Accelerated Evolution for Penguin DNA

Reader Comments
Back to article

I am mourning the loss of another intelligent fellow human being to a 2000 year old superstition. May you someday see the light of truth...

JK 11:21PM November 22, 2009

Christianity is afraid of nothing. A belief system is not a person, therefore it is incapable of being afraid.
Actually, you have and are asking questions yourself. You have yet to answer mine.
Insulting your opponent shows you have lost the debate. Also, don't you find it a little odd that I'm able to respond to if I can't read?
Brainwashed? So examining ancient documents, using logic, taking into consideration scientific laws, and so forth is brainwashing? If so, then most, if not all, people teaching in academia today are brainwashed.
I pray that God will help you to see the truth. Again, I encourage you to read books from Lee Strobel. Much of what you are saying is very similar to his investigation of Christianity.

Patrick of KY 11:57AM November 22, 2009

may I suggest an appointment with your local psychiatrist

JK 10:31PM November 21, 2009

YOU are the one ASKING questions!
My only question is: WHAT IS CHRISTIANITY AFRAID OF ??
I was hoping you could shed some light on that.
Have you even read anything I wrote??
Can you actually even read?
You spew this brainwashed, meaningless gibberish and call it evidence?
I'm tempted to say 'god help you' but I'll leave hypocrisy to you experts.

JK 10:29PM November 21, 2009

It is your turn now. Look at the evidence. Historically, what the Bible says is accurate and reliable. Especially concerning the New Testament. Why do we have the knowledge of there being an absolute right and wrong? Where did this information come from? I suggest reading Josh McDowell's book More Than a Carpenter and Lee Strobel's Case for Christ. Each will answer some of questions you are asking.

Patrick of KY 9:10PM November 21, 2009

Why has religion attacked science and dismissed knowledge throughout history?
Why is this still happening today?
Why the condescending, elitist attitudes?

JK 6:10PM November 21, 2009

According to your logic; Whenever archaeologists or historians discover something related to Greek mythology, the myth is never contradicted: Since the city of Troy has been discovered, Homer's Illiad must be true, and by extension, so must the existence of the gods Apollo, Zeus, Dionysus et al.
The goal of science is to increase knowledge, not to 'disprove god.' The fact that religion has a problem with this, says a lot about religion.
Actually, the burden of proof lies with religion, an extraordinary claim such as a supernatural god, requires extraordinary proof. By your arguments; you cannot disprove the Easter Bunny. There is plenty of proof for his existence. Any given Easter morning there appears a preponderance of colored candy Easter eggs all over North America, and possibly other sites around the world. This is an undisputed fact. No one has proof that the Easter Bunny didn't put them there. Some people may claim to have hidden the eggs themselves, but you cannot prove the Easter Bunny did not hide at least some of them. Therefore the Easter Bunny must exist.
Belief is irrelevant. Just because something is believed, doesn't mean it is true.
You are correct; the bible is not a science text book, that is why it was thrown out of the science classroom, by American courts, twice, the last time by a christian judge. Science IS primarily concerned with how the universe works. But if new discoveries are at odds with religious dogma, should the scientists be ridiculed, or tortured, or killed? If we discover that the earth orbits the sun, and not vice-versa, should we threaten the scientists with torture? Should we make them recant? Lock them up? Burn their books? Science is still denigrated by religion, even today. You did so yourself with your first post. You dismissed probably several years of careful research, by dedicated and highly qualified researchers.
Stalin, again. Look up your history. Stalin was raised a christian. He went to seminary as a teenager. After he became an atheist and a leader, he emulated a god himself. Was he not all powerful, as god? Did he not command blind, unquestioning obedience, under penalty of death, as god? Did he not order the torture and murder of millions of people, as did god? One could almost argue that he got that model from the bible. But I won't stoop to the level of associating Stalin's motivations with christianity, as christians are so fond of doing with Stalin and atheism. Oops, I guess I just did. My bad.
Inherent goodness: there are/have been plenty of aboriginal cultures, that have had no knowledge of your god, yet these 'savages' as the church likes to call them, often have more evolved senses of morality than you or I. Define morality.
resurrection: once again, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Beyond the questionable accounts of a few ancient story tellers and apologists, what is your evidence? Most biblical accounts are contradictory, how do you chose the right one?

JK 5:43PM November 21, 2009

Whenever archaeologists or historians discover something related to the Bible, the Bible is never contradicted: rights of the firstborn during the time of the patriarchs, the seige of Jerusalem by Sennacherib of Assyria and his assassination, nailing in the feet during crucifixion, the census, and etc.
The discovery mentioned in this article promotes micro-evolution, not macro-evolution. Also, how does evolution disprove God?
Boring is relative from person to person. Just because something is boring does not mean something is not true.
The Bible is not a science textbook. It is not concerned about how the universe works. Rather, it explains who the creator of the universe is and how He has been revealed Himself to humanity.
But more died under atheistic communist regimes than the Crusades. I mention Stalin because he was not affiliated with a religion. Yet, he still went on a killing spree by targetting his own people. This proves that religion is not the cause of all the evil and suffering in the world. Rather mankind is the problem. Men and women murder everyday, but not all of them are doing so because of a religion. Mankind is the problem, so how can we believe in humanity's "inherent goodness" if it continues to destroy itself?
In fact, how do we know there is goodness in humanity? Where did this information come from?
Still, what about the Ressurection?
How can the universe exist without contradicting the laws of nature?

Patrick of KY 1:12PM November 21, 2009

Why would historians and archaeologists look for evidence to contradict the bible? Why would the lack of contradictory evidence amaze you? Myths are often based on historical events and I think that any good archaeologist would be happy to find evidence that fits biblical stories. Many Greek archaeological sites have been connected to mythology, yet they do not prove the existence of Apollo, or Zeus, or Dionysus. I mean, that would be silly... right?
As for contradictory situations, the simple answer 'god did it' is... well, boring. The quest for answers is where the fun is. Finding another little piece of the puzzle to fit the overall picture, like the discovery mentioned in this article, can give one a sense of accomplishment.
The boring part about religion, is that by definition, it never changes. You can only read the bible so many times. There is nothing new no matter how many times you read it. No new explanations for why penguins can't fly even though they have wings. Or why whales have vestigial bones in their bodies. Or why our poorly 'designed' eyes have blind spots right in the center of our retina. Or why we have a useless appendix. Just the same old dogma, for thousands of years. Organized religion, and the people preaching it, are afraid of change, and knowledge. Hence the Inquisitions and Dark Ages when the 'inquisitive minds' were purged from social fabric. Culture and society changes with every generation, religion is always behind the curve, in a futile attempt to evolve and survive. The reason why religion has such a difficult time with the theory of evolution, is because stagnation is religion's nature.
The Crusaders killed Muslims (among others), who happened to be Arabs. They killed them because Allah and Mohammad were not as good as Jehovah and Jesus. They killed for political and religious reasons. Men, women and children were murdered in the name of Jesus. They did this not once, or twice... but nine times. NINE CRUSADES. Over a period of 200 years. TWO CENTURIES worth of terrorism. The consequences of those campaigns are now daily paid with blood in a worldwide holy war.
The fact that Stalin was an atheist, could not have had any influence on his horrific actions. How can the 'lack of belief in a deity' lead to mass murder? Does your lack of belief in the Easter Bunny send you into an egg stomping rage on Easter morning? It's a safe bet the answer is... no. I don't believe in any deities and I don't entertain thoughts of murder, or rape, or pedophilia, or torture. I'm certainly not perfect, but I don't generally lie, steal or cheat. I know many people who hold the same or similar views on religion as myself, none of them have shown any sociopathic tendencies whatsoever.
I don't persecute others for their theistic orientations and I shouldn't have to defend my non belief in theism.
Besides, God made me an atheist. Who are you to question his wisdom?
;^)

JK 11:48AM November 21, 2009

I too am a rational person. The only time I accept tall tales is when I'm listening to fishermen describe the one that got away or deer hunters talking about the trophy buck they got. But even during these times, I know what they are saying are lies. I also know that it is gravity keeping me on the earth, and matter and energy can not be destroyed or created. However, because of this law of conservation and 2nd law of thermodynamics, it seems impossible for the universe to exist. But since it exists, an inquisitive mind would ask how is it possible for the cosmos to exist. It appears to me that the most simple and logical answer for the moment is a creator who is not bound to the laws of physics.
Because I am a rational person I looked into the historical accuracy of the Scriptures. And I am amazed at how historians and archeaologists have yet to find evidence that would contradict what the Bible says. If you would like to know how I did this I would like to refer you to Lee Strobel's Case for Christ and Josh McDowell's New Evidence that Demands a Verdict. Both offer great information on this subject.
I do not support such a deity either. I am familiar to the parts of the Bible you might refer to, but I assure you God is not anything like what you have mentioned above.
I do not need religion to tell me what is right and wrong either. But I must wonder, "How do I know this is morally right, but this is morally bad? Where did this information about ethics come from?"
Some things done in the name of religion have been harmful. However, a close look at history will show that the Church has done a lot of good for the world as well. Think of all the schools, hospitals, and lives saved (I mean physically as well as spiritually) because of the work of Christians.
This I disagree with you. Look at Stalin and other communist leaders of the last century. Most of these men were atheists yet they killed more of their own people than the crusaders killed Arabs. Also, is it wise, rational, and logical to trust in humanity which is susceptible to buy lies (if religion is a lie), murder, steal, cheat, etc?

Patrick of KY 7:07PM November 20, 2009