Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
A look at the vastness and complexity of the universe and life on this earth shows us that any creator isn't an old man with a white beard in the sky playing with clay.
Acknowledging God beyond our limited mental scope allows that evolution and an ultimate conscious power of creation are not incompatible.
And just as physics has found knowledge deeper and deeper into the rabbit hole, our awareness of how species arise and evolve may become more sophisticated with time. (and religion/spirituality can do the same)
I think it's a mistake for religion to get it's panties in a bunch about evolution. Religion is about transforming the heart and mind, not substituting one conceptual idea about something for another. Jesus didn't preach any science or spend an instant correcting wrong ideas about the physical world prevalent during his time (and religious folk would have to assume he knew better)
It's a distraction. Let science explore via its means, and let us all look for the meaning of life in our hearts, and not in cataloging beliefs that change nothing but the superficial content of our brains.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Landgolier
climber
the flatness
|
|
Jody said: "whenever an evolutionist presents "evidence" for "evolution", it is always micro evolution presented as evidence for macro evolution."
Drawing an artificial distinction between the two has been a rhetorical gambit employed by creationists for decades, but has no real root in any kind of science. The distinction is often made between variation within a species and changes between one species and another, but we must remember that there is in fact no hard observable line between species. We've constructed this test of "can produce viable offspring," but that's a probabilistic observation, not something you can read into the genetic code by seeing if 99.xxxx% of the material is the same. It's the difference between saying "it's a fair coin if we flip it 100 times and get between 45 and 55 heads" and "it's a fair coin if we measure its shape and density using the most accurate equipment available and determine that it is within 99% of being perfectly cylindrical and of even density."
If a life form's genetic makeup changes across generations, the likelihood of any degree of change is simply a function of how often and how large the changes are and the amount of time allowed. Microevolution x 4.56 billion years = macroevolution. There simply isn't a good creationist argument for why microvariation cannot eventually produce macrovariation, at least without recourse to the idea that God reaches in and monkeys with things whenever the natural processes he laid out start to behave in a way that would make it necessary for believers to alter their faith. Mighty strange thing for a deity who created intelligent life to do, I think.
Jody, you've claimed a few times that even billions of years isn't enough time for macroevolution. Care to post up your math and tell us how long it would actually take for a reasonable probability of observing the level of speciation and diversity we see now, say a 50/50 chance? It's not difficult, really, you just need to specify the parameters that determine the distribution of the variation, calculate a standard deviation, and compute a likelihood of a given outcome from there. But of course you haven't done that, what you have done is just fall back to an intermediate argument when your first position was weakened in the hopes of salvaging something of your claim by simply saying it's not long enough. Unfortunately, you've already conceded the point; by admitting that it is not long enough, you have admitted that it is possible given more time, which means that you do in fact believe in the possibility of evolution in principle, which is inconsistent with your other claims.
A challenge to all of the defenders of creationism here: postulate some testable hypothesis that if found to be false would cause you to abandon your belief in creation. If you can't, you're simply not making a scientific claim, and we're all talking past each other.
|
|
andanother
climber
|
|
”Jay...there is no evidence that humans and apes have common ancestors. “
The same can be said about the different races of human beings, yet the Bible states that we all descended from Adam and Eve.
So you’re using science to try to disprove someone else’s views. Yet you are ignoring that same science when it clearly disproves your own views. Interesting....
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
" Jay...there is no evidence that humans and apes have common ancestors. "
Ya think? It's okay to actually open a book, and/or think some, the hive isn't the whole story, Jode.
There is more evidence than anyone could ever need, unless they Need to be in denial.
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
Werner and Karl, so appreciate your last remarks. I had a pretty good brain, but due to circumstances beyond my control it's just not with me right now.
I am assured by the pros that the brain will be back as life events are processed and configured into the new era of life I now live.
Anyway, I would so love to be a part of this discussion but it's just not there for me...so all I can do is comment on your remarks....
WBraun "Darwin is not brilliant because he missed the most important fundamental knowledge, the existence of the soul...."
Yes, the soul is the core of just who we are...separates us from all other life forms...
Merriam-Webster....soul.."the immaterial essence, animating principle, or actuating cause of an individual life
Also...the spiritual principle embodied in human beings, all rational and spiritual beings, or the universe."
Yet, Karl, I don't think that we can put science on one side and the spiritual factor on the other. I don't think one can draw a line, so to speak, in the sand. There is a co-mingling of the two, science and soul, that baffles humans.
Most want to put science and spiritually into well defined cubby holes with nice sterile labels...and then walk away saying..."there, now we've got it pigeon-holed". I doubt this will ever happen.
Blessings to all you VERY special people and your brains on the ST.
Lynne
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
wuz real!
|
|
"Okay...there is FAR more evidence that is consistent with Creation than there is for evolution. You can't disprove it. I'm in!"
An example?
Just one?
That would be more than I have ever heard/seen. I contend that there is no such evidence, prove me wrong! I dare ya! Or, at least don't continue to limp off, avoiding the question, as is the norm.
Don't tell me that wanting the world (or science, math, taxes, or anything) to be any certain way, is proof of anything, beyond an example of what you're into.
|
|
L
climber
Soy latte center of the Known Universe
|
|
"L, not sure, but taking you at your word...so what? Why wouldn't God used what worked on different species? Doesn't mean they "evolved" from each other."
Jody,
I just adore you and your stubbornness! If ever I'm a bit lukewarm about what I believe, or question what my values are, all I have to do is ask you a question and right away I find clarity. You have no idea what a multi-purpose compass you are for me--and I thank you with all my heart.
So who says God didn't use Evolution to make the world what it is today? Only you are saying those species didn't evolve from one another, not God. In fact, I've been very dedicated in listening to God my entire life and God has never said jack about all this science stuff, because God could care less about the fun we have with our chemisty sets.
God's not the moron so many religious types (not you of course) seem to think He is. God, as you so wisely pointed out, would save His energy by taking what worked initially and building from there. Evolution is God's way of saving energy, populating the Earth, and having some fun at the same time.
Your battle isn't GOD vs. EVOLUTION, Jody. Your battle is your VERSION of God, based on a patchwork manuscript that wasn't even written down initially, has been added to and deleted from according to who ruled at the time, modified to fill the coffers and control the masses by the few possessing education or power, interpreted and misinterpreted and reinterpreted over 2000 years. King James was a homosexual, Jody. A "flaming poofta". And even he got his own version of the bible!
And then you've got your fundamentalist taking the bible literally, and your traditional religions taking the bible as a parable, and all the while, little men everywhere feeling themselves wise enough and loving enough and omnipotent enough to say that their words come from the mouth of God.
I believe that God has an inexhaustible sense of humor, otherwise we'd be stomped into dust for our incredible arrogance and hypocracy, and He would just bake up a new batch of chimps to play with.
So your fight is with your VERSION of God vs. EVOLUTION. Once you realize that, you're right--none of this matters.
Thanks again, Jody--I truly do appreciate your presence here, and I mean that.
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
fattrad, the ST family is SUCH an amazing group of very special, incredible people. Thank you for your care and concern! No matter what side of the spectrum on a multitude of issues we reside....when it all shakes out the men and women of Super Topo are there for you when you need them.
Thank you all! Lynne
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
In this age of Kali: the 3 big ones.
Gold
Oil
Drugs
G
O
D
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
Ok, ST people, I need ALOT of education....start with what does in this age of Kali, mean?
Gold, Oil and Drugs...WBraun if your posts about the spirituality of life on this planet are something you truly feel are real then the Gold, Oil, and Drugs things of this planet are not all that significant compared to what the real GOD has on his agenda.
I know about pharmaceuticals, exercise and eat well (see Nature)
drugs can help...but they aren't gonna save you if you don't take care of your body. Lynne
|
|
L
climber
Soy latte center of the Known Universe
|
|
Oh...My...God....
I just found the pagan stuff...it was written by PaganMonkeyBoy...I don't know what to think....;-)
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Lynne wrote
"Yet, Karl, I don't think that we can put science on one side and the spiritual factor on the other. I don't think one can draw a line, so to speak, in the sand. There is a co-mingling of the two, science and soul, that baffles humans.
Most want to put science and spiritually into well defined cubby holes with nice sterile labels...and then walk away saying..."there, now we've got it pigeon-holed". I doubt this will ever happen. "
At the moment Lynne, on the official level, the two entities mostly operate separately, while the players have their feet in both worlds. Spirituality isn't afraid of science but Religion doesn't know how to approach it yet, and the tools of science are like a butterfly net while Spirit is like air or water, too fine for the net.
That will change in time. We're still babies on this planet. Back in the time of Jesus, people were really ignorant of the world around them and got simplistic explanations. What else could they understand? and as far as Religion went, it wasn't important for them to know more.
Even now with Science, we've been using the scientific method for an extremely short time in the grand scheme of things. Of course, if we don't kill ourselves, in 10,000 years science and "religion" will be great friends.
That's the rub, Science spends too much time developing the tools for our self destruction and Religion forgets peace and love and supplies the divisiveness and distorted dogma to propel us to misuse those weapons.
Which is why Religion should go back to it's real core, transforming the human heart by opening it to Love and Understanding. Then humanity will be inspired to put science to good work.
Peace
karl
|
|
Russ Walling
Social climber
Out on the sand.... man.....
|
|
How would this fit into your puzzle??
Soviet leader Joseph Stalin attempted to create a powerful, subservient army of ape-men by crossing human females with male apes. "I want a new invincible human being, insensitive to pain, resistant and indifferent about the quality of food they eat," Stalin was quoted in Moscow newspapers. The leadership was quick to respond, with the Politburo ordering the Soviet Academy of Science to build a "living war machine" in 1926.
Intended for use in both military and intensive industrial work like constructing railroads, Staling demanded the cross-breed should be of 'immense strength, but with an underdeveloped brain.' The Russian leadership viewed the mutants as a core part of the plan to strengthen the weakened Soviet Union and power the first of its Five Year Plans for quick industrialization.
Apes, most likely chimpanzees, were captured in the 1920s, and Stalin ordered Russian scientist Ilya Ivanov to perform the horrific research. Ivanov was the Soviet's top animal husbandry expert, having set up the world's first racehorse artificial breeding center.
His first attempt was to capture chimps and impregnate them with human spermatozoa. When that didn't work, he tried the opposite. He procured an agreement with a provincial governor in the African country of Guinea whereby patients in a local hospital could be used for inter-breeding, so long as they volunteered for it.
In a shock to Ivanov, but perhaps to no one else, not a single woman would agree to interbreed with an ape. The research returned to Russia, at the Suchumi Monkey Colony, a Soviet Primate Center. A document discovered in state archives describes the efforts: human trials for hybridization (female human with ape spermatozoa) were to be conducted on no less than five women. They could proceed only with the explicit written permission of the target female. Besides acknowledging the risk, she would also have to be isolated to prevent natural human breeding from confusing the results.
Unsurprisingly, the entire misguided project was considered a failure. Ivanov, like many Soviet scientists who failed, was arrested and sent for five years of exile in Kazakhstan. He died shortly after from illness.
Nature and logic implies that no pregnancies resulted, though rumors of continued efforts at Soviet Forced Labor camps continued through the 50's. The results of this research are fodder for conspiracy theorists today, particularly those in the 'bigfoot' camp.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 6, 2008 - 06:07pm PT
|
"a powerful, subservient army of ape-men by crossing human females with male apes." "...a new invincible human being, insensitive to pain, resistant and indifferent about the quality of food they eat,"
Sort of sounds like Camp 4. Except maybe the servient part.
|
|
Ouch!
climber
|
|
"Sort of sounds like Camp 4"
You seen pictures of the fine citizens of JTree lately?
Man didn't have common ancestor with ape. Man is an ape. Just a little less hairy. Well, some are less hairy. Except for one of us. I bet the other apes are jealous of him.
|
|
Lynne Leichtfuss
Social climber
valley center, ca
|
|
Sir Russ, WHERE do you find this stuff? I have read quite a bit but never seem to run across the information you have at your finger tips???? smiles, lrl
|
|
monolith
Trad climber
Berkeley
|
|
Jody, what about all the scientists with excellent education and modern instrumentation that have confirmed and built upon his work?
Darwin was a genius, that's for sure.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
Social climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jul 6, 2008 - 06:33pm PT
|
Some websites, with a lot of information about Darwin:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Darwin
http://www.aboutdarwin.com/
http://darwin-online.org.uk/
He was an interesting and complicated man. Many Victorian-era Englishmen were. Perhaps a little odd, too.
His lack of a doctoral degree means nothing - they weren't common at the time, and many great scientists (and inventors) from the 19th century didn't have doctorates.
(Albert Einstein didn't have a doctorate at the time of his annus mirabilis in 1905.)
|
|
WandaFuca
Gym climber
San Fernando Lamas
|
|
I don't know about Darwin, but I think there is a lot of evidence right here on SuperTopo, let alone on the rest of the Earth, that GOD!™ was not a genius.
|
|
Ouch!
climber
|
|
The complete works of Darwin are now online by some British company. Some really cool reading.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!