You've got to understand the time and the way people thought in the period. The White European Male was the intellectual giant of the time and all other "native" peoples were looked upon as inferior. For example his latter observations concerning mental and physical capacities about the Tierra Del Fuego natives has since been disproven and should considered simply as period predjuices or shoehorning the society to fit...
You know what? I think I was being dishonest, especially with myself. I get caught up in trying to smooth things over and be tactful, but I end up just confusing myself and expressing opinions that conflict with how I really feel. I do think many people don’t do their side of the issue any favors by insulting the other side. However, yes, it does seem to me that the evolution and speciation, both on large and small scales, are indisputable. I do think that believing otherwise is probably the product of incorrect assumptions, just like believing that gravity will stop working tomorrow. I feel the same way about everything supernatural.
this is very true though...this is just a weak tactic in my opinion, smart people see through the attacks and insults or just discount the person they come from outright...
It's easy to see how things like inquisitions get started by looking at this forum. People are certain that they know everything, that the final word on evolution is cast in stone and irrefutable, and that no further progress or different discoveries remain to be identified. This has been seen time and time again throughout history, and always proved wrong.
Yes, very true and wise words. Now if those who denounce such tactics would remember their stated distaste against such action more often...
I see this happen as well...I often see you fall into this same errant way of thinking when you are sure you are right and other need to 'educate themselves' but that is another issue. I have, of course, NEVER said that no further progress or different discoveries remain to be identified...this is another common tactic used..hyperbole...assuming this is just not a misunderstanding of what was posted. I have said in fact that evolution is a scientific theory because many of the details concerning evolution is still in debate or yet to be discovered. Thus much of the theory is still yet to be solidified and there is quite a bit of progress yet to go... All I have said is that evolution, the fact that species evolve, is not debatable. There is ample fossil evidence to support this... and bone..its hard when one is attacked constantly not to respond in kind but I try.
I agree 100%. I've buried a couple of hatchets over the past year and have generally found a new level of peace, but like you say. "If... then it's hard."
Personally I try to believe in both theories. Evolution and Creation have got to merge someplace and while we (mankind) may have found evidence we lack the ability to interpertate that evidence accurately now. But, now I'll ask what do ya'll think of he "Out Of Africa" theory?
Things like inquisitions were around long before evolution was ever conceived of. It was cast in stone, literally, that God was responsible for everything we didn't understand. Nothing else needed to be known, but that isn't how it worked out simply because they wanted to adhere to the God explanation. This has been seen time and time again throughout history, and always proved wrong.
The world & all that is within, on & above it was built & designed by God (Insert your choice here) Plc. And for fun he/she/it built in evolution to confuse & befudle those that were coming along further up the ladder
So I take it that only the Cave Troll is willing to admit a belief such as this. Doesn't sound like we have too many committed believers out there or at least any that will admit to it. Not too surprising I guess.
Just a comment on the difference between facts and theories. Evolution is an observational fact. We see it happening today, we can observe incontrovertible evidence that it has happened in the past. Natural Selection is the name for a group of several competing theories seeking to explain the observational fact. "Darwinism" is one, "Neo-Darwinism" is another. They differ mostly in the mechanisms by which natural selection is presumed to operate. Evolutionary ecologists argue incessantly about whether there is such a thing as group selection, whether it is all based on the individual, how mutations are initiated, and how selected traits are passed on. But they all agree that evolution is taking place. And there is no indication whatsoever that humans have completed their journey! Natural selection theory is largely based upon our experience with artificial selection and the selective breeding of livestock through selection of desired traits. Typically the most effective means of artificially producing an organism with desired traits is a three step process. 1: Growing out of large numbers of varieties 2: Observation and selection of desired traits 3. Culling of undesirable traits. Step #3 is the most crucial... the culling. In natural selection any trait which improves the ability of the individual to produce surviving offspring is selected for since other varieties are culled out. It does not matter what that trait is, as long as it functions to help the organism survive and reproduce. The cull MUST happen... there MUST be selctive mortality (or selective reproduction) for natural selection to operate. In past ages humans have been subjected to the most severe forms of culling... starvation, disease, warfare, mating combat. Our current physical forms are the result of "what works" based on thousands of generations of ancestors, ALL of whom were survivors. The human species is currently in a "growing out" phase in which we are reproducing in large numbers, but in which very limited selection pressures are being applied. Many of even the most unfit individuals are able to survive and reproduce in the current world situation of massive food abundance based on fossil fueled agriculture. There must eventually come a culling, as the current world population is unsustainable. The future form of the human species will be largely affected by this next culling, depending on how large a cull takes place, and what traits prove to be of survival value.
So Cuprum in your opinion is man changing or altering the natural evolution process. Will our selective breeding programs with animals and now with our children alter the evolution process 50,000 years from now? That is if we don't wipe ourselves out by then or find another planet to relocate to. I agree, mother-nature will exact a cruel and effective culling of our over population one of these days. It might be next year or 100 years from now but it will happen. Maybe then the correlation between Creation and Evolution will be evident. I've always heard that when your time is up and the Lord calls you home, everything will be clear and the answers to all the questions you've ever had will be answered then...
Yes, I covered this, any theory involving evolution is a scientific theory and not a fact...there is a difference between fact and scientific theory. It is a fact that evolution has been observed thus we know that it happens, it will become a scientific fact once the mechanisms of evolution are fully explained...and as things are going, this will not happen any time soon... Gravity exist as we can observe it, the mechanism of gravity are still not fully understood, thus any explanation at the moment is a scientific theory. Simply because we cannot fully explain gravity does not negate the fact that it exists. about the culling of the population and what not, that is theoretical of course. I believe it is most likely true but this eliminates the very real possibility that humanity will not find ways of supporting the expanded population, which one cannot know. So I would have to say it remains speculation.
Cuprum is convinced that evolution is "fact" and nothing is going to shake that belief. But as Drusus pointed out, it's theory. There is a good chance the theory will hold up over time. There is an equally good chance that new information will be discovered over the next couple of hundred years that leads to a new, more complete theory of how the diversity of species came about. Most strongly held scientific beliefs undergo significant change as science progresses. Maybe some of the work in genetics will overturn many beliefs and force a rewrite of the textbooks. That's the way science works. I also agree with Ben that there is probably an uncomfortably high probability that there will be a significant dieoff in the human population over the next century or two. I don't think there are too many people for the planet to support. I just don't think we have the institutions, organization and intelligence to pull it off.
Actually... while natural selection theory is continually being fine-tuned, the fact of evolution is very firmly established and there is NO chance that it will ever be supplanted by a different model. Evolution applies not only to species diversity and the fossil record, but also to widely divergent disciplines such as philosophy, religion, astronomy, and technology. It is one of those basic paradigms that lies below the foundations of rational thought, and once discovered, will never be abandoned. Let me make one minor caveat... there is no chance evolution will ever be supplanted EXCEPT in the hypothetical case in which fundamentalist religionists are successful in their quest to turn the United States into a religious theocracy. In that case you may see a selection pressure brought to bear by an inquisition and the concept of evolution eradicated by the application of execution and torture.
It is a scientific theory that remains so only because the mechanisms are not fully understood or known, it is evident that evolution has taken place...cuprum has simply said exactly what I have said...that evolution is factual but is not fully understood or explained.
