OT: Ben Stein is EXPELLED

One thing is clear. Evolution is only a threat to religionists. However, evolution does not dispell religion. Also, if religion is real and God has made it for people to question his plan of salvation so that they can grow, then stuff like evolution is the perfect way to do so.

Evolution is a fact, not a theory. Theories of evolution include Darwinism and punctuated equilibrium, and a scientific theory is not merely a hypothosis, which is a proposition that needs to be proved to be accepted as a theory. And Ben Stein is a lawyer and economist, not a scientist.

When the Pope was a cardinal, he prepared the Vatican's statement on evolution, which basically said that the church accepts biological evolution, except that the soul itself didn't evolve, but is created by God. Many other Christian sects accept evolution, as do many Christians, such as Francis Collins, MD, PhD, and former director of the Human Genome Project at the NIH.

Evolution is only a threat fundamentalists.

Exactly.

There is an excellent book by Stephan J. Gould called _Rocks_of_Ages_ that explores this very well, IMHO.

Scientists are based on the quality of their work, not their religious beleifs.

Jeff

And the sun goes around the flat earth, everyone knows this now.

The fact that things evolve does not preclude the creation by God. It's too bad that some people claim that the two are mutually exclusive. Acknowledging that some very limited versions of evolution do preclude Godly creation, but that's a fringe and not the "fact" aspect of evolutionary dogma.)

Global Warming on the other hand... (even though it's talked about in the pseudo-scientific community as if fact)

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

But that conclusion is NOT part of the *FACT* part of evolution. "Supported by" and "fact" are not the same thing, though the left likes to mix the two with everything they touch.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

And the sun has no affect on the temperature of the earth - only man-made activities. Everyone knows this too.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

Who said it was?

What does one's political views have to do with this?

It is about evidence. And the evidence supporting evolution is so overwhelming that evolution is taken as a fact by scientists.

Please tell us something in biology that is not consistent with evolution.

Jeff

Who claimed that the sun has no affect on earth's temperatures?

Jeff

That's funny!

I don't disbelieve evolution. But I don't believe what every proponent of evolution says about evolution. That's the dishonesty I was talking about earlier of establishing the fact that evolution happens as a fact, agreeing on that, and then extrapolating that agreement to "prove" that therefore any claim in favor of evolution is an irrefutable fact.

That makes as much sense as me demanding that you prove to me that God doesn't exist or that He didn't create the universe and life. Either way it's a circular argument.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

No one - just as no one claims that the earth was flat as the previous poster was saying as tongue-in-cheek sarcasm no less than my comment was tongue-in-cheek sarcasm right back at him.

Pay attention and comprehend.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

Ah, but Bill, you forget, the LIEberals have no sense of humor. And when you call them out on a lie, they just get mad and shout their lies louder. Like JoeNoBedroom, the spammer from New York, and stock boy by day.

Charles the Curmudgeon.

Please answer the question.

Nothing in science is taken as an irrefutable fact, including evolution. and gravity. For example, if you can come up with a better explanation of why chimps and humans appear to be closely related, you're welcome to do so.

In principle, *anything* in science can be disproven. Of course, you have to have the data to do so.

Wrong. In principle, I could come up with a better explanation of why the home runs hit by the Boston Red Sox always return to the ground (or stands) than gravity and support this with real data.

Likewise, in principle, I can come up with a better explanation of the relatedness of different organisms than evolution, and support this new explanation with data, as well. In addition, in principle, you can provide evidence or data that show that evolution hasn't occurred.

However, I know of no way to support or refute one's belief in God or His creation of the universe.

That's the difference between science and religion. You *can* test scientific principles, theories and things taken as fact, like gravity and evolution.

However, there is no way to test other areas of thought, including religion (please tell me how to test the God's creation) or ethics (please tell me how to test whether or not the right thing is to treat others as you want to be treated or whether or not it is right to give to charity or whether or not abortion is right).

The difference between science and religion is that in science, everything (including evolution) can be tested and, if the hypothesis, theory, law or fact found to be incorrect, the hypothesis, theory, law or fact will be revised based on the new understanding. In religion, things just can be tested that way.

I strongly suggest that you read Stephen J. Gould's book _Rock_of_Ages_ where he discusses the difference between science and religion.

Jeff

It used to be thought that the earth was flat. Just look out at the sea. It looks like the earth is flat and drops out. Of course, a better explanation of this is that the earth is round. But, this the belief that the earth is flat was disproven as better evidence came in.

I do.

You're coming off as a lunatic. It's like you didn't even read my immediately-preceding post: "No one - just as no one claims that the earth was flat as the previous poster was saying as tongue-in-cheek sarcasm no less than my comment was tongue-in-cheek sarcasm right back at him."

You are a waste of time.

Bill Putney (To reply by e-mail, replace the last letter of the alphabet in my address with the letter 'x')

Science did think that. All the while, the scorned Bible stated otherwise. For centuries.

Of course, by the definition of the nature of God. God also invented the car, as evidenced when He drove Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden in His Fury, but why aren't auto shop students taught that, rather than the secular humanistic theories of Benzism and Fordism?

It's mostly the anti-evolution people who are rejecting the evidence.

It is a fact. Otherwise the tropics would always be freezing.

And then science pulled ahead and has remained there.

Whoooosh.