Friday, January 15, 2010

Michael Savage On God and Evolution

Thanks to Damien for sending this to me.

28 comments:

Damien said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Damien said...

You're Welcome Pastorius!

Wow, I'm Glad you liked both the videos enough to post them both here!

Anonymous said...

Accepting our evolutionary history does not mean rejecting our spirituality.

Pastorius said...

Anonymous,
I like your blog (Sean Robsville).

Do you actually read IBA, or did you just happen to drop by?

MEP said...

Michael Savage is dead wrong on this. He and others like him expect us to take a scientific theory as truth, bashing us for not subscribing to it and then he turns around and dismisses our faith as "not thinking" or stupid.

Do things evolve, yes, but can one creature evolve or morph into another, no. I ask for you to give one example of this happening. Where have the fossil records proven such and not just theorized it. If you throw out all your presupposed positions, then you can't dismiss a common designer and creator as a possible reason for commonality between animals and humans. Jesus said that man and female were both created in the beginning. Not a billion years after some cosmic collision. Animals and humans are born either male or female. There is no instance of a human or animal evolving into the opposite sex. You can dismiss the Bible if you are not a believer, that is fine, but don't say you are a believer in the Truth of GOD's Word, and also say that you believe in the modern/liberal/rationalist/godless theory of evolution. It just doesn't square unless you remove the Bible as the opposing argument. Then you can say what you want.

Michael

Pastorius said...

Oh, so we have to believe EXACTLY as you do or we're not real believers, is that right?

There can be no disagreement?

MEP said...

Pastorius, you are a classic. You avoid the original topic at hand by creating a new argument based on something I implied that, once again, you just can't deal with.

You don't have to believe as I do but don't dismiss the teachings of Jesus and the traditions of the Church and then make it sound like it is just me that you are dismissing and being distrustful about. Do you believe that Jesus is the Creator of Heaven and Earth and of all things, if so, do you think He would have some idea of how it came about?

Or you can just believe what you want religiously, start your own denomination or blog, and proclaim that you, Pastorius, bring forth all truth and all others before you, including Jesus, have given themselves over to lies. Shepherds don't lead their flock into harms way, they shield them from all possible evil and deceptions. The THEORY of Evolution is the wolf you have invited in.

Michael

Damien said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Damien said...

MEP or Michael, if that's what you prefer to be called,

I'm sorry you feel that way. The evidence for evolution is overwhelming weather we like it or not. Rejecting evolution can only be done by either being ignorant or ignoring mountains of scientific evidence. Darwin's theory has not been debunked in over two hundred years, despite the attempts to do so, and all the things that could have falsified it. For example if different species on Earth had radically different genetic structures, that would go agianst the idea that all creatures on Earth had a common ancestor, but that's not the case at all. Until they something like "fossil bunny rabbits in the pre Cambrian" as many scientists have pointed out or better yet human remains in pre Cambrian strata, we will have little reason to doubt evolution. Also contrary to what you might think there are many practical applications of evolutionary theory.

These videos by Youtube user and scientist C0nc0rdance, give some excellent examples.

The light of evolution: What would be lost part 1

The light of evolution: What would be lost part 2

The light of evolution: What would be lost part 3

No one has yet shown me a practical application for intelligent design or young earth creationism, or any other type of creationism for that matter, except maybe converting people to a particular religion. However, even than they are not very effective because the empirical data backing them up is so poor. In fact, the data is non existent.

MEP said...

Damien,

I won't lie and say I watched the entire video links you sent but I did watch a little from each. I totally don't agree with the idea that micro and macro are on the same level, and that macro is the product of micro changes over a longer period of time. I would like some proof of this and not just conjecture. Also, would it be possible for mankind to devolve and go back to being apes, or is it fish, since it is put forth that we derived from them, I mean, if we waited long enough? And if that is not possible, then explain to me why not.

If we based all our beliefs on verifiable empirical data, then we would have to discount everything not personally experienced since all history and science comes to us via mankind. You base your belief system on scientific theories, which are not proven, and I base mine on what GOD has revealed to us. I am not out to prove that evolution is wrong because it has not proven itself to be true or that GOD is wrong. You are trying to rationalize the creation of the universe though your finite brain. Darwin said that his theory stands or falls on the finding of transitional fossil records. There have been no fossil records showing an animal in a transitional form between one species and another, not one. Also, I am assuming here about you and others, it is amazing how much doubt people put in mankind when it comes to religion but when it comes to science, well we must believe everything that is put forth. You can't use the argument of silence to prove that your theory is correct. Just because you can't find the data that debunks your theory does not make your theory true unless you can replicate it. You also can't dismiss the other sides arguments just because your ideology does not allow you to believe them. You don't have to believe them but you do have to weight them.

Michael

Damien said...

Sorry, I must correct a mistake. I meant to say, "Until they find something like "fossil bunny rabbits in the pre Cambrian" as many scientists have pointed out or better yet human remains in pre Cambrian strata, we will have little reason to doubt evolution." Sorry I left out a word.

Damien said...

Michael,

You're wrong again, for one thing there have been plenty of transitional fossils found over the years, and even if some are still missing, that's not much of a reason to doubt evolution.

Here are a couple of videos from DonExodus, which give some examples of actual transitional fossils.

Transitional Fossils I

Transitional Fossils II

If I wanted to I could send you video after video debunking just about every creationist claim. Also scientific theories cannot be proven, they can only be dis-proven, and no one has been able to disprove evolution in over two hundred years. Its very unlikely to be false at this point. And by the way, don't site known frauds like Piltdown man, and claim that somehow proves that scientists who accept evolution can't be trusted, when it was scientists who accepted evolution that debunked it, in the first place. Also am I really the one denying something here because of ideology? While evolution maybe compatible with my view of God, there are somethings about evolution that I don't like, believe me.

Damien said...

Sorry I accidentally linked to the same video twice.

Here's a link to the second one.

Transitional Fossils II.

MEP said...

Damien,

Are you telling me that GOD could not create an animal that shares some of the same traits as another, such as blood, mouth, eyes and so on? How do you conclude that one must have come from the other based on that? I am not closed to the idea of evolution, but I am not convinced that man is equal to that of a mere animal, but was created by GOD to have dominion over them. This makes us special since we are created in his image. It is not that I dismiss evolution outright, it is that my faith (ideology if you prefer) has doctrine that conflicts with the theory. Until they can be reconciled or one proven to be true and the other false, then I have to default to my faith in GOD and not to man. In other words, if the Bible did not say what it does about mankind, then I would be more inclined to your theory.

If you don't mind, what is your view of God and what is your idea of man's relationship with Him? Just curious so that I can fully understand where you are coming from.

Thanks,
Michael

Damien said...

Michael,

I'm not saying that God couldn't have created all the life on Earth, and neither was Micheal Savage. The point he was making is that God and Evolution are not incompatible. The Almighty could have created Life through Evolution, just as he could have created the rest of the universe by causing other natural process such as star and planet formation to happen. I just see no reason why he could not have also done so through evolution when it came to life. I regard God as eternal, perfect, omnipotent and omnipresent, as well as just. If God always existed he could choose to take his time in creating all life, any life that exists in the universe today. Being eternal he would have unlimited time. If God always existed he existed 4.5 billion years ago, when the Earth was forming and even billions of years before that when the big bang happened. Neither of which are evolution, but instead are cosmology. Many creationists however, confuse evolution and cosmology.

Sorry to tell you this, but there's no good reason to think that evolution does not happen, and that includes what you refer to as macro evolution. There's no good reason to think that over time through its decedents one species does not give rise to another. At one point in time one of our ancestors was a non human ape. Weather you like that or not, weather I like that or not is irrelevant. Before that we have ancestors that were not primates, than before that our ancestors were reptiles, before that amphibians, before that fish and if you go back far enough, nothing more than microbes. None of our ancestors were birds, dinosaurs, insects, or arachnids, but that's because their lineages branched off from ours before we evolved. All of this is true regardless of how we might feel about it or what the Bible says. Sorry, but there's nothing you or I can do to change this. If the Universe is only six thousand years old, and God created all species on Earth as is, and not through Darwin Evolution, than what I'm I to make of all the evidence that says otherwise? Am I to believe that God is a liar, or am I to become and Atheist and say that God does not exist? You seem to think we shouldn't use our brains to figure out how God created, the universe, the Earth and all life that exists. You seem to think that instead we should just blindly trust some book. That is not science, and its an unenlightened view of the universe its creator. Sorry if you don't like that, but its not up to us.

SamenoKami said...

My problem with evolution is the question - What determines change? Is it # of reproductions or is it time alone. We can classify insects in amber from 160+million yrs ago by genus, order, phyllum. They look just like they do now. The coelocanthe (sp) looks the same as it did 160+m yrs ago. So insects didn't change in # of years or in reproductions. Coelacanthe didn't change in yrs. Strombolites (sp) the oldest known life form, (I think, I'm doing all this from memory which ain't too good) haven't changed in 350+million yrs. They're still around, unchanged. Horsecrabs, alligators, ocapi, there's a long list of things that are the same as in the fossil record from million of years ago. It isn't logical. But I really don't care and this isn't an argument Creation vs evolution. It's an observation.

MEP said...

a response to Damien's last post....

Part 1

I'm not saying that God couldn't have created all the life on Earth, and neither was Micheal Savage. The point he was making is that God and Evolution are not incompatible. --------if GOD said He did it one way and science says it happened another way, then yes, they are incompatible.

The Almighty could have created Life through Evolution, just as he could have created the rest of the universe by causing other natural process such as star and planet formation to happen. I just see no reason why he could not have also done so through evolution when it came to life.-----I agree, He could have but He didn't. He even gave his process.

I regard God as eternal, perfect, omnipotent and omnipresent, as well as just. If God always existed he could choose to take his time in creating all life, any life that exists in the universe today. Being eternal he would have unlimited time.------I agree.

If God always existed he existed 4.5 billion years ago, when the Earth was forming and even billions of years before that when the big bang happened.-------interesting how sure you are about this. If GOD created the Heavens and the Earth first before light, then when did this big bang happen and what was it that banged? or what cosmic evolution existed before the big bang since the big bang was not the beginning? Also, I would really like to know if we can devolve back into microbes? I mean, I see no good reason not to think that a process could not be reversed. Do you?

Neither of which are evolution, but instead are cosmology. Many creationists however, confuse evolution and cosmology.

MEP said...

part 2

Sorry to tell you this, but there's no good reason to think that evolution does not happen, and that includes what you refer to as macro evolution.-----for me, this is a big reason--Genesis 1:20 God also said: Let the waters bring forth the creeping creature having life, and the fowl that may fly over the earth under the firmament of heaven. 21 And God created the great whales, and every living and moving creature, which the waters brought forth, according to their kinds, and every winged fowl according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 And he blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the waters of the sea: and let the birds be multiplied upon the earth. 23 And the evening and morning were the fifth day. 24 And God said: Let the earth bring forth the living creature in its kind, cattle and creeping things, and beasts of the earth, according to their kinds. And it was so done. 25 And God made the beasts of the earth according to their kinds, and cattle, and every thing that creepeth on the earth after its kind. And God saw that it was good. 26 And he said: Let us make man to our image and likeness: and let him have dominion over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and the beasts, and the whole earth, and every creeping creature that moveth upon the earth. 27 And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. 28 And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth.---------If your argument is true, then why didn't GOD just stop after creating the sea creatures?


There's no good reason to think that over time through its decedents one species does not give rise to another. At one point in time one of our ancestors was a non human ape.-----maybe yours but I am not into bestiality; just joking.

Weather you like that or not, weather I like that or not is irrelevant. Before that we have ancestors that were not primates, than before that our ancestors were reptiles, before that amphibians, before that fish and if you go back far enough, nothing more than microbes.-------and I am being acused of nonsensical thoughts, are you serious

None of our ancestors were birds, dinosaurs, insects, or arachnids, but that's because their lineages branched off from ours before we evolved.-------glad to hear we agree on something :)

All of this is true regardless of how we might feel about it or what the Bible says.------what is your definition of truth and what constitutes it for you?

Sorry, but there's nothing you or I can do to change this. If the Universe is only six thousand years old, and God created all species on Earth as is,-------- I did not say that things are exactly the same today as they were when originally created.

and not through Darwin Evolution, than what am I to make of all the evidence that says otherwise?-------"evidence" that conflicts with the Providence of GOD.

Am I to believe that God is a liar,---------I think you have already done this.

or am I to become and Atheist and say that God does not exist?---------Deism usually leads to Atheism.

You seem to think we shouldn't use our brains to figure out how God created, the universe, the Earth and all life that exists.-------our capacity for knowledge is finite, I think it is important to learn as much as possible but to rationalize these things from our perspective is a little presumptuous.

You seem to think that instead we should just blindly trust some book. That is not science, and its an unenlightened view of the universe its creator.--------and what have you learned in life about cosmology and evolution that you personally experienced? I think it is safe to say that we all put our trust in one book or another.

Sorry if you don't like that, but its not up to us.-------touche.

Michael

Damien said...

Michael,

For the most part you are completely ignoring the links I've posted. For the most part your arguments agianst my points so far are to just call them silly or quote a Bible verses. What good does that do? Seriously? IF I don't already accept the Bible as the literal word of God you might as well quote from any sacred text and tell me, it disproves evolution. Weather you like it or not, the overwhelming majority of scientists accept evolution regardless of religious affiliation. No peer reviewed scientific Journal has ever approved anything for publican in the last century that poses a significant problem for evolution. What I am saying is not absurd. A literal interpretation of genesis is absurd. I know that you don't want to hear that and I'm sorry if that offends you. If you want to convince me that evolution is false, you are going to have to provide some empirical evidence from a credible source, not scripture or some ill informed and often dishonest creationist website. Where are all the fossilized homo sapiens in pre Cambrian strata to be found?

midnight rider said...

Paging Mr Darrow. . .Paging Mr Bryan. . .Please return to the courtroom at once. . .the monkeys are getting restless. . .the sheep are getting nervous. . .

Damien said...

Midnight Rider,

LOL!

MEP said...

Damien,

I do not think you should take the majority position on science because you would then have to prove to me why mankind is the cause for the warming of the Earth that has not happened in the past 10 years or how Mars is also warming and there seems to be no humans on that planet. A literal interpretation of Genesis 1/2 may be absurd, I agree, but the historicity of the event is unequivocally held to by the Catholic church and is not just some story that stemmed from earlier pagan ones and used to relay some moral or righteous lesson about how much GOD loves us.

I believe we are at an impasse. I enjoyed the debate.

Thanks,
Michael

Damien said...

Michael,

Actually unlike Pastorius I think man is having an effect on the climate, but its not just because that's what the majority of scientists believe. The same is true for evolution. But if you want to stop now, Okay, I couldn't debate you all day anyway.

Damien said...

Have a nice day, Michael!

Anonymous said...

Fight about the small shit and you weaken us all. Get a grip. Evolution is the way life adapts to its ever changing environment, and religion has played a very important role in making us who we are. Be serious about the war you are in, O men of the West. We will ally ourselves with the murderers and traitors who dwell in the mountains if we must. The EYE must be destroyed.

Damien said...

Anonymous,

We already got a grip. We're not even debating this anymore.

MEP said...

Damien, Pastorius

I want to make a few corrections. I went back and read more about this last night and this morning. (Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma- by Dr. Ludwig Ott, and a few other sources) The Church has not decisively declared one way or another Genesis 1/2 to be taken as a scientific expose which I already knew, in fact as I and Damien agreed, it should not be taken literally. However, I did think that the Church stood more closely by the events even through relayed through a non-scientific point of view. It does say that the event (Genesis 1/2), however it played out, did in fact happen and does stand by the historicity of the event. They also say that the main crux of the issue is when the human soul was created, and the Church does affirm that the soul was immediately created by GOD and not inherited by an inorganic material or mechanically. This belief does not bleed over to the body of mankind and the door is left open to the possibility of man evolving from a more ignorant or primitive animal but they do caution against this belief for it could contradict other doctrine. They don't say that the evolution of the body is impossible. Similarly they caution against the belief that man was created in the fashion dictated in Genesis.

I only share this with you because I think it is interesting and I am sure, since you both seem to be very intelligent, you would at least like to know the opposing arguments. This is somewhat of a concession from me since what I have learned between today and yesterday does correct some of the things posted yesterday, for that I apologize. I do, however, lean more towards a special creation of man's body out of inorganic material (ie. clay) and not the inheritance from another animal, which I have the leniency to do. And likewise, you have the freedom to think that the body of man evolved from an animal or some other substance.

I will now try to get a grip on things and do other things this Saturday, like watch the Saints play.

GOD bless,
Michael

MEP said...

****CORRECTION****
I desperately need to make one final correction regarding the line below that I posted just prior to this one. The statement below is not cautioned against by the Church but is recommended for the faithful.

*******************
Similarly they caution against the belief that man was created in the fashion dictated in Genesis.

Michael