Latest Challenges to the Teaching of Evolution

There's something creaking when the top ten on the Master's leader board only has two Yanks and they are 9 and 10.

Are you referring to this question? {Isn't the demise of every civilisation due to a failure to set aside natural scientific laws permanent} If so I would say no is correct even though he and I may have a different way of explaining it!

What is your way of explaining it? "that you have a valid point"?
It would be easier for us to understand you if you were able to summarize your explanation in less than 150 words

Isn't it obvious that the breakdown of civilisation involves a return to a struggle for existence in a wilderness. What fictional work depicting such a breakdown ever shows anything but survival of the fittest situations.

spendi, "Survival of the fittest" has many dimensions; that's the reason why in so many of the under-developed and developing countries, most are barely eeking out a living, but they survive none-the-less. This has been going on for as long as man has occupied this world.

I can see your point but in my opinion some of us humans have something that no other animal has ever shown! "The ability to use logical reasoning"

This gives us the ability to somewhat step outside of our paradigm and analyze our Zeitgeist and make adjustments to better ourselves!

This is A2K ci. I don't think any of us are "eeking out a living". I'm certainly not.

I think survival of the fittest has only one dimension. That's the main reason why the kids shouldn't be taught that it is normal for life forms.

Not a single proponent of the doctrine is a normal life form. It's just an affectation. Noises off so to speak. Any with a PhD are obviously the result of the "cheap and cheerful" awards system.

spendi, You're only one of over 6 billion on this planet; count yourself as one of the lucky ones who is able to visit your local pub to have a draft or two to commiserate about the rest of the world with your buddies. Many live on less than one of your daily brew, and yet they survive till the morrow. This repeats itself over and over for all of our daily lives that has turned into one of habit, knowing that the sun will arise again tomorrow.

????It is embarrasing to debate you . Look up the meaning of phrase and clause . I was correct .

No, I think you have had enough .

So why are you worried about evolution and fundamentalists ?

You mean you understand very little and are more confusing each time you post .

IS that it? Is this the pinnacle of yourskills in debate? You still havent admitted that spwndis statement was gobledeegook and was internally unstable. You continuously prove my point that you are merely an ignoramus whose only argument points involve invective and ad hominems. Youve yet to make any documented point either here or on other threads (your bleatings on the Civil ar thread should be a serious embarassment to you if you really were an interested scholar, )
As Ive said over and over that I dont drink anymore because of medical conditions, you inexhaustiblly engage in slamming me with "Drinky pet names". That seems to be the extent of any scholarship on your behalf(I just wish to remind others of this fact)

You and fm may very well have different ways of explaining his "no". What the thread needs is for you to provide the explanations. Simply asserting that you have explanations is of no help to anybody. I only asked the question.



In the absence of our artificial laws, traditions etc there would be anarchy. Civilisation is the opposite of anarchy. If nature is not anarchic there must be a guiding intelligence. Remove the intelligent design and nature is anarchic operating under natural scientific laws but not being conscious of doing so. Science itself is thus un-natural because it is conscious of its operations and should not be taught in science classes. Science is anti-evolution unless the claim is made that we, as conscious beings, are part of evolution and our studies and applications are thus natural. In which case evolutionary success is the only measure of validity and what could be more successful than the Christian dispensation, a result of conscious study and application of and to ourselves. "The proper study of Mankind is Man." (Alexander Pope).

The setting aside of the Christian dispensation requires a justification or a blind leap into the dark. That's why anti-IDers refuse to discuss the leap. Thus the only motive they can possibly have is personal and I'm betting that it is sourced in a selfish objection to Christian teaching on sexual matters. Thinking with the crotch. And make the kids have it.

In my opinion you answered the question yourself but you seem to resist the answer! {we, as conscious beings, are part of evolution and our studies and applications are thus natural.}

Your quote: what could be more successful than the Christian dispensation, a result of conscious study and application of and to ourselves. "The proper study of Mankind is Man." (Alexander Pope).

Let me make one thing clear I do not hate Christians! My mother is a Christian and I do love her and the billion+ other Christians in the world but I do have to say that they all have one thing that is keeping all of humanity from advancing socially, morally and in any other area of well being
that I can think of.

Religion is an absolute state of mind that restrains advancement in mankind! It does not allow for progress. the only time it seems to progress is when the people of the church leave and go to another church that sees progress as a new thing to be believed!


I think that religion blinds us and makes us logically retarded!

Every thing evolves even Jesus!

The evolution of Jesus

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iOKjDWmDdQ&feature=channel_video_title

Oswald Spengler.

A tyrannical mindset is on display in the posts of anti-IDers and the quotes from outside sources which are carefully selected for our study.

And so also is the megalopolitan source in large, supra- national Media organisations.

If Spengler is correct, as I think, then the anti-ID movement is a mere sign that our civilisation is peaking or has peaked. A bit like the flocking of starlings being a sign that winter is coming. And of no further significance.

It looks pretty exhausted to me.



And like "cheap and cheerful" degrees it is a heady mix for control freaks who very readily and understandably equate the effects of the pressure of their finger with personal excellence. A current exercise of the propensity is underway in Libya. Democratic politics selects for control freaks.

Our basic attitude to control freaks could be seen when President Reagan and some other bigwigs slid off the side of the stage into a heap when one end collapsed. We laughed. A moment of sheer bliss. Like when Dawkins had trouble opening the door to the study of the eminence he had chosen to confirm his hypothesis even though the camera crew were inside at the time. Scripted science. Watch me make a 147 at snooker if I can script it. Depictions of the Big Bang are pretty good too.

I can kind of see your point Spendius! What do you think about Jesus evolving?


Did you ever see this video and if so did you find any truth to it or not?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rIij-6fN4pA

Crap. See Setanta's expert deconstruction of the idea on the Atheism thread. It's trolling. And insulting our intelligence.

I don't think anything about Jesus evolving. Brain states in your neck of the woods are another matter. Don't confuse Jesus with brain states. Everything might fall apart or, more likely, take a turn some of us would not like and suspect you wouldn't either.

Spendius were you even able to watch the video without your emotions causing you to turn it off or to not give it a consideration on whether it was truthful information or not?


Here it is again, give it a try! Try not to use Reverse Invidious Comparisons if you can!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iOKjDWmDdQ&feature=channel_video_title

Do you think that we should kill all them atheists?

I was minding my own business playing the piano early this morning and my pastor stood up and started preaching!

Here is a video of my playing and his preaching!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Emw7xAuIVG4&feature=related

You realize that you may be assessed several penalty points for having too much fun on this serious thread?

I do not mind getting penalty points if involves me being able to share with others what I would consider to be logical thinking!
I can only hope that they might at least consider their stance in reality.

So does that mean that you are NOT having fun?