Funny Evolution vs Creationism cartoons

[Sisyphus]

Yes it was. Watch this thread long enough, you will begin to see it coming from Sysiphus, Chomerics, and Alexey and the rest. Eventually it will devolve (pun intended) into "creationists are stupid sheep who are anti-science" statements.

I'm going to take Techboys advice and not post in here anymore, because it seems people expect evangelicals to have knowledge of evolutionary science equal to a PHD to be considered intellectual. But hey, since we evolved from apes, I shouldn't be expecting to not be treated like one.

You're the one making insults in this thread.

A knowledge of evolutionary science equivalent to a PhD is not required for a polite discussion. But if you want to learn something you'll need to bring a better frame of mind than repeating inane slogans ... "goo to you via the zoo". Sorry if that came across as an insult, but I don't know how else to characterize it.

Of course I can't speak for every creationist on whether they are anti-science. But the movement to get creationism and intelligent design in schools is demonstrably anti-science. Its strategy includes attacking the scientific method, miss-characterizing the current body of knowledge on evolution and undermining it so that a religious point of view can be imposed in a science class.

Evolution is not anti-religion. Evolution provides a compelling explanation for the origin of species and the diversity of life on Earth. That's it. Evolution does provide any commentary on which religions are true and which religions are false. A theist can look at evolution and note that it is inconsitent with his faith, but reconciling that discrepancy is outside the scope of the science of evolution.

[techboy]

It's very curious to me why some Christians, mainly among evangellical Protestants in the US, feel that attacking evolution is an important battleground for their faith in the 21st centruy.

I actually agree. I think some Christians are fighting the wrong battles.

It is logical to believe in Christianity. If one is already a Christian, it is logical to then believe in Creationism. That's the order that should be followed.

Trying to fight evolution directly seems a little silly, given that even if I could convince chomerics (for example) that evolution isn't a correct theory, it wouldn't make him a Christian. It'd just make him a confused atheist (at best).

I can sort of understand helping Christians who feel challenged by evolution to see that there are alternatives, but I don't really get the rest. It's fighting a battle on the wrong front.

I think the other reason is an attempt to refute people who seem to think that evolution is a weapon against faith (like Dawkins), but really, it's not the best refutation of these people by a long shot.

And yet a literal reading of the Bible suggests a geocentric Universe.

Some of it. Suggests is a good word. There are passages that imply a geocentric universe (or a flat Earth, and there're still a few Flat Earthers out there too), but nothing that outright states it. There are also passages that imply a round Earth and the like. The Bible really isn't very specific, and people have gotten into a lot of trouble trying to read more into it than is actually there.

The Church dispute with Galileo, though, wasn't really about the Bible. It was about the Aristotlean and Platonic influence on Christianity. The Catholic Church at the time was heavily influenced by these philosophers, to the point where it incorporated many elements into it's theology, and objected when those traditions were challenged.

[headexplode]

Man, I like Zguy and you guys had to scare him off. I hope not for good.

Can't you just admit that the Bible is true and God created everything?

[Sisyphus]

Man, I like Zguy and you guys had to scare him off. I hope not for good.

Didn't he scare himself off .. fearing what he thought we might say?

Surely it's unbecoming of a Christian soldier to "cut and run" like that?

[thelongestbreath]

I believe what you are describing is formally called directed evolutoin. From a completely scientific stand point, there is nothing wrong w/ this line of thinking. It is also impossible for science to prove or disprove it. If somebody tells you this is against evolution, then they are wrong and being guided by something other than science, but I think most people really in science (i.e. myself) are fine if that's what you want to believe and is in fact similar to my own beliefs, but in terms of teaching, practicing, and talking science, the fact that evolution might be directed has no real relevance (i.e. it does not change the predictions that can be made or add any testable experiments). From a philosophical stand point, it is an interesting possiblity, which is why all of this, if it is to be taught belongs in a philosophy class.

I don't think it's impossible at all. I think that's quite reasonable and I fully accept that as a strong possibilty. What I can't understand is denying all the evidence of evolution because the year's in the bible don't add up or because "I didn't come from a dirty, stinkin ape". To me, they're separate issues. All the evidence we have suggests evolution takes place. What we do not have is good evidence of what put it in place or got the ball rolling. God is as good an explanation as any for that and I don't see why the two ideas, an omnicient creator and his use of evolution, can't go hand in hand.

I always tried avoiding these threads because it's a never ending arguement with no real winners, and it turns out most people accept my justification on the topic...go figure *shrugs shoulders* who woulda thunk' it? I normally catch a lot of grief from the church(which happens to have my father/brother as the ministers) members because I believe God used evolution as opposed to things just appearing as they are now. Which doesn't make sense because if you disect the fact a day in God's eyes aren't like ours plus in Genesis you could decipher a form of adaptions taking place in verse 20 ch 1 where it talks about fish swiming through the waters and birds flying in the air and walking on ground as they were made. Seems simple enough to me I wont get why I catch so much crap for it.

[Sisyphus]

I always tried avoiding these threads because it's a never ending arguement with no real winners, and it turns out most people accept my justification on the topic...go figure *shrugs shoulders* who woulda thunk' it? I normally catch a lot of grief from the church(which happens to have my father/brother as the ministers) members because I believe God used evolution as opposed to things just appearing as they are now. Which doesn't make sense because if you disect the fact a day in God's eyes aren't like ours plus in Genesis you could decipher a form of adaptions taking place in verse 20 ch 1 where it talks about fish swiming through the waters and birds flying in the air and walking on ground as they were made. Seems simple enough to me I wont get why I catch so much crap for it.

I think the abundance of evidence makes it very clear that evolution is true: from the geographic distribution of species today, the fossil record and DNA.

It's also clear that evolution has absolutely nothing to say whether a supernatural being 'designed' the process where evolution works, whether the being started the process off with the first living organisms, or indeed if occasionally the supernatural being tweaks some of the parameters to keep the whole stew bubbling along nicely.

You can hold any or all of those beliefs and still recognize evolution as a compelling explanation for the natural world we see today and the fossil record we have uncovered.

[headexplode]

Didn't he scare himself off .. fearing what he thought we might say?

Surely it's unbecoming of a Christian soldier to "cut and run" like that?

He didn't cut and run. He's going to get God to come back and smite your ass.

[Sisyphus]

He didn't cut and run. He's going to get God to come back and smite your ass.

Ah ... a strategic withdrawl, in military parlance.

[mjah]

oh-oh, here comes the Theory of Devolution

[alexey]

As a programmer I like the idea behind Creationism because it would mean God believes in re-usable components

[zoony]

It is logical to believe in Christianity. If one is already a Christian, it is logical to then believe in Creationism. That's the order that should be followed.

.

I'm a Christian. As such, I believe in Creationism. However, I also believe in Evolution. I've never understood the debate. Unless you're a Bible literalist. In which case I think you're incapable of reason to begin with.

(I view the OT as almost entirely allegorical)



And another point... where are the fundamentalist Jews in this whole debate? We never hear from them... even though they believe the universe is only 5000 years old. Maybe more Christians should follow their lead to your point.

.....

[rincewind]

I actually agree. I think some Christians are fighting the wrong battles.

It is logical to believe in Christianity.

Why is it logical to believe in Christianity?

[zoony]

Why is it logical to believe in Christianity?

I can show you, but you'll need a duck, a witch, and a scale... and about 3-4 hours of free time.

...

[rincewind]

I can show you, but you'll need a duck, a witch, and a scale... and about 3-4 hours of free time.

...

Well she turned my into a newt!

[Sisyphus]

I can show you, but you'll need a duck, a witch, and a scale... and about 3-4 hours of free time.

...

"Who are you who are so wise in the ways of science?"


My favorite line from the movie.