The Religious Nature of Evolution, or Lack Thereof

Darkstar, I think it's time to take a look at the Benton et al paper, Assessing Congruence Between Cladistic & Stratigraphic Data.Given that the phylogenies under study are independent of stratigraphy, it is possible to compare the two to see how well they match. There are two main reasons for disagreement. 1/ The phylogeny is wrong, & 2/ the fossil record is so poor that the daughter species is found in older rock than the parent. Given that this is the case, we should expect a very low SCI (SCI is the ratio of consistent to inconsistent nodes in a cladogram) value if evolution were not indicative of reality. ie. Nodes (in complex trees) match by chance rather than signal. In other words, the null hypothesis is that the SCI value will be a low value.Stratigraphic Consistency IndexThe SCI metric may also be summarized either as a mean value for each taxonomic group or as a proportion of cladograms that score SCI values of 0.500 or more, an indication that half, or more, of the branches are consistent with stratigraphic evidence. By both measures, fishes and echinoderms score better than tetrapods. Mean SCI values are: echinoderms (0.773), fishes (0.757), and tetrapods (0.701). Proportions of cladograms with SCI values $0.500 are tetrapods (100%), echinoderms (94%), and fishes (93%). For both measures, values for all three groups are indistinguishable according to binomial error bars (Fig. 3).Within the sample of echinoderm cladograms, nonechinoids show somewhat better results than echinoids but not significantly so (Fig. 3). The mean SCI value for echinoids is 0.724, and for nonechinoids 0.849; moreover, 90%of echinoid cladograms have SCI values $ 0.500,compared with 100% for nonechinoids.SCI values for fish groups are variable but not significantly different (Fig. 3). For mean SCI values, the order is as follows: sarcopterygians (0.904), teleosts (0.744), placoderms(0.741), agnathans (0.733), and actinopterygians (0.722). In all cases, all sampled cladograms show SCI values > 0.500. The rankings of tetrapod groups by both aspects of the SCI metric are comparable. Mean SCI values give this sequence: mammals (0.837), mammallike reptiles (0.729), lepidosauromorphs (0.714), dinosaurs (0.698), archosauromorphs (0.660), and turtles (0.586). The low value for turtles is significantly lower than the high values for synapsids, mammals, and mammallike reptiles. Proportions of cladograms with SCI values $ 0.500 give this sequence: mammals (100%), mammallike reptiles (100%), lepidosauromorphs (100%), turtles (100%), dinosaurs (86%), and archosauromorphs (78%)."Why is the SCI so high? Why do cladograms & stratigraphy match on the whole if evolution is not indicative of reality? Given that cladograms & stratigraphy match relatively well, how do you explain this significant correlation?Given there is a clear signal of "evolution" in the rock stratigraphy & morphology combined, it therefore stands to reason that where these phylogenies would infer large scale morphological change (Cetaceans, basal tetrapoda, & basal amniotes, for example), evolution can be reliably inferred. Even more reliably than phylogenetic analyses, cladistics & stratigraphy on their own, that is.Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

DarkStar,You still have a substantial amount of unanswered questions that deserve to be addressed.My position is that scientists, although they can certainly be short-sighted and self-serving, aren't engaging in a religious endeavor because facts have to support their claims. That is, there has to be an evidential basis to their work, and it can't be dismissed as wishful thinking. Several posters have pointed out that the fossil record does show the gradual development of new life forms on Earth over billions of years (regardless of the mechanism of this development), and you have yet to support your objection to this universally accepted scientific fact.In addition, the accusation of bias has to demonstrate that they are willfully ignoring a valid scientific construct that is an alternative to evolution. If there is only one reasonable choice to be made, someone can't be accused of bias for making it.regards,
Esteban Hambre

---

BREATHE DEEP THE GATHERING GLOOM

Mark24,Given the number of creationists present recently, could I suggest that you make the stratigraphy argument the topic of a new thread? That way the creationists can't ignore it without totally abandoning a thread. Again, just a suggestion, but I think it would make a great thread.

Loudmouth,Sure, why not. When ark replies I'll take it over into a new thread.Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

I see a Great Debate in the works: Mark vs. Ark & Dark. This is gonna be kick ass.Regards,
Esteban "Stark" Hambre

SOrry to but in, but are you saying Hitler was Christian?

Absolutely. And most of the horrific things that the Nazi's did they justified as being Christian Acts.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Hitler's religious views are kind of confusing. I'd say that he was neither Christian nor atheist, but a sort of generalized spiritualist who hated "traditional" Christianity. Here's some quotes:"Hence today I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.""My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God's truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter.""National Socialism and religion cannot exist together...."The heaviest blow that ever struck humanity was the coming of Christianity. Bolshevism is Christianity's illegitimate child. Both are inventions of the Jew. The deliberate lie in the matter of religion was introduced into the world by Christianity.... ""Let it not be said that Christianity brought man the life of the soul, for that evolution was in the natural order of things.""Christianity is a rebellion against natural law, a protest against nature. Taken to its logical extreme, Christianity would mean the systematic cultivation of the human failure.""The best thing is to let Christianity die a natural death.... When understanding of the universe has become widespread... Christian doctrine will be convicted of absurdity.... ""Christianity has reached the peak of absurdity.... And that's why someday its structure will collapse.... ""...the only way to get rid of Christianity is to allow it to die little by little.... "
"Christianity the liar.... ""We'll see to it that the Churches cannot spread abroad teachings in conflict with the interests of the State.""The reason why the ancient world was so pure, light and serene was that it knew nothing of the two great scourges: the pox and Christianity.""Originally, Christianity was merely an incarnation of Bolshevism, the destroyer.... ""The decisive falsification of Jesus' doctrine was the work of St.Paul. He gave himself to this work... for the purposes of personal exploitation.... "

​

"Didn't the world see, carried on right into the Middle Ages, the same old system of martyrs, tortures, faggots? Of old, it was in the name of Christianity. Today, it's in the name of Bolshevism. Yesterday the
instigator was Saul: the instigator today, Mardochai. Saul was changed into St.Paul, and Mardochai into Karl Marx. By exterminating this pest, we shall do humanity a service of which our soldiers can have no idea."

​

"Christianity is an invention of sick brains: one could imagine nothing more senseless, nor any more indecent way of turning the idea of the Godhead into a mockery....
transubstantiation>.... "

​

"When all is said, we have no reason to wish that the Italians and Spaniards should free themselves from the drug of Christianity. Let's be the only people who are immunised against the disease." (p 118-119)

​

"Kerrl, with noblest of intentions, wanted to attempt a synthesis between National Socialism and Christianity. I don't believe the thing's possible, and I see the obstacle in Christianity itself.... "

​

"Pure Christianity-- the Christianity of the catacombs-- is concerned with translating Christian doctrine into facts. It leads quite simply to the annihilation of mankind. It is merely whole-hearted Bolshevism,
under a tinsel of metaphysics."

​

"There is something very unhealthy about Christianity."

​

"It would always be disagreeable for me to go down to posterity as a man who made concessions in this field. I realize that man, in his imperfection, can commit innumerable errors-- but to devote myself deliberately to errors, that is something I cannot do. I shall never come personally to terms with the Christian lie."

​

"Our epoch in the next 200 years will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity.... My regret will have been that I couldn't... behold ."

​

"We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations: we have stamped it out".

​

"For their interests [the Church's] cannot fail to coincide with ours [the National Socialists] alike in our fight against the symptoms of degeneracy in the world of to-day, in our fight against a Bolshevist culture, against atheistic movement, against criminality, and in our struggle for a consciousness of a community in our national life".

​

"I often feel that we will have to undergo all the trials the devil and hell can devise before we achieve Final Victory....I may be no pious churchgoer, but deep within me I am nevertheless a devout man. That is to say, I believe that he who fights valiantly obeying the laws which a god has established and who never capitulates but instead gathers his forces time after time and always pushes forward-such a man will not be abandoned by the Lawgiver. Rather he will ultimately receive the blessing of Providence. And that blessing has been imparted to all great spirits in history."

​

---

"Illuminant light,
illuminate me."

I am well aware of what they claimed. That doesn't mean that he was a Christian. I am sick and tired of people using Hitler as a reference for Christians. Also sick and tired of people using that as an exuse to not believe in God.Romans 8:9
You, however, are controlled not by the sinful nature but by the Spirit, if the Spirit of God lives in you. And if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he does not belong to Christ.Now, tell me Hitler had the spirit of Christ when he murdered all those innocent people. Then you can tell me Hitler was a Christian.I am sure you are well aware of Jesus's 2 greatest commandments. Now tell me Hitler followed either one of those.I won't accept that blasphemy on this forum anymore. I think most of the people on this forum are intelligent enough to reconize this.

quote:

---

I won't accept that blasphemy on this forum anymore. I think most of the people on this forum are intelligent enough to reconize this.

---

Unfortunately, most creationist make the same mistake when they link Hitler and evolution. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

I didn't know that. I feel that would be incredibly wrong also.So that was Hitler's method of man-made natural selection.

quote:

---

I didn't know that. I feel that would be incredibly wrong also.

---

I agree. I just find it curious that when you use the same arguments as creationists they suddenly become bad arguments (according to creationists). Also, if Hitler had really applied evolution he would not have killed anybody, just let nature take its course. If Hitler truly believed that the Jews were inferior then nature would have selected against them. Evolution is not about killing people, it is about out competing the competition. But anyway, back to the main topic.

Well. It doesn't much matter what you will tolerate. Or what you consider blasphemy either.All I did was to report what Hitler said and what he said he believed.History shows us that many of the most horrific acts of all times have been commited in the name of GOD. And the Judaic religions, Christianity, Judaism and Islam, have been at the forefront of violence for thousands of years. As a Christian, I cannot simply say nah-nah-nah, never happened. Nor can I stick my fingers in my ears and refuse to listen.But the topic is the religious nature of evolution.If you would like to discuss the Judaic faiths and violence, start a thread. Otherwise, let's head back towards the topic.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Um, I asked you if Hitler was Christian, not if he thought he was Christian. You said absolutly.How can you say that knowing full well what makes a person Christian or not?I hope you don't think that any religion is bad because people have interpreted it wrong. Because people interpret science wrong way more than religion, and doesn't make science bad.Also, having to do with the topic, what would in your opinion, make something a religion?