rincewind

I can see your angle but Darwin's theory is not about political power.

Darwin's theory has been misconstrued over the years and most notably in the USA by William Graham Sumner in the late 1800's.

Darwin's intent was never to change the balance of power, but unfortunately, others (like Sumner) took his theories and distorted it's meaning applying it to social economics. Sort of like what the ID's crowd are doing now

My history is a little rusty in this area, but I know Darwin is not the one to blame.

camelot

No Darwin's theory isn't about political power at all, Darwin didn't even invent evolution, there was an earlier book before Origin of Species, and he had a secret partner who made the discoveries with him, but didn't want to be known.

I'd have to question Darwin's intent, though, he was definitely part of the intelligentsia of "freethinkers" who, as a group, en mass as it were, were definitely undermining the Church for their own ends. He benefitted from that (and his own slippery position within the Establishment).

You're right about him not being the one to blame though, he was too gutless and spineless. He was always trying to distance himself from his own discoveries and those who were trying to advance his theories, so that he personally wouldn't fall foul of the Church and lose his privileged position, (which he enjoyed as a result of the established Church, I might add.) He was playing both fields because he was scared, a real yellow-belly. He never stood up for the power of his own convictions. Hardly someone to look up to. It's so ironic, but he would be absolutely horrified to know that the only thing he's remembered for is evolution.

He was even afraid to admit he was an atheist, instead he was an "agnostic", which to the Victorians was simply an 'atheist in a Top Hat.'

Wintersong

But what point are you making here, exactly?

How the hell do politics and motivations have any bearing AT ALL on the discussion at hand?

Seriously, I don't know how on earth this matters. It doesn't make all of the evidence for evolution go away. It certainly doesn't make any evidence for intelligent design materialise out of thin air.

Patrick

When the Bible was written over a two thousand years ago people thought the sun revolved around the earth. That gives you confidence in that theory doesnt it!

camelot

Oh my lord, I can't even begin to explain what it means if you don't already understand what I'm saying. Ask Rincewind, he's intelligent, he understands. Sorry, I'm not trying to be condescending, and perhaps a forum isn't the most intelligent place to try and have an intelligent conversation but if you don't get it, I don't know what else I can say. I'll try and think of a way though.

Wintersong

Apologising for it doesn't make your post any less condescending.

You haven't addressed the points I made in a previous post - http://britishexpats.com/forum/showp...3&postcount=88
or indeed in this one -
http://britishexpats.com/forum/showp...1&postcount=72

Maybe you have failed to grasp the question that I was asking.

scrubbedexpat099

I had never heard about Intelligent Design before I came to the US.

My initial assumption was that it ws a way to bypass no religion in school by trying to put a belief system into a scientific context.

I have no more interest in trying to argue against ID than I do against the Earth being flat. Or the Sun circling the Earth.

I just find it worrying that you have a President believing nutball science, very worrying,

camelot

Fair comment, but to be fair to me, I was having a specific conversation over a few posts with someone in particular - Rincewind. Your now asking me to use those specifics to what you're asking and I'm going to try, I just need to think about it, because I'm not einstein. I think you're expecting too much from me, but I really wasn't trying to be condescending, it's just that it was hard work to write those posts to Rincewind because this topic is so touchy and easily misunderstood between each person.

camelot

Right, I was responding to Rincewind's question about 'what is a belief in evolution if its not based on science,' something like that, you'll have to go back...and trace everything we've been discussing. Anyway, I was illustrating (with historical evidence) that the whole science of evolution came about as a prevaling ideology, for political purposes, in the same way that religion is often used for political reasons.

What I was saying was this, people don't necessarily base their belief in evolution on hard, indisputable scientific evidence (just as the inventor's of the theory didn't) - there's other influencing factors for why people might believe in evolution like social, political, historical, economic reasons, religious - even in defiance of God, get it?

And that is particularly relevant when it comes to evolution because it isn't entirely proven with scientific evidence. So, people aren't necessarily basing their reasons for believing in it soundly on scientific evidence, even though the vast majority of people will argue until they are blue in the face that they are. But that's for each individual to answer for themselves,

Why do you really believe in it? What is the scientific evidence? Where did the theory come from and why?, and for what purposes? Where's the proof? or are you just believing because someone is telling you to? Have you done the hard yards to properly examine why you believe in evolution?

Only each person can answer honestly for themselves when they've properly considered it - and that means a wider analysis than just 'science vs religion'....'evolution vs i.d,'.....because if you only base it on that, it's too narrow.......that vibe.......get it?

rincewind

That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

rincewind

I know it's not directed at me but I can answer that.

As theories go, Evolution is more sound and is backed up by some pretty compelling evidence. Fossil records show an over whelming track record of evolution and I will gladly provide examples if no-one can be bothered to research it themselves. Experiments have been conducted and Evolution is evident to all if you just open your eyes to it.

The fact that the theory continues to this day and has not been disproved leads me to believe it is credible.

My understanding of why it came about was due to Herbert Spencer's work (after all, it was he who actually coined the phrase 'survival of the fittest'). Darwin took it a step further and put his money where his mouth was and travelled to do his research. No so "yellow-belly" me thinks. But then I wouldn't know. I didn't know him. I wasn't around during his time so I can not say for certain that he was or was not a coward.

With my own reasoning (a human trait), Evolution holds a lot more credibility than an invisible man living up stairs whom supposedly created the Earth in six days.

I believe the bible to be a false document written by man to control man and religion is nothing more than myths created by man in days when no other explanations were present, acceptable or even conceivable.

I have done my research. I am now at the point where I do not debate as hard as I used to. If other's can not open up to the truth of it all....so be it. Just don't attempt to force your rule in our schools. Not everyone lives in the past. Dumbing down kids is nothing more than an attempt to assert a religious dominance over the World and it has to stop else we will never go forward as a species.

The universe is full of wonders and mysterious. But because we do not yet understand them all, doesn't mean its supernatural. Look at the vastness of space. Look at how it all works. Planet formations, gravity, black holes, etc. There is an exciting World out there to discover. This is no time to dumb it down or restrict our knowledge to nothing more than supernatural accounts.

The theory of Evolution itself evolves as new fossils and data is recorded. That's what science does. It looks at all the evidence and you create a theory. When new evidence comes to light, the theory adapts. Modifies to reflect the new findings. More and more evidence is discovered in favor of Evolution. It's the Christian right that play it down to brush it under the carpet. Why? Because their very belief system is wrong. No-one wants to be told what they've believed all their life is a lie. Their very being would break down. Disassociation from religion takes time, and if done correctly, takes years of reasoning.

Those that support Evolution are not anti-religion, anti-system. We're just open to something that's a lot more credible than "god works in mysterious ways."

Damn, is that the time. I need some sleep

camelot

Very well expressed. You appear to have gone to lengths on why you believe and have conveyed your reasons well...I'm not disputing that science isn't a credible tool for discovery, far from it, but by its very nature it is limited.....Let me ask you this......What about the Spiritual side? Have you considered that? What about conscience? and where does it come from?

What about the meaning of life? Why are we here? What is the ultimate purpose of our existence? - Science holds no answers for those questions,

......and yet those are the only questions that truly matter........

scrubbedexpat099

Exactly.

Religous, for want of a better word, issues, taught certainly in the UK in RE.

The problem is when you try and wrap personal beliefs as pseudoscience.

Nobody here has any issues with what others want to believe, the objection is when they cross the line and make their beliefs the one and only true way.

Very American maybe

Very un English definitely.

camelot

But that's not what they're trying to do, they're trying to say that evolution isn't the only theory on how we got here.....maybe there is an intelligent designer....but if they're only teaching evolution and ignoring creation or intelligent design - how is that broadening kids minds? It's just indoctrinating evolution.......the very thing everyone is trying to accuse religion of doing.....

camelot

Rincewind, I think this may be a matter of translation. My bible doesn't have 2 accounts......

Gen 1:25-27
God made every type of wild animal, every type of domestic animal, and every type of creature that crawls on the ground. God saw that they were good. Then he said, lets make humans in our image.......etc

Gen 2:18-19
God said, "it is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper who is right for him." The Lord God had formed all the wild animals and all the birds out of the ground. Then he brought to the man to see what he would name them.....

Your translation is clearly saying that God "formed" and you're reading it in the present tense of the text, I don't know if that's right or wrong. But mine refers to past tense, he already "had formed" the animals and that harmonises with Gen 1:25-27.

No contradiction of creation, but I know that Bibles can vary from translation to translation....But as far as the Genesis account in my Bible, there is not 2 accounts, as you can see above. (my translation is by Nations Bible Society)