Customer Discussions > Science forum

Darwin believed in God


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 26-50 of 1874 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 8:38:56 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 2, 2012 9:06:48 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Sep 2, 2012 8:39:24 PM PDT
S. Kessler says:
Does character-assassinating Charles Darwin do anything to invalidate the Theory of Evolution he developed? Of course he had precursors in thinking about evolution. And yes, he got to the printer before Wallace could. But he worked long and hard on developing the TOE by natural selection, and whatever character flaws Forest of Roachie may perceive isnthe man, does nothing to diminish his achievement. This thread is positively ridiculous in its intent.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 8:39:49 PM PDT
SinSeeker says:
Forests says: "There were scientists and naturalists way before Darwin who discovered evolution."

No one "discovered" evolution. The concept had been around for millennia. What Darwin did was clearly outline a mechanism for how the process worked that did not require supernatural intervention.

Forests says: "What Darwin did was read their works and just take bits and pieces from them all, his dishonesty was that he never gave thanks"

I've already pointed out that he acknowledged Matthew's work in later editions. He also carried out a massive number of observations to support his ideas.

I've been sucked in again. I thought I might have been able to have a rational conversation about Darwin's views on theism, and I discover that all I'm dealing with is another creationist troll.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 8:40:15 PM PDT
I'll have to read Davies' book, which should have been cited earlier in your "expose". I might be wrong, but sight unseen I bet you're both out to lunch.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 8:43:04 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 8:45:34 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 8:49:36 PM PDT
The ToE has no such implication at all.

Posted on Sep 2, 2012 8:50:49 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Mar 31, 2013 5:37:36 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 8:52:55 PM PDT
No, creationism is invalidated by mountains of other evidence. God's moral atrociousness is a separate issue.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 8:53:30 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 8:57:43 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 2, 2012 8:58:48 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:06:24 PM PDT
Not up to me to prove. You are the one asserting that the ToE has such implications. Prove that.

Evolution may show how we as humans have certain impulses and behaviors, but that gives no approval to them--and may actually help in controlling them.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:12:49 PM PDT
Doctor Who says:
Well I can label you, but it wouldn't mean much. If the label I try to place on you is some type of social recognized one, it might stick. If I were to call you a boxwood people would think I was mad.

"It was at one time perfectly normal and acceptable for whites to lynch blacks and pay no consequences, and even be commended for their actions"

structure vs. agency. The structure rewarded the behavior. Depending on the social context, it might be socially understandable. For example, a newly freed slave hitting someone. I would not agree that it is necessary, but I can understand why someone in Virginia at that time thinks it is. I would not dam (add your own "n") them for thinking it is justice, but I can blame the structure for condoning the action.

This is what is called looking at the entire picture.

"so, are you saying that Martin Luther King, Jr., and the thousands of other activists who paid the ultimate price for racial equality, just plain wrong in fighting for what was right?"

No, not at all. I actually admire them quite deeply. I never said the structures were always good and should be static. I said you don't get to blame people for living in their socially accepted structures that we now consider to be wrong or disgusting.

"wrong is wrong, and there is no socially normal about it"

Quite wrong. You cloths were made by child labor in a third world country. Is that right? It was considered right a century ago by good Christians for American children to do the work. Now the good Republican Christina business owners think it is quite good. Don't agree? go to France, China, Russia, Mexico, Texas, etc. and see how what you consider "normal" goes the same way as the french fries dipped in mayo.

"And it is spelled..."

Mamazon does not like dirty words. Best not to tempt her.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:14:17 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:19:01 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 2, 2012 9:19:29 PM PDT
Doctor Who says:
I would like to challenge you to answer this question completely as it goes right to your sense of absolute morality:

If my wife dies before bearing me a sun, is it acceptable to have sex with my daughters? They are unspoiled.

How about taking multiple wives? At the same time I mean. How about selling my daughters into slavery? they are very well behaved and well educated.

And can you tell me why it is moral for me to own a slaves from Mexico, but not from France?

By the way, bow ties are cool.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:19:56 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:23:19 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Sep 2, 2012 9:24:33 PM PDT
Doctor Who says:
Really? And who do you think made your cloths. You are supporting it. Do we condemn you for it? Should we?

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:23:24 PM PDT
The ToE states nothing of the kind. It does state that we have animal ancestry, but that does not imply we are "just" animals. Language and culture must also be considered, which takes us beyond just animals. Nor does the fact of animal ancestry imply anything about how we "should" behave.

You are spectacularly confused and/or dishonest.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:29:17 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:31:35 PM PDT
S. Kessler says:
There is no God, Roachie, so you question is moot.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:32:33 PM PDT
S. Kessler says:
There is no God, Roachie, so your question is moot.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:34:17 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:35:19 PM PDT
barbW says:
Darwin didn't even know what every grade-schooler knows today about how the Sun shines and our place in the Supercluster, but more important, the significance of the story of our crucial Moon.

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:35:20 PM PDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Sep 2, 2012 9:37:09 PM PDT
[Deleted by the author on Sep 2, 2012 9:42:21 PM PDT]
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  57
Total posts:  1874
Initial post:  Sep 2, 2012
Latest post:  Apr 7, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 5 customers

Search Customer Discussions