ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN

Information

ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN

We debate origins of the Universe, life, Earth, humans, religion, atheism, using common sense, evolution, cosmology, geology, archaeology, and other sciences, to repel biblical creationism and other religious beliefs.

Location: Oxford University, England
Members: 4136
Latest Activity: 7 hours ago

The portrait is Charles Darwin, age 31, in 1840

We welcome comments and the opening up of new discussions in this busy group. So join us if you are not already in the group.

N.B. At the end of every discussion page is a box that you can tick if you want to be notified by e-mail about the arrival of fresh comments.

Discussion Forum

Limb Regeneration Ability

Started by Patricia. Last reply by The Flying Atheist on Sunday. 1 Reply

Scientific Adam and Eve

Started by Rick Springfield. Last reply by James M. Martin on Friday. 26 Replies

Leader of the Church of England doubts the existence of god

Started by Dr. Terence Meaden. Last reply by Joan Denoo on Thursday. 35 Replies

Experimental Ebola Serum May Be In Use On Americans

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Joan Denoo on Thursday. 35 Replies

Nazca Lines Found in Kazakhstan

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Joan Denoo on Thursday. 4 Replies

A huge tragedy in our past

Started by Luara. Last reply by HPhan Sep 23. 7 Replies

Preying on our humanity

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Grinning Cat Sep 22. 3 Replies

New Mapping of Stonehenge

Started by Patricia. Last reply by Joan Denoo Sep 11. 1 Reply

Thigh Bone on Mars?

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by John Jubinsky Sep 11. 24 Replies

Where in the Universe is our Milky Way Galaxy?

Started by Dr. Terence Meaden. Last reply by Madhukar Kulkarni Sep 11. 3 Replies

DNA testing gives more history of paleo-Eskimos

Started by Sentient Biped. Last reply by Joan Denoo Aug 31. 1 Reply

Religion the virus of society

Started by Rick Springfield. Last reply by Luara Aug 25. 60 Replies

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN to add comments!

Comment by Joan Denoo on April 8, 2012 at 11:00pm

Oh dear! Someone believes Darwinism supports * logic for a hierarchy of life forms, * cast system, * euthanasia of lesser beings, and * different treatment of different races?

I wonder what books the person reads, or people to whom he/she listens, or crowd with whom he/she runs, but Darwinism means no such thing according to my understanding.

First of all, I have to say Darwin was not a philosopher; he was an observer, experimenter, and chronicler of his surroundings. He set aside philosophical imaginings and allowed the evidence to lead him to hypotheses, which he tested and continue to observe by looking and listening.

Darwin did not distinguish a hierarchy between animate and inanimate objects; he described what he observed. Patterns emerged from his observations; patterns of time and space.

Physical evidence revealed species variability and change occurs according the environment.

He recognized gradualism; change over time, with slow, gradual change of species. He looked for causes of changes, as his study of finches so clearly reveals.

Darwin recognized access to resources, diseases, and predation created struggles for survival of species. Some variations provided efficient and effective access to resources, or resistance to diseases, or greater success at escaping predators than others.

Some individuals tended to survive and leave more offspring. Offspring tended to inherit variations of their parents. Successful variations tended to be passed on more frequently than others: it is called “Natural Selection”.

Changes in gene pools and environments created changes over time. These iterations of changing genes and environments enabled divergence to new and different populations. There is no sign of hierarchy, only changes of patterns to enable survival.

Some interpret these processes and patterns to imply “Social Darwinism”, a superiority of one over another. This understanding is immature and does not stand up to meaning of change. A baby is not inferior to an adolescent, is not inferior to an adult, is not inferior to an elder; they exist as different stages and one follows the other in natural processes.

Modern humans evolved from earlier genus of humanoids that evolved from forest apes. We are all human apes, not better than, not more valuable than, not more important than, but different than other homo sapiens.

Humans are part of a much grander whole that goes from the tiny atom to the farthest universe. To see us as superior is an inadequate understanding of existence. To see us as participating in this full-of-wonder universe with no rights of dominion over anything or anyone else is a humbling experience, but one that has profound consequence.

 

Creationists recognize the equality of all humans.

If creationists recognize the equality of all humans, why do they intrude on us by coming uninvited to our doors and push materials and their beliefs onto us? Why do they send missionaries to other countries to make them into more creationists? Are they not capable of tending to their own affairs without intrusion.

Why do creationists go to battle, killing, maiming, and destroying whole cultures in order to make more creationists? If creationism is so wonderful why don’t people flock there of their own accord? Intrusion and imposition is just one level of bullying. If creationism were worth its salt, it would need not use such tactics. 

Comment by Richard ∑wald on April 8, 2012 at 10:37pm

"some of us could possibly be more evolved than others."

Wow, and I thought:

"…then why are there still monkeys?" was bad.

There's a bar I never though would need lowering.

…carry on.

Comment by David Philip Norris on April 8, 2012 at 10:22pm

Denise... LOL! "Superior attitude"!? REALLY? That's the saucepan calling the kettle bach, don't you think? Not really sure what your beef is with me or anyone else who disagrees with you, but your hostile attitude and approach has succeeded in driving at least one person out of the group. Congratulations. Have fun with your majority of one.

Comment by David Philip Norris on April 8, 2012 at 10:00pm

Back off, Denise, or I will be reporting you as well.

Comment by David Philip Norris on April 8, 2012 at 9:54pm

This has turned into a really hostile forum. I'm done.

Comment by Joseph P on April 8, 2012 at 8:30pm

What we are experiencing now is just an experiment.  When do we decide that this experiment has failed and try something new?

If this is an experiment, then what are your controls?  I don't see them.

 

We are talking about evolution which would imply that some of us could possibly be more evolved than others.

And that's a blatantly stupid statement demonstrating your lack of understanding of Evolution, as well as being an ad hominem attack.  Can we stick to a rational argument?

Comment by Joseph P on April 8, 2012 at 8:23pm

To address your last two paragraphs, though ...

I don't know.  Considering that the Christian god (or any other analog) has so far failed to demonstrate his existence with anything approaching evidence, he's got so much to make up for.  Theories are formed by the accumulation of a preponderance of evidence.

Considering that the preponderance of the evidence that has so far been accumulated points to the non-existence of the Christian deity, he's not starting from zero ... but from a negative position.

 

He's freaking omniscient.  He's omnipotent.  Let him figure out what he has to do to prove dominance over the Earth.

Comment by Joseph P on April 8, 2012 at 8:12pm

Ah, I see.  So, now you're going to attack me personally, rather than address things I've said.  Classy.

 

I've done plenty of things, but they have nothing to do with this discussion or the subject of this group.  Let's stick to the subject.  If you've got something to say in response to my points, then say it.  Otherwise, I have no interest in arguing with you anymore.

Your last two paragraphs, layered on top of your Hitler bullshit earlier, are making you look like a stealth-theist.  You know this site is for atheists only, right?

Comment by Joseph P on April 8, 2012 at 6:56pm

What does that have to do with the discussion thread or Origins in general?

 

I don't believe you can turn economics into a hard science, no matter how much you try.  You can't test it in a lab.  You can't run a control group.  You can't do repeatable experiments with controlled variables.  It's not a hard science, and it can't be.

Comment by Joseph P on April 8, 2012 at 6:48pm

I may have missed something here. What was the original discussion topic? It seems some people are trying assert their dominance as best Hitler biographer. Fascinating, but is anything productive going to come out of this argument, or is it just a contest to see which primate gets to be top monkey?

It began with this:

 

Comment by chris tidman 9 hours ago
So if we vote for Darwinism we support the logic for a hierarchy of life forms, which is used to support the cast system, euthanasia of lesser beings, and differences in the treatment of different races. Pretty well what we have at the moment.
Creationists on the other hand recognize the equality of all humans.
I believe in both and that we are not alone in the universe. When you believe that, I think that you leave the door open for free thought.

... about 6 pages back in the comments.  It's on the top of page 7, as I type this.

It only switched off to Hitler after Chris won his Godwin Award, a few posts later:

 

Joseph.  Hitler was a Christian but also a Darwinist (call it evolutionist if you like) which is where he got his weird ideas about belonging to a super race and trying to move the process along by eliminating what he felt were the inferior.

 

Members (4136)

 
 
 

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service