The Holtonian

I'm with you on the TBN tower thing. No, scratch that, I don't want to make any threats involving explosives on the internet.

I heard that TBN's lease ended and isn't broadcasting from there any more.

Benny Hin does appear to be an imposter.
If only people would spend a little time and examine how Jesus lived, and how He worked, such frauds as old Benny would not get the time of day.
It's amazing how little many Christians really know about the lifestyle, teaching, and attitude of Jesus. I will always be amused at how easy it is to fool believers.
Guys like Benny have deceived many for years.
There is one certain fact though...Judgement day is coming!!!

Far be it from to defend Benny Hinn, but remember to consider the source before you believe everything you see on the news. Sadly, it seems that many news organizations have an agenda in mind and comment on the news rather than report on it.

Did they get into his method for healing people by hitting them on the head? I bet it's all in the wrist.

The really sad part about Benny Hin's fraud, and I repeat FRAUD, is that he lies straight to the face of his veiwers, and brings false hope to the people he promised to help. Some of the the people he supposedly "healed" died shortly afterwards from the diseases Benny was supposed to have cured. He also said that he would help pay for a boy's surgeries and things for the boys eyes, even though Benny was supposed to have "healed" them. Well, they're still waiting for that money. To anybody who cares enough to read this, I will tell you this, DO NOT TRUST THIS THIEF AND LIAR!!!! Because this is one twelve year old that won't just stand by and watch people give in to the trust of this vile man.

Oh ya! Benny Hin REALLY heals people by shouting BAM! What is up with that? He is a fake and a phoney and a FRAUD. Should you trust him? No way!
People that were supposedly 'cured' died later, very soon after he 'healed' them. He makes promises he doesn't keep, makes procclamations that aren't true and makes people believe in him. He is a simple impostor. I'm only twelve, but even I can see through his act. And no way will I ever trust this faker.

Namstay
sir,
I belive in mr.benny hin and his
salvation i belive that he is a yahowa
messager he work in fulfil and command of holy sprit sir plese continue your work do something in Israel.
your in him
Himanshu

That sounds like Dispensationalism to me, Himanshu.

estoy tan sedienta de Dios quisiera que usara mi vida al maximo

Hin is the biggest fraud. Someone believed by the truly ignorant and naive. The mans lifestyle by its nature contradicts his very source of inspiration. That is, his way of life is incongruent when it is applied to the teachings of Jesus Christ, the very teachings that are his inspiration. In my mind people such as this Hin are a detriment to religion and a leach “praying” (pardon the pun) on the uninformed or ill advised. Mr. Hin and his work are that of an infectious meme, spreading and infiltrating those of weak mind. People must educate themselves from such attacks, for Mr. Hin and his cause have the makings of a cult: A strong, charismatic leader, offering praise to followers, and providing consequences to not following or attempting to change faith. Such properties are cult like and must be defended against. Mr. Hin is true scum.

I think Benny Hin is for real, the amount of joy on all those people's faces when the are healed can not be acted.
If you doubt him i think you should try Jesus, he will show you the amazing things He can do through other people even YOU.
Try him.

I totally disagree. Benny Hin is a fraud. He exploits religion and his sole purpose is on building an empire of followers to line his pockets. How can the man be for real? Would someone in touch with Christ as Benny claims to be, live in a huge house, drive a Mercedes and wear the most expensive of suits if all he cared about was the word of Christ and helping others. Jesus would surly disagree with such a materialistic life style, when there are those in the world who are dying of starvation because they cannot afford food.
The truth is Benny cannot justify this “incongruency” between his lavish life style and the teachings of Christ he exploits. Why you say? The answer is they are in contradiction .Benny Hins rich lifestyle illustrates the exact opposite lifestyle that Christ himself had lived. How can someone who you believe is in touch with Christ live off his followers.
Oh and the Joy comment you made, that is ridiculous. Obviously if someone is stupid enough to fall for such fraud they are stupid enough to truly believe that Bennys mere presence warrants their joy. If enough people get together and they want to believe something so badly, they can truly fool themselves into such fallacy, when there is ample proof in opposition to their belief.
People who truly live the good Christian life try to help others, not try to profit off them and expand their empire for that mere purpose. If you really believe in Benny, it is likely then that you are already a follower. For there is likely no one sitting on the fence on such an issue. They either are a follower and believe in him, as you do, or they understand that some people are corrupt and are willing to exploit others beliefs for money, as hopefully most do. The truth is that such a followings purpose is expansion and expansion is only for the purpose of making Benny richer.
This guy said it best: “Let all Charismatics and Pentecostals be warned that since Benny Hinn is a proven fake, deceiver and liar, that it has critical implications for you as well, since you make the identical claims and practices. How could anyone tell the difference between you and Benny Hinn. After all, no church that claims immediate, supernatural, apostolic type healings has ever been documented. If you have such documentation, please send to us at: email-webmaster.htm. ( 1. documentation that proves the illness existed. 2. documentation that proves an instant supernatural change took place. 3. documentation that proves the illness is 100% gone.)”
'How will we know the word which the LORD has not spoken?' When a prophet speaks in the name of the LORD, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the LORD has not spoken The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him"……….Deuteronomy 18:21-22 !.............
(even proven a fraud in religious text!)

Dear Man of God can u please praiy for me I love God so much and I like to preach the word of God,thank you .

Many of you are very quick in passing judgement about Benny. The important thing is that God is using him in a very effective way so let God judge him. Huge crowds are coming to Christ because of Benny's ministry and his TV coverage - thank God.
None of us will ever come close to imitating the life of Jesus - we are all human and therefore sinners. There are many examples in the bible where godly people lived a very lavish lifestyle (eg Abraham). I sincerely believe that Christ never intended that all His followers should be living in poverty. But we are expected to use the gifts and talents He has given us for His glory. I therefore don't think that Benny is doing too bad. Keep him in your prayers - it will achieve much more than trying to pull him down.
Just remember to love God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind and with all your strength and love your neighbour (that includes Benny) as you love yourself. Ultimately it is this command we all will be judged on.

Have a great day, may God bless you and give you a heart filled with love.

Many of you are very quick in passing judgement about Benny. The important thing is that God is using him in a very effective way so let God judge him. Huge crowds are coming to Christ because of Benny's ministry and his TV coverage - thank God.
None of us will ever come close to imitating the life of Jesus - we are all human and therefore sinners. There are many examples in the bible where godly people lived a very lavish lifestyle (eg Abraham). I sincerely believe that Christ never intended that all His followers should be living in poverty. But we are expected to use the gifts and talents He has given us for His glory. I therefore don't think that Benny is doing too bad. Keep him in your prayers - it will achieve much more than trying to pull him down.
Just remember to love God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your mind and with all your strength and love your neighbour (that includes Benny) as you love yourself. Ultimately it is this command we all will be judged on.

Have a great day, may God bless you and give you a heart filled with love.

Some people use others weaknesses and try to bring them down,others use their knowledge about some people to pass verdicts,
But the Bible clearly points to us that do not Judge others for all have fallen short of the Glory of God,
The people who are calling Benny Hinn all names such as a fakehealer,heretic, blah blah
Are guilty before the Almighty God and should repent,for not every one who says Lord, Lord will inherit the kingdom of God,
I urge all those who have a vast knowledge of Benny's deceptive attitude to launch weapons of mass prayer,pray to God to touch Benny's heart so that he may change,pray for Benny everyday without ceasing, your prayers work much more than criticism,our God is a God who answers prayers.
Be aware that every one has to account for what he or she lived to do on earth, so if you spend the rest of your life criticising what will you tell God when your time comes to leave this earth,
Beloved in Christ once more,JUDGE NOT.

We are forgetting the Simple truth of the matter. No man can come to the father except through Jesus Christ. You do not have to go to an evangelistic movement to receive God's blessing. Go directly through Jesus Christ. Our ability to experience our healing comes through repentence, forgiveness, etc. We have total control over how and to what extent we experience God through Christ. Greater is he that is in us than he that is in the World. AMEN

Necesito saber sobre una persona que hable Español, necesito un consejo del Siervo Benny Hins

Por favor necesito hablar con alguien que sepa español

Anabela Viteri said, "I need to know of a person who speaks Spanish, I need advice from Servant Benny Hins (sic)"

And then:

"Please I need to speak someone that knows Spanish"

Our solvation is through Christ. Let is seek him for our forgiveness. The Lord uses all means to spread him Word. Everyone on earth must be informed of the Word. Let the Lord use whomever he want to use for spreading his Word. Let us not take the seat of the Judge. Every one will be measured and given unto him according to the rightiousness he displayed during his life on the earth.

For Mr.Benny Hin Please read the Jesus Christ word on the Bible (Luke 18:18-30)if You understand this please REPENT because you are The Christiant public figure.Jesus Blessed You.

The man is a Menace.

While I believe the jury is still deliberation on the validity of Mr. Hinn, I wonder what difference it makes on how he flies or what type oh Hotel he stays in...

If it was Donald Trump that we were talking about (who has a 100 to 1 following to Mr. Hinn), we would all applaud his business savvy and universal skill. We need to separate what is in the man rather what the man uses as his/her financial instrument to earn money.

God gave us the inheritable right to make our own decision. Don't blame Mr. Hinn because others do not posses the ability to make a sound decision. Just like those who pray to God on their baseball team winning the World Series...God is just little busy taking care of the real problems facing the world today...I'm sure he does not care much on what kind of car Mr. Hinn drives..

For what it's worth...

To the fool who complained about Donald Trump.
These 2 people are not the same.
Trump worked hard for his money! Hinn lied, cheated, and one day this person will be before the courts. and I hope will spend the rest of his days in jail, and maybe even in hell.
He wont go to Heaven because I doubt that he really beleves in God.
If he did this SCUMBAG would not steal money and lie like he does.
Regards,
Rod (Australia)

This thread might someday give Colrus' prom dress post a run for the money...seven months later and you're still getting comments.

Crabby's Ford vs Chevy post went on for a year i think and got so much traffic. He eventually had to pull it due to the language.

Many will come but few are chosen...Wide is the road many will follow but only a few will follow the narrow road

Guess why?

GOD

I have been watching Benny Hin and tried to have an open mind. But I can't help but feel there is something off with Him. I ask if the truth is told by a liar, is it still not the truth? What he says is right alot of the time, but sometimes it's not but he teaches salvation through Jesus. That is truth worth hearing even if it has to come through a very questionable charector. In the NT Paul discusses nonchristions preaching and teaching in Christs name and even casting out demons in Jesus name and he said something like it is better that this happens than he isn't preached at all. As far as the healing... I get very annoyed by his chronies who bring people up on stage... very over dramatic. Still I think it is possible that the faith of the people in the crowds is what does any real healing. No matter who is up front if there are thousands seeking God with all their hearts and have faith to be healed it will sometimes happen. I don't think his money or past mistakes disqualifies a man from service, but other things may very well do so. Samson who was a prophet and judge was sometimes immoral. King David was a voyeur, murderer, and filthy rich but he wrote much of the psalms. If I watch Benny Hinn it is more out of curiosity and love to see the joy on some of the people's faces.

I have been watching Benny Hin and tried to have an open mind. But I can't help but feel there is something off with Him. I ask if the truth is told by a liar, is it still not the truth? What he says is right alot of the time, but sometimes it's not but he teaches salvation through Jesus. That is truth worth hearing even if it has to come through a very questionable charector. In the NT Paul discusses nonchristions preaching and teaching in Christs name and even casting out demons in Jesus name and he said something like it is better that this happens than he isn't preached at all. As far as the healing... I get very annoyed by his chronies who bring people up on stage... very over dramatic. Still I think it is possible that the faith of the people in the crowds is what does any real healing. No matter who is up front if there are thousands seeking God with all their hearts and have faith to be healed it will sometimes happen. I don't think his money or past mistakes disqualifies a man from service, but other things may very well do so. Samson who was a prophet and judge was sometimes immoral. King David was a voyeur, murderer, and filthy rich but he wrote much of the psalms. If I watch Benny Hinn it is more out of curiosity and love to see the joy on some of the people's faces.

Mr. Hin has caused quite a bit of anger among Christians and non believers as well. I do agree that he has not shown the best taste in the way he lives. Jesus was a humble man, he did not go traveling about with servants doting on him and setting him up in the swank, posh Inns of the middle east, pulling him about on a gold carrier. Not to mention the meals Jesus ate, simple, forget the gourmet restaurants.

I'm sending Mr. Hinn a challenge. . . find a nice home in a good neighborhood, not exceeding let's say 700,000.00 That will buy a middle income home in Orange County. Turn in your current car for a volkwagen jetta or one that is comprable. Eat at Marie Callenders, Mimi's Cafe or Baja Fresh. Live like the rest of us. Stop being a flamboyant showman. I want to see if you continue to heal the sick and love Jesus with all your heart. The gauntlet has been thrown down... Are you strong enough to do it Mr.Hinn? It's your call.

P.S. It took my mom 13 years to get new carpet in her dinky 2 bedroom home. It was filthy and worn to a frazzle. She lives like an old maid. She is one of the many who have been sucked into this massive illusion. Why she thinks she owes this man anything, is a true phenomenom.

Please excuse my terrible sentence structure and spelling. I'm sorry! I get in a hurry and want to get things done. So forgive any mistakes in my comment above.

I like Benny Hin. I think he definatley has a legit healing ministry, but I do wish he would he would cut down on some of the bling.

By reading all of these comments it makes me wonder of who you people are... are you really doing anything that benny hinn isn't? What would you do if you were benny hinn? There are record of massive amounts of healings that have come out of Benny Hinn's ministry, and all we can focus on is what he did wrong, i'm sure there were people that thought that they were healed but wern't and i'm sure benny hinn has said things to people that he couldn 't fullfill, but who is to blame him? after all he is as human as we are, and if he is a theif and a liar and a fraud, who are we to expose him? have we not all stolen something? have we all not lied to our parents? friends? siblings? So if benny hinn is all of these things that you are accusing him as, you better be without blame in all of these areas, grow up and stop scrutinizing someone who has done many great things, along with some bad, as we all have. Jesus picked up a stone and placed it at the feet of the woman who commited adultrey, and those that were accusing her could not throw thier stone because they had sin. Are we soo good that we have no wronge in us so that we can judge Benny Hinn this way? Check yourself befor you make any comment. And realize, you are a sinner just as he is.

well the point is not believing in benny hinn the point is believing in God through Jesus Christ if benny hinn has anything which God doesnt like thats between him and God but benny hinn is just being used by God miracles do really happen and someone needs to be a christian to be able to understand the spiritual things and for you to have a discernment so as far as im concerned benny hinn does things through God and is not an imposter

We should all be carful of the negativity that pours from the mouth for it plants the seed you speak. Make Proverbs is a good reminder for us all.

To the man who spoke about the differences between Hinn and Trump I would be more worried about what comes out of your mouth regarding judgment.

What happened to building God's Kingdom why keep those who are seeking out of it act like Christians.

I watch Benny Hinn almost every morning on Fox49 in Tallahassee. My feeling for those people is sad. Sad that they pay money to go see this fraud just so he can give them false hope. If there is a hell I hope this guy goes there. As I with this show in the mornings and I see him hitting people in the head or trying to sell his videos of books I developed a large hate for this guy.

quisiera saber cuanto saldria un aproximado en costos pr que pueda venir ud aperu

BENNY H. SIMPLY A SOCIOPATHIC PERSON WHO DOESEN,T CARE WHAT HE DOES TO PEOPLE AS LONG AS HE GETS THE ATTENTION AND THE MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

BENNY H. SIMPLY A SOCIOPATHIC PERSON WHO DOESEN,T CARE WHAT HE DOES TO PEOPLE AS LONG AS HE GETS THE ATTENTION AND THE MONEY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I,m always amazed at the e-mail that I read on a web site like this Judgemental, derogatory , and jealous . Worst of all Hateful. I was swimming in a world of hate when God showed it to me and I asked forgiveness and asked God to forgive me of the hatred in my heart towards a certain individual .That is when I was unbelievably , miraculously healed . While watching a television evangelist . My doctor couldn't believe it . Saved me thousands of dollars in medical bills, no operation, no pain.Now instead of judging preachers I pray for them and support them on a regular basis. HEALED OF A STRANGULATED HERNIA OCT/1982.

Just because your doctor could not explain it, it does not mean your recovery was not attributed to something else. It is your own belief that it was the show that healed you. I'm sorry to tell you, if you had a physical ailment that it was not the show, but rather something else. Many people who write in here are uneducated, or at least ignorant of the truth. Hin is a fraud, I am not a religious man, I am scientific, and all I am trying to do is warn people about Benny's fraud. And secondly, I have a right to judge him, this is a free way of expression, and he is the man who is in the lime light, not me and not others who are critical of him. What good has he done? He has done more for himself with the donations of others than for others truly in need.

What does Christ like mean? Why does he advertise so that stadiums are filled. There is plenty of healing that needs to happen in Hospitals. Why do we not hear about this. There is plenty of healing in the world that needs to happen. Most of those folk wont show up to a stadium. Where is the grass roots? Perhaps Mr Hinn can help the homeless. It appears that with the 100 of millions of dollars that has been made he could have wiped out disease in a small village or city. I have heard nothing about direct impact to communities. This is what Jesus would do... Yes, we should not judge.. But that does not mean we should not see the truth for what the truth is.

Would christ say a b lessing or a curse on all these fine church buildings? Or the lavish church budgets that do not feed people, or homeless, or orphans or widows? How many churches visit jails/ When was the last visit to the nursing home? Small groups of dedicated christians mostly, but probably more spent on the sound equipment!

http://www.exodus2006.com/fab/hinn2.htm
check this people, (great site by the way
ultimately accurate fromout the word of God: the bible

this is to inform those who are blaming benny hinn,who r u to blame him?can't u do the healing?
can't u help others?if these things are not possible from our end what is the question of blaming hinn like personality.God is using him,and he is producing the fruits of holyspirit,
until and unless we do that,let him do all these
things

Mark 10 verse 21 through 25.
Then Jesus looking at him, loved him and said to him. "One thing you lack: Go your way, sell whatever you have and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, take up the cross, and follow Me.: But he was sad at this word, and went away sorrowful, for he had great possessions. Then Jesus looked around and said to His disciples, "How hard it is for those who have riches to enter the kingdom of God! And then He said How Hard it is for those who trust in riches to enter the kingdom of God. It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.

I have watched Benny hinns program for some months. Initially, I was amazed at his healing power. But, what made me to think is that when he came to Bangalore, India there was an ambulance behind the stage. If a man can heal people by god's power what is the need for ambulance and doctors. Moreover, what is the need for such high volume songs and prayers if God can hear even the sound of a butterfly spreading its wings. If he is a man who can really heal can he make all the people healed by him to appear on a live show with Doctors to check them. He cannot. And for those who believe him, If he has god's blessings ask him to heal all the patients in America which has to proved scientifically. Then the whole world will do whatever he says.

I saw a program disclosing the fraud of a TV evanglist and how people that could walk were asked to sit in wheelchairs and the evanglist would heal them. Was this Benny Hinn?

dear benni hin Ministries, i request from India
my Name is Ashraf request for the prayer for health and success though i am in trouble facing deppretion and i request to give back the message
i will be waiting for your message please pray for me for the health to improve

Who am I, well I’ll tell you who I am: “I am a skeptic”. Hinn is not being used by god. At no time has he been able to prove that in anyway. His show is the most fraudulent thing about him. You know, the shows where the man up front, i.e. Benny, has the ability to heal people by touch. The truth is, if anybody could perform these acts they would be accepted by others outside of his following as legit. If he had true healing powers it would be observable outside of his show, or reproducible, or even proven through medical evidence. The sad thing is that it is the truly ignorant, truly alterable minds that are being hurt by frauds like this. Those who for reasons that parallel that, do not have high paying jobs and cannot afford this treachery.

Only God hills, only God saves by Jesus.

Benny if ya readin this, give me money for stuff and i will read stuff outta the bible too and then i got some friends that want in on the deal too. They said they'll pretend to fall over after i touch em on the head while sayin stuff about God but they need a bit of the green too. Benny your a good business man, i need some more ideas to get dough from people, email me.

Dios bendiga , solo quiero decir q nadie tiene por q juzgar a nadie es Dios quien conoce los corazones y si este hombre tiene lo q tiene es por q Dios honrra al q le Honrra y por lo tanto no miremos la vida de nadie miremos nuestras vidas y vivamos en paz

Benny Hinn is the most funniest comedian on t.v. these days after the other famous T.V. Benny, the late Benny Hill. So sad though, millions of viewers and "fans" of this Gumby look alike character, are duped [are made suckers] to pay him money "offerings" to live his luxurious lifestyle. When and How can you awake these poor Ignoramuses that this impostor is Benny Hinn character is the Devil Incarnate.

Good Day Mate!!

I can't believe this is still going. This is awesome.

altijd ben zelf

The last writer Misha, hit the nail in the head right-on. This funny bloody wanker could do better rating in his T.V. show if he just sorround himself with volouptous women like the original "Benny" rather than these suited monkey-faced assistants when he start the comical and theatrical part of his show, BAMming peoples head. Wohhh....unbelievable but true, people are healed out of their normalsy, and become really funny and stupid because of this cunning crook's devious "said" healing power. Also if this bloke could just get rid of that s**tty Star Trekky look white outfit and dressed instead with the boyish farmer's outfit again, like the original Benny, maybe millions of non secular people out there will watch his T.V. show more. Honestly, his show is next to nothing in comedy category after Married with Children was cancelled years ago. I wonder why his show never been nominated for any awards. :) :) :)

Sorry, I missed the real Benny(Hill). This other Benny(Hinn)is hellbound and all his fans. He IS already a nominee and a candidate for a special award. The "Award" for all of his nonsense works and accumulated wealth over these years will come by soon. His big daddy is watching him day and night and ready to take him soon ....it's a very "Hot" paradise. Can somebody guess where it is?

I hear his next healing is going to be the kid who only could recite 8,784 digits of pi from memory when he intended to recite 10,790. A couple of whops on the head should free up the memory banks in his head:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060316/ap_on_sc/pi_prodigy_1

Be healed...fall down...then go about your life like nothing happened, because nothing did.

Benny Hinn is a bullshitist, and a prominent practitioner of bullshitism.

jesus when he went to the temple and saw that the people were using it as a market became angry and trashed the place and chased the people out and it clearly states in the bible not to use the lords name in vain and we all know there are many ways to comunicate ie verbal actions etc. you shall know a tree from the fruit it bares...as for the judgement i will leave it u to god as i put all matteers in his hands he will be called to justice for i do believe he is misguided and misguiding for it also states in the bible do not look for your reward here on earth for it is in heaven the things of earth are temporary and fade with time the kingdom of god is and always will be....pray for him and god will deal with his heart and call him to repentance but to have anger in your heart will only cause you to sin yourself.. i think to be christ like is to know you are human and that you will fail but to get up everytime and go after the goal again take the path less traveled do not seek to pile up treasure here on earth when you die you are dead and there is no happiness in the things of this world..god bless

Matt. 7:21-23 "Not everyone who says to me, `Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, `I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

Matt. 7:21-23 "Not everyone who says to me, `Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, `Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, `I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!'

One word.....psycho. You Bible thumpers are nuts. Many of you discard provable ideas such as evolution, yet you believe in abstract concepts that are not provable whatsoever. Many people in the Christian community are either misinformed or are simply ignorant of the truth. The truth is that evolution is very much a real and ongoing process. Some may be surprised to know that it is almost as much a fact as the sky is blue. You see, it is not the process of evolution which is arguable, it has been proven: In fruit flies, examining viruses, in embryology, in genetics, in behavior, in structure, in function, and on and on. It is the process of how evolution operates that is under question, not if it actually exists or not. Many hardcore Christians mix this up. They think that it is evolution itself that is under question. The question of how does evolution occur is what is yet to be definitively proven. Natural selection is the process that is under question, not evolution. To date, it is probably the most correct theory of how evolution occurs.
When you think about it, evolution under natural selection is a pretty intuitive process. Perhaps so much so that it makes one think: how did I not figure it out? The idea is this: Genes are clearly a force in driving appearance. This can be seen by simply examining your children or your Uncle and the like. If this is the case, if deoxyribonucleic acid is transmittable, why is so hard to grasp that as it is passed along slight modifications are possible and that arbitrary mutations can occur also. Secondly, Evolution by natural selection operates via the environments interactions with many organisms. The environment simply creates pressure that favors some traits over others in terms of survival. The animals that find the environment too harsh and who cannot adapt die out, and the ones with the "fittest" genes produce a disproportionate amount of offspring compared to all others with alternative genotypes. There you have it: It is so simple, yet why so hard to believe? I think the man reason it is hard to believe is because many cannot observe evolution in action because it operates of course very slowly through tens of thousands of years in most organisms. Fruit flies and viruses have proven insightful since they evolve much more rapidly and have shorter generations. The fact that we must adapt our medication to new strains of bacteria, also illustrates that organisms adapt. Perhaps the most interesting fact is that humans share over 90 something percent of their DNA with chimpanzees. Such a genetically close proximity is perhaps one of the biggest pieces of evidence. Lastly, even cognitive psychological processes are a product of some evolutionary processes. This can be seen by the fact that many people have a somewhat disproportionate innate fear of dangerous spiders and snakes, things most people don’t encounter on a daily basis anymore. On the other hand they find present day dangers relatively harmless. Driving and walking around a busy street is much more likely to cause death these days, yet people maintain to preserve their innate fears that have risen from the hunter gathering society long ago. Evolution has shown that we are adapted to the interactions of organisms with past environments, not necessarily present ones.

well...after i read all the threats here, I just wanna tell you guys to be becareful with your words, for me, personally I won't dare to be like several of you guys, cause to jugde is not my right, but I believe that Judgement is the authority of God, and let God decide who's wrong, who's true, I feel so sad to know that still some of us don't realize that thing, I'm not tha fan of Beny Hinn, I'm not the fan of anybody, I'm just the fan of JESUS CHRIST my saviour, my Lord, my God, my everything! All the glory and honor and worship and praise and power only for Him, yes for JESUS CHRIST...!!!

Well that is your opinion. If you beleive in all this judgement crap, well, good for you. Just a few points though. What makes your religion right over all others. Everyone thinks that their own religin is the only salvation. In my opinion, religion operates as a coping mechanism for the truth. The truth of course is unkown. Unkown things make people feel uneasy. People like to feel in control of their life, or in the least have a feeling that if they don't they will still be sent to heaven anyway.

Great comment Misha Shevenski......I luv It

saloom,

I want benny Hinn coming back in my countery

great observation arantxa. where did you find such word? trying to find it from the dictionary and can't find it. good stuff though and says it all. muchas gracias

great observation arantxa. where did you find such word? trying to find it from the dictionary and can't find it. good stuff though and says it all. muchas gracias

hey mr evolution just because you share the same dna doesnot make you related scientst are the insecure ones since they need to see to believe and without the sight they cannot believe doughting thomases and all your theories change from year to year what happened to lucy the fake chimp that they wanted to make it the missing link but all it was was a bunch of fake bones put together science is fraud when it comes to evolution big bang haaa explain to me ho one cell could live for milions of years in order to split into another and another to become that ape you are clueless if you can believe in the baseless theories of science based only on conjecture and theory where is your proof sir they dont have it and i came from an ape how is it that man split off and all the other primnates stoped at so many different levels of inteligence and size etc. etc. reevaluate your life im no ape if you tell chilidren thart the y came from animals then they will act like them im done wasting my time on a faithless fool

Let’s evaluate your argument, shall we? Ok…..were to start: First of all, your comment “just because you have the same DNA does not mean that your related is Wrong!…..For starters, it depends on what you mean by related- the process of cell division allows itself up to 64 trillion combinations or something like that, and that’s just for humans! It is no fluke that the sequencing is rather similar between homo- sapiens and other primates. Think about it: If there is that many possible combinations it would be highly unlikely that organisms of “no relation” would “Share” over 90% of there genotype by chance. If there was no organization, no relation between organisms of similar genes, how could they come to have such similar sequences? If no selection pressure or genetic drift was applied then there would be nothing wrong with any sequence. In other words, there would be no reason to share DNA gene sequences (besides heritability) because no one sequence would do any better than any other sequence. Everything would be random, not just the changes caused by genetic drift, everything! The proposition that organisms share abundant sequences for no reason makes no sense. If every possible gene sequence was just as adaptive as all other possible gene sequences, why would different species share some many of them when there would have originally been so many alternatives?
Secondly, your second statement was, and I quote, syntactical errors and all: “explain to me ho one cell could live for milions of years in order to split into another and another to become that ape” Well, one cell would not have to live for that long at all. Incase you are ‘clueless’ DNA allows for heritable transmission of genetic information. (That is why you generally resemble someone in your family). In other words, the cell would pass on its genetic material, than die. Expression of less dominate genes would lead to new phenotypes. Those new phenotypes then recombine to form a new combination and on and on. Those cells with the fittest combination of genes survive, while the others die out. Billions of year go by (learn about carbon dating and isotope dating) the mutations and recombinations of genes have allowed organisms to be split into various classes ( Domain, kingdom, phylum, order, family, genus, species) and for those classes to be “related” genetically to one anther (perhaps loosely with greater distance). Environmental changes continue to allow certain genotypes to thrive and others to die, and eventually evolution, (regardless of the force) occurs. Those sequences that have proven adaptive are preserved, passed on, and improved upon. For example, examine the brains of reptiles and notice, the various sub-cortical structures- A simple system that has a basic function. Next observe the primitive paleomammalian brain and notice the addition of a larger cortex, and contained inside that cortex that same basic reptilian sub-cortical structure. Finally, observe the human brain with a large neocortex (new cortex). This neocortex is on top of the paleocortex, preserved with similar paleomammalian structure. Guess what else is inside?....... The reptilian structure is also there- similar to our subcortical region. So, then, you see that by examining the brains of various organisms we can see where the addition took place. (After all the evolutionary explanation of the origin of man is far more believable, then say, god created every organism and that they just suddenly appeared!)
Thirdly, you said that: “ you are clueless if you can believe in the baseless theories of science based only on conjecture and theory where is your proof sir they dont have it and i came from an ape how is it that man split off and all the other primnates stoped at so many different levels of inteligence and size etc. etc. reevaluate your life im no ape if you tell chilidren thart the y came from animals then they will act like them im done wasting my time on a faithless fool.”
Let us try and pull this apart: Evolution is no baseless theory, your simply misinformed, uneducated, or both. Evolution is observable in embryology, buy studying genes, viruses, fruit fly’s etc--it is not proven by conjecture, nor by opinion, but by observation. On the other hand, what can religion prove? It is all conjecture itself, not fully agreed upon, the cause of war and death. It cannot prove that Jesus had magic powers, which is less believable than humans and chimps evolving from a common ancestor. Just because there is a bible, does not mean that everything in it is true. How can you prove the things in the bible? You cannot…. So you chose to believe in the things that are not provable whatsoever, yet disconfirm the things that have rational support-error in you logic perhaps?... Science is not conjecture, it is generally factual, it is responsible for the invention of penicillin, cancer treatment, life saving surgery, disease immunization, building computers and robotics and on and on. What has religion done: caused war, robbed people of their money (Benny Hinn), brainwashed the week, etc. How do you explain all the religions? Is your religion the correct one? The ones in China and Indian, are they wrong in your mind? If so, are they going to hell just for the arbitrary reason of geographic location? Religion is a meme, I am not going to explain the concept (you can look it up), but that is what it is. It also operates as a coping mechanism for the unknown. I agree that it provides people with a feeling that there life is meaningful in some special way, for. many cannot stand the notion that life can be reduced to arbitrary processes.
Granted, scientists make errors, but that is what the process of replication is for. If a finding cannot be replicated, it lacks reliability, and can be disproved. Science is not conjecture for same reason that it is subject to a certain integrity, (perhaps stronger now than in the past). That is, science must follow guide lines: publish results, be subject to criticism and debate, and be reproducible, and lastly, scientific claims must be falsifiable. Religious claims are not subject to strict guidelines, they are believed because they are passed on from father to son. It is them that represent the conjecture, the hear-say. As for your last claim: all the other primnates stoped at so many different levels of inteligence and size : First of all when I say Man and other primates are related I mean that they are not related like family, they are related indirectly. They are related by relation to a common ancestor. That means that chimps and man diverged millions of years ago at some point and have been evolving differentially ever since. You ask why they have different intelligences because you do not understand evolution. Man and chimp are not the same animal, that is the simple answer. Our related ancestor that lived millions of years ago was likely scattered, as many organisms are. That means that our common ancestor was subject to differing environmental demands. It is believed that these differential conditions such as, how hard food is to get, what the land terrain is like etc, is responsible for the divergence in brain power. Some member of our common ancestor lived in areas that did not require additional cognitive adaptations, while others were selected because of their environment to require a higher cognitive capacity (read about the foraging hypothesis) Researchers examining correlations between ecology and brain size in primates -- including ecological variables such as diet, stratification, activity timing, home range size, and breeding system -- have concluded that grades of encephalization depend on taxonomic family and are correlated with body size and home range (Bauchot and Stephan 1966, Clutton-Brock and Harvey 1980.
In summary, I think I answered everything comprehensibly whether you understand it, that is another story.. lol I suspect you have not graduated from University and are ignorant of what is now taught in school. Evolution is taught instead of creationism in most first world nations now, with the exception of areas in the southern states…rednecks…lol It is your view that is outdated and is the product of conjecture, not mine. (Mine relies on credibility and skepticism and scientific moral, yours hearsay and tradition). But thanks for coming out!

Check mate!

totally agree with robert

But as most creationists, you lack the knowledge and ability to counter the argument directly. Divertive strategies are the choice: Attack the person explaining what has been observed,rather than addressing the issue and explaining why you feel it is false. I'm so sure the creationist are right...lol Most don't even understand the difference between evolutionary fact and evolutionary theory. I suggest you read the paper written by Robert Gould on the issue.

You are just Full of it BH

You are just Full of it BH

Full of what, knowledge? It is the creationists who are full of it. Your just one of them- brainwashed into believing that the bible is the be all and end all of existence. It is quite remarkable the power religion has over people. You could show them how bacteria evolve right in front of their face and they would say: "evolution is false because it is in contradiction with some old book (the Bible).

You know how the religions of the past seem quite hard to believe today- like the beliefs of native Indians or the beliefs people had in Roman Gods. Today, people think: "how could people have believed that." My prediction is that people will be saying the same thing 200 years from know about religions of today. Why you ask? Because science will eventually prevail, reason will eventually work its way past the scholars of present to the far reaches of hickville. Creationists believe for the sake of belief and turn a deaf ear to "direct" observation, common sense, and reason. Hmmmm….. I wonder who is right on the matter?...Is it the scientists, with their rigorous testing procedures, calculated findings and public standards... or is it the creationists who are right- the rednecks who are still ignorant of evolution and present day knowledge and thought, who base everything on the hearsay and translation of a book....hmmm I wonder who is right?

you"re of bullshit!!!

you"re full of bullshit!!!

The Hominid Family Tree

Orrorin tugenensis
(6 mya)

Ardipithecus ramidus
(4.4 mya)

Australopithecus anamensis
(4.2 to 3.9 mya)

Australopithecus afarensis
(3.6 to 2.9 mya)

Kenyanthropus platyops
(3.5 to 3.3 mya)

Australopithecus africanus
(3 to 2 mya)

Australopithecus aethiopicus
(2.7 to 2.3 mya)

Australopithecus garhi
(2.5 mya)

Australopithecus boisei
(2.3 to 1.4 mya)

Homo habilis
(2.3 to 1.6 mya)

Homo erectus
(1.8 to 0.3 mya)

Australopithecus robustus
(1.8 to 1.5 mya)

Homo heidelbergensis
(600 to 100 tya)

Homo neanderthalensis
(250 to 30 tya)

Homo sapiens
(100 tya to present)

mya = millions of years ago
tya = thousands of years ago

Hey Arantxa, prove me wrong if so. So far you have proven me right (scroll up). All you can do is attack me with insults. That is the choice of creationists. They have nothing intelligent to say on the matter, nothing that proves the phenomenon of natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, or evolution (in general) wrong. Some of you attack my claims by saying that I have no proof, but that is not so. It is the creationists who lack proof and who believe when there is a lack there of. Science doesn't believe in evolution because it has an agenda (like religion does). Science supports evolution because it is supported by evidence (unlike the crap in the bible). So how can you argue that evolution is not true because it has no proof, when firstly it does, and secondly religion itself is based on translation and conjecture and is not supported by proof. HYPOCRITES!! I wonder what is more believable: organisms are related through common ancestry or that animals just appeared in a temporal sequence of relatedness out of thin air...hmmm

Gentlemen,
And Ladies,please! Before we get wounds and bleed all over the place, read S.J.Goulds interview with PBS. He and many of his peers were wont to condemn others. I would remind myself and others that science has not answered every question, nor is my understanding of god limited to a single issue. I had a wise professor in school that often reminded me that science was about "how" and you are free to let god answer "why". For my fellow christians I would suggest writers like spong or borg, the jesus seminar. There is no way to pusuade anyone by bludeoning them with a beaker or a bible.
Best regards

Let’s just stop and think for a second about the psychology of the human mind: Would there be religious like beliefs if no claimed religious events had ever taken place? Yes, because many religions are quite different, so not all religious explanations can be correct, therefore, some must be incorrectly explaining existence. If it is possible for some of the religions to be 'wrong', it can very well be possible that they all are wrong. Their existence is related to something about the psychology of the human mind. This is because there are so many of them. There existence is almost a universal phenomenon: African, Asian, Indian, Chinese, Middle-eastern societies all have greatly divergent, yet religious beliefs. The universality of religion means that it will exist if it is 'real' and it will exist if it is not 'real'. Which is more likely?..... To me, it is more likely that religion explains the existence of a universal, independent, cognitive system, a system humans’ have to explain the unknown. Since the unknown cannot be explained, such practices are reinforced, culturally transmitted, and updated with the times. They relieve anxiety, and are a means to transmit old culture and, such practices are deeply rooted in family participation.

really BH, you are so funny and weird, Benny Hinn is the issue (topic) here, not anything else of your bullshiting science knowledge. who cares of your heritage from the apes, proud of it, then so be it.....okay

does BH means BUBBLE HEAD, just wondering :} :}

Are Arantxa Gallegos and Arther Miller the same person, just wondering? Both posts were within five minutes of each other and past one in the morning. hmmmm I wonder!

Benny Hinn,
charlottan for sure, but a very phat bank account. Who amoung us can dismiss the placebo effect? Statistically the effect is measurable. The US Pub Med data supports a strong corelation. So who knows, really? My biggest gripe with TV evangelist, and religion in general is the fact that christianity is in the real estate business. We sure as hades are not "taking care of widows and orphans, feeding the poor and visiting the incarcerated."

ok bh here we go again lets start at the very begining ...ohhh but firs my appologies fro my syntax error i do alittle more in life than blog 24/7 but anyway enough insults im trying to have an somewhat intelligent conve here ....but i was saying is #1 you cannot even explain how that cell has the water the earht and all that to live in sir #2 and if a cell does not have to live for millions of year to learn to split save and share its dna then you are saying it is pre programed by SOMETHING other than itself and where did this one cell come from thin air lets get the concept strait from nothing you cannot get something so first you explain to me where it all came from before you just assume it was there with out giving a vialble provable factuall basis for this claim ie no big bband that would take energy and mattter and substance and if you have nothing then you dont have those factors why is it that man thinks it is so far fetched that there just might be something more or greater than he in the world if we as humans are our hop then i might as well kill myself because im already dead science is not a perfect sience it hads done alot of great things for man kind but it has failed miserably at explaining how it came to bethey are always stating this and that then a few years go by and boom ooh well we were wrong on that we found this now and so we changeded our theory to suit what is what we claim for the next few years is the new theory im sorry my friend your long winded blog has done nothing but show me nothing but one day the man that you are will stand before the god in heaven and know that he is no APE i applod you on your intelligence and your scientific diatrieb and your ability to quote me with my syntax errors for i am a man of many faults and not perfecr but for a man with such in telligence why to you find sollice in the unfounded does it make you more comfortable to feel that you are in some sort of power over your existience or that you can some how manipulate your enviroment to make you feel better about your believe ablility you probably hold some beliefe in aliens from another realm or planet that seems scientifical ehh. but you simply find it impossible to believe in a god because you cannot see it taste it touch it but if you look around sir you do see it breath it its that sence out thier that makes you go huum when you stare at a stary sky and think man what is that feeling like im being watched i assure you it not alliens your go.....but i will appologize for calling you a fool sir i must show more respect to my fellow man forgive me..must be the ape in me...hahah robert

estor that lived millions of years ago was likely scattered.... uuh ohhh the scientist made a mistake syntax the word would be "were"....and ps i may not be the smartest person in the world but iam working on my degree im about 21 credits from my BA you dont assume because you go around qutoing other peoples work that you are somehow of a higher evolutoion than my selfall that long winded blog you wrote answered nothing you meerely go tone of your science mags and went to quoteting youve probably made awhole list on your computer to use in a flash...when called for any way i must retort on your science has saved the world THE ATOM BOMB VX GAS RIACIN GUNS IN GENERAL AND SHALL IGO ON NO I THINK YOU GET THE POINT i will explain the religion in different place theory of yours take budism budda was A man who died and you could mister scientist probably do some research and find his grave if you wanted and you would find his bones..in the religious belief we have a fallen angel who in his haste to become god now fights to defeat god hence turning man who god created in his own image against god hence the false and phoney dietisms and the romans and the greeeks were meerly trying to eplain why the sea roared with storms and the volcano errupted so that they not unlike you would feel better about themselves so as you can see all is explainable and anything you put to a christian can be put to science and im sorry if my english is to hickish for your brilliant mind to understand but im a common man and dont need big words half the population doesnt know to make me feel educated but if thats your cup of tea drink it down sometimes you dont need theoris conjecture and math problems and etc etc. to believe something my friend if your god is science then save your self from death pray to your god and heal yourself science is only as smart as the person possesing the knowledge and we all know that what men make is only temporaryand you said we are related because we share dna wich goes to proove one creator who had the knoewledge to reuse the same blue print for it alot of animals have eyes simular to us also are they my relative did we previously spawn off of them and they just decided to stop..and we keep on up the ladder to the apes and got some of that dna and so on and so on you scientist do alot of anilmal research on alot of different animalk because the part of the body that you are testinf react alot like ours are we then related i hear that the sheeps vagina is the most simular to humans but im sure you sir DO KNOW THIS...end of storie...r

well im back i know its a slow night at work and i have the time to blog away i did alittle research on your fruit flies and it seems that they did change but not like you represent sir the scientist was usind radiation to alter the genes some had no wings some two some big wings etc.mico evolution i think you guys call it but it resulted in no new changes that clearly bennifited the fruit fly they were still well fruit flies wich does not prove the macro theory of evolution wich states complete changes in a spechie small to large, ie one cell to two to three and to fish to frog etc.none of those fruit flies ever changed from a fruit fly they only changed because of the radiation that also happens im humans hardly a case to base your macro evolution on ape to man weak man very weakand now i want to say that since no one was around to see the big bang or hear it or deal with the reprocustions of such a big bang i guess that takes a little FAITH to believe it but you still cannot hAVE NOTHING FROM NOTHING and take the sun how did or does the sun excist and why does it burn and not expode completely since we all know that it does have explosion show did gravity form where did that force come from and what changed on the earth that this force knew that the living things would need it to stay on the earth as opposed to floating away and how did the spherers around the earth form to protect US from the sun and harmfull thing from space it almost sounds like someone was planing on this EARTH substaining life or did it just evolve thhis was JUST IN CASE that one day that cell that might come and one day might devide to become LIFE that would need such a protective force why is the natural world so perfect at sustaining life if it never knew that life was going to ever exsist SIR i need answers here but you cnanot give them your too busy looking for the next lucy i think im going to go ape lol lets face it god exists have a good day SIR and god bless you....:)

Once again, you have failed to understand me. That was one particular type experiment you looked at, not the whole journal. What I was implying was that by using fruit flies to study evolution was that we are able to see changes or adaptations at the "gene" level. Try to think of evolution in terms of genes, not whole "macro" organisms –a system where individual genes compete so to speak for expression. By demonstrating natural selection at the gene level, one is better able to understand how it led to macro adaptations. Why is it so hard to believe that if small changes in gene sequences can make small changes, larger changes in gene sequences can make larger changes? Sine even small changes in common gene structure can take hundreds to thousands of years, it should not be surprising that macro-level changes may take millions of years or more. Thus, such changes are not seen because no person can live long enough to see them! Nevertheless, the framework that is able to account for micro-level adaptations is able to explain macro-level adaptations because it is the same theory….Natural Selection…
Secondly, evolution is not a new theory that changes every week. It dates back to the eighteen hundreds and has for the most part been preserved as the theory of all theories’ in the area of study. All present study has built to support this framework: maternal-fetal conflict, sexual selection, punctuated equilibrium, just to name a few.

Why do you assume that your religion (Christian) is the ‘right’ religion? Let me offer some insight: You do so because you grew up a Christian and that is what you believe ….(nothing wrong with that)…. But what about the religions elsewhere?...What about Judaism, what about Hinduism, what about Buddhism, what about the other thousands of belief systems out there? Why do you assume that they are phony because they make outrageous claims while yours does also? The point is that every religion thinks that its explanation of existence is correct and that all others are wrong. What makes your religion correct over all other religions, other then the arbitrary reason that it is “your” religion? Secondly, it seems rather arbitrary to send non-believers to hell for the sole reason of geographic location. Are all the Chinese greater sinners because they have a different religion? I think the fact that almost all societies throughout history have had religious like beliefs illustrates something more about the human mind rather than the existence of a god. It is the need-to-know-now mentality perhaps, or it maybe the relief of anxiety the unknown can cause. Nevertheless, the human mind seems to possess a universal cognitive system for the production of what one would call “religion”.
.

Lastly, the failure of science to completely explain phenomenon i.e. the big bang, does not imply that what it has found is false or incorrect. In other words, just because science cannot explain how the earth came to be definitively is by no means an assertion that somewhat unrelated phenomenon i.e. Natural Selection is incorrect. Today, science is limited by the frameworks and paradigms used to understand data, technology, ethics, and the intelligence of the human mind. Just because man has not been able to explain exactly how the earth formed by no means suggests that what it has found is false. In examining the histories of scientific discoveries, it can be seen that they often build upon each other. Perhaps one day, if technology allots us, we will be able to understand better the process of planet formation……But I should mention: Religious explanations of the origin of man are quite weak and are not supported by anything other than by blind faith. At least science has working proof for its claims, and as I said: the process of evolution is much more believable than all animals appearing in a temporal sequence of relatedness out of thin air! I am sorry Robert, but I cannot fathom that humans just appeared all of the sudden out of nothing. When have you seen something appear out of thin air? Why is that so much more believable to you than evolution? It violates everything you have experienced in your life, when have you seen something suddenly appear out of thin air?! Plants slowly grow, they do not just transform from seed to stalk magically. Nature operates gradually over time, not in a matter of seconds. From this framework, Natural Selection is more believable than creationism.
For lack of time and space, I will have to address the issue of planet and life formation another day, but I will say this: the presence of water and ozone layer are not proof of god, they are however proof that life can be supported; the fact that the other planets have no ozone layer is not proof of god, because we only have a small number of planets in our solar system and there is likely billions of planets throughout the universe as a whole, in which some likely have Ozone; the fact the sun does not float away is not proof of god because the sun is held in place and together by the force of gravity; and water exists in other planets, not just earth, it is present in the atmosphere of both Venus and Mars and there is evidence that Mars had large bodies of water on its surface long ago….though that does not mean I believe in Aliens. ...lol…..

Best regards,

BH

BH...surely you're from the planet of the apes

Yes, I am. Guess what planet it is.......................................................................................................give up?................It's Earth. Do they teach basic science in your grade school or are you from hickville. You see we live on a planet called "Earth", need I go on?

BH...you must be in the cage now or in the wilds since all apes in this planet are either on these two places...how's your father king kong?...you must look alike?...are you it's mirror image?.....oga oga ogagah...how are your chimpanzee cousins.ummmmmmmm ugggggggghhhhhh

Guess what Arantxa? Guess what the dominant scholarly view of the world is? It is not creationism, it is science. Why do you think that Evolution is taught in schools and creationism is not? Why do universities solely teach evolution? I wonder what the average difference in IQ would be between the scholarly, those who are educated, and people like you.
The computer you are writing on, its built on scientific principles, what has your religion done for you? In fact most of the life you enjoy is built on science. Yet you brush it off when it goes against what people like Benny tell you. Try getting an education, open your mind to natural observation rather than what's forced down your throat (likely by your parents no doubt).
On the other hand, it is no surprise people on this website cannot understand evolution: Most come from rural hick town and have not seen the inside of a University; most have no understanding of science and scientific principles; and most are ignorant of how much science has improved their lives; Lastly, this forum is surly not representative of the consensual view humans have about evolution, it is built on a certain bias so to speak.
Most are joyous of the relief scientifically produced pain killers have given them, how present medical treatment has allotted people the opportunity to live longer and be healthier than ever. Was it prayer that saved people from the plagues past or was it medicine? Is it science that is coming up with all the answers or is it the bull they feed you from the day you were born? Think it over, go to school, and then come back and discuss the plausibility of Evolutionary theory with me. I could not be more delighted then to set you straight. Until then, I will no longer bother myself with your comments on the matter. You cannot offer an argument anyway, only attempted insults, and poor ones at that!

BH...points i will give my true beliefs i believe that we were made by a supreme being..but i also hold some scientific beliefs they are as you stated visible in the natural world but since they cannot entirely prove how it all came about i will follow my religion not that my beliefes are formed by going into a builiding i dont follow all the things modern religion says and i feel alot of them like our bro hinn use it to our and others dismay.(ps my insults are to mainly joust a little for humors intent only nothing personnel)they have taken something that i feel could be if only in theory as beautiful as you hold your science wich by the way has become a religion and holds the same basis as any religion that it will save us..but my point being is that since it does take or would take thousands of years to develop such a system say as the human body that in itself is a more reliable machine than anything man has come up with if you think about what it does and the sure traume it can take and still repair and go on with its funtions or when one part of the brain is damaged then another takes over for it and i will conceed to you that some of the stories in the bible such as creation ism may seem a bit over the top but it does take faith t believe in something even if that something is science you said yourself that you belive that one day science will figure it out or prove it points but you cannot garuntee this so you base your beliefes in a faith of science whether you are willing to believe it or not you do practice a religion it is science..or if you want buhdism or islam or hinduism etc.yes sir mans brain does sence something above himself or greater than himself and he seeks it out trying to answer the ultimate question WHY AM I HERE nothing just happens like you stated have you seen anything just appear so why would anything just appear such as molecules and atom and then form into tthe glop pools and then decide hey lets get together and become something and so one sir the theories in science are just as over the top as creationism ...why is it hard for you also to believe that thier could be a god who created this place and does allow for change with in his creation..this theory is more among my beliefs i think god is the ultimate scientist ..and as far as other religions i sir am not to judge them it is not my duty if they are right and i am wrong then i guess ill find out when im dead and if this god i believe in turns out to be nothing then it has not hurt me to try and live a better life i applaude the scientist who work hard to heal us and am very grateful for them and the work they do but religion was here before science as far as my studies but if you can prove me wrong then by all means do so and i will conceed the point but reguardless sir onething i do know that you god of science cannot stop your death as your religion goes once your dead your dead its up to the next guy i will have the faith in the resurection and if im wrong then it is my honor to let my bones and flesh rote and feed something else thefore giving me the honor of living on if only as food..or the giver of life if you want to see it that way science hyas its place as well does religion but one thing you sir cannot deny is your sence of something greater than yourself it is that drive to know and understand..and as far as your water and atmosphere explanation the only thing lacking is the whole complete picture of the life forming and every little part of the puzzle coming to gether just so to make the whole picture as you know if one little thing in oour earth goes awire were done for ...and i never said the sun doesnt float away why is it not explodeing how can something soo unstable exist for so long with out dire cataclismic event such as it blowing itself up or burning up and isnt it just funny how its the only planet that just burns as a heat sorce al other planets are not as this one is..i think we as humans need to get over ourselves we are not as great as we think just look around you maybe scientists should try in venting peace..but iknow what you will say religion has started most or the wars through out history which i will admit this but i thin that says something about the carracter of man and not religion i dont claim to have all the anwers but i think with any two sides of the story the truth lies somwhere in the middle...hows that robert

he said...To me, it is more likely that religion explains the existence of a universal, independent, cognitive system, a system humans’ have to explain the unknown. Since the unknown cannot be explained, such practices are reinforced, culturally transmitted, and updated with the times. They relieve anxiety, and are a means to transmit old culture and, such practices are deeply rooted in family participation.

Posted by: BH at April 14, 2006 08:57 PM ...well what round is this did you think by my last e-mail i would bow and conceed no im not finished yet..i belive things do evolve but not every tree florew bee ape etc. coming from one ONE COMON ancestor i think not lets look ...micro evolution the theory that things can evole or mutate is a better word on a genetic leval these either happen naturally or due to enviromental impacts.such as the radiation or chemicals ...the second natural selection or darwinism...that the strongest will survive and the weakest will die...and speciation..where one species mutates to the point tha tit can no longer mate with its own kind and become a closed off segment therfore starting a new species..SOME INTERSETING THING ABOUT THE MISSING OR SHOULD I SAY STILL MISSING LINK....piltdown man WAS SAID TO BE 500,000 YRS OLD AND "the missing link" after all the scientist were singing the praises of the found link..it was alass found to be a FAKE a combination of an oragutan jaw bone and filed down teeth and a human skull treated with chemicals so as t look old....#2 NEANDERTHALL MAN...found in germany in the neader valley in 1856 by johann furhlrott..the find a shull and some bones..protrayedas semi-errect and a brutish human like or sub-human if you will..as called you guessed it "THE MISSING LINK" the belief now is that these people suffered from rickets they were real but mainly just had vatamin d deficencies but not the missing link they were people ohh and i forgot arthritis...now we move on to nabraska man found in well nebraske in 1922 by one harold cook what did he find ONE TOOTH =man ???? anyway and was claimed tobe by H.F Osbourne to be you guessedit "THE MISSING LINK" LATER ON DOWN THE ROAD AFTER MUCH HOOPLA our loving scientist discovered no link but an estinct PIG to whom the tooth belonged to.and not least and probably not the last the famous"LUCY" FOUND IN ETHIOPIA in 1974 by one american anthropologist donald johanson...it was so incomplete the skull richard leakey along with johanson is one of the most well known anthropologists in the world said most of it was imagination made from plaster of paris....leakey even stated in 1983 that no firm conclusion couldbe made to what species could be made..so since we came from the same ancestor why oh why have we not found the evidence of it if natural selection is the case then the stong have survived that led to us the obvious strongest of the strong where are the bones of our predisessorsthe fact is that all the evidence we have of human evolution could fit in a coffin with room to spare...but one more storie about lucy Dr. johanson gave alecture at the univesity of missouri in kc nov 20 1986 on why he felt that lucy was our ancestor and he gave reasoning such as the femur and the pelvis being more robust than most chimpsand therefore "could have " wlaked upright huum was that just conjecture i heard...i drive on...then after the lecture was over he opeaned it up to q's a mr. roy holt from the audience ask "and he is a creationist mr holt" how far from lucy did you find the knee??? answerthe knee bone was actually found a year earlier than the rest of lucy about 200 ft. lower.and about three kilometers away (about 1.5 miles)again the gentleman askes the why are you so sure it belong's to lucy ...reply because of anotomical simularities(dogs and bears have anitomical simularities)so thats the science of homology.....preety weak..robert...ill be back..god in the end always wins..now refer to BH'S COMMENT I PASTED ON THE TOP WHOS RELYING ON WHAT KNOW....ROBERT

It is not faith that drew me to that 'proposition', but rather observation: Why are many religions so different, why do people from the cave men and Egyptians of past, to the tribal natives of Africa, believe in the existence of supreme beings, yet have greatly differening explanations of existence? From this framework some religions must be wrong. Why are they their then?..... I inferred that it was to do with a need-to-know mentality, or motivation man has to try to explain what he cannot. I never said that such a system exists in reality; I inferred it based on observations. I do not have faith that it exists because it is only a proposition and I would succumb to evidence to the contrary (unlike religion). That's the difference... Science is not built on faith Robert, I will tell you why: 1.) Science uses what is observable to make conclusions not on what is not observable such as the existence of a supreme being. 2) Science is subject to standards of ethics, reliability, debate, criticism, and falisfibility. The last one is the most important, item that distinguishes science from religion: Scientific theories are only scientific if the claims they make are falsifiable. That is, they must be within the realms of reason and it must be possible to prove them wrong with other theory. Religious beliefs are not changeable because they are faith-based, and they are not scientific because they make claims that are outside scientific inquiry and therefore claims that are not falsifiable through inquiry. Other claims that are faith- based are found in the pseudo-sciences. Ideologies that are not “real” respectable science are things like: Astrology, phrenology, scientology, etc. Scientology is a funny one because it is not science at all. It is a religion that tries to use science to support its claims, but it is NOT a science in the least, nor is it considered respectable among main stream scientists. Science does not wish things to be a certain way, or have faith that they are. Science is only based on evidence drawn from the environment.
Now to address the missing link thing: The failure of science to find a missing link for primate ancestry is not evidence that evolution by natural selection is wrong.: It merely implies that we have not found it yet. How do I know?......well I infer this based on the fact that other missing links have been found and other animal chains of existence are complete. i.e. “Scientists have made one of the most important fossil finds in history: a missing link between fish and land animals, showing how creatures first walked out of the water and on to dry land more than 375m years ago. Paleontologists have said that the find, a crocodile-like animal called the Tiktaalik roseae and described today in the journal Nature, could become an icon of evolution in action - like Archaeopteryx, the famous fossil that bridged the gap between reptiles and birds. As such, it will be a blow to proponents of intelligent design, who claim that the many gaps in the fossil record show evidence of some higher power.” Secondly Steven Gould’s theory called punctuated equilibrium states that it may be that the missing link is not findable because transition was rapid, though I do not know if I agree with this theory, it is falsifiable and within the realms of scientific endeavor. Secondly, we are talking about fossil records that date back hundreds of millions of years and preservation is not kind to such records… But I will leave this debate to another day. I think it may be in our best interests Robert if we agree to disagree. Let’s face it, there are some arguable holes in both sides of the story, well, for now….
Best regards,
BH

b'ther Benny Hinn is real servent of god father and jesus christ i belive him with my whole heart coz in him jesus christ is there , b'ther pls always remember me and my family in ur prayers , b'ther pls pray for who r not beliveing jesus christ and his amazing miracles doing through with u tq u

Dare I say it......brainwashed by people who want to make a buck of her, it is quite sad.

BH...I'll ask you one question, science smart ape. Explain to me why your cousins and close relatives .....the gorillas, the babboons and the monkeys still remain the same [APE LOOK] over thousands and STUPID presumption of yours millions of years compared to the rest of us excluding yourself. Shed me some "ape" light on this why this so...

BH...I'll ask you one question, science smart ape. Explain to me why your cousins and close relatives .....the gorillas, the babboons and the monkeys still remain the same [APE LOOK] over thousands and STUPID presumption of yours millions of years compared to the rest of us excluding yourself. Shed me some "ape" light on this why this so... Just curious how you look like....never mind....seen so many pictures of this ape creatures....thanks but no thanks

BH....i agree with you that the theory of rapid growth is completly a stetch to try and expain why they have failed to so far find..but i still conceed that you are still aware of something greater than yourself..and you youreself are through science trying to explain your world..some are true and have been proved..ohhlet me go back to the first point quickly since the rapid growth would also go against ole darwin who said things change over a long slow period of time ok..while others were all the radge such as lucy and my previuos examples who later on become disproven or found quite lacking in the mans race to be the one to find the link and then the fame that comes with it screwed up or just generally lied and cheated everone and in the end was found uncredible but this my friend is the pliet of al people who in any group we will find the bad apples and they usually rise to the top to be gleened away so i dont fault all scientist but here is where you fail you wont even consider god in the equation and therefore you in my humble opinion have over looked the missing link i think like i stated before god allow things to change this world is not stagnet as people are not he (god)allows us the choice to make decsitions but then you must deal with the consequenses for every action there is an equal and opposite action quite scientific would you not say could it be that god made many different types of human like animals and as you state natural selection was allowed to do its thing but in my belief if you rule out the posibility of god you loose your scientificability to see the possibilities just because god like the way the earth was formed but its not known how it was or that it was not seen by any one does not mean that he is not thereif you choose to cover one eye i theorize that you will only see half the picture to be purely scuientific yuo must leave you mind open to the posibilities that not all is at thhis point known or explainable and then in my beliefs can you see what has been missing but if you put up a wall and you close it off it will certainly return to a pile of dust leaving you lacking.think about it...you said i was uneducated and i told you im not the smartest person but let us not forget einstien was a failure in school and didnot become smart shall we say till later on and then he created or helped via his theories to create the worst known thing in man kind the atom bomb and he later regreted it since mAN ABUSED his work. i dont always know all the fancy scientific terms but i think i have held my own with you and eveni think we both came to a better understanding of the two thoughts and we have arrived at a stale mate as this debate has always for years been but i must say it gave me something to look forward to and i have enjoyed it imencely maybe we can discuss another talking point and once again my slams were ment in good humor i was really proud of the sheep one which you failed to mention i just wanted to keep alittle humor into it so it would not get overlly heated wich i felt at first it was but i mellowed and used my brain insted well god bless bh dont be a stranger i will check this sight often to see if you findthat link or if you have another topic we can battle over are you in california ,san diego??? gb...robert

The back of the animal's skull, neck, ribs and fins "are particularly tetrapod-like while the snout, lower jaws, and scale-cover are similar to those seen in closely related fish," Shubin said. The animal was a predator with sharp teeth, a crocodile-like head and a flattened body.

Scientists collected the fossils during four summer explorations on Ellesmere Island in Canada's Nunavut Territory. They turned to the people of Nunavut, who retain ownership of the fossils, for help in naming the new creature. The Nunavut Elders Council suggested the name "Tiktaalik" (tic-TA-lick), their word for a large, shallow-water fish.

At the time Tiktaalik lived, the Canadian Arctic region was part of a landmass that straddled the equator and had a subtropical climate. The deposits that produced the Tiktaalik fossils were left by stream systems meandering across wide floodplains.

"This kind of shallow stream system seems to be where many features of land-living animals first arose," said Ted Daeschler of the Academy of Natural Sciences in Philadelphia. "The species shows that evolution from life in water to life on land happened gradually in fish in shallow water."

The skeletal structure of Tiktaalik and the nature of the deposits where it was found suggest an animal that lived on the water bottom, in the shallows, and perhaps even out of the water for short periods.

"The skeleton of Tiktaalik indicates that it could support its body under the force of gravity whether in very shallow water or on land," said Farish Jenkins of Harvard University. "This represents a critical early phase in the evolution of all limbed animals, including us."

The project was also funded by the National Geographic Society, an anonymous donor, and the researchers' institutions. The team also relied on geological mapping by the Geological Survey of Canada.

-NSF-if these are bones then how do they know it had scales...and to point out that there are alot of words like perhaps or could have where is the facts the we knonw with out a dought...im not saying that it did not exist but jst to use it how they always report these thing as if they know what they are saying to be true..or fact...just a thought ...robert

Arantxa, I have answered that question, look above. You ask that question becasue you do not understand evolution. As I said, man and gorilla or man and chumpanzee are not the same animal. That is why they do not look the same. They are only presumed to be related by decent to a common ancestor. The question you asked is the same as these and does not even discredit natural selection in the least:Why are some members of the ape family small, why are others larger, why do some have bigger testes to body ratios than others, etc. The answer to yours and to the similar questions I posted above is that when man and chimpanzee diverged from a common ancestor "millions of years ago" (thousands is not long enough, read about radioactive dating)they had been subjected to differential selection pressure. This means what works in one environment does not necessarly work in another. I will repost what science has to say about differential intelligence among primates because it also follows the same logic as your question requires: Our related ancestor that lived millions of years ago was likely scattered, as many organisms are. That means that our common ancestor was subject to differing environmental demands. It is believed that these differential conditions such as, how hard food is to get, what the land terrain is like etc, is responsible for the divergence in brain power. Some member of our common ancestor lived in areas that did not require additional cognitive adaptations, while others were selected because of their environment to require a higher cognitive capacity (read about the foraging hypothesis) "Researchers examining correlations between ecology and brain size in primates -- including ecological variables such as diet, stratification, activity timing, home range size, and breeding system -- have concluded that grades of encephalization depend on taxonomic family and are correlated with body size and home range"(Bauchot and Stephan 1966, Clutton-Brock and Harvey 1980.

Arantxa, I have answered that question, look above. You ask that question becasue you do not understand evolution. As I said, man and gorilla or man and chumpanzee are not the same animal. That is why they do not look the same. They are only presumed to be related by decent to a common ancestor. The question you asked is the same as these and does not even discredit natural selection in the least:Why are some members of the ape family small, why are others larger, why do some have bigger testes to body ratios than others, etc. The answer to yours and to the similar questions I posted above is that when man and chimpanzee diverged from a common ancestor "millions of years ago" (thousands is not long enough, read about radioactive dating)they had been subjected to differential selection pressure. This means what works in one environment does not necessarly work in another. I will repost what science has to say about differential intelligence among primates because it also follows the same logic as your question requires: Our related ancestor that lived millions of years ago was likely scattered, as many organisms are. That means that our common ancestor was subject to differing environmental demands. It is believed that these differential conditions such as, how hard food is to get, what the land terrain is like etc, is responsible for the divergence in brain power. Some member of our common ancestor lived in areas that did not require additional cognitive adaptations, while others were selected because of their environment to require a higher cognitive capacity (read about the foraging hypothesis) "Researchers examining correlations between ecology and brain size in primates -- including ecological variables such as diet, stratification, activity timing, home range size, and breeding system -- have concluded that grades of encephalization depend on taxonomic family and are correlated with body size and home range"(Bauchot and Stephan 1966, Clutton-Brock and Harvey 1980.

Arantxa, I have answered that question, look above. You ask that question becasue you do not understand evolution. As I said, man and gorilla or man and chumpanzee are not the same animal. That is why they do not look the same. They are only presumed to be related by decent to a common ancestor. The question you asked is the same as these and does not even discredit natural selection in the least:Why are some members of the ape family small, why are others larger, why do some have bigger testes to body ratios than others, etc. The answer to yours and to the similar questions I posted above is that when man and chimpanzee diverged from a common ancestor "millions of years ago" (thousands is not long enough, read about radioactive dating)they had been subjected to differential selection pressure. This means what works in one environment does not necessarly work in another. I will repost what science has to say about differential intelligence among primates because it also follows the same logic as your question requires: Our related ancestor that lived millions of years ago was likely scattered, as many organisms are. That means that our common ancestor was subject to differing environmental demands. It is believed that these differential conditions such as, how hard food is to get, what the land terrain is like etc, is responsible for the divergence in brain power. Some member of our common ancestor lived in areas that did not require additional cognitive adaptations, while others were selected because of their environment to require a higher cognitive capacity (read about the foraging hypothesis) "Researchers examining correlations between ecology and brain size in primates -- including ecological variables such as diet, stratification, activity timing, home range size, and breeding system -- have concluded that grades of encephalization depend on taxonomic family and are correlated with body size and home range"(Bauchot and Stephan 1966, Clutton-Brock and Harvey 1980.

Arantxa, I have answered that question, look above. You ask that question becasue you do not understand evolution. As I said, man and gorilla or man and chumpanzee are not the same animal. That is why they do not look the same. They are only presumed to be related by decent to a common ancestor. The question you asked is the same as these and does not even discredit natural selection in the least:Why are some members of the ape family small, why are others larger, why do some have bigger testes to body ratios than others, etc. The answer to yours and to the similar questions I posted above is that when man and chimpanzee diverged from a common ancestor "millions of years ago" (thousands is not long enough, read about radioactive dating)they had been subjected to differential selection pressure. This means what works in one environment does not necessarly work in another. I will repost what science has to say about differential intelligence among primates because it also follows the same logic as your question requires: Our related ancestor that lived millions of years ago was likely scattered, as many organisms are. That means that our common ancestor was subject to differing environmental demands. It is believed that these differential conditions such as, how hard food is to get, what the land terrain is like etc, is responsible for the divergence in brain power. Some member of our common ancestor lived in areas that did not require additional cognitive adaptations, while others were selected because of their environment to require a higher cognitive capacity (read about the foraging hypothesis) "Researchers examining correlations between ecology and brain size in primates -- including ecological variables such as diet, stratification, activity timing, home range size, and breeding system -- have concluded that grades of encephalization depend on taxonomic family and are correlated with body size and home range"(Bauchot and Stephan 1966, Clutton-Brock and Harvey 1980.

Arantxa, I have answered that question, look above. You ask that question becasue you do not understand evolution. As I said, man and gorilla or man and chimpanzee are not the same animal. That is why they do not look the same. They are only presumed to be related by decent to a common ancestor. The question you asked is the same as these and does not even discredit natural selection in the least:Why are some members of the ape family small, why are others larger, why do some have bigger testes to body ratios than others, etc. The answer to yours and to the similar questions I posted above is that when man and chimpanzee diverged from a common ancestor "millions of years ago" (thousands is not long enough, read about radioactive dating)they had been subjected to differential selection pressure. This means what works in one environment does not necessarly work in another. I will repost what science has to say about differential intelligence among primates because it also follows the same logic as your question requires: Our related ancestor that lived millions of years ago was likely scattered, as many organisms are. That means that our common ancestor was subject to differing environmental demands. It is believed that these differential conditions such as, how hard food is to get, what the land terrain is like etc, is responsible for the divergence in brain power. Some member of our common ancestor lived in areas that did not require additional cognitive adaptations, while others were selected because of their environment to require a higher cognitive capacity (read about the foraging hypothesis) "Researchers examining correlations between ecology and brain size in primates -- including ecological variables such as diet, stratification, activity timing, home range size, and breeding system -- have concluded that grades of encephalization depend on taxonomic family and are correlated with body size and home range"(Bauchot and Stephan 1966, Clutton-Brock and Harvey 1980.

Hi Robert,

Yes, I too have enjoyed our debate. I am not sure, but I think that there has been scientific debate over how Gould's theory relates to Darwin's. I think that at present, the consensual view is that Gould's theory is not in opposition to it: “Punctuated equilibrium is often confused with quantum evolution, saltationism, catastrophism, and with the phenomenon of mass extinction, and is therefore mistakenly thought to oppose the concept of gradualism. It is actually more appropriately understood as a form of gradualism (in the strict and literal sense of biological continuity). This is because even though the changes are considered to be occurring relatively quickly (relative to the species geological existence), changes are still occurring incrementally, with no great changes from one generation to the next. This can be understood by considering an example: Suppose the average length of a limb on a particular species grows 50 centimeters (20 inches, a large amount) over 70,000 years (a geologically short period of time). If the average generation is seven years, then the given time span corresponds to 10,000 generations. Thus, on average, the limb grows at the minute, gradual rate of only 0.005 cm per generation (= 50 cm/10,000 generations).
Critics of punctuated equilibrium, such as Richard Dawkins, have argued that the concept of phyletic gradualism was merely a straw man—arguing in his book The Blind Watchmaker that a belief in the uniformity of rates was never really held by any serious evolutionist. Eldredge and Gould's advocacy of the theory brought punctuated equilibrium much attention, including full page stories in The New York Times and Newsweek. The resulting debate stirred up in evolutionary circles was misrepresented by some creationists to portray Darwinism as a "theory in crisis." Some detractors among evolutionary biologists wryly termed punctuated equilibrium "evolution by jerks." (It is now sometimes referred to by the slang "punk eek," with no negative connotations implied.) The actual differences between the various evolution theorists were not as large as they were made to appear. Gould himself later said that the theory did not in fact refute Darwin's gradualism, but just added the ideas of catastrophism and stasis”.
Though, there are some areas that the theories but heads, they are not really too oppositional. I find this explanation to be quite polished and it offers an excellent argument.
Just a thought or an analogy so to speak: Why do people believe certain things on faith when logic seems to cause less error in any other branch of life- would you believe a stranger who tells you that he only wants to borrow you car, or would you base your decision of whether to let him borrow it on evidence of his honesty, i.e. whether you know him, whether he has been truthful in the past, whether he has borrowed other things and returned them before or not, etc. You see, real life important decisions require evidence to avoid being cheated. It would not be an “adaptive” strategy to believe strangers honesty on “faith”, because logic would lead to less error. This framework can be applied anywhere in life. If people used faith to make most of life’s important decisions, it would cause them to be suckered more often. For example, people who believe Benny Hin’s abilities are legitimate believe on faith and then act in accordance, and so, they are the one’s who are suckered more often. It is no wonder man requires evidence to make decisions. Realistically, logic-based thought has led to the most adaptive decisions, so why do some people believe religion and religious claims based on faith when most of their decisions and decision making processes use logic?

I have just done some reading on religion and found scientific papers on the purpose of religion. Evolutionary psychologists have proposed that religious beliefs are rooted as by-products of other cognitive adaptations man has undergone in his evolutionary past. Let me first explain what a by-product of an adaptation is, before I mention his actual argument. An evolutionary by-product is an arbitrary phenotypic trait that is associated with an adaptive trait. For example, the fact most homicides in the world are universally done my men relative to women is a by-product of the aggressive behaviour that has been promoted by natural selection in males instead of females; language was not an adaptation in its own right, it was a by-product of the fact man has been selected to possess such a large neocortex; the color of blood and bones is also arbitrarily related to what blood and bones are selected for……….Anyways, you get the point.
Along these lines, I do not have faith in the future claims’, I believe them because they are rational explanations with supporting evidence from the natural world.
Because the existence of a religion is almost universal, and because many religions are so different, it is reasonable to propose that religions will be present regardless of their truthfulness. Religions themselves are therefore not adaptive. However, religious practices are socially rooted and they promote social interaction indirectly through a common front. They promote social cohesion in times of conflict, and to some degree social order. Attachment theorists propose that there is a relation between classified attachment types and religious beliefs. That is, certain attachment styles are more common in people with religious beliefs than others.
In the past 50 000 years there has been an estimated 100 000 distinguishable religions. All have their own view of the world, and not surprisingly, all are resistant to change and outside opinion, no matter how truthful it may be. Thus, scientifically it is of no surprise that I am unable to convince people who have a deeply religious background- just as I would fail to persuade the astrology- believer that astrology is a load of crap. But, why are there so many religions, why are they so universally present in almost all societies, and why are they all so different? Many are in fact quite oppositional, yet equally confident that theirs is correct over all others.
Evolutionary theories that have been proposed to account f