View Single Post
Old August 28 2012, 01:58 AM   #65
J. Allen
J. Allen's Avatar
Location: United States
View J. Allen's Twitter Profile
Re: Bill Nye: “Creationism is not Appropriate for Children”

Nerys Ghemor wrote: View Post
Venardhi wrote: View Post
The larger and more successful a population is, the less they would benefit from further selection. Mutation is still possible, and some have the potential of becoming dominant and being passed on, but it is going to be a far slower process than in a smaller and more competitive population.
I'm not sure the development of the human race can be attributed purely to the natural processes of evolution anymore, given that human creations and decision-making have entered the equation. Deliberate manipulation through medical technology, such as providing for those with genetic disorders, and other results of human decision making also have an impact on how humanity will continue to develop.

The biochemical behavior of genes hasn't changed, but our decision-making has affected things and should also be taken into account when considering human evolution.

J. Allen wrote: View Post
People, of late, have this idea that there are two sides to everything, and that just isn't the case. Having an open mind doesn't mean blindly accepting everything on it's own merits without critically thinking. There aren't always two sides to everything. Sometimes, the other idea is simply baloney.
Sometimes there are other sides that have merit that you may not have considered, though. I don't consider "creationism," referring to theories that insist on bending scientific fact, to be correct. However, you seem to ignore the fact that there is a significant number of people who are of faith but have no problem whatsoever with mainstream science. That, I think, is a reasonable choice to make.

The two ideas are not even remotely equal. It would be as if you described to me the physics involved behind the development of a star, and I answer with "God said let there be light, and that's how it happened." There's just no reasonable comparison.
I would say I thought God was behind the creation of said star through the mechanisms you just described. No alterations to physics, timelines, or anything else you outlined, and no insinuations that anything science has found out about that star is incorrect.

For me the whole thing is just a pointless argument by radical ideologues on both sides. Science contradicts literalist faith, but does not contradict the idea of ALL faith.
Faith isn't the issue. Teaching faith as fact is the issue.

Like My Little Pony? Join us at Brony Kingdom!

-= St. John of Trenton, Patron Saint of Cute Ponies =-
Bestowed upon me by Pondwater
J. Allen is offline   Reply With Quote