“it is strikingly obvious that for today’s progressives, humans are the sole species on this planet where gender differentiation has no clear basis in nature, science, evolution, or biology. This is where they are as hostile to Darwin as any creationist.”
You don’t say.
This is where they are as hostile to Darwin as any creationist.
Yeah Darwin’s evolution theory is settled science after all. Not questioned by any scientists or anyone anywhere for that matter. haha
Athiests and Darwinists of the left and right are hostile to Creationists all the time. Simply because they want G-d removed from society so they don’t feel they have to answer for anything they do.
Perhaps a little more so because one thing both Creationists and Darwinists have in common is the ability to care how things came about. ^_^
anyone who believes in Darwinian theory has to believe that man is an evolutionary creature. that being said it would logically follow that everything man does is also evolutionary and does not fall into the supernatural. we live as we do because evolution has made it possible. sometimes we make mistakes but even those would be considered evolutionary according to Darwin. relax and enjoy your evolution, you can’t change it. Of course God may jump in and change that at any moment.
patrick, you seem to be confused by the definition of ‘hostile’. I regularly challenge Creationists on this site because they are trying to pollute young minds with just as much garbage as these leftard ‘trans fans’ are. I do it because the science is virtually unchallenged by any scientist without a personal ideological agenda or crusade, NOT because I hate Creationists. BTW, if you have any quality, fact-based evidence that exposes Evolution as a fraud, by all means, lets hear it.
WOW, if you want to talk hostility, just look at the vulgar, baseless smear you just took at countless millions of complete strangers. Ha, and WE are the hostile ones…. rriiiight. If you are personally experiencing hostility from these ‘groups’, I’d say you earned it very well.
You are just another close-minded fool so ignorant that you truly believe that all atheists are dedicated leftards, just like the idiots I run into daily who refuse to accept that nowhere near all Christians are politically Conservative. Both concepts are big goddamn lies born out of bigoted partisan ignorance, but I still almost daily read from people who believe them to the core of their being.
BTW, many Christians have accepted Evolution as the fact it clearly seems to be and find it doesn’t conflict with their faith at all. Holy shit(literally), I was taught Evolution in Catholic school over 40 yrs ago, it is not some grand conspiracy to undermine Christianity!
Sheesh!
Creation and evolution are two different things. Evolution is verifiable, we see it in our lives. Neither the theory of evolution, or Darwin explained where life comes from in the first place. It is a scientific fact that life will not spring into being by mixing a bunch of chemicals together in a jar and saying magic words over them. The second LAW of thermodynamics – The entropy of an isolated system not in equilibrium will tend to increase over time, approaching a maximum value at equilibrium – basically states that systems go from a state of order to a state of disorder. This is exactly the opposite of what people who think that life miraculously sprang out of the primordial goo have as an explanation of where life came from.
Sometimes I wonder – if a homosexual was writing a one-paragraph essay about his summer vacation, would it be mandatory that he out himself?
Creation explains our existence and the existence of science.
minuteman – IMO you are confusing equilibrium with order. Order is a concept that only exists in human minds … equilibrium is a natural state that can be many different things at different times … and nature shreds equilibriums all the time … just to watch them reassemble?
And Who put the concept of order into human minds?
(And how did I get “Designer Give” for Capcha? Lol)
The trouble is, science itself has to commence from a collectikn of Axioms. You know what an Axiom is? That’s right, it is a non-decidable proposition.
Atheists claiming that science disproves creation, is like me claiming that because chessgames produce observable, and “expected” results, and because chess contains within itself no game-breaking contradictions, this shows that the rules of chess are therefore “true”. It is not only a meaningless statement, it is undecidable.
I suspect this will be the only point in history where saying (in general or statistically) males and females have biological and psychological differences will be controversial. The only people still clinging to the idea that male=superior, female=inferior will be feminists on the left and troglodytes (actual patriarchal societies). Both groups only see the male lifestyle – workaholic, promiscuous, commitment free – as the epitome of success.
Scandinavia has pretty much shown that creating a wealthy, egalitarian society where men and women have free choice and equal opportunity increases gender gaps in careers and interests. I think that in the future society will respect both the differences between the sexes *and* the differences between individuals, regardless of race, sex, etc. Gender wars and pushing for collective rights (instead of individual rights and universal human rights) will be seen as primitive thinking.
God created evolution.
I’ve found that viewing progressives as a cultish religious movement is the only way it makes sense. For example: being white as original sin, the miracle of men giving birth in place of a virginal birth, apocalyptic doom from climate change, wokeness as the new reborn, an arrogant belief that only they have Truth, the need to completely defeat their wicked opponents. They have their own political arm, priestly caste (non-STEM academics) and inquisitors (media). The cult promotes feelings over facts and an irrational utopian/dystopian worldview. They have a viscious reaction to any outsider criticism and any rules and texts questioned by the faithful will result in immediate excommunication (eg. blank slatism, intersectionality, pomo). It’s a religion and universities are the new religion’s educational institutions.
“Scandinavia has pretty much shown that creating a wealthy, egalitarian society where men and women have free choice and equal opportunity increases gender gaps in careers and interests.”
Not only that, but it shows that a society that puts more emphasis on breeding the next generation will replace one that doesn’t. Feminism, is an evolutionary dead end.
I think that their faith in the idea that men and women are equal in all talents and characteristics beyond those that can be visually verified is pretty hostile to Darwin.
Theoretically, recruitment could work. Ironically, if genetics are primarily responsible for things like political leanings, successful parenting and fecundity instead of social constructs then progressive feminists will be proved wrong in a profoundly comical way. By successfully convincing their converts to not have children, they’ll have doomed their own movement. Ditto for environmental fanatics and other anti-natalist progressive ideologies. MRAs too.
The entropy of an isolated system
1. Go outside.
2. Look up.
3. Squint.
4. Think very, very carefully about the meaning of the phrase “isolated system”.
If you guys want to dredge up the whole “mau mau science doesn’t support evolution” thing could you at least not recycle arguments that were shot full of holes half a century ago?
Being an atheist, the only thing at this point that would convince me that Creationism is real is if God did it again. If a new species, priven to be unrelated to or evolved from any existing species, suddenly appears then I’ll take up religion.
OTOH, there is ample evidence for natural selection, random mutations and evolution on record. The evidence isn’t seamless and perfect but it’s quite convincing. The best of science provides proof and is self-correcting.
Science is messy and imperfect but religious texts are equally, if not more imo, flawed and imperfect. Why is evolutionary science required to be absolutely flawless and perfect while Creationism should be accepted on much, much less verifiable proof?
It seems to me that testosterone shots for all Liberal men in Canada might just solve a lot of problems.
Maybe the Conservative Party should adopt such a “value” for access to government funds upon their next election.
I would not regard Creationism as science but even Creationists would acknowledge only two biological sexes each serving a purpose.
The Theory of Evolution is just that: a theory that was eventually challenged by something more definite – genetics.
Leftists, as much as they claim to rely and glorify science, really don’t believe in it and get rather angry when one uses science to disprove their nutty ideas.
Moving on …
I went outside,looked up, and noticed I was part of a really really big system. Evolution explains how domestic cattle came from aurox, and how wolves became hundreds of different breeds of domestic dogs and how people evolved from apes. It doesn’t explain, or even try to explain how one day there were no self replicating beings with DNA molecules in every cell and the next day there were. I am ambivalent about how this happened, but one way or other it has nothing to do with evolution.
well folks, there is one unstated question in here, and the only pertinent question to both sides of the evolution/creationist debate. And that question is, were is the starting point. Were did the singularity/space time/worm hole come from. Flip side, were did god come from. And NO, that god was forever is not an answer. There has to be a starting point!!
LC Bennett wrote:
” I think that in the future society will respect both the differences between the sexes *and* the differences between individuals, regardless of race, sex, etc. Gender wars and pushing for collective rights (instead of individual rights and universal human rights) will be seen as primitive thinking.”
You are a hopeless optimist. In the future as in the past people will try to validate their delusions – be them in evolutionary or creationist flavour – by forcing others to accept one and the only correct view.
The creationism I embrace has no conflict with science or evolution … except that little bit that says we evolved from apes (or lobsters, ha!). Find me the missing link(s), and then I’ll be completely on board. Show me some current examples of animals … in transition … from one species to another. Not simple environmental adaptations, but complete transitions into a different species, and I will consider whether God does not exist. Yeah, yeah, dinosaurs into birds … sorry, too long ago and there are no transitional species that have been discovered.
I am no science-Denier, but I also believe in the spirituality of humans. That we exist on a different plane than every other species … and it isn’t just because of the size/shape of our brain pan. Creation-science is not infecting our children’s minds … that is just nonsense. And the entire Wikipedia page attempting to describe scientific creationism is just a smear job filled with falsehoods about what I actually do and do not “believe”. Probably the MOST disinformation I have EVER read on a Wikipedia page, ascribing all sorts of nonsense about “beliefs” of scientific-creationists.
Teaching the THEORY of human evolution in the classroom while denying the THEORY of scientific-creationism is simply wrong. And don’t attempt to smear my personal belief system by claiming I would also like to see prayer in school. That’s ridiculous. Prayer in public school and/or forced worship of God in public Schools is nonsense … wrong place, wrong time. But displaying the 10 Commandments ? Information should NEVER be regulated and controlled in the classroom. Yeah, even witchcraft. The Dark Ages were full of it … teach it, I don’t care … God can weather the assault. But apparently, the theory of evolution cannot weather the “assault” of alternate beliefs. There is no better example of embracing science as a “belief system” than the “faith-science” of Global Warming. And it is not accidentally ironic that I am called a “Denier” … because … I am “Christian fundie” … by “the Science is settled” Warmist fundies.
BTW, if you have any quality, fact-based evidence that exposes Evolution as a fraud, by all means, lets hear it.
I have a fact…if evolution were true there should be an unbroken line of living creatures all the way from one cell to the higher life forms. Living creatures continuously demonstrating each stage of their evolution…otherwise explain why it stopped.
It’s a fraud, just global warming is a fraud.
We both agree that many Christians(Jews and Muslims, etc too) often have little problem reconciling the Theory of Evolution with their faith. We simply do not know enough about how life actually started, or maybe we still haven’t even properly defined what life is yet, to know for sure. For the record, we evolved alongside apes, not from them. It’s a huge difference, please stop spreading that old myth. While I’m on the topic, the “missing link” is now also considered an old folklore. There are huge gaps in historical records all over the place, scientists are always first to point that out, but the term is absolutely inaccurate.
Where I really challenge Creationists is when they try to tell me the Theory of Begats has more authority than the Theory of Evolution. It’s when they build impressive museums to show kids that man lived alongside dinosaurs, that the earth is only 6,000 years old. Which leads to the next point. It’s not just Evolution that strict Creationists are challenging, it’s the other sciences too, Geology, Paleontology, Astronomy, and that’s just for starters.
BTW, the main point of my response to patrick was to display my displeasure at his arrogantly ignorant bigotry against atheists, and apparently, anyone who dare believe in Evolution. How contemptuous to assume such great sweeping moral judgments about so many complete strangers.
Anyways, Kenji, this also gives me a chance to say I’m glad you enjoyed the Yes link yesterday.
strad, I have no more time to waste on someone as willfully ignorant as you. Evolution has NOT stopped, I have sent you repeated links that demonstrate this but you keep ignoring them, instead continually bringing opinion to a fact fight.
CO … we share enough in common, that I would NEVER let a little thing like the source of our very existence come between us! Ha! And BTW … I am no more a Bible Literalist (6,000 year Biblical genealogy) than I am a scienci Literalist (the science is settled).
I seem to recall an episode of Top Gear which featured Rick Wakeman behind the wheel of their track timed Toyota. And it reinforced the fact of just how revered the old Prog Rockers are by the Brits. And Wakeman was totally up for his sendup … a very funny, intelligent, clever … talented … fellow.
https://youtu.be/w1dkl2yx97g
try this CO: WHAT property, attribute, mechanism, whatever, is it, that protons, the building blocks of ORGANIC elements and thus compounds and thus living entities thus evolution, is it, that they ‘know’ how to coalesce at just the right place in just the right qtys in just the right sequence etc etc, to become LIFE?
I’ve been asking that for some 30 years now and could write my own book about how some meet a challenging question with sarcasm, insult, waffling, changing the subject. but so far, NO evolutionist has given anything but that.
so how DOES that work? ‘responding to the environment bla bla bla’ uhuh, in other words, OTHER protons. so let’s refine the Q, what property etc is it that a proton ‘knows’ how to respond to other IDENTICAL protons to become life? what? how does it all work? where is it? this ability, tucked in there next to the quarks . . . .
evolutionists are extremely fond of starting, in some cases, just before the cell makes its appearance ‘all hail the amino acid'( made of, wait for it, PROTONS !!!) one of them claimed life started with cells that had no nucleus. all kinds of gymnastics in that field of science eh?
p.s., asking questions about the nature of protons is NOT ‘rhetorical’.
CO, my friend, since we’re both old Prog Rockers … let me share the lyrics of my fave-Jethro Tull’s tune My God … which I believe comes quite close to getting the difference between God and Religion quite right. And the music all done up in the best Hymn-style
My God
People, what have you done?
Locked him in his golden cage, golden cage
Made him bend to your religion
Him resurrected from the grave, from the grave
He is the God of nothing
If that’s all that you can see
You are the God of everything
He’s inside you and me
So lean upon him gently
And don’t call on him to save you
From your social graces
And the sins you used to waive, you used to waive
The bloody church of England
In chains of history
Requests your earthly presence
At the vicarage for tea
And the graven image you know who
With his plastic crucifix, he’s got him fixed
Confuses me as to who and where and why?
As to how he gets his kicks, he gets his kicks
Confessing to the endless sin
The endless whining sounds
You’ll be praying till next Thursday
To all the gods that you can count
Yes, the lyrics are Christian heresy in as much as Anderson mocks the idea of limiting God to one man on a cross … but I can look past this “little detail” (of course it’s not) for his understanding that God can neither be created nor destroyed by mankind.
I am not certain that Ian Anderson knew it … but he was essentially transcribing Romans 1:20 …
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.
Sorry, probably too preachy … even for Sunday … but this was just an excuse to brag that I bought tix. to see Jethro Tull at the Berkeley Greek Theatre in June. Orchestra Pit … so I can see him play his one-footed flute riffs and his little 3/4-scale custom shop Martin Parlor guitar … up close and personal. Yeah … I guess I am checking off bucket list items … not to worry … great health still (at least as good as MY President’s) :]
furthermore evolutionists, try this one: if, IF our handy dandy protons started it all, that means those veeeerrrrry FIRST ones that became a living ‘thing’, well, according to the theory, had within them, the *capability* to. Become, Every. Living. Organism. That. Has. Ever. Lived. Or. Will. Live. every last one of them.
that is one fcukin’ TALL order right there.
and yet, and yet, evolutionists claim in a great century long chorus that life started out from the simplest of things and advanced, (skipping past all the oopsies) to become today’s biosphere.
this is a contradiction. the ‘startup’ protons HAD to have some sort of incredible capacity, and yet in the same voice, it came out of very SIMPLE organic molecules like those drifting in space.
simple coming out of the complex, or complex coming out of the simple. which is it?
the UNAVOIDABLE contradiction that lands in the lap of evolutionists is this:
according to the ‘evolutionary tree’, once a species branches off, it CANNOT ‘go back’ ‘climb back UP the tree, and take a different path.
ie, once we got wolves however that happened, then dogs, then thousands of breeds of dogs, ANYTHING that evolves out of ANY of these species of DOG can ONLY be another DOG.
hmmm. so *according to the theory*, as species branch off, they PERMANENTLY LOSE the DNA to become anything else BUT WHAT THEY ARE NOW. variations in size, colour etc etc but still ONLY a SUB species. so as the millions of years transpire, millions of species continue to LOSE the capacity to become anything else. do you claim that a cucumber has the ability, given all the time needed so far, to become, oh, lets say ferinstance, ummm, a blue whale. hmmm? after all, cucumbers and blue whales *according to evolution* have a COMMON ancestor which *therefore* MUST have had within it (within the protons) to EVOLVE in separate paths, those of cucumbers and whales.
which brings us back to the protons where it all started and my initial point, that being, those protons that became the *very first life* *apparently* had this potential within them. SO WHERE IS IT???? they must still have it, unless an ‘evolutionist’ somewhere claims that protons *also* evolve.
p.s. anyone agreeing with my thesis, feel free to spread the word and expose the highly s-e-l-e-c-t-i-v-e and limited view of evolution.
Buff dude: Spot on … from what primordial goo does sentience, thinking, and reasoning spring from ? At which evolutionary step … did we become … self aware? Sorry, Animal righters I’m not using the term to mean the low-level brain stem awareness of pain. And that doesn’t mean we are free to torture animals … geeze … life is complex, and feel the need to explain my every belief in more detail … it gets exhausting
Great intelligent and reasonable (for the most part) discussion on Creation and the Theory of evolution.
(I believe in Creation. )
However…did anyone besides Jamie read the whole essay??
Evolution has NOT stopped,…
If it ever existed, of course it has…to be fact there would have to be a whole living line from one cell to advanced life continuously evolving. With all various stages also as living examples. But it stopped…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdNASJDwvAU
this one.
this, this wondrous song of worship.
a teensy glimpse of the glory and peace awaiting the forgiven.
on this Sunday day of worship. those who exercise our free choice.
My Heavenly Father will NOT surround Himself with legions of sycophants. that is very clear.
enjoy. and a big hug and thanks to Kate who could not have know what she wrought in the interests of truth and freedom and justice, this blog.
Bach was the long haired rocker of his day … his rhythms, notes, and patterns are probably the REAL root of Rock and Roll. It’s no accident that ALL the Brit Prog Rockers were all classically-trained musicians …. so I’ll go with this for my devotional …
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iPeVIuRjUi4
I even threw-in the Celtic Woman ! … ;]
I LOVE me some Bach and the Lord.
hey kenji, have a good week.
I like to point out the similarities between Jimi Hendrix and Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart.
revolutionaries, brilliant and gifted, died broke, copied ever since, etc etc.
I got this printed and mounted, after cropping to emphasize the prominence of the plaques.
http://c8.alamy.com/comp/ATTN91/blue-plaques-marking-the-london-homes-of-handel-and-jimi-hendrix-ATTN91.jpg
Jimi mentioned God a couple times in his music.
I got a deal with my Creator, help me learn guitar and I will play spirituals alongside the rock riffs.
Jamie McMaster: “Sometimes I wonder – if a homosexual was writing a one-paragraph essay about his summer vacation, would it be mandatory that he out himself?”
I hesitate to respond, given the infinite weightiness of this thread, but yesterday I was in Home Depot and noticed the check-out guy had a ‘rainbow’ name tag with his name on it.
I mentioned to my wife, “What exactly does his sexuality have to do with his job description?” As one wit once remarked, “they’ve gone from the ‘love that does not dare speak its name” to the point where even after finding acceptance, they just can’t shut up.”
Actually, back in the day, I remember reading a paper that discussed the possibillity that organic life evolved from defect structures in sheet silicates (micas). As I remember the argument, it began with the fact that crystals are inorganic but do truly grow. It went on to speculate that micas were particularly suggestible to having foreign bits introduced to their crystals and to adapting to same – possibly to the extent that a carbon-based structure arose which could be termed “life”.
I will throw in one more comment. Growth and reproduction require cell division. There is no known natural process by which cell division could originate by chance.
historybuff, sorry, but what world do you live in? How does scientists openly stating ‘We don’t have a clue how life started.” translate into dismissing everything else they HAVE clearly proven on Evolution?
“…and expose the highly s-e-l-e-c-t-i-v-e and limited view of evolution.” LO-freaking-L, you can’t be that naive not to see your outstanding display of hypocrisy, there. Ha, how much demand have you ever put on Creationists to justify THEIR claims? Hmmmm, Mr. Selective?
If you applied even a small percentage of the skepticism you have for Evolution towards Creationism, I would pay more attention to your sales pitch. Hardcore Creationists push outright lies and fairy tales with a clear agenda to promote a religious ideology, I didn’t notice you wasting any time questioning their unfounded claims. Do you actually agree the world is only 6,000 yrs old and that man lived alongside dinosaurs?
One final thing, I just love how people challenging science as corrupt rarely hesitate to quote science when they believe it will serve their purposes. Your arguments make you sound completely like a ranting conspiracy theorist, to me.
Have an awesome day.
Some of my favorite bands are populated with devout Christians, also. Speaking of Yes, I would have to say that Asia has become one of my absolute fave bands, they are often described as a Christian rock band. I don’t give a tinkers damn about their spiritual beliefs, they simply kick ass. Lots of musicians I enjoy express their Christian faith in their music. I sometimes wonder how many Christians would even give the time of day to a band that openly promoted Atheism.
A reminder as to why I even became active on this thread. I see lots of ignorance, contempt, fear and even hatred directed at atheists on this site, it is depressing as all hell. I have learned how deeply ignorant and uninformed many Christians are towards the ‘unfaithful’. We ARE NOT the enemy, and we most F*CKING CERTAINLY are NOWHERE near being ALL libtards.
Thanks for the Top Gear link, I hope the show’s reincarnation creates the same feeling of camaraderie amongst the hosts that we have grown to love. Was it Captain Slow who remarked that they should have set up some keyboards on the dash? Hilarious.
Indeed, we may disagree on the big questions that matter, but at least we do seem to have lots of trivial, unimportant shit in common. 🙂
“There is no known natural process by which cell division could originate by chance.”
Exactly, no KNOWN natural process…. yet!
Ain’t scientific discovery wonderful?
I wait with baited breath, but i will not hold my breath.
I need to give Asia another chance. I generally like what I’ve heard of them on the radio (very little) but they have been so maligned as a schmaltzy band (perhaps owing to their expression of faith) that I haven’t really given them a listen. But, then again, I have no personal fear of liking “schmaltzy” bands … because I generally don’t give a schitz what other people have to say about my tastes. Hell, I am still a huge fan of Alan Parsons Project (and even saw them play a brilliant set at a tiny venue in Oakland; Yoshi’s Japanese restaurant and Jazz Club, recently). The Alan Parsons LIVE project played the entire concept lp I-Robot from beginning to end … with me sitting at my cocktail table 20 feet from Alan at his keyboards! Pure sonic bliss! One of the 5-best live performances I have EVER seen. My own kids still mock the hell out of me for liking Alan Parsons (and having his music in my regular rotation).
With fear of sounding like some sort of an ..ist, I can tell you that “some of my best friends are atheists”. In fact, the man who I would consider my very closest friend likes to exclaim that he can NEVER be a Christian, because he … “is incapable of feeling guilt”. Don’t worry H-Buff, I’m working on him. I suspect that just like you, I am somewhat naturally repelled by (many) Christians who wear their faith on their sleeve, which they use to slap you in the face constantly. Even those who aren’t actively proselytizing, but simply cannot help but inject Christ into each and every conversation … uggh, it can get quite tedious (I TRY not to be guilty of this “sin” of boredom … so feel free to let me know when I’ve crossed the line) I came to my own faith way back in HS, owing to a “youth” group that was active on my campus, and in particular one man who was perhaps the most antithetical Christian you could imagine. He drove me around in his old Porsche, and we played Rugby together for years (he was -still is- one tough bastard!). And what sealed the deal … was that he LOVED Steely Dan as I did. In fact, his personality was quite like a Donald Fagen lyric; acerbic, witty, and … irreverent ( a real “dry” sense of humor). But he was a unique “Ambassador of Christ” who changed my life for the better. I would say that I honestly still try to “be like” him. There are parts of my life that I have literally patterned after himm. He was, essentially, a father figure to me … since my own was lost in a bottle somewhere. So, you … and many (not just any) atheists can ALWAYS consider me their friend, and I will ALWAYS be respectful of your (their) views and opinions. Especially when the respect is mutual. Thanks for not writing me off.
Oh … and PS … there is no such thing as trivial and unimportant stuff … everything matters … 🙂
Thanks for expressing those sentiments, you remind me of one of my Christian friends in particular here in BC.
Try this on for a fit… it’s my oldest daughter’s favorite, she can’t sit still when she hears it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MvQm1IEGg8
Asia has a huge body of work over it’s history, and sadly, there is a tiny bit of schmaltz in there, but IMHO, it is swamped by their huge talent, harmony and ability to kick some serious hard rock ass. This is one of my faves, I’ll take a shot that it is up your alley too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3-VBHBWXxo