Psudo 
CKA Elite
Posts: 3266
Posted: Wed Feb 20, 2008 8:56 pm
Kjorteo, I'm not all that fond of criticizing evolution since I'm about 99% sure it's true, but I have heard some good, rational, even atheistic arguments criticizing the theory of evolution being the sole diversifying factor of terrestrial life. My personal favorite notes from information theory that there is a difference between a communication medium and the message communicated, the internet connection and the network cable. This necessary distinction is applied to living things: just because you have a physical brain in perfect functioning form does not mean it necessarily contains a coherent mind, just as a network cable does not necessarily contain communication data. Thus, even if evolution from a common ancestor explains the physical diversity of Earth's species, it does not explain the origin of the functional, self-aware mind. (Ugh, I'm so dissatisfied with that explanation; where is that dang bookmark!? It explained the idea so much better.)
Though I know less specifics, Ben Stein argues against evolution without being part of or advocating any religion. Instead, he sees evolution as the philosophical basis for modern imperialism and might-makes-right military behavior, an argument far more political than religious. This fits well into his professional field of politics (which predates his days as an actor).
While evolution criticism is dominated by religious faith standing opposed to scientific evidence, it is not entirely composed of such. The conclusion still does not inherently invalidate or even classify the reasoning behind it.
Liam, I'm not necessarily doubting that you have reasons for believing what you do, just that sometimes you forget to mention those reasons instead opting for personal attacks or social pressure.
I completely agree with your stem cell statements. The issue essentially resolved itself without government intervention, now that identical stem cells are procurable without destroying an embryo.
