► Show Top 10 Hot Links

Posts Tagged ‘Evolution’

Strange Bedfellows: Communism & Evolution

by WrathofG-d ( 37 Comments › )
Filed under Evolution, LGF at February 4th, 2009 - 3:20 pm

While defending their position in the ongoing evolution and creation debate, those advocating the theory of evolution often falsely compare those who believe in the theory of creation to Islamists.  They base their argument on the fact that Islamists and those who advocate the theory of creation share the belief that G-d created the heavens and Earth, and dispute the theory of evolution.

I wonder then how these evolution theory-only types would respond to the fact that the theory of evolution is a core tenant of the Communist Party U.S.A.

_________________________________________________________________

From “Revolution” Magazine – “Voice of the Revolutionary Communist Party U.S.A.”:

communist-evolution

Part 1: Introducing The “Science of Evolution” Series.  “We all need to know at least the basic scientific facts about evolution and understand also how the religious fundamentalists who want to keep people ignorant and confused about evolution are driven by a reactionary social and political agenda…. This series will also discuss why evolution is under relentless assault by Christian fundamentalists and refute the antiscientific claims of “creationism” and “intelligent design” about the origin and development of life on the planet.” (Quote From Revolutionary Worker, May 12, 2002) (Revolutionary Worker #1157, June 30, 2002)

Part 7(e): Creationism’s New Wrapper Won’t Fool Us: Intelligent Design Theory Is Still Just Religion –It Is Not Science –And Its Still Wrong.  (Revolutionary Worker #1220, November 23, 2003)

Part 7(b)Snake Oil Salesmen and Charlatans At Court. (Revolutionary Worker #1216, October 19, 2003) “In the modern world, many Christian and other religious authorities and believers are willing to adapt their religious beliefs to encompass modern scientific understanding.  But traditional Creationists will have none of that, particularly (although not only) when it comes to the scientific fact of evolution: to them the Bible is the Word of God and everything in it must therefore be literally true, so there is no possible way evolution could be true. Still, in today’s world they realize that many people are not satisfied by blind faith any more and want some scientific evidence for things. So many of these traditional Creationists have tried to wrap their non-scientific–and even anti -scientific–views in what they like to call “Creation-science.” They have even created so-called “research institutes” and creation-science “museums” (the San Diego-based Institute for Creation Research and its associated Museum being probably the most well-known) and they publish numerous books, pamphlets, web sites, etc., etc. But do they do any legitimate scientific research that gets published in any serious scientific journals under the supervision and critical review of the established scientific communities? NO.”

_________________________________________________________________

The above publication is only one example of the collusion between the Revolutionary Communist Party, U.S.A., and those who argue for the theory of evolution.  There are many, many more

Following are a few statements from the Revolutionary Communist Party, U.S.A. that might sound familiar to some of you:

Intelligent Design: Stealth War on ScienceRevolution #201, November 6, 2005, posted at revcom.us.”  It then goes on to quote and discuss “Wedge Theory”.

Defend Science, Darwin, and The BiologistsRevolution #155, February 8, 2009. [Discussing an Evolution Conference in January 2009]  “We learned a great deal: About important new organizations and efforts to popularize science; about the fierce struggle biologists are waging against creationist attacks on evolution, and in some cases just to teach evolution; and about what scientists and others can do to fight for science now—especially around Darwin Day and Darwin Year.”  It then goes on to discuss the Revolutionary Communist Party, U.S.A.’s push beginning in 2009 to fight against “creationists”.

Misrepresenting Working Scientists – A Favorite Creationist TacticRevolutionary Worker #1216, October 19, 2003.Creationists in general are famous for their shoddy and unprincipled methods. So-called “scientific Creationists” and the “Intelligent Design” Creationists can produce no actual scientific evidence for their theories. They have in fact never published a single scientific research paper in any peer-reviewed scientific journal (which publish articles only after they have been critically reviewed and assessed by multiple working scientists with established credentials and experience in relevant scientific arenas). Since Creationists can provide no scientific evidence whatsoever for their own theories, they focus instead on trying to tear down the opposition (the evolutionists) any way they can: they try to confuse people who don’t know much about science into thinking that the theory of evolution is wrong, that the evidence for evolution is not solid or that evolution is a “theory in crisis” as proven by the fact that evolutionists argue among themselves.”

Kansas School Board Enshrines Anti-Science”   Posted on revcom.us, November 12, 2005. “The Kansas State School Board announced their decision that in Kansas public schools the new state standards for the teaching of science call for attacking evolution in science classrooms in the state... The new science standards were forced by a faction on the school board that champions intelligent design, the latest form of creationism. The intelligent design movement is driven by Christian fundamentalists at its core – the attacks on science in Kansas are one part of the whole Christian fascist agenda which aims to make sweeping reactionary changes in every sphere of life in this country. “

An Urgent Call To Defend ScienceRevolution #78, February 11, 2007. “The signs of this are everywhere. The attacks are coming at an accelerating pace, and include frequent interventions by powerful forces, in and out of the Bush Administration, who seem all too willing to deny scientific truths, disrupt scientific investigations, block scientific progress, undermine scientific education, and sacrifice the very integrity of the scientific process itself–all in the pursuit of implementing their particular political agenda.”

_________________________________________________________________

Just to be clear, my intent is not to infer that those that advocate the theory of evolution are all communists (even if they so happen to walk, talk, and sound like just a Marx reading duck), but instead to show those who make the “Creationism” = Islamism argument how intellectually stunted they really are.

Ben Stein withdraws as UVM commencement speaker after outcry over intelligent design

by bar ( 33 Comments › )
Filed under Evolution, LGF at February 4th, 2009 - 9:12 am

Calls commencement flap ‘pathetic,’ denies he’s anti-science

Ben Stein described the brouhaha over his selection as commencement speaker at the University of Vermont as “laughable” on Tuesday called the whole episode “pathetic.”…

In a phone call to the Free Press on Tuesday, Stein said that describing his views as “antithetical to scientific inquiry” was “a wildly unfair characterization.” He said he was by no means “anti-science,” as some of his critics have described him.

“I am far more pro-science than the Darwinists,” Stein said later in an e-mail. “I want all scientific inquiry to happen — not just what the ruling clique calls science.”
____________________________________________
(Via Hot Air)
I don’t care that he’s a creationist any more than I’d care if he were a phrenologist. It’s goofy, but so long as he doesn’t turn the speech into a lecture on the subject, I’m willing to tolerate his eccentricity. What I wouldn’t tolerate is his egregious bad-faith attempt to equate Darwinism with social Darwinism. Why would an audience filled with scientists and science majors want to be addressed by a guy who believes “science leads you to killing people”? Better yet, why would that guy want to address them? It’d be like inviting a liberal who believes conservatism is inherently racist to guest-blog on Hot Air. I get enough flak for linking HuffPo occasionally in Headlines that I can imagine how that’d go down with our readers.

Exit question: Can it really be that we’re creeping up on 9 p.m. on the east coast without a post yet on this from LGF?
________________________________________________

Around and around we go.
I am sure some “creationists” will have some meltdowns at LGF today over this.

Discussion!: Creation ’09

by WrathofG-d ( 34 Comments › )
Filed under Open thread, Religion at January 26th, 2009 - 12:50 pm

The“Creation ’09” Music Festival

A Tribute To Our Creator

creation-092

(Ack! So much evil, brainwashing, and 19th Century Archaic-i-ness in one place!  With this amount of mass Creationism being so blatantly displayed, we can have no doubt that it is the beginning of the end for all scientific thought in America!  The beginnnnnning of the endddd!!!!!  All rational thought is dead!!!! Run for cover, head to the hills…..ahhhh)

_______________________________________________________________________________________

There is no better evidence of this impending doom than the Festival’s own website:

Exhibit A – Their policy on Alcoholic Beverages and Drugs.

These are absolutely not permitted on the festival grounds and those found under the influence of, or in possession of such will be escorted off the property, and or, turned over to the law enforcement officials.

Exhibit B – Their policy on Religion.

One of our visions for the Creation Festival is to bring the entire Body of Christ into unity through worship, prayer and the Word. The Creation Festival welcomes all denominations of the Body of Christ. The world will know we are Christians by our love.

Exhibit C- Their policy on social interaction.

After midnight please be quiet. Don’t “bless” others with loud singing or talking. If asked by someone to “quiet down,” please respond graciously. Boom boxes are to be shut off in the camping areas by 11:30 pm.

Exhibit D- Their policy on a dress code.

Leaders, Chaperones and Parents: We need your help in enforcing this policy – our staff cannot do it alone! MODESTY is the key word. While the style and fashion these days seems to be “less is best,” we do not want to be guilty of causing another person to stumble. Girls: Bathing suits are NOT permitted, except in the showers. Clothes must be put on over your bathing suit for the walk back to your campsite from the showers. Tank tops are fine but bellies must be covered (even though the fashion now is to show it off). Shorts and/or skirts need to be long enough and shirts big enough. Guys are not exempt from the dress code: SHIRTS (and shoes) MUST be worn by all at all times.

________________________________________________________________________________________

The horror……………the horror…………………

[*Neither Little Green Blogmocracy, nor WrathofG-d actually endorse this Festival.  We do however greatly endorse the friendly ribbing!]

Intelligent Design?

by DJM ( 81 Comments › )
Filed under Evolution at November 25th, 2008 - 6:24 am

“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.”
–Charles Darwin, Origin of Species

With this statement, Charles Darwin provided a criterion by which his theory of evolution could be falsified. The logic was simple: since evolution is a gradual process in which slight modifications produce advantages for survival, it cannot produce complex structures in a short amount of time. It’s a step-by-step process which may gradually build up and modify complex structures, but it cannot produce them suddenly.

Darwin, meet Michael Behe, biochemical researcher and professor at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania. Michale Behe claims to have shown exactly what Darwin claimed would destroy the theory of evolution, through a concept he calls “irreducible complexity.” In simple terms, this idea applies to any system of interacting parts in which the removal of any one part destroys the function of the entire system. An irreducibly complex system, then, requires each and every component to be in place before it will function.

As a simple example of irreducible complexity, Behe presents the humble mousetrap.
mousetrap1
It contains five interdependent parts which allow it to catch mice: the wooden platform, the spring, the hammer (the bar which crushes the mouse against the wooden base), the holding bar, and a catch. Each of these components is absolutely essential for the function of the mousetrap. For instance, if you remove the catch, you cannot set the trap and it will never catch mice, no matter how long they may dance over the contraption. Remove the spring, and the hammer will flop uselessly back and forth-certainly not much of a threat to the little rodents. Of course, removal of the holding bar will ensure that the trap never catches anything because there will again be no way to arm the system.

Now, note what this implies: an irreducibly complex system cannot come about in a gradual manner. One cannot begin with a wooden platform and catch a few mice, then add a spring, catching a few more mice than before, etc. No, all the components must be in place before it functions at all. A step-by-step approach to constructing such a system will result in a useless system until all the components have been added. The system requires all the components to be added at the same time, in the right configuration, before it works at all.

(From Idea Center)

And the rebuttal: