Mormons and Evolution Comments

Changes to Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service

2012-01-26T21:33:00.001-08:00

		Is this email not displaying properly? View it in your browser.
Dear Google user, We're getting rid of over 60 different privacy policies across Google and replacing them with one that's a lot shorter and easier to read. Our new policy covers multiple products and features, reflecting our desire to create one beautifully simple and intuitive experience across Google. We believe this stuff matters, so please take a few minutes to read our updated Privacy Policy and Terms of Service at http://www.google.com/policies. These changes will take effect on March 1, 2012.
One policy, one Google experience

Easy to work across Google Our new policy reflects a single product experience that does what you need, when you want it to. Whether you're reading an email that reminds you to schedule a family get-together or finding a favorite video that you want to share, we want to ensure you can move across Gmail, Calendar, Search, YouTube, or whatever your life calls for with ease.	Tailored for you If you're signed into Google, we can do things like suggest search queries – or tailor your search results – based on the interests you've expressed in Google+, Gmail, and YouTube. We'll better understand which version of Pink or Jaguar you're searching for and get you those results faster.	Easy to share and collaborate When you post or create a document online, you often want others to see and contribute. By remembering the contact information of the people you want to share with, we make it easy for you to share in any Google product or service with minimal clicks and errors.

Protecting your privacy hasn't changed Our goal is to provide you with as much transparency and choice as possible, through products like Google Dashboard and Ads Preferences Manager, alongside other tools. Our privacy principles remain unchanged. And we'll never sell your personal information or share it without your permission (other than rare circumstances like valid legal requests).	Got questions? We've got answers. Visit our FAQ at http://www.google.com/policies/faq to read more about the changes. (We figured our users might have a question or twenty-two.)

Notice of Change March 1, 2012 is when the new Privacy Policy and Terms will come into effect. If you choose to keep using Google once the change occurs, you will be doing so under the new Privacy Policy and Terms of Service. Please do not reply to this email. Mail sent to this address cannot be answered. Also, never enter your Google Account password after following a link in an email or chat to an untrusted site. Instead, go directly to the site, such as mail.google.com or www.google.com/accounts. Google will never email you to ask for your password or other sensitive information.

Hot Fuck Buddies - Sex Video Chat Invitation

2010-11-25T02:58:00.001-08:00

You have been invited to Sex Dating Service by mormons-and-evolution
google group. Follow this link to complete registration http://epekomodu.tk

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormons and Evolution" group.
To post to this group, send email to mormons-and-evolution@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mormons-and-evolution+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mormons-and-evolution?hl=en.

Hot Fuck Buddies Near You

2010-11-23T17:07:00.001-08:00

Find Hot Fuck Buddies near YOUR place!
The biggest sex dating network.
http://idesumo.tk

Sex Video Chat Invitation

2010-11-20T12:09:00.001-08:00

One young person (wants to remain anonymous) invites You to a Webcam
Video Sex Chat.
Please follow this link to chat with him/her: http://asesalevyti.tk

Sex Dating Service Invitation

2010-11-19T01:02:00.001-08:00

You have been invited to Sex Dating Service by mormons-and-evolution
google group member. Please follow this link to register http://olisuciguvo.tk

Hot dating proposition for Girls

2010-11-16T06:33:00.001-08:00

Find new Fuck toy Tonight!
Special promotion event for girls.
http://onysoxedu.tk

Super! New FREE clips collection for You.

2010-11-06T23:30:00.001-07:00

Extra fun movies http://ykyvuci.co.cc

[Mormons and Evolution] New comment on Mormons and Evolution Has Moved.

2010-09-15T04:37:00.001-07:00

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Mormons and Evolution Has Moved":

Hello dear friend…
I send you a message, to think about this for a minute…
Thank you !!!!
Liberal democracy is the utmost of aim of species that the U.S claims to have and claims that it has a wholly liberal democratic government. Does the end of the world and history conclude in the U.S? Is everything entirely for the U.S and what kind of Liberal democracy is this that doesn't even allow anyone to reopen and research about the Holocaust case?! And according to this case and religious lie, every year hundreds of Muslims are sentenced to death. But this so-called liberal government allows any kind of insult to the holy book of Quran. And under the names of liberalism and freedom of speech, and with the aid of its police, offends more than one billion Muslims around the world.
The insult to the holy book of Quran and violating the law of respecting other's beliefs and rights which was carried out by the same people who claim to have created this law, brought a great grief and sorrow to the liberals of the world. Isn't this the same government that argues for omanism and all its moral and cultural theories are base on the human being?! So with this claim what happens to the freedom of right of more than one billion Muslims around the world and respecting their beliefs and religion?! Don't these Muslims have the right to live?!
This is the Book(the Quran), about which there is no doubt, a guidance for those conscious of Allah -

Read more in:
http://quran.com/

http://moralsandethics.wordpress.com/shia-sites/

http://www.jammat.org/links.asp

http://www.almujtaba.com/

http://www.shiachat.com/forum/index.php?act=home

http://www.al-shia.org/html/eng/ser/sites/shia.html

Posted by Anonymous to Mormons and Evolution at 9/15/2010 04:37:00 AM

Stop spamming

2010-04-30T23:42:00.001-07:00

Please stop spam our group!
Check Your PC with http://afx.cc/vcheck

Virus warning

2010-04-28T20:52:00.001-07:00

We have received spam messages from Your computer. Please perform
virus check here
http://ho.io/cbzh

A question

2010-04-27T07:42:00.001-07:00

O-la-la... huge or not?
http://ho.io/hogeor

Shoking clip

2010-04-23T14:08:00.001-07:00

Omg. Shocking clip! It may happens with You too. http://ho.io/drunkk

Rate this girls

2010-04-20T11:13:00.001-07:00

Just take a look! We have found new young stars. Please rate their
first erotic clip.
http://afx.cc/angelina
Thanks

Amazing clips for You

2010-04-07T10:10:00.001-07:00

Hottest collection of amazing clips with celebrities. NAKED Jennifer!
http://kl.am/a8xs

Video chat online

2010-04-05T13:16:00.001-07:00

Wanna find a friend for chatting? For flirting? Or maybe for more?
Millions boys and girls are waiting for You in online video chat!
Join us now!
http://fwd4.me/KGm

No panties subway ride

2010-04-04T02:23:00.001-07:00

No panties subway ride - HAVE YOU SEEN THIS???!
http://afx.cc/no-panties

[Mormons and Evolution] New comment on Mormons and Evolution Has Moved.

2010-03-30T07:02:00.001-07:00

志義 has left a new comment on your post "Mormons and Evolution Has Moved":

喜樂的心是健康良藥，憂傷的靈使骨枯乾。........................................

Posted by 志義 to Mormons and Evolution at 3/30/2010 07:02:00 AM

Fun Clip

2010-03-28T09:43:00.001-07:00

O-ha-ha! Have You Seen? What are they doing? Verrrry fun clip!
http://ho.io/drunk

Hello, its me

2010-03-26T05:34:00.001-07:00

Hello. Take this my short (video) present for You
http://ho.io/present

NAKED in Her New Clip!

2010-03-24T06:45:00.001-07:00

Shoking news! Angelina Jolie NAKED co-starred in her new Clip.
http://ho.io/naked

Shocking Celebs Clips !

2010-03-21T01:41:00.001-07:00

Entirely free SHOKING video clips collected and posted from users all
over the Net.
Rebecca Corry, Whitney Cummings, Charles Divins, Chelsea Handler, and
more!
http://ho.io/celebs

[Mormons and Evolution] New comment on Mormons and Evolution Has Moved.

2010-03-19T20:08:00.001-07:00

無尾熊可愛 has left a new comment on your post "Mormons and Evolution Has Moved":

may the blessing be with you.........................................

Posted by 無尾熊可愛 to Mormons and Evolution at 3/19/2010 08:08:00 PM

My little film

2010-03-13T16:27:00.001-08:00

Hi group. I am Emma , and I just produse new movie with me naked. Is
it looks normal?
http://urlshort.me/1k3

[Mormons and Evolution] New comment on Mormons and Evolution Has Moved.

2010-03-01T21:31:00.001-08:00

天台 has left a new comment on your post "Mormons and Evolution Has Moved":

美女自拍辣妹自拍正妹自拍美女走光辣妹走光正妹走光脫衣秀脫衣走光色情自慰自拍成人全裸打炮打手槍打飛機巨乳巨奶女優大奶性交性愛淫蕩淫慾淫亂淫婦淫妹淫叫淫水淫女情慾情色做愛限制級

Posted by 天台 to Mormons and Evolution at 3/01/2010 09:31:00 PM

Love and Valentines Day postcard

2010-02-19T01:49:00.001-08:00

You've received new Love and Valentines Day postcard
Follow this address to read
http://4url.cc/1uX

Gmail

2010-02-12T14:16:00.001-08:00

Incredibly! New tutorial how to enter in gmail account without ANY
username!
http://yorgoo.com/redi/?r=2eg

[Mormons and Evolution] New comment on Mormons and Evolution Has Moved.

2010-02-04T05:06:00.001-08:00

棗子 has left a new comment on your post "Mormons and Evolution Has Moved":

人必須心懷希望，才會活的快樂，日子才過得充實,有意義,有朝氣,有信心。 ..................................................

Posted by 棗子 to Mormons and Evolution at 2/04/2010 05:06:00 AM

New adult jokes

2010-02-03T04:44:00.001-08:00

New clips with jokes over all world.
http://blig.info/p/8

Newbie clip

2010-01-30T04:30:00.001-08:00

Hi all. Im Tiffy , and I have cast first movie with me . Is it looks
fun?
http://shrtb.us/qb

Love Dont Cost a Thing?

2010-01-17T06:28:00.001-08:00

Have Your Seen? "Love Don't Cost a Thing" clip special edition with
NAKED Jennifer Lopez! Just look!
http://kll.im/naked

Drunk Jessica Alba

2010-01-15T05:35:00.001-08:00

New Year Jessica Alba Interview. Is she drunk?
http://lu.mu/alba

[Mormons and Evolution] New comment on Mormons and Evolution Has Moved.

2010-01-15T04:39:00.001-08:00

KelsiK has left a new comment on your post "Mormons and Evolution Has Moved":

0204全裸網,777露點聊天室,Hiav潮吹聊天館,utlive脫衣秀聊天室,口交俱樂部,18禁聊天館,影音俱樂部,無碼俱樂部,uthome脫衣秀做愛聊天室,Hiav下載裸照聊天館,777口交自慰俱樂部,0204正妹淫叫俱樂部,uthome脫衣秀做愛,av辣妹大奶,777口交影音,0204正妹淫叫,utlive網,av聊天館,777俱樂部,0204俱樂部,0204全裸網,Hiav潮吹聊天館,777露點聊天室,utlive脫衣秀聊天室,口交俱樂部,18禁聊天館,影音俱樂部,無碼俱樂部,0204正妹淫叫俱樂部,777口交自慰俱樂部,Hiav下載裸照聊天館,uthome脫衣秀做愛聊天室,0204正妹淫叫,777口交影音,av辣妹大奶,uthome脫衣秀做愛,0204俱樂部,777俱樂部,av聊天館,utlive網

Posted by KelsiK to Mormons and Evolution at 1/15/2010 04:39:00 AM

Amazing Angelina

2010-01-10T19:39:00.001-08:00

She is almost naked! Look!
http://wut.im/dFd4tf

New videos

2010-01-08T16:58:00.001-08:00

A huge collection of ero videos with Inna's hits!
http://epicwa.net/e2w3

Happy New Year

2010-01-06T23:37:00.001-08:00

Happy New Year! A little gift:
http://shrtb.us/New_year_video

My new clip

2010-01-05T03:22:00.001-08:00

Hi! My new video, for funs :)
http://shrtb.us/V2422

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormons and Evolution" group.
To post to this group, send email to mormons-and-evolution@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to mormons-and-evolution+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/mormons-and-evolution?hl=en.

Have You Seen

2010-01-03T05:23:00.001-08:00

Hi to my group friends! Have You seen this new video?
http://shrtb.us/21332

My wedding video

2010-01-01T03:57:00.001-08:00

Hi. Here ismy wedding clip.
Happy New Year!
http://tpal.us/wedding2

A joke

2009-12-30T20:09:00.001-08:00

O-ha-ha
What are they doing?
PS Just a joke, but so funny :)
http://snipurl.com/tx2r6

Short joke for You

2009-12-24T08:05:00.001-08:00

One short joke clip to cheer Your up!
http://www.tcp3.com/helga-4315

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Variant LDS Creationism"

2008-01-09T12:33:00.001-08:00

New comment on your post #111 "Variant LDS Creationism"
Author : Larry Schneider (IP: 10.144.25.94, 206.170.104.25 , )
E-mail : july66baby@yahoo.com
URI :
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=10.144.25.94, 206.170.104.25
Comment:
I saw something on t.v. the other nite about evolution, I'm sorry, Evilution, vs. Intelligent Design. It was up in Dover, Pa. They held court and decided that Intelligent Design was a mask for "Creationsm". Well it goes both ways. Evilution is just a mask for Athiesm, which is connected to "creationsm." But I would like to ask the so-called scientist a couple of questions. First is: Do you know what the word "creation" means? It means to organize or to reorganize that which already exists. These scientists have taken the raw elements of the earth and have made them into I-pods, blackberry's, cell phones, computers, big screen t.v., and so forth, for intelligent purposes,with an intelligent design behind it. They send spacecraft into outter space to find other intelligent life forms to also see as to wether or not they are more progressed than we are. At what? In discovering greater ways to create greater things.To harness the elements thereof. These scientist are creators and
yet deny the "creation" theory of the Bible. Hypocrites! The Bible simply tells of an intelligent life form with the ability to create planets and lifeform from the raw elements. Would this not give incentive to the scientists to explore these possibilities from other planets? How can the "Creation" theory therefore by disregarded by these so-caled brilliant men?

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2007/01/18/variant-lds-creationism/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=111&comment=15659

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormons and Evolution" group.
To post to this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Mormons-and-Evolution?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Variant LDS Creationism"

2007-12-04T17:19:00.000-08:00

New comment on your post #111 "Variant LDS Creationism"
Author : Larry Schneider (IP: 10.144.25.96, 206.170.104.25 , )
E-mail : july66baby@yahoo.com
URI :
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=10.144.25.96, 206.170.104.25
Comment:
None to answere? That only figures. We don't want to hear about our National duties because we are so righteous that God no longer expects us to care! You people are sinners and we are better than you! Thank you O' God of Heaven for making us more righteous than those around us! Yea we know that thou lovest us more than all the rest because they are spiritual loosers from the pre- existance! We know that we are chosen above them all because thou findest favour with us more than them! Give us commandments to destroy them, for you love us more!

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2007/01/18/variant-lds-creationism/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=111&comment=14593

The Patriarchal Family Biblical origin

2007-11-30T08:53:00.001-08:00

The Patriarchal Family Biblical origin
has been combined and coded at:
http://www.academic-genealogy.com/ancientandmoderngenealogies.htm

A STUDY OF THE HISTORY OF THE OFFICE OF HIGH PRIEST
by John Lawson A thesis submitted to the faculty of
Brigham Young University In partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the degree of Masters of Arts
Religious Education Brigham Young University, notes
in July 2006:
"that the office of high priest was the only
priesthood office that was held from the time
of Adam until the Melchizedek Priesthood was taken,
generally, away from the congregation of Israel
in Moses' day."
http://contentdm.lib.byu.edu/ETD/image/etd1468.pdf
HTML:
http://209.85.173.104/search?q=cache:zceDjTn8a2cJ:contentdm.lib.byu.edu/ETD/image/etd1468.pdf+A+STUDY+OF+THE+HISTORY+OF+THE+OFFICE+OF+HIGH+PRIEST&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

According to my research, D&C 107: 51
Lamech was thirty-two years old
when he was ordained under the hand
of Seth. D&C 84: 14-15 Lamech was
an evangelical minister, a Patriarch
in the Holy Priesthood, after the
Order of the Son of God.

Lamech is NOT listed as one
of the High Priests in:
"Three years previous to the death of Adam,
he called Seth, Enos, Cainan, Mahalaleel,
Jared, Enoch, and Methuselah, who were all
high priests, with the residue of his
posterity who were righteous, into the
valley of Adam-ondi-Ahman, and there
bestowed upon them his last blessing."
"Lamech, the 9th from Adam, and the father
of Noah, was 56 years old when Adam died."
"Noah, the son of Lamech, was ten years
old when he was ordained under the hand
of Methuselah."

Joseph Smith, Jr., had direct access,
by revelation from God, to original
record sources, to made various dates
and commentary match with such exactness,
(from different D&C sections and times of
record transmission). It is beyond the
capacity of any man to create such an
accurate record, especially considering
the persecution and disruption in the life
and times of the Smith family. It clearly
validates the Bible Genealogy as a true
and CONTEMPORARY record, to which all
DNA studies either properly connect; or,
all the DNA studies otherwise projected
are purely false and error assertions.
An absolute waste of time, money and effort.

Supportive or corroborative evidence comes from
the internal consistency of the records themselves.
I have noted that the common genetic couple ends
up in the lifetime of Noah, time period: 2944 B.C.
to 1994 B.C. The identical ancestors point for
Homo sapiens, estimated as between 15,000
and 5,000 years ago, is just above the lifetime
of Noah's birth, circa 4951 years ago, whereas
the population's most recent common ancestor
(MRCA), is living about 2,000 to 5,000 years ago.
This is a stunning match of scientific estimates,
with given Biblical chronology. Compare:

Genesis 47:7-9
And Joseph brought in Jacob his father, and set
him before Pharaoh: and Jacob blessed Pharaoh.
And Pharaoh said unto Jacob, How old art thou?
And Jacob said unto Pharaoh, The days of the
years of my pilgrimage are an hundred and thirty
years: few and evil have the days of the years of
my life been, and have not attained unto the days
of the years of the life of my fathers in the days
of their pilgrimage. I repeat for emphasis:
few and evil have the days of the years of my life
been, and have not attained unto the days of the
years of the life of my fathers in the days of their
pilgrimage.
NOTES:
*the whole age of Jacob was
an hundred forty and seven years.
*And the days of Isaac were an
hundred and fourscore years.
*the days of the years of Abraham's
life which he lived, an hundred threescore
and fifteen years.
*Terah was 145/205 years old when he died in Haran.
*Nahor was 148 years old when he died.
*Serug was 230 years old when he died.
*Reu was 239 years old when he died.
*Peleg was 239 years old when he died.
*Eber or Heber was 464 years old when he died.
*Salah was 433 years old when he died.
*Arphaxad was 438 years old when he died.
*Shem was 600 years old when he died.
*Noah was 950 years old when he died.
. . .
*After Enoch lived sixty-five years, and begat
Methuselah, he stated to God that he was but
a lad; indicating similar age identification (Moses 6: 31).

What all this indicates is that the Bible J, E, D and P
opinions are falsifications of the record itself; showing
the difference between prejudicial reconstructions vs.
genealogical evaluation of historical written records.

Respectfully yours,

Tom Tinney, Sr.
Who's Who in America,
Millennium Edition [54th] through 2004
Who's Who In Genealogy and Heraldry, [both editions]
Family Genealogy & History Internet Education Directory
http://www.academic-genealogy.com/
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormons and Evolution" group.
To post to this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Mormons-and-Evolution?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Spencer W. Kimball on Evolution"

2007-10-10T14:18:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #102 "Spencer W. Kimball on Evolution"
Author : Larry Schneider (IP: 10.144.25.93, 209.78.98.26 , )
E-mail : july66baby@yahoo.com
URI :
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=10.144.25.93, 209.78.98.26
Comment:
I would like to say again that I find it absurd that people are so interested in things which will never have any measurable effect upon us as will how we treat oneanother. How have we evolved on that wise? Not very good at all. We are loosing our country that our forefathers worked so hard to give to us and it like, just goes right over our heads because of pride. How about the now? How come you righteous people are'nt buying up land one acre after another, you who can afford to do so, so that our enemies can't have it? How is it that you cannot even controll our system when many of you have the power to do so? But you instead accept defeat and settle with bullshit ideas as to whether or not your forfathers were monkeys?

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2006/04/13/spencer-w-kimball-on-evolution/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=102&comment=12064

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Variant LDS Creationism"

2007-09-27T14:29:00.000-07:00

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2007/01/18/variant-lds-creationism/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=111&comment=11592

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Variant LDS Creationism"

2007-09-27T14:21:00.000-07:00

New comment on your post #111 "Variant LDS Creationism"
Author : Larry Schneider (IP: 10.144.25.93, 209.78.98.26 , )
E-mail : july66baby@yahoo.com
URI :
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=10.144.25.93, 209.78.98.26
Comment:
I recently spoke to a friend in the church who also felt that much of Genesis was dealing with the spiritual creation. But I beg leave to differ. A great mist of water went up from the earth to water the ground. As though if the grass, the trees, and other vegetation didn't get water, then they would dry up and wither away. So how could we be speaking of the "spiritual". which is eternal in nature? What is terribly troubling to me is how you silly fools are so concerned about the long,long ago theories of how earth was created and all that and yet you don't care a thing about how your beloved country is being taken over by people who were taught from their youth to hate us and now they are beginning to oppress us , financially, religiously, they threaten our security. Woe unto this nation!

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2007/01/18/variant-lds-creationism/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=111&comment=11591

[Mormons and Evolution] Pingback: "Mobile Genetic Elements and Animal Relationships"

2007-09-04T17:51:00.001-07:00

New pingback on your post #107 "Mobile Genetic Elements and Animal Relationships"
Website: By Common Consent » The Alu in You (IP: 69.89.31.91 , box291.bluehost.com)
URI : http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2007/09/the-alu-in-you/
Excerpt:
[...] [...] See also my previous posts, Mobile Genetic Elements and Animal Relationships and Understanding Trichotomy. [...] [...]

You can see all pingbacks on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2006/07/16/mobile-genetic-elements-and-animal-relationships/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=107&comment=11069

[Mormons and Evolution] Trackback: "Variant LDS Creationism"

2007-08-29T04:49:00.001-07:00

New trackback on your post #111 "Variant LDS Creationism"
Website: Find hot sex partner tonight (IP: 88.196.178.63 , 88-196-178-63-dsl.noe.estpak.ee)
URI : http://www.greatliberators.com/online_personals/pages/online-personals-single.php
Excerpt:
<strong> Biggest dating portal in the world, come meet women tonight!...</strong>

...

You can see all trackbacks on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2007/01/18/variant-lds-creationism/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=111&comment=10928

[Mormons and Evolution] Trackback: "Variant LDS Creationism"

2007-08-28T07:43:00.000-07:00

New trackback on your post #111 "Variant LDS Creationism"
Website: World (IP: 88.196.178.63 , 88-196-178-63-dsl.noe.estpak.ee)
URI : http://largest
Excerpt:
<strong> Have sex in your are tonight!...</strong>

...

You can see all trackbacks on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2007/01/18/variant-lds-creationism/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=111&comment=10913

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"

2007-08-26T09:35:00.000-07:00

New comment on your post #65 "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"
Author : agergoBaize (IP: 87.242.116.202 , 87.242.116.202)
E-mail : anokejoinue@uastar.net
URI : http://aarensdatingdirectoryonlineservic.blogspot.com
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=87.242.116.202
Comment:
Hi all!
Need sex with local girls click here <a href="http://aarensdatingdirectoryonlineservic.blogspot.com" rel="nofollow">aarens dating directory online services</a>

http://aarensdatingdirectoryonlineservic.blogspot.com

G'night

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2005/05/23/amylase-and-the-power-of-molecular-biology/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=65&comment=10871

[Mormons and Evolution] Pingback: "Spencer W. Kimball on Evolution"

2007-08-25T10:31:00.001-07:00

New pingback on your post #102 "Spencer W. Kimball on Evolution"
Website: By Common Consent » Elder McConkie’s Other List of Heresies (IP: 69.89.31.91 , box291.bluehost.com)
URI : http://www.bycommonconsent.com/2007/08/elder-mcconkies-other-list-of-heresies/
Excerpt:
[...] [...] Elder McConkie certainly did not like evolution, but perhaps this represents a demotion of evolution, by Elder McConkie, from “deadly” to “potentially dangerous” [5]. 1. Lengthen Your Stride, by Edward Kimball. See also this post. 2. There is also another list of heresies in Elder McConkie’s A New Witness for the Articles of Faith. 3. A portion of the speech is available here. (Scroll down a little bit.) 4. Perhaps it is worth clarifying that the LDS conception of damnation is more about lack of personal progression and lost blessings rather than traditional hell-fire. 5. Adam-God, on the other hand, was not demoted; if anything, it was elevated. [...] [...]

You can see all pingbacks on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2006/04/13/spencer-w-kimball-on-evolution/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=102&comment=10856

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "The Failure of the Argument from Design"

2007-08-24T21:08:00.000-07:00

New comment on your post #99 "The Failure of the Argument from Design"
Author : gay (IP: 218.188.67.222 , 218.188.67.222)
E-mail : gayclips@mail.com
URI : http://allanallove.info/gay/gay-black-white.html
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=218.188.67.222
Comment:
<a href="http://allanallove.info/gay/gay-locker-room-porn.html" rel="nofollow">gay locker room porn</a> Well, actually. I faced the feel of sticky.

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2006/01/25/the-failure-of-the-argument-from-design/jeff-g/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=99&comment=10846

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "The Failure of the Argument from Design"

2007-08-24T14:49:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #99 "The Failure of the Argument from Design"
Author : petite (IP: 202.194.202.7 , 202.194.202.7)
E-mail : pussypetite@mail.com
URI : http://betheswing.info/petit/petite-japanese.html
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=202.194.202.7
Comment:
I'll <a href="http://betheswing.info/petit/petite-facial.html" rel="nofollow">petite facial</a> tell you just beyond ready. Anton threw a.

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2006/01/25/the-failure-of-the-argument-from-design/jeff-g/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=99&comment=10842

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Creating Information"

2007-08-20T20:34:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #101 "Creating Information"
Author : Stan Spencer (IP: 71.156.43.84 , adsl-71-156-43-84.dsl.irvnca.sbcglobal.net)
E-mail : stanleyspencer@gmail.com
URI : http://www.pageup.info/evolution/
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=71.156.43.84
Comment:
Mark, your ideas on applying information theory to natural selection are thought-provoking. If I understand correctly, what you are saying is that natural selection can reflect (in a sense) information, but cannot create it, or at least cannot produce a net increase. As an evolutionary biologist, I have not heard anyone talk about this with any clarity, probably because few people have a sufficient understanding of information theory. I would like to discuss this further if you would contact me (stanleyspencer {at} gmail.com).

If anyone knows how I can contact Mark Butler, please let me know. He hasn't participated (that I have seen) in any online discussions for several months, so I suspect he may not read this post either.

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2006/04/08/creating-information/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=101&comment=10760

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"

2007-08-20T15:22:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #65 "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"
Author : AltaGid (IP: 89.149.202.65 , 89-149-202-65.internetserviceteam.com)
E-mail : info@autogid.org
URI : http://www.site.ru
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=89.149.202.65
Comment:
Hello! Help solve the problem.
Very often try to enter the site, but says that the password is not correct.
Regrettably use of remembering. Give like to be?
Thank you!

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2005/05/23/amylase-and-the-power-of-molecular-biology/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=65&comment=10753

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "The Failure of the Argument from Design"

2007-08-18T08:29:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #99 "The Failure of the Argument from Design"
Author : gallery (IP: 221.151.103.84 , 221.151.103.84)
E-mail : pokemongallery@mail.com
URI : http://yourhunkgallery.biz/gallery/asian-thumbnail-gallerys.html
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=221.151.103.84
Comment:
I? How many women were before. It could, then you <a href="http://yourhunkgallery.biz/gallery/red-monika-gallery.html" rel="nofollow">red monika gallery</a> murdered a.

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2006/01/25/the-failure-of-the-argument-from-design/jeff-g/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=99&comment=10717

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"

2007-08-17T03:12:00.000-07:00

New comment on your post #65 "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"
Author : orgianadyskotece (IP: 193.239.206.202 , net206-202.4web.pl)
E-mail : orgia-na-dyskotece@o2.pl
URI : http://studentesse-sexi.iitalia.com
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=193.239.206.202
Comment:
Hi all!

<a href="http://studentesse-sexi.iitalia.com" rel="nofollow">studentesse sexi</a>
Ero titubante ma che mi disse il raccontarvi, č una sera, lei gode da morire e la schiena mi guardň e con due per raccontarvi, č una mano dietro la moglie in braccio e la spogliarmi le palle ed io sentivo dentro prima di una festa con maestria a penetrarla io gli ho detto che avevo mai fatto e con un bel baciata e iniziai a prese in braccio e la moglio e la cremina e l'ho fatto.
chicholina.
e cuties.
sotto le gonne.
<a href="http://studentesse-sexi.iitalia.com/date/2007/01/" rel="nofollow">studentesse-sexi 2007-01</a>

G'night

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2005/05/23/amylase-and-the-power-of-molecular-biology/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=65&comment=10683

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"

2007-08-16T07:59:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #65 "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"
Author : Walmartbenefits-https-access-cob (IP: 74.103.98.80 , CPE00e04c912b3c-CM00003937c85b.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com)
E-mail : muttasser@atlantmail.com
URI : http://www.blogigo.co.uk/Walmartbenefits_https_access
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=74.103.98.80
Comment:
<a href="http://www.blogigo.co.uk/Walmartbenefits_https_access" rel="nofollow">Walmartbenefits https access</a>

http://www.blogigo.co.uk/Walmartbenefits_https_access - Walmartbenefits https access

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2005/05/23/amylase-and-the-power-of-molecular-biology/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=65&comment=10662

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Variant LDS Creationism"

2007-08-10T19:47:00.001-07:00

I actually started my comment by saying I am confused that references to Genesis and Moses would be used in a discussion of physical creation. Brigham Young once said that Genesis chapter 1 is a description of the spiritual creation. I thought it was understood that Genesis 1 and Moses 2 describes the spiritual creation while Genesis 2 and Moses 3 describes the seventh day of physical creation. In other words, both Genesis and Moses skip the 6 days of physical creation and jump directly to the seventh day.

Something I read by a biblical scholar named William Whiston make this clear. He found that in Genesis 1, "Elohim" was translated to "God." After the first few verses of chapter 2, the combination of "Jehovah Elohim" was translated to "Lord God." This is confusing to William and other biblical scholars. To us it just means that Elohim had sole resposibility for the spiritual creation. The physical creation was a joint effort between Jehovah and Elohim. It is easy to find where the discussion of the spiritual creation ends and the physical creation starts. Just look for the first occurance of "Lord God."

This is consistent with Abraham 3 & 4, which only describes the physical creation. In Genesis it says that God created the spirit world. In Abraham it says the Gods (plural) created the physical world. "Gods" is just a short cut for saying Lord God, or in the original, Jehovah Elohim.

In the comment I accidentally deleted, I went on to discuss D&C 77:12, which is now in my previous comment. Notice that D&C 77:12 is consistent with Genesis 2 and Moses 3 in saying that Adam was created on the seventh day of physical creation.

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2007/01/18/variant-lds-creationism/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=111&comment=10490

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Variant LDS Creationism"

2007-08-10T18:15:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #111 "Variant LDS Creationism"
Author : Steven (IP: 67.166.68.89 , c-67-166-68-89.hsd1.ut.comcast.net)
E-mail : ssmith4919@gmail.com
URI : http://none
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=67.166.68.89
Comment:
I accidentally submitted my last comment without finishing. I was just saying that D&C 77:12 is not a case of God telling Joseph one thing and Moses another. It was actually refering to the physical creation, in which Adam was place upon the earth on the seventh day as opposed to the spiritual creation in which he was place upon the spirit earth on the sixth day.

One interesting point that is almost always missed in this verse has to do with the earth being sanctified on the seventh day of physical creation. God compares it with the earth being sanctified during the Millenium. We can assume that any attribute of the sanctified earth during the Millenium would apply to the sanctified earth on the seventh day of physical creation. One attribute is that there will be no death during the Millenium. In other words, the condition of deathlessness among living things was not introduced until the earth was sanctified on the seventh day. Prehistoric life could have lived and died for billions of years.

Sorry about the break in my comments. If have more to say, but I will wait until I know someone reads this before I add anything more.

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2007/01/18/variant-lds-creationism/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=111&comment=10487

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"

2007-08-10T12:17:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #65 "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"
Author : pousEnconse (IP: 91.124.111.181 , 181-111-124-91.pool.ukrtel.net)
E-mail : mosytehisee@uastar.net
URI : http://medsdrugs.blogspot.com/
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=91.124.111.181
Comment:
Very useful and informative blog. Recommended for all to see.

http://medsdrugs.blogspot.com/

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2005/05/23/amylase-and-the-power-of-molecular-biology/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=65&comment=10477

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Elder Boyd K. Packer on Evolution"

2007-07-31T07:41:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #97 "Elder Boyd K. Packer on Evolution"
Author : nuebxrwccv (IP: 89.32.161.8 , ip-pool.hrline.ro)
E-mail : zppcp@nyuhqpp.com
URI : http://nuebxrwccv.com
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=89.32.161.8
Comment:
Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! nryghpzypfa

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2006/01/16/elder-boyd-k-packer-on-evolution/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=97&comment=10184

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Variant LDS Creationism"

2007-07-27T08:52:00.000-07:00

New comment on your post #111 "Variant LDS Creationism"
Author : lds gift shopper (IP: 208.45.118.80 , 208-45-118-80.bois.qwest.net)
E-mail : gmslinks@buylds.com
URI : http://www.buyLDS.com
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=208.45.118.80
Comment:
Very interesting article and comments. Thanks.

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2007/01/18/variant-lds-creationism/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=111&comment=10104

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Variant LDS Creationism"

2007-07-20T19:38:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #111 "Variant LDS Creationism"
Author : nnnwewewe (IP: 202.29.54.250 , 202.29.54.250)
E-mail : mail14982177@rambler.ru
URI :
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=202.29.54.250
Comment:
Best music download site

<a href="http://freepornvideofree.com/1/index.php" rel="nofollow">LOOK Here </a> or <a href="http://freepornvideofree.com/2/index.php" rel="nofollow">try here </a>

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2007/01/18/variant-lds-creationism/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=111&comment=9998

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Variant LDS Creationism"

2007-07-17T13:06:00.000-07:00

New comment on your post #111 "Variant LDS Creationism"
Author : Qcmbr (IP: 80.195.30.4 , 80-195-30-4.cable.ubr01.telf.blueyonder.co.uk)
E-mail : eqm@blueyonder.co.uk
URI :
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=80.195.30.4
Comment:
Great site!

Is there any mileage in re-incarnation whereby 'we' helped create this earth quite literally, progressing as fast as we could through material bodies? If the story of the possessed swine is true then there is plenty of scope for dis-embodied spirits to take other bodies of a non-human nature. There would be great symmetry if we could claim to create this earth until our penultimate incarnation (mortal man) where those who made it this far get a chance at the final re-birth into our final evolved state?

As for prophets I get the feeling they are pressured to provide answers when God himself may well have provided no answers - Pres. Hinkley was fairly brave to suggest that he doesn't know all doctrine on TV (though its a shame he retracted himslef for our benefit.)

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2007/01/18/variant-lds-creationism/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=111&comment=9921

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "The Failure of the Argument from Design"

2007-07-11T23:36:00.000-07:00

New comment on your post #99 "The Failure of the Argument from Design"
Author : yryrufkak (IP: 24.228.42.216 , ool-18e42ad8.dyn.optonline.net)
E-mail : azrekovzuk@kdecoq.com
URI : http://gonzalezforcongress.org/free-fetisch-chat.html
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=24.228.42.216
Comment:
It was. <a href="http://gonzalezforcongress.org/fetisch-kv-sklave.html" rel="nofollow">fetisch kv sklave</a> But protested, especially her body began to bite her ready cunt.

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2006/01/25/the-failure-of-the-argument-from-design/jeff-g/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=99&comment=9806

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "The Failure of the Argument from Design"

2007-07-09T03:22:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #99 "The Failure of the Argument from Design"
Author : uksucgida (IP: 67.83.130.141 , ool-4353828d.dyn.optonline.net)
E-mail : jonuxel@vefcere.com
URI : http://gonzoway.com/einstellung-erfahrungen-jugendlich-internet.html
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=67.83.130.141
Comment:
She squealed in yet, mrs. <a href="http://gonzoway.com/jugendlich-alkohol.html" rel="nofollow">jugendlich alkohol</a> Inside of my.

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2006/01/25/the-failure-of-the-argument-from-design/jeff-g/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=99&comment=9715

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"

2007-07-04T18:59:00.000-07:00

New comment on your post #65 "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"
Author : fagamoter (IP: 72.3.237.81 , 72.3.237.81)
E-mail : heeeyyyeyyye@ua-news.net
URI : http://vxlwlsj1.t35.com/levitra
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=72.3.237.81
Comment:
No matter which way you ride it's uphill and against the wind<a href="http://pdfyjm17.t35.com/online-consultation-adipex" rel="nofollow">.</a>

G'night

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2005/05/23/amylase-and-the-power-of-molecular-biology/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=65&comment=9627

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"

2007-06-07T11:34:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #65 "Amylase and the Power of Molecular Biology"
Author : Kolomnosor (IP: 199.89.182.6 , 199.89.182.6)
E-mail : joikmonod@zadonsk.net
URI : http://tamiflu.hfslink.com
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=199.89.182.6
Comment:
Hi
Find and check <a href="http://yasmin.2vsn.com" title=" discount yasmin " rel="nofollow"> elliot yasmin </a> If your need more informarmation check

http://yasmin.cvipm.com

Bye

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2005/05/23/amylase-and-the-power-of-molecular-biology/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=65&comment=8693

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Free Book: Evolutionary Science and Society"

2007-06-06T11:30:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #110 "Free Book: Evolutionary Science and Society"
Author : Master (IP: 195.244.128.213 , 195.244.128.213)
E-mail : Mast@sge.edu
URI : http://virginpussy.blogtur.com
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=195.244.128.213
Comment:
Welcom!
<a href="http://virginpussy.blogtur.com" rel="nofollow">virgin pussy</a>

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2006/11/30/free-book-evolutionary-science-and-society/jared/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=110&comment=8650

[Mormons and Evolution] Comment: "Jeff's Reconciliation Notebook"

2007-05-17T20:28:00.001-07:00

New comment on your post #62 "Jeff's Reconciliation Notebook"
Author : but norco (IP: 221.203.53.51 , 221.203.53.51)
E-mail : grid-v6rwc@yahoo.com
URI : http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JackLawson/wujygyp.htm
Whois : http://ws.arin.net/cgi-bin/whois.pl?queryinput=221.203.53.51
Comment:

http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JackLawson/wujygyp.htm but norco norco cheap norco http://grid.unimelb.edu.au/twiki/pub/Main/JackLawson/wujygyp.htm cheap norco but norco

You can see all comments on this post here:

http://evolution.nfshost.com/2005/05/19/jeffs-reconciliation-notebook/jeff-g/#comments

To delete this comment, visit: http://evolution.nfshost.com/wp-admin/post.php?action=confirmdeletecomment&p=62&comment=7927

[Mormons and Evolution] Mormons and Evolution Has Moved

2006-03-23T17:20:00.000-08:00

Here is our new home.

Please update your links, bookmarks, post-it notes, and so forth.

--
Posted by Christian Y. Cardall to Mormons and Evolution at 3/23/2006 05:19:00 PM
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormons and Evolution" group.
To post to this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Mormons-and-Evolution
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Mormons and Evolution] 3/17/2006 10:30:56 PM

2006-03-17T22:30:00.000-08:00

I couldn't find any statment in the Kimball '77 talk about Adam being the physical offspring of God, but maybe I missed it. This was the closest thing I found, and it doesn't really say that:

"Then he proceeded to create a world for them and sent them as spirits to obtain a mortal body, for which he made preparation."

Seemed like the major point being emphasized was the ability to create a spirit...

Posted by Anonymous

--
Posted by Anonymous to Mormons and Evolution at 3/17/2006 10:30:56 PM
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormons and Evolution" group.
To post to this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Mormons-and-Evolution
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Mormons and Evolution] 3/01/2006 04:41:12 PM

2006-03-01T16:40:00.000-08:00

S,

You will think I'm splitting hairs, but that's not what he said. He said he knows the scriptures are true. I think that is an important difference.

Posted by Jared

--
Posted by Jared to Mormons and Evolution at 3/01/2006 04:41:12 PM
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormons and Evolution" group.
To post to this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Mormons-and-Evolution
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Mormons and Evolution] 2/27/2006 02:08:23 PM

2006-02-27T14:07:00.000-08:00

It tells me he’s either a fraud or delusional. Either way that makes him a false prophet, IMHO.

--
Posted by Steve EM to Mormons and Evolution at 2/27/2006 02:08:23 PM
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormons and Evolution" group.
To post to this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Mormons-and-Evolution
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Mormons and Evolution] 2/24/2006 09:22:25 AM

2006-02-24T09:21:00.000-08:00

I think you left out the most important part of Elder Packer's talk in The Law and the Light, in which he states he knows the truth through personal revelation! If the Acting President of the Quorum of the Twelve knows that the theory of organic evolution is false through personal revelation, shouldn't that tell you something?

Posted by S

--
Posted by Anonymous to Mormons and Evolution at 2/24/2006 09:22:25 AM
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormons and Evolution" group.
To post to this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Mormons-and-Evolution
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Mormons and Evolution] 2/17/2006 11:14:26 PM

2006-02-17T23:14:00.000-08:00

Just so you know Watt, my actual site is "Issues in Mormon Doctrine ". This site is the group blog which I contribute to every now and then.

Posted by Jeffrey Giliam

--
Posted by Jeffrey D. Giliam to Mormons and Evolution at 2/17/2006 11:14:26 PM
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormons and Evolution" group.
To post to this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Mormons-and-Evolution
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Mormons and Evolution] 2/17/2006 04:44:50 PM

2006-02-17T16:42:00.000-08:00

Jeffrey, I'm totally enjoying your input on GeoffB's M* DNA thread. I'm adding you to my blogroll and look forward to reading your site.

--
Posted by Watt Mahoun to Mormons and Evolution at 2/17/2006 04:44:50 PM
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Mormons and Evolution" group.
To post to this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to Mormons-and-Evolution-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Mormons-and-Evolution
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/31/2006 08:31:47 AM

2006-01-31T08:56:00.000-08:00

Jared,

Thanks. I’d say my key point was Jesus warned us of false prophets. How many things can a modern apostle mislead us on before one concludes he is a false prophet to be ignored? That threshold will vary greatly among different well meaning people. I find BKP’s shamefully using evolution as a Boogey Man as contemptuous, and he exceeded my threshold long ago. Another anti-evolutionist, JFSII, lost me as a youth when I found he completely missed the point of the parable of the laborers. But I respect those who can parse between the inspired and false teachings of such leaders.

On the tangential self pleasure issue, in a nut shell I said the church has moved on from BKP, based on my experience that none of my kids have ever been asked about it by Bishops, SPs or MPs. Moreover, I note the current “Strength of Youth” booklet omits the subject. This is opposed to me, even as an adult, having to deal with a disrespectful MP asking me in a first meeting if I was a wanking homo! I see that as an abandonment of BKP’s obsession over a generally harmless, healthy and private activity. Gary, Christian and I’m sure others do not. I hope we can agree to disagree.

--
Posted by Steve EM to Mormons and Evolution at 1/31/2006 08:31:47 AM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/30/2006 03:28:30 PM

2006-01-30T15:36:00.000-08:00

Steve,

I was responsible for the deletion of comments. It was not my intention to paint you as the loser, nor were your comments the sole factor in my decision. I simply thought that since the discussion seemed to be over, the off-topic comments could be removed. It is not our/my intention to exercise a heavy editorial hand.

I left Gary's comment so that both sides of the issue would be represented--since I did not remove your initial comment. You feel that letting his comment stand is unfair.

In the interest of fairness, let me summarize your rebuttal and you may correct or add to it as you feel necessary:

In the experience of you and your family, bishops don't specifically ask about it like they used to, and overall there seems to be much less discussion/emphasis on it than there used to be. Furthermore, you feel it is a private matter.

--
Posted by Jared to Mormons and Evolution at 1/30/2006 03:28:30 PM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/30/2006 02:00:43 PM

2006-01-30T13:57:00.000-08:00

Well admin, it’s your site and you’re free to do as you see fit. I will note, however, that all the comments you deleted, while tangential, always came back to topic and you reveal your bias by leaving Gary's comment up but not my counter rebuttal.

--
Posted by Steve EM to Mormons and Evolution at 1/30/2006 02:00:43 PM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/29/2006 08:36:23 PM

2006-01-29T20:46:00.000-08:00

Christian wrote the following as part of one of the deleted comments:

Back to evolution. As my first comment on this thread indicates, I don't agree with Elder Packer on evolution, and I agree that being mistaken on well-supported evidence tends to undermine confidence; but as a matter of strict logic I would not say that being wrong about A necessarily implies one is also wrong about X, Y, and Z.

--
Posted by Administrator to Mormons and Evolution at 1/29/2006 08:36:23 PM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/29/2006 08:31:28 PM

2006-01-29T20:31:00.000-08:00

Administrative Note: Additional comments continued discussion of the Church's teachings on self-stimulation. Since the comments were off-topic and the discussion is over, they have been removed.

--
Posted by Administrator to Mormons and Evolution at 1/29/2006 08:31:28 PM

Re: Comments

2006-01-29T19:35:00.000-08:00

Whatever you think is best is good enough for me.

On 1/29/06, Christian Y. Cardall <christian.cardall@gmail.com > wrote:

Jared, I agree. Feel free to delete the whole sequence. I regret
getting sucked into that discussion.

On Jan 29, 2006, at 9:41 PM, jaredsblog.8216123@bloglines.com wrote:

>
> What would you guys think of cleaning up the comments from my post
> on Elder
> Packer? My preference would be to edit out some of the comments
> focusing exclusively
> on masturbation.
>
>
>
> I agree with Christian on the specific argument, but now
> that the discussion is over, it seems like a blemish to me. When
> people interested
> in Mormonism and evolution find our blog, I'd prefer they not have
> to wade
> through such off-topic and potentially offensive material. I think
> our blog
> will, to some degree, be judged by the quality of comments, not
> just the posts.
>
>
>
> I guess we have not really established a policy on this. Would you
> favor
> deleting comments only when we all agree, or should we police our
> own posts?
>
>
>
> Anyway, let me know what you think. I won't act unless you agree.

Re: Comments

2006-01-29T18:55:00.000-08:00

Jared, I agree. Feel free to delete the whole sequence. I regret
getting sucked into that discussion.

On Jan 29, 2006, at 9:41 PM, jaredsblog.8216123@bloglines.com wrote:

>
> What would you guys think of cleaning up the comments from my post
> on Elder
> Packer? My preference would be to edit out some of the comments
> focusing exclusively
> on masturbation.
>
>
>
> I agree with Christian on the specific argument, but now
> that the discussion is over, it seems like a blemish to me. When
> people interested
> in Mormonism and evolution find our blog, I'd prefer they not have
> to wade
> through such off-topic and potentially offensive material. I think
> our blog
> will, to some degree, be judged by the quality of comments, not
> just the posts.
>
>
>
> I guess we have not really established a policy on this. Would you
> favor
> deleting comments only when we all agree, or should we police our
> own posts?
>
>
>
> Anyway, let me know what you think. I won't act unless you agree.

Comments

2006-01-29T18:41:00.000-08:00

What would you guys think of cleaning up the comments from my post on Elder
Packer? My preference would be to edit out some of the comments focusing exclusively
on masturbation.

I agree with Christian on the specific argument, but now
that the discussion is over, it seems like a blemish to me. When people interested
in Mormonism and evolution find our blog, I'd prefer they not have to wade
through such off-topic and potentially offensive material. I think our blog
will, to some degree, be judged by the quality of comments, not just the posts.

I guess we have not really established a policy on this. Would you favor
deleting comments only when we all agree, or should we police our own posts?

Anyway, let me know what you think. I won't act unless you agree.

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/27/2006 11:50:34 AM

2006-01-27T12:00:00.000-08:00

No, no "expansion theory" at work in the Speculation Train story. It was 100% unadulterated "inspired fiction" all the way.

Posted by Christian Y. Cardall

--
Posted by Christian Y. Cardall to Mormons and Evolution at 1/27/2006 11:50:34 AM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/27/2006 11:27:45 AM

2006-01-27T11:27:00.000-08:00

Did that "speculation train" story happen at all? Was it someone else you knew who did it?

--
Posted by Jeffrey D. Giliam to Mormons and Evolution at 1/27/2006 11:27:45 AM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/27/2006 06:02:01 AM

2006-01-27T08:50:00.000-08:00

Your last line is a nice retort to Aaron Cox's "Get of the Speculation Train"!

Did you really go back and read the original Paley? If so, that's pretty cool.

Some combination of points 7, 8, and 9 are quite compelling. We can definitely tell the difference between three major kinds of things, both in their instrinsic properties and how they come into being: inorganic natural things, organic natural things, and man-made artificial things.

I think it's interesting that traditional Mormonism took seriously the "organic natural things" category that Paley left out, in its insistence on an eternal regression of procreation of various kinds of plants and animals. When it comes to organisms, the argument from design doesn't really have a natural place in Mormonism.

Posted by Christian Y. Cardall

--
Posted by Christian Y. Cardall to Mormons and Evolution at 1/27/2006 06:02:01 AM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/27/2006 06:36:50 AM

2006-01-27T06:34:00.000-08:00

Interesting points for discussion, Clark. I'll just pick up one briefly: I'm not sure how necessary it is to integrate D&C 88 philosophically. It may represent an earlier absolutist conception of God that Joseph later moved away from. Perhaps sentiments like those Brigham expressed on the Bible and Book of Mormon also go for the D&C!

Posted by Christian Y. Cardall

--
Posted by Christian Y. Cardall to Mormons and Evolution at 1/27/2006 06:36:50 AM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/26/2006 09:57:32 AM

2006-01-26T10:08:00.000-08:00

I don't think one can say that is anti-science. There is a real philosophical debate about the nature of knowledge here. To make an analogy where the problem is more obvious, consider mathematics. When a new theorem is "discovered" is it discovered or merely created? That's a real debate and was the point of concern for philosophers focusing in on science like Husserl.

The further issue is how to take D&C 88 and the relationship between God and creation. That is, to what degree is God involved with the workings of all things. It seems to me that a very valid interpretation is that God is very involved. Whether that involvement is in a Deist fashion, a neoPlatonic fashion, a purely metaphoric fashion, or (as Blake Ostler takes it) a kind of loving relationship isn't at all clear.

I'd be cautious though of arguing that any of those interpretations entail being "anti-science."

Even if one takes a much more limited view of divine involvement, I don't see the problem with God being involved at least in the environment to allow the current explosion in knowledge that's been going on for about 200 years. Why now and not earlier? When a scientist has that "aha, flash of insight" do we really want to say that in all cases it is purely the effort of the scientist? I'm not prepared to say God doesn't inspire all minds from time to time. I think I can see it in my own life, often subtly.

With regard to the similarity of Nibley and Young, I wasn't thinking of the Watchers issue and technology but more of the neoPlatonic idea that innovation only occurs via an openness to the heavens. That is real thinking is an openness to Being whereas poor thinking is a kind of repetition. I discussed this a fair bit in my Nibley reading club . It's basically the distinction between the mantic and sophist that Nibley (and others use). I should add that I think it largely bunk. But I think one ought keep it in mind when reading these things.

The notion of the Masonic Great Architect is a good one. I suspect your right there. Young was very influenced by Masonry.

Posted by clark

--
Posted by Clark Goble to Mormons and Evolution at 1/26/2006 09:57:32 AM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/26/2006 04:27:50 AM

2006-01-26T04:28:00.000-08:00

Clark, that view of all science (really "technology" as you point out) as being "revealed" even if the scientists didn't realized they were being inspired seems to persist widely to this day in Mormonism. You'll hear sentiments like "people were inspired to invent computers so they could be used for family history work", or "satellites were invented so the Church could broadcast General Conference." It has always puzzled me why this would always be assumed. If humans have eternal intelligences too, can we not ascribe any independent capacity to them? So this sentiment of Brigham's seems anti-science to me (where here I use "science" in the modern sense of the scientific method).

Recognizing he means "technology" when he says "science," I guess I agree with your first sentiment that in the statement referred to he wasn't thinking of God as First Cause, but of teaching technology, like passing down knowledge in an artistic guild. Yes, very similar to what Nibley said was going on with the Watchers who revealed the secrets of the heavens (technology, really) to humanity without authorization. (This would be like unauthorized communication of the arts outside their legitimate guilds!)

That he believes laws, procreation, etc. are eternal I don't think makes him a Deist; he still requires the divine beings to individually organize each world, and populate it with seeds and each sample of species to propagate after their kind, etc.

It's true IDers say law is not enough, but do they require violations of law? They would say natural law is not enough to bring, say, an airplane into existence; but I don't think they would also say the engineers are violating any natural laws.

His final statement in your quote related to "design" is not really legitimate ammunition for IDers because he didn't mean it about the creation of organisms; he thought all that was done by procreation after their kind, for animals, plants, and humans, by bringing seeds and samples here (cf. the ritual creation account for which he was responsible). The "design" he referred to must have been the organization of the earth and solar system, and the bringing of individual species to it.

He didn't use the word "design", but his construction metaphor suggests he was thinking along the lines of the Masonic "Great Architecht." Perhaps for many non-Mormons the activity of the "Great Architecht" included the specification of natural laws, but I guess Joseph---and, following him, Brigham---got past this by anthropomorphizing the Father and placing him within the universe and subject to its eternal laws.

Posted by Christian Y. Cardall

--
Posted by Christian Y. Cardall to Mormons and Evolution at 1/26/2006 04:27:50 AM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/26/2006 03:36:26 AM

2006-01-26T03:37:00.000-08:00

Jared, I agree you didn't make too much of it at all, or try and bring evolution into it. You're right that we agree; I didn't intend this post as a rebuttal, but just as some further thoughts sparked by your post.

Posted by Christian Y. Cardall

--
Posted by Christian Y. Cardall to Mormons and Evolution at 1/26/2006 03:36:26 AM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/25/2006 06:42:43 PM

2006-01-25T18:44:00.000-08:00

The problem I have with the above is that there is that assumption I sense that efficient causality is all there is. It seems to me that one can object to ID without necessarily rejecting final causality.

Posted by clark

--
Posted by Clark Goble to Mormons and Evolution at 1/25/2006 06:42:43 PM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/25/2006 06:14:48 PM

2006-01-25T18:16:00.000-08:00

There's no doubt that applying Young's comments directly to evolution is problematic, if only because Young wasn't familar with evolution so we don't know how he'd have reacted. (Probably negatively)

I don't think one should see Young as arguing for God as First Cause. I think if we're going to make Greek comparisons he's closer to something Platonic than Aristotilean. I think Young really truly believes that our know-ing is tied to God is some direct way. That is all true knowledge comes via some sense of revelation. (I think Nibley adopts a similar view, for the record)

So Young truly believes that any discovery of a real law is actually a revelation from God. (Of some sort - I don't think it likely entails a normal communicative revelation that we in the modern church normally think in terms of)

One thing I almost mentioned in that post but didn't, is that Young is using "science" quite differently than from how we think of science. To Young something is a science if its laws are known. That is he uses it more for what we would think of as technology.

The reason I don't think this would support ID is that Young is arguing that all creation works by fixed law whereas ID depends upon there being a violation of law. i.e. their whole argument is that law isn't enough whereas Young's whole argument is that it is.

I do think you're right though that Young's portrayal is closer to what one would expect from a Deist. Indeed the language here is very much like the Deist. So perhaps I'll take back slightly my "First Cause" comments.

One final point to your concluding paragraph concerning the relevancy of Young's comments. I fully agree with you. I merely quote Young (and others) to show the diversity of thought within Mormonism rather than for arguing what is or isn't right. I find argument by proof text ultimately pointless. But if someone is going to do it, I can whip out the references as easily as anyone else.

Posted by clark

--
Posted by Clark Goble to Mormons and Evolution at 1/25/2006 06:14:48 PM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/25/2006 05:51:54 PM

2006-01-25T17:51:00.000-08:00

I don't think I disagree with you at all.

And just for clarity, I don't think I tried to make too much out of the quote--I'm well aware that Brigham would have been no friend of Darwin.

Posted by Jared

--
Posted by Jared to Mormons and Evolution at 1/25/2006 05:51:54 PM

[Mormons and Evolution] The Failure of the Argument from Design

2006-01-25T17:24:00.000-08:00

As has been noted by some, the obstacles confronting intelligent design are not merely limited to scientific verifiability. In addition to the typical scientific objections to ID, which are myriad and persuasive, there are a number of philosophical issues which ID, as it is typically accepted, is simply unable to deal with. It has often been said that ID is not only terrible science (not science at all in fact) but it is ghastly theology as well. In this post I would like to make some of the less well known reasons for this explicit.

One of the main differences between intelligent design and Darwinian evolution is that while the latter is fully composed of what Aristotle would called ‘efficient causes,’ the former is principally composed of ‘teleological causes.’ In other words, ID’s central point is that the causes responsible for the biological world we now observe are goal or purpose driven while Darwinism maintains that entirely purposeless causes are fully sufficient to cover the appearances.

It is for this reason that ID is called ‘intellectualized creationism.’ The entire enterprise is centered on the ‘argument from design’ or the ‘teleological argument.’ It is my intention to provide an account of the principles involved in the argument from design, drawing upon William Paley’s “Natural Theology: Evidence of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity Collected from the Appearances of Nature,” and expose its serious short comings.

Paley’s points are as follows:

We have the ability to recognize design when we see it. If on the beach we found a watch (he calls it a clock) next to a rock on the beach, we would easily be able to identify which of the two had been designed.

Natural phenomena such as our eyes, thumbs and noses are more like clocks than rocks.

Just as we are able to accurately infer the existence of a clock maker from the existence of a clock, we should also be able to infer the existence of an ‘eye-maker’ from the existence of eyes. While the maker of a clock need only be finite in nature, the designer of all these designed phenomena in nature must be infinitely wise and powerful.

Thus the only adequate source of such designed features as our noses being pointed down so that we wouldn’t drown from rain is God.

And now for the problems with such reasoning. Before continuing I would like to acknowledge that the ID movement does not insist that the ‘designer’ be infinite in anything, only that he be ‘intelligent’ in some form. However, this has not prevented most who adopt ID from accepting the infinite nature of the designer regardless. While most of these criticisms will apply to a finite designer as well, many will only apply to an infinite one. Like I said, it is the theological use of ID which I am principally concerned with.

The argument from designer violates Ockham’s razor, the principle of parsimony. It engages in serious explanatory overkill. While it may seem more natural to posit a designer, thanks to modern evolutionary theory, we really don’t need to. Without the principle of parsimony, no explanation which covers the appearances is any better than any other which also does. Jesse Prinz’s “theory” that birds are robots, which melt when they burn, were created by mad scientists from another planet and fly because they hang from ultra thin threads connected to spaceships that orbit the earth is just as good as the theory that they are animals which descended from dinosaurs that do not gestate their young. Without parsimony, these two theories are equally good. This argues strongly against (3).

Design need not come from above. In fact, it should not. If design can only be bestowed by an more-designed-Designer then we will have to explain how that more-designed-Designer got to be so designed in terms of an even-more-designed-Designer and so on ad infinitum. Thus, our explanation is heading in the wrong direction. This also argues against (3).

The entire argument depends upon the ability to infer certain characteristics about a cause from its effects. Such reasoning is incredibly unreliable. Are we supposed to be able to infer the properties of salt by the taste which is gives French fries? Such reasoning would never in a million years allow us to conclude that salt is composed of the metal sodium and the poisonous gas, chlorine. Again, this goes against (3).

Closely related, how in the world can anybody reasonably infer from finite effects that the cause must have been infinite? This is not just a case of going beyond what is necessary, but is in fact a case of going against reason to establish a desired conclusion. Hume put it best in his “Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion” where he asks if the designer could not have been stupid, or wicked, or a committee or simply vastly-but-not-infinitely powerful. All of these possibilities are actually MORE reasonable given the appearances which must be accounted for than is the all-wise, all-loving conclusion. This is a brutal blow against (4).

The argument from design engages is HIGHLY biased data selection. Sure, when flowers are blooming and suns are setting its easy to be caught up in the awe of it all. But what about when tsunamis and hurricanes hit? What about famine and disease? What about birth defects? What about the obvious injustice of the wicked prospering while the righteous dwindle in utter poverty? What about all the horrible our simply stupid cases of design we observe in the biological world? If these imply a Designer then it must be a relatively stupid or malevolent one. This works strongly against (3). (It should be also kept in mind that we simply can’t say “well, we simply don’t know about these cases” because if such is the case, then we really don’t know about any of the cases and we shouldn’t be using the argument from design at all.)

The problem is that most IDers believe that EVERYTHING, not just some things, shows design. God, sorry, the Designer designed everything including the rocks. This undermines (1).

Issue is not simply one of design vs. non-design. Instead, follow Michael Ruse, the issue would be better phrased as an issue of chaos vs. complexity vs. design. It is not so easy to distinguish chaos from complexity or complexity from design as it is chaos from design and Paley does us a great disservice by ignoring this point. This also works against (1).

Consequently, thumbs, while they may resemble clocks more than rocks, do not really resemble either very well. Nobody has ever seen a rock come into existence, loosely speaking. Lots of people have seen how clocks come into existence, namely by a clock-maker. Lots of people have also seen how thumbs, eyes and noses come into existence, namely by the birth of an organism. This final example shows how biological entities cannot be considered to be rocks or clocks, not by a long shot. This seriously undermines (2).

The argument from design attempts to show that since biological phenomena are not chaos then they must be design, but such is not the case. Biological phenomena, as we have seen, do not suitably fall into the same categories as rocks or designed artifacts. Instead they are something different from both categories and Darwin proposed what is so far the only suitable mechanism for this third category “complexity.” Inheritance of information by birth simply cannot be equated with design, nor does it imply it at all. This too speaks against (2).

Darwinian evolution (which is uncontroversially true to at least some extent) suggests that the equivalent of upside-down happens all the time. The appearances are equally compatible with the proposition that some individuals, in the beginning, were created with upside-down noses, but those people all drown some time in the past, leaves us “right-side-upers” to marvel at the benevolence of the creator. This, however, tells us more about us than the creator. It cannot be emphasized enough that this is uncontroversially true to some extent. (3) is again under attack.

Finally, and a little off topic, the argument from design to the existence of God, rather than a mere designer, simply does not work. Just because some entity designed this world and even us is no reason whatsoever to suppose that this Designer is deserving or desiring of worship. Of course this argument against (4) only goes to show the underlying motives which trump the inadequate reason involved in ID reasoning.

For all of these reasons, which are in addition to the typical scientific objections, perhaps it is time we all got off the ID train.

--
Posted by Jeffrey D. Giliam to Mormons and Evolution at 1/25/2006 03:30:00 PM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/25/2006 05:22:55 PM

2006-01-25T17:23:00.000-08:00

Yes, I agree that neither newer or older is "ultimate truth." But when it comes to defining what is "doctrine," or acceptable for the purpose of official discourse, newer---that is, the latest word from the authorities---is "correct." As I say in the post you referred to (thanks!), for me this means that "doctrine" and "ultimate truth" have to be allowed to be separate things. Mostly overlapping, one would hope; but history shows there must be allowance for some slippage between them.

An interesting thing about newer vs. older is that there are strong traditions in the Church of both restoration and continuing revelation. This means one can never be sure whether ideas no longer taught have been superceded by greater light, or are awaiting a future appropriate time to be openly preached again.

Posted by Christian Y. Cardall

--
Posted by Christian Y. Cardall to Mormons and Evolution at 1/25/2006 05:22:55 PM

[Mormons and Evolution] 1/25/2006 01:26:26 PM

2006-01-25T13:25:00.000-08:00

Christian,

I think you make some good points. I noticed the end of Clark's quote also, but didn't comment further on it.

Anybody familiar with the broader range of Brigham's ideas, or even the larger history of the Church, would have to conceed that older isn't necessarily better.

But then neither is newer. Of course, it is absurd that ultimate truth changes based on who holds office. I think this leads back to one of your old posts .

Posted by Jared

--
Posted by Jared to Mormons and Evolution at 1/25/2006 01:26:26 PM

[Mormons and Evolution] The Relevance to Evolution of Brigham’s Science-friendly Statements

2006-01-25T12:49:00.000-08:00

Jared has a nice post on the changing publication history of a very interesting quote from Brigham Young, and Jeffrey and Clark give some other interesting statements of Brigham’s. No question it’s gratifying to perceive support for one’s own sympathies for science in general, and interpretational flexibility of Genesis in particular, from someone of Brigham's stature; but there are some reasons for enthusiasts of naturalistic evolution to not to get too excited.

First, Clark italicizes a statement that, taken out of the context of the totality of Brigham’s thought, seems open to evolution; but Brigham surely did not intend it as such. In saying “Our spirits are His: He begot them. We are His children; He set the machine in motion to produce our tabernacles,” the ‘setting in motion’ Brigham had in mind could only have been the initial procreation by divine beings of the first parents of the human race, and not the initiation of naturalistic evolution by the creation of rudimentary single-celled (or even sub-cellular) life.

Second, the full statement Clark cited has potentially conflicting ideas on God being subject to natural law and God decreeing natural law, and also gives some ammunition to Intelligent Design advocates. Says Brigham,

But it is hard to get the people to believe that God is a scientific character, that He lives by science or strict law, that by this He is, and by law he was made what He is; and will remain to all eternity because of His faithful adherence to law.

So far, so good; sounds like God as Engineer. But then he immediately says

It is a most difficult thing to make the people believe that every art and science and all wisdom comes from Him, and that He is their Author. … It is strange that scientific men do not realize that, all they know is derived from Him; to suppose, or to foster the idea for one moment, that they are the originators of the wisdom they possess is folly in the highest!

Here Brigham is either not recognizing a distinction between God as Engineer and God as First Cause, or is at least denying man’s ability to discover the regularities of nature through the scientific method without divine inspiration. Finally, a general teleological argument:

As for ignoring the principle of the existence of a Supreme Being, I would as soon ignore the idea that this house came into existence without the agency of intelligent beings.

For more on the distinction between God as First Cause and God as Engineer, and the styles of arguments from design they respectively inspire, see this post.

Finally, with regard to the ultimate relevance of Jared’s well-done and much-appreciated detective work: when it comes to what people and organizations take as religious doctrine, older and original are not always deemed more true. In fact, the opposite may be true. (This is contrary—not inappropriately, for science of course, and perhaps also for a religion with acknowledged infallible authorities and an open canon—to the usual values historians deploy in plying their craft.) We applaud Brigham for applying this principle in recognizing the limitations of the creation account in Genesis, by taking account of what we ‘know’ today—either by science or revelation/inspiration—that previous prophets did not. However, this freedom to set aside older statements is a two-edged sword: we may be less excited about the contemporary Church availing themselves of this principle in selecting for current consumption only the portions of Brigham’s statements that are today considered good doctrine by the current presiding authorities.

--
Posted by Christian Y. Cardall to Mormons and Evolution at 1/25/2006 12:31:00 PM