Smithsonian: How to Talk with Evangelicals about Evolution

[Thoth001]

See? I'm useless at talking about evolution.

Do you believe in Transhumanism? Or in natural evolution?

 

[surada]

See? I'm useless at talking about evolution.

Do you believe in Transhumanism? Or in natural evolution?

LOLOL

transhumanism
[tranzˈhyo͞omənizm]
NOUN
the belief or theory that the human race can evolve beyond its current physical and mental limitations, especially by means of science and technology.

 

[abu afak]

I am not going to have a logical conversation with you if you can't even have a logical conversation in return. Have you gone around being a bully to people your whole life? Have your parents never told you that it is not nice to call people retards and stupid? That just shows the true nature of yourself.

And where did I say I was a creationist? A creationist is someone who believes a God created everything. I don't think that.

AGAIN.
The astronaut theory does Not do ANYTHING in the way of enlightening on figuring out how life started from non-life.
It just pushes the problem to another planet.
You are Stupid and you now know it, so say you won't engage in a logical discussion because you already lost it due of my explanation.

`

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

And of course evolution isn’t a ‘belief’ – it’s a fact; religion is a belief.

Perhaps a belief with evidence as compared to a belief without evidence. Evidence in this case being that which can be shown.

Evidence which renders evolution a fact; 2 + 2 = 4 is not a ‘belief,’ neither is evolution.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

A good question I always thought of is if we evolved from Apes, why are there still Apes but their [sic] are no Neanderthals left?

If a river splits in two ... the branches go off in different directions, one doesn't just cease to be. The same is true of offspring. When a mutation occurs, creating a new line, it doesn't affect the existing, non-mutated lines.

As for the Neanderthals, fossil evidence shows that modern humans not only co-existed with them, but mated with them. Neanderthal DNA accounts for up to 20% of the genome of non-African humans.

The most plausible answer to where they went is, we killed them off.

Do you believe we literally evolved from Apes?

Of course not, that’s ignorant and ridiculous.

All primates share a common ancestor from whom they evolved.

Primate - Oligocene, Evolution, Adaptations | Britannica

Primate - Oligocene, Evolution, Adaptations: Information during the Oligocene is mostly from discoveries in Texas and Egypt, though the earliest platyrrhine fossils were found in South America. The most important Oligocene site is Egypt where evidence of the emerging catarrhines appear; a number...

www.britannica.com

 

[cnm]

And of course evolution isn’t a ‘belief’ – it’s a fact; religion is a belief.

Perhaps a belief with evidence as compared to a belief without evidence. Evidence in this case being that which can be shown.

Evidence which renders evolution a fact; 2 + 2 = 4 is not a ‘belief,’ neither is evolution.

Mathematics does proof, science does evidence.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm still fascinated by the Evolutionary explanation of how the first cells appeared: well, they just did! We know they existed, therefore evolution!

You need to pay better attention. The fact is that they once didn't exist, then they did. If you want to be an incapable, incurious person and fill that gap with "MAGIC!!" and give up, be our guest. Nobody is stopping you.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You chose only to look at one spectrum of evidence while disregarding a whole plethora of other evidence.

You have not a single shred of such evidence, much less a "plethora".

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The problem I have is such a giant leap in such a short amount of time.

Uh....what? This to that took about 6 million years:

 

[fncceo]

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Do you believe we literally evolved from Apes?

Of course we did. And apes evolved from monkeys. Etc. Etc.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

..the theory is we did not evolve from apes.......

Indeed we did. The common ancestor of all apes -- of which humans are a species -- was an ape.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

And now we have the masked apes.They so dumb, they wear a mask that don't even block a virus if the germ theory is even true.

And some of the human apes are so ignorant that, a year into the pandemic, they think we wear masks to block free floating viruses.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Poor Indoctrinated Cultists.
Turns out you have to break it to them gently. Very gently.

HOW TO TALK WITH EVANGELICALS ABOUT EVOLUTION
Smithsonian Magazine -- 4-19-2018

""Rick Potts is no atheist-evolutionist-Darwinist. That often comes as a surprise to the faith communities he works with as head of the Smithsonian's National Museum of Natural History Human Origins Program in Washington, D.C.

Raised Protestant — with, he likes to say, “an emphasis on the ‘protest’” — the paleoanthropologist spends his weekends singing in a choir that sings both sacred and secular songs. At 18, he became a conscientious objector to the Vietnam War...
[....]That’s why, for him, human evolution is the perfect topic to break down entrenched barriers between people in an increasingly polarized, politicized world.
[.....]
If you aren’t caught on one side of the evolution debates, it can be hard to grasp what all the fuss is about. Here’s the short version: Charles Darwin’s crime wasn’t disproving God. Rather, the evolutionary theory he espoused in "On the Origin of Species" rendered God unnecessary. Darwin provided an explanation for life’s origins — and, more problematically, the origins of humanity — that didn’t require a creator.

What would Darwin think if he could see the evolution wars rage today? If he knew that, year after year, national polls find one-third of Americans believe that humans have always existed in their current form? (In many religious groups, that number is far higher.) That, among all Western nations, only Turkey is more likely than the United States to flat-out reject the notion of human evolution?
[.....]
[.....]

How to Talk With Evangelicals About Evolution

For two years, researchers from the Smithsonian traveled the country explaining the science of our shared origins

www.smithsonianmag.com

Here is how to talk to evangelicals about evolution:

No discussion. No taking class time for remedial babying. You fail, re-take the class. Bring your bullshit into a room of science, get laughed out of said room.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

I'm still fascinated by the Evolutionary explanation of how the first cells appeared: well, they just did! We know they existed, therefore evolution!

You need to pay better attention. The fact is that they once didn't exist, then they did. If you want to be an incapable, incurious person and fill that gap with "MAGIC!!" and give up, be our guest. Nobody is stopping you.

I just said that! Post hoc, ergo propter hoc!

Was the DNA fully formed in this mythical, random first cell? Did it self replicate or run into another IDENTICAL, totally random second cell?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc!

No. I did not say that life was caused by having no life. You are not using that phrase correctly.

Was the DNA fully formed in this mythical, random first cell?

Probably not. Define, "cell". If you mean just a self organizing bit of stuff with a lipid barrier around it, then no, DNA was not necessarily needed for that.

the irony here is that the only people pretending to know how life formed are people like you. Magical thinkers who think they have the answers, but have no answers. Once there was no life, then there was life. Something happened in between. Correct? Now why would you toss magic in here, but not into, say, star formation? Once there was no star, then there was a star. Star formation occurred. Do you think THAT was magical?

 

[cnm]

Crusader Frank thinks unless laboratory experiments can be carried out no 'scientific' knowledge can be obtained. Yet he accepts the existence of black holes. He can never be accused of consistent thinking.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc!

No. I did not say that life was caused by having no life. You are not using that phrase correctly.

Was the DNA fully formed in this mythical, random first cell?

Probably not. Define, "cell". If you mean just a self organizing bit of stuff with a lipid barrier around it, then no, DNA was not necessarily needed for that.

the irony here is that the only people pretending to know how life formed are people like you. Magical thinkers who think they have the answers, but have no answers. Once there was no life, then there was life. Something happened in between. Correct? Now why would you toss magic in here, but not into, say, star formation? Once there was no star, then there was a star. Star formation occurred. Do you think THAT was magical?

"Once there was no life, then there was Life" is where you got it completely wrong.

You'll realize how and why things work, once you understand that.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Crusader Frank thinks unless laboratory experiments can be carried out no 'scientific' knowledge can be obtained. Yet he accepts the existence of black holes. He can never be accused of consistent thinking.

You're not making sense and we have created black holes in a lab.

Why do you feel it's physically impossible to test temperature differences in an atmosphere whose only variable is either 280 or 400 PPM of CO2?

 

[cnm]

You're not making sense and we have created black holes in a lab.

You'll pull any shit from your arse and wave it proudly in defence of your fragile ego and more fragile arguments.