Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Oh, so we ARE apes. Well, then we really don't need to puzzle about exactly WHY we are here, on this planet, in this spirt-body then do we? Just pass me a banana.
What species do you think we are a part of, amphibians, reptiles (well, in the case of Bush and his right wing cronies that may be true)?
Scientists have made a major step forward in creating life in the laboratory as researchers announce they have rebuilt a living bacterium from four bottles of chemicals.
So some seriously stupid man at the Discovery Institute (David Klinghoffer) asked a professor at the University of Vermont, Nicholas Gotelli, to debate Evolution and Intelligent Design (aka creationism). Read the invitation here.
Here's Dr. Gotelli's response:
Dear Dr. Klinghoffer:
Thank you for this interesting and courteous invitation to set up a debate about evolution and creationism (which includes its more recent relabeling as "intelligent design") with a speaker from the Discovery Institute. Your invitation is quite surprising, given the sneering coverage of my recent newspaper editorial that you yourself posted on the Discovery Institute's website:
However, this kind of two-faced dishonesty is what the scientific community has come to expect from the creationists.
Academic debate on controversial topics is fine, but those topics need to have a basis in reality. I would not invite a creationist to a debate on campus for the same reason that I would not invite an alchemist, a flat-earther, an astrologer, a psychic, or a Holocaust revisionist. These ideas have no scientific support, and that is why they have all been discarded by credible scholars. Creationism is in the same category.
Instead of spending time on public debates, why aren't members of your institute publishing their ideas in prominent peer-reviewed journals such as Science, Nature, or the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences? If you want to be taken seriously by scientists and scholars, this is where you need to publish. Academic publishing is an intellectual free market, where ideas that have credible empirical support are carefully and thoroughly explored. Nothing could possibly be more exciting and electrifying to biology than scientific disproof of evolutionary theory or scientific proof of the existence of a god. That would be Nobel Prize winning work, and it would be eagerly published by any of the prominent mainstream journals.
"Conspiracy" is the predictable response by Ben Stein and the frustrated creationists. But conspiracy theories are a joke, because science places a high premium on intellectual honesty and on new empirical studies that overturn previously established principles. Creationism doesn't live up to these standards, so its proponents are relegated to the sidelines, publishing in books, blogs, websites, and obscure journals that don't maintain scientific standards.
Finally, isn't it sort of pathetic that your large, well-funded institute must scrape around, panhandling for a seminar invitation at a little university in northern New England? Practicing scientists receive frequent invitations to speak in science departments around the world, often on controversial and novel topics. If creationists actually published some legitimate science, they would receive such invitations as well.
So, I hope you understand why I am declining your offer. I will wait patiently to read about the work of creationists in the pages of Nature and Science. But until it appears there, it isn't science and doesn't merit an invitation.
In closing, I do want to thank you sincerely for this invitation and for your posting on the Discovery Institute Website. As an evolutionary biologist, I can't tell you what a badge of honor this is. My colleagues will be envious.
Sincerely yours,
Nick Gotelli
P.S. I hope you will forgive me if I do not respond to any further e-mails from you or from the Discovery Institute. This has been entertaining, but it interferes with my research and teaching.
That's how the opponents of Evolution should be treated!
For millennia uncountable, humans have been asking "why am I here". That is why there are creation stories across cultures. Up until a couple of hundred years ago, we didn't have the scientific knowledge or ability to truly investigate the question. Now we have the scientific capabilities to expand our knowledge of how our species come about.
When I went to my confirmation classes, I has some serious discussions with my priest about the apparent disconnect between evolution (i.e., science) and the creation story. I've always found his response to be the best I've ever heard, and after much contemplation, it makes much sense to me.
The story of creation is the story of when humans became aware of themselves as being special, different from the other animals around them. In that time in the distant, misty past, we (as humans) needed a way to explain why we are here. All those myriad of stories is how humans answered the question.
It directly contradicts ancient middle eastern creation myths that are warmly embraced by "western" culture.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Why
Why is the theory of evolution so controversial??
