And that first "scientist." I took his name and plugged it in and it brought up that horrendous website. Give me a break.

And the second guy on the list is a psychologist? WTF? What contributing interest does he have in Evolution? Or he just wants to stick his name on a list?

This list is tiny compared to the scientists who support evolution, the NCSE produced a list of scientists who supported evolution with over 800 names, and they are all called Steve (there are only 4 Steves on your list):

http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/article...

b) Project Steve is a joke inteded to poke fun at such lists. Science is not decided by a vote count, bullsh*t is bullsh*t no matter how many people believe it.

c) You have to look at the credentials of the scientists not just their names. Where are their PhDs from (how many went to Bible Universities which don't give a good education - e.g. Liberty University)? How many peer reviewed papers have they published? What is their reputation in the academic community?

d) All the scientists on your list who lived before Darwin can be discounted, as there was no other theory around at the time.

e) A linguistics expert or an electrical engineer (there are many with similar positions on your list) are only marginally more qualified to discuss evolution than the average person on the street, how many on the list are involved in Life Sciences?

Edit: I understand that you want to show that some creationists are intelligent. But even supposedly intelligent people can hold stupid beliefs, and when 50% of americans believe the creation story (thats 150 million) the laws of statistics state that some will be scientists (does it not worry you that in the scientific community your viewpoint is very very severely under represented, 50% of americans vs. approx. 0.1% scientists?).


Thanks Seamonster for finding "Project Steve." I had a dead link there.

So Eljay, explain again what I need to "get myself out of?"
Edited by Krimsa on Thu 02/05/09 03:15 PM

This is an explanation for what "Project Steve" is exactly in case anyone was confused or wondering. I took this from Wikipedia.

Project Steve is a list of scientists with the given name Stephen or a variation thereof (e.g., Stephanie, Stefan, Esteban, etc.) who "support evolution". It was originally created by the National Center for Science Education as a "tongue-in-cheek parody" of creationist attempts to collect a list of scientists who "doubt evolution," such as the Answers in Genesis' list of scientists who accept the biblical account of Creation according to Genesis or the Discovery Institute's A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism. The list pokes fun at such endeavors in a "light-hearted" manner to make it clear that, "We did not wish to mislead the public into thinking that scientific issues are decided by who has the longer list of scientists!"

However, at the same time the project is a genuine collection of scientists. Despite the list's restriction to only scientists with names like "Steve", which in the United States limits the list to roughly 1 percent of the total population, Project Steve is longer and contains many more eminent scientists than any creationist list. In particular, Project Steve contains many more biologists than the creationist lists, since about 2/3 of the Steves are biologists.

The "Steve-o-meter" webpage provides an updated total of scientist "Steves" that have signed the list. The Steve-o-meter registered 996 Steves as of January 6, 2009.

Dr. Jack W. Cuozzo, Dentist


Taken from Eljay's list.

Okay I'll stop. Im being bad now.

'Salutations amicales' right back at you Eljay :)



This rather 'easy' analogy speaks volume of the incompatible perspective which, IMO, you and a few others appear to bring to this question Eljay.

While you wouldn't find me criticizing the sometime useful role of a specific industry's 'labor union', and the legitimate right they have to a 'party' celebrating their 'in meritis' members,
... I fail to see how the results of such 'subjective voting' based on the personnal preferences of a panel of 'industry friends' can possibly be pertinent as a comparison to the process of having 72 NOBEL scientists testifying in form of a Supreme Court hearing. The fact that 'Nobel' and 'SAG' happen to have 'awards' in one of their numerous declinations, explains my choice of 'easy' in qualifying your analogy here.

In my opinion, an impertinent comparison which doesn't forward the debate we are having here.




And that brings us, Eljay, to clarify the context of the debate we're having here as opposed to the 'side-shows' which often impose themselves (confused, or incompatible multiple perspectives) in exchanges of this nature.

First point to clarify, you talk of

'... split scientific community along a 'world view'...'

... when you implicitely argue for one of those 'world views' as being an 'unnegociable' 'belief' in a 'specific biblical dogma', how do you then engage in assessing 'science' exclusively through this religious dogma???

While most legitimate as far as 'beliefs' go, a specific religious dogma is an incompatible context to 'WORLD VIEW' and assess science.

It would be a bit like insisting to 'VISUALLY AND PRAGMATICALLY EXPLORE' the universe through an ancient book of the formidable 'Greek Myths'. Might make for an amazing METAPHORICAL play, or philosophical essay, but science assessment??? Hardly compatible.



This comment allows us the second point which IMO we need to clarify in order to exchange on an appropriate 'channel'.

You bring the notion of 'winning' an argument. Right along the 'winning' notion, you link it with nothing other than a nebulous 'democratic' or 'popular' vote based on dogmatic or non-dogmatic views. This is totally impertinent.

Those are premises or perspectives upon which discussing 'evolution' specific subjects, or even religion specific subject for that matter, cannot take place intelligently. Does your 'church' decide on its dogma based on popular vote??? I doubt it. And neither does science.

Regardless of one's 'world view', and regardless of one's insistence in presenting 'evolution' as something other than what it is, based on a personnal or collectively shared world view, exclusively assessing the merits of the 'Theory of Evolution' cannot be done through the 'view' of the religious or biblical dogma perspective.

We are way past the middle ages, and the tyranny of church dogma. If you hesitate to agree with this point, go to the Supreme Court, and declare all the Supreme Court Judges 'heretics' for not agreeing with the 'biblical dogma', and wait to see what happens!!!

Of course you wouldn't even think of doing that (I dare hope), it is totally inconceivable in today's context.

But the perspective you are proposing here is just as inconceivable. Fundamentalists and the 'creationist-experts' trying to 'convince a majority, by 'popular SAG-like' vote, that the 'bible' is a nicer story than 'evolution', is holding a middle-ages backward view of the world!!! The perspectives don't match. They point in two completely opposite directions: back to the tyranny and dogmatic ridden middle-ages, or humbly exploring further into the future.

RELIGIOUS DOGMA and SCIENCE are not compatible, and were never meant to be! Science doesn't make converts out of proselytizing, or other apologetic tactics.

For a small minority of the USA population, and an insignificant proportion of the world's population, whom exclusively live by a 'biblical world view', to impose dogmatically and most disingeneously that their's is the 'view', simply because their 'biblical dogma' says so!!! is just not credible nor useful.

However stubbornly this minority holds on to its its 'belief' of proselytizing and imposing its biblical 'world view' (their irritating but legitimate right), HUMANITY'S TIMELESS WISDOM IS PREVAILING AND SHALL PREVAIL ONWARD!!!

The validity of the 'Theory of Evolution' doensn't get decided by a voting list of religious dogma preferencees!

The validity of the 'Theory of Evolution' is manifest and observable in every aspect of our lives today. No need to believe, we all LIVE in an 'evolution theory reality' everyday of our lives. The fact that some insist in disagreeing with 'reality', 'reality' really doesn't care!!!

And whether 'biblical world view' adepts know it or not. Whether they deny it, or wish it to disappear, the small 'biblical-exclusive-world-view' minority wakes up everyday in world that is VERIFIABLY 'theory of evolution' COMPATIBLE.

The Supreme Court presenting their unanimous judicial verdict as a result of the 'scientific' representation of 72 'Nobel' scientists, unfortunately has nothing to do with the SAG award party, nor does it have anything to do with random, religious, or popular preferences.

The hostess's question:

'... Evolution: is it compatible with the bible?'

... might be an interesting question shared by the fundamentalists, or word-for-word bible believing fundamentalists, but in the real world, it is simply a non-question, and non-debate.

A bible exclusive perspective cannot render any form of verdict-judgement on the scientific, any more than the scientific can render a verdict-judgmet on the religious.

One must detach oneself from the scientific or religious views to objectively discuss the two together.

Debating the two distinct domains from a social, political, philosophical or personnal specific perspectives would be most approprite and healthy.

To impose the sovereign nature of the one over the other, as the 'fundamentalist-creationists-apologetics-bible-exclusive' minority insists in doing, will always be a non-debate and a royal waste of energy for both parties.

As always Eljay, with all due respect to you personnally and your legitimate right to your beliefs and world view(s).

if one split science in half, as half truth, and half well intentioned theories, and religion in half, as half truth and half well intentioned theories, then it is clearly seen, EACH SPEAK TRUTH THAT THE OTHER DOES NOT "SEE OR HEAR"???

if EACH human be a circle, half as the tree of knowledge and good and evil, and the other half as the tree of life, then SEPERATING WHAT EACH SPEAK THAT BE OF EACH TREE, show the portrait of EACH TREE???

if all began as one speck, then to see what the WHOLE LARGE SPECK HAS NOW BECOME, one must REMOVE THE GLASS DARLKY, called a "holy spirit", that make the WHOLE PICUTRE AS A "HOLY GHOST", a ghost that blind the "internal heavenly inner sanctum tree of life eye", causing it to only SEE thru what self deem as "holy or not holy"???

Voil

As you can see, there are some serious flaws and gaps, in this theory of evolution. First of all no body for sure knows if those gases were present in the atmosphere. Secondly, how could mere chance and accident, initiate such intricate, complex, sophisticated process of life, with perfect order in function and structure of the cell? Nay it can not be. The forming of steel particles from Iron ore and coal at high temperature, could have lead to the construction of Eiffel Tower, through a series of happy coincidences, that assembled the material in proper order." Further, no body has ever demonstrated the conversion of one species into the other; and what is the proof that man is the descendant of big apes? It is purely a conjecture and theory based on anatomical and physiological similarities between species. This is purely an attempt to humanize the animals and animalize the humans. Look at the order of evolution, first plants, why? Because every living being consumes Oxygen and releases CO2 and plants do the opposite, therefore God or Allah, Quran, according to His plan, first made arrangement for O2 by creating plant kingdom first.


Quran and Evolution - Origin of Life:

Science tells us now that the life on earth originated from water. Even today while we are exploring the galaxies and actively searching for life on other planets, the first question we ask; is there any water on that planet to sustain life, because without water life is impossible. Quran 1400 years ago, before the discovery of science, said the same thing :

"Do not the unbeliever see that the heaven and the earth were joined together, then we set them asunder and we got every living thing out of water. Will they then not believe".
[chapter 21 - verse 30]

First living thing was algae in plant kingdom then animal kingdom started. Quran makes reference to plant kingdom.
[chapter 21 - verse 53]

"(God is the one who) sent down the water from the sky and thereby brought forth pairs of plants, each separate from the other." The verse also points out the sexual reproduction in plant kingdom, much before science discovered it. In 13/3 male and female fruit plants are described.
[chapter 13 - verse 3]

Similarly reference is made to the water origin of animals

"Allah Almighty (God) created every animal from water. Among living objects there are some which crawl on their bellies, some walk on two legs and some on four".
[chapter 24 - verse 45]


Creation of Man

You just read Aya, that every living thing came out of water as a matter of fact 60% of human's body is water. There are number of verses in Quran that refer to the earthly origin of man, which the Science found later. Let us go through verses.


"He caused you to grow from earth"
[chapter 11 - verse 61]

"We fashioned you from soil."
[chapter 22 - verse 5]

"It is He who initiated your creation from inanimate matter and prescribed laws to determine the term of your physical life".
[chapter 6 - verse 2]

"Man's creation was initiated from inorganic matter which before you, was lying lifeless in the form of clay".
[chapter 32 - verse 7]

"All these planets are only masses of particles which are attached together; whereas human life has progressed and passed through innumerable stages of development (32:7)".
[chapter 37 - verse 11]

"If you want to have an idea of various aspects of His Power, think about the creation of your own self".
[chapter 55 - verse 14]

"The status of human life has been achieved after successfully passing through the steps of animal life".
[chapter 23 - verse 12]

Quintessence means gist or extract of some thing. All the chemical components of human body can also be found in earth as well, that is what the aya implies. So, long before the science discovered earthly origin of man, Quran said it before.

Quran Perspective Man Transformation

We have seen four waves of humans, transformed over a period of time, accepted in Science. Is there any thing in Quran about these transformations. Following verses refer to that:

"We created you and fashioned you and then We asked Malaika to bow before Adam, the representative of humanity".
[chapter 7 - verse 11]

"The Rabb (God Almighty ) Who according to His law of creation, took you through various evolutionary stages one after the other; and fashioned you by removing unnecessary elements, thereby creating excellent balance, proportion and symmetry in you".
[chapter 82 - verse 7-8]

" This tussle occurs because We have bestowed man with the ability to nourish and develop his self and lead a balanced life in a dignified manner".
[chapter 95 - verse 4]

" How can you attain this state of life? For this you should ponder over the Divine Law of Creation, according to which you have passed through various evolutionary stages to attain human form".
[chapter 71 - verse 14]

"(They are very proud that they are mighty and strong; but they forget that) We have created them; and We have endowed strength and stability to their countenances. If they oppose Our Laws, then according to Our Law of Mashiyyat, it is not at all difficult for Us to wholly replace them with another nation".
[chapter 76 - verse 28]

"Allah's law is that everyone is assigned a position according to his deeds of which Allah Almighty is not
unaware ".
[chapter 6 - verse 133]

These two verses of Holy Quran talk about the disappearance of certain communities and their replacement with others, according to the plan of Allah. Today's human could very well be the result of these phenomena and events.

Have you ever wondered why so many verses are in Quran about origin of life in general and man is particular, while it is not even a book of Science? The reason for that is, the Quran had condemned the existing wrong opinion, at the time of its revelation, and then dictates the right opinion. Bible also has the description of origin of life and man,

I will end this with the statement...that Quran is the word of God and creation around us, is the work of God. If the source of both is same, then there can not be any discrepancy in the two, one has to confirm the other. One is theory and other is the practical, therefore nothing in Science is against Quran..... The same as the Bible...As we have seen today science actually confirms what Quran had already said. Scientists are only discovering the laws of the creator, because everything in nature is caused, by secondary causes, regulated by the primary cause, the creator. To serve best his creator, man must study His (Allah's) laws and their working.

Because of God......He gave great men insight to give us science. But this doesn't go without saying that within that you didn't have man doing for man instead of doing for the greater purpose of humanity. I will always believe in Science my father was one his whole life. And I do believe that some great things have come of science. But don't kid yourself into thinking that Science would ever be able to explain creation because it just can't be. That would be like saying you 100% understand God and that is an imposibility.


The Quran and the Bible do not oppose science because through God all things are possible.....imo But you can't have evolution and creation that is what it opposes.

Who or what are you talking about? You cant just copy and paste wildly with no explanation as to what you are addressing. The great apes are the members of the biological family Hominidae which includes humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans. Please explain why you share 96% of your DNA with chimpanzee please.

Sorry K....I should of specified....I changed it...




So what if we share 96% of our DNA that doesn't mean we evolved from them.n I also have very similar hands to my possum but does that mean I evolved from Louie...

But the theory of evolution does NOT state that you evolved from chimp. How many times have we been over this Deb? We tell you what the theory entails and then you simply repeat the same argument.

You share 96% of your DNA with chimpanzee because about 6 millions years ago you branched off from them. We each went our own ways and developed into our own unique species. The same thing happened to horse. The same thing happened to ALL animals. Humans share a common ancestral heritage with the Great Apes.

Please explain the DNA.

It's the same thing....whether we branched or not....don't you get that.....And if that were the case and we branched off...and for what purpose did we branch off where all still remain....sorry but it logically just makes no sense. I am sure there are a million things that have same DNA but it doesn't mean that we evolved.....Within our species yes...that's it.


I repeat the same argument because you repeat the same crap. We did not ever have anything to do with any other creature of this planet...We have been human and didn't branch from anything else.

We never fell from flossom to the water, to a tad pole to a chimp to an ape or vise versa and branched to us....no way no how....

Also FYI the horse still has always been a horse....a donkey a donkey and put the two together and you get a mule....but they are all still within the same species....You have a wolf, who created all the dog species we know....but never did they come from a elephant or a cat....


Now if this is what you would like to believe.....well by golly believe it....But I never will...

yea, and in the beginning, atom was said to name the animals, the atom of awareness passing thru the creepy crawly things and animals, aquiring the awareness later to be called man..........

Read my post above again 'feral'.

I don't question your 'biblical-exclusive' perspective. I don't question your right to your own beliefs and points of view.

I say that those personal religious, bible-based points and beliefs cannot in any way shape or form be the perspective through which one judges any form of science. Anymore than the science pespective could judge the 'biblical-exclusive' perspective.

Try hard and focus on just that!

Then, try and reverse the tables.

How would you react if the scientific community came to your church and declared the church 'closed' until you 'prove' the existence of god according to the scientific method?!?!?!?

You'd be right to boot the science fundamentalist lunatics out of your church, based on the fact that science had no business tyrannically imposing 'its' (scientific world view' on religion), ... and 'giggle' the whole thing off!!!

What is so hard in understanding the other side 'feral'.

Religion has no business trying to impose its 'biblical-exclusive' verdicts on the science labs of the world.

Check out the First Amendment and the Establishment Clause. Check the verdicts of the Supreme Court. As long as you choose to live in the USA, planet earth, Them's are the ONLY applicable laws the the whole.

Of course you can believe in your own biblical laws and apply them to YOUR LIFE, but they don't apply in any way shape or form to the whole of the US population. Constitutional law is the only law that applies in the US, ... the 'biblical' law, however much YOU believe in it, doesn't apply at all in the US (Thank god!!! oops). That would make an Iran of the USA!!!

In other words, one's 'biblical-exclusive' world view, puts one in clear conflict of interest with modern day Constitutional US reality, when they set out to impose on the rest of the population.

The freedom of religion that the Constitution affords anyone, ENDS where those 'someones' attempt to impose (tyranny) their beliefs on the rest of the population. That's as simple as the Constitution of the US gets.

Can you appreciate this simple point 'feral'. The US constitution affords you the freedom to believe in anyting you wish, but PROHIBITS you or the STATE from imposing it on others!!!

That's all!!!

'... evolution: is it compatible with the bible!!!'

... from the imposed and tyranical perspective of religion, is squarely an UNCONSTITUTIONAL question!!!

It's no longer cool, as it was in the Middle-ages, to call people HERETICS, because they don't subscribe to a 'bible-exclusive' world view, and dare to understand the premises of the theory of evolution, distinct from their reigios beliefs.






My point about the QUR'AN is that it has no quarrel or difficulty with the 'theory of evolution'!!!

And if you suggest the bible does not oppose science, than this whole conversation is over.

The 'theory of evolution' is 100% science, and the bible does not oppose science.

I would appear we are in full agreement.

I guess I missinterpreted your thoughts the whole time. My apologies. We can both move on from here.

Won't you please inform your friends!

Find another animal that shares 96%deoxyribonucleic acid identity with homo sapien.

Actually it can now be said that it is 100%.

96% was due to the infamous missing pair of chromosones!!!


In the past couple of years, human chromosone #2 was proven to have 'fused': the couple of #2 chromosones fused with the #??? (thought to be until now, missing couple of chromosones).

It is now a 'fused' 100% MATCH !!!

and it was once written to understand and discover man, "look unto the ant"???

The two largest christian religions-Roman Catholic and Mainline and Liberal Protestant, which make up about 2/3's of all christians believe in evolution.

Feralcatlady,

You say that it logically just makes no sense. Are you truly looking for logic?

Okay, then lets assume you are right and God made mankind from the mud of the earth. Let's just say for a minute.. that this is a fact.

How did God do that?

Get down to the nitty gritty on a quantum level or even magick and tell me how you think God did that?

No matter how miraculous anything is, there has to be a method or means by which the thing was done. What was the technology that accomplished that feat... LOGICALLY. Remember, it MUST BE LOGICAL in order to make sense.

I'm serious about this question. You apparently require logic in order to make sense of information. Where is your logic in the story that God created mankind from the mud?

What does that mean to you? How did God do that?

The Quran does not support the theory of evolution because if that were the case then where would that leave God. I also stated that the Bible and the Quran don't oppose science and the evolution theory is just that and is not solid science. I mean that there is much more to science then just evolution. So again don't twist and turn what was said to meet your agenda...Because it just won't work. Evolution in science is a mere speck of all that is science my friend....so again off the high horse there voil.

Feralcatlady,

If evolution is just a "mere speck" of science (and I don't doubt that it is) but ..then why oh why are so many people all up in arms about it? Why all the heated discussions about it?

Somewhere I smell trisomy of the 48th