The Rise of Darwinism and Its Implications

[Strefanasha]

religion in the public place is only an exercise in hypocrisy. I am a convinced christian, a young earth creationist, and as such i object to the taking of God's name in vain as appears in religion in the public place.

so do not think that young earth creationism equates with right wing agenda, for they do not

[BereanBeacon1]

@Strefanasha There is no political solution to the world's problems.

[konohanominato]

I'd rather be related to a primate then to clay XD

[BereanBeacon1]

@konohanominato Primates won't be hell bound.

[konohanominato]

@BereanBeacon1 .... but clay will?

[AThagoras]

Science is naturalistic because science must be testable.The supernatural is just a term to describe our ignorance. If we understand something it is natural, if we don't understand it, we call it supernatural. But throughout the history of science, the supernatural has always been turning into the natural. Thunder used to be supernatural.

[Euphobia1]

The problem for the theist religions is that The Modern Scientific Theory of Evolution proves that a human Adam & Eve as those described in the bible could not have existed. That means they could not have committed original sin so no need for god to send his son etc.

This is most damaging from which ever way you look at it! No Prince of Denmark, NO "Hamlet".

The theists religion would not give a fig for Evolution if they could come up with a counter argument. As it stands the game is up!

[norwegianbuddha]

boooooooooooooring!

[sediment5]

Yes you are.

[fergmasterflex]

This man is an idiot.

[FlashAcesDesign]

"under our present state of ignorance", "I do not know if these results are accurate" - Quotes from the real idiot - Charles Darwin

[fergmasterflex]

Ah yes, quote mining at its finest!

[sciencesaveus]

Darwinism is an ignorant term. The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is one of the most insightful, brilliant, and solid theories in history, and should not be cheapened to the term Darwinism, which sounds like a belief system like Creatinism.

[Hooya2]

Teaching people the Bible as fact IS child abuse. Evolution is demonstrable by science. If you think it's not, you badly need an education.

[GlobalLiberty]

good way to loose and hour of your life that you can never get back...

[tamarind777]

"good way to loose and hour of your life that you can never get back..."

What's crazy is that both evolutionists and right wing, gun, war, and death mongers who call themselves Christians that will all have to give an account to God one day. Yes, I am a conservative Christian and I am saying this! I personally believe that many evolutionists will come to their senses one day and see that their religion is a deception and will turn to God, but MOST Christians today are LIVING in deception.

[Dividedbymyself]

Quote from this movie: "Francis Bacon (mentioned as a dominant christian scientist) gave us the modern scientific method."

This excludes the super-natural. This means: not assuming gods, fairies, etc. This "lecture" is nothing else than a pack of creationist lies and misrepresentations.

I just lost over an hour of my life. It's gone. I'll never get it back again.

[tamarind777]

"I just lost over an hour of my life. It's gone. I'll never get it back again."

Those who believe the religion of evolution will lose more time than just an hour. Try losing out on eternal life on this earth made anew with no sin or death. Your religion says death is good for you. If death does not occur, evolution does not progress.

[Dividedbymyself]

You already lost more than just an hour, but also the use if many brain cells.

[tamarind777]

"This excludes the super-natural. This means: not assuming gods, fairies, etc. This "lecture" is nothing else than a pack of creationist lies and misrepresentations."

So, believing that frogs turn into princes over long periods of time is not a fairy tale?

[Dividedbymyself]

I don't know the exact details, but it took longer than 100 million years for reptiles to change into mammals and eventually humans, including princes. This is over 100 million years of changes in the genetic makeup in every generation, with other species as result. This is far from a fairytale and scientifically explained. Maybe Adam instantly made out of dust, and Eve made of his rib sound more plausible? There's not enough room here to even start asking for scientific explanations about that.

[Dividedbymyself]

I noticed you didn't even care to reply to my response, but I'm just too curious.

Are Adam and Eve more plausible then the mechanisms of evolution? Please explain.

[tamarind777]

"Are Adam and Eve more plausible then the mechanisms of evolution?"

What don't you understand about the word "Religion?" Biblical creationism is a religion and does not have to stand up to the scrutiny of "scientific" study. Although there are tons of proof why creation is more plausible, there are some things that require faith, and Adam and Eve is one of those things. With that said, evolution is also a religion. It requires tons of faith, and it's contradicted by science.

[Dividedbymyself]

It's not the word religion, but the faith part in your religion that concerns me most. That you want to deny, but on the other hand profit of science is one thing, but that people like you want to ruin science by trying to implement your faith into science is just plain ridiculousness.

If you need "faith" to live your life that's ok, but you people should leave science alone, they do much and much better without god.

[tamarind777]

"It's not the word religion..."

Actually special creationism is scientific, in fact, it's TRUE science. That said, I don't push for it to be taught in public schools, unlike you. You push your religion into science classrooms when it's clearly NOT science. I believe what I believe because it makes more sense when weighed against science than evolution. My Bible tells me that the gene pools has limitations and I see that with my own eyes. You can't prove that wrong. Your religion says contrary.

[Dividedbymyself]

If you don't know the difference between science or even naturalism/atheism and religion, than you should show more interest to learn what it really is. Your bible has been proved wrong on so many occasions already, it's not very handy to use as scientific reference imho.

Science has never been so successful since they abandoned god and the bible some 400 years ago. I propose to keep it that way.

[tamarind777]

1.

"If you don't know the difference between science or even naturalism/atheism and religion..."

No offense, but it's doesn't seem you do either. Many people, like you, confuse the fact that the Bible is not a book chronicling scientific experimentation and historical details of every sort. It's a book that teaches you HOW TO DEVELOP A CHARACTER LIKE GOD's, the way we were originally created (in His IMAGE). Yes, it does have some time lines and science in it, but that is not the essence of it.

[tamarind777]

2.

"If you don't know the difference between science or even naturalism/atheism and religion..."

What you fail to realize, or also CHOOSE to be ignorant on is that evolution is NOT natural nor is it science. There is NOTHING about evolution that you can prove, observe, replicate, experiment, or even convince anyone of using nature, logics, or common sense or even ANY sense at all...lol. Which of the five senses could you use to demonstrate evolution? The only one is NONEsense!

[Dividedbymyself]

I didn't confuse the bible with scientific data, that's what you creationists are doing. Check your own remark on "gene pool limitations". You didn't even tell me what that is (I can't find out anything about, so either you're making it up or abuse some property of evolution that you don't understand yourself) or where it's in the bible, so I couldn't check it.

I think you're full of baloney. Show me what you mean.

[tamarind777]

"Show me what you mean."

You know what I mean, you are just skirting the real issue. In any case, you'd never see nor is there any proof that any animal ever had a mutation that was not ALREADY a part of his own genetic makeup. For example, why don't we see a dog with a wing mutation or some other feature that is unique to another animal. I am just using this as a rough example, but use poetic license and use any creature you want, the rule still applies.

[Dividedbymyself]

From how you said it, it could mean anything. It still does. But could you also give the bible quote for me? It's interesting to know how Jesus said it. But your priest must have given you that information, because still it's full of baloney.

It's true that once functionality of a gene is established, the gene gets conserved. That's the bases for studying genetic evolution in the first place, as most of the basic functions of animals have been formed in the early development stages of animals.

[Dividedbymyself]

After that they radiated into their own shapes and specialties, leaving a trail of ancestry in the genomes. So it's true humans won't de-evolve into jellyfish again or something like that, neither will a cat grow a lobster claw. But there are many biochemical mechanisms that can change the genome for new functionality to arise. Genes are not just functional at once or functional at all after a single "mutation", they become more and more functional over time. Most mutations are not beneficial...

[Dividedbymyself]

(note that over 99.9% of all species that ever lived has gone extinct) because of the complexity of many genes that arose over time, positive mutations are rare. Most noticeable mutations are referred to as "genetic disorders". Many genes that we share with other species through our ancestral connection with them have evolved very differently into quite different functionality. This completely complies with darwinian common ancestry evolution theory.

[Dividedbymyself]

Why don't you read some research on the evolution of the hox-genes? Do web searches for: - PMID: 17379523 - doi:10.1111/j.1472-4669.2007.0­0125.x - PMID: 17098381 - doi:10.1038/sj.hdy.6800621 - PMID: 12620122 - doi:10.1038/31933 - doi:10.1038/34530 There's a lot more, also about other genes and in other journals and science websites, you can find out by clicking citing and related articles and do some searching on your own. If you want to know, you can. If you don't want to, you never will.

[tamarind777]

"If you want to know, you can. If you don't want to, you never will."

I could tell you the same thing about Creation. If I don't want to know and it's true, then I'll just be a littler dumber, but if I am right and you're not, you have EVERYTHING to lose.

[tamarind777]

"Most mutations are not beneficial..."

But still you can't name even ONE beneficial mutation. Know why? Because there aren't any! All mutations are deleterious to a species' survival. And don't mention bacterial or insects "resistance" to chemicals b/c they simply could have ALREADY possessed the genes that is resistant and they did not mutate anything. You can't prove any of this, besides, they are still roaches and bacteria, not some new creature.

[tamarind777]

"But there are many biochemical mechanisms that can change the genome for new functionality to arise."

Would you please prove this statement or give an example if it's science? I am assuming that you refer to some "beneficial" mutation here.

[Dividedbymyself]

Btw, I meant to say "most of the basic functions of genes..." in the first post of this series.

[tamarind777]

"From how you said it, it could mean anything. It still does. But could you also give the bible quote for me? It's interesting to know how Jesus said it. But your priest must have given you that information, because still it's full of baloney."

I can't give you a quote from a religious book, b/c what I've said is basic observable science. What you're saying is religion masked to look like science. You can't prove one iota of your pseudo-science.

[Dividedbymyself]

"I could tell you the same thing about Creation. If I don't want to know and it's true, then I'll just be a littler dumber, but if I am right and you're not, you have EVERYTHING to lose."

What a stupid wager. You're a loser using religion as insurance for the "afterlife"? Is your actual faith in god the fear of some kind of imaginary hell? Hell is invented by the ancient Greek. You may as well believe in Zeus if you believe in hell.

I read lots of the bible btw

[Dividedbymyself]

There is no science in the bible, only ancient observations that they couldn't explain and a hell of a lot of imagination.

And you want to endanger the health of yours and everybody's children as genetics (thus evolution) is the foundation of (future medical) science?

You have no idea what the capabilities will be once we have real detailed understanding of the genome, the cell, etc. If evolution wouldn't be happening or true, it wouldn't be able to base a science on it at all.

[Dividedbymyself]

By denying evolution, we would deny a complete new world of medical science.

You didn't even read one single article I gave you?

They talk about a whole bunch of positive mutation: the hox genes. This is not just one mutation, but a whole sequence of beneficial mutations. The hox genes are responsible for limbs.

If all mutation would be bad for a species' survival you wouldn't be here. You have mutations too you know. If you go to a lab and have yours and your parents DNA analyzed, they can

[Dividedbymyself]

show them to you. And how do you think forensic police scientists work when identifying someone's DNA?

This is based on finding differences and/or similarities in DNA. When there are differences, this means there have been mutations making them different.

You are very ambiguous btw. First you say that the bible says the gene pool has limitations, and then you say you can't quote the bible. At first you say the gene pool has limitations, and then you say positive mutations can't happen at all.

[Dividedbymyself]

But another example is the "Nylon Bug". It's a bacterium that eats nylon and nothing else, while nylon

is only invented about 70 years ago. In lab tests nylon eating bacteria evolved as well and this is because of mutations. I'm not going to search for the actual research as you're not going to read it anyway, like the other research I found for you before.

Did you know more than 8% of the human genome is made out of viral DNA because of viruses inserting their own DNA in the genes of our human

[Dividedbymyself]

ancestors in the past? So obviously even those mutations are not necessarily negative.

I did prove my statement with the articles I referred to, but you choose not to know it and even deny it.

And yes, it is observable science that the genome is limited in the respect that a cat won't grow a lobster claw. Only some god could do such a thing. The scientific theory of evolution doesn't make such ridiculous predictions. Very rarely humans do get born with a remnant of a tail though.

[tamarind777]

"There is no science in the bible, only ancient observations that they couldn't explain and a hell of a lot of imagination."

The Bible is not a checklist of scientific facts, but a way to put on the character of God, something you're not interested in. Imagination? ALL evolution has is imagination. Let's face it, when you tell me about billions of years ago, you have to imagine that b/c it was too long ago to prove. What I believe does not take imagination, but faith in what makes sense.

[tamarind777]

"And you want to endanger the health of yours and everybody's children as genetics (thus evolution) is the foundation of (future medical) science?"

What??? Genetics and evolution are polar opposites, they have nothing to do with each other. Genetics is science that can be observed, tested, and proven. Gregor Mendel, the founder of modern genetics WAS a believer and God used him to enhance medical science, not to promote some spurious religion masquerading as science.

[tamarind777]

"If evolution wouldn't be happening or true, it wouldn't be able to base a science on it at all."

There is NO science based on evolution. You are sadly mistaken. Every single branch of science contradicts evolution.

[tamarind777]

"Is your actual faith in god the fear of some kind of imaginary hell?"

You have a perverted understanding of the Bible. I don't serve God b/c of fear of hell, but, b/c I love Him. Period. Hell, btw, was not INVENTED by the Greeks, it was PERVERTED by the Greeks. Biblical hell is NOT a place of burning and torment, but the GRAVE. According to the Bible, there is NO place of eternal torment where the Devil is in charge. That is a Catholic fairy tale along with purgatory, just a money-making scam.

[tamarind777]

"What a stupid wager."

What hope does evolution have to offer? To be worm food and fertilizer when you're dead? To tell you that you have not purpose in life and your life has no meaning but what you give it? That you have no absolute morality, but you can do anything the laws tell you is legal? What if the laws say its ok to have sex with kids? Would that be fine with you? It would according to evolution. Sorry, evolution is a religion invented by the devil to deceive the so-called wise.

[Dividedbymyself]

I didn't even mention the devil, but the bible says there is a place of eternal torment for if you don't live explicitly by the laws of the bible, whatever they may be.

Everybody with a little bit of intelligence can make up his or her own goals and purposes in life. If you want that to be "fertilizer", that's fine by me, but please not in my garden. I'm pro-cremation btw.

A good reason to live is to raise your kids to be friendly people that hopefully will lead a happy life.

Moral is largely

[Dividedbymyself]

dependent on how you're raised, in what environment, social economical standards and culture. You want it to be fixed as the bible prescribes absolute laws to live by, but that's not what's happening if you're observing well. And non-theists do not have "lower" moral than theists, but sometimes a different moral.

Check out UN figures about who's donating most to foreign aid projects, or where there's less crime, teen pregnancies and abortions, in christian USA or in European

[Dividedbymyself]

predominantly atheist countries? Well, it's the atheist countries, I'll tell you that already as you're not going to look it up anyway.

And now you're getting really ridiculous about the sex with children. Evolution absolutely prescribes that one should NOT have sex with children. It hurts them, they don't like it and they wouldn't know what's happening to them, it can give them infections and diseases and when they get pregnant they again have a much higher risk to die because of that.

[Dividedbymyself]

If you want to see evolution at work, look at what's happening in Sudan. The Arabs are killing the men and raping the women and girls of other "racial" populations. The christian Serbs did the same in their war only a decade ago.

Blaming the theory of evolution for people without compassion is like blaming quantum theory for sunburn and lightning.

What science does is observing the phenomena, try to explain it and make advantage of the advantages that explanation has to offer, which can also

[Dividedbymyself]

be trying to tackle negative side effects of these observed phenomena, like bad mutations while (the human) species are evolving.

What evolution has to offer? I already said that. By studying evolution we can determine what to do about the bad side effects of evolution. Evolution has given us a humans a pretty well functioning navigation device (our brains) that enables us to do that. I say we'd take advantage of that. How can finding solutions for medical problems be the work of the devil?

[Dividedbymyself]

And if you'd had done some reading on the sciences of evolution, like the articles I gave you, you'd have known that everything only makes sense in the light of evolution. Every science confirms evolution, whether it's genetics, (nuclear) physics, geology, etc. But you prefer to stay dumb. You said it yourself.

Your religion doesn't provide anything of what science has to offer. I said it before, there hasn't been so much progress in science as since science abandoned the idea that everything in

[Dividedbymyself]

the bible was based on the truth and tried to explain everything only to confirm the bible. That just didn't work out.

By studying evolution maybe not too long from now doctors can make someone grow a new leg after an amputation, or make your own body repair your heart tissues by genetic therapy after a defect is found. This is no imagination, this is real science, they're trying to find out how right now.

And do a search for "recent human evolution" if you want to find out how humans have

[Dividedbymyself]

evolved over the past 100,000of years (though I don't think you want to). Mostly our metabolism has adapted to changes in the climate (which also has an adverse effect resulting in a higher chance of obesity), when spreading over the world. But there are also mutations found that are responsible for changes in skin and eye color, bone and muscle structure, etc, etc.

Scientists don't need to have lived millions of years ago to see what happened in those days. They have lots of methods to see what

[Dividedbymyself]

it must have been like and what must have happened in the past.

And I don't have a perverted view o the bible. You were trying to scare me with hell. It's your own perverted view on the bible that's responsible for that. You are confused about the origins of the hell. Hades was invented by the Greek long before Jesus lived (if he even did). According to the bible hell didn't even exist before Jesus.

[Dividedbymyself]

In the OT there's only a place where ALL the dead were supposed to go. It's the translators that turned the word for that into "hell" when they thought it was appropriate in certain translations.

It's not the clever ones that are being tricked by the devil, you are being fooled by your church. Some christians also say the devil doesn't exist, that evil is "the absence of god". But as I mentioned before, statistics show that there's no relation between religion and moral.

[Dividedbymyself]

And has moral really gone down since scientists found out the earth is not the center of what we now know to be our solar system and the universe, and not like as the bible prescribes the earth being the center of everything?

And tell me, is a christian who doesn't want his kids to be vaccinated of low or extreme high moral? Or not a christian at all, because you and the church you visit are the only true christians of course. That's what every denomination and religion says.

[tamarind777]

"If you want to see evolution at work, look at what's happening in Sudan. The Arabs are killing the men and raping the women and girls of other "racial" populations. The christian Serbs did the same in their war only a decade ago."

If by this you mean social Darwinism, the idea that one race of people is superior and should subdue another, then yes, that is evolution. Your analogy about the sun is flawed. Humans are able to make logical, rational decisions about their actions, the sun doesn't.

[tamarind777]

"If you want to see evolution at work, look at what's happening in Sudan."

So what happened to black slaves in this country was just evolution in action? Are whites superior or more evolved and their actions were justified? Let's hear what you have to say about this. Remember, be consistent with your statement about what's happening in Sudan. Don't try and hedge your way around this one and be all pc on me.

[tamarind777]

"Evolution absolutely prescribes that one should NOT have sex with children. It hurts them, they don't like it and they wouldn't know what's happening to them, it can give them infections and diseases and when they get pregnant they again have a much higher risk to die because of that."

Ahhh! Now we're getting somewhere. No, this is not ridiculous. So, what if science says that those things you've just mentioned are no longer so? Then would it be ok? You see the trouble you get yourself into?

[Dividedbymyself]

Either you still think I'm a pedophile just because I'm an atheist or you're out of arguments.

But I can't get this out of my mind, so please answer me in detail:

What's there between you and and a child except for the wrath of god? Would you see no reason not to rape young girls if there would be no god, or if you'd realize that evolution is really happening? Do you get aroused of children and the only thing between your penis and that child is the hand of god?

Please answer me those questions.

[tamarind777]

"Either you still think I'm a pedophile..."

No, I don't think you're one. The reason I use this horrid type of abuse is that we CANNOT say it's "wrong" if there is no one greater than us to give us our morals. If you say pedophilia or murdering old people is wrong, then is it simply b/c it's not good for our survival? My point is this: what if "science" says these things are "good" for our survival, then would they be acceptable? According to your thinking, they would be.

[tamarind777]

What's there between you and and a child "except for the wrath of god? Would you see no reason not to rape young girls if there would be no god, or if you'd realize that evolution is really happening? Do you get aroused of children and the only thing between your penis and that child is the hand of god?"

Wow! You really miss the point, don't you? You could use survival of the fittest, like killing old people b/c they take up valuable resource. That's your religion.

[automaticAEV]

Wow! You really miss the point, don't you? You could use survival of the fittest, like killing old people b/c they take up valuable resource. That's your religion. <<

If that was true and it isnt it would have no effect on what is true. For example fire can burn people and thats bad. That is no argument for that fire is cold is it?

[tamarind777]

"Evolution absolutely prescribes that one should NOT have sex with children."

As hurtful as this is, I brought it up for a reason. I want to make a point that evolution does not have a basis for absolute morality. I understand that morality stems from societal norms, but evolution does have a say in it. In fact, it directs and drives social mores and norms. If all the evils you mentioned about hurting children were retracted by science, then evolution would say it's ok.

[Dividedbymyself]

You're not answering my questions. Never mind, I didn't expect you to. You not only say you are dumb, you are dumb by nature. Of course the sun doesn't think. Obviously neither do you. But did it make people kill each other more than before they found out that bible story was not true? Or all those people around the world that don't believe in your bible, neither in a fixed or holy moral that don't just rape and kill each other? The same goes for evolution. In many of the most civilized coun-

[Dividedbymyself]

tries in Europe the population is 40 to 50% or more atheist. They don't kill each other. That was very different in the days most people still were religious btw. Those days Europe only knew wars, religious killings and divine scare mongering. And you only cherry picked from my comment on the child sex. I said also: "They don't like it and wouldn't know what's happening to them". There's not much room here on youtube to have a serious discussion, so every word is important. I think people who

[Dividedbymyself]

have the urge to have sex with children are sick and should be locked up. Most humans have compassion by nature, but unfortunately not all. We get all our basics for moral by nature, how it's filled in is learned from your parents and culture.

Imagine yourself believing evolution is true. Would you go outside and just start killing everybody? If you do, you are a hell of a scary MF. I know for 100% sure evolution is a fact, still I never have the urge to rape kids or start killing whoever.

[Dividedbymyself]

You also didn't go into the crime/teen pregnancy/abortion rates of christian US vs. atheist Europe. You want to stay dumb on that as well? Is slavery evolution? I think everything concerning populations of life forms developing is linked to evolution. Europeans migrating to the US is evolution as well. Just like "the sun", the only thing we can do is take it into account in how we handle certain situations like genetic diseases, viruses, what we eat, etc.. It provides us insight in how and why

[Dividedbymyself]

certain things happen. This doesn't justify slavery from humanitarian point of view though. The bible does allow slavery though. Though evolution is a fact, this doesn't lift anyone from his or her responsibilities. Evolution dictates our lives, whether we like it or not because it made us what we are. Not believing in god demands a lot of responsibility and rationality, as I don't believe god will "save the planet" once things go wrong. Therefore maybe it's better when people like you keep

[Dividedbymyself]

believing in your god, otherwise things might go wrong. You're just not ready for that responsibility, like all those preachers that can't keep their hands of kids. On the other hand, if many people like you keep thinking god will solve all our problems, things will go out of hand as well. I think we rent the planet from our children and we should leave it in a state even better than how we entered it. We're not the last ones. If we ruin the planet, they will be hurt. Though we're not divine

[Dividedbymyself]

creatures, we're still are pretty special. It may very well be possible there are other life forms, it's not likely the universe

is full of other intelligent life as far as we know now. In universal context we're hardly different than a microbe on a rock, but now we're here, we might as well enjoy the ride and find out as much about ourselves and our environment as possible don't we? By doing that we can anticipate on what's still to come, and keep the world, humanity and bio-diversity healthy.

[Dividedbymyself]

It's up to us to stay alive. There's no other place than earth to go to. You should realize how minute we are as a species.

By studying evolution scientists can determine what to do about the negative side effect of that very process. The human species is the most violent species there is. No other animal does as much useless killing (not for food or defence) as us. Maybe science can do something to get that number much lower too one day, maybe just by rational thinking alone and get the people

[Dividedbymyself]

to listen to them some more, in stead of some incompetent fairy tale god. But you're just too pathetic to have any further

discussion with if you keep insisting that I'm a ferocious baby raping person just because I know evolution is a fact, "as it is", like the sun and gravity, and all of their adverse side effects, and should be studied as such.

You should either shake the crap out of your head or start living a stone age life style, without science at all. Still I hope you have your kids

[Dividedbymyself]

vaccinated and bring them to a doctor when they're ill. I wouldn't want them to suffer because of your stone age thinking. Oh no, suffering and illness have a reason and are divine tools to test us if we're ready for "heaven", or as punishment or whatever irrational reason for suffering you and those ignorant religious folks before you made up already. Of course god will heal us if we believe enough in him. If you believe hard enough you of course never get sick, even if you'd swallow

[Dividedbymyself]

plutonium, how silly of me to think "real faithful" people get sick or get/cause accidents as well...

[Dividedbymyself]

Btw, social darwinism is the science of studying the social behavior of species (humans included) in the context of evolution. It's not a bible or prescription of "how to behave". That's up to our ratio.

[tamarind777]

"vaccinated and bring them to a doctor when they're ill. I wouldn't want them to suffer because of your stone age thinking."

Evolutions has ZERO to do with vaccination. I always get a kick out of evolutionists using science at large (microwaves, tv, vaccinations, etc.) and linking that with the lie that an elephant and a fern are related. You don't know what science is if you believe that. Evolution is a fait-based religion with "father time" as it's god.

[tamarind777]

"The bible does allow slavery though."

I've heard this from atheists in EVERY time, but they fail to say where it's in the Bible. Why did God do all that He did to save the Israelites from Egyptian slavery if He condoned it? You obviously don't understand the context of Bible times. When the Bible talks about slavery, for example, with the Jew having slaves, it's simply talking about servants, maids, etc. Read Exodus 20 that talks about the "servants" resting on the Sabbath.

[tamarind777]

"You also didn't go into the crime/teen pregnancy/abortion rates of christian US vs. atheist Europe..."

First, I don't know where u get your stats from, but your figures could be skewed b/c you compare a tiny country and the US, which is a large country. Also, there are tons of factors that could confound your stats. It is a fact that there is less crime and dysfunctions (period!) among Christians. Please check your "facts" again.

[Dividedbymyself]

The theory of evolution is science, just like computers, and studying how they actually work up to the tiniest level.

Vaccinations have much to do with evolution, but you can only see that if you understand the concept of evolution.

Past viral infections can be traced back in genes, whether they are retroviruses (inserting themselves in the host gene, never to leave again) or by influencing the gene pool by natural selection

killing). In Europe in the dark ages the population was plagued by

[Dividedbymyself]

viruses, and up to 75% of the population died, almost only the virus resistant genes that are still to be found in the majority of the European people today. Because of this resistance they could carry the virus without getting (severely) ill or dying. Then the Spanish went to South America a few centuries ago, they had such a virus, but the indigenous people were never exposed to this virus before and had not evolved natural resistance. 90% of them died because of that. By vaccinating people

[Dividedbymyself]

against dangerous viruses, we influence the natural walk of evolution that would have happened if we didn't vaccinate. Also studying viruses and how they evolve is very much part of finding clues to how to create new vaccines, or vaccines that can handle whole families of viruses and bacteria at once. Studying genes of humans and our relatives (chimps, mice, dogs.) that have resistance against viruses they can resist but us humans not (like HIV) could lead to a genetic therapy or vaccination.

[Dividedbymyself]

On the other hand, vaccinating is interfering with the works of god of course. As if we think he didn't make us well enough before he took his day off. As with everything, he's supposed to have a reason for spreading viruses. But that goes for every medical science too of course. The whole of modern medical science gets more and more based on analysis of evolution on the molecular scale and how that influences our lives. And the way evolution is studied is so varied, it involves many other

[Dividedbymyself]

sciences, from nuclear and quantum physics to (bio-) chemistry. If they were found to yield only untrustworthy result, your computer wouldn't work either.

Slavery: Matthew 18:25, Luke 12:45-48, Ephesians 6:5-9, Exodus 21:2-6. The "servants" were allowed to be sold and beaten. They had to fear their master as much as god and Jesus. If they went out without permission they were to be pinned though the ear. Well, I think it's no more than fair they get a day off as well. I hope you have a better

[Dividedbymyself]

contract.

Yes, the first thing to do when confronted with statistics is doubting the source and methods, especially on a place like youtube. but blaming it on the size of a country is really strange. I didn't show you where I got if from because you can check international crime statistics all over the web if you're interested. And if you've never heard of how criminal the US is over other developed countries, you haven't been paying attention to anything else than yourself for

[Dividedbymyself]

the whole of your life. But I did the work for you. This is what I found within a click or two: (These are short url's, copy&paste what's between the quotation marks in the address bar of your browser):

This is a comparison between the US and where I live and other countries (about half of us are non-religious, and the teens in the Netherlands do have plenty of sex nowadays):

".in/27u",".in/27v", ".in/27w" (type "xrl" in front of the dot). Note that the use of marijuana and hashish are allowed

[Dividedbymyself]

over here, but the use of drugs is way lower than in the US. Also in the Netherlands the lower social economic classes have higher teen pregnancy and abortions rates.

Teenage pregnancies: ".in/27x", abortions: ".in/27z". I can imagineabortions being less in religious states because abstinence, social pressure and harsher legislation.

But I didn't give those statistics to show that religious people are more criminal, as I don't think this is the case. I wanted to show there is no necessary

[Dividedbymyself]

relation between religiousness and "immoral behaviour". ".in/280" shows the very religious black and Hispanic community in the US have the most pregnancies and abortions. This looks like a social-economic and educational relation to me if you'd combine it with the Europe vs. US comparison. Not religion. Religion can be a reducing factor, but is not necessarily so. The most important is to get teens educated about how to prevent unwanted things from happening. If someone chooses abstinence,

[Dividedbymyself]

that's a personal choice, but the use of condoms and other contraception as well. I respect both decisions.

And about the "god of time". I recently watched a documentary in which there was a christian girl who was no virgin anymore. Now she got married, she felt sorry for her future husband and went to a surgeon to have her hymen restored. Then why not just take an awl and thrust it through her labia if the thinks the pain and blood so important? To me this is like making a baby, who already

[Dividedbymyself]

said his first word, do it for the second time by removing the vocal cords and restore them again and then wait for him to talk again.

Nobody can influence or turn back time, We can study the past and influence the future in a positive way (less suffering) if the study of the past is done well. That's as far as it goes.

It's you religious people who live in a fantasy world with imaginary goals and purposes.

[McMonster65]

This man is so utterly and profoundly dishonest I weep for the poor fools who are taken in. He distorts the positions of Gould without a hint of conscience. NO SCIENTIST says "just believe in evolution". This man is a pathetic liar.

[soloman81]

Very misleading presentation. That's a shame.

[lawilson200]

Wow! An actual lecture. Regardless the format you try to present this nonsense in, it is still nonsense!