A Leauki's Writings
The Word is "Lie"
Published on June 16, 2008 By Leauki In Religion

What opponents of evolution (and other theories) don't understand is that science is not about finding the truth (that is best left to philosophy professors) but about finding out something useful about this world.

The predictions of theories can be used in engineering and other fields. Applications of the theory of evolution have been used successfully in such diverse fields as medicine and (yes) computer science. Evolution is solid, a tool that we can use to advance.


For a good article about the difference between a scientific theory and Creationism and the utter stupidity (and, I want to add, sacrilege) of believing in "Intelligent Design", see Steven Den Beste's essay about the human eye.

http://denbeste.nu/essays/humaneye.shtml

The vertebrate retina is a terrible design. The optic nerve comes into the eyeball at a certain point, and the nerve fibers spread out across the surface of the retina. Each individual nerve fiber reaches its assigned point, burrows down into the retina through several layers of epithelial cells, and ends with the light receptor itself pointing away from the lens of the eye, which is the direction from which the light must come. As a result, incoming light strikes the surface of the retina and must penetrate through multiple layers of inactive cells and then through the body of the nerve itself before it reaches the active point where it might be detected. This both diffuses and attenuates the light, decreasing the efficiency of the retina in accomplishing its function.

For a rationalist and atheist like Steven Den Beste, extrapolating from the existence of the human eye to a "designer" is illogical, because there is no evidence for design but plenty evidence for evolution.

For me, personally, saying that the human eye has been "designed" is blasphemy. I do not think it is all right to claim that G-d would intentionally create a faulty design or was incapable of doing better. (Plus I agree with Steven's thinking as well. There is evidence for evolution in the human eye, but no evidence for design.)


But the problem here is not the fact that some people are not capable of understanding complicated science and are thus forced to make up fairy tales that make them believe that they are as clever as scientists (and even cleverer since scientists don't "know" the truth), but the fact that those some people sometimes have the power to take away knowledge from the rest of us.

There are MANY countries in the world where Creationism is taught instead of evolution. I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the majority of the world teaches Creationism to some extent, replacing biology or "adding to" biology in schools.

But what does that do for those societies?

Are they leaders in science based on learning something that is a "theory" just like evolution and a "better "explanation?

It's not enough to change the rules to allow Creationism (or "Intelligent Design") to become science, because what is science is not a decision made by man. It's ultimately a desicion made by nature (or G-d, if you will). Because science is something we can use to create.

When we look at the world and compare societies, we see that countries that teach evolution create technologies, whereas countries that teach Creationism, do not have the workforce to be leading in any field of technology.

Teaching Creationism causes stupidity. That's the problem.

And it doesn't help if "Christian" fundamentalists in the west blame Islam for it and pretend that teaching "Christian" Creationism will give better results, because the Creationism of Islam IS the Creationism of Christianity. It's word for word, letter for letter the same legend.

And it's phony. It's phony and stupid and a big lie.

    * Why does the birth canal run through the middle of the pelvis?
    * Why does the backbone run down one side of the trunk instead of through the middle where it would be more balanced?
    * Why does the ankle attach at one end of the foot instead of in the middle?
    * Why are there toes?
    * Why is it that nearly every part of the brain is as far as possible from the piece of the body with which it is associated?
          o Why is the motor control center for the right side of the body on the left side of the brain, and vice versa?
          o Why is the vision center at the rear of the brain, as far from the eyes as possible -- and on the opposite sides?
    * Why is it that fully 90% of the genetic material we carry around is useless?
    * Why do we share a single canal through the neck through which we both breath and swallow?

Biology has explanations for these oddities. Creationism does not. "It was G-d's will" is not an explanation, it's an excuse for incompetence.

(Why are some people born with a mechanism that destroys the beta cells in the pancreas, causing Type 1 Diabetes that is ALWAYS deadly within a few months without treatment? Would an "intelligent designer" design his subjects like that?)

Richard Dawkins called evolution the "blind watchmaker" because evolution does not "see" what it produces, it merely tries out what happens with the stuff it finds. I find the term "incompetent designer" appropriate for a god who designs things like us. And I cannot pray to an incompetent designer. How could I?

Teaching Creationism has never helped a society and is bringing down many.

 

Dear Creationists,

I do not want the western world to become a second "Islamic" world.

Do you not understand that?

 


Comments (Page 1)
42 Pages1 2 3  Last
on Jun 16, 2008

Leauki,

Excellent article. On this particular topic I agree with you 100% Unfortunately you posted a quoted paragraph that contains the words "vertebrate retina" and "optic nerve" which will no doubt cause many eyes to glaze over (nothing wrong with the paragraph, it's our on-demand instant gratification culture that's to blame) Saying that God did it all is so much more easy and comfortable and leaves more room in our brains to watch American Idol, or read the Left Behind books!

I too agree that I do not want the western world to become a second "Islamic" world. Nor do I want it to be a "Christian" world or an any particular religion world for that matter. I propose the invention of a giant super-computer that will be vastly more intelligent than all of combined humanity that should tell us what to do (we can call it God if some folks choose, although imagine the firestorm of accused idol worship that would come of it!)

on Jun 16, 2008

science is not about finding the truth (that is best left to philosophy professors) but about finding out something useful about this world

Oh my,  look here....the first paragraph contains first lie....

What science discovers is what is already existent by the will of Almighty God.

Take anesthetic...Scientists discovered it and that it greatly relieves suffering and pain..but they did not make or cause the power therein that produces unconsciousness or insensibility to pain, that belongs to the nature  God gave the thing discovered.

If science denied belief in God, then rest assured taht the world's greatest Christian scientists would never have professed their belief in and love of God.  Their discoveries sustain their belief in HIm as Creator of the universe and all that's in it.

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

on Jun 16, 2008
Leauki and Artysim

Your blind hatred for Christianity has taken you this far? You really blew it this time Leauki. You couldn't be more wrong and I'm going to prove it to you scientifically. Even those on your side in the scientific community disagree with your stance here. It's not about religion, it's about money and has always been about money. You said:

When we look at the world and compare societies, we see that countries that teach evolution create technologies, whereas countries that teach Creationism, do not have the workforce to be leading in any field of technology.

Teaching Creationism causes stupidity. That's the problem.


So does this make creation scientists stupid?

What about the members of the National Acadamies of Science that signed the "Dissent from Darwinism" clearly stating that they do not believe in Darwinian evolution? Stupid? You are only nominated and elected to the National Academies if you have contributed seminal work to your scientific field. So clearly,creationism is not correlated with stupidity.

Many great scientist have also been great creationists. To blame creationism for a country's inability to contribute to scientific advancement is ignorant.

Rather, a country's ability to perform novel scientific research is very correlated to the money it contributes (either by private or public means)towards furthering scientific studies. For example, America is a leader in scientific research, because the government makes it a priority to support the development of new technologies and therapies by research grants, etc. Mexico does not give much money in support of scientific research, and thus, they do not contribute much to scientific advancement. Thats because basic mathematics tells you that the more you invest, the more your return will be. There is more scientific research, or publication of results, in richer territories.

I can come to this "intelligent" conclusion, and I am a creationist. How about you? Moreover, my conclusion is supported by scientific literature, and your conclusion is not.

So which of us is being more scientific here?

According to Thomson-Scientific (the official record keeper of scientific journal data), the total number of papers published in all fields are ranked by country as the following:

United States 2,907,592
Japan 790,510
Germany 742,917
England 660,808
France 535,629
China 422,993
Canada 394,727
Italy 369,138
Spain 263,469
Australia 248,189
India 211,063
South Korea 180,329
Taiwan 124,940


So are you telling me Japan and China are Christian? Are you kidding? China is one of the biggest if not biggest persecutors of Christianity and has been for a long time. Does this look like a Christain who's who list to you?

This quote comes from PLoS Biology (a new major high quality scientific journal):

"It is rather obvious that richer countries are able to invest more resources in science and therefore account for the largest number of publications. It is also likely that there is a statistical bias on the part of the SCI as a bibliometric database, since it represents North American and European publications far better than those of the rest of the world"

1995;
May
1997;
Alonso and Fernández-Juricic
2001;
Vohora and Vohora
2001)."
http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0020001&ct=1

on Jun 16, 2008
Sorry about the links messup. Try this:

http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0020001&ct=1&SESSID=1010bf1fbbf5905e500eab28d8f4a505

on Jun 16, 2008

Your blind hatred for Christianity has taken you this far?

Tee hee!!

KFC, this may shock you but I'm a christian. I have no hatred towards christianity at all. I do believe the church has been deeply perverted by money, politics and a whole host of factors. Next I am assuming that you will tell me because of my stated beliefs there is no way I'm a 'real' christian. Let's cut all of that pointless rhetoric out right now and save everyone from another cyclical, semantic argument, and just say we're both christians who happen to disagree.

I believe the bible is a spiritual book. It is not a technical manual. It does not address the mechanism whereby we were created. Scientifically, there is absolutely no basis for stating that we were or were not created by an all-powerful being. This goes back to Leauki's earlier posting about the experiment to find out how smurf's get from one floor of the house to another.

on Jun 16, 2008

If science denied belief in God

I never said that science denied belief in G-d. Try to keep with the flow of things!

 

on Jun 16, 2008


So are you telling me Japan and China are Christian?

What???

KFC, have you lost it completely?

I didn't say anything about "Christian" and "non-Christian" countries. I spoke of countries that teach Creationism and countries that do not.

Your superstition has made you blind to the world.

I never hated Christianity. And if you weren't so blinded by your superstitious beliefs, you would have noticed that I often speak highly of Christian (Catholic) friends and that I NEVER called your superstitious beliefs _Christian_, I _always_ put the word in quotes, when I referred to to your beliefs. I never agreed with you that what you believe is representative of Christianity, and it is not very honest of you to pretend that I spoke about Christianity when I spoke about your beliefs, because you KNOW I never agreed with you on that.

I never ever referred to the Christian faith when I said "Christianity". I referred to what YOU and people like you call "Christianity", but which I have never accepted as the faith spawned by a religious Jew.

You will never see me put "Christianity" in quotes when I speak of the Pope or Lutheran ministers or Christian martyrs, up to and including newly converted Christians in Islamic countries who face persecution and sometimes death because of their (genuine) Christian beliefs. But if I see a superstitious fundamentalist who knows little about religion and studies "angels" instead of scripture and calls my G-d a "moon god" because she didn't bother to learn about Byzantinian symbols and just happens to believe what fellow "Christians" (note the quotes) tell her, I do confront her.

You see, KFC, I am a fundamentalist too, in a way. Like I would have said to Artysim, had I been able to post earlier today, in response to his remarks about idol worship, I have my beliefs too.
And you never cared about that. You insulted them, treated them as inferior, and dismissed everything I had to say because it wouldn't fit into your insane worldview.

You see, KFC, I care about my faith. I once quit my job to travel to Jerusalem. I studied Hebrew to understand scripture better. When Israel was under attack and many people cancelled their trips, I went there anyway. I donated time and money to help in the holy land. And guess what, I met Christians there who did the same.

And I have a problem, KFC, and you may call it religious intolerance, but I have a problem with people who, like you, study "angels", as if they were physical beings (despite all analysis of Biblical texts by Hebrew-speaking scholars disagreeing with that interpretation), because, as Maimonides warned, thinking that angels have physical form is dangerously close to believing that G-d has physical form.

I have a problem with idiots who do not know much about the G-d of the Jewish people and therefore dismiss Him as a "moon god" just because the descendants of Ishmael also pray to Him. You tried to show that Muhammed's Allah and your god are not the same god because Muhammed didn't speak of a Trinity. Well, guess what, neither did Moses. That's when I finally understood. You really had no idea. You didn't know, and you still don't know even after I explained it to you. I bet you never even looked up the word relatioships I told you about. You don't really care about what scripture says, do you?

And then you started your greatest project. Not only do you propose that religion should be taught in science class, DESPITE scripture telling us that we must not test G-d, but you accuse my G-d of designing us, designing us imperfect beings. We are created in the image of G-d, KFC, but that refers to our souls, not our bodies. Our bodies are NOT created in the image of G-d, because G-d doesn't have badly designed eyes. Look at me. Do you think G-d wears glasses? And G-d didn't design our eyes either, He is not responsible for disease and our weaknesses, He is NOT a designer of things in His universe. He is NOT the incompetent fool you are trying to convince everyone designed us. That's not how it worked.

My G-d, KFC, is not a sadistic being who "designs" women designed to risk death in childbirth because of an imperfectly planned birth canal. He is not an incompetent engineer who thought it would be a fun idea to design a friend of mine to develop Type 1 Diabetes (and don't dare to tell me that he is probably being punished for a sin or some such nonsense). He is not a flippy joker who loves most among His children those who refuse to study the world and believe that they already know everything they need to know.

I have listened to your superstitions and insults long enough, KFC. And now you tell me that I _hate_ Christianity, because I have a problem with YOU (not Christians, YOU) putting down other people's faiths, insulting all Muslims by calling their god (and mine) a "moon god", insinuating that Jews are incomplete in their faith because they rejected one out of thousands of Jerusalem preachers, treating Mormons as if you are somehow better than they, and lying about evidence for evolution? I am sick and tired of giving you example after example for everything you want to have never happened or think cannot be observed just to find you pretend that you never heard about all those things a day later when we meet again and discuss "Creation science" once more. And all that comes under that nice umbrella of the "Christian principle" of "honesty". Do you think you actually brought ANYONE here closer to the Christian faith?

So... that rant had to happen sooner or later.

I feel better now.

Know what I did on the weekend?

I wrote a program that transliterates Hebrew and Arabic to English and to each other.

You can find a description and screenshots here:

http://web.mac.com/ajbrehm/Not_A_Linguist/Not_A_Linguist_Blog/Entries/2008/6/15_Transliteration_Program.html

I often spend weekends studying Hebrew or, which I realise is not cool, the Bible.

But whenever I do, I find that I have become less superstitious and more open to the world.

Oh... and KFC... two points:

1. It doesn't matter how much money one pours into universities; if the students are Creationists the research results will be shit. Money is a multplicator. It makes better what already exists.

2. There is no such thing as a "Creation scientist".

on Jun 16, 2008

You couldn't be more wrong and I'm going to prove it to you scientifically.

Challenge accepted.

You may prove scientifically that "Creation science" works. You may use any god you like for whatever experiment you are going to present.

I waive the requirement that it has to be a Greaco-Roman or Semitic god.

on Jun 16, 2008
First of all you went on a big ramble totally not dealing with the orginal subject matter and totally misrepresenting me btw. Calling me a liar and skipping out on the conversation doesn't make you look credible. Let's stick to the subject matter first and not about stuff I've written about angels and Allah which has nothing to do with your original article.

You have a lot to say and have alot of ideas but cannot back up your ideas and instead tell me what you do which has nothing to do with your hypothesis. You are obviously not a scientist. You would not have said something so stupid if you were.

1. It doesn't matter how much money one pours into universities; if the students are Creationists the research results will be shit. Money is a multplicator. It makes better what already exists.

2. There is no such thing as a "Creation scientist".


My son is a Christian. He's also a Scientist. So what is he? You're wrong. The money invested in him from private funds as a Scientist has yielded high impact publication.

This is all about money and not about religion. Did you read the premier journal link I gave you? It's all right there. You're not wanting to believe this and you're making a correlation with 0 facts.

You made assumptions with NO facts. I gave you literature. I've given you solid scientific fact. Where are your facts? Don't just say things.

Now it's on you to show me the data to support your conclusion.

YOUR HYPOTHESIS IS:
countries that teach Creationism, do not have the workforce to be leading in any field of technology.


countries that DO NOT INVEST MONEY INTO SCIENTIFIC PROGRAMS, do not have the workforce to be leading in any field of technology.

We can't both be correct. Data you have provided in support of your hypothesis; NONE

Data that has been supported in my hypothesis is "It is rather obvious that richer countries are able to invest more resources in science and therefore account for the largest number of publications. It is also likely that there is a statistical bias on the part of the SCI as a bibliometric database, since it represents North American and European publications far better than those of the rest of the world" (Gibbs 1995; May 1997; Alonso & Fernandez-Juricic 2001; Vohora & Vohora 2001

Here's the full article:

http://biology.plosjournals.org/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1371/journal.pbio.0020001&ct=1&SESSID=1010bf1fbbf5905e500eab28d8f4a505


Clearly all the countries with the publications listed in my previous are comparatively more wealthy countries.

NOTE: A highly atheistic country is not on the list. According to your hypothesis this country should be on the top. Top countries that are athestic are

1. Sweden 85%
2. Vietnam 81%
3. Denmark 80%
4. Norway 72%

According to your hypothesis these four countries should be the most likely candidates for scientific output and should be teaching something other than creationism since the majority of their population is considered atheistic.

Conversely a country like the US with a 3-9% population of athesists should be one of the less likely to be on that original list I put forth and yet they are the leaders.

Not looking too good for your hypothesis.

This data here is from Zuckerman 2005.






on Jun 16, 2008
Science (from the Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is the effort to discover, understand, or to understand better, how the physical world works, with observable physical evidence as the basis of that understanding. It is done through observation of existing phenomena, and/or through experimentation that tries to simulate phenomena under controlled conditions.

knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b: such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena

systematized knowledge derived from observation, study, and experimentation carried on in order to determine the nature or principles of what is being studied
on Jun 16, 2008
What???
KFC, have you lost it completely?
I didn't say anything about "Christian" and "non-Christian" countries. I spoke of countries that teach Creationism and countries that do not.


You're right on this. I tried to edit this part of what I wrote and could not get back in to do so. So just skip that part because I totally did not answer you correctly on that point and just confused things .

on Jun 16, 2008
Smoothseas.

Ok so you defined science from a College Textbook so what does that have to do with Leauki's hypothesis?

on Jun 16, 2008
Know what I did on the weekend?
I wrote a program that transliterates Hebrew and Arabic to English and to each other.
You can find a description and screenshots here:


ok now your mostly unsubstantiated rant is over and you feel better. I have to say once again...your rant had NOTHING to do with the subject matter.

Maybe later after we discuss just this subject we can talk about what you did this weekend.

Because I do have a question for you about being a Jew.
on Jun 16, 2008
KFC, this may shock you but I'm a christian. I have no hatred towards christianity at all. I do believe the church has been deeply perverted by money, politics and a whole host of factors. Next I am assuming that you will tell me because of my stated beliefs there is no way I'm a 'real' christian. Let's cut all of that pointless rhetoric out right now and save everyone from another cyclical, semantic argument, and just say we're both christians who happen to disagree.


It does shock me. So are you telling me you follow Christ and his teachings?

I also agree with you on the condition of the church, but I also know that Christ died for his church (called out ones). And no I wouldn't call you a non-Christian based on just this statement.

One very important thing to historic Christianity and I'm talking all of the writings and messages from Christ himself and later the Apostles was unity. One way we would know fellow Christians was by the spirit. The spirit bears witness.

I believe the bible is a spiritual book. It is not a technical manual. It does not address the mechanism whereby we were created. Scientifically, there is absolutely no basis for stating that we were or were not created by an all-powerful being. This goes back to Leauki's earlier posting about the experiment to find out how smurf's get from one floor of the house to another.


I also believe the bible is a spiritual book. But what do you mean by that? It does address the creator and the creation created. No, we are not given technical details. Agree there. But we don't have details presented by the evolutionary theory either. No one wrote it down as it happened. We actually have more details from this Mosaic account than anything else the scientific community has shown.




on Jun 16, 2008

I never said that science denied belief in G-d.


and I never said you did say that...however, your entire article sure infers it. Your touting the theory of evolution which excludes Creator God, you promoted atheist Steven den Beste and his dumb idea that the retina proves evolution...




We are created in the image of G-d, KFC, but that refers to our souls, not our bodies.


I agree 100%.

And G-d didn't design our eyes either,


Yes, according to Genesis 1 and 2, He did. God designed our physical nature (our human bodies) as well as our spiritual nature (our eternal souls).

1:26, "And he said, "Let us make man to our image and likeness."

2:7, "And the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth: and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul."


In v. 26, notice the word image and likeness? Man is the first among all God's creatures on earth becasue he was created in the image of God and is therefore like unto Him. This "likeness" though is twofold...a natural and a supernatural likeness unto God...meaning man has a spiritual soul which not only makes his body live, but it is immortal, reasonable and gifted with free will. By these we are like unto God, who is Eternal, whose Intelligence is Supreme, and Whose will is infinitely free.

Now, the body of man bears no likeness to God, for God has no body. But at the same time our body has high prerogatives...for it is the dwelling place and instrument of the immortal soul...It's more complete and better adapted to every kind of work than the bodies of animals. We raise our eyes to heaven for which man was created. OUr humanity is the masterpiece of God's visible Creation...I say visible becasue God also created invisible creatures called angels or spirits.

We are therefore to hold our body in honor and not pollute our soul by sin. "Glorify and bear God in your body." 1Cor.6:20.


You tried to show that Muhammed's Allah and your god are not the same god because Muhammed didn't speak of a Trinity. Well, guess what, neither did Moses.


Oh yes, Moses spoke of the Blessed Trinity right here in Genesis 1:26...

1:26, "[I]And he said, "Let us make man to our image and likeness."

Here, the words, "us" and "our" indicate the plural number...to insinuate the plurality of Persons in the Deity.

He is not responsible for disease and our weaknesses, He is NOT a designer of things in His universe. He is NOT the incompetent fool you are trying to convince everyone designed us. That's not how it worked.
My G-d, KFC, is not a sadistic being who "designs" women designed to risk death in childbirth because of an imperfectly planned birth canal. He is not an incompetent engineer who thought it would be a fun idea to design a friend of mine to develop Type 1 Diabetes


Well, yes in the beginning God created Adam and Eve perfectly, there was no disease, aging, poor eyesight or pain in childbirth, sorrow or even suffering. At that time all things cohere becasue all things are submissive to the Author of life and being. But this adhesion to God is affected in a free act of love and this freedom gives to the entire creation an incomparable majesty. God receives a praise that is spontaneous of all His creation. ONce man in a gesture of pride and egoism, tempted by Satan refused to obey, thinking he would be like God, the whole order of things fell apart. The entire universe turned against man, its betrayer.

Man's own body revolted and he beheld within himself sinful passions. Seven fetters, which theology later called the capitol sins, will shackle him forevermore. The pair perceive themselves as "naked". There is no more harmony in man's very being...our sorrows are multiplied, we now experience pain.

There is an imbalance that develops between the perfect harmony of man and woman and social discord follows...quarrels in family forms and murder results...wars between cities and between nation and nation, world war and revolutions...

The animal kingdom rises up too as so does the earth...man must work and sweat to earn his meager fruits...

Man was created to be a friend of Christ went astray in the disobedience of Adam...Humanity separated from Christ is without form, harmony or beauty.


The Blessed Trinity didn't leave us in our state of hopeless misery..

Christ came in glory but under the reign of sin; the wall of separation between God and man...also between man and man...Christ the Incarnate God, will humble Himself and come to earth as True-God and True-man and reconcile in His Precious Blood heaven and earth. He will unite the people.

42 Pages1 2 3  Last