American Morning
Tune in at 6am Eastern for all the news you need to start your day.
November 20th, 2009
09:08 AM ET
Kirk Cameron attempts to debunk Darwin
Former teen idol Kirk Cameron is on a crusade to debunk evolution. He's a born-again Christian and part of a group that wrote a new 50-page intro to Darwin's "On the Origin of Species" to mark its 150th anniversary.
Cameron and his group are handing out thousands of copies of the book on universities across the country. CNN's Carol Costello reports.
About this Show
Welcome to the American Morning blog where you can get daily news updates from American Morning's reporters and producers. Join us for "the most news in the morning," weekdays from 6-9 a.m. ET, only on CNN.
On Twitter
RT @EarlyStart: Ten people, including a police officer, were killed Monday after a gunman opened fire in a grocery store in Boulder, Colora…
RT @calebsilver: On the @Investopedia Express podcast this week, my pal and former colleague, @ChristineRomans from @CNNBusiness and @CNN j…
This is amazing for us, Meredith! twitter.com/mbennettsmith/…
Derek Chauvin's trial is a chance for the justice system to prove it can actually work msnbc.com/opinion/derek-…
RT @ConstitutionCtr: #WomensHistoryMonth is a time to reflect on the women who have shaped America’s story.@RosenJeffreyey an@MSNBCBC's @Al…
RT @centralbanks_: The Exchange | Conversations for a Better Future One-on-one conversation with IMF Chief Kristalina Georgieva and Micros…
cb asked: When did the "Theory" of Evolution become "fact"?
Oh, I don't know, probably around the same time the word "theory" was defined as being an analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another.
I believe many people confuse the definition of a hypothesis with the word theory. Theories are factual and hypothesis are educated guesses.
Having read some of the comments here, I would strongly recommend that everyone read some philosophy of science to better understand how science works. Science itself is an evolutionary process, utlilizing the best logical and inductive reasoning processes along with all the evidence available. It is not belief – rather it is a growing understanding of the reality we confront. It isn't what you would like to believe – it is what we are led to believe by the best tools available.
Science is never final in it's position – however – given the great amount of evidence evaluated for many major theories – and the evidence based process – it is by far the best we have to understand what is. And yet, it always continues and clarifies further – sometimes demolishing a major point of view. But usually, reinforcing a major theory with greater detail. This has been the case with evolution.
You can believe anything you want – that you evolved from royalty living in the clouds – because it makes you feel more worthy. It doesn't change the scientific evidence and best understanding of what it means. But your actual worth should be measured by your adherence to the rigorous processes of science to understand the universe – which is ultimately beautiful and awesome. Read the philosophy of science -a and unduderstand how it works.
I am fully content with that latter understanding. Check out the NASA image site to see truly awesome information on our place in the universe.
Better yet – please review this site's video on the depth of the universe – the farthest we can see from the newest Hubble telescope version. This coupled with our oneness with the universe says it all.
!!
> Hubble deep field – great animation of red shift to,separate deep
> field shots...and show how far we can see to the edge of the known universe.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oAVjF_7ensg&feature=channel.
Paul
#1. No where in the Bible doe it say that the Earth revolves around the sun or the sun around the Earth. The whole issue of the Galileo Affair was one man expressing ideas that the Church didn't like. The Church and the people grew up.
#2. What I find most disturbing is how most of the posts here are being just like the Church of Old. Believe what we believe or we'll condemn you. Those are the posts coming from the science side. What's wrong science? Can't just present your arguments and let the people decide if they believe you? Do you have to throw out the insults about being religous?
Last time I looked, science still hasen't found a cure for the common cold. If the universe was created by a Big Bang, care to explain what was around before that bang? How many chemical, biological weapons have been created by SCIENTISTS with nothing better to do than to see how bad bad could get? Come on science, what's the comeback?
"would rather be a creation of God than a monkey's uncle, or a former blob, and there are scientists, then and now, much more brilliant than Darwin (assuming he is brilliant) who believe they were creations of God, not former mindless blobs floating around in space or something."
How many named Steve?
"FYI – Before you decide on whether Darwin was racist or not , here is the original title of his book : On the Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection, or, the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life"
In the 19th century, 'races" was often used for "varieties" in the botanical literature and biological literature in general. Perhaps Kurt never heard the expression "don't judge a book by its cover."
Darwin was an ardent abolitionist who fulminated at the abuses of slavery. Compare that to Cameron's Christian forebears in the 19th century and the Souther Baptist Convention which only apologized for slavery a few years ago.
You can't criticize a theory by attempting to assassinate the creator of the theory. Newton was an alchemist. I never heard anybody criticize Newtonian Mechanics by saying 'But Newton was an alchemist"
Is not the need of so many to believe in continued existence after death in spiritual form or through reincarnation in fact a product of natural selection? A strong will to live and protect our families are crucial needs for success for many organisms including human beings. As humans beings however we must manage this powerful need in the face of absolute knowledge that at some point we and our offspring will die. it is almost a cruel joke in that those most in need of continuity after death are undoubted driven to this need by the process that has been most damaging to their beliefs in a continued existence after death ie natural selection.
As was said to Job – "Where were you when I laid the foundation of the Earth?" Declare it – if you understand.
I wasn't. But my good friends U235, U238 and Rb87 were.
Matt writes:
"
I am a Christian and a scientist. I happen to believe both sides of the story. I believe that God created us in his own image. I also believe that organisms on Earth do evolve over time. I have yet to see evidence linking Homo sapians to apes directly (ever heard of the missing link). "
Matt, give this missing link bit a rest. The fossil record of human evolution is more than complete enough to convince any fair minded skeptic.
the Australopithecines have a mixture of characteristics that are human like and ape like. What more do you want? After Lucy came a gradual succession of hominids, homo habilus, erectus, etc.
"However, seeing evidence of animals that have had to adapt to their environment, does support that evolution does occur. I believe that both can occur."
Bully for you.
"Man has yet to create life from scratch. He has had to use life to create life. (that is a fact!)"
Which has no bearing on the theory of evolution.
"Although the Theory or evolution has much evidence to support it, it is still a theory."
So is gravity. Theories explain *facts*, they do not become facts. The theory of evolution explains why life on earth changes through time. The modern theory of gravity , General Relativity explains why things fall when we drop them and a number of other things.
"On the comment that we (Christians) "choose to live in Caves" because we believe in Creation- Well that is very closed minded thinking that Christians cannot believe in scientific thinking."
There are and have been many great Christian scientists. Darwin comes to mind.
However, if you think the Bible is a science book, you won't get anywhere fast.
Creation or "intellegent design" are able to explain the observables far better than an untestable "theory" of macro evolution that requires constant revision. Work in the physical and life sciences is carried on in exactly the same way by creationists and evolutionists except for funding. Macroevolution and man-made global warming are religions that require a great leap of faith.
If you wish to respond, kindly submit your educational credentials so that we are able to judge your qualifications to have an educated opinion in the same manner in which we would choose advice about a heart-lung transplant.
My PhD from Yale is in theoretical chemistry. I also have an MD degree, multiple board certifications, and have taught in medical schools for over 25 years.
As a Christian, I believe that God has a great and wonderful plan for all of his creation that we humans cannot always understand. I've never understood why other Christians cannot reconcile God and evolution. We are God's works in progress! Science and Christianity CAN live together peacefully.
You don't seem to understand all the differences between intelligent design and creationism. I am sure Mr. Cameron's church is on the side of creationism rather than intelligent design.
Americans are evolving....into mush brained college graduates who have been convinced by equally jelly-brained academe that they were once of the tree-swinging variety. Man, such a waste of a country that once was looked up to by others for their brilliant inventors and upstanding institutions who, by the way, most were put up for theological purposes.
Some posters here don't even know that long before Galileo discovered the telescope and long, long before the world was proven to be round, desert dwelling, camel-riding prophets have already declared that God hung the world on nothing (read space), and that it is God who will laugh last, who by the way, sits in the circles of the earth, and not at the edge which the "learned" and "sophisticated" Romans and Greeks (which I am sure you former monkeys admire) thought was flat and populated with sea monsters, or thought rested on the shoulders of Atlas or whoever that idiot god was.
Here's Job, a desert dweller, writing a few hundred years (or maybe a thousand ?) before Christ. And if you all are so fact-minded and evidence conscious, how about pulling that Bible out from somewhere and reading Job 26:7 (oh, by the way, the 26 is the chapter and the 7 is the verse for the ignorant among you bright dudes):
He stretcheth out the north over the empty place, and hangeth the earth upon nothing.
And here's another desert guy. A prophet. Lived about 700 years before the Creator, before whom you all will give account, came in human flesh.
It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in Isaiah 40:22.
So, Mr. Cameron may not have the diplomas and the certificates and the Ph.D.'s that you all gush over but who needs them if someone could be so stupid as to believe he was once a monkey ?
As a scientist / medical professional and a Christian, I'd like to state that evolutionists like to ignore the fact of God (Jesus) coming down, living an exemplary life, dying on the cross, rising on the third day, asking his disciples to go to all the world and preach the good news of the gospel to all the world, and stating he'll be coming back to all believers to be with Him for ever. This is the greatest practical truth one needs to know.
While China and India are becoming science and technology jaugernauts in the global market, we have zealots running around preaching that the world was created in six days. Yeah, good luck. We're gonna need it.
Cameron doesn't have the knowledge to debunk evolution. In his useless attempts he displays props, meaningless rhetoric and false information which have no substance. He proves that he knows nothing of science every time he opens his mouth.
cb – The "Theory" of evolution explains the observed "Facts" of the natural world. So, it is a fact that evolution does happen (please check out a science book for a more in-depth explanation). You have to realize that the definition of a scientific theory isn't just a whimsical idea. Before an idea becomes a scientific theory it starts off as a hypothesis and spends years being tested and scrutinized by skeptical scientists.
Well spoken, "An Educated Christian."
Only a few hundred years ago, the top scientists in the world believed the earth was flat. Who knows what new evidence we will find in the centuries to come? And who knows whether scientists will interpret the evidence correctly?
We will never know for a scientific fact how we came to be, and I am okay with that. Life is too complex and beautiful, I believe, to be a simple product of random evolution. How could a designer NOT be behind this?
why no matter what the subject you leftist allways respond with anger keep your miseryto yourself
What makes the right-wing think as they do? He is not going to change minds. He is not well informed. He just knows what his church tellsl him to believe, so sad.
ps: They will tell you that if you don't subscribe to their view or belong to their church you are not a true Christian. Don't believe that lie either, it's how the religion business maintains control and power.
Creationism is the ultimate lack of faith. It's made up science to prove Chistianity is the truth. The problem is that if Creationism is proven wrong then Christianity is a complete fraud and these so called Christians believe in nothing. True Christianity requires faith. There mysteries that God has given us which require faith. Beware of the religion business, it's not Christianity. The religion business are people that distort Christianity for their own wealth and power. They teach stuff that allows them to maintain control and Creationism is one of their tools. The bible tells us that God created us in his image and that makes us intelligent enough to figure out the science of evolution instead of some wacko creationism lie. Evolution being true does not discount the bible as being true, it discounts those that use the bible for their own schemes. These creationists moron don't speak for all Christians. There are plenty of us that have faith, believe in the bible and use the intelligence that God has given us.
Why is is that so many do not understand that Cosmology relates to the origins of the planet and evolution relates to biology and why are both brought into the topic as if interchangeable? Those are two different topics folks.
You want an example of macroevolution in higher species? Start with Equidae. Sigh, no wonder the U.S. is so low on standardized science exams. The ignorance of the masses is astounding.
What's amazing, even amongst the supporters of both arguments, is that no one seems to be acknowledging the presence of randomness in nature. When nature is random, there is no plan. Evolution is logically true, because it assigns no plan to the process of life; rather it just allows for the randomness to take control. And evolution has no such requirement that changes be slow and continuous, that's just someone who doesn't understand the science trying to pigeon hole the theory. Changes can be abrupt, as the science allows for discrete random variables as much as it allows for continuous random variables. The assignment of a continuous process is little more than a mathematical convenience; it's not vital to the theory.
dear cb.............
Is there anything more of a theory than religion ?
Everybody has their opinions and they have their right to express them here and in other forums. However, what annoys me to no end are the comments such as...
"Kirk = Epic Fail" by Mar, or
"Kirk Cameron is an idiot." by Frankie, or
"He is an actor and an idiot." by StevenR
These people do nothing to persuade me to even listen to their views if all they can do is resort to 2nd grade name calling.
Please...it would be nice to have a little civility in these discussions. Please state your case and allow others to do the same.
@Larry – Preach it, brother!
Mr. Cameron is a literalist in interpretation; calling Kirk and others like him who hold literal views of Scripture idiots is uncharitable. I'd like to think those of us who believe in God and His son have learned from the history of the church when it failed to recognize truth (Galileo and Copernicus) and are willing to suspend judgment until all the facts are in – a position that does not contradict God at all but also one that does not depend on human wisdom alone.
Check out "Mere Christianity" by C.S. Lewis; you'll not see an attack on the theory of evolution or any of the sciences, but a reminder that we are accountable for our behavior and beliefs. Would that more people who profess belief in Christ learn to be more like Him and less like themselves...
Bryan Hupperts said:
"It is willfully absured [sic] to think that nothing created everything,"
That argument has nothing to do with evolution. Evolution does not claim to identify or disprove a creator. Neither does it claim to have proof of how life began from non-life. All it talks about is how new forms of life are derived from existing ones.
Creationists need to stop saying (and saying and saying and saying) that Darwin was trying to disprove the existence of God. No, he wasn't.
OKAY, if you're going to have an opinion regarding evolution- you should AT LEAST understand the Theory.
The theory does not claim that humans evolved from apes...there was never an ape that just magically birthed a human, that's not how the theory works. The theory explains that humans and apes evolved from the same ancestral form.
Based on the pro-creationist comments out there it's obvious not one of you has tried to understand the theory before claiming that your assumptions are correct. Good work.
Kirk who?
Would all of you PLEASE get the following facts straight: creationism is NOT the same as intelligent design. It might make it easier for the non-believers out there to dismiss us all as anti-scientific "idiots" by lumping us all together, but there are profound differences between us. Creationism teaches the book of Genesis is inerrant, that the earth was created in seven human days. Those of us who accept intelligent design acknowledge that the process has taken billions of years, but argue that it was guided by the hand of the Creator, the intelligent designer, and that the Book of Genesis is a human reflection of that grand design. (BTW, this is one of the reasons why atheists hate the "Big Bang Theory": "and God said let there be light," and, boy, was there ever light!). I would direct you to Lee Strobel's "The Case for a Creator," if you would like to see what adherents of intelligent design assert.
I believe that Kirk Cameron might be right, but not for the reasons that he preaches. It wasn't too long ago that somebody or some organization found a direct descendant of man and that, did debunk Mr. Darwin's theory of evolution. I even saw a depiction of how that fossil look like. Since there is a separation of church and state, then the Solomonic solution is for each one to stick to their theory. The church can teach intelligent design and the state can teach the debunked theory of evolution.
What nonsense! This is why Christianity is the most dangerous religion on the planet, including Islam. If Evolution can be "debunked" so can the emancipation of slaves, the hold on Jews from killing without restraint,etc, etc etc. Chinese Government: please take note.
This sort of thing never ceases to boggle the mind. How can people be so utterly blind to the intricacies of science. Do they not read??? Are their minds so full of wool they cannot think clearly? Sheep, nothing but sheep.
I do not believe that Kirk Cameron is trying to brainwash anyone, only trying to spread the truth according to the Word of God. The Bible states that God created man and woman in His image. The Bible also clearly states that God created all living things.
One can be spiritual, a Christian and a believer in science. There is no law that says that everyone is entitled to free speech. However, I draw the line when Cameron and his ilk interfere with the education of our children in science classes. Creationism belongs in Sunday School not public school. A country is as great as its technology. The dumbing down of Americans is disturbing. Every primitive tribe developed a belief system to explain their existence in this world. This includes the early Israelites, Aborignes, Native Indians. If they read history, the evolution of humans beings is staring them right in the face.
In my last fifty years I have studied and explored religions of all types.I have found good things in each as well as wonderful people dedicated to the idea of God the Father.What I have settled with is that none of the formed religions for my mind,have THE all knowing answer we humans seek.That is because I believe that the answers are all inside each of us. The questions come from us individually and so then the answers.
It's just mind blowing what we can convince ourselves of..........
I have a linear way of thinking and science is logic to me.To blindly have faith and not ask the questions seems absurd.
I can hardly choke out the word religion in the context that Christianity is the "right" way and only way. Come on now!
I am averse to cramming any religion down anyone's mental throat.There is a real danger in the lemming idea as history proves.
Give it up Kirk.. and other zealots .........what works for you is just that.
Wow...another religious nut. I'm really sick of these wackos constantly trying to debunk the proven theory of evolution. I really like it when they say "the earth is 6,000 years old" and that God "planted" fossils and bones that have been carbon dated as being hundreds of thousands of years or older to "test our faith". I'm sure he also belives its OK to subugate women and keep salves because "the Bible says so".
Bravo to Jamin and his St. Augustine quote. I've never read that quote before nor heard about it, but if all of us Christians would remember that our soul mission in life is to bear witness to Christ's glorious ressurrection and subsequent promise of eternal life like St. Augustine expouses, than the world would be a better and more peaceful place to live. We wouldn't offend others by meddling in affairs that are left best discussed by those considered experts. That being said, I personally like Kirk Cameron, appreciate him for the brother in Christ that he obviously is, even if I happen to disagree where he is spending his time and efforts. I am also puzzled at the aminosity I see being posted about him – he's a man expressing his first ammendment rights and from what I see he is not trampling on the rights of others or causing anyone undue harm in the process. What's the big deal?
Let's see: Evolution is 'only a theory.'
So, since we only have the 'theory of flight,' airplanes don't exist. What about birds?
Since electricity is 'only a theory,' then there is no such thing as electricity generating plants. Not to mention theoretical computers, and the theoretical Internet, powered by theoretical electricity.
What about space flight? That's 'only a theory,' so no such thing as the Space Shuttle, and the International Space Station.
Oh, and don't forget nuclear theory! ONLY a theory. So, no nucler power. No such thing as the 'Nuclear powered United States Navy.' And, don't forget all those 'nuclear power plants.' Those exist only in 'theory.'
The position of the Catholic Church (no that I'm a great fan or even a member of the Church, but I do agree on this point) is clear. God created the Heavens and the Earth, and evolution is the means by which S/He accomplished, and continues to accomplish, His/Her creation.
We accept the realities of air travel, electricity, space flight, and nuclear power, even though they are only scientific 'theories.' Evolution is a scientific theory that is as observable and real as any other.
As a Christian, I certainly do believe in the existence of the Creator. But I also believe that evolution is the mechanism He chose to create us. What greater display of His power and majesty than to start out with single cell creatures and wind up with us?
Who are these 'true Christians' to place limits on the power and might of our Lord? Do they not believe in evolution because it would be too hard for Him to do? Open your minds, people! When we say the Lord is capable of anything and infinite in his power, this is the proof in the pudding.
Asking 'do you believe in Evolution' is just as foolish as asking 'do you believe in Gravity'. We actually have a lot more evidence for Evolution than we have to support our understanding of Gravity. Just read Richard Dawkins latest book: 'Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution'.
Even if 'the theory of Evolution by Natural Selection' were false, that would not prove that 'Intelligent Design' is. ID needs to proof its own case. What is the ID theory anyway? A supernatural power (God) did it? Where did this power come from? Who created the creator? ID is not even a real theory because it doesn't explain anything.
There are tons of us christians who believe the scientists and that GOD created all and designed it that way. Read Frances Collins book.
the bible stated that the earth was round. secondly, macro-evolution is a theory that has never been proven, hence the theory. micro-evolution is a fact, but it does not involve the evolution of one species to the other. if most of you morons actually studied the FACTS, instead of compromising facts with the fiction that goes on in your heads, you would realize that there is and never will be solid evidence for macro-evolution.
Evolution is a manmade scientific theory on which many other theories are based. Scientists are forced to look through the lens of evolution and build on it-this has been going on for decades. Truly scientific minds will allow alternative theories like Creation and Intelligent Design to be explored.
Many man-made theories have been corrected. For e.g., model of atom-initially it was thought to be indivisible. Then there was a model which compared atoms to watermelon and electrons to its seeds. Then there was a model put forward by Rutherford, which was later discredited by he quantum theory. I am not a physicist but an engineer so please excuse my lay language. The moral of this example is man-made theories often get corrected so we should not hold on to Darwin's theory as if it is 100% accurate.
Who gives a rip what Kirk Cameron says or does? The scientific theory of evolution simply expresses that which has been observed in nature, which is what science does. Darwinism is not in any way an attempt to debunk anyone's belief system. If someone wants to take it that way fine, let's compare observable evidence of God to the evidence of evolution. Trust me, you don't want to go there Kirk. One of the biggest problems in our society is we give so much weight to the whimsical fantasies of the rich and famous and subsidize their ridiculous and largely useless lives. Religion should be something other than an excuse for those either incapable or unwilling to exercise independent, critical thought.
Kirk Cameron is a seriously misguided publicity seeker. He is unable to see how the concept of evolution affected his own 'bible'. It changed over time to suit the religious powers that be, and every argument he clumsily tries to make against evolution could be easily be applied to the New Testament. Given the success of the American Education system, it does not surprise me that this is a topic up for debate, nor that he is being successful in generating interest in his little project.
Oh and didn't he 'evolve' from a teen idol into a prostelytizing zealot? I will give him this, he has tapped into a fundamental lack of scientific understanding and is exploiting it very effectively for sensationalistic purposes. He's a sligtly less crazy, more polished Glenn Beck. And is your God green Kirk? Apparently HE put trees on this earth to be sacrificed for his noble quest.
Here's the issue: some "religious" people are not content to live with their beliefs without trying to force or impose them on everyone else. They need to learn to just shut up, and leave everyone else alone. If they want to fight evolutionary theories, start with the one that is closest to them: that their religions share much in common with the classical, polytheistic, mythology of the "pagan" cultures or religions than they might allow. There is no proof for their god(s), but their is more than a scintilla of evidence that Darwin was right. Socrates may have been put to death for less for heresy regarding the existing gods.
Most of the founding fathers of this country were deists. Quit trying to convert them and everyone else. Believe what you want as long as you harm no one else, and then shut the hell up. Darwinism requires fact not faith, which is more than be said for the religions of the world. If you want to believe in things that go bump in the night...do so...but don't force your myths upon others.
And, don't throw out ludicrous pieces of scripture–again mythology–as if they are proof of anything more than the writings of delusional people.
i am a firm believer of evolution and the big bang. it just makes sense. however i am stuck on one question. if all the universe's matter came from one giant event, who created that matter for the event? God makes sense.
"cb" asks,
When did the "Theory" of Evolution become "fact"?
We scientists understand that theories are stronger than facts, since they have been tested, not just observed and reported. For instance, the "Theory" of gravitation has the same validity as the theory of evolution. Both have been exhaustively tested, to the point where disputing them the way creationists and flat earthers do is just ignorance on parade.
Why does it matter that evolution occurs? Because that's how complexity arises from simpler systems, and how species form.
Evolution should matter to you because it keeps you alive! Drug resistance arises because the microbes with the least susceptibility survive longest against an antibiotic, so natural selection makes them the ones left alive to proliferate if an antibiotic is stopped too soon. So-called intelligent design" has nothing to do with it. It is simply impossible to understand biology, physiology or anatomy without understanding the role evolution has played, and continues to play.
To those who respond with the tired argument that "I'd rather believe in creation than to believe I descended from apes..."
Common ancestry is not "descended from." Science does not say that man descended from ape. Science says we had a common ancestry, a split (which happened before either species developed into current form) and a separate evolutionary path. Bubbles the Chimp did not suddently morph into Bruno the Man.
Why do some insist upon making God so small...
@cb – A "Theory" in science is a "fact"; the technical term is not used the same as the common term. Gravity is a theory as is evolution because of the over whelming evidence that allows us to accurately predict and explain things. Other people posting are wrong. There are Mnay many examples of transitional species. Kirk and his ilk intentially lie (breaking a commandment I might add) when they ask about such idiocies like croc-o-ducks or other blatent misrepresentations of what evolution is all about.
For those who think evolution is not supported experimentally:
Rice, W.R. and G.W. Salt (1988). "Speciation via disruptive selection on habitat preference: experimental evidence". The American Naturalist 131: 911–917. doi:10.1086/284831.
W.R. Rice and E.E. Hostert (1993). "Laboratory experiments on speciation: What have we learned in forty years?". Evolution 47: 1637–1653. doi:10.2307/2410209.
There is just a sample of much, much more experimental & observational evidence.
Come on! It's simple! There's a magical invisible man who lives in the clouds who loves us so much and made us all with his magic! How can evil science go against that FACT?!
cb:
Theories do not become facts. Laymen use the term "theory" to mean what a scientists will call a "hypothesis". For a scientist, a theory is an explanation of the facts, not a fact itself. The theory of evolution will always be a theory in the sense that it will always be an explanation of how life changed over time, a fact that is incontrovertible for anyone with even a cursory knowledge of the fosil record. Darwin's theory could be amended over time as we learn more, but so far it has held up for over 150 years. It now includes a synthesis with genetic theory, and studies of gene mutation support Darwin on every point. Fossils are unearthed on a regular basis, giving us more and more "missing links". So far, not one fossil has ever overturned Darwin's theory. All it would take is one rabbit fossil from the Cretateous period, and Darwin would be dead. So far, no such luck for creationists.
As for the idea of "macroevolution" that is an argument made by creationists who don't understand Darwin. Darwin never said that there would be a transformation of one species into another in one generation, and no evolutionist now claims this (it's known as "saltation", and is discreditied). Darwinian evolution proceeds from microevolutionary steps over very long periods of time. Enough small changes over hundreds of thousands of years can lead to macrochanges, just as one step at a time can lead to a long journey. Humans have already accomplished this through selective breeding. Nature operates on millions of animals over millions of years, and evolution leads to the kind of apparent design that fools people into believing in a designer. Gould's notion of abrupt change, by the way, still takes hundreds of generations. It's only abrupt in relative terms.
As for the idea that the earth is only 6000 years old, how then can we explain the fact that we can see galaxies that are 13,000,000,000 light years away? The speed of light is invariant, according to Eiunstein. Of course, if you want to simply change the laws of physics to suit your argument, no rational appeal can change your mind.
Sorry, but the "theory" of creationism has no support in evidence or logic, and none of the "refutations" of evolutionary theory have yielded even one demonstrable fact or published scientific paper.
Man I love it when A C T O R S are given free reign to insert foot into mouth. Rates up there with the Hollywood defense of Roman Polanski.
Let's remember one very important thing...Evolution is a THEORY. No one has seen evolution happen. To say so would be intellectually dishonest. This idea that "it was once widely believed to occur in small, incremental steps. Experts more recently have found that changes in life forms are often abrupt, dramatic and even violent" is a way to shrug off the lack of transitional species. Nothing else.
It is refreshing to see that the very first post here by Dave pretty much summarizes the crux of the argument–those of us who believe in the scientific method have NEVER argued that Darwin's theory are the "be all and end all". Darwin himself was entirely convinced that his theory was far from complete and would be improved upon (Kirk, did you read the WHOLE book?). Thus, my problem is not that he or anyone else questions Evolution. The problem is that they "counter" it with intelligent design, which essentially says, "Man, this question of the origins of life is really complicated–it must have been done by some supernatural being". This is, at its core, intellectual laziness. If you don't like Darwin's or anyone else's theory, fine. Get into the field, the lab, the library–wherever suits you best–and start working on finding the answers. Throwing up your hands and saying, "God did it" is not good enough. Try harder to answer the tough questions...
Kirk Cameron can try all he wants to convert those of us who don't believe in a supreme being but if he got in MY face I'd tell him to keep his religious beliefs to himself. I find this kind of proselytizing totally obnoxious. Each to his/her own.
things should still be evolving if it is true. How come the worm in my backyard and my dog have not evolved into an american woman? has anybody found a human coming out of a gophers hole yet?
Just remember: if you hear the phrase "The Bible says...," the debate has hit a dead end, and for all intents and purposes, it's over. You might as well talk to the wall.
Just another NUT CASE!
What gives Kirk Cameron anymore authority or relevance than any other crackpot? Because he's an actor? If he wasn't an 'actor' than he wouldn't receive any more coverage than any other religious fanatic who annoys students on their way to class. Just because he's an actor or a celebrity doesn't make his opinion (and this is an opinion, not fact) any more valuable or trustworthy than anyone else. I would argue that it's makes it less so.
All evolution naysayers are nutters, period. Evolution is a fact, just as religion and "god" are creations of mans imagination to manipulate and control people and extract money from them all while trying to explain that which their small finds fail to grasp in science and our environment.
Yet another story on this debate. We spend too much time looking back, or looking for a god to take of of us, or arguing points that, at the end of the day, don't change the real issues humanity is dealing with now. Everyone is so busy trying to prove that they know the 'real' truth of the matter, when the truth is this: we value the wrong things, we blame and condemn others without self-evaluation, we over-eat when others starve, we over-buy when others are homeless, we waste resources like water when millions die every year for the lack of simple clean water, and we pretend we need organized groups to tell us how to behave and live. We all know what we should be doing – arguing isn't it. We stopped behaving 'human' a long time ago – don't we have better things to focus on than how we got physically got here?
They are "believers" because they so desperately want to rely on someone else to catch them if they fall. That way, they don't have to take responsibility for what happens to them.
Life can be hard. I understand why one might want support in this manner.
I would love to know that there is some benevolent being watching out for me. The problem is that all that I have observed of humanity in 40-odd years is that such a being is purely imaginary and that this is just a tendency in humans so that we can deal with what is sometimes a difficult life.
Humanity has a creative, fantastical side that sometimes gets out of control – it's the nature of having complete freedom of thought. The manifestation of that is fantasy which we let roll around in our heads to the point where we start to believe it could be true. Then we believe that it IS true, and then our tendency to "group" ourselves (most humans abhor the individual), creates a religion.
This happens over, and over, and over again and will never stop. It is simply part of being human. And as long as it doesn't interfere with my life, then I don't see why it has to stop. Believe what you want – in that sense it's not important that you agree with me.
It is when religion becomes an influential socio-political animal that requires you to conform to their belief system that it must be controlled. That is the road to theocracy.
Thankfully I live in Canada where religion hardly factors into your life unless you want it to. I can't understand why 35 minutes away there is a border between a country where religion seems to be an imperative. What happened to America? Where did it go astray?
Many of the comments on here are very illogical. For one, you claim because someone is an actor then they can have no knowledge of truth or error.
Your argument goes something like this:
1. Only scientists can know the truth.
2. Kirk Cameron is not a scientist.
Therefore, Kirk Cameron cannot know the truth.
This would also discredit many of you making the comments. But, at last, if you need credible proof from a scientist, then i will name one that graduated from MIT with a Ph.D. and is very involved in science. His name is Dr. Walt Brown and he wrote the book, "In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood." So, for your very faulty argument to begin with:
1. Only scientists can know the truth.
2. Walt Brown is a scientist.
Therefore, Walt Brown knows the truth.
Look at evidence people and read for yourself. Ignorance is not bliss.
There have as many human origin stories as there are cultures. Until Darwin, all were mythological. Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection was the first explanation of human origins that was completely naturalistic. The reason that Christian fundamentalists cling on to their literal belief in the Garden of Eden and the fall is that if there was no original sin, Christ died in vain. They don't want to know the truth, so they aren't going to try very hard to find it - here's a testable prediction: only a tiny proportion of PhD's in fields like biology, geology, genetics, biological anthropology etc. are Christian fundamentalists. Sure, there are one or two, but they are the exceptions that prove the rule.
And why is this news? Why are you taking this seriously? Why do we take the fringe ideas of a few and treat them as a serious alternative?
I wonder if Cameron and his ilk also have a different opinion about gravity.
After all, gravity is also only a theory.
It is time to debunk religion. Christianity is made up, as well as the others. Prove God. Can't? Religion and God only exists in people’s heads probably those who enjoy fairy tales. Every folk tale has the mysterious dying god. Religion was created as the humans developed ways of burying their dead.
I know that perhaps the news cycle slows over the holidays, and that your staff feels the need to find familiar old crap to fill the gaps in the 24-hour news day (This Just In: Daylight Saving Time sucks!), but you really have a responsibility not to report garbage like this.
Why not report on an actor from ALF who believes the Earth is flat, or a dude from a hair-metal band who thinks he can prove, once and for all, that the "THEORY" of gravity is all wrong? The reason is, I suspect, because you'd get laughed off the air.
Look, we all know that there are people who contend that any science that strays from a literal account of Genesis is wrong. That's NOT NEWS. Likewise, Kirk Cameron is not a scientist. He's not even really a theologian or philosopher. He's a washed-up child actor who feeds off attention, and you're giving it to him.
There's a laziness in media that pretends that you have to give all viewpoints equal time in order to be "fair." As a result, you cover crap like this and present it as if you're all about "equal time," no matter how absurd the "controversy." Stop it. Do your jobs. This is a disgrace to journalism.
the issue is something that will never go away...can't we just allow for a difference of opinion? it is sad that those of faith (not all) that continue to make these differences of opiinion an issue cause a further dividion between us all is annoying...as someone who is not a person of faith, but open to the idea it makes me turn away from those that force it down our throats instead of simply allowing for a person to make up their own mind...
And the world is FLAT, right? Education just doesn't land on some people's shoulders. Incredible that people in these times can debunk science. Shows how little they've learned in 2000 years. I think this shows that the great apes do have more intelligence than some humans.
Hmmm.....who should I believe? Charles Darwin or Mike Siever from Growing Pains? LOL
Gimme a break. Kirk, please close your mouth, do your homework, and stop making yourself look foolish.
Matt:
Are you a scientist or a person who claims to understand science? Because no scientist (any decent ones, however) will use the expression "still a theory", because it denotes that he/she does not understand whatsoever how the scientific method or how science works.
Christianity is religion one amongst many. The bible is a book written, translated, and edited by men over thousands of years. Historically interesting, but no more than that.
Evolution is a mechanism that makes sense of the biological world, including us. For those who say it's just a theory, please educate yourself about the definition of a scientific theory before expressing any further opinion.
This growing tide of religious ignorance is the greatest threat of the 21st century. You church monkeys will take us back a thousand years.
Religion is legalized fraud designed to pray on people's spiritual weaknesses.
If I made millions advertising and selling a highly addictive product that nobody can see, hear or touch, I'd be tried and sentenced to a hundred years in prison at the drop of a hat. Yet, these "preachers of the faith" get away duping entire nations out of billions of dollars, selling fairy tales and promising eternal bliss, just like the mortgage wizards sold those bad loans we all know about.
These predators are happily exploiting human nature's need to believe in something bigger than ourselves and lining their pockets in the process, while half the world is dying of hunger. What would God say to that?
Honor your God not by practicing man-made religion and memorizing scripture but by truly helping all in need. Your suffering neighbor needs your effort more than God needs your prayers or your preacher needs your money.
I think all high school students should be required to take, concurrently, geology and theology. It's the only way to fairly introduce both points of view. I believe in God, but it seems like everyone who does just doesn't understand science (like it borders on conspiracy or worse). I love science, and the geologic record is supported irrefutably. I just think we continue to try to put a final word on who God is and how He did all of this for us. I would like to see The History Channel or DSC run a series on religion, like it's history and modern contribution to wars. I would also hope that we are teaching biology and geology so that everyone can understand the principles, the mysteries, and why we don't understand it all.
Facts are that Darwin took his grandfather's crackpot ideas, and then introduced them to a generation that is historically credited for falling for wild ideas on a grand scale.
I would rather comment on fact, than on liking/hating Kirk Cameron. I do not have scientific credentials in biology, geology, paleontology, but I am a registered professional engineer with 3 degrees and 51 years of life experience, who has held senior management positions for about 20 of them. I am now Vice-President of Engineering of one company with a world-class technology, and President of another joint venture company. This does not make me an authority, but should establish clearly that I can learn, observe, and apply reason to what I observe. The reader is free to disagree with my conclusions, but not to simply lambaste my character, as some have done with Kirk . End of preamble...
Nobody can prove the Darwin/creation debate by science, since none of us can recreate the experiment, and nobody observed it. What we know is the product of our observations and the constructs we make to tie them together. Those constructs result in a faith in a theory, whether creation or Darwinism.
Mankind has learned much, and the rate of acquisition of knowledge has increased exponentially. However, we are limited in time and space. We cannot think back rationally to the start of time, nor can we think of an end to time. We cannot imagine the infinitely small, nor the infinitely large. Our brains, though the most complex thinking devices in the world, are limited. This leads us to the rational conclusion that we are not the cause of the observable universe, nor its master, but a tiny part of it, ever groping for more knowledge.
As a professional engineer, I've spent a good part of my career experimenting and applying knowledge to developing new technologies. I observe that people want to know the truth when it applies to their health and safety. They want a doctor with a medical degree, a pilot with a license, working to specified standards of practice, to lead them. However, in matters that can have potentially far greater importance, such as the Darwin/creation debate, they are loath to seek the single truth if it is inconvenient.
Unfortunately, there can only be one truth about the matter. If creation is true, then the Creator must necessarily be the master of the creature. If Darwinism is true, then chance rules supreme, and much of what we believe regarding the value of life is a crock. If there is a third way, it behooves us to discover it. Believing a lie is nonsensical, and can have huge consequences.
What is truth in this matter?
We observe fossils, layers of them, extinct animals, appearance of age of the earth.
We also observe no known macroevolution, no known driving force for increasing complexity of life, a code in DNA that is irrefutable (whether or not you call it intelligent design), fossil fuels formed cataclysmically, no rationality for the decreasing entropy required to drive macroevolution, no logical mechanism for transition between earth and sea, no explanation of the symbiosis required for ecosystems to evolve in parallel.
I could go on for a long, long, time, as could probably every one of my readers. To do so would show some knowledge, but mostly my ignorance and pride in trying to overwhelm with my knowledge. The question is not, "Who knows the most?", but "What is truth?".
I believe that I am the product of creation by a Creator who planned all that I can see. That is the construct that makes the most sense to me. I cannot rationalize Darwinism with observed fact. Although I cannot prove the existence of the Creator, what I see points me in that direction without the need for huge leaps of faith to fill in missing observations.. They only leap of faith I need to take is that a Creator who operates in a realm that I can't understand chose to create the universe in which I live. Once I make that leap of faith, the rest of what I observe matches perfectly.
I believe that everything I can observe points me to truth, but that I may not always draw the right conclusions from what I see, so should never shut out evidence that is difficult for me to comprehend.
I just want to say that these people were at my campus giving out copies of Origin of Species on Wednesday. The people giving the books did not say ANYTHING about a 50-page creationist intro; they were screaming, "Free copy of a famous 150-year-old book!" Talk about disingenous! I saw at least one student realize what the book really was, and try to give it back to the Living Waters group.
cb,
A fundamental misunderstanding of science and its method, sadly a common problem among Fundamentalists. A fact is an observable phenomenon something recorded and documented. The fossil record is a fact. A theory is much more than fact, it is a well tested set of explanations for the facts that we observe. Theories are tested repeatedly, modified when needed, and built upon years of investigation and study. the theory of evolution ties together many disciplines within biological sciences and other areas of science.Putting the word in quotes does not change the scientific meaning of it. If you wish to participate in the discussion at least get your terms right and understand their meaning. Otherwise put your head in the sand and leave those of us with actual minds that work alone.
I just want to know if the 'Creationists' believe that their God put all the scientific evidence (i.e., remains and fossils of Lucy, dinosaurs, other evolutionary species, etc.) on earth just as 'props'? Was that to test their faith or prove us that think freely as the 'unwashed masses'?
The first two posters here (George and Dave) are right on track...thank you for such well stated comments. We need go no further!
Thank God I am an atheist!
You would think after over 150 years, the fact of the evolutionary process would be accepted by all but the most uneducated. The problem is that while our knowledge of creation, the universe and God grow everyday, our underlying system of myth is still a cosmic view based on the knowledge of creation circa 1500 BC. As the modern world grows, as science discovers more, these folks with antiquated belief systems are getting very nervous. Why the judeo christian islamic systems choose to represent their myth as truth and history is thru a misunderstanding of myth itself. According to Joseph Campbell, myth is a metaphor for the infinite mystery we call God. As God is incapable of being understood by man, no matter what the scientific cosmology has discovered, we represent these symbols and concepts with myths. When the myths no longer work, we need to find new ones. Most Creationists i have heard have an almost kindergarten like view of the process. Its fear thats driving these folks not faith.
Amazing CB, you just won the prize for the gazzilionth customer with that question.
A scientific theory by definition describes and explains known and repeatable facts, observations, experiments, mathematical laws, etc
Evolution is probably the bet proven theory in human history, in fact better supported by fact than the theory of gravity.
To me, this attitude and belief is an insult to science. Darwin postulated a theory, which it still is. There are a lot of pieces still missing, but it is a theory, a good theory. The theory of evolution and religion can co-exist, but Kirk Cameron and his cohorts are acting like fools. Why don't they also slam astronomy, medicine, and all other sciences and go live back in the Middle Ages when no one was allowed to believe anything other than Christianity?
Religious people are both gullible and delusional!
Let's not forget the human hierarchy, evolved over eons:
1. Instinct (food, shelter, fear, sex, etc)
trumps
2. Emotionality (heart, love, compassion, hope, etc)
trumps
3. Rationality (reason, logic)
Many religionists understand deep down that Reason is secondary to Emotion and strive for a (however tenuous) co-existence between the two. They make it work in their hearts, and downplay how their heads react. It makes sense to me, and, understanding our Hierarchy, I do not ridicule them for it.
We atheists, having (of course) the same Emotional needs, seek to fulfill them where it doesn't conflict with our Reason: whether regarding community, guidance, spirituality, father figures, explanations for the awesome, fear of death, etc.: all this we fulfill right here on earth, without looking to a large pasta being or Yahweh (or whatever) to give our search validity.
Lastly: look to coexist peacefully!
Micro evolution is plainly evident as can be seen even with our species ie different colors etc, but macro evolution is far from proven and highly unlikely ie breed a donkey and a horse and you get a mule but the mule cannot propagate. Science has not shown in any way that one species can evolve into another it is only supposition.
While I don't totally agree with Cameron at least he is doing something which is more than I can say about the commentators on this board. So I say "speak your mind Cameron and keep going".
I wish these Jesus freaks, flat-earth society believers, and the like would have spent more time in a science classroom than buying into the bible, which by the way, is the single most fictional book of all time.
Nature will always weed out dead-end, useless, non-evolving organisms that fail (or refuse) to adapt ie: Kirk Cameron.
Intelligent design is neither....
Why is it that wacko Christians feel that they have to change everyone elses minds about the world. You can have your own ideas, but please keep them to yourself.....we dont care.
Honestly, do they really think students at UCLA are so stupid they won't see through this scam? Passing off their "enhanced" copies hoping they can convert a few is really pathetic. Most college kids are smarter than that, so why not take all the money you wasted on publishing your propaganda and spend it some other way, like feeding the poor or caring for the sick?You know, truly Christian acts that gain no publicity or sound bytes. How about trying that stuff for a change? Now that would be admirable.
Classy idea...plug in your own propaganda as an introduction and hand it out free to the masses under the guise of a classic literary work. Hey, what if someone did the same thing with the bible? I wonder how that would fly with the Christian extremists? Why is it always a one way street with them?
Most extremist “True” believers who promote the Young Earth theory and Intelligent Design use faulty logic, out of date information, phrases taken out of context, and “made up” science in an attempt to convince the not so well informed that their view about the development of life on Earth is true. That type of dilution of science will hurt this country and my fear is that it will relegate us to that of a third world nation when comes to the basic sciences. They say they want to “teach the controversy” in our public schools but what they really want to do is “preach the dogma”. They are spreading religion dictated science, not real science.
I don't understand rocket science yet I see rockets being launched. Since rocket science is beyond my grasp should I believe that God is the one launching the rockets?
Not to dis all men. But in those early days somehow they thought they were the only ones who knew anything or could do anything. That's all I'm saying. I love men – the good ones – that is. I know. That's broad, but you intelligent folks know what I mean.
Boy oh Boy! If the fundamentalist Christian(s) think creationism is it, then riddle me this: (and correct me if I am wrong.) If Adam and Eve were the first humans created and they had two sons, Cain and Able, two males, how the hell did the rest of us get here???? Who slept w/Eve, and/or did she have other children like maybe a girl? And if we were all born of this creation then it explains how everyone is stone crazy!
The other thing is – and this is for all you good Christians out there – if God is all there is; God is everywhere evenly present, all knowing, all powerful, then wouldn't it stand to reason that he created people like scientists, doctors, architects and on and on? In other words, he put certain people here to show the rest of us how things work, how things are built and on and on. Life is a mystery and a journey. God created every last thing in the universe – ergo the tiniest organism which EVOLVED and EVOLVED and EVOLVED. And what we have is what we have today. Everything imaginable. So take it to heart. Everything has a contrast. Soooo there are the smart people and the stupid people, day and night, life and death etc. etc. The point is to appreciate what you have. If there were no contrasts you wouldn't be able to do that. So yes. There was creation. AND that creation evolved and evolved. God wants us to seek out the mystery to find out who we are.
And yes. Kirk Cameron is an idiot. Nothing is more infuriating than born again Christians because they are zealots and should not be listened to. (Some)People without an education crack me up pontificating on subject matter they know nothing about. And it's those very people who are always shaking their hands in accusation of what someone else is doing when they are the very ones doing the thing they are accusing others of doing. To you I say, get the spec out of thine own eye and he who is without sin cast the first stone!
The universe is three things: it is spiritual – after all we did come from someplace other than the womb; it is mathematical – the world couldn't be built without numbers and a measurement; and magical – which is the wonder of it all – like how a spider knows how to spin a web and where to hook it up or the real power of intuition and psychic abilities.
My faith tell s me that life is about discovery on the journey. The bible was written by men to the great exclusion of women. Some things are good in that book, but a LOT is lost in translation. Imagine for a minute: the bible was written in a different language of a different era; then these men all sat around deciding what could go in it and what wouldn't. Then all that being translated by other men all the way up to today. And we all know how men think..... So go figure.