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

Skip to comments.

Must Science Declare a Holy War on Religion?
Los Angeles Times ^ | August 11, 2009 | Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum

Posted on 08/11/2009 1:05:47 PM PDT by nickcarraway

The so-called New Atheists are attacking the mantra of science and faith being compatible. Others in the science community question the value of confrontation.

This fall, evolutionary biologist and bestselling author Richard Dawkins -- most recently famous for his public exhortation to atheism, "The God Delusion" -- returns to writing about science. Dawkins' new book, "The Greatest Show on Earth," will inform and regale us with the stunning "evidence for evolution," as the subtitle says. It will surely be an impressive display, as Dawkins excels at making the case for evolution. But it's also fair to ask: Who in the United States will read Dawkins' new book (or ones like it) and have any sort of epiphany, or change his or her mind?

Surely not those who need it most: America's anti-evolutionists. These religious adherents often view science itself as an assault on their faith and doggedly refuse to accept evolution because they fear it so utterly denies God that it will lead them, and their children, straight into a world of moral depravity and meaninglessness. An in-your-face atheist touting evolution, like Dawkins, is probably the last messenger they'll heed.

Dawkins will, however, be championed by many scientists, especially the most secular -- those who were galvanized by "The God Delusion" and inspired by it to take a newly confrontational approach toward America's religious majority. They will help ensure Dawkins another literary success. It's certainly valuable to have the case for evolution articulated prominently and often, but what this unending polarization around evolution and religion does for the standing of science in the U.S. is a very different matter.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: antichristian; antitheism; atheism; atheismandstate; bookreview; churchandstate; culturewar; dawkins; evolution; godsgravesglyphs; greatestshow; homobama; homosexualagenda; newatheists; pages; perverts; religion; religiousintolerance; richarddawkins; science; thenogodgod; thoughtcrime
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 next last

1 posted on 08/11/2009 1:05:48 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Dawkins will, however, be championed by many scientists, especially the most secular -- those who were galvanized by "The God Delusion" and inspired by it to take a newly confrontational approach toward America's religious majority.

Antitheist atheists aren't "secular". Their religion is atheism. It forms their worldview and emboldens them to lash out at the other "false" religions of the world.

2 posted on 08/11/2009 1:20:23 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (There is no truth in the Pravda Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
bestselling author Richard Dawkins -- most recently famous for his public exhortation to atheism, "The God Delusion" -- returns to writing about science.

Hahaha. Apart from co-authoring a couple papers in the 1970's on parasite wasps, since when has Dr. Dawkins ever written about testable, observable natural processes (i.e., science)? Look carefully at his list of publications and it is easy to see he has made a career, not as a scientist, but as a demagogue and rather ignorant ideological cheerleader.

Keep it up, Dr. Dawkins. Every time you put your pen to paper I see more Ph.D's reading what you write and later citing it as the reason they first began questioning naturalism and Darwinism.

3 posted on 08/11/2009 1:26:12 PM PDT by Liberty1970 (Democrats are not in control. God is. And Thank God for that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
bestselling author Richard Dawkins -- most recently famous for his public exhortation to atheism, "The God Delusion" -- returns to writing about science.

Hahaha. Apart from co-authoring a couple papers in the 1970's on parasite wasps, since when has Dr. Dawkins ever written about testable, observable natural processes (i.e., science)? Look carefully at his list of publications and it is easy to see he has made a career, not as a scientist, but as a demagogue and rather ignorant ideological cheerleader.

Keep it up, Dr. Dawkins. Every time you put your pen to paper I see more Ph.D's reading what you write and later citing it as the reason they first began questioning naturalism and Darwinism.

4 posted on 08/11/2009 1:26:44 PM PDT by Liberty1970 (Democrats are not in control. God is. And Thank God for that!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
I truly believe that atheism is a toxic poison to any civilized society and most particuarly western civilization.

It's not coindicental that the first sin mentioned in the Bible was man's attempt to displace God w/ himself. That path leads only to death.

It was ever such.

5 posted on 08/11/2009 1:30:26 PM PDT by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Dawkins will have nothing new to add to this argument, for there isn't anything new to add to it. All the arguments for and against theism have been discussed to death. Science has not found any new evidence to support its views on the origin of the universe, much less why there is a universe. It is still trying to prove the existence of dark matter. When or if science can answer these questions, then atheists/secularists will have something new to add to the argument. Until then, it will be the same old, same old. Dawkins is just preaching to the choir.
6 posted on 08/11/2009 1:32:41 PM PDT by Nosterrex
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
No less than 6 times in the article do the authors qualify the conflict between the evolutionists and the biblical literalists as being in the US, or American, or in the country.

Through-out the rest of the world, it is an entirely different story.

7 posted on 08/11/2009 1:34:23 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pietro

Must Religion Declare a Holy War on Science?


8 posted on 08/11/2009 1:36:35 PM PDT by SunTzuWu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

“They will help ensure Dawkins another literary success,” it’s got to be all about the money.


9 posted on 08/11/2009 1:38:33 PM PDT by glide625
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunTzuWu

Of course not. The truth, like a cork, will allways rise to the top.


10 posted on 08/11/2009 1:40:09 PM PDT by Pietro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: glide625

Just another of those confrontational cottage industries. Those who earn money writing and lecturing about it care about it.


11 posted on 08/11/2009 1:46:10 PM PDT by texmexis best (uency)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: texmexis best

So right; man, we need to get on some bandwagon to make some money; I just haven’t come up with one yet.


12 posted on 08/11/2009 1:55:28 PM PDT by glide625
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Science is the study of God’s laws.


13 posted on 08/11/2009 1:56:25 PM PDT by Miztiki
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
The holes in Dawkins logic, as presented in his books, are big enough to drive a whole convoy of trucks through. He jumps from unproven points into massive and unsupported deductions from those. The arrogance of the man is astounding.
14 posted on 08/11/2009 1:56:34 PM PDT by dog breath
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
I'm not of particularly strong religious beliefs, in fact I would consider myself borderline atheist who would like to be pleasantly surprised by proof of a God. One of the things that is starting to convince me more of God's existence (and that of evil) is the absolute rabid hatred
some people have for Christianity. Most of these people have
seen no harm from Christians whatsoever. I would think that
this would make them indifferent, not hateful. Does this mean that there IS a force influencing them?
15 posted on 08/11/2009 1:56:44 PM PDT by CrazyIvan (What's "My Struggle" in Kenyan?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CrazyIvan

One thing you need to notice -

in effect, it’s ONLY Christianity that is the subject of the rabid hatred you’re seeing. That’s because it is the TRUTH, and everything else is the product of LIES.

Check out some of the Lee Stroebel “Case for” books/videos/audios. He was an atheist journalist that set out to prove Christianity false, and ended up convincing himself of the truth of Christianity with what he found.


16 posted on 08/11/2009 1:59:58 PM PDT by MrB (Go Galt now, save Bowman for later)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: SunTzuWu

Maybe science should throw out all the science that came from religion, like all the scientific knowledge preserved by the Catholic Church, and the science of genetics, since it was discovered by a Catholic priest.


17 posted on 08/11/2009 2:10:12 PM PDT by nickcarraway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Well, they’d have to throw out Newtonian physics and Einstein and the scientific method as well. Not that the latter would be a loss. Certainly Dawkins isn’t using it.


18 posted on 08/11/2009 2:45:59 PM PDT by Seruzawa (Obamalama lied, the republic died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: CrazyIvan
"One of the things that is starting to convince me more of God's existence (and that of evil) is the absolute rabid hatred some people have for Christianity."

My maternal grandfather was that way. He was also my only grandparent who, as the end of his life neared, was obviously very afraid to die.

19 posted on 08/11/2009 3:23:57 PM PDT by Ranald S. MacKenzie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Oh my...But surely they know God created science just like everything else!

No...they’re blind...


20 posted on 08/11/2009 3:30:06 PM PDT by LadyPilgrim ((Lifted up was He to die; It is finished was His cry; Hallelujah what a Savior!!!!!! ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CrazyIvan

When somebody is passionately for or against something, we should always ask “why.” It is because of the implications of the argument. I am passionately against Obama’s socialism because I see the bad implications of his ideas.

When people are passionately against Christianity, it shows that there is an emotional component and they don’t like the implications of Christianity. Usually they don’t like how Christianity says that some behaviors are immoral. It is rarely really about intellectual issues.

When I was in college,I was indifferent towards Christianity. I had rejected it because I thought that it had no basis for it. I was not vehemently against it. I just didn’t care one way or another. It was only later that I was challenged to consider the historical evidences for the resurrection and became convinced that it was true. But it took over 6 months of weekly conversations. You’re right to be skeptical of people who “protest too much.”


21 posted on 08/11/2009 5:51:39 PM PDT by DeweyCA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]


· join list or digest · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post a topic ·

 
Gods
Graves
Glyphs
Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. I think something very similar has been posted before, but the main reason is, this topic will probably become a Bloodbath, if it hasn't already (I didn't bother to check). To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.
GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother, and Ernest_at_the_Beach
 

·Dogpile · Archaeologica · ArchaeoBlog · Archaeology · Biblical Archaeology Society ·
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · Google ·
· The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists ·


22 posted on 08/11/2009 8:27:47 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/__Since Jan 3, 2004__Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway
Maybe science should throw out all the science that came from religion, like all the scientific knowledge preserved by the Catholic Church, and the science of genetics, since it was discovered by a Catholic priest.

Maybe that's why the Catholic Church accepts evolution as the way God did it.

23 posted on 08/11/2009 8:43:53 PM PDT by Moonman62 (The issue of whether cheap labor makes America great should have been settled by the Civil War.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Nick, this is the oldest story God gave His people. There are two trees, the humble fruit of Life and the shiny, tempting apple of knowledge of good n evil- to be like God. People have an overwhelming desire to purge God, so they can pursue their own interests, like Euthanasia and Abortion. I love science, am humbled by the complexity and order. Loving God and science are not mutually exclusive events, but both of these require a lot of faith. Due to our own limitations of detecting and explaining scientific theories, I would hafta say they require much more faith than belief in God. Esp when you consider science as revealed outside of the human realm, we cannot even detect nor comprehend this aspect, but it influences what we can and do detect.


24 posted on 08/12/2009 5:34:58 AM PDT by momincombatboots (The last experience of the sinner is the horrible enslavement of the freedom he desired. -C.S. Lewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pietro
I truly believe that atheism is a toxic poison to any civilized society and most particuarly western civilization.

Yes. In fact, the great mathematician Leonhard Euler considered atheists to be 'among the most pernicious enemies of mankind'.

25 posted on 08/12/2009 6:58:06 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Evolution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CrazyIvan; metmom
One of the things that is starting to convince me more of God's existence (and that of evil) is the absolute rabid hatred some people have for Christianity. Most of these people have seen no harm from Christians whatsoever. I would think that this would make them indifferent, not hateful. Does this mean that there IS a force influencing them?

That is an extremely interesting point, and, yes, the phenomenon you describe has an eerie, un-ignorable, cumulative convincing power also on believers who frequently encounter these rabid types.

26 posted on 08/12/2009 7:05:07 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Evolution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62; nickcarraway
the Catholic Church accepts evolution as the way God did it.

It is a dogma of the Catholic faith that every human being (not just Adam and Eve) involves a supernatural act of creation on the part of God. Is that what the theory of evolution says?

27 posted on 08/12/2009 7:17:01 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Evolution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Moonman62; nickcarraway

There’s a difference between Mendel and Darwin.

Accepting the work that Mendel did, which Darwin apparently never heard of, is different than accepting what the present day evos claim the Catholic Church believes concerning the ToE as it stands today.


28 posted on 08/12/2009 7:20:52 AM PDT by metmom (Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Liberty1970
Look carefully at his list of publications and it is easy to see he has made a career, not as a scientist, but as a demagogue and rather ignorant ideological cheerleader.

He did some work on the statistics of chicken-pecking. He also discovered memes, which are invisible genes that do not exist. That must count for something. Here's a Dawkins interview: Richard Dawkins goes insane.

29 posted on 08/12/2009 7:48:55 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Evolution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode
It is a dogma of the Catholic faith that every human being (not just Adam and Eve) involves a supernatural act of creation on the part of God.

In the sense that every human being has a soul, and every soul represents a supernatural act of creation. The body is another matter.

Is that what the theory of evolution says?

The theory of evolution does not address the soul.

30 posted on 08/12/2009 8:32:47 AM PDT by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode
Here's a Dawkins interview

You forgot to add the "heavily edited for humorous effect" part.

31 posted on 08/12/2009 8:33:30 AM PDT by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: a fool in paradise
It is our duty to do even more than we have done to make the antireligious movement, not only in the USSR, but in the capitalist countries as well, a movement of vast millions. We are entering the sixteenth year of the proletarian revolution with great gains to our account in the field of atheism. But these gains are insufficient; our work must be improved, consolidated, expanded, deepened. The banner of militant atheism must be raised still higher. Propaganda in favor of militant atheism must be carried on more widely, must become deeper and more serious. The ranks of the militant atheists must be increased to include millions. Remember that the struggle against religion is a struggle for socialism!

E. Yaroslavsky (Central Committee of the Communist Party, President of the League of Militant Atheists)


32 posted on 08/12/2009 7:30:40 PM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Evolution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
The theory of evolution does not address the soul.

If so, then it is not a theory of human origins.

33 posted on 08/13/2009 1:40:06 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Evolution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Ethan Clive Osgoode
If so, then it is not a theory of human origins.

It is not a theory that addresses the origin of any supernatural aspect of humans. It does not pretend to be. It's not a criticism of evolution to point that out, and it's not a weakness of evolution that it doesn't do souls.

34 posted on 08/13/2009 8:48:14 AM PDT by Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: metmom

“there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such.”

Pope Benedict XVI


35 posted on 08/13/2009 8:52:56 AM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: glide625
If Dawkins was truly brave and not in it for the money, he'd write a book detailing how it is physically impossible for Mohammend to have ridden on horseback into the heavens.
36 posted on 08/13/2009 8:54:33 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (There is no truth in the Pravda Media.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
" “there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see and which enriches our understanding of life and being as such.”

Pope Benedict XVI"


Yes, but what type of Evolution is he referring to? Do you think all Evolution is equal? It most certainly is not. All species from one species, plant Evolution, animal Evolution, Evolution inside the same species, because there is science for some of those, but others are complete made up fairy tales.
37 posted on 08/13/2009 7:06:16 PM PDT by Jaime2099 (Human Evolution and the God of the Bible are not compatible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Dawkins is pathetic. His motivation and belief in Evolution is not scientific, it is simply a bad case of God hatred. Listen to his interviews and anyone could see his blind hatred for God. Mr. Dawkins, why don’t you write a book about the dinosaur fossils that were found by a Professor at NC State that had tissue still in tact and observable? I’m sure you can explain that away can’t you Mr. Dawkins? Sure you can, you’ll just not use science just like you do with the rest of your books.


38 posted on 08/13/2009 7:11:40 PM PDT by Jaime2099 (Human Evolution and the God of the Bible are not compatible)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jaime2099
Yes, but what type of Evolution is he referring to?

Probably not the atheistic soul-denying evolution that allmendream wants everyone to believe.

"theories of evolution which, in accordance with the philosophies inspiring them, consider the spirit as emerging from the forces of living matter or as a mere epiphenomenon of this matter, are incompatible with the truth about man." [John Paul II]

39 posted on 08/13/2009 7:13:30 PM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Evolution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
It is not a theory that addresses the origin of any supernatural aspect of humans. It does not pretend to be.

So then, according to this, it cannot be a theory of human origins, because a human being is both body and soul.

40 posted on 08/14/2009 2:11:16 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode (<<== Click here to learn about Evolution!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

If science does declare war on religion, they will give Islam a pass.


41 posted on 08/14/2009 2:17:44 AM PDT by airborne (WAKE UP AMERICA! OR DIE IN YOUR SLEEP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Ha Ha Thats Very Logical; Ethan Clive Osgoode

Evolution is only possible with HETEROSEXUAL relationships.

There is no evolutionary viability for homosexuals.


42 posted on 08/14/2009 2:58:31 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: nickcarraway

Dawkins will only be championed by the militant atheists.

Everyone else thinks he’s just making an ass of himself.


43 posted on 08/14/2009 4:51:03 AM PDT by The_Repugnant_Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jaime2099; allmendream; SunkenCiv; nickcarraway; Ha Ha Thats Very Logical

I find that in the West many Christians in the last century or so try to use science to prove the existence of God or a miracle, etc.

This seems like a Western Christian way of viewing the world and what I mean by that is that to Eastern Christians, God and his works are a mystery so to use science or worldly knowledge to uncover proof of God’s hand is a waste of time such as searching for Noah’s flood, or the real Garden of Eden, etc.

An Eastern Christian would for example have the view that physics is a measure of the world and God is knowable so how can he be quantified?

Science is a measure of the natural world. God dwells (according to Christian theology) in the ‘supernatural’ world. Hence science is not designed to measure the supernatural world so why use it to do so?

Of course this leads to the conclusion that there is no supernatural world because science can not detect it but science can’t detect alternate realities either and evidence exists via a theoretical model for those but that gets into philosophy and philosophy is not empirical science.


44 posted on 08/14/2009 6:32:32 AM PDT by Nikas777 (En touto nika, "In this, be victorious")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Jaime2099
The Pope is referring to biological evolution, of which there is, as he says, much scientific proof in favor of, and which enriches our understanding of life and being.
45 posted on 08/14/2009 6:33:39 AM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Jaime2099; allmendream; SunkenCiv; nickcarraway; Ha Ha Thats Very Logical
I screwed a line up - should read: An Eastern Christian would for example have the view that physics is a measure of the world and God is knowable Unknowable so how can he be quantified?
46 posted on 08/14/2009 6:34:19 AM PDT by Nikas777 (En touto nika, "In this, be victorious")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
Please familiarize yourself with parthenogenesis and asexual reproduction. Your statement as presented is false, although your bizarre and off topic point is valid.
47 posted on 08/14/2009 6:36:34 AM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: allmendream
Please familiarize yourself with parthenogenesis and asexual reproduction.

Please familiarize yourself with mammalian biology from a 5th grade text book.

Insects also evolve through heterosexual relationships.

By the theory's definition, heterosexual reproduction represents the higher state of evolution as it is the most advanced state of reproduction.

48 posted on 08/14/2009 7:14:44 AM PDT by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Ben Ficklin
No less than 6 times in the article do the authors qualify the conflict between the evolutionists and the biblical literalists as being in the US, or American, or in the country.

Through-out the rest of the world, it is an entirely different story.


It is. At least from my experience. Much of the rest of the Christian world is either Catholic or Orthodox and has no explicit problem with the theories of evolution. Popes and Patriarchs have even made pronouncements in favor of it. The protestants that do have a problem with it pass those lessons on to their children and trust their children to resolve whatever conflicts might arise in their studies of evolutionary biology.

It IS an increasing point of tension in the moslem world but there isn't much that doesn't wind them up these days. I think it gets lost on the cloud of other things that make them drool with hatred. I don't think anybody bothers with what the Buddhists think about it until they start arming themselves.
49 posted on 08/14/2009 7:17:54 AM PDT by TomOnTheRun
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Sir Francis Dashwood
Claiming that evolution doesn't happen to asexual or parthenogenic populations is wrong. Evolution is studied extensively in asexual reproducing populations. Sexual reproduction is certainly advantageous to reproduction as it increases genetic diversity, but it is not essential to evolution.
50 posted on 08/14/2009 7:39:13 AM PDT by allmendream (Income is EARNED not distributed, so how could it be redistributed?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-64 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