Happy Birthday Charlie D

On this day 199 years ago a great man was born. Unlike other supposed "great men" this one actually existed. He was the man who brought us Evolution, The theory that explains how species arise. His Name was Charles R Darwin.

Charles Darwin was born in born in Shrewsbury, Shropshire, England on 12 February 1809 at his family home, the Mount. He was the fifth of six children of wealthy society doctor and financier Robert Darwin, and Susannah Darwin. After a varied academic career studying everything from Medicine to taxidermy Darwin started seeing the world aboard the Beagle.

While voyaging on the Beagle Darwin become obsessed with the exotic species and fossils he was finding on his travels and this lead him to start wondering where it all came from. Unlike most people of the time Darwin wasn't satisfied with the infantile notion that a magic-sky-man clicked his fingers and made it all and was sure that there was a science that could explain how such a varied array of biology could come about.

After noticing that different animals were suited to their environment Darwin formulated the theory of evolution by natural selection. The theory that says through the survival of the fittest and small gradual changes an organism can evolve into a completely different species, A species that was perfectly suited to it's environment.

Though evolutionary theory has changed a lot since Darwin first conceived it, Due to the discovery of genetics and the study of cells, Natural selection still remains the foundation of all evolutionary theory.

Without this great man medicine and the study of viruses would be pretty much nonexistent. We have a lot to thank him for.

The Next Dishonest Tactic To Be Used By Filthy Creationists

Ever since science started putting doubt in to peoples minds regarding the validity of religious dogma the corporations in charge of the dogma, The religions themselves, Have been intent on destroying peoples ability to learn, To keep them primitive and to keep them subservient.

Christians in particular have a long history of trying to deny people knowledge because they believe an educated mind is less likely to buy in to their primitive bronze age myths and, More importantly, Less likely to hand over money to such a scam.

In quite recent history, When Charles Darwin wrote his book detailing the process that caused the species to arise, The christians went absolutely nuts. They aren't concerned with the validity of evolution, They are simply concerned with preventing anyone learning about anything that contradicts their unfounded beliefs.

In 1982 a book was written called "of pandas and people" which was intended to be used as a text book in a science class teaching children that god an "intelligent designer" made us. It's basically creationism. But because America, Thanks to it's unbelieving christian-hating founding fathers, Has a law preventing religious filth being taught in schools they decided that they would, Like typical christians, Try to deceitfully get these lies taught via a back door. "intelligent design" was born.

Intelligent design, Unlike biblical creation, States that humans and animals couldn't have arose via natural selection and that a "designer" has to be responsible for at least some aspects of some organisms. Obviously this is just a re-branding of biblical creation, As was pointed out by Judge John Jones in the Dova trial.

So since there is now a president where christian filth biblical creation "intelligent design" was found, In a court, By a judge, To be nothing more than a deceitful way of getting religion taught as science the creationists have had to out do themselves and excel in both dishonesty and stupidity and take a new rout to get this nonsense taught in schools.

"Teach the controversy" is born. The newest tactic the disgusting creationists are using to get filthy lies taught as science is to pretend that there is an academic "controversy" regarding evolution and that a lot of respectable scientists, Scientists who were found to be complete morons at the Dova trial, Doubt evolution.

The solution to this, According to them, It to at least teach the controversy to children and "let them decide". Now, I have two problems with this;

Firstly; There isn't a controversy. it's all in their head. Compared to the vast body of scientists who fully support evolution the ones questioning it are comparable to the amount of astronomers who believe in astrology. ie, Not many at all.

Secondly; If there is a "controversy" regarding the theory of evolution it has to be settled in the academic arena using peer reviewed research and evidence. it's not to be settled in a classroom full of children who don't even have a basic grasp of the subject. This presents a problem for creationists is they don't actually produce any data, Any experiments or any academic papers.

When this issue goes to court, And it will, The case is easily won by evolutionists simply by saying that "teaching the controversy" is tantamount to teaching the controversy between alchemy in chemistry and Astrology in astrophysics.

The Fact Of Evolution And The Lies Of Creationists

I am mostly writing this post so i have a link to send people to when they leave replies on the blog that demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of evolution. I'm fed up of writing the same stuff over and over again.

In this post i am going to clear up a few things about evolution and try to set the record straight, Explain a few misconceptions that creationists have and expose a few of the lies they tell.

Evolution is just a theory.

How many times have you heard this? A lot of creationists assume, Wrongly and probably intentionally, That a theory is somehow less certain than a fact. They assume that a theory is on a lower rung of the hierarchical ladder of certainty that eventually leads to fact.

In science "theory" has a different meaning than the general word "theory". When most people say theory they mean a guess or speculation. In science a theory is simply a way to explain facts. A theory doesn't eventually become a fact, It explains facts.

It is a fact that animals change, Over time, Based on natural selection. The theory that explains this fact is the theory of evolution.

Evolution Doesn't Explain The Origin of Life

That's right, It doesn't. But then, It never claimed to and it never intended to. History class doesn't teach you how to play a trumpet, Does that mean all history is wrong?

Darwinian Evolution only ever claimed to explain the origin of the species, That's why he called the book "the origin of the species". Evolution starts when the first life forms came about and natural selection became a factor. There are sciences that explain how cells could have first formed and how life came about, But Evolution isn't one of them.

Irreducible complexity Proves a Designer

Well it would, If creationists could find a real example of irreducible complexity. Irreducible complexity is a phrase that Michael Behe came up with to describe a characteristic or mechanical part of an organism that requires all of it's parts to be intact from the beginning for it to function and for natural selection to have something to favour. The trouble is, For Behe, That every time creationists think they have found something irreducibly complex evolutionists point out that it had a beneficial function at each stage of it's construction and thus had something for natural selection to favour.

Ken Miller used the mousetrap to explain this. A mouse trap can only function as a mousetrap when all of it's parts are intact. If, for instance, we only have the base, The spring and the arm of the mouse trap it can't kill mice and doesn't function as a mousetrap. But it does function as a tie clip. It still has a beneficial function and as such has something for natural selection to favour.

We Should Teach All Theories And Let Students Decide

No, We shouldn't. We need to teach children the truth at all times. Everything that is taught in a classroom has endured the scientific process that leads to it being taught. If intelligent design can get through this process then it is more than welcome in a science class, If it can't get through this process it is going to have to stay where it belongs, In theology.

The process that all other sciences goes through is;
Claim > Research > Peer review > Concensus > Text book.
The process intelligent design want's to go through is;
Claim > Political preasure > Text book.

If intelligent design is a fact let us see your research. let us see what kind of experiments you do to test your hypotheses. If you can't produce these and can't get through the scientific process you have no business being taught in a science class.

There Are No Transitional Fossils

The trouble with refuting this claim is that when evolutionists are asked to present a transitional fossil they aren't seen to be refuting the claim made by creationists, They are seen to be producing two more gaps where transitional fossils are missing.

It's a dishonest tactic used by creationists. It is simply impossible for evolutionists to comply with this unreasonable request without presenting fossils of every animal species on the planet at every stage of it's development.

As evolutionists find more and more fossils they rightly believe they are adding to the fossil records and adding to our understanding of evolution. But in the illogical mind of the creationist they are simply creating more and more gaps in the fossil record because each gap we fill by finding a fossil creates two gaps either side of it.

Suffice to say, There are transitional fossils that show characteristics and traits developing over time ^[1]. All we need now is for creationists to develop the integrity and courage to accept them.

Darwin Didn't Believe in Evolution

This statement is usually a result of dishonest quote mining from creationists. They simply look for small snippets of text, Take it out of context and then use it to support their argument when in actual fact the whole quote does nothing to support their claim at all, And is actually the direct opposite of what they are claiming.

Scott Huse fell foul of this type of dishonesty on page 73 of his book The Collapse of Evolution when he quoted Darwin ^[2] as saying; "To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree.

It looks like Darwin is saying the eye couldn't have evolved by means of natural selection, Doesn't it? But if we look at the quote in it's entirety it paints a completely different picture of what Darwin thought about the evolution of the eye. He goes on to say; "...Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself first originated; but I may remark that several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light, and likewise to those coarser vibrations of the air which produce sound.

The point Charles Darwin is making here is that, With small beneficial mutations, Even the most seemingly complex organs and functions of an organism can be produced by natural selection.

Intelligent Design Is Not Creationism

The only difference between intelligent design and creationism is the spelling. We know that the name change came about in an attempt to get it taught in a science class and to trick people in to believing it's an actual scientific theory, And not religious mumbo-jumbo.

This is evident by looking at a draft of the intelligent design text book "of pandas and people" where the phrase "cdesign proponentist" was found when a sloppy editor didn't correctly replace "creationist" with "design proponent".

The titles of the drafts alone are evidence that ID is creationism. The first draft, in 1983, was called Creation Biology, the next is Biology and Creation, dated 1986, and is followed by Biology and Origin in 1987. It is not until later in 1987 that Of Pandas and People emerges^[3].

This article will be expanded as i become reminded of other lies told by creationists and other misinformation spread by them and their devious organisations.

The Difference Between America And England

As a British citizen, And more specifically an Englishman, I can't help almost constantly being reminded of the differences between America and England, Especially when it comes to religion. In America religion is an important part of society, Even for those who don't believe in it due to the influence it has on public policy and education. In England however we have a comparatively relaxed approach to religion and our motto seems to be; "say what you like about religion, We all know it's bollocks. But try not to piss of the Muslims, You know what they are like".

The differences between the institutional approach to religion can best be summed up in the following picture.Can you imagine if in America they too celebrated someone who so fully and concisely proved a key aspect of christian doctrine to be false?

Extra information.
£5 note: Elizabeth Fry, Worked to improve conditions in prisons.
£10 note (above): Charles Darwin, Naturalist.
£20 note: Edward William Elgar, Composer.
£50 note: John Houblon, First Governor of the Bank Of England.