Dawkins has the brain of an amoeba and Attenborough has the other half. How can anyone be so dof? Although the level of their thinking raises the probability that perhaps there is such a thing as evolution. Only a microencephatic brain could come up with such nonsense.

Report this

Its amazing that no matter how hard the evidense is to support evolution, there will be ignorant and stupid people will still not believe it. Those people are hindering mankinds progression and debates such as this is stalling it.

Report this

Before the Big Bang - who knows, after the Big Bang - pure science :) it could as well look something like this: unknown --> Big Bang --> science ;)

Report this

@Stan Try reading my post again: I go through Kieron Dean's post line by line identifying the falsehoods, misrepresentations and distortions, and his ignorance of the subject. This web site has made mincemeat of my careful HTML formatting!

Report this

Richard Forest seems to have dedicated bis life to twisting facts, misquoting research, and through persuasive (ie loud) argument, portray his rather imaginative version as fact.. (thinks...Maybe this is why he is a creationist - he creates facts) Sorry Dicky but I far prefer the Evolution theory to your twisted, factually hideous LSD fantasy. And yes I have also been looking at it. I however do not claim to be an expert, if you had any sense you wouldn't either. Real scientists start with an open mind - something our creationists have never been accused of.

Report this

This is good how can mumbo-jumbo pass as science.

Report this

If we are to teach creation stories in science class, which story should we teach of all the different ones out there? How can these stories be backed up by scientific experimentation?

Report this

@Kieron Dean <i>I have been a keen follower of the creationist vs evolution debate for over a year and it has become one of the most important studies that I have discovered. Interestingly enough, Dawkins cannot answer fundamentals about his own religion (as that is what evolution is)<i> Flatly false. Evolution is a phenomenon of nature we can observe in action in the natural world and replicate in the laboratory <i>such as: 1. What is the origin of life, he hypostasises that we come from primordial soup (literally);<i? Irrelevant, because evolution is not an explanation for the origin of life. That is a field of science called abiogenesis. Research in that field is very active, in particular because we have found life in unexpected places over the past couple of decades. It has led us to think that life may be ubiquitous in the universe, and present on other bodies in our own solar system. <i> 2. Dawkins cannot even provide one factual improvement to the human or animal world through evolution, NOT ONE.<i> What about the evolution of antibiotic resistance in bacteria? That's very beneficial to the bacteria. <i>Darwin was one of the first people to introduce evolution,<i> Flatly false, He wasn't. Evolution is an idea which had been discussed since the time of the ancient Greeks - as Darwin recounts in his introduction to "Origin of Species" <i>his inspiration came from reading a book,<i> Flatly false. His inspiration came from his detailed studies of living organisms. <i>he had literally 0% knowledge of the complexity of the human cell.<i> Utterly irrelevant. There are many aspects of modern biology of which Darwin was unaware. However, evolutionary theory accounts for the complexity of the cell, and nothing we have learned in the past centuries of research in biology suggests any alternative to evolution as a mechanism for creating such complexity. <i>Scarily, evolution was driven into education by people who found an escape to the morality " issues " that creation presented.<i> Flatly false. We teach evolution in schools because it is accepted by the overwhelmingly large majority of biologists as the only scientific explanation for much of their science. In the words of a prominent biologist and devout Christian, ,Theodosius Dobzhansky, "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution" (you can find his essay on the subject here: http:people.delphiforums.comlordormanlight.htm). As for "morality issues", science does not address the issue of morality. <i> If DawkinDawkin is to be believed then we share a common ancestor to a banana.<i> Well, that's what the evidence shows. If you have a better explanation for the evidence which can be tested using the tools of science, feel free to offer it. If you can't - and clearly you can't - why shouldn't we accept the conclusions reached by the scientists who have studies the genetics of humans and bananas rather than those who don't even understand the nature of science and demonstrate a profound and dogmatic ignorance of the subject? <i> They use billions of years as a way to talk rubbish, no fact, pure hypothesis.<i> ...as us demonstrated by this. Hypotheses are formed from the facts, and tested by the acquisition of further facts. <i>There is literally not a shred of evidence for evolution,<i> Flatly false. Evolution is a phenomenon of nature we can observe in action in natural populations and replicate in the laboratory. It is a fact that evolution occurs. Evolutionary theory seeks to explain how evolution happens. <i>and I have an objective view on life.<i> I suggest that even if you believe this to be true, the content of your post shows that this is not the case. <i> For interest sake, people think that carbon dating is evidence where in fact it is completely not reliable.<i> As carbon dating is accurate only to a few tens of thousands of years, and as we know the reasons why it can be unreliable under some circumstances, so what? <i>. I will end off with a short reason as to why evolution is so dangerous. Hitler used the theory of evolution to create the Arien race,<i> Flatly false. Hitler hardly referred to evolution at all, and his views on race are flatly contradicted by evolutionary theory. His beliefs were closer to those of creationists. For example, he believed that races were created separately. It is a mark of the dishonesty of creationist arguments that they try to associate evolutionary theory with Hitler in this way. <i>People who think that they are on earth purely by chance find it simple easy to kill, rape or (insert tragedy here).<i> No, people find it easy to carry out such acts because they are dominated by an ideology which dehumanises others. Such ideologies include Christian sects as much as communists, Nazis and others. Nobody ever killed anyone else in the name of "Darwinism" - in rather stark contrast to the number of people killed in the name of Christ - in many cases simply for being the wrong kind of Christian. <i>I live my life knowing that we were divinely created and it is amazing to wake up knowing that we are uniquely special, from that I have a drive to be a better person. <i> Well bully for you. Why should that condone an ignorance of the universe you believe your God created, and the unquestioning acceptance of the falsehoods peddled by creationists? <i>Teaching our kids that we are one tail removed from a monkey is catastrophic.<i> In what way is it "catastrophic" to teach our children science?

Report this

Creationists, I don't insist you believe what I believe. Why then must I believe what you do - and insist that children in their formative years have to believe it, too?

Report this

evolution, and Darwinian evolution, should be taught in science classes as a theory. Creationism, and intelligent design, should be taught in comparative religion classes

Report this

Anonymous - have you even read his book, The God Delusion, as you seem such an authority on Prof Dawkins? There are far too many people who blindly believe what they have been taught without questioning any of the teachings - the 'sheeple' of this world. I would hazard a guess that he is by far the better educated one!!

Report this

Parents, make sure that your children are well grounded with the truth of God's Word, so that they can give an answer to the absolute rot being taught by so called "educated scientists".

Report this

=========== Dawkins’ “solidly demonstrated fact” is a miracle of time-worship. Dead, primeval elements, given billions and billions of years, transmogrify themselves into a complex biosphere, and, mindlessly, produce a conscious, thinkingdesigning life form. An interviewer’s question to him, “Can you give an example of a genetic mutation or an evolutionary process which can be seen to increase the information in the genome?” produced 11 seconds of speechlessness followed by a bafflegab response. The critical ‘increase in information’ issue that funds the evolutionist “miracle” was completely ignored.

Report this

Gentleman, These issues are deeply spiritual. If you believe in them, that's in order with me. If you don't believe in it, that's fine too. Who cares? We're all entitled to our opinion and that includes Richard Dawson

Report this

Anon 7:41pm for the Darwin award.

Report this

Religion ≠ science. simple.

Report this

Hear hear...2000 years too late unfortunately...but here's hoping anyway!

Report this

I know that I do not have a captive audience so I will keep as short as possible. I have been a keen follower of the creationist vs evolution debate for over a year and it has become one of the most important studies that I have discovered. Interestingly enough, Dawkins cannot answer fundamentals about his own religion (as that is what evolution is) such as: 1. What is the origin of life, he hypostasises that we come from primordial soup (literally); 2. Dawkins cannot even provide one factual improvement to the human or animal world through evolution, NOT ONE. Darwin was one of the first people to introduce evolution, his inspiration came from reading a book, he had literally 0% knowledge of the complexity of the human cell. Scarily, evolution was driven into education by people who found an escape to the morality “ issues” that creation presented. If DawkinDawkin is to be believed then we share a common ancestor to a banana. They use billions of years as a way to talk rubbish, no fact, pure hypothesis. There is literally not a shred of evidence for evolution, and I have an objective view on life. For interest sake, people think that carbon dating is evidence where in fact it is completely not reliable. I will end off with a short reason as to why evolution is so dangerous. Hitler used the theory of evolution to create the Arien race, the weak being killed for the creation of a super gene group. People who think that they are on earth purely by chance find it simple easy to kill, rape or (insert tragedy here). I live my life knowing that we were divinely created and it is amazing to wake up knowing that we are uniquely special, from that I have a drive to be a better person. Teaching our kids that we are one tail removed from a monkey is catastrophic. We are all absolute miracles and don’t let anyone tell you differently. Enjoy the moon, sun and the stars stars, from the butterfly to the mighty elephant. Enjoy life people it is all not one giant mistake.

Report this

Show me one evolutionary theory that is a solid fact. It isn't a fact because Prof Dawkins says so.

Report this

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was formless and void, and darkness was on the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, ................... then there was a bang!

Report this