Evolution? How?

Australopithecines

Also, if you have any knowledge of the progression from the basic developmental stages of man, you can see the small brain cavity becoming larger with each advancement.

That is evolution of man, pure and simple.

Are you familiar with hominids, Cro-magnon, homo habilis, homo erectus and the other homos? <tee, had to make a homo joke>

Australopithecines

Also, if you have any knowledge of the progression from the basic developmental stages of man, you can see the small brain cavity becoming larger with each advancement.

That is evolution of man, pure and simple.

Are you familiar with hominids, Cro-magnon, homo habilis, homo erectus and the other homos? <tee, had to make a homo joke>

hephzibah wrote:

Well that's because we know that couldn't happen don't we?

Yes, and what you stated couldn't happen either. That was exactly my point.

hephzibah wrote:

It seems if it is said that there is tangible proof of such things, there actually ought to be.

Tangible proof of what, something which nobody even claims ever happens?

What the heck are you asking for?

BTW-- Admitting evolution can strengthen faith, rather than obliterate it. Depends on the person, and their faith, I suppose.

Hi Heph, try not to worry.

I know it can seem pretty damn weird at first to look at the world and say it all came from natural, relatively simple events, and that no creator was needed. The evidence for this is huge though, and you might find it liberating.

BTW-- Admitting evolution can strengthen faith, rather than obliterate it. Depends on the person, and their faith, I suppose.

rosborne979 wrote:

hephzibah wrote:

Well that's because we know that couldn't happen don't we?

Yes, and what you stated couldn't happen either. That was exactly my point.

hephzibah wrote:

It seems if it is said that there is tangible proof of such things, there actually ought to be.

Tangible proof of what, something which nobody even claims ever happens?

What the heck are you asking for?

Sorry. I'm gonna have to get back to you and the others on any questions later. Thanks for the input though.

Tough Assignment: Teaching Evolution to Fundamentalists


SCIENCE JOURNAL
By SHARON BEGLEY, Wall Street Journal, December 3, 2004; Page A15 original

Professional danger comes in many flavors, and while Richard Colling doesn't jump into forest fires or test experimental jets for a living, he does do the academic's equivalent: He teaches biology and evolution at a fundamentalist Christian college.

At Olivet Nazarene University in Bourbonnais, Ill., he says, "as soon as you mention evolution in anything louder than a whisper, you have people who aren't very happy." And within the larger conservative-Christian community, he adds, "I've been called some interesting names."

But those experiences haven't stopped Prof. Colling -- who received a Ph.D. in microbiology, chairs the biology department at Olivet Nazarene and is himself a devout conservative Christian -- from coming out swinging. In his new book, "Random Designer," he writes: "It pains me to suggest that my religious brothers are telling falsehoods" when they say evolutionary theory is "in crisis" and claim that there is widespread skepticism about it among scientists. "Such statements are blatantly untrue," he argues; "evolution has stood the test of time and considerable scrutiny."

His is hardly the standard scientific defense of Darwin, however. His central claim is that both the origin of life from a primordial goo of nonliving chemicals, and the evolution of species according to the processes of random mutation and natural selection, are "fully compatible with the available scientific evidence and also contemporary religious beliefs." In addition, as he bluntly told me, "denying science makes us [Conservative Christians] look stupid."

Prof. Colling is one of a small number of conservative Christian scholars who are trying to convince biblical literalists that Darwin's theory of evolution is no more the work of the devil than is Newton's theory of gravity. They haven't picked an easy time to enter the fray. Evolution is under assault from Georgia to Pennsylvania and from Kansas to Wisconsin, with schools ordering science teachers to raise questions about its validity and, in some cases, teach "intelligent design," which asserts that only a supernatural tinkerer could have produced such coups as the human eye. According to a Gallup poll released last month, only one-third of Americans regard Darwin's theory of evolution as well supported by empirical evidence; 45% believe God created humans in their present form 10,000 years ago.

Usually, the defense of evolution comes from scientists and those trying to maintain the separation of church and state. But Prof. Colling has another motivation. "People should not feel they have to deny reality in order to experience their faith," he says. He therefore offers a rendering of evolution fully compatible with faith, including his own. The Church of the Nazarene, which runs his university, "believes in the biblical account of creation," explains its manual. "We oppose a godless interpretation of the evolutionary hypothesis."

It's a small opening, but Prof. Colling took it. He finds a place for God in evolution by positing a "random designer" who harnesses the laws of nature he created. "What the designer designed is the random-design process," or Darwinian evolution, Prof. Colling says. "God devised these natural laws, and uses evolution to accomplish his goals." God is not in there with a divine screwdriver and spare parts every time a new species or a wondrous biological structure appears.

Unlike those who see evolution as an assault on faith, Prof. Colling finds it strengthens his own. "A God who can harness the laws of randomness and chaos, and create beauty and wonder and all of these marvelous structures, is a lot more creative than fundamentalists give him credit for," he told me. Creating the laws of physics and chemistry that, over the eons, coaxed life from nonliving molecules is something he finds just as awe inspiring as the idea that God instantly and supernaturally created life from nonlife.

Prof. Colling reserves some of his sharpest barbs for intelligent design, the idea that the intricate structures and processes in the living world -- from exquisitely engineered flagella that propel bacteria to the marvels of the human immune system -- can't be the work of random chance and natural selection. Intelligent-design advocates look at these sophisticated components of living things, can't imagine how evolution could have produced them, and conclude that only God could have.

That makes Prof. Colling see red. "When Christians insert God into the gaps that science cannot explain -- in this case how wondrous structures and forms of life came to be -- they set themselves up for failure and even ridicule," he told me. "Soon -- and it's already happening with the flagellum -- science is going to come along and explain" how a seemingly miraculous bit of biological engineering in fact could have evolved by Darwinian mechanisms. And that will leave intelligent design backed into an ever-shrinking corner.

It won't be easy to persuade conservative Christians of this; at least half of them believe that the six-day creation story of Genesis is the literal truth. But Prof. Colling intends to try. Of course, if it gets too tough, there's always fire jumping.

hephzibah

Quote:

Ok, fair enough. So then what makes the theory's on evolution so much more reliable than the theory's on religion?

The answer given was tangible proof. Allow me to expand on that.

Creationism and ID say all animals that ever existed were created at one time by God.

Evolution says they evolved at different periods of time.

If Creationism is correct we should find in the fossil record a flotsam and jetsam of fossils. Dinosaurs mixed with humans mixed with older Permian age animals. But we don't find that. Instead we find fossil confined to their particular age group. Dinosaurs are found in the Age of Dinosaurs group and humans are found in the much later Pleistocene Age. Every fossil find there is supports evolution because every fossil is found in its proper time slot.

Quote:

Hmm... interesting. And science has physical proof of these ancestors?

Yes and just recently a new find was announced that some believe may be the link between Homo erectus and Homo sapiens.

If your interested in seeing our ancestors here is a good place to start.

One thing to note here. No fossils of dinosaurs or Permian Age animals were found with our human ancestors. But by what Creationist say they should be.

Scientists recover T. rex soft tissue

70-million-year-old fossil yields preserved blood vessels

Updated: 9:58 p.m. ET March 28, 2005

WASHINGTON - A 70-million-year-old Tyrannosaurus rex fossil dug out of a hunk of sandstone has yielded soft tissue, including blood vessels and perhaps even whole cells, U.S. researchers reported on Thursday.

Paleontologists forced to break the creature's massive thighbone to get it on a helicopter found not a solid piece of fossilized bone, but instead something looking a bit less like a rock.

When they got it into a lab and chemically removed the hard minerals, they found what looked like blood vessels, bone cells and perhaps even blood cells.............

Wow. Good article. Lash, I think I understand what you were saying now.

I've been reading some of the stuff people posted links to. It's interesting to say the least. Only time will tell if it's really "liberating" or not.