But I also object to the word “evolutionist.” Evolution is not my philosophy. It is not my religion. It is not an article of my religious faith, though the fearless pursuit of accurate knowledge is.
via Of Creation, Evolution, and Worship « Threads from Henry’s Web.
There is something nice about this post, linked too above, but is Henry just speaking to the end? Can you hear what he is saying?
Cliff Swallows in Cayucos, California, USA. The nests were built on the bridge over Cayucos Creek. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)
Crossing the road has gotten easier for cliff swallows. Over generations, the mortal threat of speeding cars may have shortened their wings.
Over the last 30 years, the number of cliff swallows killed along roads in southwestern Nebraska has plunged, and the birds’ average wing length has shrunk, researchers report March 18 in Current Biology.
via Shorter-winged swallows evolve around highways | Life | Science News.
So, the birds evolved… or is that adaptation? What ever excuse AiG uses, I’m sure it’ll be with the best of science.
He’s the dilly-o. Unlike what the troll in South Korea who got ran out of the U.S. before he was arrested believes, Scripture has nothing to say about the origins of the universe. Further, unlike what Hambone and Hammy-K has said, God is still progressing Creation along, through creation and recreation. This is one of those examples.
I know there’s something of a tradition on this blog in highlighting the, erm, ‘teachings’ of Ken Ham, and I will periodically continue this great tradition with my ongoing series entitled: Around the twist with Ken Ham.
Today we discover how rejecting AIG’s creation narrative inexorably leads to gay marriage and abortion:
AiG’s Creation Museum is being challenged once again by the secularists, this time in the renowned magazine Scientific American. A guest columnist reports he visited the museum recently. Jacob Tanenbaum, a fourth and fifth grade science teacher, wrote the column titled “A Science Teacher Draws the Line at Creation.” The piece was originally published in the January 2013 print edition of Scientific American under the title “Creation, Evolution and Indisputable Facts.”
The fact that the well-known Scientific American has published this commentary is significant. To us it means the editors understand the importance of this battle over origins. In reality, it is a struggle over the question of authority. Who is the ultimate authority—man or God? Whatever authority you acknowledge will determine how you view moral issues such as “gay” marriage and abortion. If God is the authority (and He is), then marriage is one man and one woman, and abortion is a crime against God. If man is the authority, then marriage can be however one wants to define it—and abortion is just another way to kill an animal.
Did you spot that slight of hand.
According to Mr Ham to accept evolution is to reject the authority of God leading to immorality such as abortion and gay marriage.
And that, dear reader, is a classic example in the art of conflation.
Even as biologists and others are now trying to explain there is nothing inherently progressive about the evolutionary process, that it is fittest within a particular and changing environment, it has become almost impossible to separate the idea of progressive march from the word evolution. Evolution is not a progressive, unilineal track. There is no guidance inherent to the process, no in-built directionality. Organisms can become simpler or can become more complex. Sometimes a simpler organism will be better adapted to a changing environment.
via Evolution and Natural Selection, Anthropologically – Anthropology 1.2.
the entire article is worth reading… Come to find out, the way we classify evolution, natural selection, and the such may not be the way they should be classified.
And there is another point in that article worth noting… Good luck
Evolution, often perceived as a series of random changes, might in fact be driven by a simple and repeated genetic solution to an environmental pressure that a broad range of species happen to share, according to new research.
Princeton University research published in the journal Science suggests that knowledge of a species’ genes — and how certain external conditions affect the proteins encoded by those genes — could be used to determine a predictable evolutionary pattern driven by outside factors. Scientists could then pinpoint how the diversity of adaptations seen in the natural world developed even in distantly related animals.
via Princeton University – Far from random, evolution follows a predictable genetic pattern, Princeton researchers find.
Love this stuff….
“I don’t see it as even a matter of science because I don’t know that you can prove one or the other. That’s one of those things. We can talk about theology and all of those other things but I’m basically concerned about, you’ve got a choice between Claire McCaskill and myself. My job is to make the thing there. If we want to do theoretical stuff, we can do that, but I think I better stay on topic.”
via Todd Akin: No ‘Science’ Behind Evolution | ThinkProgress.
Oh Todd Akin… me thinks you do not know the meaning of science. Most have gotten his science education at Tee-Tee University.
The results, published in the current issue of Nature, are revealed through an in-depth, genomics-based analysis that decodes how E. coli bacteria figured out how to supplement a traditional diet of glucose with an extra course of citrate.
“It’s pretty nifty to see a new biological function evolve,” said Zachary Blount, postdoctoral researcher in MSU’s BEACON Center for the Study of Evolution in Action. “The first citrate-eaters were just barely able to grow on the citrate, but they got much better over time. We wanted to understand the changes that allowed the bacteria to evolve this new ability. We were lucky to have a system that allowed us to do so.”
via Evolution is as complicated as 1-2-3.
Well, looks like it can.
Immediately, you’ll get calls that this is really adaptation. Oddly enough, I’d agree in theory – but adaption over extended periods of time lead to evolution. Further, as this is not a sentient being, how does it “know” to adapt? Ahhh… because of evolution.
Just more evidence of God’s continued creating process…
A leading human origins researcher has come up with an idea that involves aggression between groups and the boom-bust cycles that have punctuated our spread into new environments.
Prof Ian Tattersall said there were few examples to rival the accelerated evolution that led to our species.
via BBC News – Conflict and ‘boom-bust’ explain humans’ rapid evolution.
First, love this stuff. This fits well with several pet theories of mine (Girard). Anyway… duh?
Religious belief is very common in Homo sapiens, with almost all cultures having some kind of supernatural belief that is important to their sense of identity, although that’s about the only unifying characteristic of these ideas. Within the spectrum of human society is a similarly broad spectrum of religious beliefs. These range from the simple “animal spirits” who are responsible for the unexplained (but not much else) to a “High” or “King” God who takes an active role in the world, dictating morals of a people he created.
via How “god” evolved « EvoAnth.
The study is interesting. I’m saving this for later, for if you get a chance, let me know what you think.