Do 6 Out of 10 Americans Really Not Believe In Evolution?

reply to post by DASFEX

Ontogeny Recapitulates Phylogeny?
Haekel’s faked embryonic drawings

The theory of embryonic recapitulation asserts that the human fetus goes through various stages of its evolutionary history as it develops. Ernst Haeckel proposed this theory in the late 1860’s, promoting Darwin’s theory of evolution in Germany. He made detailed drawings of the embryonic development of eight different embryos in three stages of development, to bolster his claim. His work was hailed as a great development in the understanding of human evolution. A few years later his drawings were shown to have been fabricated, and the data manufactured. He blamed the artist for the discrepancies, without admitting that he was the artist. (source: Russell Grigg, “Fraud Rediscovered”, Creation, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp.49-51)

That is a fairly straightforward description of Haeckel. Again you don't say what your problem with it is.

Modern Biology rejects Haeckel. It is not taught in modern biology classes or mentioned in modern biology textbooks other that to mention its existence and describe why it is in error. See Wikipedia and CB701 and CB701.1

There are a couple of text books mentioned on CreationWiki. I would be surprised if the actual content matched their declared level of heinousness. The two sentences they quote is a straightforward description of the gills which are undeniably present in a human embryo at a particular stage in its development. The point is only that gills come before lungs on an evolutionary time scale and are required by the embryo until the lungs have formed. This is not Haeckel's idea at all, and is merely discriptive of the stages the embryo goes through.

To call Haeckel a fraud because he proposed an hypothesis which proved to be wrong is "bearing false witness". Lots of hypothesis are proposed and rejected. And the problems with Haeckel's drawings were found almost immediatly.

On the other hand the world that Haeckel operated in was one of colonialization and subjugation of supposedly inferior peoples. The American Civil war had recently ended and the shock of the end of the institution of slavery created a great deal of angst among those who found support for slavery in the bible. There was a need for 'scientific' proof of the superiority of the 'White Man'. It was in this context that the concept of 'race' was invented (notice that Modern Biology rejects the concept of race too). Haeckel's work was one of the attempts to prove the superiority of the European White race. If there was fraud involved, it was against people of color, not biology or science in general or the bible or the public or anything else.

If you really want to fulminate against science fraud, why not go after the tobacco companies that denied the havoc their product perpetrated on the public for decades after they knew it to be fact, quashed any science that contradicted them, and paid for pet scientists to do bogus research and publish bogus findings (and continue to do so).


[edit on 14/7/2009 by rnaa]

reply to post by DASFEX


While we are on the subject of 'fakes and frauds', I notice you haven't mentioned the Paluxy Dinosaur Man Tracks anywhere.

Might there be a reason for that?

reply to post by DASFEX

Archaeoraptor Liaoningensis:
Fake Dinosaur-bird ancestor

The most recent and perhaps the most infamous evolution frauds was committed in China and published in 1999 in the journal National Geographic 196:98-107, November 1999. Dinosaur bones were put together with the bones of a newer species of bird and they tried to pass it off as a very important new evolutionary intermediate.

Another tedious example of you not doing your own research, but blindly following your agenda and quoting your misinformed gurus. Again the story is easily located on Wikipedia and numerous other sites.

The error was detected by paleontologists which proves nothing about evolution theory except that it works. The only fraud that occurred was perpetrated by the Chinese quarry workers who knew that a complete fossil specimen would be more valuable than fragments. So they glued various bits and pieces together. They were not scientists.

The gem and mineral collectors who thought they found something important were blinded by the media attention they were going to get for their fossil collection museum. They were not scientists. They contacted NG which sent in a paleontologist to check out the claim.

The paleontologist that studied the specimen detected the problem at a glance. However, the owner, Stephen Czerkas, down-played the problems to NG and a paper was prepared for peer-review that directly and repeatedly described the incorrect composition. The paper was rejected by two peer review journals because of the obvious problems.

NG printed a report of the 'find' anyway, with a note that peer-review of the findings were pending. Note that National Geographic is NOT itself a peer reviewed journal, it is a popular science journal. Never-the-less it does have a reputation to protect and was severely embarrassed by this article. It published a withdrawal saying it had 'jumped the gun'. Czerkas admitted his mistake and apologized to NG and the paleontologists involved.

Czerkas is not a scientist and holds no University degree. He is a avid dinosaur buff, and runs a dinosaur museum (I have not seen it, but from the description I would classify it as a 'Tourist Trap', but that may be unfair) and publishes a personal journal which continues to make fundamental errors.

Hey! I just found the web page you cut and pasted holus-bolus for your post. That page actually had live links in it, couldn't you even be bothered to fix them or delete them from your post? It makes it very difficult reading; I almost missed this example.

In spite of the spin some of the linked articles want to put on this affair, there is nothing in this story that weakens Evolution, Evolution Theory, the Scientific Method, or the integrity of Scientists. No paleontologist was fooled, even for a second. No paleontologist attempted to claim that this was a legitimate fossil or an example of a valid transitional form. No paleontologist acted in any way other than professional and ethical.

Why do you feel it necessary to perpetuate the lies that these things represent fraud and unethical behavior? I understand that you don't believe in the Evolution Theory, and you very much want to see it disproved. But that is not going to happen by throwing excrement and hoping something sticks.






[edit on 14/7/2009 by rnaa]

I stand FIRMLY behind the theory of
UNINTELLIGENT DESIGN

This Proof is better than both the Darwin Turtle Pepper Moth Myth and the Creationist Omnipotent Almighty Creation Fallacy.

Listen up and listen up good because this is the theory that will stand the test of time.

"There have been 23 elephant-like animals in history, and yet only two survive today (and we add, they're not doing very well). Clearly, this is the mark of an all-powerful creator who is stuck on the same stupid idea and can't figure out why the heck they keep dying off. Hmm, perhaps it's because giant, big-eared mammals with huge, prehensile noses are ridiculous? I mean, WTH? A giant, powerful, grasping… nose? It looks like something a preschooler would make up."

The Theory of UNINTELLIGENT DESIGN goes on to say

"But there's more. The fossil record is littered with animals that prove God, er, whatever magical force designed life, is several fries short of a happy meal. I mean, look at the Dodo. Unlike other huge, successful birds like eagles and buzzards, our creator decided the next big thing would be a huge bird with teeny-tiny wings that didn't do squat. Add to this the fact that the stupid things practically jumped into the Portuguese sailors' cooking pots themselves."

These Theoretical Factualities are based deeply upon PROVEN conjectures and unrefutable unsubstantiation.

I will leave you with this nugget of wisdom regarding the LAW OF UNINTELLIGENT DESIGN

"And who the hell thought giraffes were a good idea? Bloody unlikely looking, if you ask me. And those tyrannosaurus, with the tiny little arms? Why even leave the arms in, except to flail about Corky looking for a snack. Speaking on this subject, did you know whales have hip bones? That's like if a human engineer put an outboard boat motor on a city bus. I think it's clear God never went to college, and I'm thinking it's sketchy he even has his GED. They guys in middle school shop class made more function and professional looking projects that half of God's motley menagerie."

All quotes were from the center for Unintelligent Design Research at the web address for Unintelligent Design Network, Inc.

www.theshrubbery.com...

reply to post by TurkeyBurgers


Elephants are actually really powerful and awesome beasts. Look back in history. Some of the most powerful military forces of antiquity used elephants in war. War elephants were even used as recently as the late 1800's with light cannons mounted on their backs.

They are also good painters.

reply to post by PieKeeper


We have to figure out a way to send God some of our Ideas! There must be SOME way to show God how to take the strength and Brain of an elephant and combine it with the grasping hands of the Primate? God is AWESOME in that he created these things he is just kind of a little bit DUMB.

No reason to get all bent out of shape about it. God is STUPID! BUT we can help her see the error of her way! We can try to find a way to send God a message showing him how his creations are F.U.B.A.R. We can show God how to fix them so they work better!

We want to send god some Engineering Books. He is VERY creative but he is street smart, not book smart. We are not sure if we should use Black Holes or Temporal Worm Holes or some other means to get this information to God.

I like Turkey Tacos better than Turkey Burgers.

Originally posted by TurkeyBurgers
I stand FIRMLY behind the theory of
UNINTELLIGENT DESIGN

This Proof is better than both the Darwin Turtle Pepper Moth Myth and the Creationist Omnipotent Almighty Creation Fallacy.

Listen up and listen up good because this is the theory that will stand the test of time.

"There have been 23 elephant-like animals in history, and yet only two survive today (and we add, they're not doing very well). Clearly, this is the mark of an all-powerful creator who is stuck on the same stupid idea and can't figure out why the heck they keep dying off. Hmm, perhaps it's because giant, big-eared mammals with huge, prehensile noses are ridiculous? I mean, WTH? A giant, powerful, grasping… nose? It looks like something a preschooler would make up."

The Theory of UNINTELLIGENT DESIGN goes on to say

"But there's more. The fossil record is littered with animals that prove God, er, whatever magical force designed life, is several fries short of a happy meal. I mean, look at the Dodo. Unlike other huge, successful birds like eagles and buzzards, our creator decided the next big thing would be a huge bird with teeny-tiny wings that didn't do squat. Add to this the fact that the stupid things practically jumped into the Portuguese sailors' cooking pots themselves."

These Theoretical Factualities are based deeply upon PROVEN conjectures and unrefutable unsubstantiation.

I will leave you with this nugget of wisdom regarding the LAW OF UNINTELLIGENT DESIGN

"And who the hell thought giraffes were a good idea? Bloody unlikely looking, if you ask me. And those tyrannosaurus, with the tiny little arms? Why even leave the arms in, except to flail about Corky looking for a snack. Speaking on this subject, did you know whales have hip bones? That's like if a human engineer put an outboard boat motor on a city bus. I think it's clear God never went to college, and I'm thinking it's sketchy he even has his GED. They guys in middle school shop class made more function and professional looking projects that half of God's motley menagerie."

All quotes were from the center for Unintelligent Design Research at the web address for Unintelligent Design Network, Inc.

www.theshrubbery.com...

LOL. you just listed a bunch of opinions. that is the worst research i have seen in a long time. just because you think elephants and giraffes are weird looking or certain animals have (apparently) useless adaptations. you just defined ignorance in the purest form. if you don't understand the topic at hand, it is not wise to try and talk about it.

reply to post by dannyfal


I am not even sure where to begin with your post!

Creation, or the scientific term, DESIGN is a proven FACT it is not something you or I can even begin to DEBATE!

All that I am presenting is a THEORY!

The THEORY of Unintelligent Design.

And all that I ask is if Intelligent design is taught in school then Unintelligent design should receive an equal amount of class room attention as well.

I mean lets be honest with ourselves here.

the duck-billed platypus. The creator spends millions of years dividing everything up into nice little categories like "mammal" and "reptile," and then completely blows it on this one little egg-laying furball. I'm surprised He (or She? Oh, watch the capitals) was able to stick to it this long as it was.

www.theshrubbery.com...

That is SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE right there! If neither Darwinists or the Creationists can PLAINLY SEE this Theory is the most LIKELY theory then I do not know what to tell you.

Go back to the beginning.

Look at the FACTS!

Fact #1- God Created all of the Animals

Fact #2- Much like Obama and his Birth Certificate, God has NEVER shown us where he went to College or even if he DID go to college AT ALL!
GOD HAS HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL ENGINEERING AT MOST! At even that is suspect!

Fact #3- God is LAZY! Old girl was so FLUSTERED that her creations were not coming out according to schematics that she COMPLETELY destroyed the entire planet in a flood! LEARN TO TROUBLE SHOOT!

Fact #4- God is blind or of a low I.Q. Let us use the evidence of the design of the Human Reproductive system. The placement of both the Male and Female reproductive system is what we would equate to building a Walt Disney World inside of a SEWAGE SYSTEM. One could argue that Florida is in and of itself a type of waste management system but that is begging the question.

After this pile of evidence I just presented I am sure you will have no rebuttal and be forced to accept the theory of Unintelligent Design as the theory that we should be teaching our children.



[edit on 15-7-2009 by TurkeyBurgers]

Originally posted by Kaytagg
February marked the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin, and to my chagrin, a quick google search reveals that only 4 in 10 Americans believe in evolution. This startles me greatly, as evolution is a well established theory (some of you don't know what a theory is, and that's part of the problem) that's been kicking around for quite some time now. It's no less understood or observed than the theory of gravity, and yet we have a majority of Americans who either say it's false, or don't know if it's valid. How does hard science, with abundant data, get categorically rejected by so many people? Is the American mindset really this bizarre? If so, how can you count on them to make informed decisions about anything, when they can't even inform themselves about basic facts of science in the 21st century?

The way I see this attitude is "Reject what nature proves to be true, Insert what I WISH to be true." And sadly, I see that sort of mindset in more than just the evolution debate!

Edit: Oops, got the title wrong. Should read "6 out of 10"

[edit on 29-6-2009 by Kaytagg]

However, we have to consider why they let the "wishing" get in the way, then. I'm sure there's some people out there who wish they could fly just like a bird, but I don't think many are going to discount the theories of gravity and aerodynamics. I think it's because there's another belief in at least one of these:

1. if evolution is true, that implies God doesn't exist,

2. if evolution is true, then it implies my doctrines are false, but I'm afraid
I'll go to hell if I give them up,

Now the first is not correct, as evolutionary theory doesn't even mention God, and the second is half right if the doctrines under consideration are, for example, that the Bible can be taken literally as a source of historical fact. However the bit about the hell, though, that's just a lot of fear, instilled by CHURCHES for power.

Originally posted by TurkeyBurgers

the duck-billed platypus. The creator spends millions of years dividing everything up into nice little categories like "mammal" and "reptile," and then completely blows it on this one little egg-laying furball. I'm surprised He (or She? Oh, watch the capitals) was able to stick to it this long as it was.

That is SCIENTIFIC EVIDENCE right there! If neither Darwinists or the Creationists can PLAINLY SEE this Theory is the most LIKELY theory then I do not know what to tell you.

wait... what? how is this scientific evidence? since when was "the creator" brought into science? and the categories of "mammal" and "reptile" are manmade terms, just cause humans are retarded and don't know what they're categorizing doesn't mean anything.

Look at the FACTS!

Fact #1- God Created all of the Animals

that is a fact? God created all of the animals? do you have a source for this information you are recieving?

Fact #2- Much like Obama and his Birth Certificate, God has NEVER shown us where he went to College or even if he DID go to college AT ALL!
GOD HAS HIGH SCHOOL LEVEL ENGINEERING AT MOST! At even that is suspect!

this is a fact? are you like 8 years old? do you even know what the word fact means?

Fact #3- God is LAZY! Old girl was so FLUSTERED that her creations were not coming out according to schematics that she COMPLETELY destroyed the entire planet in a flood! LEARN TO TROUBLE SHOOT!

god is lazy is a fact? then you refer to bliblical stories?

Fact #4- God is blind or of a low I.Q. Let us use the evidence of the design of the Human Reproductive system. The placement of both the Male and Female reproductive system is what we would equate to building a Walt Disney World inside of a SEWAGE SYSTEM. One could argue that Florida is in and of itself a type of waste management system but that is begging the question.

dude i dont know where u get your so called facts.... but you should start reading some books

After this pile of evidence I just presented I am sure you will have no rebuttal and be forced to accept the theory of Unintelligent Design as the theory that we should be teaching our children.

this is a joke right? somebody's just messin with me?

For those of you who have a difficult time reconciling your religion with science. Or evolution with the bible.

reply to post by TurkeyBurgers


I have to agree with Dannyfal, Your so called proof is nothing but opinions. And what's with all this God graduating from high school stuff?

Originally posted by Magstat
reply to post by TurkeyBurgers

 

I have to agree with Dannyfal, Your so called proof is nothing but opinions. And what's with all this God graduating from high school stuff?

im seeing alot of stuff about how god must be real or we wouldnt have souls? there is no such thing as a soul. when your brain and heart stop thats it, youre dead. theres no soul that keeps living. the only reason people believe in a soul is because thats what you are brainwashed to believe in ever since you were born.

reply to post by Lateralus51


Seeing as to how you have all the answers. Explain this please. I honestly don't think you can to any degree of certainity.
www.npr.org...

We've all heard the stories about near-death experiences: the tunnel, the white light, the encounter with long-dead relatives now looking very much alive.

Scientists have cast a skeptical eye on these accounts. They say that these feelings and visions are simply the result of a brain shutting down.

But now some researchers are giving a closer neurological look at near-death experiences and asking: Can your mind operate when your brain has stopped?

'I Popped Up Out The Top Of My Head'

I met Pam Reynolds in her tour bus. She's a big deal in the music world — her company, Southern Tracks, has recorded music by everyone from Bruce Springsteen to Pearl Jam to REM. But you've probably never heard her favorite song. It's the one Reynolds wrote about the time she traveled to death's door and back. The experience has made her something of a rock star in the near-death world. Believers say she is proof positive that the mind can operate when the brain is stilled. Nonbelievers say she's nothing of the sort.

Reynolds' journey began one hot August day in 1991.

"I was in Virginia Beach, Va., with my husband," she recalls. "We were promoting a new record. And I inexplicably forgot how to talk. I've got a big mouth. I never forget how to talk."

An MRI revealed an aneurysm on her brain stem. It was already leaking, a ticking time bomb. Her doctor in Atlanta said her best hope was a young brain surgeon at the Barrow Neurological Institute in Arizona named Robert Spetzler.

"The aneurysm was very large, which meant the risk of rupture was also very large," Spetzler says. "And it was in a location where the only way to really give her the very best odds of fixing it required what we call 'cardiac standstill.' "

It was a daring operation: Chilling her body, draining the blood out of her head like oil from a car engine, snipping the aneurysm and then bringing her back from the edge of death.

"She is as deeply comatose as you can be and still be alive," Spetzler observes.

When the operation began, the surgeons taped shut Reynolds' eyes and put molded speakers in her ears. The ear speakers, which made clicking sounds as loud as a jet plane taking off, allowed the surgeons to measure her brain stem activity and let them know when they could drain her blood.

"I was lying there on the gurney minding my own business, seriously unconscious, when I started to hear a noise," Reynolds recalls. "It was a natural D, and as the sound continued — I don't know how to explain this, other than to go ahead and say it — I popped up out the top of my head."

A Tunnel And Bright Light

She says she found herself looking down at the operating table. She says she could see 20 people around the table and hear what sounded like a dentist's drill. She looked at the instrument in the surgeon's hand.

"It was an odd-looking thing," she says. "It looked like the handle on my electric toothbrush."

Reynolds observed the Midas Rex bone saw the surgeons used to cut open her head, the drill bits, and the case, which looked like the one where her father kept his socket wrenches. Then she noticed a surgeon at her left groin.

"I heard a female voice say, 'Her arteries are too small.' And Dr. Spetzler — I think it was him — said, 'Use the other side,' " Reynolds says.

Soon after, the surgeons began to lower her body temperature to 60 degrees. It was about that time that Reynolds believes she noticed a tunnel and bright light. She eventually flat-lined completely, and the surgeons drained the blood out of her head.

During her near-death experience, she says she chatted with her dead grandmother and uncle, who escorted her back to the operating room. She says as they looked down on her body, she could hear the Eagles' song "Hotel California" playing in the operating room as the doctors restarted her heart. She says her body looked like a train wreck, and she said she didn't want to return.

"My uncle pushed me," she says, laughing. "And when I hit the body, the line in the song was, 'You can check out anytime you like, but you can never leave.' And I opened my eyes and I said, 'You know, that is really insensitive!' "

A Vision That Matches The Record

Afterwards, Reynolds assumed she had been hallucinating. But a year later, she mentioned the details to her neurosurgeon. Spetzler says her account matched his memory.

"From a scientific perspective," he says, "I have absolutely no explanation about how it could have happened."

Spetzler did not check out all the details, but Michael Sabom did. Sabom is a cardiologist in Atlanta who was researching near-death experiences.

"With Pam's permission, they sent me her records from the surgery," he says. "And long story short, what she said happened to her is actually what Spetzler did with her out in Arizona."

According to the records, there were 20 doctors in the room. There was a conversation about the veins in her left leg. She was defibrillated. They were playing "Hotel California." How about that bone saw? Sabom got a photo from the manufacturer — and it does look like an electric toothbrush.

How, Sabom wonders, could she know these things?

"She could not have heard [it], because of what they did to her ears," he says. "In addition, both of her eyes were taped shut, so she couldn't open her eyes and see what was going on. So her physical sensory perception was off the table."

An Alternative Explanation?

That's preposterous, says anesthesiologist Gerald Woerlee.

"This report provides absolutely no evidence for survival of any sort of consciousness outside the body during near-death experiences or any other such experiences," he says.

Woerlee, an Australian researcher and near-death experience debunker who has investigated Reynolds' case, says what happened to her is easy to explain. He says when they cut into her head, she was jolted into consciousness. At that point, they had not yet drained blood from her brain. He believes she could hear — despite the clicking earplugs.

"There are various explanations," Woerlee says. "One: that the earphones or plugs were not that tightly fitting. Two: It could have been that it was due to sound transmission through the operating table itself."

So Reynolds could have heard conversations. As for seeing the Midas Rex bone saw, he says, she recognized a sound from her childhood.

"She made a picture in her mind of a machine or a device which was very similar to what she was familiar with — a dental drill," Woerlee says.

Woerlee says Reynolds experienced anesthesia awareness, in which a person is conscious but can't move. He figures back in 1991, that happened in 1 out of every 2,000 operations.

That doesn't convince cardiologist Sabom or neurosurgeon Spetzler. They believe the combination of anesthesia and the sluggish brain activity caused by hypothermia meant that Reynolds could not form or retain memories for a significant part of the operation. At the very least, Sabom says, Reynolds' story raises the possibility that consciousness can function even when the brain is offline.

"Is there some type of awareness that occurs from a nonfunctional, physical brain?" Sabom asks. "And if there is, does that mean that there's a soul or spirit?"

Re-Creating Near-Death Experiences

In the end, Reynolds' story is just an anecdote. And in fact, that's the problem with all the studies of near-death experiences. After all, you can't do clinical trials where you kill Mrs. Smith and tag along as she passes through the tunnel to the light, just to verify her story.

reply to post by TurkeyBurgers


Sorry man. None of that was evidence. That was fluff piled upon fluff to epic proportions.

reply to post by TurkeyBurgers



Brilliant!

chemical reactions right before you die. im sure our brain does all kind of crazy stuff before you die. believing in god is like being a grown ass man and believing in santa clause

reply to post by Lateralus51


Simple incorrect analogies aside. Did you even read the case? Chemical reactions within the brain does not account for what's talked about. And this is from a neurologist.

[edit on 25-7-2009 by Watcher-In-The-Shadows]