by cofty 69 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
cofty said: You will learn more about evolution in that 10 minute, evidence-packed video than in 4 years of high school.
I agree. And it's rather a sad statement. I think the Science classes in high school need an overhaul. I've learned more about evolution as an adult because I was interested in the topic than I ever did in high school. I also think that a class on Evolution should be mandatory for all high school students.
At last evolution is a compulsory topic in the science curriculum in the UK
How else do you account for the small pelvis and leg bones that are buried deep in the blubber of whales?
Jehovah designed whales that way to test our faith.
At last evolution is a compulsory topic in the science curriculum in the UK
This is good to read, cofty. I am not sure if this is true in Canada. When I was in high school, it was not (but then, I'm rather old now ).
Heaven - We were taught evolution in the 60s, as part of the curriculum (Nova Scotia) in junior high school. It's 'general' science. Perhaps that varies from province-to-province.
It surprises me that after over a century of science on evolution, people still call it 'unproven'. It's not a subject I find particularly interesting, and I don't want to "study" it, but I know it is correct! I don't know how all of Newton's Laws of Physics work, either, but I know they are part of proven science as well.
Religion benefits greatly from a disbelief in evolution. I mean if G*d didn't create us, then the whole Bible myth falls apart. THAT is the only reason, imho, that a person would decry evolution as a fraud - in order to hold onto the belief in their mythological overlords.
tal
Heaven - We were taught evolution in the 60s, as part of the curriculum (Nova Scotia) in junior high school. It's 'general' science. Perhaps that varies from province-to-province.
Hey tal, this is good to read. I was in high school in the '70s in Ontario. If I recall correctly, Evolution was handled in high school Biology class. This course was not mandatory. I know because I did not take it in grade 10 as I didn't like the teacher. So my Science involved a General Science class (which did not include Evolution), a separate Physics course, and a third separate class on Chemistry (we made acid rain and I inhaled a lung full of it... nasty!).
To get your grade 12 graduation diploma, it was mandatory that you had Science credits, but not necessarily Biology/Evolution.
cofty - "I am convinced that evolution is a powerful tool to make some JWs think."
One of the key factors in me learning the TATT.
Interesting video.
It amazes me that the evidence for speciation by evolution is overwhelming yet there are still many who refuse to examine it, they would rather look to ancient mythologies.
Heaven - how interesting. I wonder if we had a province-wide curriculum or governed by the school board? I only got through Grade 10 (went back to school later) before my parents took me out of school, but the only "required subject" in NS was English after 1972 - before that, it was English and History. Of course, if you wanted to go on to university, that wouldn't cut the mustard. I was taking Biology, physics, chemistry and of course, my first love,,, Math! :D
xx
tal
Some evolution is verifiably true - micro evolution , observable and repeatable . Macro-evolution is not a proven fact , NOT a proven fact . Recent scientific evidence is actually leading honest scientists , people who follow the evidence where it goes , away from macro -evolution . The flaw in the evolution argument is that something already had to exist to be able to evolve . Fossil rcords do not exist to support macro -evolution . Some of the people opposed to Darwins theories were palaeontologists .Darwin himself wrote
""The number of intermediate varieties, which have formerly existed on the earth should be truly enormous. Why then is not evey geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links . Geology assuredly does not reveal any such graduated organic chain ; and this is , perhaps the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory "
Palaeontologist David Raup of the Field Museum of Natural History , which houses tone of the largest fossil collections in the world said
" We are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded . We now have a quarter of a million fossil species , but the situation hasn't changed much . The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and , ironically we have fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwins time . "
Niles Eldridge of the American Museum of Natural History admits
" WE paleontologists have said that the history of life supports the story of gradual adaptive change knowing all the while it does not "
Let us stick with facts , not how people would like things to be .
The film is condescendingly simplistic and the agenda is I would suggest to promote an atheistic view , which the facts do not support . Who is John Perry ?
The subject of DNA is brought up , yes all living things share a lot of DNA , to make the jump to a common ancestry is just that a jump . The issue is far more complicated than that . Read up on it for yourselves .
All quotes fron the book by John Lennox "God's Undertaker " lots of other scientists have written books explaing the problems with evolution . I am not trying to say that much of the Theory of evolution isn't correct , but it cannot be the whole answer and any scientist wil agree with that , (if they do not have an atheistic agenda ) . Do not suppose that only scientists who are Christians have trouble with some of Darwins theories , that is not the case .
Jan
