- Oops, you just spilled Quechup on your pants
- Geek Week: XP's not sacked, iPhone dev kit hacked
- A Fool's Paradise
- So long and thanks for all the dish
- Geek Week: E-voting experts and nymphomaniacs wanted, inquire within
- Smoking guns and broken voting machines
- Sequoia and e-voting: The best government money can buy
- Geek Week: Google Wireless, Vista SP1, and other thought crimes
- Scientology, The China Syndrome, and my wiki ways
- Diamonds are a CEO's best friend
June 06, 2007 | Comments: (0)
Going ape over evolution
There is no truth to the rumor this blog is turning into a earth sciences forum, though you wouldn't know it by looking at the response to my item last week (“Unnatural selection”) about the Creation Museum. That entry inspired more than 140 comments; judging by the heat coming off some of them you'd think William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow were squaring off in the Scopes Monkey Trial.
Naturally, some Cringesters told me to stick to technology and leave religion and politics alone. I think IT touches everything, and it especially touches science and education, which is what we're really talking about. If the notion that Adam and Eve rode into town on the backs of brachiosaurs doesn't make you chuckle, I think it's time to adjust the medication.
But I have a few corrections to make. Old Testament scholar M. D. notes that, according to the Torah, we live 5767 years from the date of Creation, not 6000. (Math was never my strong suit.) Frequent contributor R. G. points out that the dinosaurs living outside the museum's Garden of Eden are "animatronic," not "amniotronic." (Apparently spelling isn't either.)
Finally, Cringester K. A. brings the discussion home quite nicely:
Thanks for poking the hornet’s nest in your Unnatural Selection blog. This was such a blast you should probably do it sparingly.One question – are the most telling assertions the ones that get the most or the least response? No one has yet to touch the notion that the concept of information, being itself immaterial, should have no place in proper (materialistic) scientific explanations. But then, who likes to find themselves pinned between the horns of a dilemma? A fine hour for IT, I say.
Our next philosophical question: If a man speaks in a forest and his spouse isn't there to hear him, is he still wrong?
Any other topics you want to debate? Post them below or send me an email. Top tipsers may receive a Cringe bag large enough to carry both a Bible and a copy of The Origin of Species.
Posted by Robert X. Cringely on June 6, 2007 07:32 AM
RATE THIS ARTICLE:
-

- COMMENTS
Just a brief "atta-boy" from a believing Christian who has no problem with evolution and a 3-billion-year-old earth. It's possible to believe the Bible without taking everything to the most hyper-literal extent (especially things in Genesis chapters 1-11).
To my atheist/humanist friends out there: Rest assured that most Christians are not nuts like the Answers In Genesis crowd.
Posted by: MrWhipple at June 6, 2007 10:27 AMOur next philosophical question: If a man speaks in a forest and his spouse isn't there to hear him, is he still wrong?
Unfortunately, yes -- but he doesn't have to hear about it!
Cring, Next subject you should hit on is does believing in a all powerful being, help or hurt IT?
Being an atheist, I say it might help, cause you can own slaves. which is cheaper than off shoring your projects.
And I'm sure you though you lost a lot of readers when you went to the on-line only edition. Was this a way to just get feedback as to how many people were reading your "rants" :-)
Posted by: AndyW at June 6, 2007 11:01 AMI would say believing in an all knowing, all powerful Being helps IT, because when things go wrong you have somebody to blame besides Microsoft.
(And, of course, someone to ask for help when things really go south.)
cheers,
rxc
Posted by: cringe at June 6, 2007 11:31 AM> ... and his spouse isn't there to hear him, is he still wrong?
I have to quibble about the question... Spouse: if you mean "wife", then, of course the answer is "Yes". But if the spouse is male (hey, I'm from Canada), then which stereotype applies?
Posted by: Ron G at June 6, 2007 01:01 PMThere are more than 10.600 Christian clergy members who have signed a letter attesting to their belief in the compatiblity of evolutionary science and Christian belief. Check out "The Clergy Letter Project" at http://www.evolutionsunday.org
Posted by: Dick Lessard at June 7, 2007 04:22 AMA quibble for MrWhipple, the "...Christian who has no problem with evolution and a 3-billion-year-old earth.": The Earth, as far as we know, is 4.5 billion years old.
Posted by: KB at June 7, 2007 05:10 AMA quibble for KB. You should know what MrWhipple is intending to say. How about you try to be as open-minded as MrWhipple and stop worrying about being precisely correct. That kind of arrogant sounding response just fuels antagonism and lends nothing to a polite respect of our differences.
Posted by: Poking KB at June 7, 2007 06:59 AMThe SUN is ~4.5 billion years old, the earth is a few hundred thousand years younger. I also believe that with IT, everything effects it and it effects everything is some way, even through degrees.
Posted by: JL at June 7, 2007 07:33 AMJust want to make my presence known as another IT engineer believer who has no problem with evolution. As I see it, the only place big bang and evolution clash is in one chapter of one book which was written by ever fallible human beings.
Just as an aside... any time I see proponents of an argument stating "i'm 100% right and you're 100% wrong"... my alarms go off. 99.99999% of the time truth is not absolute and reality lies somewhere in between.
oh.. and I am profoundly embarrassed by ALL of these ignorant head-in-the-sand the-sky-is-falling moronic believers who eschew all science and nature of the Answers in Genesis ilk.
MrWhipple is right.... there ARE intelligent rational believers out there that think for themselves as well as tolerate and even ENJOY contrary opinions and intelligent debate.
PLEASE... don't paint us all with the barefoot, unreasonable, & ignorant brush!
Posted by: Joann at June 7, 2007 09:49 AMPreviously, an article was written about "The Pending Marriage of Science and Genesis".
That, and the article even previous to that (The Divorce of Science From Humanism)
were forerunners to this culmination. After more than fifteen years of rejections by other
publishers, the revelation of the truth of Genesis will now be available for all to examine.
The book promotes "Biblical Reality", which states that Genesis, written by Moses, was
never about Creation (Week). Moses had written down (perhaps by one or more
designated scribes) what God had revealed to him while he was with God on Mt. Sinai in
1598 BC. Creationism and theology have mistakenly believed that Moses was writing
about how our Earth & universe were created, but not so. God revealed to Moses seven
defined geological ages of the historical past to Moses. Even Moses didn't understand
what he saw, but he just had it written down for later generations to learn and perhaps
someday understand. That final understanding would not occur until December 1993,
being about 3,604 years later. How timeless is the Word of God?
Unfortunately, creationism and theology have not done their homework, and continue to
teach false doctrines, namely "young Earth" beliefs (Creation Science), theistic evolution
("Reasons to Believe"), long creation days ("Day-Age" theories), and Ruin & Restoration
("Gap" theories) doctrines. Every single one of them are in error, including "progressive
creationism", and are a misrepresentation of the Genesis text. The "Bible believing
community" can either jump on board with the truth of Genesis, or stand on the sidelines,
and continue promoting their own proven false teachings.
However, there is another "front" that this book is doing battle against, which is the insanity of secular science concerning our origins and prehistoric history of our Earth and
universe. Our creation occurred 4.57 billion years ago (according to the science of
geology), completing in six days (Exodus 20:11), with God "resting" on the seventh day
of a 168 hour week. But God did not reveal that week to Moses. God revealed only one
day from Creation Week, and one day each from the first week of the six following
geological ages of mankind. The seven days which were revealed to Moses (aka "the
Observations of Moses") were not revealed in chronological order, but in what's called
"Biblical Order", which any theologian or "bible scholar" worth their salt should be able
to ascertain. Here is where the current ignorance of mainstream theology will be made known for all to see.
To preview what the book (“Moses Didn’t Write About Creation!!”) shall convey, go to:
http://hometown.aol.com/ephraim7/myhomepage/index.html.
There, it will keep you abreast of when the book will be available, and how to obtain a
copy. In the book, the true “Origin of Satan” is revealed. Also, comprehensive coverage
of the “Extra-Celestial Civil War” (aka “the war in Heaven”) is given, what brought it
about, when it ended, and why Satan was allowed to do his evil deeds in this universe.
It is a given that secular science shall at first criticize the work, calling it "a new attempt
to harmonize science with religious literature". Afterwards, they may try to call it "a
convenient coincidence". But what will the worlds of current creationism and theology
do? Close ranks, "get on board" and accept the truth, or remain defiant and criticize from
the sidelines, as the Sanhedrin did in 27 AD?
Herman Cummings
Ephraim7@aol.com
PO Box 1745
Fortson GA, 31808
Herman writes:
"... accept the truth..."
Which truth, Herman? People who look for something as rare as "truth" in an allegorical book written by old men after seeing "visions" perplex me. Do you also look for "the truth" in other fairy tales, like the many works of the Brothers Grimm?
Happy now, Cringe?
Sheesh.
Posted by: Greg at June 11, 2007 11:37 AMOur next philosophical question: If a man speaks in a forest and his spouse isn't there to hear him, is he still wrong?
My beloved wife tells that the answer is "YES!!!".
Who am I to disagree?
Read through the AiG link from the article. It says that all creatures were created on the sixth day, and all as vegetarians. Then Adam rebelled, and animals started eating meat.
So, why do some animals have teeth suited only for eating meat if they were "created" as vegetarians?
Posted by: Omnivore at June 11, 2007 12:03 PMObviously, God is all-knowing so he already knew Adam will rebel and created carnivores accordingly.
;)
Cringe,
I'm one of your biggest fans. Your articles, columns, blogs and tv series have given joy to my heart, knowledge to my mind, and perspective to my career.
It is for this reason that I am BEGGING you: stay out of religion. Religion is the highest cause of death in World History (http://www.clmitchell.net/dotnet1/HistCosmos.php). Making fun of religious fanatics (Jewish, Christian or Muslim) is worse than throwing yourself naked into a snakepit or sending emails with terrorist keywords to the White House.
Take the advice of someone who cares about you: if you don't know what you're talking about (and even if you do) keep your opinion to yourself.
Ur Biggest Fan
Posted by: Calvin Mitchell at June 12, 2007 06:22 PMGod has a sense of humor...
...that's what I'm afraid of!
Wise Old Owl
Posted by: Calvin Mitchell at June 12, 2007 06:30 PMAre you telling me that "The Flintstones" isn't a Bible-based documentary? Blasphemers!
Posted by: Phineas at June 14, 2007 09:12 AMJust to set the record straight, "religion" is nowhere near the highest cause of death in world history, unless you count communism, colonialism, and nazism as religions. The current champion, communism, is explicitly anti-religious.
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/20TH.HTM
Posted by: Robert Merrill at June 15, 2007 10:37 AMI can't recall them at the moment, but I have read of at least a few examples in the past of "carnivorous teeth" in plant eaters.
It never ceases to amaze me how many people are willing to believe the "modern creation myth". Instead of being on the back of a turtle, we are on nothing. "In the beginning was nothing, then it exploded...." Right. And your computer put itself together automatically.
I wish I had that "natural selection" the last few times I have been building systems from parts. Unfortunately, they demonstrated the folly or believing that things orient themselves spontaneously. :)
Posted by: Brad Andrews at June 18, 2007 11:44 AMOmnivore wrote:
>>So, why do some animals have teeth suited only for eating meat if they were "created" as vegetarians?
Possibly they ate the Meat-textured vegetables that were in the Garden of Eden? And claws are for holding down the wriggly ones.
;-)
Posted by: Mark at June 18, 2007 11:49 AMYou all forgot something vital: time apparently is provably variable (reletivity, you know,- the two atomic clocks which differ according to the gravity present...) Science seems to say "it's thus many years old" and also "time may have gone way, way faster back then". (also explains how the light from distant stars got here so quick, too!)
Get it right, science! either the universe is very old, / or / time varies - But not both!
Think about it!
I note that the link Cringe gives for "Adam and Eve rode into town on the backs of brachiosaurs" points to an ASP page. Why doesn't it surprise me that people who continue to believe a tribal creation myth programmed into them during childhood over common sense and consistent scientific evidence would be fans of Microsoft? Maybe their other webpage is at microsoftdoesnothaveamonopoly.org.
Posted by: PigglyWiggledy at June 20, 2007 11:43 AMHello.
There are less than five living experts on the book of Genesis. All
others are exhaling "hot air". Adam & Eve never saw any dinosaurs.
Dimetrodons were created in 4.6 Billion BC, and died out in 245
Million BC. Dinosaurs were created in 244 Million BC, and died
out in 65 Million BC. The huge mammals were created in 64
Million BC, along with the first humans to be in God’s image.
Adam was made in 7200 BC, Eve was made in 7000 BC.
Lastly, the “six days of Moses” in chapter one of Genesis are
not the “seven days of Creation” (Exodus 20:11). The book
“Moses Didn’t Write About Creation!!” explains from Creation
to the Red Sea Crossing.
PO Box 1745
Fortson GA 31808
Ephraim7@aol.com
Hello.
Much to my suprise, the book "Moses Didn't write about Creation!", is now available. The truth of Genesis can now be known. Go the the following link, or to your bookstore:
http://www.amazon.com/Moses-Didnt-Write-About-Creation/dp/1424182204/ref=sr_1_1/002-4508089-7775203?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1187196517&sr=1-1
Hermn Cummings
ephraim7@aol.com







