Re: When did the first beaver decide to build a dam without knowing that it would help?

Question

I respect everyone's opinion, but I thought the opinion of the following would carry more weight. This is not meant to provoke you, just in case you may interpret it that way. Following are SCIENTISTS WHO BELIEVE/D IN CREATION. The list is much longer, and the source that lists more scientists who believe in creation is given at the end of this question. Even the list at this website is not nearly exhaustive. What do you think?

EINSTEIN: “Science without religion is lame. Religion without science is blind”.

DR GEORGE WALD, 1967 Nobel Laureate in Medicine.

Source for LONGER short list:
english.sdaglobal.org/research/sctstbel.htm

Again, guys. I wasn't trying to offend. You misunderstand.

Answer 1

Actually, Einstein believed in Spinoza's god. He didn't believe in a creator. Anyone who says otherwise is a liar.

----

I also noticed how you phrased that... "Source for a longer SHORT list"

Funny, isn't it, that you can only find a short list, when Project Steve has over 100,000 names on it supporting Evolution -- and they limit themselves to PhDs named Steve. Can you imagine how massively limiting that is? ONLY PhDs, and ONLY if they're named Steve.

Answer 2

"I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own--a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotism." Albert Einstein - Obituary in NY Times 19 April 1955

http://positiveatheism.org/hist/quotes/einstein.htm

Science is not a democracy anyways. It wouldn't matter how many scientists said something. Science is about the scientific method. Besides, there are more scientists named "Steve" than there are creationists.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/steve/

In regards to beavers... The beaver may have not knew that what it was doing helped..but if an environment was such that a beaver was able to produce more offspring by knowing that it was a good thing to create a dam.. then those beaver's genes would take over the gene pool over time.

To learn about evolution...that is if you even care about what is true rather than what just makes you feel better...
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/

Answer 3

Einstein did not believe in creation, do not insult him with this garbage.

"Thus I came--despite the fact that I was the son of entirely irreligious (Jewish) parents--to a deep religiosity, which, however, found an abrupt ending at the age of 12. Through the reading of popular scientific books I soon reached the conviction that much in the stories of the Bible could not be true." - Einstein in his autobiography.

As for Wald, who cares really? i wouldn't go to a mechanic to get my tooth pulled, why would you go to anything other then an evolutionary biologist for evolution info?

Further, the vast majority of those commonly tell of a believe in God, not their opinion on the validity of evolution.


either way... project Steve blows it away. >.>
http://www.natcenscied.org/resources/articles/3541_project_steve_2_16_2003.asp

Answer 4

The origin of man

A different model proposes that a small, relatively isolated population of early humans evolved into modern **** sapiens, and that this population succeeded in spreading across Africa, Europe, and Asia -- displacing and eventually replacing all other early human populations as they spread. In this scenario the variation among modern populations is a recent phenomenon. Part of the evidence to support this theory comes from molecular biology, especially studies of the diversity and mutation rate of nuclear DNA and mitochondrial DNA in living human cells.From these studies an approximate time of divergence from the common ancestor of all modern human populations can be calculated. This research has typically yielded dates around 200,000 years ago, too young for the "Multiregional Hypothesis." Molecular methods have also tended to point to an African origin for all modern humans, implying that the ancestral population of all living people migrated from Africa to other parts of the world -- thus the name of this interpretation: the "Out of Africa Hypothesis."

Whichever model (if either) is correct, the oldest fossil evidence for anatomically modern humans is about 130,000 years old in Africa, and there is evidence for modern humans in the Near East sometime before 90,000 years ago.