Genesis of a social divide

  • Article by: PETER M. LESCHAK
  • Updated: July 21, 2012 - 6:34 PM

Nearly half of Americans still don't believe in evolution. I understand; I once was one of them.

  • 93
  • Comments

  • Results per page:
hecklesJul. 21, 12 7:28 PM

From the article: "The chief fault lies with the scientific establishment." No, the chief fault lies with those satisfied with their own ignorance. The information is out there and easy to obtain.

davehougJul. 21, 12 8:43 PM

Check out the first few verses of the Bible. How did a bunch of wandering sheepherders get it so right???? I recall when all learned men did NOT think 'all the dry land was gathered together'. Wouldn't we all feel foolish if God tells us "Dude, I showed Moses a movie over the course of a week because he asked about creation" :) Personally, I am more in awe knowing God spent 14 Billion years getting ready for me!!

bhdanielsJul. 21, 12 9:30 PM

Thanks for a very clear look at the importance of understanding reality. If this man can read and learn the truth, other people can, too. Science is all about asking questions and rigorously seeking truth. The writer is correct; our democracy, our civilization, and humankind's future depends on everyone being willing to look for honest evidence, with clear vision, and embrace truth and reality when confronted with it.

kris2003Jul. 21, 12 9:30 PM

I agree with the author, there are many smart people on both sides of the issue, including scientists of all disciplines from the same universities holding the same degrees. They are not the majority, for sure, but ask them about the philosophical hostility towards some of them and their research when researching intelligent design. The author makes a categorization of the faith-based community's hostility to evelotion, based on his own mindset at the time: "This was not mere skepticism, which is an intellectually healthy response to data and pronouncements from all sources, including scientists. It was, rather, a philosophical hostility that denied credence and even sincerity to the other side." I find, in my own experience, that this is also the case towards those skeptical of evolutionary theory. I'm sure this will be witnessed in the hostility in the upcoming comments sure to come. I think there's also a lot of scientific research, especially in recent years since the authors own conclusions, that many people have not considered for themselves. The bottom line is there is also a measure of faith applied by evolutionists.

paulrburnettJul. 21, 12 9:37 PM

There is simply no rational excuse for the scientific illiteracy of creationism in the 21st century. Willfully ignorant creationists want to return to the Dark Ages of a theocracy, but what about the rest of us?

bluebird227Jul. 21, 1210:06 PM

The bible is anti-intellectual and anti-human from the beginning. Adam and Eve, whom god created faults and all, are punished for seeking knowledge. Apparently the devil, whose influence god allowed, made them do it. Then god punishes all people from then on with "original sin." Did I miss something? Where's the logic? Should children be punished for their parents' sins? Who could worship such an unjust god?

shushyn78Jul. 21, 1210:24 PM

Don't get hung up on 6,000 or 7,000 years of history that some creationists have staked out as the timeline. Personally, I have no problem with eons and eons of time before God created man. Not an evolved man but a man healthier and more robust than we are today. Genesis 1:2 refers to the earth being formless and void and is purposely vague because it is not a necessary proposition to us establishing our relationship to the Creator. Sir Isaac Newton, perhaps the greatest scientist ever, who also enumerated the laws of gravity said the following, "all variety of created objects which represent order and life in the universe could happen only by the willful reasoning of its original Creator, whom I call the Lord God". Isaac Newton in all his wisdom saw the vast intracacies of the universe and the natural world and came to a logical conclusion. On the other hand, Richard Dawkins believes we are the seed of an alien civilization. Even he sees the intelligent design of man, but can't admit to a God, so his alternate solution. Which way seems more plausible?

mgtwinsfan1987Jul. 21, 1210:27 PM

I am a Christian who does not buy the literal ideas of other Christians about the Bible. When you look at how it came to be put together, you understand that lots of good people put their thoughts down, inspired by God, and the church voted over time to accept some and not others. That of course politicized the faith and started us down the road to dogmatic thinking. I prefer to try to get to the basic message and not sweat how many generations of people existed up to the time Jesus was born. Giant waste of time.

okbruceJul. 21, 1210:35 PM

The problem for hardliners on both sides is actually quite simple. Science gets in trouble when it tries to do things it cannot, like theology. And theology gets in trouble when it tries to do things it cannot, like biology.

cstoney48Jul. 21, 1211:05 PM

One-third of all humans will experience moderate to severe back pain in their lives. The reason is simple--the design is not very good. The human spine is a jerry-rigged structure for use by a bi-pedal creature which at one time was a quadrupedal creature. It is like the Panda's thumb--it isn't very good--it just sort of works. If an intelligent designer structured it the way it is intentionally, then he sure did a lousy job. Some perfection--what a putz!


Comment on this story   |  


  • about opinion

  • The Opinion section is produced by the Editorial Department to foster discussion about key issues. The Editorial Board represents the institutional voice of the Star Tribune and operates independently of the newsroom.

  • Submit a letter or commentary
Connect with twitterConnect with facebookConnect with Google+Connect with PinterestConnect with PinterestConnect with RssfeedConnect with email newsletters