DARWIN WAS DEAD WRONG

Did you ever just think, think, that creation does not have to be an instantaneous process, and that in fact, evolution is the mechanism by which creation manifests itself. Why do you have to equate God with something you can personify and understand, instead of leaving it unknowable and beyond comprehension?

Changez, I did not refer to God, did I? Changez, I simply do not understand what you are saying. Why don't you simply check out TIM HARWOOD and see what I am talking about.

I didn't say anything about creation being an instantaneous process either. Please stop drinking so heavily and smoking that crack pipe when contributing to this forum.

I didn't say evolution doesn't take place either, did I? No, I said DARWIN WAS WRONG! And, that some form of incredibly capable intelligence has been involved with the establishment of life as we know it.

Please READ what I actually wrote and stop making things up, OK?

My crack pipe is not up for debate. However saying Darwin was dead wrong is. What do you mean when you say intelligence is behind the creation or establishment of life? I am simply arguing that such an intelligence is beyond comprehension and therefore is beyond classification. Evolution is not a justification for atheism, and form what I can see of the quotes you have provided, the men on record are simply stating that evolution may not be the best hypothesis for explaining how creatures adapt and change in it's specifics, rather than refuting the idea altogether. Not to mention none of them gives any evidence of their claims. Evolution is a theory and it will have it's detractors.

I simply view evolution as a process that is observable. If I was a religious man I would say that evolution is the tool by which an intelligence decided to create life in all it's different forms. Not to exclude a creator but the same way we can look at stars and see how they are made, we can marvel at the process by which a vast intelligence can give birth to life and celebrate that intelligence, not confine it to our restrictions on what it should look like.

OK, Changez, I get you brother. I like what you are saying.

The point I am talking about is the point where Darwin claims that NO INTELLIGENCE was necessary in ANY OF IT, thereby essentially eliminating, SCIENTIFICALLY, the existence of such intelligence or ANY form of God whatsoever. THIS is the Darwinian point most atheists use as their SCIENTIFIC proof that there is NO GOD.

Changez, it is also interesting to learn how Darwin is believed to have been a racist, and how he supported the movement to apply his evolutionary theory to people too. Then it is known as Social Darwinism. This is where the superiority and inferiority of various races enters the picture. TIM HARWOOD had a nice article on his site about this too.

Hitler was a big fan of this Social Darwinism, believing it was OK to kill deformed people, Black People, Jews, and Slavs because they were inferior to his German people.

Harwood's article goes on to describe how Social Darwinism was a handy tool to justify Slavery, Imperialism, Racism, Genocide, The Holocaust, Fascism, and taking advantage of the poor.

I don't think it is possible for an intelligent man, like darwin, to deny the existence of God, but maybe the perception of it as put through the church etc. Like einstein, who was a very spiritual person.

social darwinism is of course a convoluted extension of his theory that I do not knwo too much about, but can see how it was twisted by twisted minds. I will find out. Thanks for the heads up. peace

Mos said it best: "Smarts! Get smart with your smartness! Too busy surviving to argue about Darwin! Darlin!" Now that's real talk. Perhaps his point should be taken.

Half the stuff in Charles Darwin's book wasn't his personal material, he
plegiarized it from one of the sailors on the ship that he sailed with to
Galapgos Islands. The sailor was doing a similar study as Darwin, he gave
Darwin his book and Darwin, instead of publishing it as half his and half
of his friend pretended that it was all his own. When the sailor saw the
book ORIGIN OF SPECIES he said, there are no acknowledgments, why did you
not put my name in? 25/6/2009.

It's hard to believe such ignorance still exists after Darwin's theory was published. Obviously, there are exceptions to the theory--you sure haven't evolved!

It's hard to believe such ignorance still exists after Darwin's theory was published over 150 years ago. Obviously, there are exceptions to the theory--you sure haven't evolved!

SanDiegoDave, You think that a man can change into another man by sitting
around for a thousand years like Darwin theorised? Get your brain read with a shrink if you think that happened with birds and animals who have
a much shorter life than man does. Without a Creator God there could be nothing. Darwin denied God and lied to the world. I read his book and saw
the movie on TV ORIGIN OF SPECIES. You think that two houses sitting on 2
adjoining blocks of land that are same in design evolved over a thousand
years one from another? Impossible, there had to be an intelligent architect or designer to do it. 27/6/2009.

mllovric: Darwin wrote that man and all species had to adapt to different challenges in their environments or simply perish. I'm sure no species just "sitting around for a thousand years" ever existed because the only constant in nature--in life--is change. Those that haven't adapted to those changes perished. If you look a pictures from just 25 or 50 years ago you can see change. The phenomenal breakthroughs in medicine over the past 50 years shows how man as adapted--evolved--into a more survivable species.
I cannot but think their was a super force that produced the Big Bang which is still expanding the universe. This is something I can't explain as a mortal. But whether or not God or a god created the universe has no bearing on my day-to-day life. I don't like using the trite phrase but it is what it is.

mllovric: Darwin wrote that man and all species had to adapt to different challenges in their environments or simply perish. I'm sure no species just "sitting around for a thousand years" ever existed because the only constant in nature--in life--is change. Those that haven't adapted to those changes perished. If you look at pictures from just 25 or 50 years ago you can see change--improvements. The phenomenal breakthroughs in medicine over the past 50 years shows how man has adapted--evolved--into a more survivable species.
I cannot but think their was an outside force that produced the Big Bang which is still expanding the universe. This is something I can't explain as a mortal. But whether or not God or a god created the universe has no bearing on my day-to-day life. I don't like using the trite phrase but "it is what it is. "

Man can adapt to living anywhere and eating any kinds of food. Medecines
and drugs can only be produced by man, no animal has ever done that, nor
has any bird or fish done it. Animals and birds cannot communicate as man
does, nor can they cook, write books or produce mechanical or electrical
appliances. To get all the knowledge and information about life, it's not
found in any one particular book but the answers come in milestones from
different ones. THE HOLY BIBLE, THE KORAN, THE BOOK OF MORMON, I have them all and have read them all but neither of them holds all the answers to live's questions. You must keep searching. I think freely and lot of people don't like me because I am what they call a free thinker who investigates those kinds of things and more. I'm not denying the big bang but there are two creation stories in the Bible and they are completely different. I studied through all that in various Bible Studies of mine which you will find right at the beginning of my writings on Allvoices. The Creation how I disputed the
Catholic church's idea and wrote of two different creations, the first
one where the original Adam and Eve were hairy like Apes and the earth
and all life was destroyed when Satan was dumped to earth out of heaaven which leads to the second creation of a totally different Adam
and Eve in a totally different Garden of Eden. You can't read just one
book and take it as the full gospel truth but you must search for knowledge wherever it is found. You may call that evolution. Cloning is
an interesting subject too, wouldn't it be better to say that God cloned Adam from the mud of the earth and when He created Eve, He cloned her from Adam's rib? That is exactly what was done, using human
DNA from a human bone God cloned Eve. Think about it and what about the
test tube babies of the nineteen seventies, were they now also cloned
from human DNA by mixing the male and female in a test tube to create
a fetus and implant it into a woman to be nursed to maturity and give
it birth. Yes everybody is searching for a missing link but they can't
recognize it when they see it because it's too fantastic. 28/6/2009.

mllovric Kudos on reading the Bible, Koran and the Book of Moron. Now how about picking up a science book or two... maybe at around the sixth grade level.

mllovric Kudos on reading the Bible, Koran and the Book of Moron. Now how about picking up a science book or two... maybe at around the sixth grade level.

It looks like this topic has been exhausted. It's time to end this ridiculous "internet beef" between both users, and move on. Mos said it best: "Smarts! Get smart with your smartness! Too busy surviving to argue about Darwin! Darlin!"

Fine with me, InspectorGadget. I'm usually tolerant of others' opinions; it's just hard for me to suffer fools.

Nevertheless, it is quite entertaining to see both of you go at it. Maybe Allvoices.com should arrange a real-life debate, cage match style. Put money and a championship belt on the line, winner takes all! Bring your tag team, bring your sources, bring your materials, and bring whatever else you need. Battling each other like this on some website is just pathetic. This is some grown man business! We need to settle it in the streets!

SanDiegoDave, I believe that InspectorGadget is right, put the crap away.
At this time I'm reading the last chapter of LORD OF THE RINGS PART ONE.
THE FELLOWSHIP OF THE RING. I have read the other three, THE HOBBIT, THE
TWO TOWERS, and THE RETURN OF THE KING. This is the last one I managed to
procure so I have the whole set. Next book I'm going to read is called MATTERS OF CHANCE by JEANETTE HAIEN. vagaries of fate. I read any book that takes my fancy at any one time. Life is full of chances that you can't go without. 28/6/2009.

That site is nothing more than quote mine after quote mine. Try something scientific.

mimj_gregory, I read the BOTTOM LINE YEAR BOOK 1995. It is very scientiffic and legal, leaves the reader cold and dry without any kind of
satisfaction. I have the book with me and it gives information on all the
subjects except Darwinism. I have read various Body Language books, that
includes the Naked Ape. Those sort of books yes I love reading because of
what they tell, if any turn up around here, I'm sure to buy them. I have
a bunch of old hard cover text books and Encyclopedias that someone gave
me years ago, I don't read them unless I don't have nothing else to read, plus they are already out of date, museum pieces if you like to
call them. When I finish reading them I give them away. Sometimes I get
needed information from them but it's very rare. 29/6/2009.

We are all dumber for having read this.

First of all, that's not science. Second, for you to be right, you'd have to deny many, many known FACTS, summarized in this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5nj587d5ies

Wrong about what? I'd say without knowledge of dna and molecular biology he did pretty good.It might not have occured exactly how he envisioned it but it is a fact that the main ideas of his theory have been proven correct.

I went to the city a few days ago and saw a second hand book for sale in
Toyland, something to do with evolution of animals by Charles Darwin. It
wasn't the ORIGIN OF SPECIES but something. Providing it's still there when I get my pension on July 21 I'll buy it just to brush up on his ideas. Just the same, that doesn't mean that I believe in evolution. On the contrary, it will give me something to make flack about and disprove
it as falsehood. 11/7/2009.

Truly bwinwright, your ignorance (or trolling bluff) is comical!!
'The theory of evolution justifies atheism' ???
It might, tangentally, but the two intellectual positions are not necessarily connected.
Atheism is the natural, normal, outlook on life for a free mind.
The 'theory' of evolution via natural selection is a proven scientific description of the fundamental mechanisms whereby species have come to be as they are.
It is even possible for a mind to be both polluted by religious delusion and sufficiently educated to understand the process of evolution.
Surprising, isn't it, the plasticity of the mind?