1. New: Christian Forums Staff Recruit Video.- It's that time of year again. We are having our annual Staff Recruit Drive. Simply ask any staffer to help you apply and enjoy the video...
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Please help us test our new CF PrayPal app available right now in the Google Play store for Android devices. The iPhone app should be available within the next few days. If you would be so kind to also add a review for it that would be great! Thanks!

    Just Click Here
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice

Welcome to Christian Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
  • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
  • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting after you have posted 20 posts and have received 5 likes.
  • Access to private conversations with other members.

We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

10 Evolution Is A Lie: Theory of Evolution Implies Death And Evil Are Good

Discussion in 'Physical & Life Sciences' started by speakout, Oct 15, 2008.

  1. Chalnoth

    Chalnoth Senior Contributor

    Messages:
    11,460
    Likes Received:
    341
    Marital Status:
    Single
    Faith:
    Atheist
    All individuals aren't expected to be better fit. That statement doesn't even make sense.

    What evolution says about this particular issue is that some individuals will be better at reproducing than others, and that their ability to reproduce partially depends upon things they pass down to their children. This is hardly "falsified", it is an irrefutable fact of nature.

    Now you're just jerking my chain. You can't be serious. Dogs are evil because they bark?
     
  2. Incariol

    Incariol Newbie

    Messages:
    5,721
    Likes Received:
    219
    Marital Status:
    Single
    Politics:
    US-Democrat
    Faith:
    Christian
    Time to review High School biology.

    Evolution occurs at what level of organization? - Yahoo! Answers

    "better fit" doesn't even make sense.
     
  3. Blayz

    Blayz New Member

    Messages:
    3,365
    Likes Received:
    208
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Atheist
    I remember speakout. He had that blog called dawkinswatch or something similar, and he kept making 3rd party references to it in his threads pretending it wasn't his blog but instead an authoritative source.

    Thanks for the necro, whoever.
     
  4. Jazer

    Jazer Guest

    Isn't that the theory behind the Nazi death camps? Kill everyone that is not a part of the master race. Is it a good idea for us to step in and help mother nature to make us all more perfect?
     
  5. VehementiDominus

    VehementiDominus New Member

    Messages:
    307
    Likes Received:
    12
    Marital Status:
    Single
    Politics:
    UK-Liberal-Democrats
    Faith:
    Atheist
    Not quite. There's no "Master race", if anything, eugenics is a result of misunderstanding evolution by natural selection.

    Having the diversity of so many different races within our species, each with strengths and weaknesses, makes our whole species stronger and more adaptable to an ever-changing environment.
     
  6. Insane_Duck

    Insane_Duck Because ducks are just awesome like that.

    Messages:
    1,392
    Likes Received:
    19
    Marital Status:
    Private
    Politics:
    US-Democrat
    Faith:
    Atheist
    Not really no. The idea was that the Jews were a race of sub-humans that needed to be exterminated. (as they were ruining everything, apparently) The idea wasn't to improve the genepool persay, but to destroy a hated enemy. (which wasn't Hitler's aim anyway, he just needed as scapegoat)

    That being said, nature has nothing against genocide, and commits it frequently. (genocide is the killing of a race, what is killing of a species?)
     
  7. Chalnoth

    Chalnoth Senior Contributor

    Messages:
    11,460
    Likes Received:
    341
    Marital Status:
    Single
    Faith:
    Atheist
    You cannot derive "ought" from "is". That is, evolution is a description of the way life is. It isn't a prescription for what we ought to do.

    And even more damning, evolution makes no statement whatsoever about which is "better". Natural selection only says that that which is better at reproducing reproduces more.
     
  8. Jazer

    Jazer Guest

    So does that make rape or incest or anything that produces a baby a good thing? They do not think it is a good thing to have a baby in China. They boast about how they have prevented as many as 600,000 babies from being born. Also war tends to kill a lot of people before they are able to reproduce. You would think that all the pro war people would have been killed in those wars and natural selection should have eliminated it by now. Anti war people tend not to go off and fight, so they would be around to reproduce.
     
  9. Insane_Duck

    Insane_Duck Because ducks are just awesome like that.

    Messages:
    1,392
    Likes Received:
    19
    Marital Status:
    Private
    Politics:
    US-Democrat
    Faith:
    Atheist
    Rape often doesn't produce a baby and causes trauma. When/If the baby is born it will often be in a single mother home and therefore not as successful. Rape is also a less favorable way than normal sex to raise a successful child. Incest has a high deformity rate therefore causing evolution to select against it. (why most people don't get attracted to immediate family) In reproduction, best isn't always most. :p

    1. Not all pro war people go off to war.
    2. Many of our genes were developed before civilization and formal war was around. (10,000 years isn't a long time for evolution)
    3. Something like affinity for war will often be developed societal, through parents, upbringing, and their experience.
    4. If a (way back when) tribe refused to fight at all (there needs to be a balance) the tribe would often be wiped out.

    I think you need a better understanding of evolution and biology at large. Come back when you've learned a little. (try Wikipedia, it will actually bring you far far above the knowledge level regarding evolution you currently achieve)
     
  10. Chalnoth

    Chalnoth Senior Contributor

    Messages:
    11,460
    Likes Received:
    341
    Marital Status:
    Single
    Faith:
    Atheist
    Why would it? Evolution doesn't say what is good or bad. It just says what is. As I said before, you cannot derive ought from is: evolution cannot give any moral prescriptions one way or the other.

    But I should mention that incest is quite damaging for future reproduction, because it causes concentration of genetic defects, leading to all sorts of nasty problems. This is, fundamentally, why incest is taboo: it doesn't make for successful offspring.

    As for rape, the nasty thing there is that in many situations, rape is an effective reproductive strategy for the males of a species. It is particularly popular among many insects, some of which perform what is known as "traumatic insemination", where the male actually stabs his mate, injecting the semen directly into the abdomen. But again, evolution doesn't say what is good or bad (we humans generally consider rape to be very bad indeed). It just says what is.

    Evolution isn't magic, and cannot produce a "perfect" organism. There are all sorts of suboptimal aspects of various organisms, because species frequently get sort of trapped in an evolutionary rut where getting rid of a trait tends to affect other things, so effectively that trait can't be removed (or at least it can become very hard to do so).

    But what's more, war is actually a pretty effective strategy for reproduction, because if you kill off the people who have different genes than you, then your genes now have more room to propagate.
     
  11. Wiccan_Child

    Wiccan_Child Contributor

    Messages:
    19,631
    Likes Received:
    565
    Marital Status:
    In Relationship
    Politics:
    UK-Liberal-Democrats
    Faith:
    Atheist
    "Functionally better" is not the same as "morally good".

    Likewise, anti-war people are also killed more frequently when war comes to them. People are anti-war for largely cultural reasons, not genetic reasons. For a large part of human history, armies were made of conscripts, not volunteers - anti-war or not, you had no choice.
     
  12. Naraoia

    Naraoia Apprentice Biologist

    Messages:
    6,614
    Likes Received:
    292
    Marital Status:
    Single
    Faith:
    Atheist
    This statement doesn't make sense. If every individual is "better fit", then what are they "better fit" than? "Better" is relative. You need to have variation in order for some individuals to be "better" (at whatever we are measuring) than others.

    Natural selection is just a fancy expression for the fact that some individuals have more descendants than others for genetic reasons. And natural selection is just ONE way evolution can happen. Other mechanisms (I see someone linked genetic drift) don't require any difference in fitness at all. Genetic variation is enough in itself to cause evolution.

    (Just how much interesting change you can achieve without selection is a different question)

    English language lesson: "incubate" is what female birds do to their eggs. You want him to elaborate.

    (a) Really? (b) How does ventriloquy make something wicked?

    Haha, the problem is, what we do changes what is "more perfect" (in quotes because evolution doesn't ever deal in perfection). If the Nazis kill off all members of certain groups, then being a member of those groups ain't much of an evolutionary advantage. But if there are no Nazis to slaughter them, I'd say Jews (and the Romani people, another target of the Nazi madness) are pretty good at keeping their genetic heritage alive.

    The point being, evolution knows no absolutes (well, strictly speaking it doesn't "know" anything, being an inanimate phenomenon). We can't "help mother nature to make us all more perfect", as the very act of our trying changes the definition of "more perfect". Fitness is always context-dependent.

    In other words, the Nazis misunderstood evolution, or chose to misunderstand. Which is not really a surprise, considering the number of people that still do. (You being one of them right here, or I wouldn't need to write this reply)

    Like so many people, you are ignoring an important distinction between different meanings of "good". Anything that produces a baby* is a "good thing" in the sense that it propagates the parent(s)'s genes. That's something different from being morally good, which is a value judgement imparted by humans (or gods, whichever you prefer).

    *It is also way more complicated than that. Yeah, a baby is "good". A baby that has a chance of growing up and producing babies of its own, that is. Which is why rape by a random stranger is in no way a good thing for a woman, even if we include "good things" in the "increase fitness" sense. (1) Mr Random Stranger is probably not the (genetic) dad she would've chosen for her babies, or he wouldn't have to force himself on her, (2) Mr Random Stranger's unlikely to stay around and help raise the kid, (3) Her mate/husband, if she has one, is unlikely to help as much with Mr Random Stranger's kid as he would with his own. Ergo, the baby is less likely to increase her reproductive success than a baby born from her pair bond/marriage would be. And she's just wasted months or years of her fertile life, depleted her body's reserves, and, if we're talking pre-modern times, risked her life with childbirth. From the rapist's point of view, all that doesn't matter. If the baby lives, he wins. If it dies, all he lost is a squirt of sperm.

    There are two parents behind any baby, and what's "good" for one isn't always "good" for the other. It's a huge area of research since biologists realised that reproduction isn't all "you like me, I like you, let's make babies together!" (See entire book written on the subject)

    Of course, rape can happen within a pair bond. Which makes the whole issue even more complicated.

    (This turned into something of a rant. Sorry for that... take home message is still that "good" is always relative in evolution.)

    They do not think it's a good thing to have many babies, and they have a good reason for that. China has something of a population problem.

    Of course, the whole one-child policy is beginning to seriously bite their demographics in the rump, but that's a different issue again.

    Nah, anti-war people would end up massacred or enslaved when the pro-war tribe next door exterminates their own pro-war fighters that their anti-war sentiments prevented them from helping.
     
  13. Naraoia

    Naraoia Apprentice Biologist

    Messages:
    6,614
    Likes Received:
    292
    Marital Status:
    Single
    Faith:
    Atheist
    I've got to wonder how much choice you had in a prehistoric hunter-gatherer society. Most of human history is prehistory, and so long as there was opportunity for people to act on their genetic inclinations with regards to fighting, selection could shape those inclinations.
     
Loading...