Isn't this old news? This is why our shoulders are built the same way that tree-swinging primates' are. We can hang from branches with ease, grasp branches, and all that.

There's been two separate models that have been debated for years now. One model is the knuckle walking lineage and the other is the tree swinging one.

I prefer to think I was a tree swinger, sounds pretty cool.

Enter someone with a "Hah, science is always changing it's mind therefore god did it" comment in 3...2...1...

Hah, science is always changing it's mind therefore god did it




Not that I believe in the god stuff, but I just wanted to throw ol' DL a bone

Thanks dude, you made my day

that's really good to know :) i've always argued with this theory anyways

You have to admit though, that we creationists have had the same theory for longer. We don't go d**king around with it, you what they say..."if it ain't broke..."

LMAO

I, I don't know what to say. So much to say, so little incentive to say it.

A couple of small points, did you read the article? How have creationists "had this theory for years", most don't even believe that evolution is fact. I seriously think you have no grasp of science or any knowledge of evolution which is fine but when you make a comment like this it makes you look foolish.

And yes, it's very much "broke"

Slavery (in many countries, many forms) was a good idea for thousands of years too...

Maybe you're right. We should just stop learning stuff. It's too confusing. And it's hard work! Science uses lots of math, and math is hard! We don't need to know any more stuff anyway. God will cure cancer for us if we just sit around and pray!

Yeah...too bad it was the villainous creationists who said "all man are created equal" and fought to back that up...

As for DL...creationists have always said we didn't descend from "knuckle draggers"

belvario...no we should just mock the beliefs of those who went before, instead of learning from their wisdom. And as for your thing about math??? what was that about??? Creationists love math, science and all that...we just think that sometimes scientists can be wrong...this article proves THAT right.

To know everything is an impossible state of being. Instead, scientists learn. They hypothesize, experiment, analyze their results, and come to conclusions. When new facts come to light that contradict earlier assumptions, scientists make new hypotheses and conduct new experiments. They do not take anything on blind faith.

Yes, scientists can be wrong. But they can also be right. You cannot assume that because one hypothesis failed that the next one will fail as well.Religion != science. Your beliefs do not tell me how a combustion engine runs, how to prevent disease, or how a Post-it note works. "God did it" is not an acceptable explanation in science, no matter how much you want it to be.

Oh, I'm sorry did I say that? Hmmm..all I said is that the Creationist hypothesis hasn't had to undergo much change, I think it's because the evidence seems to be leading back towards it. But you know math is hard...

Please explain.

Interesting, dear, I'm not going to refute what you personally believe.

But you're throwing things out there that just won't stick.
Creationists may have said all men were created equal* but...note the asterisk. It wasn't until recently that "all men created equal" actually meant "all humans are created basically the same." Even a century ago, that phrase meant "all white men are created equal and lets not even get started on the women, who we think might be more like monkeys."
That doesn't really support your view.

As to the "theory" not changing... it's because you aren't *looking* to change it. Scientists, however, have a job to do; make sure the theories are right. Creationists have a strong incentive to not question their belief.

There is no evidence for god/s.
The hypothesis of "There is a God" cannot be verified, tested or falsified. It is an unworkable hypothesis, and thus disregarded by scientists, untill there actually is a way to test, and verify, and check for falsification.

Falsification is the process of making a counterargument that consist of a test that hypothetically would "disprove" a theory or "verified" hypothesis.

For instance, in order to falsify the theory of evolution, you must find something that contradicts evolution. For instance, finding modern day bunnies in the cambriam, or any other anachronism. And since there is still no evidence found for that, the theory of evolution still stands firm.

Science revels in being wrong. All the time. It's part of the scientific method. Science is in a constant state of iterative refinement - it's the engine that powers scientific progress. Scientists are a feisty and argumentative bunch. You can never progress or learn if you're sure you already know everything. Science acknowledges that human understanding is very limited, and whenever we think we really know something, there is probably a huge amount more to know.

Creationism, on the other hand, revels in being "right." Since it's based on pure dogma that can never be questioned by its adherents, there is no room for learning or progress - you either accept the dogma or not. Explain to me how this benefits humanity - what diseases will Creationism cure? How will it improve our understanding of the biome and help address world hunger? What planets will it help us explore? How will it enhance our understanding of quantum physics and help us engineer better computers? Science does all of these things (and many more) so well that we take it almost completely for granted. Frankly, Creationism has only served to hinder scientific progress by interfering with science education. Contrary to your contention, Creationists do not "love" science - they don't even understand what it really is, or they wouldn't be able to be Creationists anymore...

I think there should be a movement to get evolutionary biology taught in every Sunday school. Here's my reasoning:
- Churches receive state funding by virtue of preferential tax-exempt status.
- Therefore, church educational programs are state-funded and should be subject to state regulation.
- The Creationist community assures us that Creationism is science.
- Therefore, there is a state-funded science curriculum in Sunday school.
- By the Creationist "equal time" argument, evolutionary biology should get equal time in Sunday school if Creationism is taught.

How does that sound? Or maybe we could just agree to keep Sunday school in churches and science education in the public schools instead - how about it?

Oh please. Don't tell me that you actually believe that.

I have already tried to explain that I accept that people have different beliefs. But to believe that evidence is mounting to verify creationism is too much to accept.

I'd love to see what that might be.

What about Southern Baptists who used the bible to back up their pro-slavery stance back in the day?

The article isn't saying that evolution is wrong. Science learns and grows and re-assess. There's a reason why creationist and Christian beliefs haven't changed for so long and it's not a good thing or something to shout about. Your book endorses keeping slave remember.

Exodus 21:20,21

20 "If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, 21 but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.

Exodus 21:2-6

2 "If you buy a Hebrew servant, he is to serve you for six years. But in the seventh year, he shall go free, without paying anything. 3 If he comes alone, he is to go free alone; but if he has a wife when he comes, she is to go with him. 4 If his master gives him a wife and she bears him sons or daughters, the woman and her children shall belong to her master, and only the man shall go free.

5 "But if the servant declares, 'I love my master and my wife and children and do not want to go free,' 6 then his master must take him before the judges. [a] He shall take him to the door or the doorpost and pierce his ear with an awl. Then he will be his servant for life.



Yes, science can be wrong. That's the nature of learning and gaining knowledge. I'd be seriously worried if science dogmatically stuck to what it believed to be true and never grew or retested or gained knowledge.

If this wasn't the case I can assure you I wouldn't trust my children medical care to doctors and medicine.

The fact that science reassesses and reconfirm,s what it knows and refines and grows is a good thing. Dogmatically sticking to a belief in the face of gained knowledge however is not a good thing and will never cause advancements

Muzzled - can't talk. Oh the pain.