question for those who reject biological evolution

[Pogo]

I learned certain things in school about evolution that were eventually changed. They weren't taught as possibilities in school, but as facts. And as students, no one expressed the thought that these things can change. Neither did the teachers I studied with.

Evolution and Creationism in High School Textbooks on JSTOR

Arthur Woodward, David L. Elliott, Evolution and Creationism in High School Textbooks, The American Biology Teacher, Vol. 49, No. 3 (Mar., 1987), pp. 164+166-170

www.jstor.org

An interesting study on textbook teaching of evolution.

Just what things did you learn that have been changed? Experience tells me that your examples will not be things that have been changed, but things you "learned" incorrectly.

lAs for your article, it is not about changes in the theory of evolution but about problems with teaching evolution brought on by religious groups and others like you who have a problem with science.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I learned certain things in school about evolution that were eventually changed. They weren't taught as possibilities in school, but as facts. And as students, no one expressed the thought that these things can change. Neither did the teachers I studied with.

Evolution and Creationism in High School Textbooks on JSTOR

Arthur Woodward, David L. Elliott, Evolution and Creationism in High School Textbooks, The American Biology Teacher, Vol. 49, No. 3 (Mar., 1987), pp. 164+166-170

www.jstor.org

An interesting study on textbook teaching of evolution.

Answer honestly:

Is gravity a fact?

The data can change, but we are far past the point that there could be another explanation. What is being worked on now are just the details of how it happened. So yes, like it or not evolution is a fact. Like it or not you are an ape. Like it or not Genesis was refuted over a hundred years ago for the creation myth or over two hundred years ago for the Noah's Ark myth. Even if evolution was by some miracle proven to be wrong Genesis would still be wrong.

 

[YoursTrue]

Answer honestly:

Is gravity a fact?

The data can change, but we are far past the point that there could be another explanation. What is being worked on now are just the details of how it happened. So yes, like it or not evolution is a fact. Like it or not you are an ape. Like it or not Genesis was refuted over a hundred years ago for the creation myth or over two hundred years ago for the Noah's Ark myth. Even if evolution was by some miracle proven to be wrong Genesis would still be wrong.

There is nothing you can say that will convince me that humans, gorillas, bonobos, chimpanzees, etc. evolved from some Unknown Common Ancestor. Humans are far beyond the thinking capacity of gorillas, bonobos, and chimpanzees. That, to me, is just realistic. You will never convince me that they are not. I know you do not have respect for the Bible which is why I am not quoting anything from it.
Nevertheless, the reality shows that humans are far beyond chimpanzees, etc., in thinking ability.

 

[YoursTrue]

The question really is not about evolution, because many people believe in that, and do not believe in God. Or are agnostic. But there are those who believe in the theory of evolution AND also God. So the question is why do such ones believe in God? They've given their reasons for believing in the theory of evolution, but so far have not explained why they also believe in God.

 

[AdamjEdgar]

Absolutely! The Gospel of James is one of my particular favorites.

I dont think there is any issue with the epistle of James. Does it matter if it was James the apostle or James the brother of Christ? All were contemporaries of the earlierst of Christian church fathers and this is as close to eyewitness accounts as we can get.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is nothing you can say that will convince me that humans, gorillas, bonobos, chimpanzees, etc. evolved from some Unknown Common Ancestor. Humans are far beyond the thinking capacity of gorillas, bonobos, and chimpanzees. That, to me, is just realistic. You will never convince me that they are not. I know you do not have respect for the Bible which is why I am not quoting anything from it.
Nevertheless, the reality shows that humans are far beyond chimpanzees, etc., in thinking ability.

Then you are just denying reality in the same way that a person walking off of cliff might. Lucky for you the penalties for denying evolution are not usually anywhere near as harsh.

 

[YoursTrue]

Then you are just denying reality in the same way that a person walking off of cliff might. Lucky for you the penalties for denying evolution are not usually anywhere near as harsh.

Yeah, I don't want to hurt myself.

 

[exchemist]

simple people who dont now how to do basic research come up with statements like yours above...

Book of Romans:
"1Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, and set apart for the gospel of God—"

Corinthians
1Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and our brother Sosthenes,

James
1James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ,

Revelation

​

John Greets the Seven Churches 4John, To the seven churches in the province of Asia:b John’s Vision on Patmos 9I, John, your brother and partner in the tribulation and kingdom and perseverance that are in Jesus, was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and my testimony about Jesus.

Stupid is as stupid does...you follow in the footsteps of those who dont know the basic principles of collating evidence.

The reason why we know who wrote the majority of New testatement books is because the writers themselves tell us they wrote them. Anyone who has even the smallest knowledge of bible readings would already know this.

Then, we can further verify authorship through external evidences...such as we know that Moses most likely wrote the Torah because for example one exernal source, the Babylonian version of the Talmud tells us he wrote it! So that is an historical source that dates back well over 1000 years.

We have archeological artifacts and findings that support the bible narrative...such as Hezekiahs tunnels (which you can go and see "in the flesh" so to speak even today).


Al-Yahudu tablets from 500B.C illustrate Jewish captivity in Babylon

We know these things because we actually use our intelligence and do some research instead of coming out with brainless statements such as those of naysayers who dont bother researching anything other than third hand wives tails!

It's been a while since I read anything so silly. Just because someone writes "I am Fred Bloggs" does not mean the writer must actually be Fred Bloggs.

For example, there is a host of novels written in the first person, not to mention numerous examples of non-fiction written under pseudonyms.

In this case there is an obvious motive for a writer to adopt the name of an apostle, since it would give his writings hugely more authority. Alternatively, it could be that there were real sayings of the apostle that somebody wanted to collect together in written from, and they chose to do so under the name of the apostle. Or, the writings might indeed have been written by the apostle himself. So there is a whole series of possibilities. The text itself can't tell you directly which one it is.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I learned certain things in school about evolution that were eventually changed. They weren't taught as possibilities in school, but as facts. And as students, no one expressed the thought that these things can change. Neither did the teachers I studied with.

Sounds like you had horrible teachers.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

There is nothing you can say that will convince me that humans, gorillas, bonobos, chimpanzees, etc. evolved from some Unknown Common Ancestor.

Yep. Exactly.
Thanks for being honest about your intellectual dishonesty.
Thanks for acknowledging that no amount of evidence, demonstrability, explanatory power,... will ever convince you.
Thanks for acknowledging that you have put yourself in the intellectually dishonest position of clinging dogmatically to a religious story from which you will not budge no matter what.



Yet if that is the case, I have to ask: what are you even doing here discussing this subject?
Why bother? If you simply come out and honestly tell us that the evidence does not matter to you at all, that you have your dogmatic belief and that literally nothing will ever convince you that you are wrong, which literally means you do not CARE about evidence or being rationally justified in your beliefs, then why are you here trying to refute / discuss the evidence or the theory itself?

What's the goal here? I don't get it.

Nevertheless, the reality shows that humans are far beyond chimpanzees, etc., in thinking ability.

And the albatros is far beyond the chicken in flying ability. They are still both birds which share ancestry.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

The question really is not about evolution, because many people believe in that, and do not believe in God. Or are agnostic. But there are those who believe in the theory of evolution AND also God. So the question is why do such ones believe in God? They've given their reasons for believing in the theory of evolution, but so far have not explained why they also believe in God.

ps: there are more god believers that except evolution then there are god believers that reject science.


You talk as if they are some kind of exception. They are not. You are the minority here.

 

[Valjean]

simple people who dont now how to do basic research come up with statements like yours above...
Book of Romans:
"1Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle, and set apart for the gospel of God—"
Corinthians
1Paul, called to be an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and our brother Sosthenes,
James
1James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ,
Revelation

​

John Greets the Seven Churches 4John, To the seven churches in the province of Asia:b John’s Vision on Patmos 9I, John, your brother and partner in the tribulation and kingdom and perseverance that are in Jesus, was on the island of Patmos because of the word of God and my testimony about Jesus.

Stupid is as stupid does...you follow in the footsteps of those who dont know the basic principles of collating evidence.

Agreed. Historians and biblical researchers generally agree that the Bible is not an accurate, historical account, and that most of it is apocryphal.
So why cite it for anything factual or historical?

The reason why we know who wrote the majority of New testatement books is because the writers themselves tell us they wrote them. Anyone who has even the smallest knowledge of bible readings would already know this.

Except the actual linguists and biblical scholars.

Authorship of the Bible - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Then, we can further verify authorship through external evidences...such as we know that Moses most likely wrote the Torah because for example one exernal source, the Babylonian version of the Talmud tells us he wrote it! So that is an historical source that dates back well over 1000 years.

We don't even know if Moses actually existed. All we have about him is from religious folklore, And, of course, many of the legends about him are demonstrably false. Moses - Wikipedia
As depited in the Bible, he seems to have been a tribal warlord and terrorist.

We have archeological artifacts and findings that support the bible narrative...such as Hezekiahs tunnels (which you can go and see "in the flesh" so to speak even today).

Equating the tunnels with the conduit mentioned in 2 Kings is pure speculation. If it is the tunnel mentioned, so what? How does that support the biblical narrative?

Al-Yahudu tablets from 500B.C illustrate Jewish captivity in Babylon

We know these things because we actually use our intelligence and do some research instead of coming out with brainless statements such as those of naysayers who dont bother researching anything other than third hand wives tails!

No, the Egyptian captivity legend is known to be a fable by pretty much all scholars, archæologists and historians for multiple reasons,

Anyone actually using his intelligence and doing some research, instead of brainlessly quoting an apocryphal and unevidenced collection of folklore would be aware of this.

 

[Valjean]

I learned certain things in school about evolution that were eventually changed. They weren't taught as possibilities in school, but as facts. And as students, no one expressed the thought that these things can change. Neither did the teachers I studied with.

Evolution and Creationism in High School Textbooks on JSTOR

Arthur Woodward, David L. Elliott, Evolution and Creationism in High School Textbooks, The American Biology Teacher, Vol. 49, No. 3 (Mar., 1987), pp. 164+166-170

www.jstor.org

An interesting study on textbook teaching of evolution.

Out of curiosity, what things did you learn that were changed?

 

[Debater Slayer]

***Mod Post***

Thread closed for review.​

 

[JustGeorge]

**Thread Reopened**​

 

[SkepticThinker]

That was what I asked. Was it too much?

It seems that the one who said there were some illnesses which treatment "was only possible to develop using scientific knowledge from biological evolution" exagerated or purposedly lied about this.

Apparently the doctrine of evolution is not as useful as some would have us believe.

Evolution is the backbone of modern biology. It doesn't work without evolution being a fact of life.

 

[SkepticThinker]

I learned certain things in school about evolution that were eventually changed. They weren't taught as possibilities in school, but as facts. And as students, no one expressed the thought that these things can change. Neither did the teachers I studied with.

Evolution and Creationism in High School Textbooks on JSTOR

Arthur Woodward, David L. Elliott, Evolution and Creationism in High School Textbooks, The American Biology Teacher, Vol. 49, No. 3 (Mar., 1987), pp. 164+166-170

www.jstor.org

An interesting study on textbook teaching of evolution.

From 1987? Seriously?

 

[SkepticThinker]

There is nothing you can say that will convince me that humans, gorillas, bonobos, chimpanzees, etc. evolved from some Unknown Common Ancestor. Humans are far beyond the thinking capacity of gorillas, bonobos, and chimpanzees. That, to me, is just realistic. You will never convince me that they are not. I know you do not have respect for the Bible which is why I am not quoting anything from it.
Nevertheless, the reality shows that humans are far beyond chimpanzees, etc., in thinking ability.

Then you will remain ignorant.
And willfully so, as you've said here.
Why would anyone want that???

 

[Pogo]

From 1987? Seriously?

It is a one page preview about NYC telling publishers that not emphasizing evolution in order to not have problems with the teach the controversy crowd was not acceptable. It doesn't in any way support any argument she is trying to make unless she wants to claim that she is ignorant because she had to use one of these textbooks.

Also, I'm sure she doesn't have access to JSTOR so all she has read is the preview.

 

[Audie]

Then you will remain ignorant.
And willfully so, as you've said here.
Why would anyone want that???

Ignorance is, uh, bliss?