Posted by
michael
on from the roundup-will-take-care-of-it dept.
An anonymous reader writes "A new species of plant came into existence about 30 years ago. It is a fertile hybrid which cannot breed with either of its parent species."
Re:Non-Biased reporting
by
Ashurbanipal
·
· Score: 2, Informative
You are correct.
But there are creationists that believe in the theory of evolution by natural selection; when I worked in Natural Science (been almost a decade since I was writing taxonomic database management code, I admit) there were plenty of knowledgeable scientists who believe in both divine creation and evolution.
Some of them were even Christians, although mainstream Christian beliefs are pretty rare among evolutionists. Most scientists don't like the paradoxes engendered by trying to resolve observed reality with the biblical creation fables.
I beg to differ
by
Frankenmoro
·
· Score: 3, Informative
it does disprove creationism
Well, not really. Depends on who you're talking to. If you're talking to a strict fundamentalist who has no science background, then yes, it does disprove his breed of creationism. It doesn't, however, disprove Dr. Michael Behe's breed of "creationism".
What it does disprove, though, is that speciation is possible, but that's rather obvious to anyone who looks at the genetic/chromosomal make-up of, say, chimps, gorrillas and humans.
If you're truly interested in this debate, then I would recommend a book called "The Science of God" by Gerald L. Schroeder. He's a physicist who is also a creationist, but with a rather different take on the whole thing. He maintains that God did create the world in 7 literal days, but that it also took roughly 13.5 Billion years. Has to do with the theory of relativity of time... He's also Jewish, and has an incredible grasp on the Hebrew underlying the English in Genesis, and brings to light several key verses that could have either been translated better, or simply lost something in translation. Great stuff.
As a creationist who also has a degree in genetics and did research under an evolutionary geneticist, I've seen both sides of the spectrum. both sides extremes have their intellectual/theological bigots who aren't willing to budge simply for spites sake. However, those that are willing to at least listen generally can have very unique viewpoints.
You are correct.
But there are creationists that believe in the theory of evolution by natural selection; when I worked in Natural Science (been almost a decade since I was writing taxonomic database management code, I admit) there were plenty of knowledgeable scientists who believe in both divine creation and evolution.
Some of them were even Christians, although mainstream Christian beliefs are pretty rare among evolutionists. Most scientists don't like the paradoxes engendered by trying to resolve observed reality with the biblical creation fables.
Well, not really. Depends on who you're talking to. If you're talking to a strict fundamentalist who has no science background, then yes, it does disprove his breed of creationism. It doesn't, however, disprove Dr. Michael Behe's breed of "creationism".
What it does disprove, though, is that speciation is possible, but that's rather obvious to anyone who looks at the genetic/chromosomal make-up of, say, chimps, gorrillas and humans.
If you're truly interested in this debate, then I would recommend a book called "The Science of God" by Gerald L. Schroeder. He's a physicist who is also a creationist, but with a rather different take on the whole thing. He maintains that God did create the world in 7 literal days, but that it also took roughly 13.5 Billion years. Has to do with the theory of relativity of time... He's also Jewish, and has an incredible grasp on the Hebrew underlying the English in Genesis, and brings to light several key verses that could have either been translated better, or simply lost something in translation. Great stuff.
As a creationist who also has a degree in genetics and did research under an evolutionary geneticist, I've seen both sides of the spectrum. both sides extremes have their intellectual/theological bigots who aren't willing to budge simply for spites sake. However, those that are willing to at least listen generally can have very unique viewpoints.