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 14)
42 PagesFirst 12 13 14 15 16  Last
on Dec 22, 2008

Evolution is an integral part of the original creation leauki ... and that original was created ...

YES, YES, YES.....A THOUSAND TIMES YES.

 

on Dec 22, 2008

YES, YES, YES.....A THOUSAND TIMES YES.

So you don't believe that G-d created each species individually any more?

 

on Dec 22, 2008

So you don't believe that G-d created each species individually any more?

I responded too hastily to TA, and upon re-reading it, I can see why you would ask this question.

I believe according to Genesis that God created individually each original "kind" (what has become known as species)....and that over time "evolutionary" change occurs within kind. Darwin witnessed that with all the different beaks in birds.

 

on Dec 22, 2008

and that over time "evolutionary" change occurs within kind.

How does evolution know when to stop?

 

on Dec 22, 2008

How does evolution know when to stop?

who says it has to?

 

on Dec 22, 2008

who says it has to?

Lula.

_I_ say that species evolve and that they evolve into different species and ultimately totally different animals.

Lula says such evolution _stops_ before they evolve into different species or different animals.

I want to know how evolution knows when to stop.

 

on Dec 22, 2008

I agree with Lula on this one.  I don't believe we can evolve outside our species.  A human will always stay a human, a dog a dog, a cat a cat.  Now I believe God has engineered it so that diff variations can evolve from each species....but a tomato will never ever evolve into a watermelon only diff variations of tomatoes. 

There is no Science that can show otherwise Leauki. 

So I'm saying there is no neccessity in stopping as long as the different variations come into contact with each other.  There's endless possiblities. 

on Dec 22, 2008

KFC Kickin For Christ
I agree with Lula on this one.  I don't believe we can evolve outside our species.  A human will always stay a human, a dog a dog, a cat a cat.  Now I believe God has engineered it so that diff variations can evolve from each species....but a tomato will never ever evolve into a watermelon only diff variations of tomatoes. 

There is no Science that can show otherwise Leauki. 

So I'm saying there is no neccessity in stopping as long as the different variations come into contact with each other.  There's endless possiblities. 

thats one of the stupidest things you have ever said, also it is all entirely wrong.

We CAN and we HAVE evolved.

Tomatos CAN AND DO evolve.

There is TONS of science that shows otherwise.

You BELEIVE god made imaginary bariers between "species" (a human definition), and pretend any proof to the contrary does not exist.

on Dec 23, 2008

Like Lula and KFC you focus on the religion rather than the Creationism/science argument.
I said that countries that teach Creationism instead of evolution are behind in science

My response is specifically toward that point. All those giants were taught creationism .... saying that they rose above their culture is just to avoid the point ... ALL great scientists rise above their cultures ....

Teaching Creationism, as it should be taught, creates no obstacle to research in any branch of knowledge. Bias, narrow-mindedness and intolerance of free speech do. follow these three evils and u see where research is lacking.

ThinkAloud, edit your comment

Ohhh leauki ... i gave up on this editor .. i complained a lot about it.... no use obviously. and i dont know why quoting sometimes comes out that way. i dont use Word or anything other than the provided comments' text tool. They should also provide spell-check

on Dec 23, 2008

I don't have any ideas of what the eye's design should be. But people who build cameras do. And we are lucky that they possess the very arrogance you speak of.

  !!!!

you mean their Cameras' design is better and more efficient than the Eye's design????!!!!

this is like somone's earlier comment that someday we will have a computer that can replace our thinking processes !!!!

Both "pipe-dreams" are flying in the face of everything that Science itself say. Science says that through two fundamental principles:

1-  Gödel's incompleteness theory .... He proved mathematically that no man-made system of any kind can be consistent, powerful-enough AND complete at the same time. it always gets bogged down (in infinite loop) whenever it starts to reflect upon itself. our brains always find a way out and we reflect upon ourselves all the time. we know what we doing, why we doing it and recognize when we get bogged down and we are able to get out of that infinite loop we even know what the loop's cause is (or was)... computers will never be able to do that ... they just get stuck .... and freeze .... no two ways around that Leauki ... and some think they can be better than our brains !!!!!

2- Organisms or parts-their-of "Know" the condition they are in ... in all its minute details and know how to respond to it... no man-made system can achieve that level of self-awareness and self-correction capabilities. Accordingly ... no matter how accurate the Camera or the thermostat or any man-made device is, it can never achieve the capability of a live organ with similar function.

I think you are confusing speed and accuracy with "Functionality" and "Durability" and "self-preservation" ....

May be the Camera is more accurate and faster sometimes (and so are computers).... but that in itself makes it a bad "eye" ... not an eye that can convey an image that can make sense to the brain... the camera does not even know it is taking a picture ... let alone aware that there are other organs which need to process what it is doing !!!!

that is creation Leauki ... not manufacturing !!!!!

 

on Dec 23, 2008

1. bullshit theory. But if it makes you comfortable, keep thinking that. At least it would be a surprise when people like me build a functional AI.

2. Are you claiming that the eye is SENTIENT and KNOWS things and THINKS and DECIDES? thats RETARDED! And last I checked the eye is not very repairable.

 

The eye is one of the most flawed and imperfect devices in nature. It is full of bad design choices and can be vastly improved on by mankind. In fact we already HAVE, no human eye can compare to a TELESCOPE... now CHEAP and SMALLER (than the eye) camaras at the store which beat the are a different thing. But if size and money is no issue, it has long been surpassed.

Heck there are some that are pretty portable and NOT very expensive that are way better than the human eye.

on Dec 23, 2008

1. bullshit theory.
2. Are you claiming that the eye is SENTIENT and KNOWS things and THINKS and DECIDES? thats RETARDED! And last I checked the eye is not very repairable.

well... if you call Godel's Theory a bullshit ... then there is no use in trying to convince you of anything.

did you study it? do you even know how he developed it or just read  his proof? !!!!

of course ... "if you dont know ... you can say anything"

better to stick to what you know ...

btw, how many years can any camera function under the same conditions of the eye and still operates as it should with no replacement of any part of that "flawed" design?

on Dec 23, 2008

you mean their Cameras' design is better and more efficient than the Eye's design????!!!!

Yes.

We can build cameras that can see into a far wider spectrum than human eyes, that can see at night, can see other radiation, and can work for longer times without rest.

You didn't even read the article that started this, did you?

"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."

Yes, we are quite capable of building cameras that are better eyes than human eyes. And we didn't even make the mistakes listed above, with light having to penetrate through multiple layers of unnecessary material.

Whatever made you think that the human eye can see better than modern cameras?


on Dec 23, 2008

 Whatever made you think that the human eye can see better than modern cameras?

Godal's MATHEMATIC PROOF showing that nothing man made would ever be able to equal the glory of god... No really that is what he said... let me quote him.

Gödel's incompleteness theory .... He proved mathematically that no man-made system of any kind can be consistent, powerful-enough AND complete at the same time

It is funny, the more he argues, the deeper he digs himself, now he isn't just talking genetics, but brings in computers and optics into the fray and claims on those two things aswell human made devices can't equal god (demonstrating is ignorance of even the most basic knowledge in those fields as well)... except computers far surpass in CERTAIN aspects, and will eventually surpass in all. And in optics... well human made devices long ago suprass nature made ones in every single way shape or form.

on Dec 23, 2008

Lula.

_I_ say that species evolve and that they evolve into different species and ultimately totally different animals.

Lula says such evolution _stops_ before they evolve into different species or different animals.

I want to know how evolution knows when to stop.

Leauki,

First, Evolution per se doesn't "know" anything. Evolution is a process not an intelligent entity.

Evolution meaning change over time from one original "kind" to a completely different one never stops becasue it never started...it's becasue of the way God designed cells and specifically DNA which through science we are just now getting to learn more about.  DNA is the barrier and DNA won't allow  genetic crossover that would be necessary for one kind to "evolve" into a completely different kind with different DNA.

 

 

 

 

 

42 PagesFirst 12 13 14 15 16  Last