Hey, I don’t really want to argue, but I would like to understand more about what Athiest believe, especially about the origin of, well, everything.

Anyway here is a quote from Charles Darwin :
“To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberrations, could have been formed by natural selection,seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.”

From what I have read, Darwin said these words at the end of his life and he apparently regretted some of his earlier writings. It seems he came to profess at least some form of a creator.

How do athiest respond to this?

Alzheimer’s maybe.

He was right most of his life. He was dying and he freaked out. Regrettable, but it doesn’t mmake much of a difference. We didn’t believe his earlier assertions because it was him who made them, we believe them because they make sense and the mountains of evidence all point in that direction.

There are 2 ways to read that quote above.

Some read it and think.. since it is absurd, it is impossible.

of course, a kind , loving , all powerful God who condems most, if not all people, to an eternity of punishment for some finite misdeeds..  that makes perfect sense.

Oh please, not this stupid question again. Obviously Tracy has read up on the popular Creationist bullshit without actually reading anything by Darwin himself. OK, I’m game. Here’s how I respond to your question, Tracy: Put down your Creationist propaganda books and go read The Origin of Species for yourself. Careful, though, you might end up learning something!

First off, the quote you’re referencing isn’t anything Darwin said on his death bed nor was it anything to do with regret over his previous writings. It appears right in his landmark book in Chapter 6 subtitled Difficulties on Theory.

Secondly, it’s a partial quote taken out of context to give the appearance that Darwin is admitting something he is not. Allow me to provide you with the education your Creationists books appear to have left out with regards to this quotation in its full context:

“To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of Spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree. When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei ["the voice of the people = the voice of God “], as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certain the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.”

Darwin then goes on to provide examples of this graduation in eye complexity which shows amazing insight (if you’ll pardon the pun) for the time period.

Seriously, if you want to challenge us at least have a passing familiarity with the subject of your queries that isn’t derived from a pro-Creationist book. Before you even ask another question you should sit down with a modern book on Evolution written by SCIENTISTS and not APOLOGISTS and study up before you make yourself look like an idiot for a second time.

Hey, there’s no need to be so defensive.  Like I said, I don’t want to argue, just seeking.  I really want to know about your view of this.  You have completed the question.  I know first hand how things are taken out if context and uesd to promote whatever you want it to.  I did read that quote in some creation pamplet, or something.  I cut it out & have it from a while back.  Thanks for the rest of the quote, I had not heard it.  Do wish you weren’t so mean though.

Hey, again.  Sorry for the gramatical errors.  I’m doing several things at one time.  Please don’t make fun of me. Thanks

I’m mean because I’m tired of being asked the same stupid question over and over again by people too ignorant and lazy to bother checking into the reality of the situation for themselves. What is it going to take to get you people to put down the Creationist crap and pick up a real science book and do a little reading? Or a decent history book or biography for crying out loud.

It’s not hard to pick up this knowledge, but if you’re going to insist on remaining ignorant then don’t expect people who do have a friggin’ clue to treat you as anything other than the uneducated thumb sucker you appear to be.

Okay, you exposed me as a simpleton.  But, I bet you really sucked at kickball in gradeschool.

Kickball was for sissies. We played dodge ball and I was pretty good at it.

If I saw Les wielding a dodgeball in gradeschool I’d run… Run for my life. Hell if I saw him just looking at me I’d probably run.

This charming and ever-recurring myth of Darwin’s deathbed recantation reveals the prestige science (or at least what scientists believe) still commands even among the fundamentalists.  If Darwin, construed as the arch-atheist, can be pictured as having had doubts about evolution, then its seductive power is largely defused in their God-created eyes.  Never mind that the truth or falsity of evolution has nothing to do with Darwin’s personal beliefs; but then again, differentiating between belief and logic is not a long suit of the fundamentalists.

The need that begot this myth- “what if, despite all the Bible tells me, science is right?” is the complement to the nagging doubt some atheists have- “what if, despite all reason tells me, the Bible is right?” It would be interesting to know if this deathbed recantation was consciously fabricated out of the whole cloth, or whether it evolved from various bits and pieces kicking around the religion memeplex, under the unconscious selective pressure of fear and desire.  Probably some of both, much like the Bible, and the Koran, the Zendavesta, etc., themselves.

And Les- I agree.  Kickball was boring.  Dodgeball was a real sport, requiring lightning reflexes and sophisticated psyching out, and I was pretty good at it too.

Laugh! Dodgeball! Now that’s Darwinism in a nutshell!!!

Tracy, the truth is that when the genome was first sequenced, it not only revealed the blueprint for the organism in question, it also revealed that organism’s evolutionary path and it’s relationship to other organisms.

This was kept subdued for obvious reasons.... The people who put the “mental” in fundamental would’ve cried outrage and and effectively crippled further research.

You should instead question why creationists feel the need to take qoutes/facts out of context and misrepresent their own views so as to appear “scientific”. If creationism is valid then present the research. Subject it to peer review, test it, use it to make hypotheses, predictions, etc. It seems the creationists can do nothing more than sit on the sidelines and throw stones....

The irony is that creationists turn to science at the first sign of trouble.... Given a diagnosis of cancer they acknowledge that science is far more effective than a laying on of hands..... Those that don’t experience their own Darwinian event.

Dodgeball as a metaphor for evolution- nice observation, mrk421. “Hey, you- out of the gene pool!”

Taking quotes out of context is par for the course for fundies.  Years ago a friend of mine fell into the clutches of the Moonies, and she admitted to me (long before it became public) that they lied about non-existent drug rehab programs to solicit donations.  Their term for this? “Divine deception”.  Of course, that just proves that Sun Myung Moon is the tool of the Devil.  Christians would never resort to deceit or distortion to con the marks, er, save the heathens.

All’s fair in love, war, and religion, as long as you get to define for yourself what “fair” means.

Agreed ziltch, I think it was Twain who said, “Get your facts first and then distort them as much as you please.”

But I honestly don’t feel too threatened by the fundies. The universe is what it is. It doesn’t look to us for approval. Because of this I think reason and rational thought are naturally favored and will be the ultimate means of acquiring knowledge. Belief is self-stroking and anchored in nothing more than itself.

It’s taken centuries, but the genie’s out of the bottle. (Barbara Eden = babe).

Dodgeball as a metaphor for evolution- nice observation, mrk421. “Hey, you- out of the gene pool!�

In school, we had a similar game, we called (In German) ‘dotzballl’ - when you were hit, you had to fall down, and you could only return to the game once someone dragged you to the sidelines. You had to stay limp otherwise.

Probably would be considered MUCH too dangerous these days. People could get hurt a little!

Me, I remember it fondly because you could touch the girls Probably another reason it would not be okay today.

In a more serious vein: Les, is Orgin of the Species a good book? As in ‘well-written’, not as in the subject matter? I’ve been wanting to read it for some time.

It’s not the sort of book that’ll keep you up at night turning pages because you can’t bring yourself to put it down if that’s what you mean, but otherwise I think it’s pretty decent. The above (mis)quote should give you a pretty good feeling on the style of the book. It’s not so technical that a layman will have trouble following it. It can be surprising to realize how much of the basic theory he puts forth still holds up well today and it does well as a starting point for learning more about Evolution in addition to its historical significance.

I loved dogeball as a kid.  It has been removed from schools in Canada along with many other slightly violent games as usuall because someone might get hurt.  I would prefer my kids learned that life is hard ealry and one of those red balls to the face lets you know you’re alive.  i like the sound of the german variation sounds sort of like a militry (medics) kind of twist.

I wonder if there is an adult dodgeball pickup game in town in the evenings??????

Several things to add.

1) Teaching of creationism in school:
I thinking of something different with regards to this issue. Perhaps creationism could be taught in school. Not taught as science per se but what is NOT science. It should be taught in a chapter that includes how to do your own research and how not to get suck up in pseudo science such as “crystal therapy” or similar forms of unproven alternative traditional treatments.

Science is a huge subject. Many people following high school science may just take some science modules rather than a degree or not. And even if one is say a professor of physics he may not have full knowledge outside his field say in biology or chemistry.

Therefore there is a need to teach people how to separate fact from fiction when one perhaps lack the background or science in that particular area.

Creationism is taught but students are graded at least for that chapter on how they debunk it. Identifying false or illogical argument or researching and coming out with facts to counter certain creationist claims.

Furthermore, creationist cannot complain that intelligent design or creationsim is not taught in school…

Hmm I wonder if say someone ran for political office of a school board vowing to the fundamentalist to teach creationism but introduces the above, is he considered as breaking or keeping his promises?

2) Violent Games
This is obviously a separate topic but I have to say that I do not see the need to teach character through violent games. At least with football or perhaps ice hockey the object is not to inflict violence. Alright I admit I have never played dodgeball although from the name I gather you just try to throw balls at people and they avoid them?

Getting hit by a ball does not teach you life is hard, it just teaches them that getting hit hardly by a ball is painful.

Teach them about life. Tell them that if they do not study hard they may have trouble getting a job as manufacturing jobs are sent to places that can produce more efficiently. Tell them that studying hard is also no panacea as people too are educated overseas. One has to develop both to be able to make it. Well at least for me, the scary talk from my dad when I was a kid was about education and how one’s prospect can be severely limited. A lawyer can still paint his paintings but a painter cannot be a lawyer, so as to speak. I guess I started putting in a lot more effort in school growing up the moment I stop seeing at merely as results per se but rather as steps to make money, to get a good job.

Part of the final exam of a paleo course I took at UC Berkeley was to debunk a Chick tract.  It was lots of fun and a good test, not only of our knowledge of the subject, but of how to deal with arguments so faulty they aren’t even wrong.

Alright I admit I have never played dodgeball although from the name I gather you just try to throw balls at people and they avoid them?

If you had ever played dodgeball, Pop Tarts, you would not have said “just”.

And ingolfson, I’ll go along with what Les said about the Origin- a bit stodgy, but carefully thought out and put together.  BTW, the first translation of it was into German, which Darwin insisted on copyreading, though he understood next to nothing of the language.  Scientists in Germany were some of the first avid fans of Darwin.

I have another question/point.  When all is said and done, it seems that evolution is requiring some faith in the original protoplasm, or whatever that developed into all that we see now.  Where did that original protoplasm come from?  It’s just the same as having no proof there is a God- because where did he come from?  They both require faith and both sound like a religion to me.  I really love dodgeball, but not the movie, it was kinda lame.

I wonder what the Creationists would think if a group of Hindus insisted their version of creation be taught in schools?  Otherwise, the schools would be favoring Christianity over other religions, and that’s goes against that naughty Constitution.  I can see it now:

“Okay class, we’ve covered Darwin, we’ve covered how God made the world and Adam and Eve and all that, now we’re going to discuss how a giant turtle floating on his back in a sea of milk with a mountain on his belly, encircled by a snake pulled at both ends by many gods, created the universe.”

I’m not knocking Hinduism, mind you, and I don’t think I have the story right, but you get my point: if Creationists insist that schoolkids get all the “facts”, then I think the snake/turtle/milk story should be taught too!  There are quite a few Hindus in America, after all.

Me, I think a giant purple flying lettuce from Neptune created the universe.  What?  They don’t teach that in schools?  I’m being oppressed, help help!

--Joe

Tracy, did you go off and read at least one recent book on the Theory of Evolution as I instructed you to? Based on your question I’m assuming you haven’t. Are you just a glutton for punishment or what? Go read something by real scientists about the topic and then come back and ask some questions if you have any. I would recommend The Structure of Evolutionary Theory by Stephen Jay Gould as a good place to start.

It’s a truly frightening prospect to behold that the stupidest country on Earth and the most powerful country on Earth are one and the same. It’s enough to make you weep, really.

Tracy, science is NOT religion. It is the exact opposite of religion. Religion is based on belief. Science is based on observation .

As for the “original protoplasm”, I could go into a history of nucleosynthesis in the 14 billion years since the big bang but you could learn that yourself through a trip to a bookstore or library. If you live near a University, go sit in on some colloquia (they’re free and entertaining).

The process is fairly well understood and voyages to other moons/planets are helping us to understand the conditions present on the primitive earth.

If it all seems mysterious then consider how mysterious it seems that trillions of water molecules know to simultaneously align themselves to form an ice cube at a certain temperature. Does that mean there is an invisible intelligence that flips a switch from “water” over to “ice”? Or does it mean that at some point the motions of the individual water molecules slow down sufficiently that their magnetic moments are able to take over and lock them together....

Just because we don’t understand something doesn’t mean it isn’t understandable. I think this is the basic point of the quote by Darwin.... If evolution is heresy, think how heretical it is to claim the earth is round or that it orbits the sun - two claims that fly in the face of common everyday experience. But through observation, science overturned belief.... (Though I hear there is still a flat earth society in southern cal)…

Tracy sez:

have another question/point.  When all is said and done, it seems that evolution is requiring some faith in the original protoplasm, or whatever that developed into all that we see now.  Where did that original protoplasm come from?

why do you insist on demonstrating that you are willfully ignorant yet again, Tracy?

The theory of biological evolution has jackshit to do with where the “original protoplasm”, as you refer to it, comes from.  Biological evolution deals with the divergence of species from the original life form(s).  It does not address the origin of life (or the origin of the universe or any of the other shit you ignorant Invisible Sky Daddy worshipers attempt to turn evolution into). 

The subject of the origin of the first life forms on earth is addressed by theories of abiogenesis.  they are not terribly well-developed at this point in time.  Despite the lack of a developed mature theory of abiogenesis, there is evidence that the components of both modern and ancient life forms can assembly spontaneously form inorganic compounds.  You might try checking on something called the Miller-Urey experiments where it was demonstrated that certain amino acids could self-assemble given specific conditions.  Moreover, it has been demonstrated that nucleic acids--they building blocks of all life on earth--possess catalytic activity in the absence of proteinaceous enzymes.  In other words, nucleic acids can modify themselves via autocatalytic activity in the absence of proteins.  this obviates the need for enzymes (the vast majority of which are proteins) needed to catalyze biochemical reactions within cells and hence takes out a layer of “complexity” that lying evolution-deniers such as yourself typically howl about.  You might try Googling a fellow named Thomas Cech who won a Noble Prize a few years ago to learn about this. 

Additionally, membranes can self-assemble in nature from simple oils in a manner that leaves an “inside” somewhat protected from the external environment.  This happens when you drop oils into water as the oils/fats are hydrophobic in nature and the oil/fat molecules tend to coalesce and trap a bit of water inside the oil droplet.  These are typically called micelles.  This separation of “inside” vs “outside” is an example of a crucial requirement for any cellular life form seen today and for less simple things that are not typically considered to be “life” like viruses (which do indeed have nucleic acid-based means of carrying genetic information). 

I could go on and on, but I won’t.  Suffice to say that the few bits of repeatable, evidence-based science leaves upon the possibility that the “original protoplasm” could indeed have come from inorganic components on earth.  These three simplistic pieces of evidence are not “faith-based” and make far more sense than the fairy-tale that 4000+ year-old Jewish goat herders dreamed up around the campfire when they imagined that their Invisible sky daddy picked up a handful of dust and breathed “Life” into it.

To sum up, Tracy, you have a problem.  You’re ignorant as fuck and you seem to wish to remain that way.