Just to inform: the theory of evolution is LESS controversial to scientists than the theory of gravity (myths, doctrine)

[infeatheredeyes]

Had to inform because I keep seeing people using "theory" incorrectly. Theory, in science terms, is an accepted idea. Not just a "maybe this happened" speculation. That would be a hypothesis.

It is not the hypothesis of evolution, it is the theory.

[Fundamentalist]

Originally Posted by infeatheredeyes

Had to inform because I keep seeing people using "theory" incorrectly. Theory, in science terms, is an accepted idea. Not just a "maybe this happened" speculation. That would be a hypothesis.

It is not the hypothesis of evolution, it is the theory.

Neither proven nor observable. You sure you have the right room?

[asiago12]

Theorem needs a demostration.. Theory needs a "natural law".. Evolution's theory is still searching for a natural law..

[Ploughboy]

It all depends on whether you want to accept ancient superstition or not? Just for one small example of evolution doctrine: the ape-to-man hoax was long in play before the discovery of the Neanderthal Man and other "hominid" fossil discoveries. Today people think Darwin was some great scientist who proved man evolved from apes. But this careless thinking avoids the reality that what came down to us from Darwinian assumptions had been an ancient mystical belief long before St.Augustine's time. Here, Augustine is speaking about the origin and diversity of humans and some myths which have come about since ancient times.

City of God: Book XVI, chapter 8, p.663 (Penguin Classics translation),

"Some years ago, but certainly in my time, a man was born in the East with a double set of upper parts, but a single set of the lower limbs. That is, he had two heads, two chests, and four arms, but only one belly and two feet, as if he were one man. And he lived long enough for the news of his case to attract many sightseers.
In fact, it would be impossible to list all the human infants very unlike those who, without any doubt, were their parents. Now it cannot be denied that these derive ultimately from that one man; and therefore the same is true of all those races which are reported to have deviated as it were, by their divergences in bodily structure, from the normal course of nature followed by the majority, or practically the whole of mankind. If these races are included in the definition of 'human', that is, if they are rational and mortal animals, it must be admitted that they trace their lineage from that same one man, the first father of all mankind. This assumes, of course, the truth of the stories about the divergent features of those races, and their great differences from one another and from us. The definition is important; for if we did not know monkeys, long tailed apes and chimpanzees are not men but animals, those natural historians who plume themselves on their collection of curiosities might pass them off on us as races of men, and get away with such nonsense."

City of God, Marcus Dods translation:

"Some years ago, quite within my own memory, a man was born in the East, double his upper, but single his lower half--having two heads, two chests, four hands, but one body and two feet like a ordinary man ; and he lived so long that many had an opportunity of seeing him. But who could enumerate all the human births that have differed widely from their ascertained parents? As, therefore, no one will deny that these are all descended from from that one man, so all the races which are reported to have diverged in bodily appearance from the usual course which nature generally or almost universally preserves, if they are embraced in that definition of man as rational and mortal animals, unquestionably trace their pedigree to that one first father of all. We are supposing these stories about various races who differ from one another and from us to be true ; but possibly they are not ; for if we were not aware that apes, and monkeys, and sphinxes are not men, but beasts, those historians would possibly describe them as races of men, and flaunt with impunity their false and vainglorious discoveries."

Charles Darwin would be the natural historian who would entertain the false theory which placed man in the same pedigree as the moneys and apes. Julian Huxley would have fun making fun of the mentally challenged as Darwin's theory allowed for such bigotry. But real science proves that mutations at birth are all human through and through, and mentally challenged people can give birth to normal healthy children. In all cases, no human being who was born either a Siamese twin or mentally challenged is subhuman as Darwin and J.Huxley would want us to believe. And here, from 4th century Augustine, we see that long before Darwin's ignorance about human deformations were believed by pagans to be apes and monkeys, a show of mockery for those born different from other humans. Today, Darwin's ape to man theory--borrowed from ancient pagan philosophers--is used to degrade and dehumanize people so that corrupt powers will rule over the masses and strip them of all their earned income and make them slaves to a dictator of the state. Augustine mentions how absurd these people were back in his day and now we see why Augustine mentioned their absurdities.

We now see Darwin's view of humanity and ape over a thousand years before Darwin would call it his own and hijack science with his arrogance and dehumanizing view of human origins. Regardless of Augustine's mistake about antipodes, he was dead on accurate about those natural historians of his day who would become the natural historians of our day once Greek and Roman literature was returned to western society after nearly 1000 years of being held hostage over in Islamo-land. After the return of Greek and Roman literature to the west, which was a good thing overall, we see how there were some Greek and Roman philosophers who held to the theory we know as evolution long before Darwin! So people who think Darwin was a scientist do not know the mystical histories that led to this mystical view called evolution theory.

[mensaguy]

This thread was started in 2010, and had been dormant until today.

Had it been started more recently, it would have been promptly closed because it violated the Religion and Spirituality rules, which include:

As of January 2, 2017, Science threads are not to be started in any of the Religion & Spirituality forums.

Two additional thoughts are worth applying here:

First:

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak and to remove all doubt. (dubiously attributed to Abraham Lincoln)

Proverbs 17:28: Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: and he that shutteth his lips is esteemed a man of understanding.

Second:

The City-Data Terms Of Service includes this statement:

Instead of copying-and-pasting articles, photos, or other material you find on the Internet, you should be posting links to those articles. Posting a snippet from the article and then the link is the appropriate way to post.

There is no exception made for material where permission to copy is given, where you wrote it yourself, or where you believe the material to be in the public domain. Don't copy and paste material to City-Data.