<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Was Darwin Wrong? (Part 2)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/</link>
	<description>An exploration of skepticism, science, atheism, humor, and feces.</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 06 Sep 2010 23:22:16 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: PeteS</title>
		<link>http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1607</link>
		<dc:creator>PeteS</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 May 2009 17:44:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saintgasoline.com/?p=167#comment-1607</guid>
		<description>Got here via Engineer-Poet. Nice blog.

To answer Liew above, people reject evolution because they a) aren't that well acquainted with the scientific arguments ( - there's a lot of water under the bridge between Darwin and the neo-Darwinian synthesis where many of the more compelling arguments are fleshed out), b) they perceive Darwinism as a direct contradiction to a literal interpretation of the Bible which, no matter how perverse and ahistorical, they see as foundational to their ideas about God, morality etc., c) on the other side of the fence, dogmatic atheists and supremely unqualified philosophical lightweights like Richard Dawkins make it their business to make overreaching claims about the metaphysical implications of Darwinism, ratcheting up the stakes in the creation-versus-evolution war.

Fortunately this tension is a largely American phenomenon, although to some extent it is being exported along with the evangelical Protestantism to which it owes most of its underpinnings.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Got here via Engineer-Poet. Nice blog.</p>
<p>To answer Liew above, people reject evolution because they a) aren&#8217;t that well acquainted with the scientific arguments ( - there&#8217;s a lot of water under the bridge between Darwin and the neo-Darwinian synthesis where many of the more compelling arguments are fleshed out), b) they perceive Darwinism as a direct contradiction to a literal interpretation of the Bible which, no matter how perverse and ahistorical, they see as foundational to their ideas about God, morality etc., c) on the other side of the fence, dogmatic atheists and supremely unqualified philosophical lightweights like Richard Dawkins make it their business to make overreaching claims about the metaphysical implications of Darwinism, ratcheting up the stakes in the creation-versus-evolution war.</p>
<p>Fortunately this tension is a largely American phenomenon, although to some extent it is being exported along with the evangelical Protestantism to which it owes most of its underpinnings.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dogdayafternoon</title>
		<link>http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1598</link>
		<dc:creator>dogdayafternoon</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2009 19:15:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saintgasoline.com/?p=167#comment-1598</guid>
		<description>I enjoy all the bantering on your blog St. Elmo, I agree with you a hundred percent the "Creationists" take on evolution is almost humurous, I am glad they exist, it is a funny circus they run and therefore proof of evolution we have evolved and they are just a few more genes closer to our primate ancestors. You are a well written individual keep it up;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I enjoy all the bantering on your blog St. Elmo, I agree with you a hundred percent the &#8220;Creationists&#8221; take on evolution is almost humurous, I am glad they exist, it is a funny circus they run and therefore proof of evolution we have evolved and they are just a few more genes closer to our primate ancestors. You are a well written individual keep it up;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ted</title>
		<link>http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1597</link>
		<dc:creator>Ted</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 May 2009 01:08:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saintgasoline.com/?p=167#comment-1597</guid>
		<description>This is huge!

http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/religionandtheology/1374/the_ponzi_prosperity_gospel/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is huge!</p>
<p><a href="http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/religionandtheology/1374/the_ponzi_prosperity_gospel/" rel="nofollow">http://www.religiondispatches.org/archive/religionandtheology/1374/the_ponzi_prosperity_gospel/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: God</title>
		<link>http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1596</link>
		<dc:creator>God</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2009 13:26:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saintgasoline.com/?p=167#comment-1596</guid>
		<description>Of course Darwin was wrong, we were just sharing a laugh about it at last week's poker game.  The fact is, any time a species engages in homosexual activity, I zap 'em with lightning.  As an unintended consequence, it seems to alter bits of their DNA in EXACTLY the same way in every individual.  Peace out minions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course Darwin was wrong, we were just sharing a laugh about it at last week&#8217;s poker game.  The fact is, any time a species engages in homosexual activity, I zap &#8216;em with lightning.  As an unintended consequence, it seems to alter bits of their DNA in EXACTLY the same way in every individual.  Peace out minions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aoede</title>
		<link>http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1593</link>
		<dc:creator>Aoede</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2009 01:50:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saintgasoline.com/?p=167#comment-1593</guid>
		<description>@Devysciple:
Well, the alternative phrasing would be "I know what I believe", but I don't think it's altogether appropriate to apply that verb to evolution.



@Saint Gasoline:
I see; that makes more sense. I asked because I also consider myself a creationist in the God's-somewhere sense (which is where the verb "believe" is more appropriate; no rational basis).

And now I will hightail it out of here because I know I'm not welcome. Your tests are fun, though :)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Devysciple:<br />
Well, the alternative phrasing would be &#8220;I know what I believe&#8221;, but I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s altogether appropriate to apply that verb to evolution.</p>
<p>@Saint Gasoline:<br />
I see; that makes more sense. I asked because I also consider myself a creationist in the God&#8217;s-somewhere sense (which is where the verb &#8220;believe&#8221; is more appropriate; no rational basis).</p>
<p>And now I will hightail it out of here because I know I&#8217;m not welcome. Your tests are fun, though <img src='http://saintgasoline.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Saint Gasoline</title>
		<link>http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1592</link>
		<dc:creator>Saint Gasoline</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 23:54:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saintgasoline.com/?p=167#comment-1592</guid>
		<description>Creationism is basically the belief that a deity created each "kind" distinctly, Aoede.  More subtle forms tend to focus less on that aspect and go into more of a denialist attitude toward evolution, but in the end you pretty much have to be a creationist of some sort to not find the evidence for evolution highly convincing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Creationism is basically the belief that a deity created each &#8220;kind&#8221; distinctly, Aoede.  More subtle forms tend to focus less on that aspect and go into more of a denialist attitude toward evolution, but in the end you pretty much have to be a creationist of some sort to not find the evidence for evolution highly convincing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Devysciple</title>
		<link>http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1591</link>
		<dc:creator>Devysciple</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 21:28:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saintgasoline.com/?p=167#comment-1591</guid>
		<description>@Aoede: "since I know what I know"

Wow, that's way more than I do. I only know that I know nothing ;)

I don't want to anticipate St. Gasoline's answer, but mine would be:

Pick &lt;a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism#Types_of_Christian_creationism" rel="nofollow"&gt;one of these&lt;/a&gt;!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Aoede: &#8220;since I know what I know&#8221;</p>
<p>Wow, that&#8217;s way more than I do. I only know that I know nothing <img src='http://saintgasoline.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_wink.gif' alt=';)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>I don&#8217;t want to anticipate St. Gasoline&#8217;s answer, but mine would be:</p>
<p>Pick <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creationism#Types_of_Christian_creationism" rel="nofollow">one of these</a>!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Aoede</title>
		<link>http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1589</link>
		<dc:creator>Aoede</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 02:30:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saintgasoline.com/?p=167#comment-1589</guid>
		<description>Hallo, I strayed here as a testmonkey from OkC; what follows is a general comment not specifically pertaining to this post.

I took your Evolution vs. Design test more out of curiosity for the test than anything else, since I know what I know. What I noticed was that (at least in the all-science result!) you chose to portray "creationism" as at odds with a scientific attitude. So I'm curious: what's your definition of "creationism"?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hallo, I strayed here as a testmonkey from OkC; what follows is a general comment not specifically pertaining to this post.</p>
<p>I took your Evolution vs. Design test more out of curiosity for the test than anything else, since I know what I know. What I noticed was that (at least in the all-science result!) you chose to portray &#8220;creationism&#8221; as at odds with a scientific attitude. So I&#8217;m curious: what&#8217;s your definition of &#8220;creationism&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: cj</title>
		<link>http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1588</link>
		<dc:creator>cj</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 23:35:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saintgasoline.com/?p=167#comment-1588</guid>
		<description>@ Liew:

NIMH -- "An estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older — about one in four adults — suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year."

ARIS -- "... Significantly, 38.6 percent of mainline Protestants now also identify themselves as evangelical or born again." 

'Someone' is you.  Get started! :)

@ St. Gas -- excellent blog (just found you).  Keep on writing!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@ Liew:</p>
<p>NIMH &#8212; &#8220;An estimated 26.2 percent of Americans ages 18 and older — about one in four adults — suffer from a diagnosable mental disorder in a given year.&#8221;</p>
<p>ARIS &#8212; &#8220;&#8230; Significantly, 38.6 percent of mainline Protestants now also identify themselves as evangelical or born again.&#8221; </p>
<p>&#8216;Someone&#8217; is you.  Get started! <img src='http://saintgasoline.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> </p>
<p>@ St. Gas &#8212; excellent blog (just found you).  Keep on writing!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ziztur</title>
		<link>http://saintgasoline.com/2009/04/26/was-darwin-wrong-part-2/comment-page-1/#comment-1587</link>
		<dc:creator>Ziztur</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2009 18:19:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://saintgasoline.com/?p=167#comment-1587</guid>
		<description>Hey, I need the omnibrain this weekend, it's my turn to use it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, I need the omnibrain this weekend, it&#8217;s my turn to use it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
