Is evolution as crooked as Hillary?

[Shad]

Could it be possible that Evolution theory is just a monstrous lie based on cross breeding? The only observable facts to the regular Joe is we have seen cross breeding and know that animals can change. For the rest we would need to look at the server in Hillarys' basement.

The average Joe is sold as a commodity to media organizations which in turn use people as a basis for value to organizations that use the media to sell their own product. For example the Superbowl is a major sporting event thus will net a lot of users. Hence advertisement slots are expensive to buy as more people will see it. They want you to see more of their product for you to consume. The average Joe is bombard by advertisement they may have no interest in, no interest in the product (ad can be entertaining in itself) but are of interest to corporations. Sadly education is not a well sold product to the average Joe as evident with the decline and change of TLC and History channels. The emergence of specialty channels which cost the viewer more to offset the reduced view of smaller viewership totals and the reduced in quantity and quality of ads on these specialty channels.

Evolution is not a product itself but is the basis for methods that develop products which can be sold. For example many farms use modified seeds. While these yield greater crops, thus product to sell for the farmer, once harvested the next generation seeds are not suitable or incapable of producing a new, or as successful crop. This is extension as this ensures return costumers for the companies that sell the first generation seeds. For centuries we never used this method of farming as we harvested our seeds from our own crops hence heritage/heirloom seeds.

Individual interest vs corporate interest. Consumer products vs specialty products (education)

Seriously they make such a big deal out of Evolution theory, but what good does it do?

Heard of medicine?

If you were building a building, and miscalculate the strength of steel, the building might fall down. But if you're wrong about Evolution theory, name one thing which would result from it.

That's engineering (method) which is has far more practical applications and would be based on theories of physics. You jumped a step in your comparison. Construction also has had centuries of practical application while evolution is fairly new. We did use selective breeding for our food needs. This now falls within a mechanism for the theory of evolution. In other words we had a grasp of what happens when we bred animals a certain way but never understood the long term effects outside our own needs.

 

[Kemosloby]

The average Joe is sold as a commodity to media organizations which in turn use people as a basis for value to organizations that use the media to sell their own product. For example the Superbowl is a major sporting event thus will net a lot of users. Hence advertisement slots are expensive to buy as more people will see it. They want you to see more of their product for you to consume. The average Joe is bombard by advertisement they may have no interest in, no interest in the product (ad can be entertaining in itself) but are of interest to corporations. Sadly education is not a well sold product to the average Joe as evident with the decline and change of TLC and History channels. The emergence of specialty channels which cost the viewer more to offset the reduced view of smaller viewership totals and the reduced in quantity and quality of ads on these specialty channels.

Evolution is not a product itself but is the basis for methods that develop products which can be sold. For example many farms use modified seeds. While these yield greater crops, thus product to sell for the farmer, once harvested the next generation seeds are not suitable or incapable of producing a new, or as successful crop. This is extension as this ensures return costumers for the companies that sell the first generation seeds. For centuries we never used this method of farming as we harvested our seeds from our own crops hence heritage/heirloom seeds.

Individual interest vs corporate interest. Consumer products vs specialty products (education)



Heard of medicine?



That's engineering (method) which is has far more practical applications and would be based on theories of physics. You jumped a step in your comparison. Construction also has had centuries of practical application while evolution is fairly new. We did use selective breeding for our food needs. This now falls within a mechanism for the theory of evolution. In other words we had a grasp of what happens when we bred animals a certain way but never understood the long term effects outside our own needs.

Medicine is chemistry and biology. I think the meaning of evolution has evolved to mean progress. And that makes me feel old. Once upon a time it meant dinosaurs and men turning into apes, or vice versa. And that was fun. What it is today is Orwellian brainwashing.

 

[gnostic]

Probably no church teaches that Adam was a pattern of the one to come, and the One is Christ. I had to open the scriptures and read them for myself. I do not give in to authoritative bullying but seek the truth myself. Evolution is just authoritative bullying as is a lot of church dogma.

I am not a biologist, Kemosloby. I am more of engineer than a scientist, with background in civil engineering after high school and computer programmer/network designer.

So a large part of my focus in science, as in "formal" education, involved mostly physics, with some chemistry, and very little biology. (There have been some biology involved in civil engineering, because (A) woods can be one of the materials being used for construction, as well as (B) the understanding the effects of organic compounds in soil studies, geology and site's foundation.)

So much of tertiary studies involved "Applied Science". The reason why I am telling you about my background in science, is that Applied Science is practical science, where they drill into my head, that nothing is true or false, until it has been tested or finding evidences.

But there are many areas of science that are not covered in my formal education, like astronomy, particle physics, molecular chemistry, optics, relativity, quantum physics, etc.

I am just genuinely curious about science in general. So when I want to learn science, I will pick up a textbook of whatever I am interested in, then read, do a little research and attempt to understand what I am learning in my own time.

With evolution, I just took the time to understand it, by getting a biology textbook and read. I don't read books on popular science, that you could pick up at bookstore, which might up bring up the subject of religions or the theism vs atheism. And I don't go to anti-theism or anti-religion websites to pick up some propaganda.

You said yourself, that you don't accept dogma, and that you like to read the scriptures yourself.

Well, boo, Kemosloby. You are not the only one who like read things for yourself. What do think I do? I do precisely that. Whether it be science or religion, I read everything for myself.

I wasn't bully into accepting evolution. I read it my own accord, and I just happen to understand what I am reading...well, not everything, but enough to form my own opinion on the matters.

But I do exactly the same thing like I do with science, if I want to learn about religion, I would get the scriptures and just read, and form my own perspective.

You think you are special, because you read scriptures. Well, you are not.

Many of us - atheists, agnostics, deists, etc - have some connection with Christianity in their lives. Some were brought up in, while other converted, and people have different reasons why they left their church. I nearly joined 2 different churches, when I was a teenager.

Do not assume that just because someone who is not a Christian now, don't know anything about the bible. Some of us, actually understand the bible just as good as you.

And I have studied the bible, just as I have studied other literature with religious or mythological themes. On just canonical scriptures alone, I have half-dozen different translations on my bookshelf - KJV, NIV, NRSV, the Good News Bible, the Tanakh (from NJPS), the Septuagint (NETS) and the Dead Sea Scrolls.

I have even more on non-canonical texts, like the Apocrypha, the books of Enoch, Book of Jubilees, the Rabbinic Aggadah and Midrash, the Gnostic Nag Hammadi codices. Heck, I even have the Book of Mormon and the Qur'an.

I also have religious/mythological texts that are not Abrahamic in nature, translations of from ancient Greece, Rome, Norse Scandinavia, Ugarit, Hittite, Sumerian-Akkadian-Babylonian cuneiform, Egyptian hieroglyphs (Pyramid Text, Coffin Text and the Book of the Dead).

All these come from me wanting to read things for myself.

But getting back to "you". I may not be a biologist or astrophysics, but I can tell that you don't understand biological evolution and you don't understand the Big Bang.

All I see is another pitiful creationist who want to debate on subjects that they really don't understand. Yes, Kemosloby, there is "Orwellian brainwashing" (as you put it so mildly) going on here, but OB is emanating from you.

 

[Kemosloby]

I am not a biologist, Kemosloby. I am more of engineer than a scientist, with background in civil engineering after high school and computer programmer/network designer.

So a large part of my focus in science, as in "formal" education, involved mostly physics, with some chemistry, and very little biology. (There have been some biology involved in civil engineering, because (A) woods can be one of the materials being used for construction, as well as (B) the understanding the effects of organic compounds in soil studies, geology and site's foundation.)

So much of tertiary studies involved "Applied Science". The reason why I am telling you about my background in science, is that Applied Science is practical science, where they drill into my head, that nothing is true or false, until it has been tested or finding evidences.

But there are many areas of science that are not covered in my formal education, like astronomy, particle physics, molecular chemistry, optics, relativity, quantum physics, etc.

I am just genuinely curious about science in general. So when I want to learn science, I will pick up a textbook of whatever I am interested in, then read, do a little research and attempt to understand what I am learning in my own time.

With evolution, I just took the time to understand it, by getting a biology textbook and read. I don't read books on popular science, that you could pick up at bookstore, which might up bring up the subject of religions or the theism vs atheism. And I don't go to anti-theism or anti-religion websites to pick up some propaganda.

You said yourself, that you don't accept dogma, and that you like to read the scriptures yourself.

Well, boo, Kemosloby. You are not the only one who like read things for yourself. What do think I do? I do precisely that. Whether it be science or religion, I read everything for myself.

I wasn't bully into accepting evolution. I read it my own accord, and I just happen to understand what I am reading...well, not everything, but enough to form my own opinion on the matters.

But I do exactly the same thing like I do with science, if I want to learn about religion, I would get the scriptures and just read, and form my own perspective.

You think you are special, because you read scriptures. Well, you are not.

Many of us - atheists, agnostics, deists, etc - have some connection with Christianity in their lives. Some were brought up in, while other converted, and people have different reasons why they left their church. I nearly joined 2 different churches, when I was a teenager.

Do not assume that just because someone who is not a Christian now, don't know anything about the bible. Some of us, actually understand the bible just as good as you.

And I have studied the bible, just as I have studied other literature with religious or mythological themes. On just canonical scriptures alone, I have half-dozen different translations on my bookshelf - KJV, NIV, NRSV, the Good News Bible, the Tanakh (from NJPS), the Septuagint (NETS) and the Dead Sea Scrolls.

I have even more on non-canonical texts, like the Apocrypha, the books of Enoch, Book of Jubilees, the Rabbinic Aggadah and Midrash, the Gnostic Nag Hammadi codices. Heck, I even have the Book of Mormon and the Qur'an.

I also have religious/mythological texts that are not Abrahamic in nature, translations of from ancient Greece, Rome, Norse Scandinavia, Ugarit, Hittite, Sumerian-Akkadian-Babylonian cuneiform, Egyptian hieroglyphs (Pyramid Text, Coffin Text and the Book of the Dead).

All these come from me wanting to read things for myself.

But getting back to "you". I may not be a biologist or astrophysics, but I can tell that you don't understand biological evolution and you don't understand the Big Bang.

All I see is another pitiful creationist who want to debate on subjects that they really don't understand. Yes, Kemosloby, there is "Orwellian brainwashing" (as you put it so mildly) going on here, but OB is emanating from you.

And I see you swallowed it hook line and sinker. Now you have become the authority on the origin of the universe and mankind.. I get it, I understand. But the bible rings true to me...

 

[gnostic]

And I see you swallowed it hook line and sinker. Now you have become the authority on the origin of the universe and mankind.. I get it, I understand. But the bible rings true to me...

I read things for as you do, kemosloby as you do, but the differences between you and I, is that I am not as you paranoid as you are, thinking that there is a conspiracy theory within the "evolution" camp.

There is no conspiracy. If there were conspiracy, then why would a number of religious and spiritual people at this forum also accept evolution.

In my recent thread (Doing the head counts on who accept evolution), I did a poll, to find out many theists accept evolution, and...

• 11 of them responded (4 of them are theists but don't belong to any religion).
• 6 responded as being religious but not theists.
• Another 6 belonged to either the mystic or spiritual camp.

So it is not necessary for a person to be an atheist in order to accept evolution.

 

[Kemosloby]

I read things for as you do, kemosloby as you do, but the differences between you and I, is that I am not as you paranoid as you are, thinking that there is a conspiracy theory within the "evolution" camp.

There is no conspiracy. If there were conspiracy, then why would a number of religious and spiritual people at this forum also accept evolution.

In my recent thread (Doing the head counts on who accept evolution), I did a poll, to find out many theists accept evolution, and...

• 11 of them responded (4 of them are theists but don't belong to any religion).
• 6 responded as being religious but not theists.
• Another 6 belonged to either the mystic or spiritual camp.

So it is not necessary for a person to be an atheist in order to accept evolution.

No, just the teachers pet.

 

[gnostic]

No, just the teachers pet.

Excuses me, but I have never been anyone's pet, teachers or otherwise.

Are you going to keep throwing strawman at me with your replies.

I have learned what I wanted to learn, like evolution on my own.

I have never got to learn evolution, because my last biology classes were Year 9 high school science. I only got as far as learning human anatomy and some anatomy of few selected animals. Because I didn't do evolution in the following years, I missed out learning evolution; because my main focus were on physics, chemistry and maths.

You don't know me, so stop making up things that I didn't do.

 

[Kemosloby]

Excuses me, but I have never been anyone's pet, teachers or otherwise.

Are you going to keep throwing strawman at me with your replies.

I have learned what I wanted to learn, like evolution on my own.

I have never got to learn evolution, because my last biology classes were Year 9 high school science. I only got as far as learning human anatomy and some anatomy of few selected animals.

You don't know me, so stop making up things that I didn't do.

Oh, I mistook you for that other guy. You're the one who compared dna to language right? That was an interesting comparison.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Is evolution as crooked as Hillary?

How did you manage to pass your Bio classes in school?

Could've been like mine and the teacher skipped over evolution.

 

[Sapiens]

Let's make it as simple as possible. A knowledge of evolution is required to understand where to look for antibiotics as well as to understand why, over time, antibiotics become ineffective. The answer to ineffective antibiotics: "DNA vaccination" (a technique for protecting against disease by injection with genetically engineered DNA so cells directly produce an antigen, producing a protective immunological response) also stems directly from a detailed knowledge of evolution.

 

[Ouroboros]

Well now, that seems like an intelligent design.

Who designed the letters? Humans, not God. Who construct language? Humans, not God. What designs species? The genetic code that comes through natural processes. Humans, nature, all of is, of course, intelligent. Some scientists even go as far to say that reality is constructed only from information. So, in that sense, God, nature, species, genetics, humans, all of it is information or intelligence, i.e. we all are God. We make up God. God is us. "ye are gods", Jesus said.

Also, in Genesis, it says that God commanded the oceans, the sky, and earth to produce life. That sounds like God created evolution to me.

Put it this way, evolution is God's process of creating life. And who are you to reject or deny God's will or God's process of creating?

 

[Valjean]

Could've been like mine and the teacher skipped over evolution.

That would be like teaching chemistry without atomic theory.

 

[Kemosloby]

Let's make it as simple as possible. A knowledge of evolution is required to understand where to look for antibiotics as well as to understand why, over time, antibiotics become ineffective. The answer to ineffective antibiotics: "DNA vaccination" (a technique for protecting against disease by injection with genetically engineered DNA so cells directly produce an antigen, producing a protective immunological response) also stems directly from a detailed knowledge of evolution.

Antibiotics is more like gardening than evolution. The first one was cheese mold..penicillin. You give a person an infection their body can tolerate to kill the other infection. Like a gardener plants ground cover to crowd out weeds. It's not evolution, just finding things that work together. Evolution to me would mean a natural process of how the world came to be. but more an more I see the word evolution has changed into some Orwellian monster buzz word, possibly as an advertising gimick to sell medicine.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Just name one thing Evolution theory produces.

It encouraged researchers to develop Nylon and other plastics in the face of creationists who insisted that long chain molecules required a living principle. Evolutionary Theory also provides a framework that gives freedom to discover what is in nature without any imposed constraints on what is possible.

It begins as a hypothesis to explain variation among birds on a tropical island. It gathers interest and many people find it convincing and begin to compare it to nature. It explains things such as fossils of extinct creatures. It gathers more and more convinced seekers, because it works as a framework to study the dates of fossils, geologic events and more recently some astronomical events. It is a gift to all people everywhere.

It is also particularly good for religious families. First of all they don't have to rely upon spooks and clerics to tell them about nature. It enables them to seek truth without having to have sex with witch doctors, without patting pastors on the back, without kissing the ring of someone who has perhaps a lot of book knowledge but not much life knowledge, without having to be slaves to others. It is very simply a discipline of observation, comparison and secular discovery.

 

[Kemosloby]

It encouraged researchers to develop Nylon and other plastics in the face of creationists who insisted that long chain molecules required a living principle. Evolutionary Theory also provides a framework that gives freedom to discover what is in nature without any imposed constraints on what is possible.

It begins as a hypothesis to explain variation among birds on a tropical island. It gathers interest and many people find it convincing and begin to compare it to nature. It explains things such as fossils of extinct creatures. It gathers more and more convinced seekers, because it works as a framework to study the dates of fossils, geologic events and more recently some astronomical events. It is a gift to all people everywhere.

Oh, so you're saying evolution removed God out of science, lifting any moral restraints scientists might have?

 

[Brickjectivity]

Oh, so you're saying evolution removed God out of science, lifting any moral restraints scientists might have?

Not at all. Also, you are mistaken about Scientists having no moral restraints and slander them by saying so and in moral behavior they compare favorably against ministers who are notoriously unworthy of trust. Scientists are the servants of God, faithful and hard working. Evolution is the sword Excaliber which God gave to the world to slay the demons which ail it and those demons are: superstition, hate, and self aggrandization. If you believe in God then you really ought to be a Scientist.

 

[McBell]

Could it be possible that Evolution theory is just a monstrous lie based on cross breeding? The only observable facts to the regular Joe is we have seen cross breeding and know that animals can change. For the rest we would need to look at the server in Hillarys' basement.

Seriously they make such a big deal out of Evolution theory, but what good does it do? If you were building a building, and miscalculate the strength of steel, the building might fall down. But if you're wrong about Evolution theory, name one thing which would result from it.

Interesting that there is a whole sub-directory of nothing but creationists trying in vain to disprove evolution.
Problem is, they do not understand evolution.
So they are merely attacking strawmen.
Don't get me wrong, they whoop up on them strawmen like no tomorrow.
But have not even come close to disproving evolution.

Perhaps you could get at the very least a basic understanding of evolution before making an even bigger fool of yourself?

 

[Kemosloby]

Not at all. Also, you are mistaken about Scientists having no moral restraints and slander them by saying so and in moral behavior they compare favorably against ministers who are notoriously unworthy of trust. Scientists are the servants of God, faithful and hard working. Evolution is the sword Excaliber which God gave to the world to slay the demons which ail it and those demons are: superstition, hate, and self aggrandization. If you believe in God then you really ought to be a Scientist.

Hey, that was pretty good. I'll meet you halfway. No doubt God is truth and love. But nobody's perfect or incorruptible, so there's truth here and truth there. But you said in your previous post " Evolutionary Theory also provides a framework that gives freedom to discover what is in nature without any imposed constraints on what is possible." I suppose I misinterpreted what you meant by that. You mean it removed preconceived ideas such as religious dogma. And I agree a lot of religion is dogma, removing it is the silver lining in the cloud of evolution. But lets not rule out God and throw truth to the ground, keep what is true in either science or religion. Throw away religious dogma and evolution together and stick to what is useful and true.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Hey, that was pretty good. I'll meet you halfway. No doubt God is truth and love. But nobody's perfect or incorruptible, so there's truth here and truth there. But you said in your previous post " Evolutionary Theory also provides a framework that gives freedom to discover what is in nature without any imposed constraints on what is possible." I suppose I misinterpreted what you meant by that. You mean it removed preconceived ideas such as religious dogma. And I agree a lot of religion is dogma, removing it is the silver lining in the cloud of evolution. But lets not rule out God and throw truth to the ground, keep what is true in either science or religion. Throw away religious dogma and evolution together and stick to what is useful and true.

Not what I mean. Dogma is information issued from superior beings to inferior beings. Evolution can never remove preconceived ideas or dogmas, because it is unrelated. It begins as an explanation given to you by equals, not comparable with dogma which begins with a proposition or message from supposedly superior beings -- untouchably superior and not reachable by even self improvement. If you observe that animals are similar and can be arranged roughly in a tree according to similarity, Evolution is one explanation for that. That is all it is just an explanation from one human to another. If on the other hand a superior informs you that God made animals that way then you are not receiving an explanation but dogma from a superior, and acceptance of what they say comes along with acceptance of their superiority. One is not dogma. The other is dogma. The dogma uses the information as bait to trap you into acceptance of a superior. The non-dogma does not.

 

[Shad]

Medicine is chemistry and biology.

Vaccines every year are made to treat diseases that can and have changed becoming immune or resistant to older vaccines. This change is covered by ToE. Modern biology rests on the back of ToE

I think the meaning of evolution has evolved to mean progress.

Nope that is not biological evolution and can be applied to anything. Language evolving is not the same type of evolution.

And that makes me feel old. Once upon a time it meant dinosaurs and men turning into apes, or vice versa. And that was fun. What it is today is Orwellian brainwashing.

Hardly.