On the religion of Darwinism

http://www.religionofdarwinism.com/origins.html
The study of comparative religion shows that a large number of superstitious religions have been influenced by one another, and many similarities can be detected in their beliefs and doctrines. The ancient pagan religions of Greece and Mesopotamia formed the basis of many modern religions which adopted their beliefs and doctrines. One superstitious religion that grew out of them is the religion of Darwinism.
There are many similarities between Darwinism and other superstitious religions regarding their understanding of the formation of the universe and of living things and in their general beliefs and doctrines. Contrary to what a large number of people believe, Darwinism is not an established scientific theory based on facts, observation and experiment but merely a rationalistic attempt, based on a non-scientific foundation, to explain the universe. In the course of this book Darwinism will be compared with other manmade religions with regard to its origins, its founder, its scripture, its understanding of the world, and its missionary activities.
Darwinism did not begin with the theory established by the amateur observations and investigations of Charles Darwin and other scientists in the 19th century. Its origins go back to much earlier materialist philosophies. Darwinist beliefs were first encountered a few thousand years ago in the polytheistic and materialistic religions of Greece and Sumeria. Therefore, Charles Darwin was not the first person to put forward the idea of evolution; he was an amateur researcher who traced the main outlines of this basic belief, gave form to its doctrines, and later established a theory.

What you’re saying is like saying gravity is the religion of Newtonism/Einstienism.

What you're saying is like saying gravity is the religion of Newtonism/Einstienism.
Yes, and every Sabbath day they throw things in the air to prove their belief in the great god gravity. Works every time. Lois
http://www.religionofdarwinism.com/origins.html The study of comparative religion shows that a large number of superstitious religions have been influenced by one another, and many similarities can be detected in their beliefs and doctrines. The ancient pagan religions of Greece and Mesopotamia formed the basis of many modern religions which adopted their beliefs and doctrines. One superstitious religion that grew out of them is the religion of Darwinism. There are many similarities between Darwinism and other superstitious religions regarding their understanding of the formation of the universe and of living things and in their general beliefs and doctrines. Contrary to what a large number of people believe, Darwinism is not an established scientific theory based on facts, observation and experiment but merely a rationalistic attempt, based on a non-scientific foundation, to explain the universe. In the course of this book Darwinism will be compared with other manmade religions with regard to its origins, its founder, its scripture, its understanding of the world, and its missionary activities. Darwinism did not begin with the theory established by the amateur observations and investigations of Charles Darwin and other scientists in the 19th century. Its origins go back to much earlier materialist philosophies. Darwinist beliefs were first encountered a few thousand years ago in the polytheistic and materialistic religions of Greece and Sumeria. Therefore, Charles Darwin was not the first person to put forward the idea of evolution; he was an amateur researcher who traced the main outlines of this basic belief, gave form to its doctrines, and later established a theory.
Well, as soon as the doctrine of any religion leads to major advances in medicine and genetic engineering (or any other scientific advance), then you may feel free to compare it to "Darwinism". Until then, quit it! >:-(

BugRip, just for your information: coral star has been banned. Said otherwise: he left the place, but not by his own free will. :slight_smile:

What has come to be called “Darwinism” is simply an acceptance of the theory of biologicall evolution. No belief is necessary because most of its premise has objective evidence supportimg it. Religion is a belief system with little or no objective evidence for its premises. Eeverything nust be taken on faith.
Most biological science is based on the premise of biological evolution. Without it there would be no medical research, no genetic engineeing, no human engineered breeding of animals ot cross breeding of plants. Without it the human population of the world would not survive, because enough food could not be produced to sustain it.
Darwinism is not a religion. It is a scientifically valid and proven biological premise. Saying evolution is a religion would be like saying evidence based physical, chemical, geological or even mathematical premises are religions. Only a complete and utter fool would make such an inane and ignorant statement.
Lois

BugRip, just for your information: coral star has been banned. Said otherwise: he left the place, but not by his own free will. :)
He or she freely chose to continue to, unnecessarily, disrupt the margins in threads, by posting pictures that were too large. I think that , and possibly the suspicions of trolling, is what got him or her banned.
What has come to be called "Darwinism" is simply an acceptance of the theory of biologicall evolution. No belief is necessary because most of its premise has objective evidence supportimg it. Religion is a belief system with little or no objective evidence for its premises. Eeverything nust be taken on faith. Most biological science is based on the premise of biological evolution. Without it there would be no medical research, no genetic engineeing, no human engineered breeding of animals ot cross breeding of plants. Without it the human population of the world would not survive, because enough food could not be produced to sustain it. Darwinism is not a religion. It is a scientifically valid and proven biological premise. Saying evolution is a religion would be like saying evidence based physical, chemical, geological or even mathematical premises are religions. Only a complete and utter fool would make such an inane and ignorant statement. Lois
That, and also, "Darwin Damn it!" doesn't make a good epithet.

Looks like another gap in the evolutionary record has closed. Another “living intermediate species” has been found.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/video/watch/man-catches-rare-horror-movie-shark/vi-AA8tprP?ocid=U220DHP

Looks like another gap in the evolutionary record has closed. Another "living intermediate species" has been found.
Nonsense! When you find an 'intermediate species', you didn't plug a gap. You put it square in the middle of a gap and create two gaps where only one used to be! Learn your theist arguments! :P
Looks like another gap in the evolutionary record has closed. Another "living intermediate species" has been found.
Nonsense! When you find an 'intermediate species', you didn't plug a gap. You put it square in the middle of a gap and create two gaps where only one used to be! Learn your theist arguments! :P Are you saying that the more intermediate species (alive or dead) are found, the stronger the theist argument becomes? That's funny... :lol: To a rational theist, my argument would be that "never has an intermediate species been found which was out of place in bio/geological history". IOW, no species existed before it could have evolved from previous ancestors. Each fossil find and time of existence confirms the gradual genetic change through the evolution and natural selection of species. It is remarkable that, while most intermediate species are extinct, occasionally a missing living intermediate species is found, in this case an 80,000,000 year old "early" shark. The modern shark does look different, don't it? More efficient in design and abilities, more adapted to long range ocean hunting. It's a marvel of evolution. Below is a clip of Richard Dawkins, where he reviews his book "The Greatest show on Earth". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S_LY-LZtJAs
Looks like another gap in the evolutionary record has closed. Another "living intermediate species" has been found.
Nonsense! When you find an 'intermediate species', you didn't plug a gap. You put it square in the middle of a gap and create two gaps where only one used to be! Learn your theist arguments! :P I'm just going to believe that is sarcasm. I'll sleep better. You could line up every transitional fossil ever, that is to say, every generation of a species as it transformed from one to another and a creationist still wouldn't get it.
Looks like another gap in the evolutionary record has closed. Another "living intermediate species" has been found.
Nonsense! When you find an 'intermediate species', you didn't plug a gap. You put it square in the middle of a gap and create two gaps where only one used to be! Learn your theist arguments! :P I'm just going to believe that is sarcasm. I'll sleep better. You could line up every transitional fossil ever, that is to say, every generation of a species as it transformed from one to another and a creationist still wouldn't get it. I was indeed being sarcastic. :p
Looks like another gap in the evolutionary record has closed. Another "living intermediate species" has been found.
Nonsense! When you find an 'intermediate species', you didn't plug a gap. You put it square in the middle of a gap and create two gaps where only one used to be! Learn your theist arguments! :P I'm just going to believe that is sarcasm. I'll sleep better. You could line up every transitional fossil ever, that is to say, every generation of a species as it transformed from one to another and a creationist still wouldn't get it. If my memory serves me correctly, didn't science discover that DNA or the evolutionary cell process keeps making small changes over time? Then it reaches a point where the cell make a big change, sort of a jump to make room for the small changes to start over. And these jumps that are the small gaps in the evolutionary process. What was being stated was that there were no small gaps in the evolutionary process, just a learning curve on how the process operates. I understand that there are still pieces of the puzzle still missing. But the discussing the theory of Darwin is more in line with talking about how bad our education is, that this issues should even be brought up at this point in mankind’s advancement.