View Full Version : Questions Darwinism cannot answer
10th February 2009, 06:29 AM
I don't know if you read this little "gem" from the paper yesterday, to my great frustration my letter back didn't make it but thankfully some really good replies made it into print which is a bit heartening.
Darwin with a twist
Tom Frame says a "dedicated Darwinian would welcome imperialism, genocide, mass deportation, ethnic cleansing, eugenics, euthanasia, forced sterilisations and infanticide" ("Questions Darwinism cannot answer", February 9). This is absurd.
Understanding Darwinian theory and recognising it is the best explanation for life on this planet does not lead one to want to accelerate or assist the process of natural selection.
Does Frame think that once someone understands electricity, they will want to electrocute people?
Ben Tankard Blaxland
Darwinians do not "welcome" anything. They simply realise that living things evolved because of the pressures placed upon them by their environment over time.
Tom Frame clumsily tries to make Darwinism into a philosophy so that he can fight it with his own. It's a fight that Darwinism, and science, are not interested in.
Tony Podpera Woden (ACT)
Tom Frame argues that Darwinism cannot explain the "why" of life. We will probably never fully understand why life exists.
But surely it is better to continue asking the questions than to believe concepts that have no scintilla of evidence supporting them.
Gillian Baldwin Bathurst
10th February 2009, 07:23 AM
'These romans are crazy'
10th February 2009, 12:21 PM
This is basically him expressing his lack of understanding of Evolution/Darwinism.
He seems to assume the term 'religion's' only applicable definition is 'christianity' :confused: Some people really just dont get it do they. I am far from agnostic, but I know that IF there is a god, it definitely isnt a christian one.
I find the materialist atheism of some rational sceptics harder to accept than theistic belief.
This is a question I have often asked and once again refer to Newton and the rainbow. Why is it that people just dont want to hear the right answer? Why are they so unsatisfied with the most rational, logical and proven answers?
I would suggest that its a bit like Heroin addicts. They are so addicted and used to the feeling of a mystical magical fantasy world its hard to let go of. they have been over accepting and stimulated by contradictory, irrational and total flawed stories, so much that the facts have become a lie, to them. just as many herion addicts know they should stop using, but find it very difficult to actually do so.
I can understand the problem, and that it must be a very hard habit, and principle, to break, just like drug addiction.
Though I am still agaph as to why people have so much trouble believing the facts, I think that it is often misinterpretation, and they try to make it sound like they really understand, but I believe the 2 are totally uncompatible and for one to truly understand, they would be unable to continue with the out dated beliefs.
So is it missinterpretation or just out right over stimulation to unprovable, dramatically wild, assertion of magic and miracles. To be honest I dont think they actually grasp the principle.
10th February 2009, 01:54 PM
Do we call the theory of gravity Newtonism, and those who "accept" it Newtonists or Newtonian? I strongly dislike the use of the term Darwinism, as if it's some form of doctrine, particularly when used in a pejorative sense, by creotards, like Tom Frame.
I see that Frame is a Professor of Theology. I once saw a theologian described as "a blind man, in a dark room, looking for a black cat, that isn't there, and finding it".
"It [the Bible] is full of interest. It has noble poetry in it; and some clever fables; and some blood-drenched history; and some good morals; and a wealth of obscenity; and upwards of a thousand lies."
Mark Twain (1835-1910)
10th February 2009, 05:22 PM
Extremely well expressed gentlemen.
11th February 2009, 08:15 AM
Why is it that people just dont want to hear the right answer? Why are they so unsatisfied with the most rational, logical and proven answers?
Because, for them, the alternative is burning in hell. If there is a god and they turn away to science and reason and it was the wrong choice... they will be damned for all eternity. Fear is a horrific motivator. Just think... listen to Richard Dawkins and face an eternity of never ending torment.
The arguments you/science/atheists present appear as Satan whispering doubts in their ears. The more you show and explain, reason and justify, the more they see themselves as Jesus tempted in the wilderness. They CAN'T be wrong, that would make them wrong and potentially their parents wrong, the way they were brought up wrong, the society they live in wrong, most of the population wrong, most everyone who has ever existed wrong. Wrong Wrong WRONG! And that just can't be. How could that many people be wrong? Their MUST be a god and anything you say against him is him testing me through his enemy satan.
If a believer listens to an atheist, they are dicing with the devil.
It's really sad.
They are locked behind a wall of their own self-imposed ignorance with their fingers in their ears madly clinging to the belief that they will be rewarded for not questioning god.
11th February 2009, 08:49 AM
I was not raised in christian/religious family, so i guess i don't realise how hard it must be to break free of such self deluding insanity.
I really do feel for some of them that feel they may be wrong but just don't have the courage to go with it. It is a shame.
It would be great to see a movement of religious people, away from their myths but I don't think i ever will.
11th February 2009, 10:13 AM
I find the materialist atheism of some rational sceptics harder to accept than theistic belief, and cannot make sense of my life in this world without believing in God and providence. Crudely naturalistic science leaves no room for poetic truth, refuses to honour any spiritual element in physical things and cannot accept the existence of a human soul.
Such science is also inhibited from asking whether life has any meaning, as this would require stepping outside the processes that led its practitioners to the point of questioning. Evolution might account for the story of life's beginnings and progress, but it cannot explain its origin nor cast any light on its destiny.
Oh 'the meaning of life'.... the useless persuit(and ego) of a developed brain. Poetic truth? What an oxymoron. This guy is living in his story and twisting the facts to fit. Sad.
12th February 2009, 05:38 AM
Fiery what I don't quite get is why Evolution isn't incorperated within their beliefs rather than outrightly denied. I would have thought there was minor scope to do this.
I also wanted to point out "justice" or the escape from it by the guilty as also a big motivator for them to lend beleif.
vBulletin® v3.8.1, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.