questfortruth
Well-Known Member
It is evil to do good for own benefit.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Darwinism is evil, isn't it?
- Thread starter questfortruth
- Start date
-
- Tags
- darwinism
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Albert Einstein and Sir Newton are not on your side of the fence?
If you want to understand the difference between the kindness and understanding of those who believe that we evolved and those who don't, you only need look at how the Christians and humanists compare. Look at the pro-theocracy Christians in America and compare them to their humanist counterparts. Where's the Christian kindness there? The humanists are weeping for the girls and women of America while the Christians don't seem to care about anything but fetuses, not people. The humanists are interested in tolerance, Christians seemingly have little use for it. How many humanist white supremacists have you seen? How many advocate for more guns? How many do you think marched on the Capitol, and how many of those people identify as Christian patriots? How many such people are antidemocratic or want crimes ignored? How many humanist homophobes have you encountered calling gays abominations?
How many humanists start post after post calling Christians evil?
You don't have a case, but you did provide an excellent opportunity to point out the shallowness of Christian love. I really couldn't bring myself to start a thread to make this comment about how unkind Christianity appears, because that would be unkind, and I would feel like I was bullying and being mean-spirited, and a bit insecure about my beliefs. But with you opening the door, none of that is true - not for me, anyway.
Really? You believe that? Did you learn that from your religion? Most of the good one does benefits himself as well as others. When one does something for himself only, it is not evil. Do you ever put on a coat when you're cold? It's for your benefit alone. Is that evil?
Last edited:
questfortruth
Well-Known Member
Perhaps, I am the problem?
No, Darwinism isn't evil. Nor is it good. It is just a fact of biology.
Having a common ancestor with monkeys does not make them give birth to us. Nor does it make us give birth to them, for what it is worth.
In any case, I fail to see how or why the exact biological origin of humans would make any difference there.
Having a common ancestor with monkeys does not make them give birth to us. Nor does it make us give birth to them, for what it is worth.
In any case, I fail to see how or why the exact biological origin of humans would make any difference there.
Altfish
Veteran Member
Oh dear, so I shouldn't help an old lady across the road because your God thinks I'm being evil for showing compassion. Compassion being a positive trait that I know about
Is it?
I assume that you mean to say that one's motivations should not be selfish. That is fair enough, but there is nothing wrong with noticing that good deeds bring the best in other people and to some extent reward the effort.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
W
The ToE is not our enemy as it's just plain old common sense and basic science that material objects tend to change over time, and genes are "material objects".
Einstein...
Man would indeeded be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
The word 'God' is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, and religious scripture a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change this.
I do not believe in the God of theology who rewards good and punishes evil.
The family that prays together...is brainwashing their children.
From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist.
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
The word 'God' is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, and religious scripture a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change this.
I do not believe in the God of theology who rewards good and punishes evil.
The family that prays together...is brainwashing their children.
From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist.
So very often misrepresentated in the name of religion.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
There are Old World Monkeys and New World monkeys. Before they split they were just "monkeys". Would you agree with that?
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
Linnaean taxonomy is still useful. But it can be misleading. It was based on the concept of "kinds" and no creationist has come up with a working definition of "kinds". All of the definitions that they use are refuted since we can show that life is the product of evolution. Creationists are always claiming that evolution has a change of kinds and those that understand evolution will tell them that that is not the case. Using cladistics there would be no argument of whether we are monkeys or not. Give a proper definition of "monkeys" and the answer is obvious.
Viker
Häxan
Carl Sagan isn't on yours. Give this a read. Especially, pay a little attention to his baloney detection kit.
The Baloney Detection Kit: Carl Sagan’s Rules for Bull****-Busting and Critical Thinking
Nope, monkeys, new or old world didn't exist at the time of propliopithecidae. They were primate but neither monkey or ape
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
So they both evolved into monkeys separately? That may be a first.
Monkeys evolved from prosimians during the oligocene epoch. Apes evolved from catarrhines during the miocene epoch
Both prosimians and catarrhines evolved from propliopithecidae
WITHOUT EDUCATION IN BIOLOGY OR GENETICS, YOU ARE NOT QUALIFIED TO DISREGARD IT.
There is much to know, and I cannot teach an entire lifetime of education in a simple forum post.
The scientists have PhDs, are tenured professors, and have specialized in fields of genetics or anthropology. You, on the other hand, are pursuing a false notion, and will stop at anything to assert it, as long as it supports your beliefs. Scientists don't do that. Scientists merely pursue the truth, even if it disagrees with their ideas. You likely feel that it is blasphemy to say something contrary to the bible. But, Darwinism isn't contrary to the bible.
CHEMICALS MADE LIFE:
Truth is truth, from any source.
The bible doesn't specifically say that Darwinism is wrong.
The bible says that man was made from mud (chemicals).
Scientists say that life was evolved from chemicals.
So, the bible agrees with science.
Scientists use DNA. DNA is used as court evidence, and it is regarded as the most reliable. DNA shows a clear relationship between humans and bonobo chimps. Even the missing chromosome in mankind is clearly identified as the merger of two chimp chromosomes. It is that missing chromosome that makes it extremely difficult (or impossible) for humans to mate with chimps.
Other species have similar DNA differences that make them different species, though, in some species mating is possible (though not often accomplished).
There is clear DNA evidence that mankind mated with early humanoids (lNeanderthals and Denosovans).
Africans didn't mate with Neanderthals, but virtually all other races did.
Melanesians mated with Denisovans.
A very recent find, in Russia (near Denisova) shows that some Neanderthals mated with Denisovans.
NOT AN INSULT TO BE RELATED TO A CHIMP:
Though they are hairy and not as intelligent, doesn't mean that they are unworthy of being our ancestors. I have many relatives who are hairy and dumb.
Our ancestors don't make us kind.
WHAT IS EVIL:
Take the administration of pResident Bush, for example.
LYING TO PROMOTE WAR: pResident Bush created wars in Iraq, Afghanstan, and tried to promote wars, using lies, in North Korea (orange alerts), and Niger (bore false witness about Niger selling Uranium to Iraq to justify the war in Iraq and make a new war to steal Niger's resources and territory).
LYING TO POLLUTE THE WORLD WITH OIL AND DENY MANKIND'S IMPACT ON GLOBAL WARMING:
pResident W. Bush sent his lawyers into the office that produced the United States Environmental Report, and redacted statements that it was proven that mankind's impact on Global Warming causes storms to be more intense, and will overheat the world.
President Donald Trump, using the same unqualified people that W. Bush put in office (after the resignation of the woman scientist who wrote the report), asserted that Global Warming is a hoax.
1,000 died of a 117 degree Farhenheit heatwave in Portugal last week.
NASA predicts that California has about one year to run out of water (not enough to supply Californians even with mandatory conservation). Isn't it going to be expensive to have the entire population of California move out of the state?
Carlsbad, California has the largest desalination plant in the state. But, it costs about $2500 per acre foot. Homes use about 2 1/2 acre feet per year (using conservation). Thus, in Carlsbad, water would cost homeowners roughly $7,000 per year.
But, the Carlsbad plant uses old technology. In Israel, they use newer and different technology (plant material for reverse osmosis filters, rather than porous rock). That newer tech means that homeowners would pay merely a tenth of that price ($700/year).
We don't have to run all of the cities on purely desalinized water. But we could make some of their water from the ocean.
This would decrease the amount of water coming from the California aquaduct (Oroville and places south). This would also decrease the amount of water diverted before it reaches Mono Lake (saving 1/3 of the migratory California sea gulls, and eared plovers, etc., that feed on the artemia Monica brine shrimp (Unique to the Mono Lake, and not transplantable, since no other lake has its unique saline and alkaline mix with volcanic ash. The artiemia Monica brine shrimp have eggs that sink to the bottom, so are not eaten by birds, making the life in Mono Lake the denses biomass on earth. (Source: Book published by the Mono Lake Committee, by, among others, Ellen Hardebeck. I phoned her last and wished her a merry Christmas last year, though she and her husband, Physicist, Harry Hardebeck (former Senior Researcher of Caltech's Owens Valley Radio Telescope north of Big Pine).
Lowering levels in Mono Lake have attacked Negit Island to the shore, allowing coyotes to invade the nesting area (eggs and chicks) of the many birds.
The Owens Lake gets its water from Mono Lake, and it has the most polluted air in California (alkalai dust). Mediation efforts included turning the owens river into a sterile concrete channel, planting willow trees to transpire moisture, and plowing the alkalai into the center of the lake. Danny Miller, son of the chief of the local Paiute tribe, heading the Owens Lake pollution mitigation for the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (DWP) was fired for intentionally driving million dollar heavy equipment into quicksand, then at night salvaging and keeping it. (Source: My interview with tribesmember, Cooney).
Desalination in southern California poses yet another problem. Water has to be pumped through reverse osmosis filters, and to cities above sea level. This is like running Hoover dam in reverse (a lot of electricity). We could use solar panels and pump only during the day.
Opposition to desalination includes dumping brine back into the ocean which will cause local areas to get too salty for some sea life. Why not distribute the salinity with pipes? Why not premix the sality with regular ocean water to dilute it before putting it into the ocean? Why not put the brine in settling tanks to extract precious metals (magnesium), then purifying the salt for human usage or cattle usage?
Another problem with desalination is sucking eggs or sucking fish or other sea life. Why not put a chainlink fence around the suction area, to lower the intake pressure?
There are millions of eggs in other parts of the ocean to take the place of any missing eggs.
@ChristineM spoke to Einstein.
Part of my post was implied. To make it explicit, I prefer the company of honorable atheists to those who find the products of science such as evolution as automatically evil. And by "honorable atheists" I explicitly mean those who accept their responsibility to do their best to discharge their worldly responsibilities and who have the open mind of a seeker after truth.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You might have your history a bit messed up. To be monophyletic we would have to be "monkeys" too as this chart shows:
The split between the two groups of monkeys occurred before the split between Old World Monkeys and apes. That would mean by cladistics that we are monkeys.
When someone isn't listening to you, no number of times being told will suffice. So say yourself the trouble, don't bother counting.
You might have your history a bit messed up. To be monophyletic we would have to be "monkeys" too as this chart shows:
The split between the two groups of monkeys occurred before the split between Old World Monkeys and apes. That would mean by cladistics that we are monkeys.
By cladistics we are also daffodil