Scientists Get Close Look at Evolution

Los Angeles Times ^ | February 9, 2003 | David Kelly

[liberallarry]

On a rocky slope in the Santa Ynez Mountains, Cristina Sandoval grabs a branch and beats it like a punching bag. "Aha!" she cries as a few wriggling insects spill into her lap. "Aren't they adorable?" The squat, beady-eyed bugs may have faces only a biologist could love, but researchers say they are offering a rare glimpse into the mystery of evolution.

[JZoback]

Man's greatest dilemma?

Trying to prove man isn't made in the image of God though science.

Too bad you picked evolution as your poker hand.

Ace's and 8's all the way.

[LiteKeeper]

read later

[Libertarianize the GOP]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[ALS]

In the future REAL scientists will look back and see today's religious sect of "scientists" the same way today's looks back and sees neanderthals pointing at swamp gas.

The same goes for how abortion is viewed. All the icons of "reproductive rights" will be looked at as murdering morons. Not that they aren't today....

[John H K]

In the future REAL scientists will look back and see today's religious sect of "scientists" the same way today's looks back and sees neanderthals pointing at swamp gas.

Boy, that was a brilliant attempt at refuting the article.

[dsc]

Thought I might read it, but no way I'm going to register on the LA Times site.

[unspun]

"... the mystery of evolution."

A brief and rare zephyr of humility and honesty.

[Phaedrus]

Lefties and the LA Times love Evolution.

[buffyt]

Once my son told me that if there were any such thing as evolution we would have all evolved into the same thing, why would some creatures remain fish, dogs, cats, trees, bugs..... everything would have evolved! From then on I realized that evolution was only another trick, a lie, from satan.

[Abcdefg]

From an earlier post, http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/839466/posts?page=6#6 :

[Abcdefg]

John H K posted: " 'According to Genesis, from the time of Adam to the time of Noah, it had never rained on the earth. Plants were watered from a mist that rose from the ground. Most likely it would be wise for Scientists to start from that assumption.'

If they'd consumed about 5 tons of crack per scientist, yes."

to which I replied: That's a lot of crack, even for a scientist!

[PatrickHenry]

Ping. I ain't gonna register at the LA Times to read this article, but the thread may be fun anyway.

[AZLiberty]

Once my son told me that if there were any such thing as evolution we would have all evolved into the same thing, why would some creatures remain fish, dogs, cats, trees, bugs..... everything would have evolved! From then on I realized that evolution was only another trick, a lie, from satan.

For one thing, "we" would not all have evolved into the same thing because we don't all live in the same environment. Fish are fish because they live in water, for God's sake.

Refusal to admit -- or even attempt to understand -- reality is closer to Satan than evolution is.

[RightWhale]

we would have all evolved into the same thing

First thought is: why?

Second thought is: according to the meaning of the word, we are all the same thing anyway. Evolution is nothing but presenting new characteristics.

[ALS]

I hadn't gotten to the article yet...

in denial? :)

[canuck_conservative]

If we didn't get here by evolution, then how?

[Aric2000]

A great bearded one in the sky said," this is no fun, here I am this ALL powerful being, who should be worshipped, I know what I'll do..." and poof, the rest is history.

Or so the creationists claim.

[RadioAstronomer]

Once my son told me that if there were any such thing as evolution we would have all evolved into the same thing, why would some creatures remain fish, dogs, cats, trees, bugs..... everything would have evolved! From then on I realized that evolution was only another trick, a lie, from satan.

You are kidding I hope.

[gore3000]

Boy, that was a brilliant attempt at refuting the article.

What article? All we have up there is a promo for the article. It in no way backs up the claim it makes in the first paragraph.

You just show quite well that evolution is not science but ideology - you agree with anything that agrees with your views even though there is absolutely no evidence for it (there certainly is nothing to back up the statement in that first paragraph).