Do you believe in God? Simple question

[StreetHazard]

Again for the 3rd time....for you and everyone else on this board, Christians, Satanists, Muslims, Atheists, Buddhists, Agnostics and everything in between alike. the term "Evolution" is not the same as "Evolutionary Synthesis" coined by the man Julian Huxley in his book (Evolution: The Modern Synthesis). For the avoidance of confusion and for the sake of any arguments on this page or any other conversation elsewhere. The scientific explanation of "how" life evolved on this planet should be termed as such. It has been (shortened) to just "Evolution" due to the idea's (and title) put forth in Julian Huxley's book, but they are not the same.

Yes I accept Evolutionary Synthesis as the most plausible explanation on "how" life evolved on this planet (so far) in the same way every rational human being has, and "working" biologists have as well according to the National Academy of Science. I would take their opinion over yours regarding these matters, whose members serve pro bono as advisers to the nation on science, engineering, and medicine. I will quote a chapter conclusion in that press release here.

"Creationism, intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not science because they are not testable by the methods of science. These claims subordinate observed data to statements based on authority, revelation, or religious belief. Documentation offered in support of these claims is typically limited to the special publications of their advocates. These publications do not offer hypotheses subject to change in light of new data, new interpretations, or demonstration of error. This contrasts with science, where any hypothesis or theory always remains subject to the possibility of rejection or modification in the light of new knowledge."

There will never be wisdom or knowledge in the unknowable. Science does not hinge around belief, it does not even fit a definition of philosophy, it's pursuits are finding truth which shapes our perception of reality.

Exactly what wisdom and insight have you learned (besides what I have just taught you), when pursuing these outdated texts from an ancient culture that was originally written in a language you most likely do not understand? And what makes you think the religion you follow is the sole means to attain it? Humans do gain understanding in many other ways, such as through literature, the arts, philosophical reflection, and religious experience (forgive my political correctness), and I will concede there is certainly some wisdom to impart from the teachings of the character Jesus Christ...If he even existed at all. His birth as depicted is an impossibility, his life undocumented as well as his death outside of the new testament, a cowardly suicide with dreams of martyrdom and an unknowable payoff in the afterlife as much as any Islamic extremist. But his teachings are commendable in his humanitarian efforts. But it's just a shame his imagined father is such a fucking asshole.


If you want to argue with someone about evolution or evolutionary synthesis , don't argue with me...argue with the scientists that reviewed and agreed with it's conclusions.




John Baldeschwieler

J. Stanley Johnson

Professor and Professor of Chemistry

Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering

California Institute of Technology

Pasadena, California

John E. Dowling

Maria Moors

Cabot Professor of Natural Science

The Biological Laboratories

Harvard University

Cambridge, Massachusetts

Marye Anne Fox

Chancellor

North Carolina State University

Raleigh, North Carolina

Wilford Gardner

Dean Emeritus

College of Natural Resources

University of California at Berkeley

Berkeley, California

Timothy Goldsmith

Professor of Biology

Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology

Yale University

New Haven, Connecticut

Avram Goldstein

Professor of Pharmacology, Emeritus

Stanford University

Stanford, California

Ursula Goodenough

Professor Department of Biology

Washington University

Saint Louis, Missouri

Robert Griffiths

Professor of Physics Carnegie

Mellon University

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Norman Horowitz

Professor Emeritus

Division of Biology

California Institute of Technology

Pasadena, California

Susan Kidwell

Professor

Department of Geophysical Sciences

University of Chicago

Chicago, Illinois

David Pilbeam

Henry Ford II

Professor of Social Sciences

Peabody Museum

Harvard University

Cambridge, Massachusetts

Luis Sequeira

J.C. Walker Professor Emeritus

Department of Plant Pathology

University of Wisconsin

Madison, Wisconsin

Phillip Tobias

Professor Emeritus

Department of Anatomical Sciences

University of Witwatersrand

Medical School

Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa

And other anonymous reviews.

While the individuals listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, responsibility for the final content of this report rests solely with the authoring committee and the National Academy of Sciences.


Council of the National Academy of Sciences

Bruce Alberts

President

National Academy of Sciences

Washington, DC

Mary Ellen Avery

Professor of Pediatrics

Harvard Medical School

Boston, Massachusetts

Lewis M. Branscomb

Professor Emeritus

John E Kennedy School of Government

Harvard University

Cambridge, Massachusetts

Ralph J. Cicerone

Chancellor

University of California, Irvine

Irvine, California

Marye Anne Fox

Chancellor

North Carolina State University

Raleigh, North Carolina

Ralph E. Gomory

President

Alfred P. Sloan

Foundation

New York, New York

Ronald L. Graham

Chief Scientist

AT&T Labs

Florham Park, New Jersey

Jack Halpern

Louis Block Distinguished Professor Emeritus

Department of Chemistry

The University of Chicago

Chicago, Illinois

David M. Kipnis

Distinguished University Professor

Washington University School of Medicine

Saint Louis, Missouri

Daniel E. Koshland Jr.

Professor in the Graduate School

Department of Molecular and Cellular

Biology University of California, Berkeley

Berkeley, California

Peter Raven

Director

Missouri Botanical Garden

Saint Louis, Missouri

Sherwood E Rowland

Donald Bren Research Professor of Chemistry and Earth System Science

Department of Chemistry

University of California, Irvine

Irvine, California

William J. Rutter

Chairman

Chiron Corporation

Emeryville, California

Luis Sequeira

J.C. Walker Professor Emeritus

Department of Plant Pathology

University of Wisconsin

Madison, Wisconsin

Carla J. Shatz

Investigator

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

Professor

Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology

University of California, Berkeley

Berkeley, California

Jean D. Wilson

Charles Cameron Sprague Distinguished

Chair in Biomedical Science

University of Texas Southwestern

Medical Center

Dallas, Texas

Robert H. Wurtz

Chief

Laboratory of Sensorimotor Research

National Institutes of Health

Bethesda, Maryland

[ahabion]

Again for the 3rd time....for you and everyone else on this board, Christians, Satanists, Muslims, Atheists, Buddhists, Agnostics and everything in between alike. the term "Evolution" is not the same as "Evolutionary Synthesis" coined by the man Julian Huxley in his book (Evolution: The Modern Synthesis). For the avoidance of confusion and for the sake of any arguments on this page or any other conversation elsewhere. The scientific explanation of "how" life evolved on this planet should be termed as such. It has been (shortened) to just "Evolution" due to the idea's (and title) put forth in Julian Huxley's book, but they are not the same.

Yes I accept Evolutionary Synthesis as the most plausible explanation on "how" life evolved on this planet (so far) in the same way every rational human being has, and "working" biologists have as well according to the National Academy of Science. I would take their opinion over yours regarding these matters, whose members serve pro bono as advisers to the nation on science, engineering, and medicine. I will quote a chapter conclusion in that press release here.

"Creationism, intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not science because they are not testable by the methods of science. These claims subordinate observed data to statements based on authority, revelation, or religious belief. Documentation offered in support of these claims is typically limited to the special publications of their advocates. These publications do not offer hypotheses subject to change in light of new data, new interpretations, or demonstration of error. This contrasts with science, where any hypothesis or theory always remains subject to the possibility of rejection or modification in the light of new knowledge."




If you want to argue with someone about evolution or evolutionary synthesis , don't argue with me...argue with the scientists that reviewed and agreed with it's conclusions.




John Baldeschwieler

J. Stanley Johnson

Professor and Professor of Chemistry

Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering

California Institute of Technology

Pasadena, California

John E. Dowling

Maria Moors

Cabot Professor of Natural Science

The Biological Laboratories

Harvard University

Cambridge, Massachusetts

Marye Anne Fox

Chancellor

North Carolina State University

Raleigh, North Carolina

Wilford Gardner

Dean Emeritus

College of Natural Resources

University of California at Berkeley

Berkeley, California

Timothy Goldsmith

Professor of Biology

Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology

Yale University

New Haven, Connecticut

Avram Goldstein

Professor of Pharmacology, Emeritus

Stanford University

Stanford, California

Ursula Goodenough

Professor Department of Biology

Washington University

Saint Louis, Missouri

Robert Griffiths

Professor of Physics Carnegie

Mellon University

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

Norman Horowitz

Professor Emeritus

Division of Biology

California Institute of Technology

Pasadena, California

Susan Kidwell

Professor

Department of Geophysical Sciences

University of Chicago

Chicago, Illinois

David Pilbeam

Henry Ford II

Professor of Social Sciences

Peabody Museum

Harvard University

Cambridge, Massachusetts

Luis Sequeira

J.C. Walker Professor Emeritus

Department of Plant Pathology

University of Wisconsin

Madison, Wisconsin

Phillip Tobias

Professor Emeritus

Department of Anatomical Sciences

University of Witwatersrand

Medical School

Johannesburg, Republic of South Africa

And other anonymous reviews.

While the individuals listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, responsibility for the final content of this report rests solely with the authoring committee and the National Academy of Sciences.


Council of the National Academy of Sciences

Bruce Alberts

President

National Academy of Sciences

Washington, DC

Mary Ellen Avery

Professor of Pediatrics

Harvard Medical School

Boston, Massachusetts

Lewis M. Branscomb

Professor Emeritus

John E Kennedy School of Government

Harvard University

Cambridge, Massachusetts

Ralph J. Cicerone

Chancellor

University of California, Irvine

Irvine, California

Marye Anne Fox

Chancellor

North Carolina State University

Raleigh, North Carolina

Ralph E. Gomory

President

Alfred P. Sloan

Foundation

New York, New York

Ronald L. Graham

Chief Scientist

AT&T Labs

Florham Park, New Jersey

Jack Halpern

Louis Block Distinguished Professor Emeritus

Department of Chemistry

The University of Chicago

Chicago, Illinois

David M. Kipnis

Distinguished University Professor

Washington University School of Medicine

Saint Louis, Missouri

Daniel E. Koshland Jr.

Professor in the Graduate School

Department of Molecular and Cellular

Biology University of California, Berkeley

Berkeley, California

Peter Raven

Director

Missouri Botanical Garden

Saint Louis, Missouri

Sherwood E Rowland

Donald Bren Research Professor of Chemistry and Earth System Science

Department of Chemistry

University of California, Irvine

Irvine, California

William J. Rutter

Chairman

Chiron Corporation

Emeryville, California

Luis Sequeira

J.C. Walker Professor Emeritus

Department of Plant Pathology

University of Wisconsin

Madison, Wisconsin

Carla J. Shatz

Investigator

Howard Hughes Medical Institute

Professor

Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology

University of California, Berkeley

Berkeley, California

Jean D. Wilson

Charles Cameron Sprague Distinguished

Chair in Biomedical Science

University of Texas Southwestern

Medical Center

Dallas, Texas

Robert H. Wurtz

Chief

Laboratory of Sensorimotor Research

National Institutes of Health

Bethesda, Maryland

Nice Copy/Paste, I'm glad you're free thinking mind has lead you to read and believe in the things written by man.

And yes, I'll make the generalization of evolution because you've already summed it up oh so nicely. Much like Christianity or any other denomination is termed religion for short, to include all generalization.

And yes you're exactly right... intelligent design and creationism isn't science. This isn't an argument that it is otherwise. I am a believer in science and scientific discovery. The argument at it's core is the belief of evolution. Evolution takes as many leaps and bounds to believe as does any religion... or if you want to compare apples to apples.... evolution to global warming. Even the scientific community can't come to grips with the "evidence" that is so "conclusive" but yet many believe it and that thinking has pushed thru the populace that Earth is warming and we're all going to die in 7 years if we don't minimize our carbon footprint. Speaking on those same terms, there are many more scientist and many biologist for that matter who believe in a religion of some sorts.

To emphasize the bold above... basically stating and further verifying a previous post: Science can never be REAL truth because what is true today may be tomorrow's false... and today's false may be tomorrow's truth. OR to put it in movie terms "...there is no spoon..." -kid in The Matrix- (I swear that movie is a perfect analogy of what we Christians term: faith)

There will never be wisdom or knowledge in the unknowable. Science does not hinge around belief, it does not even fit a definition of philosophy, it's pursuits are finding truth which shapes our perception of reality.

Exactly what wisdom and insight have you learned (besides what I have just taught you), when pursuing these outdated texts from an ancient culture that was originally written in a language you most likely do not understand? And what makes you think the religion you follow is the sole means to attain it? Humans do gain understanding in many other ways, such as through literature, the arts, philosophical reflection, and religious experience (forgive my political correctness), and I will concede there is certainly some wisdom to impart from the teachings of the character Jesus Christ...If he even existed at all. His birth as depicted is an impossibility, his life undocumented as well as his death outside of the new testament, a cowardly suicide with dreams of martyrdom and an unknowable payoff in the afterlife as much as any Islamic extremist. But his teachings are commendable in his humanitarian efforts. But it's just a shame his imagined father is such a fucking asshole.

heh, the Bible is full of wisdom and insight. If you've read it, you'd discover it yourself. Especially if you read it with the intent of learning instead of trying to find the so called "flaws" that you've lead yourself to believe in. I read a biology book with the intent on learning and discovering something new I didn't know before... though I know it'd be twisting and arm and a leg to have you even pick up a Bible. And you're right, there are plenty of other places that you can experience wisdom and insight... but none like an all-knowing God has to offer.

But hey, not trying to be all spiritual and stuff... I figure based on your post, you're tired of defending evolution. It's ok. Here's to you Sir!

[BABY J]

heh, the Bible is full of wisdom and insight. If you've read it, you'd discover it yourself. Especially if you read it with the intent of learning instead of trying to find the so called "flaws" that you've lead yourself to believe in. I read a biology book with the intent on learning and discovering something new I didn't know before... though I know it'd be twisting and arm and a leg to have you even pick up a Bible. And you're right, there are plenty of other places that you can experience wisdom and insight... but none like an all-knowing God has to offer.

Some1 with a true desire for searching for truth or anything close to it will not approach the bible w/ the INTENT of learning anything. They will approach it with an arbitrary eye. You seem to be fairly intelligent on most days and I'm sure you'd agree.

If I were a Christian I'd LOVE for people to challenge it b/c if it rang true it'd only prove my view to be sound when they reached the same conclusion that I had reached. Asking questions means I am learning something - the people that followed Mr. Jones didn't ask enuff questions - neither did the people that followed Mr. Koresh and they paid with their lives.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence --- Christians have never been able to produce evidence or anything that resembles evidence. Jesus was no more important than any other common hero of humanity (i.e Martin Luther King, FDR, Ghandi, etc). There are ZERO 1st hand accounts of him rising from that grave --- and if there are, well... people still see Elvis too. LOL

[ahabion]

Some1 with a true desire for searching for truth or anything close to it will not approach the bible w/ the INTENT of learning anything. They will approach it with an arbitrary eye. You seem to be fairly intelligent on most days and I'm sure you'd agree.

If I were a Christian I'd LOVE for people to challenge it b/c if it rang true it'd only prove my view to be sound when they reached the same conclusion that I had reached. Asking questions means I am learning something - the people that followed Mr. Jones didn't ask enuff questions - neither did the people that followed Mr. Koresh and they paid with their lives.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence --- Christians have never been able to produce evidence or anything that resembles evidence. Jesus was no more important than any other common hero of humanity (i.e Martin Luther King, FDR, Ghandi, etc). There are ZERO 1st hand accounts of him rising from that grave --- and if there are, well... people still see Elvis too. LOL

It is already hard enough for many who call themselves Christians to even believe what they believe to be correct and absolute. Even if they thought it, do they live it, is the big question. Where Christians fail (as a people) and where the rest of society see them is that they're seen as being one of the same crowd and doing the same things everyone else does but "preach" a different thing. So they challenge the status quo never realizing that they only challenge themselves in front of the status quo. So to prove that they're right (to address the bold) only allows them to validate and vindicate themselves. Ask the tough questions and wrestle down truth.

And you are right that great claims require great evidence. Archeology provides sound evidence for events within the Bible and the same can be said of evolution as well... discover truth.