There is No Controversy Over the Process of Evolution
Human evolution and the evolution of all plants and animals on earth is really quite easy to understand. Those with the right traits to survive the environment lived long enough to reproduce and passed these traits along to their offspring. Those who did not survive their environment did not reproduce and did not pass on their disadvantaged genes in as great a number. This process continues throughout millions of years and species can change dramatically over that period of time. The human species is no exception.
There really is no controversy on the scientific understanding of evolution. There is no controversy over the view that the earth is flat or that gravity exists. The only ones who attack scientific rigor are the ones who rely on delusions of grandeur to get by in life. They would rather think that they are "god's" favorite creation and that they are so special that they are above the laws of physics and biological evolution. This is the sad result of religious fanaticism. This pathology can also be due to a lack of intelligence/education, mental illness or a combination of all said factors.
Published by Articles
Hello, thanks for visiting. View profile
The Ethics of OutsourcingOver recent months, the debate of outsourcing has risen to new light. This informational look at the different types of outsourcing analyze both the practices of Nike, and a var...- The Politics of FearReaching far beyond gavel-pounding, statute-stretching jurisprudence, this is an examination of the more visceral, emotional elements of our politics.
- Charles Darwin: Breaking the Beliefs of GenerationsAn overview of the life and achivments of Charles Darwin.
- Addressing the Issue of the Religion Not Being Taught in America's Public SchoolsSomehow, religion became a taboo subject in American schools. Most Americans agree that some sort of religious education is need, yet it is not required. Where and when does religion belong in our schools?
- The Great Debate on Genetically Modified OrganismsScientists the world over debated the safety of genetically modified organisms (GMOs); the debate is still continuing to this day. The Midwestern United States is right in the middle of this debate as they are prolifi...
- Ego, Death, Religion and Human Purpose
- 'Darwinism' is Still a Fighting Word in the Culture Wars
- Is Blindness Really a Deficiency?
- The Death of Darwinism
- Common Myths Regarding Evolution - It's Only a Theory, Right?
- Opinion Piece About the Place of Race in Modern Medicine
- How to Understand Sigmund Freud's Psychic Apparatus Within the Context of His Drea...
5 Comments
Post a CommentVery well, Chadd; there is no purpose to controversy over an incontrovertible observation. To wit, there would similarly be no merit in controversy over the process by which children are conceived; it's pretty well documented, is quite repeatable and, to the sorrow of those whose beliefs it inconveniences (children with the idea they came from a cabbage patch, for example), doesn't change as a fact if any percentage of anyone, anywhere disagrees.
Too bad 66% of the Unites States' not agreeing doesn't matter.
The problem is if your thesis is that there is no controversy over evolution, you're wrong. There is a controversy over evolution - I'm not going to debate whether or not it exists, the article itself is wrong, if 66% of Americans believe in some form of Creationism, and 25% of them believe in a dual Creationism/Evolution, yes, there is controversy in the theory - and thus the article is wrong.
If 66% of the United States disagreed with gravity, would gravity care?
Agree or disagree as you see fit, I'd say; evolution is an observation of cause and effect, not a debate. What's so damn tricky to see about this? We can plainly determine how genes interact, and...hold onto your pants...if you died before you could breed, your specific genes aren't passing on. Maybe why you died wasn't genetic. Fun fact is, it doesn't matter why you died; your genes still aren't going anywhere.
If detractors of evolution had a single functioning braincell to share between them, they'd argue that evolution doesn't necessarily equivocate into ever-increasing superiority and survivability of a species, but that would make sense. Plus it doesn't give them something to wave their bibles around about, so that's just no fun at all.
Evolution is a fact. Unfortunately, if it worked out as most seem to expect and we're the best of the best that thousands of generations have culminated i
You first say that religion is "an evolved cultural trait." Then you later imply that belief in God is unnecessary and even a "pathology" (from pathos - sickness). If belief or faith is in fact evolved, then it *necessarily* had or has *some* benefit for human life, by definition, as you explain. Such is evolution. If so, how can it also simultaneously be a sickness?
Too bad 66% of the United States disagrees with you.