Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

What Are The Darwinists Afraid Of?
The Post Chronicle | 8\07\05 | Patrick J Buchanan

Posted on 08/07/2005 6:25:03 AM PDT by RepublicNewbie

In the "Monkey Trial," 80 years ago, the issue was: Did John Scopes violate Tennessee law forbidding the teaching of evolution? Indeed he had. Scopes was convicted and fined $100.

But because a cheerleader press favored Clarence Darrow, the agnostic who defended Scopes, Christian fundamentalism -- and the reputation of William Jennings Bryan, who was put on the stand and made to defend the literal truth of every Bible story from Jonah and the whale to the six days of creation -- took a pounding.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; Philosophy
KEYWORDS: anothercrevothread; crevolist; enoughalready; ohnotagain; patbuchanan; sameolsameol; scopes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 451-490 next last

1 posted on 08/07/2005 6:25:04 AM PDT by RepublicNewbie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie

Hmm... Is there any more to this?


2 posted on 08/07/2005 6:30:50 AM PDT by Rodney King (No, we can't all just get along.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie; Admin Moderator

How about a link???


3 posted on 08/07/2005 6:31:11 AM PDT by raybbr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: raybbr
http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=8439
4 posted on 08/07/2005 6:36:21 AM PDT by monkapotamus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie

I'm sorry..

http://www.postchronicle.com/commentary/printer_100278.shtml


5 posted on 08/07/2005 6:37:32 AM PDT by RepublicNewbie (Every Man Has His Price.. Ted Dibiase aka: The Million Dollar Man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
What Are the Darwinists Afraid Of?

by Patrick J. Buchanan
Posted Aug 5, 2005

In the "Monkey Trial," 80 years ago, the issue was: Did John Scopes violate Tennessee law forbidding the teaching of evolution? Indeed he had. Scopes was convicted and fined $100.

But because a cheerleader press favored Clarence Darrow, the agnostic who defended Scopes, Christian fundamentalism -- and the reputation of William Jennings Bryan, who was put on the stand and made to defend the literal truth of every Bible story from Jonah and the whale to the six days of creation -- took a pounding.

The aim of his defenders was not to prove Scopes innocent, but to humiliate the fundamentalists and persuade a higher court to throw out the Tennessee law. But today, Darwinism is in the dock. Dogmatic believers in evolution are facing challenges to the claim that their doctrine is established truth, scientifically proven.

"Intelligent design" is the banner under which evolution is being put under siege, and the methodology of attack is the one Darrow used on Bryan: Prove to us that your theory is true, because it seems to contradict common sense.

If, for example, we are told a forest is uninhabited and, while walking in it, come across a garden, with plots of tomatoes, beans, corn and cabbage, reason tells us someone lives here. The garden presupposes the existence of a gardener, for it reflects intelligent design. As does Stonehenge, that millennia old marvel of gigantic stones placed one upon the other in a fashion that is not accidental. Though we know not how it was done, an intelligent being did it.

The same is true of our universe. Not until recent centuries did we discover that the Earth is not its center but, with the other planets, revolves with mathematical precision around the sun. As a watch presupposes a watchmaker, an ordered universe argues for an ordered intelligence. Call it the First Cause, the Prime Mover, the Great Watchmaker, but this world appears to be no accident.

Our ordered universe was created out of chaos. Who or what created it? The latest theory of the evolutionists is the "Big Bang," a gigantic explosion, eons ago, did it.

But from common sense and experience, when, ever, has an explosion created order? Explosions destroy. And if the Big Bang was due to an explosion, where did the chemicals come from? And who lit the firecracker that caused the Big Bang?

As a wag has put it, to believe an explosion created an ordered universe is like believing a hurricane roaring through a junkyard can create a fifth-generation computer.

And there are gaps in human evolution. Where are the missing links between lower and higher forms? Where are the intermediate forms? Why are they not everywhere? As for that picture on the wall of the biology class, showing a reptile crawling ashore, then moving on four legs, then dragging his knuckles, then straightening up, then walking on two legs, then becoming the man of today -- is that really how it happened? Or is that a theory, a belief, an act of faith of the Darwinists? Is there really all that much difference between that picture and one of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden?

Science itself points to intelligent design. For most of man's existence, we did not understand the laws of gravity, the laws of physics, the laws of chemistry. But applying those laws today we can send a rocket millions of miles and strike a distant planet, predicting impact to the minute. But does not the existence of these natural laws imply the existence of a lawmaker?

How can evolution explain the creation of that extraordinary instrument, the human eye? How can it explain DNA? Only in the last century did we understand that molecules can be broken down into atoms and subatomic particles, and the force that holds them together. Did all this come out of nothing? If it all came from something, where did the something come from?

What causes a disbelief in Darwinian fundamentalism, the Genesis of our secular elite, is not only Christian faith, but reason.

In an editorial, "But Is It Intelligent?" The Washington Post accuses President Bush, who spoke warmly of intelligent design, of "indulging quackery." "To pretend that the existence of evolution is still an open question," sniffed the Post, "is to misunderstand the intellectual and scientific history of the past century."

The Post notwithstanding, we are not pretending. Evolution fails to answer the arguments of reason. And parents have a right not to have their children indoctrinated in an unproven belief system, one purpose of which is to destroy their faith.

A Solomonic solution. Let parents choose between having their kids spend a year in biology class cutting up those poor frogs and being indoctrinated in evolution ideology -- or a year studying the Old and New Testaments as the greatest book of Western civilization and literature, and the basis of morality and ethics. As they say, freedom of choice.


6 posted on 08/07/2005 6:38:17 AM PDT by monkapotamus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie

Geee. I wonder if the same people who post to the 345,876,989,045 other crevo threads will copy and paste their arguments to this one.

The same people posting the same things over and over.

How fun.


7 posted on 08/07/2005 6:39:24 AM PDT by Skooz (Political Correctness is the handmaiden of terrorism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; RadioAstronomer
The latest theory of the evolutionists is the "Big Bang," a gigantic explosion,.... [emphasis added, to illustrate what a buffoon Pat really is]

This op-ed piece is proof positive that Pat Buchanan doesn't know Jack Sh*t about Astronomy. That being the case, why should we give his rantings about biology any greater consideration?

Pat should stick to his idiotic "populist" diatribes, where he's more intellectually at home.

8 posted on 08/07/2005 6:48:56 AM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

Executive Summary of Thread:

A.) Bible says creation in six days. End of argument.

B.) But a day is a thousand years to God. Creation and Evolution are not mutually exclusive.

A.) You need to accept Christ, get saved, and learn the truth.

B.) I am a Christian.

A.) You're going to Hell. You aren't really saved.

B.) We'll have to agree to disagree.

A.) No. You have to admit you're wrong and stop arguing Satan's side of the argument, or else you are going to Hell.


9 posted on 08/07/2005 6:52:39 AM PDT by nhoward14
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie

bump


10 posted on 08/07/2005 6:58:34 AM PDT by ThreePuttinDude (Allah, is not... Akbar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie
What Are The Darwinists Afraid Of?

Could it be the teaching of religion in the government schools? Could it be the return to teaching of a flat Earth, a Table of elements containing only earth, air, fire and water? Could it be a return to teaching that all illness is caused by possession by evil spirits – or the four humors as an acceptable “scientific approach” to medicine?
11 posted on 08/07/2005 6:58:56 AM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie
Thanks for the link.
12 posted on 08/07/2005 6:59:20 AM PDT by raybbr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: monkapotamus

later


13 posted on 08/07/2005 7:01:15 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Liberals: Too stupid to realize Dick Cheney is the real Dark Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie

What Are The Darwinists Afraid Of?



Loss of government protectionism, and funding cuts.


14 posted on 08/07/2005 7:02:19 AM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie
What Are The Darwinists Afraid Of?

That science and superstition are being given the same credence.

That non-scientists are attempting to tell scientists how to teach science.

That the basis of modern Biology is under attack by a tidal wave of the ignorant.

That the same Crevos who show up on every thread will reappear on this one repeating the same disproved arguments yet again.

15 posted on 08/07/2005 7:06:41 AM PDT by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
That the basis of modern Biology is under attack by a tidal wave of the ignorant.

And from Pat Buchanan's writings in this piece is is clear that he is the high priest of the tidal wave of the ignorant.
16 posted on 08/07/2005 7:09:32 AM PDT by TrebleRebel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie
But from common sense and experience, when, ever, has an explosion created order? Explosions destroy. And if the Big Bang was due to an explosion, where did the chemicals come from? And who lit the firecracker that caused the Big Bang?

Stone ignorant. Just stone ignorant. As if we needed one more example of why creationism is the ugly shame of conservatism.

17 posted on 08/07/2005 7:09:47 AM PDT by Physicist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie

Ah...one more thread where all the students of the scribblings of the desert wandering, sandal wearing, Bronze age goat herders (and ok....fishermen too), try to explain to empirically trained people of science how their theories are doo doo.... and when that fails, calls them communists, bolsheviks, pinkos, reds and atheists.

PS....isnt Buchanan a Catholic???? He better check with the Pope. He is out of order with the holy see.



18 posted on 08/07/2005 7:10:17 AM PDT by Vaquero (Lets all play the Christian of European ancestry brand of Jihad.....its called 'THE CRUSADES')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

So you're saying schools are doing a lot better job now than,say, back in the sixties and before when religon (philosophy) wasn't taboo?


19 posted on 08/07/2005 7:11:07 AM PDT by eddie2 (We're #1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie

Pat Buchanan was wrong last year, he's wrong today, and he will be wrong next year.


20 posted on 08/07/2005 7:12:00 AM PDT by Soliton (Alone with everyone else.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie

No design including "intelligent design" adherents can ever be called intelligent. Thus nothing could prove the evolution better than the existence of creationists, for they have not evolved.


21 posted on 08/07/2005 7:12:57 AM PDT by GSlob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Physicist

What is wrong with Pat's little synopsis/


22 posted on 08/07/2005 7:14:51 AM PDT by eddie2 (We're #1)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie
What Are The Darwinists Afraid Of?

Ending a sentence in a preposition? Buchie is a fascist fool.

23 posted on 08/07/2005 7:14:57 AM PDT by 68 grunt (3/1 India, 3rd, 68-69, 0311)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vaquero
He better check with the Pope. He is out of order with the holy see.

Oh no. Didn't you hear? We have a new Pope now who takes time out of his busy day to dump on the ToE and opine against the corrupting influence of Harry Potter books.

24 posted on 08/07/2005 7:17:17 AM PDT by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Physicist
Show one closed system that evolves to ascending levels of intelligence or function. One. There are none.

Only one thing evolves -- ideas. And because we see apparent evolultion in the long biological record -- that means one thing. Some ideas are evolving and being implemented throughout biological history.

That is, G-d acts continually upon His creations.

25 posted on 08/07/2005 7:17:33 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: longshadow; PatrickHenry
This op-ed piece is proof positive that Pat Buchanan doesn't know Jack Sh*t about Astronomy.

I would add science in general. What ignorance. What is worse, a self imposed ignorance.

26 posted on 08/07/2005 7:20:47 AM PDT by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Physicist

GMTA. :-)


27 posted on 08/07/2005 7:22:44 AM PDT by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: bvw
Show one closed system that evolves to ascending levels of intelligence or function. One. There are none.

The sun dumps a practically unlimited supply of energy on the planet every day. So much for the closed system.

Only one thing evolves -- ideas. And because we see apparent evolution in the long biological record -- that means one thing. Some ideas are evolving and being implemented throughout biological history.

Whatever, so long as you recognize that the above statement belongs in college-level Philosophy classes, and not high-school science classes.

28 posted on 08/07/2005 7:23:29 AM PDT by Zeroisanumber
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber

IFAIC, doing science without a meta-physics is no science at all. Why do it? If you can't answer that question, you are at best a lemming. Lemmings do not do science.


29 posted on 08/07/2005 7:30:56 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Zeroisanumber
You can't even explain how the sun got there -- without an ideator to set the circumstance for it to be made, nor how the planets came to be and to revolve around it at their set distances. Those are ideations, not random chance.

The mechanisms and physics are MORE interesting -- imo -- when viewed from the stable meta-physical platform of accepting that there is G-d, Creator, and Maintainer.

30 posted on 08/07/2005 7:36:30 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: R. Scott

Evolutionism is a cancer to knowledge. Evolutionists are definitionally incapable of recognizing intelligence. They claim to be created in their own image: a most unimpressive collection of matter.

Not surprisingly evolutionism is definitionally flawed: "A change in gene frequency over time." Even DEvolutionists believe in this! It only gets worse from here for evolutionism.

So the gatekeepers of higher ed are definitionally incapable of recognizing intelligence. Does anyone see a problem here?

Evolutionism is the answer to the fornicator. If your will to fornicate is strong enough, evolutionism and all its glory is yours.


31 posted on 08/07/2005 7:42:16 AM PDT by forgivenyeah (Evolutionism is a cancer to knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie

The "Darwinists" -- i.e. people who know something about biology and think that science education is important -- are afraid of having religious material insterted into science curricula.

Of course, why should we stop with just _one_ religion's idea of the creator? There are dozens, if not thousands to choose from: Osiris making the world by masturbating is a good one which would make a great link between sex ed and origin of life in bio class.

There are even made-up ones: http://venganza.org/

Religious people (thoughtful ones, at least) should also be afraid of this kind of muddle. If matters of faith are presented as matters of scientific fact, then if the "facts" are disproved, the faith is shattered.


32 posted on 08/07/2005 7:47:08 AM PDT by Trimegistus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nhoward14
No. You have to admit you're wrong and stop arguing Satan's side of the argument, or else you are going to Hell.

LOL Good summary. I only occasionally post to these threads because I am informed that:

See Above Quote

33 posted on 08/07/2005 7:48:15 AM PDT by JimSEA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie

They are afraid of kids asking "why/"


34 posted on 08/07/2005 7:55:33 AM PDT by cookcounty (Army Vet, Army Dad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Trimegistus

Darwinist presents a theocracy as well. A god it makes. A nihilistic god of "it is what it is", and random process. No love, no mercy, nor even passion in that god. Totally wrong, but it appeals to the dim bulbs.


35 posted on 08/07/2005 7:58:19 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Trimegistus

Interesting, I am new to this argument, but it seems that one is not allowed to challenge "evolution" without getting smeared, there isn't a logical scientific defence of evolution anywhere on this page. Only a bunch of people yakking as if all is known, all is proven and shut the hell up. I am no creationist, as it were, I am probobly best defined as a DaVinci code Christian, but the Intelligent design people have a very valid point. Namely that the evolutionists can damn well PROVE their point or allow others to talk. The evolutionst side of this discussion need to act like what they claim to be, namely scientists anbd rational people, calling people knuckle draggers and misrepresenting their arguments for the sake of a laugh or two does not impress.


36 posted on 08/07/2005 8:04:22 AM PDT by ronnieb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: bvw
Darwinist presents a theocracy as well.

I think you'll find that only a small handful of christians (the dim bulb ones?) thnk that.
37 posted on 08/07/2005 8:05:30 AM PDT by toadthesecond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer

"Blessed are they who have been touched by His Noodly Appendage."


38 posted on 08/07/2005 8:09:38 AM PDT by longshadow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: bvw
Show one closed system that evolves to ascending levels of intelligence or function. One. There are none.

What closed system are you referring to?

39 posted on 08/07/2005 8:09:42 AM PDT by TomB ("The terrorist wraps himself in the world's grievances to cloak his true motives." - S. Rushdie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: eddie2
So you're saying schools are doing a lot better job now than, say, back in the sixties and before when religon (philosophy) wasn't taboo?

Of course not!
When I was in high school – the early 60’s – science was taught as science and religion was taught as religion, in a comparative religion class. There was no big squabble with fundamentalists trying to force schools to teach religion as science.
40 posted on 08/07/2005 8:20:48 AM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: forgivenyeah
Evolutionism is the answer to the fornicator. If your will to fornicate is strong enough, evolutionism and all its glory is yours.

???????
41 posted on 08/07/2005 8:22:42 AM PDT by R. Scott (Humanity i love you because when you're hard up you pawn your Intelligence to buy a drink.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: toadthesecond
To deny there must be a stable metaphysics to understand science is dim bulb. Artistic curiousity only goes so far, as a motive to good science. To continue past intellectual doldrums one needs (and so the world was made to cause that need) to look deeper. The "muse" -- curiousity, drive to understand, to achieve -- goes only so far and no further.

Darwinism is not without a stable metaphysics. For science abhors a metphysical vaccuum. If one finds that science is done in a culture for a few generations, a culture that disclaims a metaphysics, one then can assume that it is the metaphysics that is denied or ignored, yet there is a metaphysics.

The metaphysics of Darwinism is denial, is stopping short of deeper truths, is in replacing "why?" with "what?" and "how?". But why is there being at all? Darwinism denies that as important, claiming "it is what it is, it is how it is." Darwinism denies G-d. Darwinism denies an active G-d. Darwinism is dumb and blind to the transcendent "Why?".

This is in fact, in the long term, an unstable metaphysics. A saddle-point stability, sure it has, a temporary stability. But it cannot withstand, over time, the calling of the "Why?".

42 posted on 08/07/2005 8:23:11 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: RepublicNewbie

I think the better question is what are the Christians afraid of?


43 posted on 08/07/2005 8:23:15 AM PDT by Sentis (Visit the Conservative Hollywood http://www.boondockexpansionist.org/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TomB

Silly question.


44 posted on 08/07/2005 8:25:12 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Physicist

>>But from common sense and experience, when, ever, has an explosion created order? Explosions destroy.

>Stone ignorant. Just stone ignorant.

Indeed. Anone who thinks that explosions do nothing but destroy and create chaos has obviously never heard of the use of explosives in forming structures (see: http://www.people.ku.edu/~aerotoad/Explosive_Forming.htm). Nor has said ignoramous ever heard of the fact that high velocity impacts - such as with meterorites - for nice, ordered, circular craters.

Hell, H-bombs form nicely ordered helium.


45 posted on 08/07/2005 8:28:15 AM PDT by orionblamblam ("You're the poster boy for what ID would turn out if it were taught in our schools." VadeRetro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: bvw
Silly question.

No it isn't. You made a direct statement about a "closed system" as fact. I'm interested what you are referring to as a closed system.

Now what is it?

46 posted on 08/07/2005 8:32:38 AM PDT by TomB ("The terrorist wraps himself in the world's grievances to cloak his true motives." - S. Rushdie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: bvw
>You can't even explain how the sun got there

Actually, Intelligent Design does adequately explain such things. The Sun was made and put into place by the Flying Spaghetti Monster.


47 posted on 08/07/2005 8:34:40 AM PDT by orionblamblam ("You're the poster boy for what ID would turn out if it were taught in our schools." VadeRetro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: nhoward14

Thanks for that!


48 posted on 08/07/2005 8:35:07 AM PDT by cambridge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: forgivenyeah
> Evolutionism is a cancer to knowledge. Evolutionists are definitionally incapable of recognizing intelligence. They claim to be created in their own image: a most unimpressive collection of matter.

I have no idea what you're talking about. So here's a cat with a pancake on its head thinking about a bunny with a pancake on its head.


49 posted on 08/07/2005 8:38:42 AM PDT by orionblamblam ("You're the poster boy for what ID would turn out if it were taught in our schools." VadeRetro)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Sentis
what are the Christians afraid of?

The same thing all super-naturalists are afraid of.
Being exposed as just one more temporary cult established to control the masses though enforced ignorance.

50 posted on 08/07/2005 8:40:05 AM PDT by ASA Vet (Line the border with trebuchets.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 451-490 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson