ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN

Information

ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN

We debate origins of the Universe, life, Earth, humans, religion, atheism, using common sense, evolution, cosmology, geology, archaeology, and other sciences, to repel biblical creationism and other religious beliefs.

Location: Oxford University, England
Members: 4188
Latest Activity: Aug 28

The portrait is Charles Darwin, age 31, in 1840

We welcome comments and the opening up of new discussions in this busy group. So join us if you are not already in the group.

N.B. At the end of every discussion page is a box that you can tick if you want to be notified by e-mail about the arrival of fresh comments.

Discussion Forum

Ancestral humans had more DNA

Started by Steph S.. Last reply by Gerald Payne Aug 28. 6 Replies

Researhers Turn Off Obesity Gene in Mice

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Susan Stanko Aug 22. 5 Replies

Mini moons may zip around Earth

Started by Steph S.. Last reply by Gerald Payne Aug 19. 3 Replies

explanation for reality Theism or Atheism?

Started by dudaboli yev. Last reply by Joseph P Jul 31. 5 Replies

Fossils illustrate evolution of life

Started by Steph S.. Last reply by Gerald Payne Jul 27. 1 Reply

On Abolishing Religion

Started by Rounaq Biswas. Last reply by Gerald Payne Jul 16. 69 Replies

Researchers Say There Might be Life After Death

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by John Jubinsky Jul 15. 56 Replies

On the scientific miracles of Qur'an

Started by Rounaq Biswas. Last reply by Daniel Gotro Jun 26. 25 Replies

Modern Humans Interbred with Neanderthals in Europe

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by Gerald Payne Jun 25. 3 Replies

Comment Wall

Comment

You need to be a member of ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN to add comments!

Comment by Lemual Poot on December 10, 2014 at 10:07am

In the many discussions I've had about evolution, I've found one common thread of misunderstanding.  Apparently, from the pulpit, their religious leaders cite Darwin's original "Theory of Evolution," rather that the accepted fact of, or principal of evolution.  They're usually hung up on the whole, "came from monkeys" paradigm.  I've actually made some headway by first admitting that Darwin might have guessed wrong, or rather used the wrong example.  Admittedly, I haven't read the entire text of "Origin of The Species," in a very long time but I believe he wasn't all that clear about humans and their relationship with that particular species.  For illustration sake, I use their bible as reference.  It's really difficult for them to discount my words when I'm quoting Genesis.  If any of you happen to have a copy of "The Book" turn it to the very first page and read.  It's a near-perfect description of the evolutionary creation of our planet.  You have to read around the fairy tale references that were written for the intellect of the readers of that time but within it, is enough weaponry for a logical debate in the name of evolution.  I know, it's a poor choice of reference but it's the only way I've ever gotten them to even listen to me.  My question is, "How the hell did Moses (or whoever) know that stuff?"    

Comment by Joan Denoo on November 8, 2014 at 1:02pm

The neuroscientist tackles consciousness and the self. "In his most recent book, Consciousness: Confessions of a Romantic ReductionistKoch writes that 'consciousness is a fundamental, an elemental, property of living matter.' He puts forth an 'integrated information theory' that he believes provides the first rigorous scientific theory to explain consciousness."

Christof Koch presentation at Mind and Life Conference at Mundgod, India - January 17-22, 2013

Comment by James M. Martin on October 28, 2014 at 5:39pm
Anyone seen the bizarre docudrama, "Darwin," by Peter Greenaway? It's on YouTube and deserves the hour or so of your time to watch it. It consists of a series of tableaux showing Darwin at different points, those around him moving in, out, and away like some TV commercials of late, a beautiful stylistic device that is hypnotic. Greenaway's best film since "Prospero's Books."
Comment by Joan Denoo on October 5, 2014 at 11:47am

JanBodh, it is a great pleasure to see you post on Origins, and on Atheist Nexus. We have much to learn from you. Superstition has no place in modern culture, even as we do value history, and enjoy mythology as fiction. You have a particularly difficult environment in which to live with all the ancient traditions that come from India. Know you have people who stand with you, even as you see or hear so little in you homeland. 

Comment by Joan Denoo on October 4, 2014 at 5:09am

@JanBodh, thank you for a sampling of Indian poet Ramdhari Singh "Dinkar. Indian alphabet is so pretty. Is this Hindi? 

He writes of strength that underlies gentleness.

Tolerance, forgiveness and clemency
Are respected by the world
Only when the glow of strength
From behind them is unfurled 

Comment by Joan Denoo on October 3, 2014 at 12:36pm

@JanBodh and those interested in political resistance, especially Indian writers resisting English colonialism.

For example: 

I am trying to find English versions of Ramdhari Singh Dinkar' prose and poetry. "He was a Ramdhari Singh was born on September 23, 1908 in a small village of Simariya in Bihar. He came off a poor Brahmin family. He studied, Sanskrit, Maithili, Bengali, Urdu and English literature. Dinkar was immensely influenced by some great poets like-Iqbal, Rabindranath Tagore, Keats and Milton. 

"Initially Ramdhari Singh was associated with the revolutionary movement in the Indian Freedom Movement. During this time he started writing his nationalist poetry as a revolutionary poet.But in his later part of life he followed Gandhaian ideology though he thought sometimes revenge is necessary for self protection."

Indian Nationalist Poets - Rashtrakavi

Comment by James M. Martin on September 21, 2014 at 6:20pm

@JanBodh, how are you going to counter the believer's argument that God is infinite, therefore the fact that the universe is infinite only proves God's existence. Well, sure, it is a bit "circular," but believers are mostly ignorant of the logical fallicies. I think this is why that Anglican archbishop said he sometimes has doubts. I didn't quit believing entirely and was only an agnostic until I applied logic to the proposition "God exists." Rational people and freethinkers know that the proposition has no supporting evidence soever for "Yes" and an enormous trove of data proving "No," I needn't adumbrate further for readers of A|N.

Comment by Joseph P on September 20, 2014 at 2:04pm

Doesn't prove anything, but nice little turn of phrase.  ^.^

Comment by James M. Martin on September 15, 2014 at 6:27pm

Dhruv Kumar Ghosh, you are 100% correct. This is one of the main reasons I am an atheist.

Comment by Dhruv Kumar Ghosh on September 14, 2014 at 10:06pm

Sir what science has done in 1000 yrs religion couldn't do it in 10000 yrs because they don't broaden their minds they just give their explanation on the basis of their holy books and all those nonsense stuff. Do they have any experimental proof that there what so ever creator created universe just writing it down in their holy

book doesn't gives 

 

Members (4186)

 
 
 

© 2015   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service