To Be a Darwinist or To Be a Darwinist

[AV1611VET]

What is with that?

It keeps me off the streets at night.

 

[Loudmouth]

Jealous?

Not at all. I don't need a large post count. Obviously, you do.

 

[Jamin4422]

It keeps me off the streets at night.

How do you get your exercise then. I live in a safe neighborhood where people like to walk for exercise.

 

[CabVet]

How do you get your exercise then. I live in a safe neighborhood where people like to walk for exercise.

I am going to go out on a limb here and say probably during the day.

 

[AV1611VET]

How do you get your exercise then. I live in a safe neighborhood where people like to walk for exercise.

My wife told me to quit yakking on the Internet all night and get some exercise ... so now I shoot pool on the Internet.

 

[TLK Valentine]

It keeps me off the streets at night.

For which I'm sure the streets are grateful.

 

[AV1611VET]

For which I'm sure the streets are grateful.

... Good one!

 

[HitchSlap]

... Good one!

Yeah, but you don't sleep with the interwebz.

 

[Speedwell]

So have I.

In my opinion ... no.

To a point, then they hit a boundary and cannot go any farther.

I don't know what that boundary is, but I know it's there because God is [a] God of boundaries.

The boundary may be in the form of sterility, or a preset number of generations, or a weakening of the ability to procreate, or all of the above.

I don't know.

But there is no evidence for it whatsoever, and no biblical support, either.

 

[pitabread]

But there is no evidence for it whatsoever, and no biblical support, either.

AV1611VET just tricked you into necroing a thread.

 

[Speedwell]

LOL

AV1611VET just tricked you into necroing a thread.

LOL! I didn't know my response would show up in this one. (I kind of wondered what had happened to it)

 

[AV1611VET]

But there is no evidence for it whatsoever,

That's because science is myopic.

... and no biblical support, either.

Job 14:5 Seeing his days are determined, the number of his months are with thee, thou hast appointed his bounds that he cannot pass;

Psalm 104:9 Thou hast set a bound that they may not pass over; that they turn not again to cover the earth.

God sets boundaries.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

That's because science is myopic.

It certainly restricts itself to inference from empirical observation. But that's a Good Thing if you want to gain objective knowledge.

 

[AV1611VET]

It certainly restricts itself to inference from empirical observation.

And uses said observations against the Bible at times.

Do the years 1925 and 1973 mean anything?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

From yahoo answers:

Perhaps someone can confirm this?

Accepting evolution is kind of like accepting a blue sky. It's just there.

Calling someone who accepts evolution a "Darwinist" is to be out of touch with reality. Darwin was fine for his time, but science has progressed since his day.

 

[AV1611VET]

Calling someone who accepts evolution a "Darwinist" is to be out of touch with reality. Darwin was fine for his time, but science has progressed since his day.

Meaning Darwin was so wrong no one wants to associate with him anymore?

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

I will try to make the question more clear: how would eating a fish prove that he was not a ghost?

To you and me, it is not proof; it could have, for example, been a mere vision. But it was enough for the disciples at that time. We all, ultimately, have to accept Christ's words on faith that He was truly resurrected and in the flesh.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Meaning Darwin was so wrong no one wants to associate with him anymore?

Darwin wasn't wrong. But his ideas have been refined. It is analogous to Newton and Einstein. Newton's ideas were a great advance. Einstein's ideas brought in refinement. And we still await the reconciliation between quantum mechanics and relativity. So you don't, today, call a practicing physicist a "Newtonian". Even when he uses ordinary Newton formulas to calculate satellite orbits.

 

[AV1611VET]

So you don't, today, call a practicing physicist a "Newtonian". Even when he uses ordinary Newton formulas to calculate satellite orbits.

Fair enough.

But then why not call evolution "Darwinism"?

After all, isn't Lamarckism named after Jean Baptiste de Lamarck?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

And uses said observations against the Bible at times.

Science is a tool. People, usually historians, have attempted, with varying success, to use science to support or refute the historicity of biblical stories, claims, events, etc.

Do the years 1925 and 1973 mean anything?

In and of themselves? No. With respect to people and events? Yes, a multitude of meanings.