Interesting article on the 'deconversion' of a Young-Earth creationist

[crossnote]

There is no alternative scientific view.

So it's ok to have a theory, namely the theory of evolution, crammed down our throats and ears?

 

[pitabread]

So it's ok to have a theory, namely the theory of evolution, crammed down our throats and ears?

For the purpose of creating a scientifically literate populace, yes.

A scientifically literate populace is important for economic competitiveness. Especially keeping in mind that the modern ToE has real-world application.

 

[crossnote]

For the purpose of creating a scientifically literate populace, yes.

A scientifically literate populace is important for economic competitiveness. Especially keeping in mind that the modern ToE has real-world application.

Yes, 'real world application'. I remember reaching a point later in life, concluding 'since we came from animals, why not act like one'?...and so I did, and so have many others.

 

[pitabread]

Yes, 'real world application'. I remember reaching a point later in life, concluding 'since we came from animals, why not act like one'?...and so I did, and so have many others.

Except that's not a scientific application of the ToE. What you describe is a misguided moral philosophy which has nothing to do with the ToE.

A real science application for the ToE would be underpinning methodologies in comparative genomics (see here: Comparative genomics - Wikipedia ) which in turn are used in medical research, agriculture, etc.

Another application of the ToE would include any applications of phylogenetics (phylogenetics being the study of evolutionary relationships of organisms). One important application of phylogenetics is pathogen tracking and the determination of disease origins and spread.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, 'real world application'. I remember reaching a point later in life, concluding 'since we came from animals, why not act like one'?...and so I did, and so have many others.

Yup ... my favorite example is Klebold & Harris "going ape" or "going feral;" but evolutionists refuse to make the connection.

They think we "great apes" owe it to each other to be trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent ... with no exceptions.

 

[pitabread]

Yup ... my favorite example is Klebold & Harris "going ape" or "going feral;" but evolutionists refuse to make the connection.

What creationists seem to refuse to understand is that science is descriptive, not prescriptive.

There is nothing in the ToE that tells people to go shoot up a school.

 

[crossnote]

Except that's not a scientific application of the ToE. What you describe is a misguided moral philosophy which has nothing to do with the ToE.

It was a real life application. Not a theory.

 

[pitabread]

It was a real life application. Not a theory.

What you described is not an application of the ToE. The ToE does not exist to provide moral guidance on how people should live their lives.

 

[crossnote]

What creationists seem to refuse to understand is that science is descriptive, not prescriptive.

There is nothing in the ToE that tells people to go shoot up a school.

I don't understand the pitting of the ToE against Creationism when evolution supposedly deals with changes among species and not origins, whereas creationism has to do with origins. If you want to talk about origins without a First Mover...try it.

 

[crossnote]

What you described is not an application of the ToE. The ToE does not exist to provide moral guidance on how people should live their lives.

Why? At least I had the audacity to carry out evolution to it's logical conclusion.

This was your original statement...

Especially keeping in mind that the modern ToE has real-world application.

 

[AV1611VET]

There is nothing in the ToE that tells people to go shoot up a school.

But when they do, why do "experts" scratch themselves crazy wondering why?

 

[pitabread]

I don't understand the pitting of the ToE against Creationism when evolution supposedly deals with changes among species and not origins, whereas creationism has to d with origins. If you want to talk about origins without a First Mover...try it.

If you're referring to the origin of the universe, the ToE doesn't cover that either.

Insofar as "pitting" the ToE against creationism, this is something creationists have done to themselves. Some forms of creationist theology denies evolution in favor of claiming that higher life forms (e.g. cats, dogs, people, etc) were spontaneously created as opposed to having evolved.

The problem though is that just because people deny the ToE, doesn't make the ToE go away. The real issue seems to be bad theology.

 

[pitabread]

But when they do, why do "experts" scratch themselves crazy wondering why?

Because motivations for human behavior is a complex subject.

 

[AV1611VET]

Insofar as "pitting" the ToE against creationism, this is something creationists have done to themselves.

Which came first? creationism or evolutionism?

Who is encroaching on whom?

 

[pitabread]

Why? At least I had the audacity to carry out evolution to it's logical conclusion.

Because again, there is nothing in the ToE that describes how you should live your life.

This was your original statement...

And your example was not an application of the ToE.

I previously listed some examples of applications of the ToE. Perhaps you should read those to understand the difference.

 

[pitabread]

Which came first? creationism or evolutionism?

Who is encroaching on whom?

Science is simply a methodology to understand our universe. That life on Earth looks like it is the product of evolution just means that life on Earth looks like it's the product of evolution.

If creationists have a problem with that, that's on them.

 

[AV1611VET]

Because motivations for human behavior is a complex subject.

If Klebold & Harris would have run into the schooling showering them with love and affection, would their "complex subjects" have been as head scratching?

Like I said, we're expected to act trustworthy, loyal, helpful, friendly, courteous, kind, obedient, cheerful, thrifty, brave, clean, and reverent, else "experts" wonder what's wrong.

If you tell someone all his life he's a dog who came from dogs, would you scratch yourself bloody if he bites someone every now and then?

 

[crossnote]

The problem though is that just because people deny the ToE, doesn't make the ToE go away. The real issue seems to be bad theology.

I believe it is bad logic amongst those who deny a creator. How do evolutionist have a basis if there is no God? Do they expect us to believe that matter is eternal? or that something comes from nothing? Or the complexity we see in creation just happened randomly? All that would take blind faith to believe.

 

[AV1611VET]

Science is simply a methodology to understand our universe. That life on Earth looks like it is the product of evolution just means that life on Earth looks like it's the product of evolution.

If creationists have a problem with that, that's on them.

Which came first, chief? creationism or evolutionism? who is encroaching on whom?

 

[crossnote]

And your example was not an application of the ToE.

OK, it was a 20th century experiment gone awry. lol