Reasons Why Evolution Is Just A Fairy Tale For Adults

[Geoff-Allen]

Just found an interestin article -

https://www.google.com.au/search?so...Why+Evolution+Is+Just+A+Fairy+Tale+For+Adults

Here is one quote -

“I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.”

Cheers!

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

Just found an interestin article -

https://www.google.com.au/search?so...Why+Evolution+Is+Just+A+Fairy+Tale+For+Adults

Here is one quote -

“I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.”

Cheers!

First of all you gave the link to the search you made to try to find an article that shared your viewpoint.

Second of all that is what many people thought about the Earth orbiting the sun, yet look where it stands now.

Third of all I think that replacing the line "theory of evolution" with "delusion of creationism" and this idea will be more accurate.

 

[Terese]

Sure m8.

 

[Revoltingest]

I have found that evolution is a fount of humor.
The Darwin Awards come to mind.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

I have found that evolution is a fount of humor.
The Darwin Awards come to mind.

Why is this called the Darwin Awards?

 

[Revoltingest]

Why is this called the Darwin Awards?

In Darwinism, there's natural selection which favors the fittest, & weeds out the least fit.
Darwin Award winners are the least fit.
They do stupid things which keep them from reproducing.....things like dying.

 

[Taylor Seraphim]

In Darwinism, there's natural selection favors the fittest, & weeds out the least fit.
Darwin Award winners are the least fit.
They do stupid things which keep them from reproducing.....things like dying.

LMAO!

 

[LuisDantas]

It is sad to see how deep the lack of proper scientific education runs.

People still talk of evolution as if it had not been verified, evidenced and applied consistently for about a century already. And they even have such numbers that their political reach is considerable.

We have become too alienated from the very resources (including scientific knowledge) that support our current situation. That bodes ill for our near future.

 

[George-ananda]

Just found an interestin article -

https://www.google.com.au/search?so...Why+Evolution+Is+Just+A+Fairy+Tale+For+Adults

Here is one quote -

“I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.”

Cheers!

So, how DO you think man came to be??

 

[Parsimony]

Conveniently...

 

[AndromedaRXJ]

The article, for the most part, clearly indicates that the author is very ignorant of the Theory of Evolution. But I do think it points out one important issue, and it's that people do have a degree of blind faith in what scientists say. It's true that a lot of laymen believe evolution to be true without really understanding it. They just hear that scientists say it's so, so they believe it. It's understandable though, because it takes a significant amount of time to study and understand it and most people probably don't have time.

Nonetheless, pointing out that laymen have little understanding of it, doesn't do anything to invalidate the theory.

 

[Riverwolf]

A "fairy tale for adults", huh? So... just a fairy tale, then?

...okay, it's not, not even remotely the same category, but still... "fairy tale for adults"... as someone who's both read many fairy tales, and written some, that seems a rather redundant phrase.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Just found an interestin article -

https://www.google.com.au/search?so...Why+Evolution+Is+Just+A+Fairy+Tale+For+Adults

Here is one quote -

“I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.”

Cheers!

This isn't facebook. Did you want to debate something?

 

[Helvetios]

Incidentally the third result on that Google search is a reddit thread where someone goes through the article point-by-point to show why it isn't true. They do skip over some points, but since there is a lot of repetition in the original article I don't see that as a bad thing. I'm not sure what you intended when you posted this article, but if you want to talk about its contents then please do. Otherwise there's no point in dropping it here and refraining from further response.

I also found a rebuttal from an excellent science blog, where the author addresses the big-picture misconceptions perpetuated by the original article: http://theness.com/neurologicablog/index.php/44-reasons-creationists-are-deceptive/

 

[Ouroboros]

And still, all the evidence supports evolution, and not a single shred of evidence for essentialism or orchard creationism.

 

[Skwim]

First of all you gave the link to the search you made to try to find an article that shared your viewpoint.

There are several places where the statement

‘I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.’
​

is quoted. My guess is that Geoff-Allen got it from here.

– Malcolm Muggeridge, well-known British journalist and philosopher—Pascal Lectures, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. From the Revised Quote Book, containing 130 quotable quotes on creation/evolution by leading authorities. Published by Creation Science Foundation, Australia (no longer in print).
source​

 

[Helvetios]

There are several places where the statement is quoted. My guess is that Geoff-Allen got it from here

‘I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been applied, will be one of the great jokes in the history books of the future. Posterity will marvel that so very flimsy and dubious an hypothesis could be accepted with the incredible credulity that it has.’

– Malcolm Muggeridge, well-known British journalist and philosopher—Pascal Lectures, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. From the Revised Quote Book, containing 130 quotable quotes on creation/evolution by leading authorities. Published by Creation Science Foundation, Australia (no longer in print).
source​

Funny you say that since I am a Waterloo student myself. The Pascal lectures' stated goals are to bring together individuals who have areas of accomplishment in their Christian faith and another area of life, supposedly to enlighten students. My perception after a few years is that the quality of speakers varies. Malcolm Muggeridge, the first Pascal lecturer, is ignorant of the marvelous array of evidence supporting theory of evolution. He is also responsible for the Mother Teresa cult (starting when he claimed that the lighting conditions during the making of her BBC documentary were a miracle). There are honest Pascal lecturers, and then there's Malcolm. The history of this annual event is filled with intellectual embarrassments and a scattering of truly interesting speakers.

The Veritas Lectures, a brand extending beyond the university, are another annual Christian lecture series. They tend to be a little more interesting, and I especially appreciated Dr. Denis Alexander's treatment of bioethics this year: he addressed the different positions fairly and respected the subject's complexity. There are ways to bring Christianity and science together well; there are also ways to do it poorly. I'm continually surprised at the strong religious presence here given Waterloo's focus on STEM, but although misconceptions and frustrating parts exist (like many of these lectures, and several of the student clubs) they are generally easy to get along with. Many of them do not support incredulous statements like Malcolm's. However, I still question why speakers like him are paid any attention since we're supposedly a hub for science and technology.

 

[Skwim]

Funny you say that since I am a Waterloo student myself. The Pascal lectures' stated goals are to bring together individuals who have areas of accomplishment in their Christian faith and another area of life, supposedly to enlighten students. My perception after a few years is that the quality of speakers varies. Malcolm Muggeridge, the first Pascal lecturer, is ignorant of the marvelous array of evidence supporting theory of evolution. He is also responsible for the Mother Teresa cult (starting when he claimed that the lighting conditions during the making of her BBC documentary were a miracle). There are honest Pascal lecturers, and then there's Malcolm. The history of this annual event is filled with intellectual embarrassments and a scattering of truly interesting speakers.

Which brings up the question: why should we care what Malcolm Muggeridge thinks? Creation.com, the source for my quotation of his statement, says he was a philosopher.

"Malcolm Muggeridge, well-known British journalist and philosopher"​

but is philosophy a relevant area of expertise with which to judge the merits of the claims of biology, anthropology, archaeology, etc. Of course not. AND, the fact is, Muggeridge never was a philosopher---the assertion, just another creationist lie---anyone surprised? So, what was Muggeridge's background? Well . . . . .

Thomas Malcolm Muggeridge (24 March 1903 – 14 November 1990),[1] known as Malcolm Muggeridge, was a British journalist, author, media personality, and satirist.
Source: Wikipedia

"His early education forced Mr. Muggeridge, at Selwyn College, Cambridge, to concentrate on scientific studies, 'chemistry, physics, zoology, despite the fact I had no interest in them, and only the scantiest knowledge of them,' he wrote in 1972.
"Four years at Cambridge did little to alter this situation," he said. "I managed to scrape up a pass degree, but have never opened a book or thought about any of my three subjects from that day to this."
Because he had also taken some education courses, Mr. Muggeridge, when he rceived his degree in 1923, joined the staff of Union Christian College in South India.'
source

​

 

[Helvetios]

That also leads to the question of why we should care about the original article alluded to in the OP, since the author is not well-educated enough in the appropriate areas to address the theory properly. In both cases there is nothing substantial to discuss.

 

[LuisDantas]

One certainly feels disgusted by how often anti-evolutionism, more often if inaccurately named "creationism", resorts to lies of several kinds.

Were I a theist it would bother me even more than it currently does.