dan, now you're just talking vacuous nonsense. evolution is an unchallengeable myth no more nor less than gravity, and you have no more grounds to doubt the one than the other.

When one wavers from a logical critique to a purely subjective belief in a divine interference in nature, where miraculous catastrophic interventions occur in the course of the history of life and the history of earth, one is bereft of any critical thinking. As early as 1830, Charles Lyell with his Principles of Geology (1830-3) rightly challenged Victorian orthodoxy. It is impossible to get on with the actual practice of geological science (or any other science for that matter) if one always had to entertain the possibility that the facts were not to be explained by the laws of nature, but that this case was a miracle or the result of laws of nature which had ceased to act.

Darwin and Darwinism have become clichés for a much wider movement. Faith and evolution have no relation. I fear there are many whose mental DNA throws back to a Victorian orthodoxy. Neither can a 'natural theology' apply, where, as shown by Thomas Malthus in 1798 (Principle of Population etc.) with some apparent mathematical force, nature's 'harmony' is far from perfect. Population increase was geometric and food production arithmetic. Even in the 19th. Century it appeared as evident, not only was nature niggardly, but vice, misery, war, famine, and death were inevitable consequences of nature's laws, unless man could restrain his sexual appetite.

A lot of posters here seem to think that if the Bible (or any other religious mythology) is not *literal historical fact* it's worthless junk and should be thrown in the garbage immediately!

This is just as "fundamentalist" in attitude as the religious people they oppose.

So what if it's not literally true.
Neither are the Scandinavian, Greek or Roman myths.
Can we not still learn important lessons from these stories?

I was severely bible-bashed as a child.
If anyone would feel resentment and hostility, it would be me.
But I don't.
I dislike Bible-bashers, but not the Bible itself.

I particularly like the Eden story, but interpret it rather heretically.
To me, the snake is the Hero.
Adam and Eve may have lived in Perfection.
But it was a Prison, and the snake made them realise this.
Through disobedience, they gained true freedom.

See, I neither think of Eden as historical fact, not interpret the story in the orthodox way, but I still *get something* out of it!

And the childish "Prove there's a God" routine.
This is pointless.

You can neither prove nor disprove such a thing exists.

There also seems to be an assumption that all mythologies are treated as literal fact and that all religious people are theists.
Neither is true.

Even if it were scientifically proven that there is no spiritual dimension (by any definition), does this "truth" automatically make the world a better place.

Imagine a culture, with (to our eyes) a ludicrous mythology.
Yet all the people in that culture are happy, sexually fulfilled, productive, peaceful and materially prosperous.

Would these people be better left to live their "fantasy"?
Or should we "enlighten" them with the cold hard truth?
Does "truth" have a value that overrides all other considerations?

shockadelic, i for one have no trouble with valuing myth. but i think you have the wrong end of the stick. the main issue here is not people demanding the bible be literally true, though they may hold up for ridicule people who try to claim this. the main issue is religiously motivated hostility to biological truth.

don't talk to me, talk to people like grey, and dan. they're the ones who can't seem to get straight that truth means truth and myth means myth.

Unquestionable Articles of Faith:

Aristocracy
To live correctly, political power should be kept by an elite.

Humanism
To live correctly, morality must be based on universal human qualities, particularly Reason.

Anarchism
To live correctly, compulsory government must be eliminated.

Relativism
To live correctly, you must accept that context determines the truth of anything.

Authoritarianism
To live correctly, we must strictly obey authority.

Environmentalism
To live correctly, we must cause as little environmental degradation as possible.

Hedonism
To live correctly, pleasure should be our most important pursuit.

Conservatism
To live correctly, we should maintain traditions and resist radical change.

Socialism
To live correctly, the community should control the distribution of wealth.

Scientism
To live correctly, knowledge of natural science must be the basis of all action.

Nationalism
To live correctly, our people must constitute an independent political community.

Republicanism
To live correctly, our country must not be led by a hereditary monarch.

Liberalism
To live correctly, the interests of the individual must prevail over those of the community.

Communitarianism
To live correctly, the interests of the community must prevail over those of the individual.

Secularism
To live correctly, religion must remain separate to government.

Utilitarianism
To live correctly, morality must be determined by the outcome of our actions.

Totalitarianism
To live correctly, the state should regulate both public and private behaviour.

Despotism
To live correctly, our society must be ruled by a single authority.

Materialism
To live correctly, we must base all actions on our knowledge of physical reality.

Meritocracy
To live correctly, we should be governed by those with appropriate demonstrated abilities.

Communism
To live correctly, society must be classless, stateless, and based on common ownership of the means of production.

Democracy
To live correctly, the people must have the authority to govern themselves.

Feminism
To live correctly, patriarchy must be abolished.

Nihilism
To live correctly... Hang on, there's no way to live correctly!

There is a clear difference between gravity and evolution. If I were silly enough to want to challenge gravity, I need only to set up a test, perhaps try stepping off the roof of my house.

However, what is the test for whether one kind of animal morphed into another in some distant past? Unfortunately, evolution has no real tests. We accept it by faith or on the authority of those who created the story.

This fairy tale belongs in the same category with the myths, not with gravity.

P.S. Nice list, Shocka.