How we as humans came to be

ScoutParent · October 4, 2002

NJ,

Your profession probably does help to view the world in those terms. But as much as I would like to be able to fulfill your wishes for scandal here, can't really help you out. My husband and I married in 1984 (both for the first time), had our son 1 week short of 2 years later and have been married ever since. We don't drink, take drugs or have extra-marital relationships. In fact, we still get teased about liking to spend time together (go figure). Our son is a Christian, honor student, well liked by his peers and well loved by his family.

NJCubScouter · October 4, 2002

I'm not getting involved in the discussion between ScoutParent and Firstpusk, but I couldn't let this one go by:

We'll meet at a neutral location with a Biologist and a Theologian, and Psychologist.

Isn't there a joke in there somewhere? Do they walk into a bar?

firstpusk · October 4, 2002

Rooster7,

Let's break this down into smaller chunks.

"Firstpusk,

The compliment (Firstpuck) was accidentally. Nor was any malice intended. Yet, I may have contempt for some of your ideas."

I never thought malice was intended. Kinda thought it was funny. I know some of what I write annoys you, sorry that is not the intention.

"As for your statement to ScoutParent - "You have been unable to provide an alternative." What makes you think evolution is so viable? Popularity and truth are not one in the same."

I don't think that science is a popularity contest. Ideas are tested and those that don't hold up soon are gone. Darwin's ideas have held up to the scrutiny of peer review for nearly a century and a half. If popularity were the deciding factor, you and ScoutParent would be happy. Most Americans want creationism taught. The problem is most Americans are woefully ignorant of science in general and evolution in particular.

"The arguments being made by the scientific community (as ScoutParent has pointed out) are logical conclusions based on the theory of evolution."

ScoutParent is on a tear that has little to do with reality. She is taking things out of context and using one logical fallacy after another. The conclusions being drawn are erroneous and belong to ScoutParent. They are not based on the theory. I have pointed a couple of examples out, she chooses to ignore all refutation.

"You can't have your cake and eat it too. If you believe the theory to be correct, then you must accept the logical conclusions, which it supports, no matter how obscene and/or distasteful they may be. If you refuse to accept their conclusions, then you should reexamine your support for such a theory."

I kind of think this last bit is the most ironic of all. ScoutParent thinks she is arguing against evolution by misrepresenting the theory in the most outrageous manner. In fact, she uses the outrageous to frighten people. Do you and her actually think that alcoholism, homosexuality, pedophilia and racism were caused by Charles Darwin. And even if that were true, does that change the nearly century and a half of observation and peer review that buttress the theory.

No, I don't have to accept ScoutParents misrepresentations if I accept the theory.(This message has been edited by firstpusk)

OldGreyEagle · October 4, 2002

Scoutparent, I was not referring to you when I made my comment about how could a scientist use data from 1948 to make conclusions that chikdren enjoyed the sex. I was commenting on this statement:

"It's even being proposed now by scientists that children enjoy the sex(Kinsey report) and that age of consent should be removed entirely.

It was those scientists that I have issue with.

I understand just because data is old doesnt mean it shouldnt be used. The ancient greeks had mathematics down pretty good and pretty much established geometry and their work is as true today as it was then. I was talking about a social survey done in an era when most "normal" people would barely acknowledge sexual activity existed, let alone answer quesitons about it.

Why not dust off a survey taken in Atlanta in 1850 about the morality of slave owner ship (no offense to Atlanta, its the biggest southern city I can name right now). Would it be fair to the residents in Atlanta to hold them to the attitudes expressed then? Would a survey of church hierarchy about the methods of the Spainish Inquesition done during the Inquesition have any validity towards church officals attitudes now?

The Kinsey report was written before the population explosion of the baby boomers, before "THE PILL" before the sexual revolution of the 60's, the herpes epidemic and HIV/AIDS. I would like to hear how the Kinsey report can be used with any validity after those enormous social changes.

2 months old children? Nazi sexual experiments? This is the data that is being used to say the age of consent should be removed?

I really cant say I understand what is being debated here, or actually who is on what side. I just had to get clarification when I saw pedophilia being talked about and that some did not consider it abhorrent behavior.

Venturer2002 · October 4, 2002

It seems to me that ScoutParent has made several wise conclusions.

1. Evolution supports the idea of "survival of the fittest" and champions genetic change which increases survival, genetic superiority if you will.

2. It is an established fact that scientists used such "evidence" during the 1940's in pre-war Germany to "cleanse" the gene pool of "lesser races" that would hinder the creation of a master race. For further clarification, read Meine Kampf (sp?)

To me these two pieces of fact turn the credibility of evolutionary theory on it's head. Eugenics and Evolution are inexorably linked, which precludes nearly anyone of religious convictions from subscribing to this idea.

Evolution, like many areas of science, is not infallible. As many have stated, Newton's "law" does not apply in particular situations.

The idea that the power of government stems from the people is the cornerstone of american democracy. This principle has been subverted by such institutions as the Electoral college, created so that dumb people wouldn't make stupid mistakes.

Another american institution, evolution, seems to be doing the same thing. Even though the general populace is outraged when evolutionary theory is preached, the outcries fall on deaf ears.

Evolutionary theory is not science, for it relies too heavily on faith for it to be a science. Faith you ask? Yes! Faith that there is no God. Faith that we WEREN'T created by God. Faith that we were once simpler organisms. And , yes, the faith that this process will continue.

Modern Evolutionary theory, and its offshoots known as planned parenthood, eugenics, & "social darwinism", are nothing more than the dogma of a failing religion. Nothing more than the feeble hope of man to transcend humanity. Nothing more than the serpeant's promise in the Garden of Eden.

For, as a religious teaching, this school of thought has no place in any academic institution, and should be confined to the bitter tirades of secular humanists and atheists.

(I already can hear people outraged at my use of the Holy Bible in this post, and for them I will pray tonight. Think of your replies as a prayer list :-) )

sctmom · October 4, 2002

Sorry OGE, but I have to poke fun at your remark about Atlanta in 1850. Atlanta didn't exist until after General !@$%@#$ Sherman marched through and burnt down Marthasville. Also, it would be horrible to hold today's Atlanta residents to something that happened 150 years ago in the south --- I live in the Atlanta area and am surrounded by Yankees. My sweet, southern drawl is almost gone! Bye y'all, ya come back ya hear, I'm fixin' to go fix supper.

NJ, I like the joke -- A Biologist, a Theologian, and a Psychologist walk into a bar....

Or they are on the same life boat?

Or stranded on an island together?

firstpusk · October 5, 2002

"FirstPusk:

Here's my challenge to you:"

ScoutParent,

Not interested. I asked for something from you first. Provide me with a viable scientific theory that is an alternative to evolution. We talked about this first eleven days ago. Still no direct answer only slurs and mean-spirited misrepresentation.

Is it possible for you to become more crass? I will grant you must have IQ points to spare. I suggest you put those little grey cells to work on the links and references Merlyn and me provided you, instead of the creationist claptrap.

Venturer2002,

If you are out there. I think you are totally wrong about evolution and I hope you get some exposure to the truth about it in your further education. It is not the engine of evil you have been told. I am cool with you using the Bible. I am fine with you praying for me. We all need a little help now and then. You could pray for firmness and clarity for me from the pulpit on Sunday when I will use my Bible. I would only ask that you pray with me for ScoutParent. She could use to be a little more charitable.

Venturer2002 · October 5, 2002

Firstpusk,

Evolutionary theory deals with creation outside of the scope of God, based on that alone it is an engine of evil.

I wasn't clear on your meaning about you preaching sunday, please clarify.

firstpusk · October 5, 2002

'Firstpusk,

Evolutionary theory deals with creation outside of the scope of God, based on that alone it is an engine of evil."

No, evolution is a science and as such can be used for good or ill. In and of itself, it can no be good or evil. It is what we do with the science. If I as a scout leader tell a scout, "Evolution is true, God does not exist." In my faith tradition I have committed a grevious sin, violated the Scout Law and abused the science. Evolution does not speak to the existence of God, that is a matter of faith. I have lied to a young person because the science does not speak to God or to our morality. These are choices we make for ourselves.

"I wasn't clear on your meaning about you preaching sunday, please clarify."

I mentioned that because I know that accepting evolution does not mean you must deny your faith. I have been a lay minister in my church for nearly thirty years. I have been active in the religious emblems program, have led religious retreats for scouters and recieved my church's adult recognition. Scouting is my main ministry and evolution does not deny its importance or meaning.

OldGreyEagle · October 5, 2002

Ya' know, I was so hesitant about using Atlanta and then, BOOM, I was wrong. I knew I should have used Savannah (home of Juliet Gordon Low)

Oh well, Around Chicago they dont talk much about the Civil War (wait werent nothing civil about it)or the War between the states or as I have learned during my travels through the south, the War of Northern Aggression. I mean, usually all they teach is Lincoln good (Illinois, Land of Lincoln ya know)Jefferson Davis Bad, US Grant good (from Galena, Illinois ya know) Robert E Lee bad. And oh yeah, per normal the good guys won...

ScoutParent · October 5, 2002

FirstPusk writes:

"Not interested."

I didn't expect you to accept the challenge. Then there would be data to substantiate both of our actual understandings of the subjects of evolution and intelligent design; not to mention our abilities to understand.

"I asked for something from you first. Provide me with a viable scientific theory that is an alternative to evolution. We talked about this first eleven days ago."

FirstPusk, I told you intelligent design. Your assessment that it is not viable doesn't really interest me. Look up Yale+intelligent design or Natural History+Intelligent design and see if it interests professional scientists.

"Still no direct answer only slurs and mean-spirited misrepresentation."

FirstPusk:

These statements from you are patently false and pretty much standard towards anyone who disagrees with you on this subject. Substantiate this claim with any slur that I have made against you or cease and desist with this nonsense.

firstpusk · October 5, 2002

"I didn't expect you to accept the challenge. Then there would be data to substantiate both of our actual understandings of the subjects of evolution and intelligent design; not to mention our abilities to understand."

Simply sophmoric and completely off topic. If you want to flash a Mensa card that's okay with me. That is even worse than saying I win the argument because I have these three college degrees.

I subscribe to Natural History and read the whole special section. You should, too. It made it clear that Intelligent Design was not science. As I recall the title was "Intelligent Design?" This choice remark from the introduction gives you an idea of the respect the "theory" has earned, "Most biologists have concluded that the proponents of intelligent design display either ignorance or deliberate misrepresentation of evolutionary science."

I suggest you read one book referenced at the end, Pennock's "Tower of Babel: The Evidence Against the New Creationism". This will give you a more complete perspective on the problems with this Intelligent Design approach. I would also strongly suggest "The Creationists:

The Evolution of Scientific Creationism" by Dr.

Ronald L. Numbers. It is a little older but it gives an excellent history that is extremely sensitive to the creationist perspective (Numbers was raised as a Seventh Day Adventist).

On the conference at Yale, I was indeed aware of it at the time. It was more a public relations ploy associated with the Discovery Institute's "Wedge" strategy and not a scientific conference. It was not associated with any science department at the University. As far as I can tell it was financed by the Discovery Institute to promote their creationist agenda. Two other sponsors were affiliated with the Campus Crusade for Christ. The Law School did set up a forum to help sponsor it, but it seems to be the only event that the Yale Law School Forum on Cultural and Academic Freedom has ever sponsored. The only three hits I got at the Yale site were from the fall of 2000.

Sorry, there is no groundswell from the scientific community for ID. There are a few oddballs out there like Behe, Dembski and Wells. However, they have never tried to present any scientific paper supporting ID. If it took you 12 days to come up with this, you can put a fork in it. Your argument is done.

ScoutParent · October 5, 2002

Genesis Chapter 1

"1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was[1] on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.

3 Then God said, Let there be light; and there was light.

4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness.

5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.

6 Then God said, Let there be a firmament[2] in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the waters from the waters.

7 Thus God made the firmament, and divided the waters which were under the firmament from the waters which were above the firmament; and it was so.

8 And God called the firmament Heaven. So the evening and the morning were the second day.

9 Then God said, Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together into one place, and let the dry land appear; and it was so.

10 And God called the dry land Earth, and the gathering together of the waters He called Seas. And God saw that it was good.

11 Then God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth; and it was so.

12 And the earth brought forth grass, the herb that yields seed according to its kind, and the tree that yields fruit, whose seed is in itself according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

13 So the evening and the morning were the third day.

14 Then God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years;

15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth; and it was so.

16 Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also.

17 God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth,

18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good.

19 So the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

20 Then God said, Let the waters abound with an abundance of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the face of the firmament of the heavens.

21 So God created great sea creatures and every living thing that moves, with which the waters abounded, according to their kind, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let birds multiply on the earth.

23 So the evening and the morning were the fifth day.

24 Then God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature according to its kind: cattle and creeping thing and beast of the earth, each according to its kind; and it was so.

25 And God made the beast of the earth according to its kind, cattle according to its kind, and everything that creeps on the earth according to its kind. And God saw that it was good.

26 Then God said, Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.

27 So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.

28 Then God blessed them, and God said to them, Be fruitful and multiply; fill the earth and subdue it; have dominion over the fish of the sea, over the birds of the air, and over every living thing that moves on the earth.

29 And God said, See, I have given you every herb that yields seed which is on the face of all the earth, and every tree whose fruit yields seed; to you it shall be for food.

30 Also, to every beast of the earth, to every bird of the air, and to everything that creeps on the earth, in which there is life, I have given every green herb for food; and it was so.

31 Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good. So the evening and the morning were the sixth day. "

ScoutParent · October 5, 2002