Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Dentistry / September 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Why is denying the theory of evolution portrayed as rejecting development and progress ?

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
harunyahya - 12 Sep 2005 18:29 GMT
Why is denying the theory of evolution portrayed as rejecting
development and progress ?

HARUN YAHYA
www.harunyahya.com

The word "evolution" has been used in several senses in recent times. A
social aspect has been added to it, for instance, and the word has come
to mean human progress and technological development. There is nothing
wrong with the concept of "evolution" when it is used in this sense.
There is no doubt that man will use his intelligence, knowledge, and
strength to develop over time. The sum of human knowledge will grow
from generation to generation. In the same way that this is not
evidence for the theory of evolution itself, which seeks to explain the
emergence of life by chance, neither does it conflict in any way with
the fact of creation.

Yet evolutionists engage in a facile word game here, and confuse a true
concept with a false one. For example, it is true to state that "On
account of man's long years of living as a social being, his knowledge,
culture, and technology are in a constant state of development." (We
must remember, however, that there can be regression over time as well
as progress. Sociologically speaking, there have been times of
progress, as well as times of stagnation and regression.) However, the
claim that "In the same way as man has developed and progressed, living
species have also advanced and changed over time" is completely false.
Although it is perfectly logical and scientific to say that, as a
thinking being, man's knowledge has increased and been passed on to
subsequent generations, allowing constant progress, it is utterly
senseless to claim that living species developed and evolved by chance
and coincidence, in accordance with uncontrolled and unconscious
natural conditions.

The greatest names in the advancement of science were all creationists

No matter how much evolutionists try to identify themselves with
concepts such as innovation and progress, history has shown that the
real initiators of innovation and progress have always been faithful
scientists who have believed in divine creation.
We see the mark of such believing scientists at every point of
scientific progress. Leonardo da Vinci, Copernicus, Kepler, and
Galileo, who opened a new era in astronomy, Cuvier, the founder of
paleontology, Linnaeus, the founder of the modern classification system
for plants and animals, Isaac Newton, the discoverer of the law of
gravity, Edwin Hubble, who discovered the existence of the galaxies and
the expansion of the universe, and many others have believed in God and
that life and the universe were created by Him.

One of the greatest scientists of the twentieth century, Albert
Einstein, said:
I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith.
The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is
lame..

The German Max Planck, who laid the foundations of modern physics,
said:
Anybody who has been seriously engaged in scientific work of any kind
realises that over the entrance to the gates of the temple of science
are written the words: Ye must have faith. It is a quality which the
scientist cannot dispense with.

The history of science reveals that change and progress have been the
work of creationist scientists. On the other hand, of course,
scientific developments in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries
especially have allowed us to come by countless pieces of evidence of
creation. Modern science and technology have allowed us to discover the
fact that the universe came into being from nothing, in other words
that it was "created." It is a fact accepted by the whole scientific
world that the universe came into being and developed as a result of
the explosion of one single point. In this way, the model of the
infinite universe, with no beginning or end, maintained by materialists
under the primitive scientific conditions of the nineteenth century has
been destroyed. It has been realised that the universe was created, as
it says in the Qur'an, and that it has a beginning and frontiers and
has expanded over time. The Qur'an expresses this fact thus:

Do those who disbelieve not see that the heavens and the Earth were
sewn together and then We unstitched them and that We made from water
every living thing? So will they not believe? (Qur'an, 21: 30)

It is We Who have built the universe with (Our Creative) power, and
verily, it is We Who are steadily expanding it. (Qur'an, 51: 47)

It was again twentieth century scientific progress that allowed us to
discover more evidence of the design in life. The electron microscope
revealed the structure of the cell, the smallest unit of life, as well
as the parts that comprise it. The discovery of DNA demonstrated the
infinite intelligence in the cell. Biochemical and physiological
advances have shown the flawless workings at the molecular level of the
body, and its superior design which cannot be explained by anything
other than creation.

As opposed to all this, it was the primitive state of science 150 years
ago that prepared the ground for the formation of the theory of
evolution.

In conclusion, it is impossible to consider those who believe in
creation, and who constantly provide new evidence of it, as being
opposed to progress, development, and science. On the contrary, such
people are their greatest supporters. Those who actually oppose
progress are those who turn their backs on all the scientific evidence
and defend the theory of evolution, which is nothing but an
unsubstantiated fantasy.
dr shad j lewis (via google) - 12 Sep 2005 18:31 GMT
I don't know, but I'm not interested in it, either.  Too much other
stuff going on right now!
carabelli - 12 Sep 2005 18:55 GMT
"harunyahya" <harunyahya2011@yahoo.com> wrote ...........

Are you from Kansas too?

carabelli
W_B - 13 Sep 2005 17:35 GMT
>"harunyahya" <harunyahya2011@yahoo.com> wrote ...........
>
>Are you from Kansas too?
>
>carabelli

Hmmm Kansas...

Where it's ok to go to the family reunion to pick up chicks.
--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
Steven Fawks - 13 Sep 2005 22:59 GMT
You're thinking of Ar-kansas.

Most Jayhawkers aren't *that* low.

Fawks

>>Are you from Kansas too?
>>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> W_B
W_B - 13 Sep 2005 23:06 GMT
Yer right, my bad.

>You're thinking of Ar-kansas.
>
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>>
>> W_B

--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
carabelli - 13 Sep 2005 23:55 GMT
> Yer right, my bad.

The embarassing thing is that the fundamentalis Christian Right have enough
sayso on the State Education board that the teaching of evolution in schools
is being reviewed in Kansas again.  IMHO they're acting like monkeys.

carabelli
W_B - 14 Sep 2005 15:22 GMT
>> Yer right, my bad.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>carabelli

If man evolved from monkeys...

    Why do we still have monkeys ?

Hand me that banana.
--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
Tim Dixon - 14 Sep 2005 15:37 GMT
>>> Yer right, my bad.
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> Hand me that banana.

MUTATION + NATURAL SELECTION + TIME = SLIME TO MAN. SLIME TO PROTOZOA TO
WORM TO FISH TO AMPHIBIAN TO REPTILE TO BIRD TO MAMMAL TO MAN. Start with
nothing, add TIME and CHANCE, and amoebas become astronauts. This is nothing
more than monkey mythology.

Once I was a tadpole beginning to begin,
Then I was a frog with my tail tucked in
Then I was a monkey in a banyan tree,
And now I am a professor with a Ph.D.
(Author Unknown)

Lindsay, D. G. (1999, c1995). The ABC's of evolutionism : Ape-man, batman,
catwoman, and other evolutionary fantasies (the rest of the stories).
Dallas, TX: Christ for the Nations.
Mark & Steven Bornfeld - 14 Sep 2005 16:32 GMT
>>>>Yer right, my bad.
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 22 lines]
> And now I am a professor with a Ph.D.
> (Author Unknown)

    Ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny.

Steve

> Lindsay, D. G. (1999, c1995). The ABC's of evolutionism : Ape-man, batman,
> catwoman, and other evolutionary fantasies (the rest of the stories).
> Dallas, TX: Christ for the Nations.

Signature

Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

W_B - 14 Sep 2005 16:58 GMT
>> Once I was a tadpole beginning to begin,
>> Then I was a frog with my tail tucked in
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
>Steve

Indeed, one of the catch phrases of my favorite bio professor.
--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
Clinton - 15 Sep 2005 02:59 GMT
> >> Yer right, my bad.
> >>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
>     Why do we still have monkeys ?

Perhaps many people don't realize they are monkeys.
Stovepipe - 15 Sep 2005 05:49 GMT
> >The embarassing thing is that the fundamentalis Christian Right have
> >enough sayso on the State Education board that the teaching of evolution
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> W_B Take out the G'RBAGE wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com

Monkeys have evolved from the old days as well.

<the Pipe uses his third arm to scratch under his arm...>

SP
Signature

Take out the TRASH to reply

Joel M. Eichen - 15 Sep 2005 11:14 GMT
>If man evolved from monkeys...
>
>    Why do we still have monkeys ?

REPLY

To set a good example so we humans know how to behave ......

Joel
Stovepipe - 15 Sep 2005 05:49 GMT
> > Yer right, my bad.
>  The embarassing thing is that the fundamentalis Christian Right have
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> carabelli

You have _no_ real idea just how dangerous and how  much clout the
religious right have in your country. They are TELLING the gov'mint what
to do and not to do in cloning practices and regulations.

It is positively scary.

<the Pipe sticks his third arm in his pocket to get a piece of gum....>

Cheers
SP
Signature

Take out the TRASH to reply

W_B - 15 Sep 2005 15:54 GMT
><the Pipe sticks his third arm in his pocket to get a piece of gum....>
>
>Cheers
>SP

Bet the girls positively adore you.
--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
Stovepipe - 16 Sep 2005 02:20 GMT
> ><the Pipe sticks his third arm in his pocket to get a piece of gum....>
> >
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> Take out the G'RBAGE
> wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com

Actually, that is another monoclonal anti-genomic ribosomal
anti-parallel alkyl-shifted experiment we are working with the religious
right-on.

SP
Signature

Take out the TRASH to reply

Stovepipe - 15 Sep 2005 05:49 GMT
> Yer right, my bad.
>
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> Take out the G'RBAGE
> wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com

Oklahoma--- Where men are men...
... And sheep are nervous....

SP
Signature

Take out the TRASH to reply

W_B - 15 Sep 2005 15:57 GMT
>Oklahoma--- Where men are men...
>... And sheep are nervous....
>
>SP

Thought that was Kanada...
--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
Stovepipe - 16 Sep 2005 02:20 GMT
> >Oklahoma--- Where men are men...
> >... And sheep are nervous....
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Take out the G'RBAGE
> wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com

Ummm... 'Think they moved it down river a bit...

SP
Signature

Take out the TRASH to reply

W_B - 16 Sep 2005 15:59 GMT
>> On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 00:49:15 -0400, stove99pipe@yahoo.ca (Stovepipe)
>wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>>
>> W_B

>Ummm... 'Think they moved it down river a bit...
>
>SP

NO, LA ?
--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
Stovepipe - 17 Sep 2005 07:14 GMT
> >> On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 00:49:15 -0400, stove99pipe@yahoo.ca (Stovepipe)
> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 19 lines]
> Take out the G'RBAGE
> wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com

Yeah.... it kinda got ta slidin' a bit... they nipped 'round ta the
front and tried ta stop it, but... ya know... A bit heavy... An' it was
on wheels,,,,, so it hit the Valley and found Peace....  Amen....

SP

SP
Signature

Take out the TRASH to reply

W_B - 19 Sep 2005 19:27 GMT
>> >> On Thu, 15 Sep 2005 00:49:15 -0400, stove99pipe@yahoo.ca (Stovepipe)
>> >wrote:
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>>
>> W_B

>Yeah.... it kinda got ta slidin' a bit... they nipped 'round ta the
>front and tried ta stop it, but... ya know... A bit heavy... An' it was
>on wheels,,,,, so it hit the Valley and found Peace....  Amen....
>
>SP

You are an odd duck, Pipe.

--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
Bill - 12 Sep 2005 20:01 GMT
Why is denying the theory of evolution portrayed as rejecting
development and progress ?

__________________

Why is denying the theory of gravity portrayed as rejecting development
and progress ?

- dentaldoc
Mark & Steven Bornfeld - 12 Sep 2005 20:09 GMT
> Why is denying the theory of evolution portrayed as rejecting
> development and progress ?
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> - dentaldoc

    If you're not worried, perhaps you don't appreciate the gravity of the
situation.

Steve

Signature

Mark & Steven Bornfeld DDS
http://www.dentaltwins.com
Brooklyn, NY
718-258-5001

carabelli - 12 Sep 2005 20:13 GMT
> > Why is denying the theory of evolution portrayed as rejecting
> > development and progress ?
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Steve

Is this turning into one of those weighty threads?

carabelli
Clinton - 12 Sep 2005 22:46 GMT
> > > Why is denying the theory of evolution portrayed as rejecting
> > > development and progress ?

Actually this kind of argument is used a lot in Sci.med its called
the, "if its too complex it can't happen argument"

intelligent design-argument, humans are simply to complex to
                  have evolved, so it can't be?

pro-amalgam - vaproization and galvanic/EM action is too complex
             a phenomena, especially if there is considerable
             variablitiy, so it must not be so!.

organized dentistry/medicine - for an organization to act in
                              a way to hide the facts would require
                              complex planning and behavior, so
                              it must not be. Developing complex
                              policies that are wrong would require
                              complex chains or error and
misjudgement , therefore error and incorrect policies cannot occur,
because only what is simple and therefore basically correct can be.

You are more like the creationists than you can even realize.

As for gravity, upon completing the theory of gravitation Newton was
asked what could keep all the planets and their satellites in orbit
at the same time. the reply, he had no idea except perhaps divine
intervention!
W_B - 13 Sep 2005 17:54 GMT
>> > Why is denying the theory of evolution portrayed as rejecting
>> > development and progress ?
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
>
>carabelli

F = ma
--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
W_B - 13 Sep 2005 17:53 GMT
>> Why is denying the theory of evolution portrayed as rejecting
>> development and progress ?
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
>Steve

Great minds think alike.
--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
W_B - 13 Sep 2005 17:53 GMT
>Why is denying the theory of evolution portrayed as rejecting
>development and progress ?
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
>- dentaldoc

Am not sure you grasp the gravity of the situation  <g>
--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
Joel M. Eichen - 12 Sep 2005 20:46 GMT
>Why is denying the theory of evolution portrayed as rejecting
>development and progress ?
>
>HARUN YAHYA

REPLY

Because God said so ......

Why do you ask?

Joel

>www.harunyahya.com
>
[quoted text clipped - 95 lines]
>and defend the theory of evolution, which is nothing but an
>unsubstantiated fantasy.
W_B - 13 Sep 2005 17:33 GMT
>Path: news.easynews.com!en206!core-easynews!newsfeed2.easynews.com!easynews.com!easynews!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
>From: "harunyahya" <harunyahya2011@yahoo.com>
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>
>HAIRY-UN YEEHAW-HA

Reported as Off-Topic:
abuse@fmanager.org
abuse@yahoo.com
groups-abuse@google.com

--

W_B
Take out the G'RBAGE
wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.