How we as humans came to be

[ScoutParent]

LittleBillie

 

You've proven the point.

[ScoutParent]

"Princeton biologist Lee Silver, in his book, Recreating Eden, suggests that enhancement through germ-line gene therapy, followed by assortative mating between the enhanced, could lead to superior gene pools (the Gen-Rich). If so, this would be the first ever success of eugenics at the population level."

 

Oops i bet he meant better adapted gene pools.

 

[littlebillie]

"You've proven the point." Um - which point? If you're saying I've proven MY point, why then, you've truly earned my respect for being able to jump up and say it. Otherwise, sorry to be slow...

 

"Princeton biologist Lee Silver...suggests that nhancement through germ-line gene therapy, followed by assortative mating between the enhanced, could lead to superior gene pools (the Gen-Rich). If so, this would be the first ever success of eugenics at the population level."

 

Oops i bet he meant better adapted gene pools."

 

Here's where we have another one of those pesky linguistic issues. Haven't read the book, so I don't know if he does the kind of thing in the beginning of so many other science-for-the-popular market texts where the author explains that kind of usage as inaccurate tho utile, or not, so I'll turn to you and put THAT question, since I doubt that you would just be pulling isolated quotes out of context just to make a point, without actually being familiar with the work you're citing.

 

Here, it wouldn't be evolution at work, it would be human hubris - one wouldn't say "better adapted" at all, tho one might say "differently designed". See, then it's Man at work, and those who see no conflict between evolution and religion see evolution as one of GOD's greatest tools, not some new parlor trick for man...

Regardless of that, tho, I'll say it again, there is no superior in evolution, and add this - some folks define a yardstick or qualitative analyzer, and speak thereafter to better or worse IN RELATION TO THAT GUIDELINE. But once again, this don't make it so.

 

Is New York really heimie town just because Jesse Jackson called it that? Did Al Gore invent the Internet just because he said so? The world don't work that way, otherwise... wait, let me try something!

 

Hey - I'm the richest person in the world!!!!

 

Shucks. it didn't work!

[firstpusk]

"And Firstpuck, you last statement - 'we are all brothers and we must work together regardless of our differences to make the world a better place.'"

Rooster7

 

As someone who grew up on the Iron Range of northern Minnesota and a die hard Golden Gopher hockey fan (2002 NCAA men's ice hockey champions), I proudly accept your heartfelt compliment.(This message has been edited by firstpusk)(This message has been edited by firstpusk)

[firstpusk]

"I asked you questions concerning genetics and evolution and you chose to make assumptions and run with them, hardly a very scientific approach to any situation."

 

As I recall, I answered your question by indicating that it was not a valid question for the science of evolution. I made no assumptions. Instead, I indicated what is plain to even a casual observer, that such questions provide cover for vilest members of our society. I am sorry if you took offense at my statements, but it was your question itself that was offensive. The fact that you asked it more than once compounded the offense.

 

"The scouts and scouters that read these posts are intelligent enough to discern the facts regardless of the slurs you are so fond of."

 

I asked you a question several times now. Can you give me a viable scientific alternative to the theory of evolution? You claimed I ran with assumptions. I disagree. It is you that have run away from a fair and direct question repeatedly. You respond in your frustration by accusing those who disagree with you of supporting crimes against humanity.

 

I have not assumed that you are a racist, nor have I said that are one. If you interpretted my remarks as such, I apologize.

 

However, I must point out that you have slurred many good people with careless and unfounded remarks. The basis of genocide is not science but ignorance, hatred and fear. We have seen this in recent years played out in Central America, the Balkans and Rwanda. It was not evolutionary biologists that inspired and carried out these murderers. It was people like you and me that gave into the basest part of their nature. These evils did not start with Darwin's book and those that study these questions do not support such acts.(This message has been edited by firstpusk)

[NJCubScouter]

ScoutParent says:

 

I really don't know why you find my statement absurd or offensive.

 

Then let me explain why. It's because you are using the Holocaust to support your religious beliefs, and to attack a scientific theory you don't like. And you're not even using the real basis for the Holocaust, but rather a theory that has been fabricated to suit your argument.

 

Of course it had a great deal to do with evolution and with creating a "master race".

 

You still have not explained the connection between trying to create a "master race" through selective breeding, and evolution. I don't think you can, because evolution is a natural process. It happens without our help.

 

It's not just my religious beliefs, it's the beliefs of millions of people worldwide.

 

Well, there are billions of people in the world, so if mere millions don't believe in evolution, that's a pretty small minority. Not that being in a minority is wrong, I am part of a pretty small religious minority myself. The numbers don't matter. The facts matter, and evolution (though not necessarily all the theories that attempt to explain it) is a fact.

 

I would ask the same courtesy in keeping your religious beliefs out of the public school systems.

 

Look, I understand that you cannot (or will not) recognize the difference between science and religion. That's your problem. Please don't try to project your problem onto me. I can tell the difference between science, which should be taught by public schools (including instruction as to what a "theory" is), and religious beliefs, which should not be promoted by public schools.

 

And if you kept the individuals in your selective breeding experiment there long enough would they become a different entity entirely? I think not they would still just be taller humans.

 

I agree. But then your statement regarding the Holocaust becomes especially absurd. If "my" hypothetical experiment has nothing to do with evolution, then neither do those of the Nazis.

(This message has been edited by NJCubScouter)

[littlebillie]

it seems as if there had been an intent to trip up the supporters of evolution by making the claim that somehow evolution equates with racism.

 

now, the pro-evolution side totally rallied against that claim, and I for one found the premise so ridiculous that I did not realize it was an attempt at a "trap". Why? Because it's an invalid premise, and I gave the folks making the equation maybe too much credit.

 

so, here's a question for scoutparent and the others on that side of things - what do YOU mean when you use the word evolution. It's obviously NOT what I mean, and it's not what's generally defined by science. so before we go on with this apples-and-oranges thing, we're we call everything grapes, please, scoutparent, just tell me YOUR definition of evolution... and if you could, how old do you think the world is?

 

(oh, and firstpusk, just to confirm - yes, I agree, we are all one family!)

 

 

[firstpusk]

littlebillie,

 

I never doubted you were family once I got a look at your opposable thumb...now about your elbows on the table...

[ScoutParent]

For those interested in seeing how the theory of evolution and darwinism is being incorporated into the social values of our culture look up darwinism, eugenics, positive eugenics, evolutionary psychology. It is the reason that the holocaust happened and it is the reason that many people now accept such abhorrent behavior as homosexuality, pedophilia, alcoholism, etc. It is based on the theory of evolution as the founder(darwin's cousin) was quick to point out and simply the next logical step. People in these movements have been successful in making words like euthanasia, assisted suicide, abortion, genetic testing all perfectly acceptable to too many people. This is not simply a misuse or abuse of the "science" as has been suggested; it is a natural extension of it.

 

 

 

 

[OldGreyEagle]

I am not sure I have been able to follow most of this discussion, but I have to say that there is a heck of a lot of difference between homosexuality and pedophilia. And pedophilia and alcholism

[ScoutParent]

OGE to an evolutionist they are all the same...a behavior programmed in your genes and thus not within your control.

[firstpusk]

ScoutParent,

 

Please try to provide some kind of rational basis for you opposition to evolution. Whether you like the theory or not, it is the only scientific explanation that I know of for the development of diversity on this earth. You have been unable to provide an alternative. Instead, you assert an ever growing list of evils that evolution is supposedly responsible for causing. Not one shread of credible evidence is supplied. When I respond to your argument, you ignore it and simply make more unfounded assertions.

 

 

"OGE to an evolutionist they are all the same...a behavior programmed in your genes and thus not within your control."

 

It is time that you actually gained some measure of understanding of what you oppose. Alcoholism is complicated. There are indeed inherited factors that appear to be involved. But to say these factors negate all human control and this is the belief of "evolutionists" is pure folly.

 

Again, I will speak to only one of your assertions. I know a little about alcoholism from the experience of a number of people that are and have been close to me. I accept evolution and I also accept that an alcoholic can find hope in sobriety. I have two very close to me that were hopeless alcoholics until they recognized something greater than themselves. Both are dead now, but both died after years of sobriety without ever returning to drink. Chuck, my classmate and friend, was a student of biology, literature and human nature. He was finished inpatient treatment before we completed our sophomore year of high school.

 

He accepted the theory of evolution but also believed that through a higher power and through his fellow alcoholics he could find the strength to live sober and help others. He died to young but it was not alcohol that took him from us. He did not think as you claim an "evolutionist" should and neither do I.

 

By the way, I am still waiting for that viable scientific alternative to evolution.

[ScoutParent]

Intelligent design is how the universe and humans within it were created. This is an undeniable truth. It does not depend on your understanding or concensus. Nor does it depend on disproving your theory. You must disprove it just as you demand with your theory.

 

More topics of interest for the social impact of evolution and darwinism include: transhumanism, gene enhancement, and shiller institute, and singer. No one need take my word for the ugly ideas these people support; check them out.

 

[OldGreyEagle]

What I was commenting on was the statement

 

"...many people now accept such abhorrent behavior as homosexuality, pedophilia, alcoholism, etc."

 

I am not sure where you all live, but where I do pedophilia is NOT ACCEPTED and I am going to need some convincing before I beleive pedophilia is becomming an accepted mainstream behavior. (Or accepted non-mainstream by anyone other than the perpertrators for that matter)

 

 

[evmori]

Homosexuality - behavior

Pedophilia & alcoholism - disease

 

Big difference.

 

None are morally acceptable.

 

Ed Mori

Scoutmaster

Troop 1

1 Peter 4:10