Discussions

Does Darwin deserve an apology?

Posted by DouglasFern • 9/29/08 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: apology, chuch, creationism, darwin, Evolution, God, religion

The Church of England has apologised to Charles Darwin, does he really deserve it?
Does the acceptance of evolution dispatch creationism and intelligent design to the trash can?

User Comments

9/29/08

globalgirl

hahhahahhaha
Does Darwin deserve an apology? He's dead, people! NO!

[Ha! Edited to add a "comma" after dead. Thanks.]

[reply]
1. 9/29/08
  
  DouglasFern
  
  He's actually a dead person!
9/29/08

csiunatc

No,

It's absolutely ridiculous when you issue apologies from people who weren't at fault for anything since they weren't even born at the time of the fault to people who are dead and buried.

Organizations do nothing, its the people that run them that do. And they are all dead and buried.

[reply]
1. 9/29/08
  
  earthlingorgeous
  
  exactly
2. 9/29/08
  
  timethief
  
  wrong spot - sorry
3. 10/29/09
  
  morgantj
  
  Yea, It is just as ridiculous to believe one must also ask god and/or Jesus for forgiveness of ones so-called sins for the same reasons you have stated.
9/29/08

hadrian1407

No way...he mislead us..he mislead science...he mislead religions...he is better dead..!
2012-apocalypse.blogspot.com
the-indigo-children.blogspot.com

[reply]
1. 9/29/08
  
  timethief
  
  You are so misinformed that useless to even try to begin to address your lack of knowledge.
2. 9/30/08
  
  Sway
  
  @timethief agreed! hadrian is soooo misinformed that it's useless to even try to begin to address your lack of knowledge.
3. 9/30/08
  
  DouglasFern
  
  I have never come across anyone who actually hated Charles Darwin before. Darwin was an exemplary human being, devoted family man and baptized into the Church of England. He never renounced his religion and even delayed publishing his great work because of it’s controversial nature. He simply followed the facts as he found them and I suggest that criticizing him for that is very un-Christian.
9/29/08

timethief

Why the heck not? It's equal to the Roman Catholic church apologizing to the dead Galielo centuries after his presentation of heliocentrism as proven fact resulted in the Catholic Church's prohibiting its advocacy as empirically proven fact, because it was not empirically proven at the time and was contrary to the literal meaning of Scripture.

[reply]
9/29/08

globalgirl

Hahhaha this is way too funny. As if monkey man can hear the apology, even if he did *deserve* it.

Why some think he *deserves* an apology is very, very funny.

So sorry Darwin! You lost because the world knows that you were deceived? Bwaahahahhahhaa Oh monkey man

National Geographic Ignores The Flaws in Darwin's Theory
www.discovery.org/a/2292

darwinconspiracy.com/

Darwinism on Trial
In this lecture from the Focus on Origins series, UC Berkeley Professor Phillip Johnson explores the academic shortcomings of Darwinism. He argues that the scientific community's methods exclude presenting negative arguments for an accepted theory and calls for a more intellectually honest evaluation of how life arrived at it's present state. Series: "Focus on Origins"
www.youtube.com/watch?v=ouxHSM8GxqI

[reply]
1. 9/30/08
  
  drjay1966
  
  Yes, there are flaws in the theory of evolution--or, perhaps, aspects that haven't been figured out.
  
  Of course, to say that there are flaws in creationism would be as silly as saying there are flaws in the theory of a world held up by unicorns. That's what's so funny about fundamentalists trying to poke holes in Darwinism. They're not throwing stones from a glass house, they have no house whatsoever.
  
  "Intelligent design" is, of course, a completely dishonest stepping stone to teaching the fairy tales of Genesis in biology class, created by fundies who clearly forgot that commandment about "bearing false witness" a long time ago.
2. 9/30/08
  
  flamingpoodle
  
  Darwinism and the theory of evolution are two distinctly different concepts. There are no scientists who believe in Darwinism, since Darwinism is not taught at university and was full of holes - as Darwin himself admitted. The theory of evolution has made significant progress since then. Creationism/Intelligent Design is yet to show any scientific use.
3. 9/30/08
  
  DouglasFern
  
  Why is it so important that Darwin's theory be wrong, it's only a theory after all. If I were to list the links that considered evolution to be a good fit to the evidence then my list would make your's pale into insignificance, but what would that prove?
  If you believe something I respect that, but you are attempting to undermine an example of human brilliance. This destroys your position rather than boltsers it!
  The purpose of the apology by the church, as I see it, was to attempt to correct this negative trend.
9/29/08

timethief

Does the acceptance of evolution dispatch creationism and intelligent design to the trash can?

If course. The trash can is exactly the correct spot for junk science to be tossed.

[reply]
1. 9/30/08
  
  ttiger
  
  trash can is the best place for creationism
9/30/08

Theresa111

You mean the world is flat, after all?

I bet if you ask Lord Likely he would tell you that Charles Darwin was a filthy old bloke. Just kidding. But do ask him though. He is from the 1800's England.

[reply]
9/30/08

rethaw

My guess is that as long as there is a pursuit of knowledge there will be its persecution as well. I wonder though, if we will live to see the day when stem cell researchers receive some reconciliation for having to put up with the arcane regulations imposed by radical minorities.

Even the LHC (Large Hadron Collider) researchers were threatened for some believed their research would bring an end to the world, in the same way the telescope was feared to shatter the firmament.

[reply]
9/30/08

voodooKobra

My question is this: Why have they not apologized to Giordano Bruno yet?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giordano_Bruno

[reply]
1. 9/30/08
  
  rethaw
  
  Maybe its just damage control on the church's part but (from wikipedia)
  
  "Bruno was not condemned for his defence of the Copernican system of astronomy, nor for his doctrine of the plurality of inhabited worlds, but for his theological errors, among which were the following: that Christ was not God but merely an unusually skilful magician, that the Holy Ghost is the soul of the world, that the Devil will be saved, etc."[14]
2. 9/30/08
  
  voodooKobra
  
  So because he did not personally believe in Christ as the son of god, he was BURNED TO DEATH? And they think that's acceptable?
3. 9/30/08
  
  DouglasFern
  
  There are certainly many who deserve an apology for a variety of reasons, which adds a degree of futility to the whole exercise. On the other hand, Darwin’s apology is more an acknowledgement of regret by the church for unfairly attacking a perfectly scientific proposition simply because it proved problematic to a literal interpretation of the bible. I wish more believers would adopt this stance.
  We must also keep a sense of balance, there are many who were persecuted because of their religious beliefs that will not get an apology. In fact, the New World was seen as a haven for religious groups (including the founding fathers) from persecution in Europe. That may explain the entrenchment of the evangelist movement on this issue. Would an apology correct this!
9/30/08

flamingpoodle

The church owes every single one of us who were raised in a religious environment an apology because it carries the burden of proof and it has none.

[reply]
9/30/08

bradhart

There is too damned much apologizing for crap that no one is really sorry about nor that matters any more. The C of E apologizing to a long dead dude just because we are getting ready to celebrate his big 200 b-day is a simple matter of ego masturbation.

[reply]
1. 9/30/08
  
  flamingpoodle
  
  It's not about ego masturbation. It's the church trying to save face.
2. 9/30/08
  
  bradhart
  
  Poodle> it comes out to be the same thing. They still are making a big deal of saying look we apologize. Apologies that actually mean something are made and don't require you tell the story over and over again. They don't require press releases and survey groups. They simply are.
3. 9/30/08
  
  flamingpoodle
  
  That's very true Bradhart. It's not like churches are going to start teaching the theory of evolution or Darwinism any time soon. It's already pushing it to have them accept that the earth revolves around the sun.
  
  Anyway, the church vs Darwin debate was settled a long time ago with the 1860 Oxford evolution debate.
  
  "Summary reports of the debate were published in The Guardian, The Athenaeum and Jackson's Oxford Journal. Both sides immediately claimed victory, but the majority opinion has always been that the debate represented a major victory for the Darwinians."
  en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1860_Oxford_evolution_debate
  
  I mean Lady Brewster is said to have fainted. How much more compelling could evidence be?
  
  The church is just desperately trying to remain relevant.
4. 9/30/08
  
  DouglasFern
  
  Darwin was baptized into the Church of England and led an exemplary life, but was demonized after the publication of ‘Origin of Species. It reflects well in my mind that the Church of England recognizes that this was not only inappropriate behaviour against one of their own, but that evolution is a reasonable evaluation of the scientific facts available then and today.
5. 9/30/08
  
  bradhart
  
  Oddly enough the catholic church who has never supported a literal reading of genesis has always supported the notion that Darwin made a logical scientific argument. that was pointed out by The Pope when the C of E, announced their plans to apologize. He also acknowledged that the Vatican hadn't given him a warm welcome either, but was not about to apologize for the way any other people alive or dead were treated in the past. On the other hand most people worldwide who claim to be catholics rebel against notion of evolution, and are some of the strongest supporters in the US of teaching creationism as an alternative theory.
9/30/08

barryfromtexas

What exactly is it they are apologizing for?

[reply]
9/30/08

crpitt

Do I get an apology for going to a C of E school that was pants?

[reply]
9/30/08

wehireu

They are apologizing in spirit. Maybe they will get a saint to talk to him.

[reply]
9/30/08

Arashmania

What do you mean? The Church can actually be wrong???

[reply]
10/29/09

moroonline

comment removed by the community.

[reply]
10/29/09

crazyTsu

The apologies would be better spent on the countries England colonized

[reply]
10/29/09

pinkmonkeychatter

Huh?? Almost all great thinkers deserve some kind of apology because of various haters during his/her lifetime. Even I could use a few. But great thinkers also understand that the majority of the population are morons.

[reply]
10/30/09

time2getdown

Yep apologize now to a dead man. Good idea.
That's like the tax department telling my great grand children, "damn sorry, your pop's been over charged tax all his life".

[reply]
10/30/09

morgantj

In most cases, such apologies and commemorations are not truly for satisfying the target of the apology, but intended to comfort the ones that are apologizing. Take for example commemorating all the dead soldiers that have died for us, giving a soldier a metal after he has died, these are acts that obviously are really done, not for the soldier, since we all know he is not around to acknowledge the acknowledgment, these are acts done to comfort the families of the dead soldiers, done to comfort the commemorators that feel they have not given the target of the commemoration proper acknowledgment.

So it isn't about if Darwin "deserves" an apology, it is about whether or not the Church feels they need to get something off of their chest, off of their conscious.

[reply]
1. 10/30/09
  
  time2getdown
  
  But at the end of the day, who really gives a sh...t
2. 10/30/09
  
  morgantj
  
  Obviously not the dead.
10/30/09

time2getdown

Hahaha

[reply]