 |
|
|
|
August 27th, 2012
11:31 AM ET
Bill Nye slams creationismBy Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor (CNN)–Famed TV scientist Bill Nye is slamming creationism in a new online video for Big Think titled "Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children." "Denial of evolution is unique to the United States," Nye begins in a YouTube video posted on Thursday. The video quickly picked up steam over the weekend and as of Monday morning had been viewed more than 1,100,000 times. Nye - a mechanical engineer and television personality best known for his program, "Bill Nye the Science Guy" - said the United States has great capital in scientific knowledge and "when you have a portion of the population that doesn't believe in it, it holds everyone back." "Your world becomes fantastically complicated if you don't believe in evolution," Nye said in the Web video. Creationists are a vast and varied group in the United States. Most creationists believe in the account of the origins of the world as told in the Book of Genesis, the first book of the Bible. CNN’s Belief Blog: The faith angles behind the biggest stories In the creation account, God creates Adam and Eve, the world, and everything in it in six days. For Christians who read the Genesis account literally, or authoritatively as they would say, the six days in the account are literal 24-hour periods and leave no room for evolution. Young Earth creationists use this construct and biblical genealogies to determine the age of the Earth, and typically come up with 6,000 to 10,000 years. Your Take: 5 reactions to Bill Nye's creationism critique The Gallup Poll has been tracking Americans' views on creation and evolution for the past 30 years. In June it released its latest findings, which showed 46% of Americans believed in creationism, 32% believed in evolution guided by God, and 15% believed in atheistic evolution. During the 30 years Gallup has conducted the survey, creationism has remained far and away the most popular answer, with 40% to 47% of Americans surveyed saying they believed that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years. Survey: Nearly half of Americans subscribe to creationist view of human origins "The idea of deep time of billions of years explains so much of the world around us. If you try to ignore that, your worldview becomes crazy, untenable, itself inconsistent," Nye said in the video. "I say to the grownups, if you want to deny evolution and live in your world, that's completely inconsistent with the world we observe, that's fine. But don't make your kids do it. Because we need them. We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future. We need engineers that can build stuff and solve problems," he said. Creationists' beliefs about the origins of the Earth are often a narrow focus, based in large part on religious beliefs, and while they reject evolution as "just one theory," they often embrace other fields of science and technology. Follow the CNN Belief Blog on Twitter In "The Genesis Flood," the 1961 book that in many ways help launch the Young Earth creationism movement in the United States, the authors write: “Our conclusions must unavoidably be colored by our Biblical presuppositions, and this we plainly acknowledge." Their goal for the book was to harmonize the scientific evidence with the accounts in Genesis of creation and the flood. The idea of creationism has been scorned by the mainstream scientific community since shortly after Darwin introduced "The Origin of Species" in 1859. By 1880, The American Naturalists, a science journal, reported nearly every major university in America was teaching evolution. "In another couple centuries I'm sure that worldview won't even exist. There's no evidence for it. So..." Nye ends his video. soundoff (14,640 Responses)« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 Next » |
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
Pointless topic. Creation theory is irrelevant until one can establish the existence of the credited God. Please provide verifiable evidence that a god exists. Without proving the existence of God, any claims made as to the abilities, actions or desires of that god are illogical and childlike.
Can you prove that He doesn't?
@Wesley: I am sorry, but the claim that a god exists caries a burden of proof. It is the responsibility of those making the claim to satisfy the burden of proof inherent in their claim.
Your post is an attempt to shift the burden of proof is dishonest. Please try harder next time.
@Eric You are incorrect. The burden of proof is on both parties in a debate. Onus probandi is the fallacy in which someone lays the burden of proof on the person making the claim. In debate, BOTH sides must provide proof for their views. Using the argument that religious people must prove there is a God is just as fallacy filled as a religious person saying that a person must prove there isn't one.
Mr. Nye's speech shows a lot of ignorance about the origins of scientific thought and history. Historically many of our greatest scientists developed theories that changed scientific paradigms as a result of searching for patterns and mathematical relationships that a more intelligent being designed.
While he tries to make the case that evolution is more enlightening, to assert that creationists cannot be scientifically literate voters, taxpayers (is there any scientific literacy involved in paying bills?), and engineers that can build stuff, is simply ignorant.
Bill Nye, I thought you were a lot smarter!
These religious nuts come from the same genetics/heritage as those of the dark ages who proclaimed the world was flat and our earth was the center of the universe (they believed the sun rotated around us and in fact the Catholic church banned the Copernicun model and these scientists were deemed heretics and punished by law). It took hundreds of years for these people to finally grasp the basic concepts of science and acknowledge they were wrong (yes, the earth is a sphere and we rotate around our sun in case a few of you hadn't been informed). As a scientist it's frustrating to see belief in a ghost be more accepted than findings which are strongly supported by the scientific method and our best understanding of the world around us. I am patient, though, and know that in sufficient time reason and logic will overcome fear and 'faith.'
My question to those who do not accept the science of evolution- do you think the earth is flat and we are the center of the universe? Do you believe in one god, or the dozens that were described before yours? If you chose to believe in one god, what if you're wrong? For there are billions of other religious people in the world that would agrue that their god is the one true god.
Not at all. If ancient dark agers and naysayer would have read Job and Isaiah they would have known the earth was round. Of course they didn't have their own bibles yet so they were forced to believe whatever the church told them.
While I am a Christian and believe in God, and have read the Bible, I also believe in evolution, and have many issues with the Book of Genesis. I have attended church with a pastor who admits that he also has issues with the Book of Genesis and creatonism. I also know other Christians who feel the same but fear admitting it because they will be shunned by the church. We have a brain to think with, to question, to answer, and on and on. For those of you who believe only in the story of Adam and Eve, who is to say that they did not look like Neanderthals? From discoveries of bodies from thousands of years ago, we know that man did not look the way we do now.
Be carefull! That is a slippery slope you are on.........
Yes it is a slippery slope.
Critical thinking leads to reason.
There's nothing wrong with synthesizing a belief in God with scientific understanding. 32% of Americans believe that God used evolution as his method to 'create' man in 'his own image'.
The Bible: greatest troll of all time! 😉
I've never understood why creationists find it easier to believe in a God that somehow came into being on its own (or existed forever) and then created the universe (as well as humans) than a universe that somehow came into being on its own (or existed forever) and evolved humans. Why is is easier to believe in a middleman? Other than as a convenient ostrich-like mental buffer, that is.
And they'll tell you "there's no scientific proof of the latter." There's no scientific proof of the former, either, but that doesn't bother them. And we can conceive that science is closing in on an explanation for the latter. As for the former....?
Genesis is mostly a poorly revisioned version of the Epic of Gilgimesh, which predates your OT by at least 2k years......You shoud be thanking the Sumerians rather than some conjured up diety.
@MF
Let me guess you are a Doctor of Divinity(Theology) and your practice in the field of biology is planting Begonias in the back yard.
The evolution of religion:
• There was probably no Abraham i.e. the foundations of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are non-existent.
• There was probably no Moses i.e the pillars of Judaism, Christianity and Islam have no strength of purpose.
prob•a•bly
Adverb: Almost certainly; as far as one knows or can tell.
• There was no Gabriel i.e. Islam fails as a religion. Christianity partially fails.
• There was no Easter i.e. Christianity completely fails as a religion.
• There was no Moroni i.e. Mormonism is nothing more than a business cult.
• Sacred/revered cows, monkey gods, castes, reincarnations and therefore Hinduism fails as a religion.
• Fat Buddhas here, skinny Buddhas there, reincarnated Buddhas everywhere makes for a no on Buddhism.
Added details available upon written request.
A quick search will put the kibosh on any other groups calling themselves a religion.
e.g. Taoism
"The origins of Taoism are unclear. Traditionally, Lao-tzu who lived in the sixth century is regarded as its founder. Its early philosophic foundations and its later beliefs and rituals are two completely different ways of life. Today (1982) Taoism claims 31,286,000 followers.
Legend says that Lao-tzu was immaculately conceived by a shooting star; carried in his mother's womb for eighty-two years; and born a full grown wise old man. "
you say thats all fake but the evidence that the bibble continues to happen everyday is proof the bibble is not made up the bibble is the most accurate book and everything thats happening today is all in the bibble word for word sorry but your decieved there was a moses just like the bibble states were in the end times now and thousands of events today that are realy happing and getting worse i believe the truth the bibble is happening all around no other book has been this much right so ive got a very good reason for believing the true word of god jesus is who he says he is and many are decieved by not believing
What is this "bibble" and how do I get my hands on one.
There are two theories that are totally accepted by the scientific community that really irk me. The first is the theory of evolution and the second is the va.ginal birth of human beings. I’m pleased that so many creationists are pointing out the flaws in the former, so allow me to address the latter.
It is OBVOIUS to me that storks bring babies! I have never seen a woman giving birth, but I have seen a lot of storks, especially on margarine containers. If you ever go to the beach, you will lots of storks carrying babies. They look just like pelicans because they carry the babies in their mouths. If women gave birth to babies, there would be no need for a navel, but that is how the stork picks the babies up from HEAVEN.
There is no REAL evidence that women give birth to babies. It is just a THEORY. If they did, why is it that men never give birth to babies? Why just women? Where do boys come from? It makes no sense. There is also the problem of the missing link, because there are only ever midwives and never “mid-husbands.”
If women gave birth to babies, why are there still women and babies? And why is it you never see a half-woman, half-baby!! Explain that evolutionists and va.ginal birth believers! Bet you CAN’T.
If you look at a stork, it is INTELLIGENTLY designed to carry babies. Why would that be if it didn’t deliver babies? And what about twins and triplets? What, do some women have 2, or even 3 uteruses? That is stupid. A stork can EASILLY carry two or three babies, but a woman couldn’t.
Why is it that for every 50 boys born, there are 50 girls. What, can a va.gina count? Ha, how stupid. But a stork could. And, what about all the GAPS in the birth record. One time I took a peek at my mother’s va.gina, and it was so small and babies are SO BIG.
You evolutionists are so dumb. Your think babies JUST HAPPENED in their mother’s womb. What, do you think they just appeared out of yucky, slimy blood and stuff ? Fred Hoyle once calculated that the chance of a baby spontaneously appearing in a woman’s uterus was the same as a storm blowing through a junkyard and creating a Boing-747. That’s harder to believe than that the stork brought them!
You might like to think you came from a mere zygote, but I KNOW I came from a glorious stork.
My father insists that I was born because he banged my mother. I derisively call this the Big Bang theory, because he cannot tell me what happened BEFORE the Big bang. And what caused the Big Bang? It must have been a stork.
You might ask, ok “what caused the stork?” Well the stork was always there.
Thank you for this... 🙂
Stork brings the baby is not a theory. IT IS A FACT!
Want to see for yourself:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IDnBu0lLb5M
smirnana- that was hilarious.
@simran,
I believe I believe.
I've got my chequebook ready. Where can I send money?
@Colin " but I have seen a lot of storks, especially on margarine containers."
Actually, that would be Vlassic Pickles, and that mis-identification completely discredits the rest of your presentation...
The Bible contains scientific facts that NO scientist could've known on their own at that time. The earth is a sphere (Isaiah 40:22), ocean currents (Psalm 8:8), embryonic development (Job 10:10), the hydrological cycle (Job 36:27-28), the jet stream (Ecclesiastes 1:6), plant processes (1 Corinthians 15:36-38), soil conservation (Leviticus 25:3-5), astronomy (Amos 5:8), etc. Open your mind, people, and don't be haters. God loves you and you hate him back. Sad.
And then there is this as Judaism continues to evolve:
By MICHAEL MASSING (NYT) 1775 words
origin: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F20E1EFE35540C7A8CDDAA0894DA404482 NY Times review and important enough to reiterate.
New Torah For Modern Minds
“Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, probably never existed. Nor did Moses. The entire Exodus story as recounted in the Bible probably never occurred. The same is true of the tumbling of the walls of Jericho. And David, far from being the fearless king who built Jerusalem into a mighty capital, was more likely a provincial leader whose reputation was later magnified to provide a rallying point for a fledgling nation.
Such startling propositions - the product of findings by archaeologists digging in Israel and its environs over the last 25 years - have gained wide acceptance among non-Orthodox rabbis. But there has been no attempt to disseminate these ideas or to discuss them with the laity - until now.
The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, which represents the 1.5 million Conservative Jews in the United States, has just issued a new Torah and commentary, the first for Conservatives in more than 60 years. Called "Etz Hayim" ("Tree of Life" in Hebrew), it offers an interpretation that incorporates the latest findings from archaeology, philology, anthropology and the study of ancient cultures. To the editors who worked on the book, it represents one of the boldest efforts ever to introduce into the religious mainstream a view of the Bible as a human rather than divine doc-ument.
The notion that the Bible is not literally true "is more or less settled and understood among most Conservative rabbis," observed David Wolpe, a rabbi at Sinai Temple in Los Angeles and a contributor to "Etz Hayim." But some congregants, he said, "may not like the stark airing of it." Last Passover, in a sermon to 2,200 congregants at his synagogue, Rabbi Wolpe frankly said that "virtually every modern archaeologist" agrees "that the way the Bible describes the Exodus is not the way that it happened, if it happened at all." The rabbi offered what he called a "LITANY OF DISILLUSION”' about the narrative, including contradictions, improbabilities, chronological lapses and the absence of corroborating evidence. In fact, he said, archaeologists digging in the Sinai have "found no trace of the tribes of Israel - not one shard of pottery."
prob•a•bly
Adverb: Almost certainly; as far as one knows or can tell.
Methuselah was also 900 years old!
If there was no one created but Adam and Eve, and they only had two children, both sons, where did Cain's wife come from?
@ Lucy you do realize that most of the things you cite were discovered long before the birth of Jesus let alone before the bible was written.
Eratosthenes would disagree (go ahead look it up....learn something real) Soil conservation – that the egyptians. Astronomy is way older than your bible.... Open your mind. don't hate science and historical facts.....
I have looked at these references before. They say nothing of the sort. They do not say anything that wasn't known by Bronze Age goat herders. For e.g. the "knowledge of plant processes" you cite syas the following:
"How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. 38 But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body."
At least read what you are citing before posting it.
Really, nobody could have GUESSED that the earth was ROUND when everything you see in the sky is ROUND. Most of the bible has been explained by natural processes. OH, and by the way, there is no Easter Bunny or Santa Clause either.
Here is another. The "Jetstream" in Ecclesiastics "The wind blows to the south and turns to the north;
round and round it goes, ever returning on its course".
Dear god this is garbage.
And none of that means that evolution is false.
Here is Lucy's support for the Bible knowing all about embryonic development, Job 10:10
"Did you not pour me out like milk and curdle me like cheese."
Lucy has lost all credibility and is obviously a Bible cuddling simpleton who is incapable of thinking for herself.
Lucy, those are ridiculous extrapolated claims. The first reference alone speaks of the "circle of the earth", not the earth as a sphere. Stand out in any large area free from obstructions and the ground you stand on appears as a circle out at the horizon. Keep in mind that the Catholic Chruch (the centuries long keepers of that bible you hold so dear) burned people at the stake for even suggesting that the earth was a sphere. It is people like you that provide comic relief for the rest of us.
CaptnKirk. The OT was written before Christ's birth. azDave: Isaiah specifically says sphere.
You Lucy are an idiot!
Sorry Lucy,
All those things – Greek civilization. No credit goes to Jesus sadly.
I'm sure you have a complete and concise record of human knowledge from thousands of years ago. Religon and concurring powers did't destroy any records of past knowledge, just ask the Mayans.
How come the great flood didn't kill the peoples of North and South America?
Teach your children creationism so that the wages will remain high for my children after they enter careers in science.
Unless Bill Hicks' fear was valid: god planted all of that evidence of dinosaurs and evolution just to mess with us; god is just f***ing with us.
An educated, eloquently spoken man pointed out very complex ideas in a digestible state to over a million people in two minutes and thirty two seconds is what I took from that video.
To deny evolution, one ultimately must be suggesting:
1. That every evolutionary biologist is wrong.
2. That every professor and teacher is wrong.
3. That every scientist using the findings of evolution is wrong.
4. That every researcher that ever made any discovery about evolution is wrong.
5. And that you, without any scientifically testable evidence, are right and that you don't have to prove it to anyone.
Arrogance is one thing. Ignorance is one thing. But to be arrogant in one's ignorance is an entirely new level of human tragedy.
OMG, "arrogance in one's ignorance"....... that's America in a nutshell. (not all of us, but ......y'know...)
Oh it isn't new, the arrogant ignorant human has been around since the dawn of man.
I would have killed to be able to type that last sentence.
Whatever keeps the story going.
Is there a place on this earth that like minded people that have shed the need for mysticism can join together and have reasonable discussions without the religion crutch? Life will eventually, and definatively be discovered on another planet and for me personally, this will eliminate any need to even listen, for the sake of being polite, to those that believe in a higher power. I will admit that organized religion does serve some purposes.... keeps the masses in line in general. Most of the 10 commandments are a probably good for a civilized society to adhere to. Also, if certain people need to believe in an afterlife to keep them behaving while living, then that is probably good for the rest of us as well. On the whole though, I'm not sure that it hasnt done more harm than good. What war has not been at least partly based on religion? My god can kick your god's butt. Really? Does it partly come from the caves we used to live in and fear of everything was just the way it was? Or does it come from the fact we really cant consistently rely on our fellow man in times of need and we have to find some shoulder to cry on? I do respect others right to believe what they want to believe but dont push your views on me. If you want to believe that by sending me a dollar you will have happiness, reply to this article and i will send you my address.
Christianity has nothing to do with creation. God isn't Christian, he;s God. Man made religions so they could taylor Gods word to suit them. Evolutionists are changing their theories all the time, depending on what someone digs up, Gods word hasn't changed since it began. Which foundation will still be standing 2000 years from now?
It is fine believing in Santa Claus if it makes life of many people happier. To say that Santa Claus exists is something else!! Evolution is a scientific theory (more than a hypothesis) which principles extend to many modern scientific disciplines taught in elite universities around the world. Modern science has proven correct the main principles of evolution at the molecular and genetic levels and now we have disciplines such as evolutionary molecular biology, evolutionary genetics, etc. Denying evolution is simple ignorance but some people have chosen to continue living in a tunnel, with the illusion of eternal Christmas. Don't be afraid of looking outside.
"Evolutionists are changing their theories all the time, depending on what someone digs up..." that's because they deal with facts and data. It's much more complicated than making up fairy tales. Sleeping Beauty hasn't changed in many years either, unfortunately it also is not based in reality.
Science constantly tries to prove itself wrong, continually questions everything. Faith refuses to question anything and remains stagnant in light of new information, lives in denial of all logic and reason.
My wife and I took a trip to the Galapogos. We stayed onbard the MV "Evolution" One of our guides during the trip told us how a recent tour group (no doubt Creationists from the US) told them that they cannot use the term "evolution" when describing any of the animals on the islands! I can only assume the ignorance and stupidity of that group is typical of other creationists. While denying the existence of evolution, they spent 18k a head for passage on a ship named Evolution to view a variety of closely-related bird, turtle, and other species that clearly evolved from common ancestors! I just wonder if they took their heads out of the a**es long enough to actually experience the unrivalled splendor of the islands.
If you take the Bible literally, you are stupid. That's all there is to say on this issue.
birch please,
"what if we are the 10^123 universe" is a big "what if". Is there any real scientific evidence for any more universes, much less 10^123?
Anon,
If penrose is wrong (I will have to research that), what about the one in 10^26 of the correct atmosphere/water cycle on the otherwise possible life sustaining 10^22 planets (that was not penrose math)?
I thought a day in the Bible represented 1000 years, at least in the creation part of it, not a literal 24 hours. At he end of the day I could give a fig what Bill-Baby or anyone else believes. My belief is what matters to me and it's not evolution...i'd like to know why there are still apes, if we evolved from them...some just decide not to evolve????
@brisso,
so 7000 years then? Relative to 4.5B years this is just as insignificant an amount of time as 7 days.
Eat some food. We branched off the same evolutionary path as apes, but not FROM apes. BIG difference.
6000 years (6 days * 1000 years) is still not long enough. There is sufficient evidence to conclude that the Earth is around 4+ billion years old.
Humans did not evolve from apes, technically we are apes, or in the Ape family. However, we did evolve from a common ancestor with other apes.
As for why there are still other apes, the entire population of a species does not have to evolve at the same time or in the same direction.
As an analogy, Britain colonized the Americas but there are still British.
averagejoe...so we decided to branch OFF the path, but apes didn't..they just decided to continue on being apes....makes perfect sense. Keep on guessing and denying and your scientist shall destroy the world, as they are doing.
Brisso, this is why our educational system has to do a better job of teaching about how the process of evolution works. We did not evolve from the same apes that are around today. Apes of today and us has a common ancestor millions of years ago. Apes of today are just as different from apes of a million years ago as we are from apes of a million years ago. We took different evolutionary paths. In order to criticize observed fact, you first need to know what you are arguing against. You honestly think highly educated people in this field haven't presented answers to the questions you just gave? You think the, "why are apes still here" is an intellectually well thought out argument? How about this one, "If God made us from dirt, why is dirt still here?"
Do you believe in pitbulls and carrots? All evolution; think of it as breeding, not apes becoming humans. Humans followed a path similar to apes, but went another direction. Yes, Darwin did speculate that we did evolve from apes; but that was over 100 years ago, you do are allowed to dismiss whatever you dont agree with; however, look at all plausable aspects of the evidence available. There is plenty of evidence that proves the theory of evolution. The story of our creation in Genisis was told verbally for over a century before being written down by people who did not know as much about our world as we do today. You must be able to understand metaphor in order to understand the gospel; if you do not, you will find your self believing some crazy stuff. God is allowed to use science.
you seem to all be confused that I am saying 6000 years is long enough for us to have evolved..I'm not saying that. I am simply stating that I don't think there's any claims that God made everything starting on Monday and was done by Saturday night. I don't believe in evolution at all...period. It's as big a fantasy to me as God is to an atheist. I cannot believe that all things branched off from where they started, some evolving some not and out of all of them only one evolved to have the intelligence (or lack of) of man.
Brisso, you are confused about how evolution works.
We didn't decide to do anything, evolution doesn't have an end goal. For instance, chimps and gorillas had a common ape ancestor. There wasn't some end goal of making a gorilla instead of a chimp, the different species changed over millions of years of mutation and adaptation to survive in their given environments. Humans didn't deviate, from the ape path any more than a chimp did. We are just as much apes as the chimpanzee is. In practical success, however, we have become a very successful species due to our large frontal cortex. Don't confuse our success with a chosen evolutionary path, there are far more ants on earth than humans, that doesn't mean that evolution decided that ants are the most highly evolved creature.
Brisso, your questions are good ones for someone new to the subject, you simply need to have them answered by someone who knows what they are talking about. You simply haven't had the privilege of being exposed to this information. It's out there if you are curious.
Craw, dirt is what we are returned to. For info, I wasn't educated in this country. You don't think highly educated scientist believe in creationism and can argue any of the evolutionary theories? Two way street and your peeing into the wind by making such broad statements about educated people being able to argue this and that..
You can choose to "believe" or not, but there is plenty of evidence supporting evolution:
fossils such as ambuloceteaus, tiktaalik, archeooptyrx, etc.
biogeography such as marsupials, peguins, etc.
genetics such as Endogeneous Retroviruses (ERVs), Human Chromosome-2, etc.
Wow Craw... I did not literally mean we "decided", i do realize what evolution means and how it is supposed to happen. I do realize there wasn't two apes, and one said "i'm going to change". I do remember images at school, of a hunched over ape (or whatever scientific name makes you feel good) becoming human over different stages. I do remember evolution into today's horse etc.
ME II...there is also plenty of evidence that what is written in the Bible actually happened. New discoveries every day that confirm an event or a person. Plenty scientists have become Christians through their discoveries. I haven't hear of too many Christian scientists becoming atheists due to their studies. Although I would assume they exit.
Actually, the simply diagram of an ape, hunched over man, and modern man used in past evolutionary classes is not at all an accurate representation of the big picture of evolution. To better visualize it, you need to imagine a tree with many branches. Many branches come to an end, others split and keep going. There were many human-like species that went extinct such as the neanderthals.
The hard part for most people to get their heads wrapped around is the time frames involved here. It is not easy to imagine millions of years, millions of generations, hundreds of millions of individual creatures. It is easy to want to simplify these vastly complex processes. Imagine alone thinking back past your great-grandfather. You have two parents, four grandparents, eight great grand parents, 16 great great grandparents, as it continues 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, 8192, 16384 etc. Think of the complexity in just imagining 16,384 of your relatives. I'm not even talking evolution here, I'm just talking about time frames and complex concepts. Evolution is not something one is going to have a good understanding of with just a small internet discussion.
@brisso,
"there is also plenty of evidence that what is written in the Bible actually happened."
There are events mentioned in the Bible the actually happened, that is true. That does not lend any credence to other events, especially the supernatural ones. In other words, the Bible is not valid scientific evidence unless the individual events themselves are verifiable through secondary means, i.e. testable.
Also, whether or not scientists convert to or from religion is irrelevant.
Brisso, as for your comments on the Bible and brand new discoveries everyday...who is telling you this? Surely you are making this stuff up? You can't just say something and have it be true, you need actual evidence. As someone who very seriously tried to hold onto my Christianity, I can tell you there is no evidence of Jesus outside of the Bible. Many christian archeologists have searched in vain for years to try back up the Biblical stories with actual places and have so far failed. I've read through a lot of apologetics, and the evidence is not there.
This shouldn't be new to you though, the concept of faith is to believe without evidence. You don't need evidence and don't have evidence. You're not supposed to, you're just supposed to believe...believe on faith. That is what is so foolish about the idea of faith. It is the idea that you believe something without or contradictory to what evidence tells us. This type of foolish ignorance get's us nowhere. All progress has been made through figuring out how something works or why something is and inventing ways to solve our problems.
Craw, neither is Christianity. For me the issue with science is the need to explain everything, and many times it is wrong and new theory comes about. Bottom line is that a path has a beginning, a point where everything must come from. For you I assume it's the Big Bang. But what's it's origin? As recorded history is only 6,000 years or so old (I'm guessing) everything prior to that is based on carbon dating? Because we apparently know the rate at which carbon decays or something like that. Once again everything is based a discovery by man...which should immediately throw up all sorts sorts of warning signs. If everything we know is based on man's discovery, then I question it all. And no the Bible was not discovered by man...it was given to man. To think that we as humans, no matter how intelligent can understand where we come from from our own discoveries is nothing short of arrogant.
@brisso,
Science does not claim to understand everything. In fact, it never states absolute certainty.
That does not mean that is has no use. We understand electricity fairly well at this point, but barely have a clue where electrons ultimately come from or what exactly an electric field really is. But that doesn't stop the outlet in your house from working.
I only have a problem with creationism when they try to shove it down our throats in public schools. It doesn't meet the criteria of being a science.