(November 30, 2010 at 10:12 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: No, this was in response to the claim you made that genome research helped to support Darwinian Evolution; it did not. They had to destroy the tree of life and try to rebuild it. Something does not support a model very well if it destroys it.
That is not necessarily correct Statler. In this case, the re-working of the tree of life was done due to increased understanding.
That is, it was made more accurate without vastly affecting Evolutionary theory as a whole. In short Genome Research never destroyed the ‘model’ of evolution – it simply re-categorised the ‘products’.
(November 30, 2010 at 10:12 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Actually Darwinism is just as much of a religion as Christianity, Hinduism, Buddhism, and Mormonism. It’s a faith base system that people adhere to.
Religion- –noun
1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, esp. when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.
Evolutionary theory deals specifically with the development of life on Earth i.e. the development and progression of species from common ancestry. As such, this definition is inapplicable.
(November 30, 2010 at 10:12 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: 2 .
a specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects: the Christian religion; the Buddhist religion.
3.
the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices: a world council of religions. (dictionary.com)
These last two have no application in Evolutionary Theory, they are specific about ‘beliefs’ & ‘practices’. Evolutionary Theory is not a belief, it is an evidence based theory.
(November 30, 2010 at 10:12 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: Darwinism falls under all three of these definitions. Have you ever seen Richard Dawkins speak about Darwin? The guy goes giddy! Even more giddy than many televangelists talking about Jesus. I can always just quote my buddy Michael Ruse (Atheist) again…
Please define specifically what you think ‘Darwinism’ is and how it fits the above categories.
So now passion is an indicator of religion? Do you class Football as religion? What about Golf? People can be passionate about any number of things; it doesn’t make them a religion.
You’re comparison is fundamentally flawed because of this;
“Have you ever seen a Manchester United Fan talk about them? They go giddy! Even more so than televangelists talking about Jesus! – Therefore football is a religion”
It makes no sense whatsoever.
As for Michael Ruse, his opinion is interesting but not conclusive. This is how he views something and is entirely subjective.
(November 30, 2010 at 10:12 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: I find it interesting that all you guys stand up for Darwin so much. You stand up for him with the same vigor that many Christians stand up for Christ with. Just goes to show how much of a Religion it really has become.
Is that because only Religious people can defend their viewpoint? Or did you just throw the whole “Valid logic is important to me” bit out of the window?
(November 30, 2010 at 10:12 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: There is numerous works done on the subject of how the Scientists in the Nazi regime were deeply influenced by Darwin. This directly led to Eugenics and the Holocaust. Adolf Eichmann, the architect of the holocaust was deeply interested in many of the ideas put forth in Darwin’s the Descent of Man.You miss my point. Even if it were true that it had been proven the Nazis were “Deeply Influenced” by the ideas of Darwin, it wouldn’t make Evolutionary Theory culpable for their actions.
(November 30, 2010 at 10:12 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: As to the notion that Hitler was a Christian, this has been refuted time and time again, and I am a bit surprised to see it even brought up on here. Hitler was born into a Catholic family but left his faith at an early age. He would often speak of “God” to fire up his men, but to say that he was a Christian is ridiculous. Let’s look at some quotes he actually made concerning Christians (unlike you I will also include when he said them).
It’s kind of looking like your assertion that Hitler was a Christian is a bit ridiculous. Well maybe you are right, maybe the Nazis were all a bunch of idiots who didn’t understand Darwinian Theory so they misused it to try and ensure the survival of the Anglo-Saxon, and Hitler really was a Christian who happened to hate Christianity. Sounds a bit farfetched to me though.
First of all; You will include when he said them unlike me?
Why don’t you scroll up and see how I actually quoted Hitler you arrogant prick? You’ll see the date is clearly listed in the quote header.
Now, you may believe that this has been refuted but indeed it hasn’t. Many of your quotes were relayed through Hitler’s private secretary Martin Bormann who was a staunch anti-christian himself and often imbued this attitude onto Hitler. As well as this, the Historical validity of ‘Hitlers Table Talk’ is widely known. This is primarily because the quality and accuracy of the English Translation has been widely discredited.
Hitlers work in Mein Kampf along with other writing often references his feelings ‘as a Christian’ or ‘Doing God’s Work’, this attitude is also reflected in the statements of senior Nazis who knew Hitler.
It is true that his opinions on organised religion fluctuated throughout his reign which has caused doubt about his beliefs in later life but up to and including his writing of Mein Kampf he clearly held Christian beliefs.
So actually, when you approach the subject objectively, you can see that in fact the issue can never be clear cut and if anything, the Christian influences in early Nazism are clear.
References
• Ian Kershaw. 1999. Hitler 1889–1936 Hubris. New York: W. W. Norton.
• Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, Ralph Manheim, ed., New York: Mariner Books, 1999.
• Richard Carrier. "Hitler's Table Talk, Troubling Finds." German Studies Review 26.
• Richard Steigmann-Gall, The Holy Reich, Cambridge University Press, 2003.
• Derek Hastings, Catholicism and the Roots of Nazism, Oxford University Press, 2010.
(November 30, 2010 at 10:12 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: As to the Newton thing, so when a man believes the World should make sense because he is a Creationists and uses this to derive the laws of Gravity, the fact he is a Creationist means nothing? However, when Evolutionists come up with Gene Therapy (which has nothing to do with Evolutionary Theory itself), Darwinism gets all the credit? Now that is having your cake and eating it too.
Genome Research was a direct result of Evolutionary Theory and the investigation of life on Earth, as such its existence is in part an effect of Evolutionary Theory.
Please show how Newton “Used Creationism” to derive the Laws of Gravity and we’ll talk. The fact is that not one part of what Newton did was related to his views on religion or the motivations you claim he had. Instead they were entirely to do with a scientific mind analysing the world.
(November 30, 2010 at 10:12 pm)Statler Waldorf Wrote: . . . However, you can logically prove he does exist, so it looks like I am standing on the side that can have proof, and you are standing on a side that can never have proof.
You can logically prove God exists? . . . I’m waiting.
The fact is you cannot prove anything by logic alone. In order for any logical argument to have any merit it must be both sound logically and in terms of the premises you state.
Also, if you understood anything about Atheism you would know that Agnosticism is completely compatible with it and in fact, with theism as well.
Agnosticism is a concept related to knowledge which can easily be combined with a dis-belief in deities to from an ‘Agnostic Atheist’ as I laid out previously.
Cheers
Sam
"We need not suppose more things to exist than are absolutely neccesary." William of Occam
"Our doubts are traitors, and make us lose the good we oft might win by fearing to attempt" William Shakespeare (Measure for Measure: Act 1, Scene 4)

"Our doubts are traitors, and make us lose the good we oft might win by fearing to attempt" William Shakespeare (Measure for Measure: Act 1, Scene 4)

