| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"" |
| Date: |
20 Jan 2005 01:31:28 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Evolution, Fact or Theory |
"Jeff Strickland" <spamcatcher@yahoo.net> wrote:
:|
:|"Curly Surmudgeon" <curly@curlysurmudgeon.com> wrote in message
:|news:pan.2005.01.19.19.28.37.123538@curlysurmudgeon.com...
:|> On Tue, 18 Jan 2005 16:00:17 -0800, Jeff Strickland wrote:
:|>
:|> > THIS STATEMENT IS "RELIGIOUS"
:|> > "This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory,
:|not a
:|> > fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be
:|> > approached with an open mind, studied carefully and critically
:|considered."
:|>
:|> This statement is proof only of the appalling scientific ignorance of
:|> religionists. It's much like Bush-speak, incredibly ignorant people
:|> speaking with words they don't fully comprehend.
:|>
:|
:|
:|But, the fact is that evolution is only a theory. Creation is equally a
:|theory. You accept evolution mostly because you deny creation. Creation
:|demands there be a higher power that made a conscious effort to make
:|something, life in this instance. Evolution allows for things to simply
:|happen with no plan, no design, no nothing. Just happen.
:|
:|The problem is, if things - life in this instance - just happened, why
:|doesn't it keep happening? If life is a function of a decision, then it is
:|easy to see how that decision can be made once and stop. Life can be
:|created, and then sustain itself, if creation is the means. But if evolution
:|is the means, then life would continue to evolve and new life should have
:|evolved since Darwin's day. Perhaps only one life form, maybe two, but
:|surely in the 100+ years shince Darwin put forth his yet to be substantiated
:|theory, we should see something new that is not a result of crossbreeding or
:|science.
:|
:|It is a reasonable statement that evolution is a theory, and to tell kids
:|that it is the theory that the school is teaching. It is even reasonalbe
:|that the schools do not teach creation, but they ought to at least be able
:|to front the concept that creation is another of the possible explanations
:|of how life was formed.
:|
:|
From: Wallace Harrison <wallace709@c...>
Date: Wed Jan 12, 2005 12:18 am
Subject: Creationism article
___________________________________________________
SUNDAY FORUM (Virginian Pilot, Sunday Jan. 9, 2004)
Myths of creationism don’t belong in a classroom
BY WALLACE HARRISON
In December, the pages of The Virginian-Pilot reverberated with
articles and letters debating the "theories" of evolution and creationism.
There were some thoughtful exchanges by the proponents of each side of the
issue.
However, the bottom line is that Bible literalists want the teaching of
evolution banned from the schools, with creationism and "intelligent
design" taught in its place. That is what’s behind the current movement to
allow the two incompatible ideas to be presented simultaneously, as though
they were equally viable "theories."
There are several problems with this proposal. Basically, it’s that
evolution is more than a theory while creationism and intelligent design
are much less.
It initially sounds reasonable to suggest teaching both while letting
the student decide. However, it’s really quite silly and an abdication of
educational responsibility to teach any of the vast creationist myths as
fact.
Which creation should we choose? The Norsemen believed that man and
woman emerged from the armpit of a sleeping giant, Ymir. The Australian
aborigines believed that people were carved with stone knives by the god
Ungambikula. Some Chinese believed we all sprang from the body lice of a
dead Pan Gu. The African Boshongo believed we were created from the vomit
of the great but sick god, Numba.
And the fundamentalist Christians believe that a god created the world,
including man and woman, approximately 6,000 years ago.
The beliefs are all very interesting, but the common thread is that
they are beliefs, meaning nonfactual and unprovable mythology. But even if
you want to accept the Christian belief, you’d then have to decide between
two different renderings.
One biblical story (Genesis 1), lays out the daily order of creation
as: (1) devising light, to differentiate between day and night; (2)
separating the water on the Earth from the water above the Earth (heaven);
(3) dividing the Earth’s waters to provide for dry land, and making grass,
fruit and seeds; (4) placing the sun, moon and stars in the firmament; (5)
inhabiting the Earth with fish, mammals, birds and fowl and (6) making
animals, reptiles, man and then woman.
The second version (Genesis 2) offers this creative timeframe: (1) man;
(2) a garden in Eden; (3) every tree; (4) beasts and fowl; and then (5)
woman. Though they won’t admit it publicly, those who interpret the Bible
literally have a bit of a dilemma there.
Intelligent design seems like a good explanation for the complexities
in the human body, micro-organisms and the universe. That is until you try
to fathom Down syndrome, birth mutations, Alzheimer’s, heart disease,
kidney failure and other gross imperfections (and lack of intelligence) in
the design of our bodies and the environment.
I would not belittle those who believe in creationism any more than I
would belittle those who believe we owe our existence to the god of
fertility. These beliefs belong in the homes or temples of the believers,
but not in our schools. There, we have no sensible choice but to teach
recorded history and practice testable science.
Because science, whether backward- or forward-looking, is constantly
questioning and testing itself (unlike religious beliefs), there are always
some currently unknown suppositions. But virtually every year, new
discoveries add to the growing evidence of proof of evolution. If the kind
of god that Christians envision actually exists, it’s apparent that he used
the evolutionary process to create life millennia ago.
Keep religion and science in their respective places: the former in
your hearts and places of worship, the latter in your minds and the
schools.
• Wallace Harrison, a retired editor and writer for an electronics trade
journal, lives in Virginia Beach. He was active in a Humanist Society
chapter in Fort Worth, Texas.
_______________________________________________
My phone call yesterday was a woman who tried to impress on me the validity
of creationism, questioning how the first organism that breathed got its
breath, arguing that God had to have breathed into the nostrils as
recorded.
I got a letter today from someone on Thompkins Lane in Va. Beach. It said
the following:
_______________________________________
As far as creation goes, between Genesis 1:1 and 2 there is room
for all the geological ages. The verb '\"was," or "became," "without form
or void" implies some kind of catastrophic event, according to some Hebrew
scholars.
The best argument against evolution came from a kid in Russia (then
under the communists) after the teacher had outlined the theory. He asked,
"What about the sheep, who have no natural defense and depend on the
shepherd for protection?" Well, the boy was punished, of course. The enemy
of sheep is the wolf, who has three large litters. Sheep, as you know, have
only one or two lambs.
_________________________________________
It's not a convincing argument, but it is interesting. I look forward to
more mail or proselytizing phone calls from irate readers.
Wallace Harrison
******************************************************************************
Wallace Harrison is a member of the following groups in the
Norfolk-Virginia Beach Area of Hamption Roads, Virginia
HRSepCnS · Hampton Roads SepChurch&State
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/HRSepCnS/
NORFOLK/VA. B. SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE MEETUP GROUP
http://churchandstate.meetup.com/47/
Tidewater Atheists
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TidewaterAtheists/
NORFOLK ATHEISTS, FREETHINKERS, HUMANISTS, & BRIGHTS MEETUP GROUP
http://atheists.meetup.com/88/
.
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
