many. It is by no means the ONLY one, or is your god the ONLY one.

OOPS! The 11:25AM 1/5/08 post above was mine, pagansister.

jestrfyl, if I ever move to FL, I’ll hunt you down and join your church! Does your congregation know how fortunate they are? When I was thirteen and a freshman in HS, we studied evolution in General Science class. I decided all by myself that both concepts of faith and science were compatible. Never could understand why anyone would have a problem with that. I was brought up Holy Trinity Evangelical Lutheran.

Why do scientists and other intellectuals try to force others to accept their views of things? It’s obvious they must think themselves smarter, and therefore, better, and more important than everyone else!
I don’t care what so-called evidence they are always claiming to have for evolution,I have previously examined this theory and found it illogical,poorly constructed,riddled with errors and based largely on unfounded assumptions,and it is therefore unacceptable to me! Millions of others have reached the same conclusion,for these or other reasons-whle many do find it acceptable(why I do not understand). On the other hand, while I do not accept the biblical version of creation as literally true,I DO believe in a creator and that life was created by a superior being(GOD). Contrary to what evolutionists claim, in my opinion,there is just as much scientific evidence for creation as there is for evolution-IF NOT MORE! I feel this whole issue is a matter of PERSONAL OPINION and choice, and for the government ,at any level, to mandate that either evolution or creation either MUST be taught OR MUST be excluded from being taught, is not only irresponsible, but illegal,being an unconstitutional violation of civil rights and individual liberty! I feel BOTH theories should be objectively presented and taught,strictly as THEORIES for the origin of life, NEITHER as scientific fact;or NEITHER should be taught at all!

Henrietta,
You are always welcome in our pews – or in the chancel or the choir (are you a soprano by any chance – we need a few).
Ruairi
When I had a little more time I included a bunch of Creation myths – as well as several others – in my Confirmation Curriculum. The world is filled with beautiful poetry and storytelling, and I love to share that wealth with people. I even read the Nativity from the Qur’an in our church service this year.

Mystery poster,
“Know God, time lines mean nothing to him.” – This means nothing. I think you are simply trying to re-express the poetic statements tot he effect that God is the fullness of time – and that chronology is but a portion of all that is.
pagansister,
Some of the greatest scientists, anthropology, paleontology or astronomy especially, have been RCC clergy or respected lay leaders. Often it is the loftiest “leaders” who have the most to learn (see Bishop Copernicus argument with the Pope-du-jour, circa 1540′s)

Both concepts are not compatible with evolution there is no God only a series of accidents. It is for those who in their conceit think that they can ultimately figure out how God did it. Although creation is hard to put into words and has been simplified it is true. We can never know how God did it nor reproduce His majestic works, (many scientist think they can) but by “faith” know that God did it and it is His secret, how, when, and why. And Intelligent is borderline blasphemy.
Sorry to be the mystery poster, it was just a slip.

“Why do scientists and other intellectuals try to force others to accept their views of things? It’s obvious they must think themselves smarter, and therefore, better, and more important than everyone else!”
I’ve known some scientists who probably did think they were smarter than most people and some who didn’t. I don’t know that it affected their science. Actually I suspect a lot of us secretly believe we’re smarter than most of the people around us. But in saying scientists think they are more important than anyone else you are trying to bias people against scientists, which is not becoming of you.
And most scientists are not involved in forcing anyone to accept anything. They are doing research. Some of course teach and they would not be doing their jobs if they didn’t teach the best available explanations of the things in their fields.
“…I have previously examined [evolution] and found it illogical,poorly constructed,riddled with errors and based largely on unfounded assumptions…”
What scientists do that probably you never have is to learn a LOT about science and understand the basics in their field of science and with luck advance the field. I doubt very much you’ve spent several years studying chemistry and biology at an advanced level. In fact I suspect your reason for finding evolution “illogical,poorly constructed,riddled with errors and based largely on unfounded assumptions” is that you’ve read or skimmed one of a few books written to convince people that’s the case, or maybe just heard people talk about them. Unfortunately the authors of those books are clever but not honest. They misconstrue facts and quotes and claim things they hope are true but that aren’t or that no one knows the truth of. They assume that because they don’t know how a thing came about, it couldn’t have come about. And they make a lot of money from people who want to believe evolution is false.
So I’m not inclined to put your judgement on a level with that of the vast preponderance of scientists with the background to be able to judge whether evolution makes sense, and who do in fact find it to be the appropriate theory to explain how life developed.
In short, the people with real expertise find evolution makes sense. A few people make a lot of money writing books to poo-poo it in a misleading way and a lot of people who are afraid for it to be true choose to believe those books instead. They are letting their fear do their thinking.

Now let’s examine Intelligent Design to see what it might tell us if it were true. In other words let’s assume life as we know it was planned out ahead of time in detail and by some process set up the way it is. How is that life working out and what does that tell us about a designer?
Take humans, presumably the “highest” form of life. We have immune systems that attack us at various stages of our lives: pernicious anemia, type 1 diabetes, rheumatoid arthritis, lupus and MS are just a few of the ways that happens. Not to mention reactions to mosquitos and poison ivy. A well designed immune system would not do those things.
Our cells sometimes grow wild, giving us cancer. We have backs and hips and knees that give out way before we do. We like sweets and salt and grease way too much for our own good. We don’t get along with others very well, all in all.
So if we were designed, we were not at all well designed. That says either our designer(s?) was only marginally competent at best or it (they?) were not concerned about how things worked out for us. Our poorly designed bodies clearly rule out a benign and competent designer like the Christian “God” is usually described as being.
If the ID proponents were actual scientists they’d point this out; it’s so obvious even I figured it out. But they don’t point it out, which shows they aren’t doing science. In fact they are doing an assassination; they are trying to assassinate evolution, which is science.

God didn’t make human machines, he gave us life and minds to develop our lives. Look how far we’ve come from the beginning of life on this earth. Everyone has a purpose in the Universe. Fighting and being at odds with each other causes stress and stress attacks our immune systems. Everything we think, say, and do affects our health. We didn’t know that 70 yrs. ago, but now we do because of who? scientists, doctors, para medical professionals, psychics, etc.

Think I’ll stick with the anthropologists, scientists, etc. who have proven that we definitely “evolved” into what we are, as did the other creatures on this, the Planet Earth. The ID theory just doesn’t cut it for me or for people who have read books that present facts, not distorted facts.

Ernie C.:
No one is FORCING you to accept evolution….just don’t try teaching creationism in PUBLIC schools, since it is a religious idea,and our country has separation of church and state. The government is following the law, continuing the separation of church and state. You want creationism taught? Go to a Christian school,or church, then you will have folks agreeing with you about it. However, in the Catholic school I taught in, evolution was taught. So some religions do accept evolution as the way things got started and don’t have a conflict.

Nnmns although I don’t subscribe to intelligent design and quite frankly feel it is borderline blasphemy I really have to admire your attempt to describe it in a couple of paragraphs neat stuff.
H22 In respect to the fact that it took humans all this long to discover those few little items you quoted that alone would hint to God’s wisdom that surpasses anything our well intentioned and not so well intentioned scientist have come up with so far and I’d be really careful how much power we give to them to shoot the world in the foot.
The biggest devastations the world has suffered have been at the hands of science. Recently one scientist had to recant a remark about one race being better than another; many are little children trying to play in God’s world. Some have good intentions but one would have to be blind not to see that most are sold out to money and big businesses that have no heart.
I don’t think I’d ever lord scientist around or put much of my faith in them. They just might start something they can’t stop and we will be worse off then ever before.

ps I don’t believe you are ordering EC around like that. Reminds me of some finger pointing you’ve done in the past to others.

One thing about evolution that is not theory; how it ends. We screw up!

cknuck, that’s funny! Which line in my last post was “an order?”
You’ve done no finger pointing, I assume. I admit I have, in the course of debate.

Cknuck,
This is a silly comment …Know God, time lines mean nothing to Him.
What does it matter where your god knows a time line or not? Our world today is based on time lines. I am quite sure you use a calender to keep your self on track. The bible itself is a time line of events. If it wasn’t then why are your “scholars” trying to prove certain things happened at a certain time as shown in the bible?
I show my students not only drawings of what early species were believed to look like… yes I know we don’t know positively, I also present fossil records of the same species. I hope to send students out into the real world with the ability to think for themselves and to look at the evidence available.
I am appalled at the people who actually believe the world is only 6000 years old and that humans lived with dinosaurs. That has got to be the craziest thing I’ve ever heard. My brother in law is one of these.. and I will never understand how a educated person can be so gullible.
Also, I think a person thinking responsibly could figure out that “any way” is correct” was referring to beliefs systems. I don’t know what you seem to think it meant.
Pagansister and Jestrfl, The creation stories are all so wonderful. I always include my own Celtic heritage plus several different African ones since I work in the inner city. The Montessori curriculum is wonderful about showing a multitude of aspects on cultures. This world was created as we know it due to a blending of many cultures. The Christians seem to think that only what has happened in the last 2000 years are of any relevance. But really what has the Christian religion given us other than war and over population? The Sumerian’s, Babylonian’s, Greeks, Arab’s, and other groups from that area are the ones who have truly given to the world. Their religions and that of the Norse and Romans give us the foundations of civilization that we cherish.

cknuck, thank you.

The more I read about this debate, the more I feel this is a non-issue exaggerated by both sides to get power and some glory. One is not exclusive to the other. In fact, I feel science only proves God’s power.
Remember the best novel you ever read and the worst novel you ever read (or tried to at least). What was the difference? I bet the good novel had strong, 3-dimensional characters, a story-line that could be followed (if not believed), and a structure you could understand. I believe God had to create the universe with rules and structure or else it would fall apart like that bad novel.
As for the bible being completely false if you take all the references to creation and when you take out the “creative license” and just lay out the events. Do they happen in a scientific order? How accurate are any other stories of creation.

“always include my own Celtic heritage plus several different African ones since I work in the inner city.”
Nice.
Takes a lot of guts and insensitivity to make that statement and assume one has the right. I just saying its sort of like when a white guy waiting on me calls me boss when he addresses white folk by sir. “Here ya go boss.” I usually laugh to myself at such a fool.
Who thinks the world is actually 6000m years old that is an assumption about Christians that is false.

Heh. Wonder what evolutionists are so afraid of kids if they were ever taught the arguments against evolution alongside the arguments for evolution.
And what about Creationism? Why not? Evolutions cry out Creationism is a belief. What they often forget is Evolution is -also- a belief.
It’s rather ironic in a country of choice evolutionists are terrified children may actually learn the pros and cons of one of their prized tenants they will fight for only half the story to be told.

Plenty has been said on the subject already, but in regards to the early comment on teaching the evidence for and against evolution together – there just isn’t any evidence against it, as of yet.
Kent Hovind and the people at the Discovery Institute have tried to bring up countless examples of evidences against evolution. I’ve never been a creationist, but the first time I heard their arguments they seemed like reasonable objections to evolution (if true). However, the fact remains that their objections can be easily explained (i.e. the fact that evolution hasn’t been observed) or have less scientific backing than evolution itself (i.e. irreducible complexity). There’s no point in teaching disproven science alongside science that still has valid backing.
And to anyone who says evolution isn’t valid because we can’t prove that it happened, remember that by the same token we can’t “prove” that anything in the past actually occurred – but that doesn’t mean we should cancel all history classes. Evidence in the present can paint a pretty good picture of the past.

“Heh. Wonder what evolutionists are so afraid of kids if they were ever taught the arguments against evolution alongside the arguments for evolution.”
Speaking as a non-biologist with some background in education, I’d say they/we are afraid of two things: the waste of time teaching non-science in a curriculum that’s already chock full, and confusing kids about what part comes from science and what part comes from anti-science.
But as I showed above, if Intelligent Design (ID) were true, anyone is likely to realize that the poor design of us humans rules out the existence of a god like the Christian “God” is described. No loving and all-powerful god could have made a mess like us. You’ve got to rule out loving or all-powerful or both. So it’s the Christians who should be most worried about ID being taught.
“And what about Creationism? Why not? Evolutions cry out Creationism is a belief. What they often forget is Evolution is -also- a belief.”
There are beliefs that are hypotheses with little or no proof. Creationism is one with no proof; in fact astronomy shows it’s nonsense. The universe is billions of years old, your 6,000 years is just a pimple on the behind part of time. I expect that after biology creationists will be wanting to “teach the problems” of astronomy, followed by physics. And people will be wondering why the US will be producing no scientists and no science.
On the other hand evolution is a belief with lots and lots of proof, more rolling in every day. Just for example, we share almost all of our genes with chimpanzees, fewer with gorillas, much fewer but still several with flies, etc. And for more detail, consider the whale. Advocates of ID have claimed a land mammal could not evolve into a whale, but in fact there are many kinds of evidence that happened, some presented here. If you read that in earnest you’ll be very hard put to deny that whales and cows are closely related (though, of course, cows were not ancestors of whales; they are “cousins”, just less distant cousins than, say, we are).

“It’s rather ironic in a country of choice evolutionists are terrified children may actually learn the pros and cons of one of their prized tenants they will fight for only half the story to be told.”
As I and so many others have said the real fear is on the part of people who are afraid their kids will understand how fundamental evolution is to the way life works. Some are afraid for their archaic religions that demand people think the world is only 6,000 or so years old, some are afraid morality will somehow be impaired, though that’s a needless fear and probably some are just afraid of a different kind of thinking.
But in fact in many parts of the world, e.g. Europe, evolution is well accepted and they are functioning just fine.
But for fear of pros and cons, suggest to a fundamentalist they allow an atheist or probably even a religious liberal to teach their church school for one month out of the year and listen for the howls. And of course when you bring religion into the public school it becomes fair game for discussion, like here. And in the free market of ideas fundamentalist religion doesn’t come out too well.

the human being is not a poor design you may stand alone on that one nnmns even scientist could not back you on that one, as a matter of fact most are in awe of the design.

I would agree with nnmns on the poor design angle. No doubt our nervous system and other functions are impressively complicated and fairly efficient at what they do, but when you are assuming that we were designed and created by an all-powerful, all-wise being, one has to wonder why we have so many weaknesses. If we were made in the image of god, why are we such soft, sickly creatures compared to the rest of the animal kingdom?
Brains and thumbs are our only leg up on the competition – our flesh is tender, our muscles are weak, and our teeth & nails are pretty useless compared to other animals. Not to mention our susceptibility to cancer, allergies, crippling chemical imbalances and so on. Basically, if we are the pinnacle of creation, the creator is either unimaginative or sorely lacking in skill & ability.

Just to avoid dealing with this later, saying that god made us weak to test us or teach us the value of humility is just grasping at straws, as is the explanation that prior to the fall of Adam & Eve, humans were giant, immortal super-beings.

If we were any stronger what would the world be today? We already dominate all forms of life on the earth (not to their good of course). The human body is amazing and beautiful; it is our strength that is our undoing. Most of our maladies come from not only our own treatment of our environment but also from our habits and inventions.
Most critics criticize because they feel they could probably do a better job, that’s certainly a laugh here but they also do so because of an amazing ego.
No one will be able to critique God mainly because they will never figure Him out,(we just are not Him) and so that is where all of the anger comes from.
Creation, Evolution or something in between no matter what we as such finite creatures will never unlock the secrets. But our strength will compel us to force our best guests on others and even make them law.

I once tried to use a screwdriver as a hammer. I had only limited success. I tried using a claw hammer as a pliers – also limited success. I believe that humanity is a wonderful machine for which we have not yet discovered the proper or whole function. But the discovery is fun. Is it the best, the pinnacle, un-improvable? No, but that is what the larger machinery of evolution will deal with. Too often we expect our machine to act in ways it cannot. It is as vulnerable as it is capable. We cannot expect our tool, our body, our mind, even our spirit, to accomplish everything. It is not necessarily the right tool for every task. But for the things we do well, it works great. Our task is to discover what we do well, and to do it, and then to work on adding to it. That is a lifetime of achievement right there!
I want to toss some more chum in the water here. I believe that there is NO Divine Plan. I operate out of the principle that we share in the Creation and it continues to unfold. There is no destination, simply a continual unfolding – evolution – and that is its beauty. God is with us in the unfolding, continually surprised and delighted (on a good day) as well as constantly frustrated and disappointed (see: war, domestic abuse, addictions, or greed). I am not a liner thinker, so I prefer to work without a plan. I also realize that I am in a minority. Most people prefer linear thinking and so the thought of life without a plan is sheer horror. So it goes. It will be fun to learn which is right, or if there is an even better, unrecognized third possibility.

Chnuck
I didn’t throw that figure out just for the fun of it. There are many Christians who do believe in the 6,000 year old world. As I noted above my brother in law is one of them.. I do hope my sister has more brains than that. She wasn’t present for the conversation. Check out this website or Google it yourself to read. If a family hadn’t been the one to tell me about it I would have thought it a spoof. It should be.
http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/ap_050523_creation_museum.html
As for the other nonsense about not being sensitive, what are you talking about?? How is sharing my heritage insensitive? I do have entirely black class and it most certainly in their best interests to see how others view creation. As I stated I also share other creation stories. I have told stories from China, Russia, several different Native American tribes. My job is to give them a well rounded education not a black only one. They need to be exposed to all parts of this world. First through third graders don’t go greatly in depth on individual people in history. They are learning more about their own state than the whole world.

cknuck, what in the world is the problem with Ruairi teaching African creation stories to children, along with others? How is that insensitive???? A person who doesn’t have African roots isn’t allowed to teach about African culture? Does the mean a person who doesn’t have Chinese roots can’t teach about Chinese traditions/stories, or a person who isn’t a Native American can’t teach creation stories from some Native American tribes? Seems to limit educational opportunities. Most Americans have many cultures as heritage.

I will be upfront: I believe human origin is explained correctly by a literal reading of the Christian Bible’s book of Genesis. Yes, you may (even disparagingly) call me a creationist.
Before you conclude I’m some sort of lunatic, however, I invite you to actually explore some of the information available that facilitates clearer understanding of the issues at hand:
For those Evolutionists who don’t want to hear from the “far right-wing evangelicals”, I recommend the secular science commentary, Kicking the Sacred Cow, by James P. Hogan. Check out chapter 6: Humanistic Religion: The Rush to Embrace Darwinism.
For those interested in a clear explanation of, and sound evidence for, Intelligent Design, I recommend reading “The Case for a Creator” by former atheist, Lee Strobel.
For those brave enough for a deep dive into a cogent body of information providing sound explanation by scientists for how science actually confirms creation, I recommend the Answers Academy DVD series from Answers In Genesis (AiG) answersingenesis.com – no, I don’t work for them. However, I do offer this warning if you watch: prepare to have your mind significantly expanded!
For those brave ones looking for lighter fair: try reading Evolution Exposed, also from AiG. This book reveals why the evidence for evolution is not nearly as strong as you might think.
For the brave who don’t want to waste a single dollar on creationist drivel, I recommend watching “The Age of the Earth” – a free video on the download page at drdino.com. Compelling.
So friends, as you’ve probably figured out by now, I think the debate on evolution vs creation is best done armed with information. I encourage you to read, view, dig, explore, whatever it takes to become better informed. Knowledge is the beginning of understanding; understanding will lead you to the truth.
May the God of all creation bless you with wisdom and discernment – even those of you who don’t believe in Him; He still believes in you

“No one will be able to critique God mainly because they will never figure Him out,(we just are not Him) and so that is where all of the anger comes from.”
You can have your god acting in its mysterious ways and use it to explain anything but predict nothing. And if you’re willing to worship your god no matter what happens in the world it controls, that’s your choice. But that’s irrelevant to this article.
This article is about evolution and ID. And ID includes no kinky deity as far as I know, it involves an “intelligent designer”. I’m just pointing out any designer of us is of limited intelligence or limited concern for us. We have bodies that work some but often they attack us. And it’s often not a random attack but an attack predictable based on genetics, so it’s not due to bad living or a god putting a burden on us to somehow improve us, it’s just an imperfect system breaking down, sometimes causing great suffering.
And what anger? Some of you like to think you see anger when you just see contempt for some stupid ideas.
And I have no idea I could do better, nor could any other intelligence we know of. It took the process (not an intelligence, a process) of evolution about four billion years to come up with us, with probably a lot of false starts and countless dead ends. And of course we were not a goal, we are a result, as are all the other living things we currently share the earth with. And the process goes on, so probably in say 10,000 years our descendants (if we don’t wipe ourselves out) will be very noticeably different than we are. And hopefully they will occupy a lot of other places in addition to earth, but that’s another discussion.

“May the God of all creation bless you with wisdom and discernment – even those of you who don’t believe in Him; He still believes in you ”
I’m comforted that your god believes in me and that the Easter bunny believes in me and perhaps most of all that the flying spaghetti monster believes in me.
I looked up Hogan’s book. I read and enjoyed some of his sci-fi decades ago. It seems he’s getting his kicks defending Immanuel Velikovsky (look him up), the idea HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, Intelligent Design and other quirky ideas.
I don’t mind someone defending Velikovsky for fun or money but if you venture into what causes AIDS you’d better have a lot more expertise than Hogan because you are putting peoples’ lives at risk. And if you defend ID you are putting peoples’ educations at risk. I’ve lost a lot of respect for Hogan since you pointed out that book.
I leafed through one of Strobel’s many books one day. He interviews several people, apparently all sympathetic to the conclusion he wants to reach and he puts up straw men to knock down so he can falsely make a claim for his god’s existence. Strobel has made a lot of money attacking evolution for the evolution haters, far more than he could ever have made defending it. Reading Strobel would be a waste of your time, but if you do keep your eyes open.
I’m not familiar with the Answers In Genesis materials but the very name indicates what their materials try to do and, like so many attackers of evolution I presume they use half truths and distortions of quotes and probably nonsensical arguments.
Earlier I referenced a fairly short and free source that shows whales are closely related to ungulates, e.g. cows, which anti-evolutionists have denied for years was possible. Once we realize whales and cows are relatively close cousins (as, of course are we and chimps) it becomes a lot harder for open minded people to deny the truth of evolution.

Oh, and there seem to be a lot of materials for children which attack evolution. Since I haven’t seen any materials designed to convince seven year olds of the truth of evolution I can only assume the opponents are a lot more frightened of losing the argument and a lot better funded.

Chris V
A Quick Question – which Creation story from Genesis. Is that the very poetic and carefully constructed Chapter 1 -2:3 (6 days, or 2 sets of 3 parallels), or the following Creation story (one very long and frustrating day)?
6,000 years is a fairly short amount of time. It is awfully hard to accept that thought when it is opposed by scientifically verifiable evidence that counters it over and over. There are some folks who even believe the world began on a Wednesday in October. One guy even had it in Wisconsin (obviously it was a particularly balmy day – probably in the late Spring). I find all of these thoughts (they do not pass the test for a theory) do not give God much room.
The ironic thing is that Genesis chapter 1 is not truly in conflict with evolution, atomic physics, or even astronomical science. If we separate out the timeline of days, the process of evolution is there. This works especially well if you pair “days” 1 (big bang) and 4 (formation of stars and galaxies), “days” 2 (water forms) and 5 (animals develop in the water, and advance to land-including dinosaurs), and “days” 3 (vegetation precedes mammals) and 6 mammals). It is not precise, but for a poem, it is incredibly perceptive. Grant it that power and do not idolize it by carving it in stone. Given the time that it was composed, I would say they did very well. And we keep advancing, improving our thoughts and our theories, our stories and our poems, our science and our faith.
Denying Evolution is denying that the power of God is greater than our imaginations can grasp.

“I looked up Hogan’s book. I read and enjoyed some of his sci-fi decades ago. It seems he’s getting his kicks defending Immanuel Velikovsky (look him up), the idea HIV doesn’t cause AIDS, Intelligent Design and other quirky ideas.”
Thirty-nine percent of AIDS diseases in America have nothing at all to do with immune deficiency. So what’s the cause? Not HIV. Your comments do not lead a reasonable person to believe that facts are important to you as you decry the sources without evidence, only opinion. Excellent resources were given. Hopefully someone will use them if only to know facts to debate the subject cogently.

nnmns: “Speaking as a non-biologist with some background in education, I’d say they/we are afraid of two things: the waste of time teaching non-science in a curriculum that’s already chock full, and confusing kids about what part comes from science and what part comes from anti-science.”
In all seriousness, there’s quite a bit of evidence Creation*, not Evolution, took place. There’s also evidence which disproves Evolutionists theories in a variety of matters. Evolutionists will, of course, state differently. But in all honesty, both Creationists -and- Evolutionists study the same evidence and have to differing explanations.
Science is the study of the world around us. The art of observation.
observation → induction → hypothesis → test hypothesis by experiment → proof/disproof → knowledge
Yet too many times Science is often considered something other than. There have been too many times when varied theories and hypothesis within the study of our natural world have been later to be proven wrong. Also, there are too many things science itself cannot explain.
It’s quite arrogant for anyone to say one type of study of the observation of our natural world (Creationism) should be discounted over the favor of another (Evolution) within the classroom. Those who state there is no scientific based observational evidence of the former usually have not even allowed themselves the opportunity to consider their side.
The Institute of Creation Research (http://www.icr.org/) is a site which provides research from a Creationist scientist viewpoint. Answers in Genesis (http://www.answersingenesis.org/) is another.
Whether it’s liked to be heard or not, it’s true what we believe is going to influence what we wish to teach to the next generation. This goes for whether one believes in Creation or Evolution. A person cannot escape inserting their world-view into every facet of their life since that is what their world-view does.
This society likes to say it is tolerant of opposing viewpoints whether they are liked or not. So, does in not show to it’s children it practices what it preaches?
Veering slightly off topic, for those who remarked of how “badly” we must have been created to have illness, disease, and death I’ll remind them to perhaps look up Genesis 3 to see what in the heck happened to drastically change all that. God had no hand in that. -Man- did.
(*The the term Creationism is used over Intelligent Design in the posts since it should be understood Design very much implies a Designer. There shouldn’t be any hiding around this fact.)

Great references Chris, we will never fully know its God’s business not ours but much of what you refer to is good information and evidence for creation.

Oh, brother. And these people are the majority in our country, they’re actually the ones in power. Most times these folks are holed up in a compound in Waco. No wonder we have to import scientists from Asia, we’re a country of numb skulls. I’m starting a “If Huckabee Wins I’m Moving to Canada and Watching the Second Great Depression from Afar While Munching Popcorn and Laughing” campaign. Who’s with me?

“Thirty-nine percent of AIDS diseases in America have nothing at all to do with immune deficiency. So what’s the cause? Not HIV. Your comments do not lead a reasonable person to believe that facts are important to you as you decry the sources without evidence, only opinion.”
What’s your source for your claim about AIDS? If you accuse me of not caring about facts you need to be very careful about yours.
The “sources” were given by Chris because in his opinion they amount to something. I have looked at a version of Strobel’s book earlier and was struck by how he pretends to set up an argument for evolution but really sets up a straw man then he interviews someone who agrees with him that straw man doesn’t work and having demolished his own straw man he claims to have demolished an argument for evolution. He did that over and over in the parts of his book I looked at. That’s evidence.
As for Hogan, I researched his book without reading it and pointed out the kinds of things it contained. If it bothers you that he’s defending ID side by side with defending Velikovsky, it should. Apparently he’s come to believe scientists have formed a vast conspiracy to hide knowledge of this and that from the public, and that’s just paranoid.
Certainly as science is done at times theories that have been widely held and used sometimes have to be given up in the face of new experimental results or maybe even new theories that better explain existing results. And sometimes scientists have, in hind sight, held on to the old theories too long and in fact been too hard on exponents of different theories. Scientists are human and those things will happen.
But to accuse the vast (and I mean vast) majority of biologists, many of whom are Christians, of knowingly supporting evolution when facts support creationism is paranoid. Some lay people who do that just don’t know better though they should and a few people with scientific backgrounds are profiting from the craving of some fundamentalist Christians to have their creation myths upheld. And I guess a very, very few biologists let their religious training overcome their professionalism.
As an example of just how vast the support among biologists with the background to judge the evidence expertly is, there are more such scientists just with the name Steve who support evolution than all the scientists with such backgrounds who oppose it.

jestrfyl:
“Denying Evolution is denying that the power of God is greater than our imaginations can grasp.”
So nice to have a thinking Christian’s opinion!
How is it that there is even a problem with Evolution and the belief in a Divine Being? Certainly a god should be able to do His/Her “creating” through Evolution….

As an example of just how vast the support among biologists with the background to judge the evidence expertly is, there are more such scientists just with the name Steve who support evolution than all the scientists with such backgrounds who oppose it.

As it happens, I would highly recommend that everyone take ChrisV’s advice and watch the “Age of the Earth” video and all the anti-evolution info you can get your hands on. But I also recommend taking it one step further: take all those young-earth and “creation science” arguements and run a search on them. I’ve done so myself and I can assure you that there are numerous websites with actual scientific explanations for the phenomena they mention.
An important thing to remember is that creation science is not a science – all they do is point out possible flaws in real science, and submit that the reason things don’t add up is because god did it. “Dr. Dino” aka Kent Hovind is a personal favorite creationist of mine, and he throws out items like “why do some planets rotate opposite the rest when the big bang would have made them all spin the same way?” or “how come we never see rocks turn into bananas?” Hopefully no one would give credit to the banana-rock argument, but if you look into it, there are perfectly good scientific reasons for why some celestial bodies spin the opposite direction of others.
Creationists are not stupid people, but they do their curiosity an injustice by asking the questions but not looking for the answers before filling in the blank with god.

Well, schools should support discussion of evolution, as well as any other other scientific idea.
However, the problem (and this is true especially when it comes to the evolution topic) is that religion cannot play a factor in a scientific debate.
Most creationists can only cite one source when it comes to their idea of how the universe and life on Earth came to be–that source being their religious holy book(s). How can you argue with someone on rational grounds when they are making arguments that have no scientific support whatsoever?
I think it’s really funny and sad (more sad, really), that when other scientific fields are involved (physics, chemistry, mathematics, etc.), people have no problem accepting theories that were discovered less than 20 years ago. But, when it comes to biology, a theory that has stood the test of time and rigorous scientific investigation for almost 150 years is still considered up for debate in our public school system.

mmg, long time no read. And good points. You too, Thelemite.

I agree with your post jestrfyl of 11:40 PM. I read a similar thing written by a scientist who is a Christian and I have rationalized this since I was in H.S. I don’t understand how anyone could think differently, actually, if they are Christian.

Evolution is a fact! Richard

I don’t think that scientist can agree that evolution is fact but theory and nnmns the whole steve thing is just silly and goes to that some people see things in print and automatically believe it.
When I look at the babies that are still being born malformed because of scientific advance I realize the the perfect and delicate design of life. Also I realize that it will ultimately be science that bring us to our end, then I imagine the collective oops! Then I thank God for my salvation.

cknuck:
What have science advances to do with malformed babies? Babies have been born malformed for centuries due to reasons no one can explain. Sure some due to “science advances” in this more modern era, but it is my contention that due to science advances more are born NOT with problems. I’m not giving up on science. Unfortunately some babies will always be born not perfect, because something goes wrong in the conception process. That is where “survival of the fittest” in all life comes from. Now we can save many babies that at one time would have died. That would be science and medicine advances.

“I don’t think that scientist can agree that evolution is fact but theory”
cknuck I’d think you’d have seen enough of these discussions to understand the various meanings of “theory” and that evolution is very, very well established; about as close to a fact as a scientific theory can get. But for your and others’ benefit here’s a discussion of the meanings of “theory” in science. Unlike some theories, there is overwhelming evidence in support of evolution. A little of it is presented here.
The Steve thing is a little silly but it clearly makes the point that people with the background to analyze the evidence overwhelmingly, that’s overwhelmingly believe in evolution. So if you don’t, you should at least admit you are going against the evidence.
“I thank God for my salvation.”
Well that “salvation” thing is a whole other, unrelated topic. But your god is just a hypothesis, far weaker than a scientific theory and in fact your god hypothesis is totally without evidence beyond whatever may have happened in your head. So you need to think more than twice before you criticize something as well founded as evolution.

cknuck, are you seriously suggesting babies weren’t born malformed before there was “scientific advance”? Tell me you aren’t. And while some medicines have caused all too many deformities the problem falls with the laxness of testing before medicines were/are approved for use. Certainly business is always in a hurry to capitalize on scientific developments without waiting for adequate testing for safety. You can blame that somewhat on science but some of the blame must fall on capitalism and some on the political system.
Earlier I attempted to post a response to your comment on evolution as “but theory”. It had a couple URL’s in it. Wait for it.

cknuck
Surely you don’t believe that before the Industrial Revolution and the Development of Science that there were no malformed children. That sort of pseudo-nostaligia is so silly, so pointless, so foolhardy that even a Jester cannot accept it. Malformation of offspring has always been a part of Creation. Certainly, some developments in technology have, as an unintended and horrendous consequence, resulted in malformed children (as in the infamous Thalidomide Babies – but now so many others born with or prone to cancers). But there have been times when some malformations are actually mutations that allow a species to adapt, change, migrate, and become more fully integrated in their environment. The difference between mutation and malformation may be subtle at some point. But since the first births there have been alterations. I expect your kids are an amalgam of your genes and your wife’s (genes = the LEGOs of Evolution). If not, they are either clones or you have spored and actually parented (no cast aspersions on your children – its just an example)

nnmns, Hiroshima, Nagaski, Chernobyl, and Jonestown.

cknuck:
All the above proves what? 2 were war, one a nuclear mistake, but Jonestown was a looney toon who convinced folks that there was a better place after death…and so said “have some grape juice”. BTW what has Jonestown got to do with science or evolution?
Those weren’t examples of science at it’s best. Vaccines, micro-surgery on infants before birth, and after birth, anti-biotics, etc. are examples of science at it’s best.
Evolution kept and keeps the strong, and the adaptations that worked continued, those that didn’t, died out. Science has overcome some of our human weakness, but there will always be some.

huh? Jonestown was whant?

cknuck
“Jonestown” was the not really a place, as in a location on a map. It was the location where cult leader Jim Jones convinced his followers to martyr themselves by drinking toxic Kool-Aid (a publicity nightmare for that company). Not much science thee, but surely proof that railigion can be as toxic as technology.
Do you know of another Jonestown?
It is no great trick to read through history and assign pblame to science/technology or to eligion for millions of deaths. At the same time credit can be assigned for assisting people through each enormous crisis. That accomplishes nothing.
Both science and religion advance and benefit humanity as well as communities when they work in conjunction, each learning from and strengthening the other. The Creation stories of Genesis, as well as any other comunity or culture are intuitive. Claimig “revelation” unique authority is something a person aceepts or not. However, as science has developed systems for objective verification the lessons of Evolution have become less intutitve and more veirifable. That does not diminish the divine role. It simply means we have learned more about God’s presence and subtle ways, and depend less on human imagination and intuition. Denying evolution denys God’s own work – a dnagerous place to be for a person of faith.

Thanks, jestrfyl, for filling in cknuck on Jonestown. I assumed that most folks knew about the disaster there…and I had forgotten it was Kool-Aid, not grape juice. Maybe it was grape flavored Kool-Aid! The one thing that really, really got to me about Jonestown (a situation I haven’t thought about in years) was the fact that parents also killed their children along with themselves. The kids had no choise whether they wanted to die or not, the parents did. Off the subject, just a memory that has been revived.

PS, didn’t he convince his followers to follow him to a South America Island because the world was going to end and they would be taken up and to God at that place? A lot of people didn’t know they were drinking poison, and when they realized that people were dropping dead, they ran and escaped into the jungle. This didn’t have anything to do with science, but everything to do with religion extremists.
Doctors are saving many more children than ever before; babies with hearts born on the outside of their chests, children attached to each other by different parts of their bodies, many-limbed babies, and toddlers that will live normal lives because of science. Organ transplants for all ages, vaccines, now to prevent ovarian cancer in young women. An age opening for stem-cells to extend our lives. Enough about silly Dr. Jeckle and Mr. Hyde fears.

There’s an “American Experience” episode that shows on PBS titled Jonestown The Life and Death of the Peoples Temple that I happened to see. I learned a lot I hadn’t known. Presumably it will be showing up Monday, April 9.

Nnmns, thanks for the article above. Very interesting. I didn’t pay attention to Jim Jones, until everyone was killed by him. I had him mixed up with another preacher, and the end times. Everyone should click on what you posted here. He started out so normally mixing in with politically notable people, joining causes that bothered so many in the late and through the 70′s, even going on today, actually. Amazing how so many were misled by him for so long.