rincewind

Try Genesis.


EDIT:

But to help you a little more:

Gen.1:25-27
"And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and the cattle after their kind ... And God said, Let us make man ... So God created man in his own image."


Gen.2:18-19
"And the Lord God said it is not good that man should be alone; I will make a help-meet for him. And out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field, and every fowl of the air, and brought them to Adam to see what he would call them."

The bible is full of these. Best read it with a pen to make notes.

Wintersong

But without evidence evolution has nothing.

Luckily, it has the scientific evidence to back it up. Creationism (aka "intelligent design") relies entirely on faith.

gruffbrown

With or without Peter Gabriel?

Wintersong

Phil Collins would be my first choice.

Do you have an opinion on this discussion?

rincewind

Neither, it's flawed with both

Although Peter Gabriel is cool as a solo project

gruffbrown

Not really, Bauhas made nice chairs and was quite educated, could he be God?

I'll get me coat.......

camelot

Cheers, I'll study this and come back to you....

cutina

But you're basing that on the idea that evolution discounts a god, which it doesn't. Then it would be used against the church.

Let me tell you, i do NOT think that the battle of belief is through science, that is purely religion. Battle of science, however, is only through science.

Please refer me to your information source, although simply by stating 'darwin and his cronies', i'm pretty sure it is an imbalanced view.

I was never taught evolution as a fact, but as a theory. The best theories are what modern society is based on; those with the most evidence in their favour. Like the evidence that HIV causes AIDs... maybe this guy is right, maybe it doesn't... but if i got HIV you can be damn sure i'd take that medicine to stop the progression to AIDs, even if it is a theory, it is the best so far...

camelot

Not so, like I've said in a prior post, people wanted to believe in evolution for political purposes at the time it was created. It was necessary to believe in evolution to effect change.

cutina

Oh, and the only reason Darwin's ideas could have any impact on any field is because they were brilliant... if they were crap, they would've stayed in victorian times. Whatever started the debate, science adds more and more evidence all the time.

cutina

you think religion isn't used for political purposes?

cutina

anyway, i've got to go work, cya

Wintersong

You could use precisely the same argument for Copernicus. That doesn't change the fact that the scientific evidence supports the theory.

I'm really not getting your point. There is scientific evidence supporting evolutionary theory. There is none whatsoever supporting intelligent design. The motivations of Darwin and his "cronies" are inconsequential.

Political purposes work both ways. I would suggest that many of the people who are pushing to have intelligent design taught in the science classrooms across the USA are far more politically motivated than any of the scientists who are conducting experiments providing evidence for evolution.

rincewind

It probably stems from Darwin's inspiration to study Evolution.

This comes from a Web site containing a Darwin biography:

It was likely Darwin's reading of Adam Smith which led Darwin to his decisive breakthrough.3 ("Adam Smith was the last of the moralists and the first of the economists, so Darwin was the last of the economists and the first of the biologists.") Darwin read not only about those "laws" that govern the accumulation of wealth, but also those "laws" which lead to being poor. In regards to these poor "laws," Darwin read Malthus' Essay on Population:

"In October 1838, that is fifteen months after I had begun my systematic enquiry, I happened to read for amusement Malthus' Population, and being well prepared to appreciate the struggle for existence [a phrase used by Malthus] which everywhere goes on from long-continued observation of animals and plants, it at once struck me that under these circumstances favourable variations would tend to be preserved and unfavourable ones to be destroyed. The result of this would be a new species. Here then I had at last got hold of a theory by which to work."

Read a conspiracy into that if you will

camelot

No, far from it, I'm not basing the idea on evolution discounting God at all, and neither did evolution science's inventors. It wasn't used "against" the Church or God (well not by all, although some did), rather, it 'challenged' the Church for political and social supremacy.

And you've raised a very important point. When the evolution science, and other sciences came about in the Victorian era, they were used as primarily a religious weapon for political hegemony. You have to understand that back in Victorian times religion and politics was one and the same thing. If you didn't belong to the Church you literally had no civil liberties. (That's what I meant about mitigating political and social factors)

The emerging scientists, regarded themselves as the new priesthood and even referred to themselves as 'Bishops for the minds of modern man,' in other words, they held themselves up as the most important mediators of modern life, as opposed to the Church whose priests held all the power and wealth, everything. It was in every sense a religious/political attack. And the emerging scientists had to do this because they would otherwise have no intellectual freedom because they were hobbled by the Churches power.

My source is University study, you'll have to take a degree on the subject. But I have some excellent readings from my studies which I'll dig out for you.

The most important point I'm trying to make though, is the bigger picture and the whole context is what needs to be considered, not just the limited scope that we look narrowly at today, which is only religion vs science, evolution vs ID........Understanding the history of it is vital because it's bigger than just science or religion - it is pervaded by political, social and even economic factors, as well as its history.