The Evolution Debate: It's Not About Theology - Michael Ruse

Complete video at: http://fora.tv/2009/02/17/Michael_Ruse_on_Darwinism

Science philosopher Michael Ruse says the conflict between creationism and evolution is not a theological debate, but a cultural debate akin to abortion, gay marriage and capital punishment. "Evolution represents one side, rather than the other," he says.

-----

Michael Ruse, philosopher of science, recounts the history of Darwinism by explaining the theories of evolution and natural selection.

Ruse questions whether these theories are as valid today, 200 years after Darwin's birthday.

Michael Ruse is a philosopher of science, working on the philosophy of biology, and is well known for his work on the argument between creationism and evolutionary biology. He was born in England, took his undergraduate degree at the University of Bristol (1962), his master's degree at McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario (1964), and Ph.D. at the University of Bristol (1970). Ruse taught at the University of Guelph Canada for 35 years. Since his retirement from Guelph, he has taught at Florida State University and is, since 2000, the Lucyle T. Werkmeister Professor of Philosophy. In 1986, he was elected as a Fellow of both the Royal Society of Canada and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He has received honorary doctorates from the University of Bergen, Norway (1990), the McMaster University, Ontario, Canada (2003) and most recently the University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada (2007).

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• science
• social
• culture
• cultural
• issues
• conservative
• liberal
• religion
• religious
• fundamentalism
• bible
• creationism
• creator
• god
• intelligent
• design
• id
• global
• warming
• climate
• change
• left
• right
• politics
• political
• atheism
• atheists
• fora.tv
• foratv
• fora
• tv

[Entropy56]

What a load of shit

[wclayf]

Idiot. Yeah Evolution has to do with human psychology. Right. idiot.

[NorseDisbeliever]

@caesarofearth

Ah, but microbes are not man. And evolution is not abiogenesis.

[caesarofearth]

@NorseDisbeliever God made man in His image from dust. Microbes probably came from dust, so if after a billion years descendants of that first microbe from dust became humans, that would be God making humans in His image from dust.

[NorseDisbeliever]

@caesarofearth

Matthews 5:17-18

Genisis 1:26-27

Jesus affirms the old testament. And the old testament claims that god made man in his own image, Adam, and from Adam made Eve. Or was it from dust. I can't recall. :)

You know, man did not evolve from one man and one female. We evolve in groups. This is why fundamentalists take it so serious. Like Ken Ham said. Ultimately, if this part of the bible is untrue, how can I trust the other bits. Answer is, you can't.

[caesarofearth]

@NorseDisbeliever It certainly does not mention that He created the universe using scientific laws, and it doesn't say He does in the scriptures. However, there is no scriptural data against it, and there is data in favor of it. So I'm not claiming it's scripture, I'm just saying that there isn't a scriptoral reason to disbelieve evolution. As a matter of fact, Spencer, the first one to advocate evolution in America, put it in religious terms as he was a christian.

[NorseDisbeliever]

@caesarofearth

That isn't all it says. If you think so, then you need to read the scriptures again.

[dlbattle100]

Keep dreaming about that louder voice in the middle. All we are hearing now is louder voices at each end.