No, I haven't read the article you haven't written yet.

Noted. I don't think anyone has.

I think you're confusing the Theory of Relativity with the Laws of Thermodynamics, specifically the first law which deals with the conservation of energy. "Energy is neither created nor destroyed." Which applies to matter as well.



Worship?

As a verb it means:
1. To honor and love as a deity.
2. To regard with ardent or adoring esteem or devotion.

Nah, evolution isn't worshipped. It's just accepted as a model for the development of life over time. There are no rituals or churches for evolution...trust me, it's not a religion. Atomic theory and gravitation theory aren't religions either...just a heads up.

~Zoo

Basically, they put it in the slot of Creator. That is a very high-ranking position, whether it is acknowledged or not.

 

Ah...thanks, Zoo.  Mystery solved.  I couldn't for the life of me figure out what relativity had to do with anything he was saying.

 

 

But I think you're onto something, Zoo...we could be getting tax free....

 

 

Not so.  If it were in the spot of a creator, then they'd believe in it depite any evidence to the contrary.  It's hard to test that statement because there isn't any evidence to the contrary, and man have a bunch of people tried!  But I guarantee you - if someone comes up with any testable and repeatable evidence contrary to evolution, it (evolution, not the evidence) will get dropped like a hot rock.  That's what scientists do.

    Same with cults.

Hmm...that's not a bad idea. 

 

Not at all.  I'm convinced of evolution, but I allow the existence of a god.  I may not be highly religious, but I allow for it.  In no way is a scientific theory approaching the status of deity.  Evolution isn't a being or entity that you can worship, it's a process.

Oh, evolution is a cult now?  Would you like to point out our religious views and practices? 

~Zoo

1. Try it.

2. The Creator is the only thing worthy of worship.

3. Yes. You believe we came from apes, and laugh at those who oppose you.

*sigh*...Yet another misconception. We diverged from the common ancestor of other apes and ourselves. We are apes, we didn't "come from" them.

As for laughing? Only when it merits it. I'll listen to any point of view...but I'd like evidence to back it up before I give it any creedence as a scientific possibility. Belief is one thing, proof quite another.

~Zoo

Wait, so you're saying we are apes? Or did you just forget to shave before looking in the mirror?

We are obviously not apes. We are superior to every animal. We are self-aware.

Obviously, huh? You'd better look up the classification of humans...wait, I'll do it for ya.


Kingdom: Animalia --- Well, we're animals.
Phylum: Chordata ----- Animals with a notochord
Subphylum: Vertebrata ----- Animals with a backbone
Class: Mammalia ---- Animals with hair and produce milk
Subclass: Theria ---- Placental and marsupial mammals
Infraclass: Eutheria ----- Specifically placental mammals
Order: Primates ---- Mammals with opposable thumbs, 5 digits, fingernails
Suborder: Anthropoidea ---- Includes monkeys, apes, and man
Superfamily: Hominoidea ----- Contains apes, including humans
Family: Hominidae ------- All great apes: humans, chimpanzees, orangutans, and gorillas
Genus: Homo ----- Modern humans and close relatives
Species: sapiens ----- Us

You see how far down the classification scheme we get before we become unique? All the way to Genus.




Not physically, not by a long shot. Mentally, sure. (Though some humans lead me to doubt that...unfortunately) Evolution doesn't address superiority anyway...just complexity.



Several monkeys and apes are self aware. Even some parrots are self aware. They can recognize themselves as individuals, shown by speech in parrots(remember Alex the African Grey) or sign language(exhibited by many gorillas).


Humans are good at thinking and building things. That's what makes us different. However, if you look back you can see the steps that led to it. All easily observable from family and social structure to tool use and planning ability.

~Zoo

Biologically, we are not technically the same as animals.

Second, how many animals do you see in church? Art? Not many.

You can hit me as many times as you want, even below the belt, and I keep limpin' on.

WHAT?!?!?! Evidence, links, articles...I need to see where you got this idea. How are we fundamentally biologically different from animals?



Have you not seen the structures animals build? Even termites build mighty fortresses, birds elaborate nests woven from grass, many things in nature can be considered artistic. If you want "human art"...well, some animals can paint...elephants, for instance.

As for religion? Who's to say what animals believe? Or perhaps religion is just a byproduct of our overactive imagination...ya never know.



I would appreciate some actual evidence to the contrary of what I present here. You can believe whatever you like...I don't care, that's the cool thing about being a free country. However, if you plan to actually compete with a scientific theory...well, there are rules and procedures one must follow. Evidence is a good starting point...I have yet to see any.

~Zoo

How can you say this?  Did you not even look at Zoo's last comment?  If by 'technically' you mean we pollute, destroy and force change on our surrounding environment, then you may be on to something.  But according to biology, we share a lot of things in common with our ape family.

Yeah, I meant that we're worse for the environment.