Evolution My ToE

Audie said:

Side topic- did you ever hear of a scientist losing tenure for a
controversial theory?

Click to expand...

No. Not to my knowledge.

Your question brings to mind J. Harlan Bretz and his controversial hypothesis about the origin of the channeled scablands of the Pacific Nortwest. His hypothesis and research of it were widely challenged for decades and there was much resistance. Through it all, he not only kept his position, but lived to reap rewards and honors as his ideas became recognized. It is now understood that the origins were the result of periodic and tremendous flooding from ancient and no longer, Lake Missoula.

I have heard some much less grounded ideas coming from a few academics that had no impact on their tenure. One proposed that transgenic crops were somehow causatively linked to AIDS. Way out there, but he kept his job. No research sprang from that wild idea either.

Dan From Smithville said:

No. Not to my knowledge.

Your question brings to mind J. Harlan Bretz and his controversial hypothesis about the origin of the channeled scablands of the Pacific Nortwest. His hypothesis and research of it were widely challenged for decades and there was much resistance. Through it all, he not only kept his position, but lived to reap rewards and honors as his ideas became recognized. It is now understood that the origins were the result of periodic and tremendous flooding from ancient and no longer, Lake Missoula.

I have heard some much less grounded ideas coming from a few academics that had no impact on their tenure. One proposed that transgenic crops were somehow causatively linked to AIDS. Way out there, but he kept his job. No research sprang from that wild idea either.

Click to expand...

I have been to Coulee Dam, the dry falls etc, and
know the story.

It’s a creationist thing to bring that up to show why
creationist geologists, biologists etc are scared to
let it be known, for fear of being, as they say,
Expelled.

Audie said:

I have been to Coulee Dam, the dry falls etc, and
know the story.

It’s a creationist thing to bring that up to show why
creationist geologists, biologists etc are scared to
let it be known, for fear of being, as they say,
Expelled.

Click to expand...

The tenure myth is used to offer credibility to conspiracy theories and is a conspiracy theory of its own. Creationist appear to love conspiracy theories as evidence of the motives of those sinister scientists.

I have not been there, but I would love to some of it. It is a very good story with a great ending.

Wild Fox said:

She did not have a Y chromosome unless she was not human. So now we have a god that can go inside a woman's body to convert one of the eggs in to the male equivalent of a sperm then guide them together to implant into the uterus. Does that sound right to you?
If god becomes that active in a woman then why doesn't that god go in and correct the genetic defects in children or turn off the tumor genes in those who believe in him with malignant cancers?
Why didn't god just use the appropriate organic compounds to make adam? Why change the atomic particles in dust to become organic? Why rip out a rib from Adam then genetically manipulate the genetic material to convert all of the y chromosomes to X so eve could be female unless she was actually male?
There is only one answer - these are myths created by people who knew very little about biological systems.

Click to expand...

Thiß is not an issue. For me. Because since I believe God is the Prime Cause of life, He can do what humans cannot do. As if to say God could not get a cell to divide as He wanted. But if we want to go back to evolution, I suppose you have to figure when the first appearance of male and female chromosomes came about.

Dan From Smithville said:

The tenure myth is used to offer credibility to conspiracy theories and is a conspiracy theory of its own. Creationist appear to love conspiracy theories as evidence of the motives of those sinister scientists.

I have not been there, but I would love to some of it. It is a very good story with a great ending.

Click to expand...

I don't think that even Behe lost his job for his ideas. And almost all of his claims have been refuted. He has lost all academic credibility because he will not own up to his errors. I think the only thing that can cause one to lose academic tenure is openly lying. Lying is the one unforgivable sin. And I might be overstating it. If a person that openly lied owned up to his lies and asked for forgiveness he could work his way back into academic acceptance.

Polymath257 said:

At one time it could. The only difference I can see is historical luck.

The religion that Athena was a part of didn't focus on personal relationships with deities, although appeasing them for public safety was considered essential. Certainly the worship continued over the course of centuries.

Click to expand...

Hmm historical luck that the scrolls of the Jews were held and preserved throughout millennia as sacred testimony of their history, both physically (the temple arrangements, for instance), historically (the exile to Babylon), and spiritually (their relationship with their God)? (I don't think it was luck.)

Wild Fox said:

I was raised Christian also and attended most of life. I understand why people believe in god and have faith as well as appreciate the fellowship and so much of the selfless actions performed. Most I have know accept the stories as teachings with a mixture of literal and mythical interpretations. Ironically my split from Christianity came from studying ecology rather than evolution although the two studies are interlinked. The more I saw how interconnected life was the less I saw humans as separate and not special/different. I could not find this concept in its true importance in any of the Christian teachings and that is my issue.

As I have watched the degradation of the Earths ecosystems despite all of the evidence that exists to reverse this process I wanted to understand why people did not respond to the evidence. The debates in this forum especially with regards to evolution have been very enlightening. I may not be Christian anymore but from what I have learned there is no reason for any Christian or other religions not to accept the evidence of our world and its meaning to our origins or our relationship with all life on this planet. I truly appreciate the balance you have with your faith and what we know about our world. You can believe in god an intact belief system and still understand how we came about and how we are connected to the world.

Click to expand...

When I see the interconnection of matter on the earth and even how biologists and geologists place first the earth, then vegetation, then animals, then humans latest in the line, it is in harmony with what the Bible says. The early Bible writers did not study evolution. Yet they knew that humans were after the animals. Ok let's say you believe humans are animals. (I no longer do.) But even so, evolutionists believe, let's say, that gorillas and lions came before humans did on the earth.

Wild Fox said:

I was raised Christian also and attended most of life. I understand why people believe in god and have faith as well as appreciate the fellowship and so much of the selfless actions performed. Most I have know accept the stories as teachings with a mixture of literal and mythical interpretations. Ironically my split from Christianity came from studying ecology rather than evolution although the two studies are interlinked. The more I saw how interconnected life was the less I saw humans as separate and not special/different. I could not find this concept in its true importance in any of the Christian teachings and that is my issue.

As I have watched the degradation of the Earths ecosystems despite all of the evidence that exists to reverse this process I wanted to understand why people did not respond to the evidence. The debates in this forum especially with regards to evolution have been very enlightening. I may not be Christian anymore but from what I have learned there is no reason for any Christian or other religions not to accept the evidence of our world and its meaning to our origins or our relationship with all life on this planet. I truly appreciate the balance you have with your faith and what we know about our world. You can believe in god an intact belief system and still understand how we came about and how we are connected to the world.

Click to expand...

The fact that you say you are not a Christian anymore makes me wonder what you think a Christian is. Going back into history, we can see the great divide when Constantine took over some centuries after the apostles died out.

Subduction Zone said:

I don't think that even Behe lost his job for his ideas. And almost all of his claims have been refuted. He has lost all academic credibility because he will not own up to his errors. I think the only thing that can cause one to lose academic tenure is openly lying. Lying is the one unforgivable sin. And I might be overstating it. If a person that openly lied owned up to his lies and asked for forgiveness he could work his way back into academic acceptance.

Click to expand...

Behe is another good example. He is still affiliated with Lehigh University as far as I know. His "speculation" (wink) doesn't seem to have had a negative impact on his position and career.

YoursTrue said:

When I see the interconnection of matter on the earth and even how biologists and geologists place first the earth, then vegetation, then animals, then humans latest in the line, it is in harmony with what the Bible says. The early Bible writers did not study evolution. Yet they knew that humans were after the animals. Ok let's say you believe humans are animals. (I no longer do.) But even so, evolutionists believe, let's say, that gorillas and lions came before humans did on the earth.

Click to expand...

You no longer believe humans are animals? Ah, nevermind, what would be the point?

Subduction Zone said:

I don't think that even Behe lost his job for his ideas. And almost all of his claims have been refuted. He has lost all academic credibility because he will not own up to his errors. I think the only thing that can cause one to lose academic tenure is openly lying. Lying is the one unforgivable sin. And I might be overstating it. If a person that openly lied owned up to his lies and asked for forgiveness he could work his way back into academic acceptance.

Click to expand...

Behe still has a page on the Lehigh University Bio department web site. It does include a disclaimer about his religious, pseudoscience beliefs.
Department of Biological Sciences, Lehigh University

Dan From Smithville said:

And put yourself in a box.

Click to expand...

No, at least not in the way you’re thinking.
I got my questions answered...answers that were reasonable, logical, and made sense.

You can’t get over 8.5 million people (and growing every day), from varied cultures and backgrounds, to come to an agreement on every aspect of Biblical understanding, without there being rational, logical teachings behind it.

Dan From Smithville said:

If this was about Bible study, why did common descent become a focus of these discussions? What was the motive of these brothers?

Click to expand...

By asking this, you are revealing that you (and millions of others apparently) don’t grasp the reason / purpose behind Jesus’ ransom, how it redeems faithful mankind from sin and death, since as descendants of A & E we inherited imperfection and death. (I don’t blame you; you’re just going by what you’ve been taught. I blame those religious teachers, the clergy.) Jesus’ sacrifice redeems Mankind, not animals. Am I wrong?

Dan From Smithville said:

Nothing that I know of demands that it [science] be ignored or deprecated in order for a Christian to remain faithful.

Click to expand...

Incredible! Genesis clearly states Jehovah created organisms ‘according to their kinds.’ (And if you study the fossil record in light of these statements, you’ll see that they agree; the evidence supports this.) From that link entitled “Biological Big Bang”..
“Major transitions in biological evolution show the same pattern of sudden emergence of diverse forms at a new level of complexity. The relationships between major groups within an emergent new class of biological entities are hard to decipher and do not seem to fit the tree pattern that, following Darwin's original proposal, remains the dominant description of biological evolution. The cases in point include the origin of complex RNA molecules and protein folds; .....eukaryotic supergroups; and animal phyla.”
Excerpt from The Biological Big Bang model for the major transitions in evolution

See? I’ve presented much evidence, not just Biblical passages. (Why did you imply that I haven’t?) Now, getting back to the topic...

But portraying Genesis as allegory is only a convenient POV, apparently believed by numerous professed Christian religions. They muddy and obfuscate the Bible’s words to curry favor with humans and their philosophies.

However, how did Jesus view Genesis / A&E? As genuine history. Easy to understand by reading Matthew 19:4-6 & Mark 10:4-9. And Jesus’ genealogy recorded in Luke 3. (Real people, of course, are listed. But Noah & Adam are allegorical figures? That makes no sense!) Many religions professing Christianity, by promoting such beliefs, relegate the Bible to a book of fantasy.

But these same religions also ignore Christ’s command to love their brothers...rather, they kill them in times of conflict, thereby joining the world. (James 4:4 applies to them) So I wouldn’t trust anything they promote!

I know you can follow my line of reasoning on that, right? Are you willing to, that’s the question.

Dan From Smithville said:

I cannot say that I did not have some hope that I would not be so casually dismissed, but it is not really unexpected.

Click to expand...

That’s really not fair...
My “Lol” was not employed to “casually” dismiss your statements supporting your POV, it was because you assumed my entire argument was based on apologetics, which is wrong! I presented several facts that question the validity of Common Descent.

I guess you just chose to ignore them? Are you going to ignore the statement above, made by E. Koonin?

YoursTrue said:

That's almost like saying, "See? This rock which landed on the earth is evidence that life started from outer space."

Click to expand...

How is it almost like saying that?

Here’s an interesting article on what the fossil record reveals. You may not appreciate the source, but the important aspect to consider is how accurate is the content, as it should be with everything....

Letting the Fossil Record Speak — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Hockeycowboy said:

Here’s an interesting article on what the fossil record reveals. You may not appreciate the source, but the important aspect to consider is how accurate is the content, as it should be with everything....

Letting the Fossil Record Speak — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Click to expand...

Just a series of quote mines. One of the favorite ways of lying used by creationist sites.

Hockeycowboy said:

Here’s an interesting article on what the fossil record reveals. You may not appreciate the source, but the important aspect to consider is how accurate is the content, as it should be with everything....

Letting the Fossil Record Speak — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Click to expand...

Watchtower is not only not a scientific source, it obviously also reflects the JW anti-science position. I left my own church decades ago for the same reason.

metis said:

Watchtower is not only not a scientific source, it obviously also reflects the JW anti-science position. I left my own church decades ago for the same reason.

Click to expand...

“Obviously”? I love a lot about science.

Hockeycowboy said:

Here’s an interesting article on what the fossil record reveals. You may not appreciate the source, but the important aspect to consider is how accurate is the content, as it should be with everything....

Letting the Fossil Record Speak — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY

Click to expand...

Some reason you are allergic to respectable sources?

Hockeycowboy said:

“Obviously”? I love a lot about science.

Click to expand...

Except when it refutes the myths of the Bible.

Hockeycowboy said:

No, at least not in the way you’re thinking.
I got my questions answered...answers that were reasonable, logical, and made sense.

You can’t get over 8.5 million people (and growing every day), from varied cultures and backgrounds, to come to an agreement on every aspect of Biblical understanding, without there being rational, logical teachings behind it.





By asking this, you are revealing that you (and millions of others apparently) don’t grasp the reason / purpose behind Jesus’ ransom, how it redeems faithful mankind from sin and death, since as descendants of A & E we inherited imperfection and death. (I don’t blame you; you’re just going by what you’ve been taught. I blame those religious teachers, the clergy.) Jesus’ sacrifice redeems Mankind, not animals. Am I wrong?


Incredible! Genesis clearly states Jehovah created organisms ‘according to their kinds.’ (And if you study the fossil record in light of these statements, you’ll see that they agree; the evidence supports this.) From that link entitled “Biological Big Bang”..
“Major transitions in biological evolution show the same pattern of sudden emergence of diverse forms at a new level of complexity. The relationships between major groups within an emergent new class of biological entities are hard to decipher and do not seem to fit the tree pattern that, following Darwin's original proposal, remains the dominant description of biological evolution. The cases in point include the origin of complex RNA molecules and protein folds; .....eukaryotic supergroups; and animal phyla.”
Excerpt from The Biological Big Bang model for the major transitions in evolution

See? I’ve presented much evidence, not just Biblical passages. (Why did you imply that I haven’t?) Now, getting back to the topic...

But portraying Genesis as allegory is only a convenient POV, apparently believed by numerous professed Christian religions. They muddy and obfuscate the Bible’s words to curry favor with humans and their philosophies.

However, how did Jesus view Genesis / A&E? As genuine history. Easy to understand by reading Matthew 19:4-6 & Mark 10:4-9. And Jesus’ genealogy recorded in Luke 3. (Real people, of course, are listed. But Noah & Adam are allegorical figures? That makes no sense!) Many religions professing Christianity, by promoting such beliefs, relegate the Bible to a book of fantasy.

But these same religions also ignore Christ’s command to love their brothers...rather, they kill them in times of conflict, thereby joining the world. (James 4:4 applies to them) So I wouldn’t trust anything they promote!

I know you can follow my line of reasoning on that, right? Are you willing to, that’s the question.





That’s really not fair...
My “Lol” was not employed to “casually” dismiss your statements supporting your POV, it was because you assumed my entire argument was based on apologetics, which is wrong! I presented several facts that question the validity of Common Descent.

I guess you just chose to ignore them? Are you going to ignore the statement above, made by E. Koonin?

Click to expand...

Re your Big Band, we find....As stated by the authors,[7] this book was aimed at professional biologists and assumes considerable prior knowledge.

Which is definitely not true of you.

A quote mine from some pre digested source with
a specific agenda to drive is good stuff only for the
willfully dishonest and intellectually lazy.

In the event, it in no way argues against ToE,
however much you may try to make it do so.

How about you jut come up with one fact contrary t o
ToE and get it over with?

If it were wrong, you know, it would be massively wrong,
and the disproof would be thick all about. And everyone
would know that.

Quote mining, bold type and underlining just underlines
that ya got nothing. (and are wrong)