Tennessee's Creationism Bill: Why Are We Still Fighting Over Evolution?

Then you know nothing about the theory of evolution & the fossil record. That's all there is to it, really.

I disagree....I simply don't accept what you have faith is there.....

you find fossil A and fossil B and presume that there is a link between them.....in truth, they are merely evidence that creature A and creature B existed.....this does not tell us that creature A and creature B were not created.....it does not tell us that creature A evolved into creature B.....
 
I disagree....I simply don't accept what you have faith is there.....

you find fossil A and fossil B and presume that there is a link between them.....in truth, they are merely evidence that creature A and creature B existed.....this does not tell us that creature A and creature B were not created.....it does not tell us that creature A evolved into creature B.....

That's really oversimplifying. There is plenty of evidence in the fossil record for gradual, incremental changes that led to new species.

The scientific method is there. To say that every gap has to be completely filled in or the method is moot shows very little understanding of what the scientific method is.
 
That's really oversimplifying. There is plenty of evidence in the fossil record for gradual, incremental changes that led to new species.

The scientific method is there. To say that every gap has to be completely filled in or the method is moot shows very little understanding of what the scientific method is.

when I was young the scientific method involved experimentation......I can look at the same fossil record and say with equal authority that they are evidence that God created lots of species.....
 
What is the oldest thing that one can date reliably with carbon 14?
Continental drift is still happening but what evidence (and what was the source of that evidence) that the continents were as close together as some models show?

I agree that there are a lot of things that look good in theory but seem to be supported by lack of sufficient evidence. I also agree that both sides will cling to whatever bolsters their opinion....extremes both ways. Kind of reminds me of politics.

for carbon 14 dating, i suggest that you google it

as for continental drift, if large masses are observed to be moving (slowly, very slowly) it is reasonable to extrapolate forwards and backwards

it has been too long since i was a science student and i have not kept up with theories of evolution to give you more definitive answers

however, the scientific method has yet to be disproven
 
when I was young the scientific method involved experimentation......I can look at the same fossil record and say with equal authority that they are evidence that God created lots of species.....

It's ridiculous to assert "equal authority" in this case, using the scientific method as the governing policy. Science is able to look at adaptations along the way, along with evidence of current evolutionary adaptations, and make logical conclusions as to how new species came about based on that.

There is no similar logical frame of reference for inserting God into the equation. If your faith dictates that, have at it - but don't mistake it for science.
 
let's take whale's flippers for example.......seculars take it for granted that the existence of bones in whale's flippers is evidence that they use to be legs.....on the other hand they could simply be evidence that God designed whale's flippers with additional rigidity for efficiency......
 
for carbon 14 dating, i suggest that you google it

as for continental drift, if large masses are observed to be moving (slowly, very slowly) it is reasonable to extrapolate forwards and backwards

it has been too long since i was a science student and i have not kept up with theories of evolution to give you more definitive answers

however, the scientific method has yet to be disproven

No need to google. The best carbon 14 can do is somewhere between 40,000 and 60,000 years, with the accuracy lessening the older something is. As to the continental drift subject....there's too much extrapolation for me to accept even though, like I said, it is at least plausible. As to the scientific method being "disproven," .... that's about like the Christian "proving" his faith....neither is possible though both can be shown. On this point, I will post an article with a link. I encourage you to take a look around the site at the link at your liesure. It has been a joy discussing this subject with you. And I do want to be clear that I do not advocate for creation to be taught in the public school system.

“Living Fossils”—Evolution’s Innate Circular Reasoning
by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Another earthshaking find within the evolutionary community only spotlights once again the inherent irrationality of the faltering, fallacious theory. During a Southeast Asian expedition, retired Florida State University science professor, David Redfield, captured the first photos of the Laotian rock rat, once believed to have gone extinct more than 11 million years ago. The fossilized remains, collected previously from sites in Pakistan, India, Thailand, China, and Japan, were thought to verify this last known relative of a long-extinct family of rodents known as Diatomyidae (“Retired Professor Captures...,” 2006). Surprise, surprise—another alleged “ancestor” eliminated from the tattered evolutionary tree.

Observe the two contrasting, conflicting, mutually exclusive approaches to the created realm:

1. Evolution: All animals we see today are advanced forms of primitive precursors, and descendants of a single ancestor. As more advanced forms have evolved by means of adaptation, natural selection, survival of the fittest, and genetic mutation, the earlier forms were naturally displaced and disappeared. Fossils, millions of years old, represent life forms that were the evolutionary predecessors of present life forms, but which went extinct long ago.

2. Creation: God created a spectrum of animals during the six-day week of Creation. While reproducing only after their own “kind” (an ambiguous Hebrew term that likely parallels the modern taxonomic classification “family”), these animals were created with the genetic potential for producing a variety of other species, giving rise to the diversity of animal life presently on the planet. Along the way, due mostly to environmental factors, many animals have become extinct. However, other species have escaped detection by humans for centuries, only to be rediscovered in some remote area.

Which of these two viewpoints fits the actual physical facts? Obviously, the latter. Evolutionists repeatedly find themselves in the embarrassing position of discovering that the alleged evolutionary ancestors of current life forms, that supposedly went extinct millions of years ago, are in fact still living. They are forced to cover their tracks by inventing a self-contradictory, nonsensical term to identify these anomalies—in this case, “living fossils.” But that’s like a round square. Philosophers and logicians refer to such duplicitous posturing as irrational and “logical contradiction.” Evolutionists call it “science.”

Link to article
 
It's ridiculous to assert "equal authority" in this case, using the scientific method as the governing policy. Science is able to look at adaptations along the way, along with evidence of current evolutionary adaptations, and make logical conclusions as to how new species came about based on that.

There is no similar logical frame of reference for inserting God into the equation. If your faith dictates that, have at it - but don't mistake it for science.

I'm sorry, but you have no basis for calling the assumptions you make about 'adaptations', science......they are only called 'adaptations' in the first place because of your assumptions, thus they aren't evidence your assumptions are correct.....this is circular reasoning....
 
No need to google. The best carbon 14 can do is somewhere between 40,000 and 60,000 years, with the accuracy lessening the older something is. As to the continental drift subject....there's too much extrapolation for me to accept even though, like I said, it is at least plausible. As to the scientific method being "disproven," .... that's about like the Christian "proving" his faith....neither is possible though both can be shown. On this point, I will post an article with a link. I encourage you to take a look around the site at the link at your liesure. It has been a joy discussing this subject with you. And I do want to be clear that I do not advocate for creation to be taught in the public school system.

“Living Fossils”—Evolution’s Innate Circular Reasoning
by Dave Miller, Ph.D.

Another earthshaking find within the evolutionary community only spotlights once again the inherent irrationality of the faltering, fallacious theory. During a Southeast Asian expedition, retired Florida State University science professor, David Redfield, captured the first photos of the Laotian rock rat, once believed to have gone extinct more than 11 million years ago. The fossilized remains, collected previously from sites in Pakistan, India, Thailand, China, and Japan, were thought to verify this last known relative of a long-extinct family of rodents known as Diatomyidae (“Retired Professor Captures...,” 2006). Surprise, surprise—another alleged “ancestor” eliminated from the tattered evolutionary tree.

Observe the two contrasting, conflicting, mutually exclusive approaches to the created realm:

1. Evolution: All animals we see today are advanced forms of primitive precursors, and descendants of a single ancestor. As more advanced forms have evolved by means of adaptation, natural selection, survival of the fittest, and genetic mutation, the earlier forms were naturally displaced and disappeared. Fossils, millions of years old, represent life forms that were the evolutionary predecessors of present life forms, but which went extinct long ago.

2. Creation: God created a spectrum of animals during the six-day week of Creation. While reproducing only after their own “kind” (an ambiguous Hebrew term that likely parallels the modern taxonomic classification “family”), these animals were created with the genetic potential for producing a variety of other species, giving rise to the diversity of animal life presently on the planet. Along the way, due mostly to environmental factors, many animals have become extinct. However, other species have escaped detection by humans for centuries, only to be rediscovered in some remote area.

Which of these two viewpoints fits the actual physical facts? Obviously, the latter. Evolutionists repeatedly find themselves in the embarrassing position of discovering that the alleged evolutionary ancestors of current life forms, that supposedly went extinct millions of years ago, are in fact still living. They are forced to cover their tracks by inventing a self-contradictory, nonsensical term to identify these anomalies—in this case, “living fossils.” But that’s like a round square. Philosophers and logicians refer to such duplicitous posturing as irrational and “logical contradiction.” Evolutionists call it “science.”

Link to article

which doesn't even touch on the possibility that God simply created a new species whenever he felt the need for one.....
 
I'm sorry, but you have no basis for calling the assumptions you make about 'adaptations', science......they are only called 'adaptations' in the first place because of your assumptions, thus they aren't evidence your assumptions are correct.....this is circular reasoning....

You continue to oversimplify to support your agenda. They are not called adaptations because of my assumptions. They are called adaptations because of clear changes in the fossil records that research is able to correlate with changing conditions for a given organism in the context of natural history.

You can try to "de-science" the theory of evolution all you want. The fact is that it is not some haphazard guess in the dark - it is an exhaustively researched & established theory that is based on a huge amount of physical evidence.
 
personally I've always enjoyed most the creation story set forth in the book of Job....

38:1 Then the Lord spoke to Job out of the storm. He said:

2 “Who is this that obscures my plans
with words without knowledge?
3 Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.

4 “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
5 Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
6 On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone —
7 while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels[a] shouted for joy?

8 “Who shut up the sea behind doors
when it burst forth from the womb,
9 when I made the clouds its garment
and wrapped it in thick darkness,
10 when I fixed limits for it
and set its doors and bars in place,
11 when I said, ‘This far you may come and no farther;
here is where your proud waves halt’?

12 “Have you ever given orders to the morning,
or shown the dawn its place,
13 that it might take the earth by the edges
and shake the wicked out of it?
14 The earth takes shape like clay under a seal;
its features stand out like those of a garment.
15 The wicked are denied their light,
and their upraised arm is broken.

16 “Have you journeyed to the springs of the sea
or walked in the recesses of the deep?
17 Have the gates of death been shown to you?
Have you seen the gates of the deepest darkness?
18 Have you comprehended the vast expanses of the earth?
Tell me, if you know all this.

19 “What is the way to the abode of light?
And where does darkness reside?
20 Can you take them to their places?
Do you know the paths to their dwellings?
21 Surely you know, for you were already born!
You have lived so many years!

22 “Have you entered the storehouses of the snow
or seen the storehouses of the hail,
23 which I reserve for times of trouble,
for days of war and battle?
24 What is the way to the place where the lightning is dispersed,
or the place where the east winds are scattered over the earth?
25 Who cuts a channel for the torrents of rain,
and a path for the thunderstorm,
26 to water a land where no one lives,
an uninhabited desert,
27 to satisfy a desolate wasteland
and make it sprout with grass?
28 Does the rain have a father?
Who fathers the drops of dew?
29 From whose womb comes the ice?
Who gives birth to the frost from the heavens
30 when the waters become hard as stone,
when the surface of the deep is frozen?

31 “Can you bind the chains of the Pleiades?
Can you loosen Orion’s belt?
32 Can you bring forth the constellations in their seasons[c]
or lead out the Bear[d] with its cubs?
33 Do you know the laws of the heavens?
Can you set up God’s[e] dominion over the earth?

34 “Can you raise your voice to the clouds
and cover yourself with a flood of water?
35 Do you send the lightning bolts on their way?
Do they report to you, ‘Here we are’?
36 Who gives the ibis wisdom[f]
or gives the rooster understanding?[g]
37 Who has the wisdom to count the clouds?
Who can tip over the water jars of the heavens
38 when the dust becomes hard
and the clods of earth stick together?

39 “Do you hunt the prey for the lioness
and satisfy the hunger of the lions
40 when they crouch in their dens
or lie in wait in a thicket?
41 Who provides food for the raven
when its young cry out to God
and wander about for lack of food?
39:1 “Do you know when the mountain goats give birth?
Do you watch when the doe bears her fawn?
2 Do you count the months till they bear?
Do you know the time they give birth?
3 They crouch down and bring forth their young;
their labor pains are ended.
4 Their young thrive and grow strong in the wilds;
they leave and do not return.

5 “Who let the wild donkey go free?
Who untied its ropes?
6 I gave it the wasteland as its home,
the salt flats as its habitat.
7 It laughs at the commotion in the town;
it does not hear a driver’s shout.
8 It ranges the hills for its pasture
and searches for any green thing.

9 “Will the wild ox consent to serve you?
Will it stay by your manger at night?
10 Can you hold it to the furrow with a harness?
Will it till the valleys behind you?
11 Will you rely on it for its great strength?
Will you leave your heavy work to it?
12 Can you trust it to haul in your grain
and bring it to your threshing floor?

13 “The wings of the ostrich flap joyfully,
though they cannot compare
with the wings and feathers of the stork.
14 She lays her eggs on the ground
and lets them warm in the sand,
15 unmindful that a foot may crush them,
that some wild animal may trample them.
16 She treats her young harshly, as if they were not hers;
she cares not that her labor was in vain,
17 for God did not endow her with wisdom
or give her a share of good sense.
18 Yet when she spreads her feathers to run,
she laughs at horse and rider.

19 “Do you give the horse its strength
or clothe its neck with a flowing mane?
20 Do you make it leap like a locust,
striking terror with its proud snorting?
21 It paws fiercely, rejoicing in its strength,
and charges into the fray.
22 It laughs at fear, afraid of nothing;
it does not shy away from the sword.
23 The quiver rattles against its side,
along with the flashing spear and lance.
24 In frenzied excitement it eats up the ground;
it cannot stand still when the trumpet sounds.
25 At the blast of the trumpet it snorts, ‘Aha!’
It catches the scent of battle from afar,
the shout of commanders and the battle cry.

26 “Does the hawk take flight by your wisdom
and spread its wings toward the south?
27 Does the eagle soar at your command
and build its nest on high?
28 It dwells on a cliff and stays there at night;
a rocky crag is its stronghold.
29 From there it looks for food;
its eyes detect it from afar.
30 Its young ones feast on blood,
and where the slain are, there it is.”
 
They are not called adaptations because of my assumptions. They are called adaptations because of clear changes in the fossil records that research is able to correlate with changing conditions for a given organism in the context of natural history.

true, it is not you alone...it is all who want to deny the possibility of an intelligent designer....yet, it remains circular reasoning...the clear changes are assumed by you to be the result of evolution when they equally could be the result of a planned change....the simple fact that there are changes are not convincing evidence of either....a faith choice is the only possibility....
 
true, it is not you alone...it is all who want to deny the possibility of an intelligent designer....yet, it remains circular reasoning...the clear changes are assumed by you to be the result of evolution when they equally could be the result of a planned change....the simple fact that there are changes are not convincing evidence of either....a faith choice is the only possibility....

It's the "only possibility" now? The option with no evidence is the "only possibility" over the option with a huge amount of evidence?

If you want to argue "intelligent design" as weaving its way through evolution, have at it, but there is still no scientific evidence for it. At least it fits within the facts that we have, instead of God just planting new creatures around at various points in natural history. If you want to say that God guided the evolutionary process, you're certainly welcome that contention - but have at least a basis of scientific evidence before you teach it in schools.
 
actually, it would be 100% if they were caused by an intelligent designer....retroviruses accomplish nothing as proof of evolution over creation, except perhaps to underscore the extreme unlikelihood of random chance bringing the result about....

Yes, they do. The fact that an ERV is present in the same place in the genome in both Chimpanzees and Homo Sapiens demonstrates that the two share a common ancestor. The ERV was inherited - there is no "chance." There are dozens of such ERVs. Are you suggesting that God integrated viruses into our DNA in the same exact place just for kicks?
 
It's the "only possibility" now? The option with no evidence is the "only possibility" over the option with a huge amount of evidence?

do you deliberately misconstrue what I have said or is it ignorance.....I did not say that creationism was the only possibility.....I said that there is no compelling evidence to support either claim and that the only possibility is to make a faith choice....a choice for the secular understanding of macro-evolution, a choice for creationism, a choice for some other explanation.....but all faith choices, belief in the absence of evidence....

If you want to argue "intelligent design" as weaving its way through evolution, have at it, but there is still no scientific evidence for it. At least it fits within the facts that we have, instead of God just planting new creatures around at various points in natural history. If you want to say that God guided the evolutionary process, you're certainly welcome that contention - but have at least a basis of scientific evidence before you teach it in schools.

why should you be permitted to teach a theory for which there is no scientific evidence if we may not?.....
 
Yes, they do. The fact that an ERV is present in the same place in the genome in both Chimpanzees and Homo Sapiens demonstrates that the two share a common ancestor.

no...it is equally possible that they share it because of a common creator.....you reach your conclusions before the evidence and merely assume it supports your contention....it supports mine equally well....

There are dozens of such ERVs. Are you suggesting that God integrated viruses into our DNA in the same exact place just for kicks?

no, because they serve a purpose we have not yet determined....there are some who argue that they are in fact what permits us to change in adaptation to our environment....
 
Lawmakers in Tennessee have passed a controversial new bill that would require the state’s teachers to allow discussion of creationism alongside evolution in science class. Though the bill was opposed by the governor, the ACLU, and the state’s largest teacher’s association, it nonetheless passed by a wide margin. Why has evolution suddenly reemerged as a hot-button cultural issue?

According to survey data from Pew and Gallup, the controversy over evolution never really went away. A 2010 Gallup poll showed that forty percent of Americans still believe in “strict creationism”—the idea that God created humans in their present form. A slightly smaller number believed that humans evolved with God’s guidance, and only sixteen percent believed humans evolved without God playing a role in the process. Pew’s polling, which breaks down responses by age, has shown that slightly less than half of all Americans say evolution is “the best explanation for human life.” Respondents older than 65 are least likely to agree with that statement (in 2010, only 40 percent did), and even among the youngest group (respondents aged 18-29), the number is just 55 percent. Among religious groups, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, and the unaffiliated are most likely to accept evolution, but slightly more than half of Catholics and mainline Protestants do as well. Too bad more of them don’t serve in the Tennessee state legislature.

http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-study/1...bill-why-are-we-still-fighting-over-evolution

:palm:

Here we have well-educated biology teachers who will be forced to entertain the notion that God created everything a few thousand years ago, despite the overwhelming evidence that all life on earth shares a common ancestor, and that the earth is at least 4 billion years old.

There is no evidence for or against God. It is untestable. Therefore, God has no place in the science classroom. Why is this so difficult for these religious extremists to understand?

Thing is even most scientists admit God just as likely did create it, it is just that 6 metaphorical days is a few billion earth years. Now read the rest of this response carefully, I don't want you to misunderstand me.

Heres the point; the reason that this is an issue at all is because of mind controll. In order for 3.35 million people to exert their will over 335 million people the way the last 30 years or so have gone, and continue to do so, a whole butt-ton of them must be kept pretty stupid.
What better way to keep them dumb than to teach fairy tales instead of civil rights and history. The "no child left behind act" was a direct assault on
the concept of an educated public. Don't tell the kids about the rights they are supposed to have and they will not miss them when they are taken. Unfortunately this is the conservative way in this country, at this point in history. One must try to remember the true meaning of conservative in that context; the aim is to conserve the status quo; prince and pauper, lord and lessor, haves and havenots, etc. Maintaining the rule of the ruling class. To that end, they will do or say whatever they think is needed, bar nothing.

To be honest with you, my biggest concern with this is one of seperation of church and state. Somehow these bozos are telling the school that they must teach christian mythology alongside evolution? What's next, public school prayers?
 
Yes, they do. The fact that an ERV is present in the same place in the genome in both Chimpanzees and Homo Sapiens demonstrates that the two share a common ancestor. The ERV was inherited - there is no "chance." There are dozens of such ERVs. Are you suggesting that God integrated viruses into our DNA in the same exact place just for kicks?

Can you not also conclude that BOTH humans and Chimpanzees were attacked by the same virus.....at the same time, different times, even millions of years apart....

the fact that both have the ERV is not necessarily proof of a common ancestor at all.....but only that both once had the same viral infections.....
 
Cool story, bro. I'd be very surprised if even Robertson said NO was destroyed because of black people. Do you think you could back that up with a link?

So I guess you forgot what Barbara Bush said, and no, I am not providing a link.
 
Can you not also conclude that BOTH humans and Chimpanzees were attacked by the same virus.....at the same time, different times, even millions of years apart....

the fact that both have the ERV is not necessarily proof of a common ancestor at all.....but only that both once had the same viral infections.....

They're in the same exact place in the genome of each species. Several ERVs. Do you realize the significance of that?
 
Back
Top