Read up before embracing Darwin

"Doesn't sound like someone I'd admire." ----- That is until it's your hunting dog, let alone game is affected. Unless you prefer eating diseased and sick game and claim it's God's bounty, too. These "actiongram" Christians really do themselves and their "cause" more damage each time they congregate and sprout off on their next "Jesus Loves You/Hate the sin, but not the sinner/BURN IN HELL GAYS GOD IS GOING TO CONDEMN YOU/Let's PROCREATE without contraceptives!! -- Women does with artificial imsemination and has 16: SHE'S A WELFARE QUEEN!!" hypocrisy campaign.

"Preservation of Favored Races" ---- Well, Christians really don't have much to complain, as you keep telling folks of the "chosen people" who are more "favored" because your bible told you so. So when you get your 44,000 Jewish converts during the Coming of Christ Part II, will you now claim you're now the "favored race"? Evolution and Christianity is suited for each other, and each rabid apologist camp is too stupid to even recognize it.

SandyK try not to be to upset...Remember to breath slowly taking in deep breaths...:-) Uhmm feel better?

Perfect example of Sandy's tolerance. I don't know who is more rabid, or wrong.......

It's the right of Darwinists to believe anything they want. On this site, don't expect to go unchallenged. People will exercise their constitutional right to comment on people exercising their constitutional rights.

Charles Darwin toyed with the idea of eugenics early on but quickly rejected it when he fathomed its implications. Scott Findley, the letter writer, needs to do some more reading himself on Darwin who postulated the most comprehensive theory ever put forward by science. The theory of evolution is not a speculative hypothesis but a universally accepted theory among scientists that stands the test of time. Natural selection remains at work in the human population as in every other living species despite man's social interventions.

"Perfect example of Sandy's tolerance." ---- Tolerance is tolerance, it's not obedience. I'll bash an atheist as fast as a Christian when they're extreme. This letter is an example of an apologist on yet another "my bible told me so" crusade. What the guy is upset about is his own ignorance and buying the Dawkins' wing own propaganda. Can't say I'm sorry for him, because he went into the ring boxing with their own lies.

So Cain, in other words, if most human-minded scientists says it is so it must be so right? Not all things are right as well as not all things are wrong...But to base one's ideology simply on the words of a mortal doesn't automatically give the matter complete perfection...Somethings you take on faith like God and His Word...That I believe...I look around and see His hand in every little thing and I believe...On the other hand the scientists who drew the blue print up for the foundation of carbon dating were very human and therefore their hypothesis is subject to question....People, animals as well as every living molecule was made and evolved as the world evolved...To me that is a given...The only difference I have with scientist would be that we did not begin as one giant pool of matter and space...We had and have a Creator...He didn't need help in creating our world...So therefore we live and have evolved but it has been by design not chaos...

"The theory of evolution is not a speculative hypothesis but a universally accepted theory" ---- not fact, and you're trying to use popularity as a claim as it's "universally" accepted. It isn't universally accepted, especially how it's being marketed now. There's great debates even among scientists on humanoid evolution, especially classification of humanoid remains. They can't subtype the families as the DNA isn't there, so they type by features and questionable dating of strata (which can be contaminated by natural means -- e.g., earthquakes; river floods; and any natural event that can case soil to move and compact BELOW the original date line), and that's their fatal flaw. Until they can find a better classification system, they're really grasping at straws at this stage -- at least in humanoid evolution.

Go rent the Ben Stein documentary "Expelled"....very interesting....

The theory of evolution is universally accepted as fact by highly trained scientists. There is no "gap" in the fossil record. Intermediate forms have been identified. Humans evolved from simpler organisms as every other animal, plant, eukaryote, prokaryote, virus, and every other living thing has. There is no need for a creator to explain evolution. Believe whatever you want, but beliefs and scientific facts are not the same thing. The theory of evolution is as close to a scientific fact as the theory of gravity. You Neanderthals haven't learned anything since the 1925 Scopes Monkey Trials

Cain is correct this is a classic strawman argument because you are talking about a historical footnote Darwin and not modern evolutionary theory which would note Mayr, Kimura, Dobzhansky, Fisher, Gould, etc. Basically virtually everything Darwin believed is incorrect, except his idea of natural selection (and his definition in no way resembles the modern one). Remember science isn't static but a process and progress. Genetics hadn't been discovered so Darwin believed gemmules carried traits. No scientist would ever say "survival of fittest" a term popularized by Darwinist of the day. It has to do with fitness, population genetics, comparative genetics, and evo-devo. But still fossil hounds and comparative anatomist have their say too. Many hypotheses of evolution have been disproven like Lamarckism, but that is the process using the scientific method to establish truth. Now read Goulds last book before he died "Structure of Evolutionary Theory (he is long winded and it is a War and Peace-like volume) where he discusses the history of evolutionary thought. He does a great job of critical thinking in examining all the issues.

SandyK2005...before you throw stones at the writer, go back and read the letter. You claim this is a case of "My Bible told me so" yet the writer makes no mention of God's word. Get your facts straight before throwing stones. You sound as demented as Darwin must have been.

There are plenty of examples of examining archaic DNA in artic penquins, cave bears, neanderthals, etc. I have posted this before so ignorance of the literature is no excuse-read. It is a burgeoning field and there are many critics but it is gaining acceptance. Because human evolution is controversial and many ideas abound doesn't negate the fact humans evolved. Personally I like evodevo which is also a controversial fied. Back in the day early scientist could examine embryos of the same stage in humans, mice, snakes (they have limb buds that regress during development), lizards, frogs, birds and noted the unbelievable similarity it generated the notion of recapitulation-ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. Which of course is a false idea but one realizes that certain developmental processes are highly conserved and the same. Take a comparative anatomy course and then see the logical progression. And examine comparative genetics. Evolution is embraced in all biological fields including medicine. That next cure will likely come from a strategy that uses the logic of evolution. Read "Evolution in Health and Disease" (2007, 2nd Edition)edited by Stephen C. Stearns and Jacob C. Koella

Some of you folks probably still think the earth is flat. Just tell me, if Adam and Evce were the first, then where did their sons get their wives from? And where in the H--- is Nod and why isn't it explained in the bible?

Actually disssman most jews interpreted Genesis as two parts-part one God created man and women, then later a special creation of Adam then Eve. Lilith was also introduced later in their telling as Adam's first wife before Eve. Interesting stuff. I have always noted the difference between the Chrisitan notion of Hell (which is a misnomer-Lake of Fire)and the jewish notion of Gehenna. Jews believed you go to Gehenna for less than a year (sort of like purgatory) to be punished to gain acceptance by God again. They did not believe in an eternal fire damnation. Nor did Jews believe in the eastern notion of an eternal soul. They believed everyone dies but everyone will be resurrected on the day of judgment is my understanding-that is what made their religion unique was one god and no eternal soul like the Egyptians believed. Those judged poorly are destroyed (no eternal damnation) and those in stay. Odd how it all has "Evolved". hee,hee,hee.

If you listen to the guys who promote the religion of evolution in the movie Expelled you will see how weak they are. Anyone who can look at the creation they see everyday and believe there was no creator has to be a person of great faith.

But even Darwin and his followers have a special day to honor themselves; I believe it is April 1st.

In the quote referenced in the LTE, where exactly is race mentioned, other than the "race of humans"?

Who are you disssman?...:-) Oh my word are you trying to tell me the earth is NOT flat?...Now that is not a solid foundation for a coherent argument disssman....:-)

Soldout that is a teleological argument. This assumes that one can infer the existence of intelligent design merely by examining an object. The teleological argument assumes that because life is complex, it must have been designed. Of course that is fallacious logic. Life or objects are described as "orderly" or "ordered", which implies that an intelligent designer has ordered them. However, in reality, there are numerous of systems that are non-random or ordered simply because it is following natural physical processes, for example diamonds, snowflakes,etc. We can create diamonds scientifically so does that make us creators of the universe.

Everyone knows the earth rests on the back of a giant turtle. The turtle is just invisible.

Tech that would be Gamara the Flying turtle. He becomes visible ever once in a while to raise havoc on japan. I don't know the source of this animosity, but I suspect it has something to do with Mothra and Godzilla. The giant moth and lizard. Actually the earth was round till Godzilla smashed it flat.

"SandyK2005...before you throw stones at the writer, go back and read the letter." ----- I've been in these debates for over 10 years now. I've heard it all, I debated it all, and this letter is yet another of the same. Christians don't learn, they refuse to learn, and why the Dawkins types laugh their heads off at you guys -- because you're doing the promotion for them! You're so into your own world to understand what is going on in science politics. If you did, your target wouldn't be Darwin, it would be Gould and the circus promoters that brought you Dawkins, for it was Gould who made this a political football by promoting Darwin's theory to what it wasn't was. This is also true with Hubble's Law. All you need is a promoter, and they rewrite history to their own agendas. This is what happened here and the general public is ignorant of it. Read. Learn, Know.

Gould didn't promote Darwin's theory. He argued against Darwin's gradual change with punctuated equilibrium. Who created modern evolutionary theory-J.B.S. Haldane, Sewall Wright, and particularly Ronald Fisher, who set the foundations for the establishment of the field of population genetics. Ernst Mayr, Motoo Kimura, etc. followed. Then Gould was and Dawkins (who debated and held each other in contempt) is a modern evolutionary biologist but now Elizabeth Pennisi is the modern day promoter of evolutionary thought-she has more publications in Science and other top tier journals than anyone I know-as a promoter. Read, learn, discover. Gould tried to diffuse evolution theory as a political football, unlike Dawkins, and proposed non-overlapping majesteria to maintain that religion and science are different domains. Different people side with Dawkins or Gould over this debate but without doubt Gould's intellect and publication record far surpassed Dawkins. Both egomaniacs but Gould could back it up. Basically Dawkins has a political-social position in Great Britain in support of the Bright's movement.

Biz: The children's friend. He was my favorite of the B movie monsters.

Unless you take the "7" days literally, I don't see how evolution and creation are mutually exclusive.

They were great huh Tech. I remember as a kid vacationing at Alligator Point in Florida and watching T.V. and the moon reflect off the Gulf. I was watching Godzilla with my big brothers and when he came up from the oceans depths. I remember all looking at each other then the ocean and getting spooked. What fun. I remember going to our hometown theatre on Sat and watching the three in a row movie-eating greasy fries and pickles. Three scary movies with the werewolf, Chris Lee- Dracula, etc then we would walk home taking special care to go throught the town graveyard to maintain our scared psyche. We would take bets who would be brave enough to lay on a grave. No one ever did by the way-now I'm sure kids would have sex on a grave and laugh at what we considered scary.

Unfortunately, the pro-evolution posters (excepting Bizarro) appear to have developed their arguments from watching the fictional movie, Inherit the Wind (Hollywood's version of the Scopes Monkey Trial).

Biz: Old channel 26, before they disappeared and came back. Move the antena around to minimize (not eliminate) the snow. Also looked forward to any Abbot and Costello flick. Old Shock theater, Count Justin Sane (before he got into a little trouble). Are we old are what?

You know JesusIsComing I am an ardent evangelical Christian-well I attend an evangelical church is more accurate (I have never evangelized but I should). I still claim God as creator. I believe Pope John Paul also supported Evolution theory and claimed God as creator as does Islam, except Islamic fundamentalist (funny just like Christian fundamentalist). Too bad this subject has become such a political issue when it is a science issue. Remember LeMaitre' (a catholic priest and physicist) chastized Einstein for not recognizing the universe had a beginning and the Big Bang, and also chastized the pope of the day for embracing the Universe had a beginning as "proof" of creation by telling him this was science not theology. Plenty of educated people who see the difference in these two domains. LeMaitre' claimed God as creator. Dobzhansky a pioneer of modern evolution theory and the modern definition was also an orthodox catholic.