Comments on: The Creation Controversy

By: Carly

Carly — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 04:48:25 +0000

I’m assuming by “handful of fossils” you mean the thousands of well-documented and studied fossils. And when you say that Darwin’s theories haven’t been rigorously tested, you’re not talking about all the biological experiments, field studies, and other such methods that have rigorously tested the theory.
There is confusion over the word “theory” as it is used by scientists – it isn’t a guess, it is a systematic sets of concepts that provide explanations for observing patterns in nature. A good scientific theory: 1. Agrees with the data
2. Has logical consistency – parts of it don’t contradict other parts
3. Suggests verifiable causes that explain and predict
Evolution has all these characteristics.

By: Henry

Henry — Sat, 26 Sep 2009 22:01:41 +0000

Only atheists must believe in evolution, unless they believe we were planted here by some aliens from outer space, or some other evasion.
I don’t suppose most people feel any urgency to take a position on the subject
and are more interested in where they’re going when their own relatively short span of development is over.

By: pauline

pauline — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 02:45:14 +0000

amazing article

he’s not knocking science but rather hollywood getting it wrong and blaming the wrong people

By: Grant

Grant — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:33:55 +0000

@Marissa – That’s exactly how I feel. I’m Christian, so I’m used to hearing others immediately put down the theory of evolution as “evil”. It’s a theory about our origins and (to the religious minded) one possible way God may have created man. Evolution doesn’t equal atheism.

By: Marissa L

Marissa L — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 18:13:36 +0000

Those unobjective evolutionary biologists say “I don’t know” all the time with respect to things such as various unresolved phylogenies. Is it only evolutionary scientists that are unobjective about their field, or all scientists?

The theory of evolution is not a half-baked theory; it is well supported by fossil and molecular evidence, which was unmentioned in this article.

Evolution and natural selection really have nothing to say about whether the universe is dumb or intelligent, and certainly not about the existence of God, which is a question outside the realm of scientific investigation.

By: JRM

JRM — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 17:26:27 +0000

“Would the theory of natural selection have ever ‚Äúevolved‚Äù if Darwin‚Äôs daughter had lived? We can only speculate…”

Not true at all. The Rabbi’s knowledge of history is as abysmal as his knowledge fo sciecne. Alfred North Wallace, Darwin’s contemorary indepedently also worked out details of evolution.

But the “bother’s keeper” joke was fabulous!