Creation vs. Evolution
- Thread starter ledhed
- 9,687 comments
- 447,066 views
BobK
Premium
- 7,020
- Massachusetts, USA
Perhaps because you continue to refer to it even after Duke's post?
Incidentally, looks like NASA is distancing itself from that particular claim (nanobacteria fossils in meteorites).
Dotini
(Banned)
- 15,742
- Seattle
- CR80_Shifty
http://www.latimes.com/news/science/la-sci-alien-life-20110308,0,5561322.story
Scientists dismiss alien life report
A NASA researcher says he has found fossil bacteria in meteorites, but even his employer declines to stand behind that claim.
By Thomas H. Maugh II, Los Angeles Times
March 8, 2011
A report claiming to find remnants of alien life in meteorites has been broadly dismissed by scientists after its publication Friday in an eccentric online journal.
The report was written by Richard Hoover, an engineer at NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center in Huntsville, Ala. He had sliced open a couple of small meteorites, looked at them under a microscope and seen what he thought were the fossils of tiny bacteria called cyanobacteria.
Hoover wrote his report, concluding that life is common throughout the universe. He submitted a paper to the Journal of Astrobiology, which rejected it.
Hoover then sent his paper to the online Journal of Cosmology, which promotes the idea that life on Earth came from outer space. A report by Fox News on the paper triggered a meteor storm of publicity over the weekend, followed quickly by derision from mainstream scientists.
NASA has distanced itself from Hoover's work. In an unusual step Monday, Paul Hertz, chief scientist of NASA's science mission directorate, issued a statement saying, among other things, that "NASA cannot stand behind or support a scientific claim unless it has been peer-reviewed or thoroughly examined by other qualified experts.... NASA was unaware of the recent submission of the paper to the Journal of Cosmology or of the paper's subsequent publication."
The Journal of Cosmology is a 2-year-old publication developed by Rudy Schild of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics that has unabashedly promoted the thesis that life exists throughout the universe and was brought to Earth from elsewhere. The journal has published just 13 issues and, in a news release Monday, said it would cease publication in May, "killed by thieves and crooks" at the journal Science and other subscription-based periodicals, whom it has accused of stifling its ability to distribute news.
The Journal of Cosmology claims to be peer-reviewed. In this case, the journal's editors said it had sent a copy of Hoover's article to 100 prominent scientists for critiques and would publish them as they come in. In normal scientific publishing, peer review is conducted before a paper is published to ensure accuracy.
The assessment of scientists, for the main part, has been harsh. "I'm surprised anyone is granting it any credibility at all," wrote blogger and biologist Paul Z. Myers of the University of Minnesota.
"Move along folks. There's nothing to see here," wrote Rosie Redfield, a microbiologist at the University of British Columbia, saying that it is easy to find structures in nature that appear similar to bacteria.
"This appears to be science by wishful thinking," Redfield said in a telephone interview.
Hoover has not responded to media requests for interviews.
Others said that even if the traces Hoover spotted in the meteorite should prove to be bacteria, it would be difficult to rule out contamination.
This is not the first time that researchers have claimed to find fossils in a meteorite. In 1996, a NASA researcher — this time with the agency's imprimatur — said he had found fossil bacteria in a meteorite that had been blasted off the surface of Mars. The report, which was published in the journal Science, was featured on the cover of Time magazine and was trumpeted by the White House.
Eventually, however, most scientists concluded that what researchers had seen were merely rock formations that looked like fossils.
Last year, NASA-sponsored researchers said they had discovered that certain bacteria in Mono Lake in California could incorporate arsenic into their DNA in place of phosphorus, arguing that the finding indicated the possibility of unusual life forms in space. That conclusion also was derided by other scientists.
thomas.maugh@latimes.com
Copyright © 2011, Los Angeles Times
Last edited:
Joel
Premium
- 8,141
- Halifax, NS
- Noob616
Today in my Psychology/Sociology/Anthropology class we watched this : http://www.explorationfilms.com/exploration-films-incredible-creatures-3.html
I guess my major problem with the video was that Dr. Jobe Martin was being the "scientist" for the movie. He was in the Air Force for 2 years, then he was a dentist, and now he has a Master's in Theology. What any of that has to do with evolutionary biology I'll never know. The points they brought up were how complex some organisms are, and how "there's no way it could have happened by chance", or "how does it know how to do this?" for example. The funniest part was when the host (one of the weirdest people I've ever seen) tried to use a Jaguar as a proof for intelligent design ("nobody would believe that this just happened, it had to be designed") and he spoke with the stereotypical British accent, even though Jaguar was owned by Ford at the time of the video's creation.
I found most of the arguments just came down to "this is so cool it has to be planned". The other one they circled around was how evolution requires "faith" to believe in it, yet the guy was spouting about how Jesus died on the cross for our sins... I can't believe they'd dismiss evolution as speculation but "God made it" isn't speculation.
NOTE: I don't know why my teacher is trying to rebuke evolution instead of teaching the curriculum. The joys of publicly funded Catholic high schools I guess.
I guess my major problem with the video was that Dr. Jobe Martin was being the "scientist" for the movie. He was in the Air Force for 2 years, then he was a dentist, and now he has a Master's in Theology. What any of that has to do with evolutionary biology I'll never know. The points they brought up were how complex some organisms are, and how "there's no way it could have happened by chance", or "how does it know how to do this?" for example. The funniest part was when the host (one of the weirdest people I've ever seen) tried to use a Jaguar as a proof for intelligent design ("nobody would believe that this just happened, it had to be designed") and he spoke with the stereotypical British accent, even though Jaguar was owned by Ford at the time of the video's creation.
I found most of the arguments just came down to "this is so cool it has to be planned". The other one they circled around was how evolution requires "faith" to believe in it, yet the guy was spouting about how Jesus died on the cross for our sins... I can't believe they'd dismiss evolution as speculation but "God made it" isn't speculation.
NOTE: I don't know why my teacher is trying to rebuke evolution instead of teaching the curriculum. The joys of publicly funded Catholic high schools I guess.
Joey D
Premium
- 47,510
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
They teach anthropology in a Catholic school? It seems like most strict Catholics I come across that find out I'm a degree wielding anthropologist of sorts think I'm some sort of distilled version of Satan.
But ya, looking those videos up made my head hurt. Just throw out random transition fossils during your class discussions and see how your teacher reacts. Archaeopteryx is always a good one because it's fun to say! Or you can always throw out the entire humaniod lineage fossil record and see what happens.
We used to do that all the time in classes when I was at the university...especially when we got one of God's warriors in our anthro classes.
But ya, looking those videos up made my head hurt. Just throw out random transition fossils during your class discussions and see how your teacher reacts. Archaeopteryx is always a good one because it's fun to say! Or you can always throw out the entire humaniod lineage fossil record and see what happens.
We used to do that all the time in classes when I was at the university...especially when we got one of God's warriors in our anthro classes.
Joel
Premium
- 8,141
- Halifax, NS
- Noob616
Joey D
Well the textbook has the entire fossil record of humans and our ancestry laid out over 2 pages, but the teacher said, and I quote "this book is wrong, it thinks we came from monkeys or something, that's crazy". He just threw it all out like that.
But yeah, it's "Introduction to psychology, sociology, and anthropology." Supposed to give us a taste of everything, but we've just been listening to the teacher try to dispel evolution. He adamantly refuses to believe that we share 98% of our DNA with Chimpanzees, even poking fun that idea once, with a question on our test (below).
"what is the bystander effect?"
a) You are less likely to get help with more people present
b) You are more likely to get help with more people present
c) that chimpanzees would act the same 98% of the time (according to the textbook).
He actually thinks that 98% DNA commonality means that Chimps are 98% as intelligent as humans (insert George W. Bush joke here).
Catholic school is fun sometimes. Don't even get me started on Religion class. Although I was pleasantly surprised that my Biology classes have been devoid of any "creation science".
blaaah
(Banned)
- 1,078
I did some observation in a local Catholic primary school, what I liked the best was the head teachers exasperated pleas to the children in assembly to attend the out of school church events where they should be representing the school, announcing to be disappointed with them and their parents. (the turn outs were poor)
Parents bring their kids to school to get good grades, not to be religious.
Before I started there, I was asked that I must share their ethos. Which is probably the strongest tone they can use legally to keep the school/staff catholic not just in name.
Parents bring their kids to school to get good grades, not to be religious.
Before I started there, I was asked that I must share their ethos. Which is probably the strongest tone they can use legally to keep the school/staff catholic not just in name.
Joel
Premium
- 8,141
- Halifax, NS
- Noob616
Oh, nah this is still High School. We have publicly funded Catholic schools in Canada, it's dumb. We're supposedly a "cultural mosaic" but Catholic schools get public funding (not any other religion). There's a "Public" system, and a "Catholic" system (as well as a French system), all are public, but the Catholic schools are focussed on bible thumping a little bit. It really depends on the teacher more than anything, some teachers can't separate their own beliefs from the curriculum, as is the case here. Same with my religion teacher (this is a 100% real quote).
IRL troll at the back- "I don't like Catholics, they hate everyone, like how they hate gay people"
Teacher- "We don't hate gay people, we accept them as homosexuals, just don't agree with their actions".
Noob616- I think the majority of our country disagrees with you though, gay marriage has been legal in Canada since 2005.
Teacher- "That's just because the politicians want more votes to stay in power".
Noob616- /facepalm
- 5,693
- Canada
I believe in neither Creationism or Evolutionism. We weren't developed from monkeys, and some super-human being didn't just make 2 people like robots and tell them to make more of themselves. I believe in the future we will find out the truth about how humans were created. It'll probably be a complicated explanation... I believe that the creation of humans is similar to that of the solar systems. We are all made of random floating particles assembled and modified and contorted and on and on and on and on.
In my opinion, almost all things that end with the suffix -ism are always bad. Excluding Communism, of course.
In my opinion, almost all things that end with the suffix -ism are always bad. Excluding Communism, of course.
- 87,577
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
That would probably be people who prefer to equate rigourously tested scientific theory with more supporting evidence than anything ever posited to mere belief, for some agenda they have that allows them to disregard it on a whim.
- 5,693
- Canada
I can see why people consider evolution a part of the realm of belief systems. Because the Evolution theory, like Creation theory both have flaws. For one thing, part of the Evolution theory believes we evolved from apes. That is absurd, have you ever seen apes? Maybe people could have gotten their stupidity from them, but that is about it.
Joey D
Premium
- 47,510
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
VANDENAL
How far back do you want to go? They are still finding new evidence all the time but the fossil Darwinius (Ida) is a good example of a transition fossils. Australopithecus (Lucy) is another good one to look at. There is still a lot to learn so we can't say for sure yet X-ius fossil is the so called "missing link".
Joey D
Premium
- 47,510
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
VANDENAL
Assuming you think of of cavemen in the traditional sense that would be Neanderthal, and we aren't derived from them. They are a species of hominids that evolution was a cruel mistress too and they died off.
Modern humans, if you trace their lineage back far enough would show we came from what we classify as animals. But we aren't directly from animals. I mean there wasn't an ancient ape walking around and had a baby that was a modern human....and that's putting it in hugely simple terms.
- 264
- piracingchamp
To those religious people who still believe the earth was created 5000 years ago, listen closely. Do you hear that sucking sound? That's the sound of you voluntarily forcing your head further up your own ***!
Even if carbon dating was off by 90%, the earth would still be way too old to have been created 5000 years ago. If you are completely honest, the best any of us can say about an afterlife is that we just don't know. and anyone who tells they know for sure is flat out lying to you (and themselves). Don't believe anyone who tells you that God, or the afterlife, is a fact. I will concede that it is possible that there is a 'god'. Everything is relative, and maybe this entire universe is just a lab experiment in a beaker. In that case, 'god' is a lab geek, which is fine by me. As stated, no-one knows. My only feeling on the subject is that 'god', if there is a god, must be bigger than mankind's religion. Religious faith is far from fact. I have no problem with people's religious faith. But keep it out of science, and in social studies.
Check out Frank Tippler's "The Physics of Immortality". I personally believe he was on the right track, until he let his scientific theory get mixed up with religion.
Here's another way to look at it. Someone tells you two stories, and you have NO knowledge of the Bible. The 1st, of a girl's chariot being turned into a pumpkin at the stroke of midnight, and the 2nd of a snake talking to two people in a garden, which would you believe is a ferry tale? Would you believe either is real? Just be honest enough to think objectively.
I am sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings. But we need to have an honest dialog within ourselves before we can have an honest dialog as a community.
Even if carbon dating was off by 90%, the earth would still be way too old to have been created 5000 years ago. If you are completely honest, the best any of us can say about an afterlife is that we just don't know. and anyone who tells they know for sure is flat out lying to you (and themselves). Don't believe anyone who tells you that God, or the afterlife, is a fact. I will concede that it is possible that there is a 'god'. Everything is relative, and maybe this entire universe is just a lab experiment in a beaker. In that case, 'god' is a lab geek, which is fine by me. As stated, no-one knows. My only feeling on the subject is that 'god', if there is a god, must be bigger than mankind's religion. Religious faith is far from fact. I have no problem with people's religious faith. But keep it out of science, and in social studies.
Check out Frank Tippler's "The Physics of Immortality". I personally believe he was on the right track, until he let his scientific theory get mixed up with religion.
Here's another way to look at it. Someone tells you two stories, and you have NO knowledge of the Bible. The 1st, of a girl's chariot being turned into a pumpkin at the stroke of midnight, and the 2nd of a snake talking to two people in a garden, which would you believe is a ferry tale? Would you believe either is real? Just be honest enough to think objectively.
I am sorry if I hurt anyone's feelings. But we need to have an honest dialog within ourselves before we can have an honest dialog as a community.
Last edited:
blaaah
(Banned)
- 1,078
Penis, is the key word here.
Of the spiny kind. That is what apparently differentiates us from the chimpanzee line of history from 7 million years ago, the genetic difference that has led us to become humans. Scientist were previously looking at the newly completed human genome for additional genes which chimps do not have, but it seems we have lost genes to achieve what we have, not gained them.
So are we lucky to have shed our penis spines?
"Penile spines – which make the penis more sensitive and speed ejaculation – are more common in animals that face intense competition for mates, and where females are likely to mate with many males in rapid succession.
The loss of penile spines may have allowed our ancient ancestors to copulate for longer, a development thought to have nurtured monogamous couples and paved the way for more complex social structures."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/mar/09/penis-spines-human-genetics-chimps
Of the spiny kind. That is what apparently differentiates us from the chimpanzee line of history from 7 million years ago, the genetic difference that has led us to become humans. Scientist were previously looking at the newly completed human genome for additional genes which chimps do not have, but it seems we have lost genes to achieve what we have, not gained them.
So are we lucky to have shed our penis spines?
"Penile spines – which make the penis more sensitive and speed ejaculation – are more common in animals that face intense competition for mates, and where females are likely to mate with many males in rapid succession.
The loss of penile spines may have allowed our ancient ancestors to copulate for longer, a development thought to have nurtured monogamous couples and paved the way for more complex social structures."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/mar/09/penis-spines-human-genetics-chimps
- 264
- piracingchamp
