Richard Dawkins: Attention Governor Perry: Evolution is a fact

Status
Not open for further replies.
It varies wildly. God is the creator according to the Qur'an, but there is no consensus whether species came from theistic evolution or intelligent design.
 
Speedymanic said:
I know this isn't the right thread, but I've always wondered what the Islamic stance on evolution/creationism is?

I haven't ever seen it mentioned or discussed, so I've always assumed they believe in creationism but accept that evolution is also possible.

Am I off/wrong?

They are creationists mostly. Rejection of evolution in Islamic countries is more prevalent than even the United States.
 
Ventron said:
This is ridiculous, not only is Dawkins arrogant, but he's also wrong too.



Yes, it's called Democracy. Other people may have a different favourite candidate to you, shock horror.



Wrong, evolution is a theory. It is an inference used to explain a set of observations, which makes it a theory. It's the best theory we currently have for explaining the origin of species, but that doesn't rule out a future discovery which may contradict the foundations of this theory, and we thus must create a new theory that is consistent with all observations ever made. This happens all the time in science.



...unless you work in the majority of occupations where evolution is irrelevant.



I agree with this, if he just shut his mouth after this he wouldn't seem so arrogant.

Honestly, I am so sick of science being treated as a religion, and being used to wage war against Christianity. The people who do this are the ones responsible for the rise of anti-science sentiment in certain communities.
I'm with you on that.

Oh and no human has experienced evolution. The small changes we have seen are easily described as adaptations.
 
you know
intelligent design implies that god is intelligent
like that hes a living entity

his brain must be the size of the milky way!
 
Enco said:
Oh and no human has experienced evolution. The small changes we have seen are easily described as adaptations.

...is this anything like the micro vs macro evolution distinction? because i can get into sophistry, but it's got nothing to do with science.
 
Enco said:
I'm with you on that.

Oh and no human has experienced evolution. The small changes we have seen are easily described as adaptations.

Buddy, you are just itching for an internet argument given how absurdly wrong you are.
 
Enco said:
Oh and no human has experienced evolution. The small changes we have seen are easily described as adaptations.

Evolution means "change over time."

That's what an adaptation IS. Your second sentence contradicts your first.

Also, humans HAVE 'experienced' evolution. More specifically, we have died from it happening in other species. And continue to die from it.

Here is a good place to start if you want to learn about examples:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuberculosis
 
*Thumbs up*

1nDlC.jpg
 
In what way am I wrong. Animals have adapted.

Edit: to make things clearer, we haven't experience as drastic changes as are being theorised
 
Enco said:
I'm with you on that.

Oh and no human has experienced evolution. The small changes we have seen are easily described as adaptations.

Adaptations? Naw man, that's God making edits. Evolution is such a stupid theory, really...just full of stupid. God made everything. There, so much more elegant. You don't even need any evidence to back that shit up.

Enco said:
In what way am I wrong. Animals have adapted.

You could almost call that..."evolving". But I won't.
 
DanteFox said:
Poor Dawkins. If only he knew about the monkeys, he'd realize how wrong he's been all these years.

Poor Dawkins
I bet he has to practice talking to brick walls in preparation for any time he debates with a creationist
 
Enco said:
In what way am I wrong. Animals have adapted.

Edit: to make things clearer, we haven't experience as drastic changes as are being theorised

But we can prove them, and we allready have. That's the main point that creationists conveniently ignore. Evolution is happening and the evidence is overwhelming.

The main line is that religious people argue by citing their religious texts, but don't claim to use scientific methods. They believe in it. Any true scientist would be ill adviced to argue about that, as believes aren't quantifiable by science by definition.

Creationists act as if they follow scientific procedures and standards, when in fact they don't.

Just like bunglers are a threat to other professions, these imbeciles are degrading scientific standards and achievements by using ignorance and willfull idiocy as a new scientific dogma.
 
archnemesis said:
It varies wildly. God is the creator according to the Qur'an, but there is no consensus whether species came from theistic evolution or intelligent design.
You could just combine the two answers into a simple "God made Evolution", but noooo, humans have to of always been the exact say way now, because that is what it says in our 3000 year old books that have been translated at least twice, with questionable quality.
 
Enco said:
In what way am I wrong. Animals have adapted.

Edit: to make things clearer, we haven't experience as drastic changes as are being theorised

Do we need to live for millions of years to witness a massive change in an animal species to conclude evolution a fact, when there has been mountains of evidence showing that species have changed enormously over time? The evidence has been frozen in time in the form of fossils, in discrete layers of rock. You do not ever see T-Rex fossils in the exact same deposit with Smilodon.
 
Drkirby said:
You could just combine the two answers into a simple "God made Evolution", but noooo, humans have to of always been the exact say way now, because that is what it says in our 3000 year old books that have been translated at least twice, with questionable quality.
Just as a side note, the integrity of the translation of those books have little to do with the veracity of the information contained in them... In so far as the original texts would be as inaccurate with regards to any modern scientific theories... Which would be all of them.
 
Enco said:
I'm with you on that.

Oh and no human has experienced evolution. The small changes we have seen are easily described as adaptations.
YmnBS.jpg

A is a chimpanzee. [modern, not an ancestor]
N is human. [modern]

which are adaptions and why.

edit: damnit McBacon! you win this round.
 
PetriP-TNT said:
According to a 2009 Gallup study , only 38 percent of Americans say they believe in evolution
Wow really?

To misquote Pratchett:

"Most scientists don't believe in evolution. They know that evolution exists, of course. They even investigate it occasionally. But they don't believe in it. They know it too well. It would be like believing in the postman."

At least, that's how I rationalise that sort of poll. It's more reassuring than the alternative.
 
MehsterChief said:
As much as I agree with Dawkins' general point of view, he comes off as an angry Internet nerd fighting for his opinion all the time.
If people choose to believe in God, let them be, as long as they don't hurt anyone.

He is the atheist version of some right-winged reborn christian from the Bible belt.
He's a legitimate and respected evolutionary biologist. On top of that, he's an author who's written several books trying to explain evolution to the general public.

This is a part of his job as a scientist and educator.
 
mclem said:
To misquote Pratchett:

"Most scientists don't believe in evolution. They know that evolution exists, of course. They even investigate it occasionally. But they don't believe in it. They know it too well. It would be like believing in the postman."

At least, that's how I rationalise that sort of poll. It's more reassuring than the alternative.

Having as many correct beliefs and as few false beliefs as possible is important. Accepting a false belief because it is more reassuring is a bad course of action.
 
mclem said:
At least, that's how I rationalise that sort of poll. It's more reassuring than the alternative.
My extended family is around 100 people if everyone shows up for a holiday. 10% accept evolution. Yeah, we're fucking doomed.

It is really strange to think about some of these people as adults. They can dress themselves and everything. The problem is the shit that comes out of their mouth. I might say some crazy shit but it is usually when I'm on two hits of acid.
 
Enco said:
In what way am I wrong. Animals have adapted.

Edit: to make things clearer, we haven't experience as drastic changes as are being theorised
Evolution isn't a "drastic change". It's gradual adaptation over time.
 
MehsterChief said:
As much as I agree with Dawkins' general point of view, he comes off as an angry Internet nerd fighting for his opinion all the time.
If people choose to believe in God, let them be, as long as they don't hurt anyone.

He is the atheist version of some right-winged reborn christian from the Bible belt.

He's a legitimate and respected evolutionary biologist. On top of that, he's an author who's written several books trying to explain evolution to the general public.

This is a part of his job as a scientist and educator.

Your forgot to mention how theists are actively hurting others because of their beliefs.
 
Enco said:
In what way am I wrong. Animals have adapted.

Edit: to make things clearer, we haven't experience as drastic changes as are being theorised
What drastic changes are being theorized?
 
I admire Dawkins because he's pro-active in a war on stupidity, which is by all accounts a virus. When stupid people open their mouths, sometimes some of it gets into other people's brains and they too speak the same stupid words and so on.

When people complain about him "mouthing off again", they don't realise the cause he has dedicated his public persona to: not letting stupidity spread through in-action.

When people like Perry pipe up utter nonsense, if even one person gets swayed over to the type of thinking that would keep us all intellectually in the dark ages, thats one person too many. Dawkins is loud and obnoxious to butt back against his opponents. To thrust the facts in peoples faces and at least inject a small niggling doubt or thread in peoples minds to tug at later if they so choose.

The alternative is stupid people getting stupider, and no good can come of that.
 
Zaptruder said:
Just as a side note, the integrity of the translation of those books have little to do with the veracity of the information contained in them... In so far as the original texts would be as inaccurate with regards to any modern scientific theories... Which would be all of them.
My problem is that people will evaluate the exact text of the bible for accuracy in the same manner we today will go right down to punctuation on the exact meaning of laws, such as with the US Constitution, despite the fact that the earliest parts of the Abrahamic Holy Texts are at least 2500 year old, and were written in Hebrew, before being translated to Latin, and then being translated to English, and that is not accounting for the fact there may be intermediate translations.

Though to be fair, the current popular Bible translation in use, the "New International Version", is a fairly modern translation done 30 years ago, using Hebrew Texts.
 
reggie said:
Please, please, please be a joke.

it's no joke, man. sure he's a leading zoologist, but he travels a great deal to hock his books & such, so it's possible he doesn't know we still have them about. i for one would like to see him explain this.
 
I met only a creationist in my life. I live in Italy, we have the Vatican here and it's one of the most bigoted western state (let's not even talk about the other problems), how do you go and fuck that up at thousands of km of distance?
 
Drkirby said:
My problem is that people will evaluate the exact text of the bible for accuracy in the same manner we today will go right down to punctuation on the exact meaning of laws, such as with the US Constitution, despite the fact that the earliest parts of the Abrahamic Holy Texts are at least 2500 year old, and were written in Hebrew, before being translated to Latin, and then being translated to English, and that is not accounting for the fact there may be intermediate translations. T

Don't forget the fact that the latin translations were copied and copied introducing errors upon errors, including censorship to solidify christian sovereign rule etc etc...

Seriously, anyone thinking of holy books as anything but political manifestos should actually start reading them.
 
Mortrialus said:
aronra said:
It is a fact that the collective genome of all animals has been traced to its basil form through reverse sequencing,

I assume that's a typo, but I love the idea that the basic form of any animal is a herb. A tasty one, too!
 
IrishNinja said:
it's no joke, man. sure he's a leading zoologist, but he travels a great deal to hock his books & such, so it's possible he doesn't know we still have them about. i for one would like to see him explain this.
We still got monkeys?

Why we still got monkeys?
 
mclem said:
I assume that's a typo, but I love the idea that the basic form of any animal is a herb. A tasty one, too!

Ha. Thanks for catching that. I wanted a stock response for the response "Evolution is just a theory" and Aronra's monologue here seemed like a fantastic choice and I just transcribed it one night and didn't proofread it closely. Fixing it now.
 
SamVimes said:
I met only a creationist in my life. I live in Italy, we have the Vatican here and it's one of the most bigoted western state (let's not even talk about the other problems), how do you go and fuck that up at thousands of km of distance?
I have no clue, some relatives by law on my mothers side have directly confronted me on Evolution, and have actually pulled the "It is just a Theory" card.

I don't talk to those people often anymore.

I don't even feel like bringing it up with my father's side of the family, though I find it a bit funny that I think my uncle's segment is more religious then my 92 year old Grandfather, though my Grandfather was a Chemical Engineer. Guy put all three of his kids though Catholic School. My Uncle is actually trying once again to get his first marriage that he had about 30 years ago Annulled, so he can marry his current Wife of 25 years in the Church, I do hope that goes though, since it is a petty issue in my eyes that will make the man happy.
 
Dawkins said:
In any other party and in any other country, an individual may occasionally rise to the top in spite of being an uneducated ignoramus. In today’s Republican Party ‘in spite of’ is not the phrase we need. Ignorance and lack of education are positive qualifications, bordering on obligatory.
This is so completely right.
 
I love that the Ventron guy who posted the EVOLUTION IS JUST A THEORY nonsense on the first page has wisely never posted again.
 
how about you prove god isn't a fact there richard dawkins, then i'll show you an earth that was made in 7 days.
 
SamVimes said:
I met only a creationist in my life. I live in Italy, we have the Vatican here and it's one of the most bigoted western state (let's not even talk about the other problems), how do you go and fuck that up at thousands of km of distance?

The thing that disgusted me most is that that emperor palpatine had only to snip with his fingers and collectively italian women decided to not vote for a new abortion law, throwing human rights and feminist advancements in italy back. It was back then, seeing my former classmates deciding against their own freedom of choice that I realized religion for what it is.
A useless remnant of ignorance, designed for people to ignore their own responsability for their own lifes.

davepoobond said:
how about you prove god isn't a fact there richard dawkins, then i'll show you an earth that was made in 7 days.

... Joke post?

SmokyDave said:
We still got monkeys?

Why we still got monkeys?

Well to dress them up in funny costumes and to use them in brothels in central Asia of course.
 
Log4Girlz said:
And why do bananas fit perfectly into their hands?

And why do they open them on the other side compared to humans? CLEARLY proof there is no thing as evolution!

Mortrialus said:
Ha. Thanks for catching that. Fixing it now.

Don't fix it. It is the best typo ever. Plus I love Basil

basil-bsp.jpg
 
Tence said:
And why do they open them on the other side compared to humans? CLEARLY proof there is no thing as evolution!



Don't fix it. It is the best typo ever. Plus I love Basil

basil-bsp.jpg

I honestly was so confused about evolution as a child. I think the translation of Darwin's book over the decades has changed much of the text's meaning. Thank goodness I read up this new theory called creationism, it explains everything so eloquently...it doesn't even need evidence to substantiate any of its claims.
 
Vetron said:
Wrong, evolution is a theory. It is an inference used to explain a set of observations, which makes it a theory. It's the best theory we currently have for explaining the origin of species, but that doesn't rule out a future discovery which may contradict the foundations of this theory, and we thus must create a new theory that is consistent with all observations ever made. This happens all the time in science.

"Evolution is not just a theory, it's TRIUMPHANTLY a theory." Read about what the word "theory" means among people who are actually educated here. Protip: It does not mean what you think it means.


Vetron said:
I agree with this, if he just shut his mouth after this he wouldn't seem so arrogant.

Honestly, I am so sick of science being treated as a religion, and being used to wage war against Christianity. The people who do this are the ones responsible for the rise of anti-science sentiment in certain communities.

Maybe if people didn't try to bandy about their horrific ignorance to try to deface someone who actually knows what they're talking about in the world of, ya know, facts then he wouldn't come across as so "arrogant."

People like you think he's arrogant because he's directly shitting on a standard of belief you have. Unfortunately for you, his is supported by facts and yours is supported by fairy tales and factually incorrect holy books.

Just because YOU are so incurious that you refuse to dig deep down and be honest with yourself as to the reality of your foundation for belief, doesn't mean others have to sit around and allow ass talkers like Rick Perry free reign to shit on reality. No, the Earth ISN'T 6000 years old. Yes, homosexuality IS genetic - you are born with it. Yes, evolution is a gloriously beautiful and simple explanation for why we came to be - and it's also a fact.

If you don't like these things, too fucking bad. You don't have a goddamn say in the matter, no matter how much you protest. Suck it up.
 
Amir0x said:
"Evolution is not just a theory, it's TRIUMPHANTLY a theory." Read about what the word "theory" means among people who are actually educated here. Protip: It does not mean what you think it means.




Maybe if people didn't try to bandy about their horrific ignorance to try to deface someone who actually knows what they're talking about in the world of, ya know, facts then he wouldn't come across as so "arrogant."

People like you think he's arrogant because he's directly shitting on a standard of belief you have. Unfortunately for you, his is supported by facts and yours is supported by fairy tales and factually incorrect holy books.

Just because YOU are so incurious that you refuse to dig deep down and be honest with yourself as to the reality of your foundation for belief, doesn't mean others have to sit around and allow ass talkers like Rick Perry free reign to shit on reality. No, the Earth ISN'T 6000 years old. Yes, homosexuality IS genetic - you are born with it. Yes, evolution is a gloriously beautiful and simple explanation for why we came to be - and it's also a fact.

If you don't like these things, too fucking bad. You don't have a goddamn say in the matter, no matter how much you protest. Suck it up.

God damn it you're awesome when we agree on things. One point I need to correct, we aren't exactly certain if the cause of homosexuality is genetic or not, but regardless of whether it is genetic, hormonal, psychological or preference(Which is still out of one's control), they still should have access to marriage just as heterosexuals do.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom