The Smithsonian is sponsoring a traveling exhibit called Exploring Human Origins: What Does It Mean To Be Human?, which is going around the country to various libraries. By all accounts, it's an excellent exhibit, and they also promote good education: they offer workshops on human evolution to local teachers (they also offer tours to local clergy -- they're additionally sponsored by the Templeton Foundation).
The exhibit is in Cottage Grove, Oregon right now. You've all seen Cottage Grove -- the big parade scene in Animal House was filmed there. But it's also a nice little town south of Eugene. I'd be there right now, if I were still living in Oregon. World-class educational exhibit on evolution in my former back yard? Yes, sounds awesome.
Except…other groups are free to piggy-back on the exhibit, and wouldn't you know it, the Discovery Institute is going to exploit it to spread their special lies all over it on 10 March.
Science and Human Origins—What does the Evidence Really Say? Thursday March 10, 6-8 PM
Did human beings evolve from earlier animals? Was the process that produced human beings guided or unguided? And does it matter? Here is your chance to learn about the current state of the scientific evidence, to separate fact from speculation, and to explore why it matters.
Speakers at this event are: Ann Gauger, co-author of Science and Human Origins, a Senior Research Scientist at the Biologic Institute, and Director of Science Communication at the Discovery Institute. Richard Sternberg is a Senior Fellow with the Center for Science and Culture at Discovery Institute. He previously served as a staff scientist at the National Center for Biotechnology Information and as a Research Associate at the Smithsonian’s National Museum of Natural History. Event hosted by various local Cottage Grove Churches.
Ugh. I don't even know what to say.
Did human beings evolve from earlier animals? Yes. I suspect the DI will try desperately to weasel around that question, so I'm surprised they ask it. They are opposed to natural mechanisms for evolution, some of their fellows are young earth creationists, and they've been trying to walk the line between just saying that life evolved, but with the assistance of intelligent super-beings, and avoiding the whole issue for fear of alienating their YEC allies.
Was the process that produced human beings guided or unguided? There is no evidence at all that it was "guided", but this is the DIs whole schtick -- they'll be in the middle of this evolution display trying to argue that evolution can't work, therefore this-being-they-avoid-naming-called-God.
And does it matter? Here we go, the other side of the DI: moralizing about "cultural renewal". At least John West isn't there so you might not hear much about Hitler. But you never know.
I hope competent, knowledgeable Oregonians will attend and call out the frauds. Hey, if you do, send me a report on the event, too.
“"Did human beings evolve from earlier animals?" Yes.”
Thus, the church of evolution has spoken its infallible word.
True, no one has ever seen evolution of any kind,
and none claim to explain infallibly HOW humans evolved from the earliest animals.
But just HAVE FAITH in it!
As Jesus said, in a very different context,
"Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe."
"But just HAVE FAITH in it!"
No, it is not faith, it is an overwhelming body of evidence and massive amounts of previous and on-going research. People who are honest, and have a willing desire to learn, can read and explore these things. It takes work and willingness to learn, of course - but that's why you've never done it.
You, on the other hand, have nothing but a single book's references to a person/god who, given the immense lack of historical evidence and the bible as the only written reference, most likely did not exist.
See Noevo: Read http://www.talkorigins.org/
Those who argue from ignorance deserve to be ignored.
To Wizard Suth #3:
TalkOrigins, etc…Been there, done that.
I used to believe in evolution - for about 30 years of my life.
I agree, Smithsonian + Discovery Institute = Misinformation.
However, for a more rational view on origins, readers would do well to explore the many thousands of resources available at http://CREATION.com
The Tooters are still butthurt they couldn't promote their snake oil at the United Methodist conference. The IDiots are desperate for an audience, any audience. Can't wait until they start trying to peddle this BS door-to-door.
I used to believe in gravity, but my faith was shaken by my first helium balloon. After some hard thinking, I had no logical choice but to conclude that the Intelligent Pusher is whimsical.
I used to believe in evolution – for about 30 years of my life.
Notice that sn never says he studied anything - that's because he never has. Education is one of the things he views as evil.
So SN, you SAW Jesus mouth these words? In the silly world according to SN evolution would be a fact if some ignorant sheep herder over 2000 years ago wrote "evolution is a natural process that takes on earth."
Unfortunately for our wishful-thing evolutionist friends, the fossil record from ape to human is abysmal, with massive gaps and substantial speculation. Curiously, the species to which we are most closely related, homo Heidelbergensis, looks nothing like while the species we most resemble anatomically, homo Neandertalensis, is NOT related to us genetically, although there may have been some occasional interbreeding between them and homo sapiens. But even many of the most ardent evolutionists admit that the gargantuan changes between the australopithecines and modern humans are extremely difficult to explain over just six million years... this simply is not enough time for evolution to produce the complexity, especially in the human brain, that we observe today. Also, as C.S. Lewis has pointed out, evolution does not and can not explain the existence of rational thought ... the ability to reason.
Unfortunately for our wishful-thing evolutionist friends, the fossil record from ape to human is abysmal, with massive gaps and substantial speculation.
Well no, not at all, unless you are completely willing to overlook all of the supporting science. As you seem to be.
Also, as C.S. Lewis has pointed out, evolution does not and can not explain the existence of rational thought … the ability to reason.
Referencing Lewis about rational thought is enough to prove you don't exercise it.
Evolutionists always demand proof but get defensive when you ask for some in return. There seems to be an ugly side of science that seeks to instantly dismiss any other theory on the origins of life as ludicrous. Stephen C Meyer is an incredibly intelligent man. A quick look at his wiki would show the curious response of supposedly "follow the evidence" scientists who proceed to resort to buffoonery to attack the credibility of a man who they claim is spouting nonsense. An intelligent debate usually involves both men using their studies to support their ideas while respecting the other's ability to confer or deny. This never, ever happens today and I am curious as to why they feel the need to attack the credibility of someone they supposedly think is stupid in such a vicious way. If someone is stupid, why must you try to so hard to make him appear so?
Another point, evolutionists always throw the "god of the gaps" argument out there as a seemingly catch all to what can't be explained by the evidence at hand. When anyone postulates that intelligent design is possible, all of a sudden the "god of the gaps" comes out. Yet, scientific evidence hasn't proven evolution beyond a shadow of a doubt. Darwin never proved evolution. He said the fossil record would show minute changes over time and would prove him correct upon more research. The fossil record shows vast changes in a relatively short period of time. Then minute changes much later in what could be considered a nano-second in terms of life on earth. You know what else shows this? Any technology known to man. You know who created technology? Man. I believe some of the more silly people out there realize that a house of cards has been stacked. Now they vehemently attempt to keep the wind from blowing.
Jay is there a reason you say that scientists who study evolution (the people to whom I assume you refer by "evolutionists") don't have data? I can only assume you say that because you are too lazy to read the research. And this
An intelligent debate usually involves both men using their studies to support their ideas while respecting the other’s ability to confer or deny. This never, ever happens today and I am curious as to why they feel the need to attack the credibility of someone they supposedly think is stupid in such a vicious way.
is a textbook example of the stupidity and dishonesty you claim to abhor.