8 ms·

Agree, the title is link bait for creationists

sambeau 13y ago
Of course, this is a British publication and so this wouldn't have occurred to the headline editor. It certainly didn't occur to me until you mentioned it. Most Brits would read that as disarray about the timeline of human evolution, not a challenge to the 'story'.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
  - bitwize 13y ago
    Recently I picked up a video game called El-Shaddai: Ascension of the Metatron. The game itself is good, and a little weird, but not terribly remarkable; picture playing Devil May Cry while on acid. Its most striking feature, to me, was the disclaimer at the beginning: something like "This game was based on ancient religious texts and was developed by a multicultural, multiethnic team." I found it a bit of a queer commentary on our culture that video games marketed in North America needed a disclaimer that they weren't preaching or taking a religious stance.
    - riffraff 13y ago
      I think I have seen the same disclaimer in other games. Assassin's creed possibly?
      - Karunamon 13y ago
        Indeed. A number of Ubisoft titles including all of the AC games that I'm aware of have such a disclaimer before the title screen.
    - qwerta 13y ago
      I watched documentary about Egyptian monuments. It was very good, it even included village where workers lived. But for some reason authors added Mount Sinai.
- sambeau 13y ago
  @jcromartie — Put it this way: my ten year old would laugh at anyone who thought the universe was only a few thousand years old as would his 8-year-old brother.
  - sambeau 13y ago
    @jcromartie Why did you delete your comment? I thought it was insightful. I don't live in a world where we worry about such things. Just knowing that you do is interesting.
    - jcromartie 13y ago
      I didn't want it to get too political.
- jcromartie 13y ago
  [previously-deleted comment]: I wonder what it's like to live in a country where you don't have to give a second thought to statements based on potentially massive differences in beliefs about the age of the universe.
  - petegrif 13y ago
    Turn that question around - "I wonder what it's like to live in a country where you don't have to give a second thought to statements derived from scientific investigation rather than religious dogma then move to the US?' I can answer that one for you. It's shocking. I had no idea, nor do I believe that most Europeans have any idea, just what a strong hold primitive interpretations of religion still holds over a huge percentage of a developed first world society.
    - rafcavallaro 13y ago
      The US is economically first world but cognitively third world :)
  - berntb 13y ago
    I live[d] in Sweden. There has been lots of immigration. You can describe the present situation like that the Social democrat party is actively courting the religious muslim vote and pushing homophobia and anti semitism under the carpet. The press isn't so interested in looking at this, either. This has been coming slowly for 5-10 years. It wouldn't surprise me if tolerance for denial of evolution of humans comes in a few more years.
  - cabalamat 13y ago
    Sadly we do have creationists in the UK, as this recent story demonstrates: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/oct/11/jewish-school-censored-gcses-evolution http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/oct/11/jewish-scho...
TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago
That's too simple of a statement, though. This finding doesn't actually exclude creationism - the common view among creationists has always been that all these "species", including Homo Erectus, are simply humans. *edit: clarity, grammar.
- dragonwriter 13y ago
  Since Creationism is an interpretive framework rather than a hypothesis with falsifiable predictions, it cannot be excluded. Any observation can be rationalized within Creationism.
  - TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago
    I'm less certain than you are about that... The axiom that God doesn't exist is exactly on the same level as the one that he does. Both of them require the same type of assumption. As for being falsifiable, there still isn't any evidence for macro-evolution, so it isn't beyond the state of hypothesis (yet?). Evidence of that kind would certainly falsify the predictions of creationism. However, there is no evidence for the "natural" origin of new species at this point, only for adaptation.
    - scott_s 13y ago
      The entire concept of the phylogenetic tree (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phylogenetic_tree http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phylogenetic_tree) is based on the idea of speciation. That species evolve into new species is well accepted in evolutionary theory, and well supported.
    - JDDunn9 13y ago
      The burden of proof always lies on the person making the claim. The null hypothesis would be that god (or the tooth fairy) doesn't exist until we have sufficient evidence to prove it does exist. As for macro-evolution, there is a mountain of evidence including the genetic similarity, the geographic distribution of animals, the fossil record, etc. "The Greatest Show on Earth" would be a good read as it details many of the proofs of evolution and dismantles the Creationist's pseudo-science.

Of course, this is a British publication and so this wouldn't have occurred to the headline editor. It certainly didn't occur to me until you mentioned it. Most Brits would read that as disarray about the timeline of human evolution, not a challenge to the 'story'.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
- bitwize 13y ago
  Recently I picked up a video game called El-Shaddai: Ascension of the Metatron. The game itself is good, and a little weird, but not terribly remarkable; picture playing Devil May Cry while on acid. Its most striking feature, to me, was the disclaimer at the beginning: something like "This game was based on ancient religious texts and was developed by a multicultural, multiethnic team." I found it a bit of a queer commentary on our culture that video games marketed in North America needed a disclaimer that they weren't preaching or taking a religious stance.
  - riffraff 13y ago
    I think I have seen the same disclaimer in other games. Assassin's creed possibly?
    - Karunamon 13y ago
      Indeed. A number of Ubisoft titles including all of the AC games that I'm aware of have such a disclaimer before the title screen.
  - qwerta 13y ago
    I watched documentary about Egyptian monuments. It was very good, it even included village where workers lived. But for some reason authors added Mount Sinai.
sambeau 13y ago
@jcromartie — Put it this way: my ten year old would laugh at anyone who thought the universe was only a few thousand years old as would his 8-year-old brother.
- sambeau 13y ago
  @jcromartie Why did you delete your comment? I thought it was insightful. I don't live in a world where we worry about such things. Just knowing that you do is interesting.
  - jcromartie 13y ago
    I didn't want it to get too political.
jcromartie 13y ago
[previously-deleted comment]: I wonder what it's like to live in a country where you don't have to give a second thought to statements based on potentially massive differences in beliefs about the age of the universe.
- petegrif 13y ago
  Turn that question around - "I wonder what it's like to live in a country where you don't have to give a second thought to statements derived from scientific investigation rather than religious dogma then move to the US?' I can answer that one for you. It's shocking. I had no idea, nor do I believe that most Europeans have any idea, just what a strong hold primitive interpretations of religion still holds over a huge percentage of a developed first world society.
  - rafcavallaro 13y ago
    The US is economically first world but cognitively third world :)
- berntb 13y ago
  I live[d] in Sweden. There has been lots of immigration. You can describe the present situation like that the Social democrat party is actively courting the religious muslim vote and pushing homophobia and anti semitism under the carpet. The press isn't so interested in looking at this, either. This has been coming slowly for 5-10 years. It wouldn't surprise me if tolerance for denial of evolution of humans comes in a few more years.
- cabalamat 13y ago
  Sadly we do have creationists in the UK, as this recent story demonstrates: http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/oct/11/jewish-school-censored-gcses-evolution http://www.theguardian.com/education/2013/oct/11/jewish-scho...

TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago

That's too simple of a statement, though. This finding doesn't actually exclude creationism - the common view among creationists has always been that all these "species", including Homo Erectus, are simply humans. *edit: clarity, grammar.

dragonwriter 13y ago
Since Creationism is an interpretive framework rather than a hypothesis with falsifiable predictions, it cannot be excluded. Any observation can be rationalized within Creationism.
- TsiCClawOfLight 13y ago
  I'm less certain than you are about that... The axiom that God doesn't exist is exactly on the same level as the one that he does. Both of them require the same type of assumption. As for being falsifiable, there still isn't any evidence for macro-evolution, so it isn't beyond the state of hypothesis (yet?). Evidence of that kind would certainly falsify the predictions of creationism. However, there is no evidence for the "natural" origin of new species at this point, only for adaptation.
  - scott_s 13y ago
    The entire concept of the phylogenetic tree (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phylogenetic_tree http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phylogenetic_tree) is based on the idea of speciation. That species evolve into new species is well accepted in evolutionary theory, and well supported.
  - JDDunn9 13y ago
    The burden of proof always lies on the person making the claim. The null hypothesis would be that god (or the tooth fairy) doesn't exist until we have sufficient evidence to prove it does exist. As for macro-evolution, there is a mountain of evidence including the genetic similarity, the geographic distribution of animals, the fossil record, etc. "The Greatest Show on Earth" would be a good read as it details many of the proofs of evolution and dismantles the Creationist's pseudo-science.