Go to Religion in the Modern World
- Add a comment
- Go to Darwin's Big Bang Theory and other humor
Re: fineyoungsinger was responding
Xeno-x - She's not blocked, she can always come back and explain why she felt it necessary to challenge me over the validity of a suggestion made by other people that I referred to as comedy and ridiculous.
As for the other guy, there are obviously issues there, we are all members of the "dark side". Not only is everyone who ever disagreed with him blocked but also a number of others that he fears might disagree with him are blocked. In my case I have never commented on his blog, yet he comes here and comments and even has the audacity to tell me I am blocked from his blog and why, (like I friggin care). This is a man who envisions himself as a spiritual leader? It's not funny any more, it's pitiful.
posted by
gomedome
on July 30, 2008 at 9:55 AM
| link to this | reply
fineyoungsinger was responding
to your friend and mine who has blocked just about everybody -- must be including here -- she used my blog for a comment responding to him.
she just forgot those weren't your words, but his -- soul_builder
looks like everybody needs to respond to him on others' blogs -- it's all right with me -- if someone needs to comment on mine so that dialogue can be set up then I am all for it.
posted by
Xeno-x
on July 30, 2008 at 8:49 AM
| link to this | reply
Thanks for that and yes I knew it was pre .......human in some way but it's
an interesting concept that the human mind some thousands of years ago grasped the insight to the earth mother for the human race.Call her Eve or whatever doesn't matter to me.
posted by
Kabu
on July 29, 2008 at 8:43 PM
| link to this | reply
FineYoungSinger - go back and read that portion of this post and stop being
such a twit.
Seriously, I refer to it as comedy and I have already given you one example of where I have "heard" this type of suggestion. I was being diplomatic when I said you had lost me, I simply did not want to believe that you had missed the point by such a wide margin.
posted by
gomedome
on July 29, 2008 at 2:12 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: FineYoungSinger - you've lost me here
as far as the link to the comment you've provided here is concerned, I question any fact that is supported by the statement, "I even have the article!" without providing his readers any other information about the article, other than the fact that he/she has it. Therefore, the statement/opinion is still unsupported by evidence.
posted by
FineYoungSinger
on July 29, 2008 at 2:08 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: FineYoungSinger - you've lost me here
I don't know how I could lose you, considering I was very clear. Can you provide evidence for the statement, i.e. a quotation, a document link, something that backs up what you "heard"? It's not a hard question.
P.S. Had you written "I've even heard that the baptist church forced scientists to adopt the big bang theory as a means of controlling them", I would raise the same question.
posted by
FineYoungSinger
on July 29, 2008 at 1:57 PM
| link to this | reply
FineYoungSinger - you've lost me here
What am I providing evidence for? That someone actually said this or is it a rhetorical question where you are expressing your disbelief that someone could actually suggest something like this? In either case, it came up on Blogit in the past and just recently amongst people with "similar thought processes" . . .
HERE is the last time I remember a very close derivative of this idea being suggested.
posted by
gomedome
on July 29, 2008 at 12:24 PM
| link to this | reply
OK,
I was with you until this statement:
"I've even heard that the catholic church forced scientists to adopt the big bang theory as a means of controlling them." (SURPRISED?)
Can you provide evidence for this statement rather than hearsay?
posted by
FineYoungSinger
on July 29, 2008 at 11:34 AM
| link to this | reply
Kabu - I can save you the time of looking for it
It is not really a scientific study you are referencing, though I have no doubt that it was presented to you as such. It is actually an interpretation of the results of a real scientific study exploring mtDNA (mitochondrial), with the results skewed in favor of reconciling biblical stories. A perfect example of this (and possibly the one you are referencing) can be found: HERE People twisting scientific results to demonstrate the validity of their agendas is nothing new, it happens both pro and con for any set of scientific results but in this case, the contention is leaving out one rather important aspect. From what we know, there was indeed a "biological Eve" but she may or may not have been the same species as modern humans. More likely she was from one of the predeceasing hominid species but it is also possible that she was not even human.
I clipped this online which explains it rather well: "There must be a mitochondrial Eve, mathematically speaking, but technically she need not even be human. She could have been a hominid ancestor of humans. Since dating mitochondrial mutations is imprecise, the number could be anywhere from 50,000 years ago to 500,000. Whether that makes her "human" or not is kind of arbitrary. Call her human anyway; after all, she's your mom (and mine) a few (thousand) times removed."
This goes directly to a contention I have made before: if they are talking science in church it is probably mostly bullshit. . . .
posted by
gomedome
on July 29, 2008 at 9:53 AM
| link to this | reply
I hesitate to write this because I have lost the scientific paper that I
read it from. But it stated that DNA evidence being gathered around the world is pointing to all humans originating from one female. I am NOT a fundamentalist Christian, for me the bible isn't a book of science. I just have an "inner me" relationship with my God. So this isn't a fundamentalist stab. I just find it a very interesting possibility of evolution that was a and is part of an orderly plan and not a random mistake in nature.
posted by
Kabu
on July 29, 2008 at 9:09 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: I guess nobody wants to admit we all came from pond scum...
Pat_B - that is another argument I have heard a lot from these people but more about descending from apes. For some reason it is not a good thing for us to be descended from apes but they aren't quite sure why other than they don't like the idea because others have told them they shouldn't like the idea. I always feel like the bearer of bad news when I have to break it to them that human and chimp DNA has more similarities by comparison than that of mice to rats.
posted by
gomedome
on July 28, 2008 at 9:19 PM
| link to this | reply
kooka_lives - Re: And often to show just how little they understand
I assume that if someone is of my generation and finished high school, that they have learned much the same as what I had learned pertaining to these basic scientific principles. It is what has transpired outside of education and within religious agenda in the last few decades, that is manifesting itself today in the ignorance we see on display all around us. And when you think what some of their contentions are based on. . . . things such as scientists worldwide being involved in a grand conspiracy, or these same scientific principles being reduced to religious beliefs that are being promoted by some kind of scientist cult . . it demonstrates the power of consensus when applied to an inward looking view and continuously subjected to peer pressures.
These people are the equivalent to prevailing progressive thought that inbreeding is to a society's general physical health.
posted by
gomedome
on July 28, 2008 at 9:14 PM
| link to this | reply
kingmi - thanx for stopping in
I presume you are speaking of this guy:
HERE
posted by
gomedome
on July 28, 2008 at 8:55 PM
| link to this | reply
I guess nobody wants to admit we all came from pond scum...
(aside to myself, some came further than others)...
posted by
Pat_B
on July 28, 2008 at 3:12 PM
| link to this | reply
And often to show just how little they understand
They often seem to decide that the Big Bang Theory and Evolution are part of the same idea. So you go after them as if they were one and somehow connected. A post like the ones you are talking about here seemed to say that the Big Bang theory led to the idea of evolution.
You really have to wonder just what these people were taught when it came to scientific ideas.
posted by
kooka_lives
on July 28, 2008 at 2:43 PM
| link to this | reply
GD, I enjoyed today's blog. May I add a comment regarding professor Singh?
I believe it was Prof. Singh and his book,
The String Theory in which he noted the argument you refer to, and solved it by challenging anyone to provide particles of the "big bang" that would remain today, falling through space, heretofore unknown to modern science. Then two farmers discovered microwaves, and there you have it. Lol
posted by
kingmi
on July 28, 2008 at 1:41 PM
| link to this | reply