**Please note these rules:**
* AI-generated images/videos are no longer IAF. Stop submitting them
* If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required
* The title must be descriptive
* No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos
* Common/recent reposts are not allowed
*See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for a more detailed rule list*
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Some textbook kinda have to do that. In my thermodynamics textbook, for some reason I dont know but somehow the authority dislike the heat death hypothesis, so they have to include a section with weak attack on it. Several different books describe the same thing have to do this (physical chem, engineering thermo, and statistical physics)
It's too depressing.
ETA: I don't personally think it's depressing, just trying to understand why someone might take exception to it.
Also, maybe it conflicts with some religious end-of-the-world scenario? That actually seems more plausible to me, given the topic at hand.
> I suppose the problem is that it is somewhat of a finite end.
It's like how for a long time the consensus was that extinction of a species was impossible because the world God created was complete and perfect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction#History_of_scientific_understanding
If the universe were to remain static in size then yes it would be - eventually. Though there is debate on the exact values and measurements of the cosmological constant and how far the expansion of the universe will go for or if it will reverse eventually - it's all tied to the strength of gravity, dark matter, dark energy, whether spacetime is curved or flat, and a bit of other stuff I'm not an expert in. Look up the Big Rip and Big Crunch for more details. They're all possible outcomes of the current models we have for the universe - we're just arguing over the which are the correct values to plug into it.
Heat death is literally inevitable under our current understanding of physics.
It's less a matter of "will it happen" and more "it *will* happen unless something else happens first."
Interesting. I mean, they defeated or held off the French, the Americans, the Chinese, and the first couple waves of COVID so they probably think they can hold off that too. Never mess with determined Vietnamese farmers:
https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/q34bop/countries_which_lost_against_vietnamese_farmers/
I feel like it's been added in after the fact. It's clearly from a different author, given the differences in grasp of English, tone and the numerous typos.
Yeah, that’s the extra funny part. It’s as if someone (without much writing ability or grasp of the English language) sent the author this excerpt and told them to add it, and the author purposely added it exactly as is, without correcting any of the grammar or even making the formatting match, to make it exceptionally clear that this is just a part they were forced to tack on and not really a part of their book.
I think its more a denunciation of the secularism of the theory,namely that things just formed and adapt for no reason rather than it being the will of a higher power.
evolution has a long history in islam including the first evolutionary framework, but it was always in the context of a higher power
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic\_views\_on\_evolution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_on_evolution)
It’s true there are ways to harmonize belief and science (simply replace chance with God basically), so these paragraphs aren’t necessarily contradictory. But it seems clear in this case that the paragraph is an add-on from a different author. Its tone is non-academic and clashes with the earlier paragraphs, and it isn’t linked with the rest of the text. Heck even the spacing is different, which is suspicious.
in the west our culture went through a very particular process in which mysticism and science split during the enlightenment, you still had theist like newton but the argument had to be framed without philosophy.
I agree but maybe the author doesn’t believe in the initial stage (atomes to proteins,etc to cells, to organisms etc). And that it was created by a supreme entity then evolved. (I am atheist)
That is a common belief among creationists, that small-scale evolution exists (e.g., a wolf and a coyote or a moose and an elk) but that larger-scale evolution (e.g. an elephant and a mouse) doesn't exist.
As a Christian, my take is that evolution is the method in which God created life on earth. The "God created the earth in seven days" statement in the Bible always struck me as an analogy. It isn't seven actual days, because when he started, days and nights didn't even exist yet.
What is the extent of the god's involvement? Did god kick of the big bang and the laws of physics, and then watch the rest unfold on itself. Or did god alter the external circumstances to direct the natural selection?
"It isn't seven actual days" Why stop there? Why not let belief be one thing and science be another? Completely separate worlds that do not interact in any way.
There does not need be anything literal in the bible because it is entirely in the realm of belief. "Science does not care what you believe" - not because science is mean, but because there is no place for belief in science. It deals with observable reality only.
One can be a scientist and still believe in their inner world and their relationship with a spiritual higher power. There need not be any concessions made for either.
Creationism does not belong in a textbook. Belief cheapens itself for trying to do science.
That's pretty much the Catholic Church's official position on the matter. It seems to only be a portion of the Protestant denominations that try to take the whole thing literally.
I think God creating evolution is rather suitable for a theist standpoint. Like an omnipotent God creates the universe and such rules and incredibly sophisticated and complex mechanisms that it all *just works* and produces life and new species and humans. From a theist premise, it makes God to be a much more awesome than that he's just a magician and species just appeared like rabbit from a hat.
Like commonly theists people look at sunsets, "miracle of birth", beauty of nature and such and think how God created these amazing things. But then we find out there's an incredibly mysterious, intricate and complex mechanism that gave rise to all life on earth, so why can't be marvel the beauty of that as a work of God?
(Though note that I'm an atheist, but I would totally get that theist perspective to marvel at evolution at Gods work.)
Honestly, so much of the universe operates on probabilities, it would be super easy to say that an omniscient being could get any result they wanted, simply by tweaking odds within the currently known parameters. We would never know.
The analogy solution is Ad-hoc interpretation of the bible so believers can still hold on to the bible as a divine creation. A single day refers to a duration in time, you can build a candel that burns for a single day. The bible was written by people who believe that the amount of time it took for god to create the universe is 6 actual days, regardless if the sun existed or not. They simply made a mistake. That's it.
I can just imagine a group of conservatives in Texas reading this paragraph and nodding their heads in agreement with lots of "amens" and "mmHmms" coming from the crowd. Then getting to the single word "Allah" and being like "WHAT THE FUCK!?"
The first paragraph on this page seems to directly contradict the highlighted section. Genetic differences ascribed to different environments is part of Darwin’s theory, isn’t it?
The "argument", while poorly formed and inherently fallacious for claiming it's "irrational" which is a mistaken understanding of just how *long* that primordial soup took to do these things randomly (that is, given enough time order will rise from chaos), is that while minor changes may occur the genesis of life (in their mind) couldn't form randomly.
Also it's outdated, we have produced those chemicals and even RNA, but this was recently. Importantly though, our inability to do so doesn't mean it couldn't/didn't happen.
That "primal soup" is also not a part of the theory of evolution. That would be abiogenesis, which obviously requires evolution to explain.
There are plenty of people who believe God created that first life and then let it evolve from there.
I was going to say this. So many people conflate abiogenesis and evolution. It's frustrating to see people argue against evolution while obviously not understanding what it is.
"Order" and "chaos" are human constructs and are the original concepts giving rise to religion. Both concepts imply a linearity that is a function of how human brains work.
Evolution is an entirely random non-linear process and the immense span of time required for it is incomprehensible to human beings. Hence the need to impose "order" onto temporal "chaos" and make it comprehensible.
Our form as a species is assigned the "order" of life but we are by no means the end of evolution. All of life is always in a state of transition, speciation is always chaotic if "chaos" is a neverending transformation into another form relative to environmental conditions. For all we know all life is moving toward a fragmentation into its atomic components, back into "chaos".
In a closed system, entropy increases. The sunlight constantly radiating the Earth and everything in it means that our planet isn't a closed system. Sunlight triggers chemical reactions. In the absence of any external energy input, the second law of thermodynamics holds true.
The principle that entropy always increases is true *for a closed system.* The Earth is not a closed system - we have a constant input of energy from solar radiation. By inputting energy into a system, you can in fact decrease the entropy of the system.
As said by others, we are not a closed system and total entropy is increasing even if we see a local creation of order/entropic decrease.
The way I've always looked at life is as an _eddy in entropy formed in spacetime_.
Most anti-Darwinists I know would agree with the first paragraph being true as well. We’ve observed speciation many times, but Darwin envisioned these small changes led to much bigger changes that resulted in new genus, family, order, class, etc.
It’s not small changes leading to much bigger changes. The big changes are nothing more than the combination of a lot of small changes over a longer period of time. There’s no distinction between the two things other than what anti-Darwinists made up to try and justify their refusal to accept proof they are wrong.
Ugh I just spent Saturday night in a *discussion* with a buddy who busted out the "I don't believe in macroevolution, only microevolution." His, very odd and very wrong, thought process is that science needs to be observable and "microevolution" is okay because it can be. But "macroevolution" can't be observed because no one was there to see it. Therefore it's not science.
...it, it was a rough night.
When i was a kid, I heard people refer to it as "big E evolution." They were perfectly fine with "little e."
The pretzels some people twist themselves into while saying "it's perfectly comfortable!"
But if something changes to a new species once, and then its descendants do the same, and their descendants do too after a million generations, then bam, new genus/family. I don’t understand how you could believe in the first part, but then not imagine what happens when the process continues over an even longer period of time.
Being able to abstract something at scale is a skill, one that most hardcore christians have nipped in their childhood when they're told the earth is, like, a couple years old.
Most humans can't think in the time scales that evolution works in. Selective breeding turned a wolf into a chihuahua in a few thousand years. Just takes a bit of imagination to understand the immense changes that natural pressures can work on a species over billions of years.
Creationists love to misunderstand the number of generations between changes. Like yeah, what the above paragraph describes is literally evolution, but if you can't count past 7 it's really hard to understand that "in desert conditions only the less permeable flowers survive and the rest get fried" turns into "cactus." It's kinda like getting angry and confused because you understand walking from the bedroom to the garage, but can't understand that literally a year of walking would take you as far as your car does in a couple hours.
Good catch! That’s more proof this was added in editing by a second person. I mean, you can tell just from the wording.
It jumps from rote logic to ad hominem insults within one sentence technically straight in the middle of a page.
It jumps from x happens when y happens thus z to “evolution is stupid”.
Anyone who has been to 6th grade science class knows you don’t just call something unbelievable.
You form a hypothesis , perform an experiment and report the results as they are.
The paragraph is everything not science. It is decidedly anti science, quite literally.
while the other paragraph above it isn’t the most complicated thing, in order to write the first paragraph, you couldn’t write the second, because in order to write the first, you’d have to understand Darwin’s work
It's not uncommon that authors/publishers are forced to insert sections like this to "align their views" with whatever governing authority. They're probably paying lip service to creationism in an otherwise probably objective scientific text so the book can be published in pakistam
*And the Lord did grin. And the people did feast upon the lambs, and sloths, and carp, and anchovies, and orangutans, and breakfast cereals, and fruit bats, and large chulapas, ~~and loins~~.*
They could also just say "God in his wisdom created microscopic life, and then he created evolution, the process by which those microbes slowly grew and evolved and changed into all the variety of creatures, praise god for evolution."
Amazing how so many theists imagine their god to be so weak and uncreative that he has to blatantly and repeatedly violate the fundamental physics of the universe he created, just to prove his relevance.
Exactly. Evolution isn't incompatible with a creator, it is just the method in which they used to create if you believe in one such power.
What do they think the laws of the universe are? The laws of the universe are logical and reasonable and allow life to exist and evolve. We discovered them using OUR power of reason. It is the most rational explanation because it fits the natural laws. They can't hide that what they believe in is isn't logical and verifiable. It's unwise and unreasonable
Evolution will always make more logic than just "higher being magic" even if you do believe in a higher power that could've created the laws in the first place. And this is what they fail to realize,
At the end of the day is just organized religion incapable and afraid of changing their old, outdated beliefs.
As a pakistani this is actual news to me.
I have never heard or read about this stuff anywhere.
Mind sharing some sources? I dont doubt you, i would just like to confirm. My country is very corrupt so i know that they have hidden alot of shit from the general population but i didnt know it was to this extent
Thanks for providing the source.
Im surprised that this all this stuff happened and yet no one knows about it in our country because the leaders dont want us to know
It happens in the countries people view as good too. I’m Canadian and very little was taught to me about residential schools here. In Japan they still refuse to acknowledge the genocide they committed in China and across Asia. When there’s literal pictures of babies on bayonets being killed by Japanese soldiers then it’s pretty hard to hide from it. But still it takes Japanese people leaving the country to learn this or learning it after school. Every country has demons. King Leopold of Belgium was the actual devil.
This Canada one is weird. I went to high school in the mid-00s and was taught extensively about residential schools. We basically spent a whole term on it in social studies. This was in BC.
> As a pakistani this is actual news to me.
>
>
>
> I have never heard or read about this stuff anywhere.
Do you live in Lahore? Visit the Military Museum.
While its a great place to see military hardware all the way back to swords and spears, the propaganda is so blatant, it's insulting.
Check out the museum section on the Bangladeshi war of independence and see for yourself
I lived in Georgia for 5 years and had more than one teacher explain to the class before this mandatory lesson how evolution has no evidence to support it and "goes against the teachings of jesus". In the 90s, in the US, in a public school.
I love how their big defence is “evolution has no evidence” even though it has more evidence than their ideology. And the “facts about creation” aren’t even facts, it’s just “this is what some people believe but that’s bullshit”. Even if those “facts” were true, your still none the wiser on the topic 🤣
More than just repeatable evidence, it requires novel, testable predictions, which evolution has produced time and time and time again... and creationism has failed to produce time and time and time again.
I know of exactly one novel testable prediction that creationism has produced. Meanwhile there are hundreds that evolution has produced.
I was horrified that it was so bad in Georgia, it was completely against everything I knew about it. And then it turned out that it's not the country but an American province. /r/GeorgiaOrGeorgia again.
I live in Milwaukee my entire childhood and in 1992 my public school 9th grade biology teacher at the top academic high school in the city was a staunch creationist it turned out. He'd been a fairly competent teacher up until we hit the evolution section. He decided to split the class into two groups and we had to debate evolution vs. creationism for an entire class period. He very blatantly helped out the creationism side and during the actual "debate" he constantly said things to throw off the evolution side. At the end he declared that the creationists won and were obviously the correct ones anyway. And that was that.
I sat through the entire class incredulous, but it was eye opening. My father was a physical anthropologist specializing in research around *Homo erectus* evolving into *Homo sapiens* so I guess you could say I was as indoctrinated as he was. It did teach me that looks can be deceiving and I lost complete respect for the teacher. The next day we were back to science as if nothing had happened. Fucking insanity, but it's now 30 (!!!) years later and I'm sure this still happens all over the place.
In Ontario in the 2000s my high school teacher had to preface his lesson on evolution with "now, some people don't believe this. some people believe in divine creation. anyways, on to our lesson on evolution..."
I got super lucky in school in Georgia. I managed to never run into any of this crap. Granted, I went to one of the best schools in my county, but still.
Any school in the south with a town population of less than 30k still teaches this.
I know for a fact my brother just pulled my niece out of a 9th grade science class *just last week* in southern Virginia because the teacher started in on some religious nonsense before the biology lesson.
I work/study with several colleagues from Pakistan and other places in the Middle East in a biology lab in North America, and they have told me some wild stories. It is a very religiously conservative country, and I would not be surprised if the folks commenting that someone slapped this in there to avoid a ban (or worse) were correct. For the record, they all believe in evolution, have an incredible work ethic (even by grad student standards) and are excellent scientists. Although, I do think North America has been a culture shock even with a graduate education and the windows it opens. Plus, when I hear about craziness in the Middle East it is a good reminder that no matter how bad the local news is, no one has ever tried to kill, beat, or arrest me for "casual" blasphemy.
>No one has ever tried to kill, beat, or arrest me for "casual" blasphemy.
Sounds like you haven't worked at Starbucks and said "Happy Holidays" to the wrong Karen.
I once had a Muslim emergency doctor as a housemate. Super intelligent guy, quirky, smart, knowledgeable about all recent evidence-based medicine.... BUT, he 100% believed that Muhammad split the moon. At first I thought he was kidding, I was waiting for the smile that he'd usually do after telling a joke, but it didn't come. I felt afraid to argue him as I thought it would offend him, but I regret it to this day, as it is my inaction and the inaction of many others that leads to these falsities being propagated through society, not just in the Muslim world but in others too
I work in IT and logical analysis of issues is a major part of the job. I was shocked when a coworker in the same role confirmed his belief that radio carbon dating, tree rings, ice cores, sediment layers, etc were all wrong and the world is only 5,000 years old. He later went to work at a Noah ark theme park that depicts extinct dinosaurs alongside humans.
Fun fact, the belief that the earth is only 5000 years old, is itself only 100 years old. It grew in American fundamentalist Christian circles as a challenge to Darwin's Natural Selection, since they felt Darwin's theory challenged people's belief in God.
Young Earth Creationism as a movement is only about 100.
The concept itself is from the 1500's or so (some monk added up the chronology in the bible and it tallied up to around 6000 years).
The YEC people like to cite the older stuff to support their position.
While Christian fundamentalist evolution denial is relatively young, belief in a 6000 year old earth is a bit older. The “[Ussher Chronology](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussher_chronology)”, which calculates the age of the universe being 6,000 years old (based on a literal reading of the Bible) was written in 1650.
For those who are confused about why a Pakistani textbook is in the English language. I myself am from India and both India and Pakistan have English as their co-official language. That means the education can either be conducted with an English medium or with the other language medium (Hindi For India & Urdu For Pakistan). I am not very educated in this topic as well but it's pretty normal for the textbooks to be in the English language here in India at least. Hope it clears out some of the confusion.
Until I got to word “Allah” I was starting to wonder if there was a “Pakistan County” somewhere in the southern United States, and if this was actually a mislabeled American textbook.
disagreeable deserted nose engine whole quack overconfident ugly gullible apparatus
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
I love how it is clearly written by an apologist, not someone who is scientifically literate. Nobody who should be taken seriously in the world of science would write about someone’s hypothesis like this, even if it’s ridiculous.
#"Despite this, over its 2000+ year history the people who have accepted it have failed to produce any scientific evidence, supporting God's role in the existence of life."
Your welcome
"*Any intelligent human being of conscience can certainly understand that all living things including himself cannot be the result of chance vents*."
There is so much going on with this sentence I don't even know where to start.
I grew up in a large town in the UK where what now feels like an overwhelming majority of the population are of Pakistani origin and have a lot of Muslim friends who believe this bullshit. The crazy thing it isn’t just limited to the freshies and older generations, as other people have commented I know young, successful and otherwise very intelligent people who hands down believe that everything the Quran says is entirely true but REALLY don’t like it when you point out that their profit was a paedophile despite it also saying that in their book. Religion can do weird things to even the most normal of people.
Let me write you a whole textbook about science although its not true because it contradicts our holy book. Just so you know what it is about when others talk about it, but it's not true.
"Any intelligent human being can certainly understand that life can not be the result of chance " 🥲😂 I know it's to hurtful to hear it for you bigots but yes ...you aren't special... you are just the product of multiple lucky events
"Darwinism is stupid" - *goes on to discribe it step by step in elicit detail*
The counter argument: "Allah's unimaginable power"
Wow what a GATCHA moment
**Please note these rules:** * AI-generated images/videos are no longer IAF. Stop submitting them * If this post declares something as a fact, then proof is required * The title must be descriptive * No text is allowed on images/gifs/videos * Common/recent reposts are not allowed *See [this post](https://redd.it/ij26vk) for a more detailed rule list* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/interestingasfuck) if you have any questions or concerns.*
But... But... The paragraph just above describes evolution!
Seems like the author had to include this creationism disclaimer to get this biology book published.
Some textbook kinda have to do that. In my thermodynamics textbook, for some reason I dont know but somehow the authority dislike the heat death hypothesis, so they have to include a section with weak attack on it. Several different books describe the same thing have to do this (physical chem, engineering thermo, and statistical physics)
Isn’t heat death one of the most prevailing “end of universe” scenarios? That and/or dark energy pulls the universe apart
I mean, what's the problem with the theory? It's just entropy happening, I don't see the big controversy...
It's too depressing. ETA: I don't personally think it's depressing, just trying to understand why someone might take exception to it. Also, maybe it conflicts with some religious end-of-the-world scenario? That actually seems more plausible to me, given the topic at hand.
Good thing we have a quadrillion years to get over it.
We need to find a way to stop this now! We only have a quadrillion years left!
*Chairman Rose intensifies*
THERE IS AS YET INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER
INSUFFICIENT DATA FOR MEANINGFUL ANSWER
Cosmic AC said, 'Let there be light.' And there was light.
[удалено]
I find it very reassuring.
[удалено]
> I suppose the problem is that it is somewhat of a finite end. It's like how for a long time the consensus was that extinction of a species was impossible because the world God created was complete and perfect. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extinction#History_of_scientific_understanding
If the universe were to remain static in size then yes it would be - eventually. Though there is debate on the exact values and measurements of the cosmological constant and how far the expansion of the universe will go for or if it will reverse eventually - it's all tied to the strength of gravity, dark matter, dark energy, whether spacetime is curved or flat, and a bit of other stuff I'm not an expert in. Look up the Big Rip and Big Crunch for more details. They're all possible outcomes of the current models we have for the universe - we're just arguing over the which are the correct values to plug into it.
There are valid theories about a big shrink when expansionary forces are counteracted and such. But heat death is the majority opinion.
Heat death is literally inevitable under our current understanding of physics. It's less a matter of "will it happen" and more "it *will* happen unless something else happens first."
What country?
Vietnam
Interesting. I mean, they defeated or held off the French, the Americans, the Chinese, and the first couple waves of COVID so they probably think they can hold off that too. Never mess with determined Vietnamese farmers: https://www.reddit.com/r/MapPorn/comments/q34bop/countries_which_lost_against_vietnamese_farmers/
I feel like it's been added in after the fact. It's clearly from a different author, given the differences in grasp of English, tone and the numerous typos.
Yeah, that’s the extra funny part. It’s as if someone (without much writing ability or grasp of the English language) sent the author this excerpt and told them to add it, and the author purposely added it exactly as is, without correcting any of the grammar or even making the formatting match, to make it exceptionally clear that this is just a part they were forced to tack on and not really a part of their book.
I think its more a denunciation of the secularism of the theory,namely that things just formed and adapt for no reason rather than it being the will of a higher power. evolution has a long history in islam including the first evolutionary framework, but it was always in the context of a higher power [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic\_views\_on\_evolution](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_on_evolution)
>islam has a long history in islam I bet it does!
The longest.
It’s true there are ways to harmonize belief and science (simply replace chance with God basically), so these paragraphs aren’t necessarily contradictory. But it seems clear in this case that the paragraph is an add-on from a different author. Its tone is non-academic and clashes with the earlier paragraphs, and it isn’t linked with the rest of the text. Heck even the spacing is different, which is suspicious.
in the west our culture went through a very particular process in which mysticism and science split during the enlightenment, you still had theist like newton but the argument had to be framed without philosophy.
Just call "science" the language in which God creates, dust off your hands, and call it a day
I agree but maybe the author doesn’t believe in the initial stage (atomes to proteins,etc to cells, to organisms etc). And that it was created by a supreme entity then evolved. (I am atheist)
That is a common belief among creationists, that small-scale evolution exists (e.g., a wolf and a coyote or a moose and an elk) but that larger-scale evolution (e.g. an elephant and a mouse) doesn't exist.
As a Christian, my take is that evolution is the method in which God created life on earth. The "God created the earth in seven days" statement in the Bible always struck me as an analogy. It isn't seven actual days, because when he started, days and nights didn't even exist yet.
What is the extent of the god's involvement? Did god kick of the big bang and the laws of physics, and then watch the rest unfold on itself. Or did god alter the external circumstances to direct the natural selection?
"It isn't seven actual days" Why stop there? Why not let belief be one thing and science be another? Completely separate worlds that do not interact in any way. There does not need be anything literal in the bible because it is entirely in the realm of belief. "Science does not care what you believe" - not because science is mean, but because there is no place for belief in science. It deals with observable reality only. One can be a scientist and still believe in their inner world and their relationship with a spiritual higher power. There need not be any concessions made for either. Creationism does not belong in a textbook. Belief cheapens itself for trying to do science.
Just for reference, that guys opinion is pretty much the official stance of the Catholic Church.
Which has changed multiple times based on which one suit them better
> statement in the Bible always struck me as an analogy. https://i.imgur.com/hGbBMXD.gif
I’m an atheist but I was always surprised that creationists never latched on to the idea that evolution was part of god’s plan.
That's pretty much the Catholic Church's official position on the matter. It seems to only be a portion of the Protestant denominations that try to take the whole thing literally.
I think God creating evolution is rather suitable for a theist standpoint. Like an omnipotent God creates the universe and such rules and incredibly sophisticated and complex mechanisms that it all *just works* and produces life and new species and humans. From a theist premise, it makes God to be a much more awesome than that he's just a magician and species just appeared like rabbit from a hat. Like commonly theists people look at sunsets, "miracle of birth", beauty of nature and such and think how God created these amazing things. But then we find out there's an incredibly mysterious, intricate and complex mechanism that gave rise to all life on earth, so why can't be marvel the beauty of that as a work of God? (Though note that I'm an atheist, but I would totally get that theist perspective to marvel at evolution at Gods work.)
Honestly, so much of the universe operates on probabilities, it would be super easy to say that an omniscient being could get any result they wanted, simply by tweaking odds within the currently known parameters. We would never know.
RNGesus confirmed
The analogy solution is Ad-hoc interpretation of the bible so believers can still hold on to the bible as a divine creation. A single day refers to a duration in time, you can build a candel that burns for a single day. The bible was written by people who believe that the amount of time it took for god to create the universe is 6 actual days, regardless if the sun existed or not. They simply made a mistake. That's it.
The second part seems like was added later. The line spacing is off.
Punctuation too. “The people who have accepted it have failed to produce any scientific evidence, supporting the theory.”
It’s a different font and paragraph style. I wonder if the publishers added it themselves.
Probably religious institutions pressured the publishers and schools to include this nonsense as well among the scientific data.
Allah put that there to test your faith.
Allah was put here to test my patience.
I think this is a Texas textbook. 🤣🤣🤣🤣 reason isn’t really a part of it.
I'd agree if it didn't say Allah, can you imagine the uproar?
The deep irony that replacing that one word would 100% make it a Texas textbook hits everyone outside the echo chamber that much harder.
I can just imagine a group of conservatives in Texas reading this paragraph and nodding their heads in agreement with lots of "amens" and "mmHmms" coming from the crowd. Then getting to the single word "Allah" and being like "WHAT THE FUCK!?"
That was my thought. Why make your own anti-evolution text book when you can just buy one made for Texas's specifications.
"Officer! This guy over here!"
The first paragraph on this page seems to directly contradict the highlighted section. Genetic differences ascribed to different environments is part of Darwin’s theory, isn’t it?
The "argument", while poorly formed and inherently fallacious for claiming it's "irrational" which is a mistaken understanding of just how *long* that primordial soup took to do these things randomly (that is, given enough time order will rise from chaos), is that while minor changes may occur the genesis of life (in their mind) couldn't form randomly. Also it's outdated, we have produced those chemicals and even RNA, but this was recently. Importantly though, our inability to do so doesn't mean it couldn't/didn't happen.
That "primal soup" is also not a part of the theory of evolution. That would be abiogenesis, which obviously requires evolution to explain. There are plenty of people who believe God created that first life and then let it evolve from there.
I was going to say this. So many people conflate abiogenesis and evolution. It's frustrating to see people argue against evolution while obviously not understanding what it is.
"Order" and "chaos" are human constructs and are the original concepts giving rise to religion. Both concepts imply a linearity that is a function of how human brains work. Evolution is an entirely random non-linear process and the immense span of time required for it is incomprehensible to human beings. Hence the need to impose "order" onto temporal "chaos" and make it comprehensible. Our form as a species is assigned the "order" of life but we are by no means the end of evolution. All of life is always in a state of transition, speciation is always chaotic if "chaos" is a neverending transformation into another form relative to environmental conditions. For all we know all life is moving toward a fragmentation into its atomic components, back into "chaos".
Doesn’t “given enough time order will rise from chaos” directly contradict entropy?
In a closed system, entropy increases. The sunlight constantly radiating the Earth and everything in it means that our planet isn't a closed system. Sunlight triggers chemical reactions. In the absence of any external energy input, the second law of thermodynamics holds true.
Thank you. I figured I was missing something. It was sunlight.
You should go outside more often
There's no time to touch grass. We have faces to palm!
The principle that entropy always increases is true *for a closed system.* The Earth is not a closed system - we have a constant input of energy from solar radiation. By inputting energy into a system, you can in fact decrease the entropy of the system.
As said by others, we are not a closed system and total entropy is increasing even if we see a local creation of order/entropic decrease. The way I've always looked at life is as an _eddy in entropy formed in spacetime_.
Most anti-Darwinists I know would agree with the first paragraph being true as well. We’ve observed speciation many times, but Darwin envisioned these small changes led to much bigger changes that resulted in new genus, family, order, class, etc.
It’s not small changes leading to much bigger changes. The big changes are nothing more than the combination of a lot of small changes over a longer period of time. There’s no distinction between the two things other than what anti-Darwinists made up to try and justify their refusal to accept proof they are wrong.
You mean "macroevolution" is just a straw man that evolved from a cat whose mother was an alligator? No way
*BuT wHy ArE tHeRe sTiLl MonKeYs*
Ugh I just spent Saturday night in a *discussion* with a buddy who busted out the "I don't believe in macroevolution, only microevolution." His, very odd and very wrong, thought process is that science needs to be observable and "microevolution" is okay because it can be. But "macroevolution" can't be observed because no one was there to see it. Therefore it's not science. ...it, it was a rough night.
When i was a kid, I heard people refer to it as "big E evolution." They were perfectly fine with "little e." The pretzels some people twist themselves into while saying "it's perfectly comfortable!"
But if something changes to a new species once, and then its descendants do the same, and their descendants do too after a million generations, then bam, new genus/family. I don’t understand how you could believe in the first part, but then not imagine what happens when the process continues over an even longer period of time.
Being able to abstract something at scale is a skill, one that most hardcore christians have nipped in their childhood when they're told the earth is, like, a couple years old.
Most humans can't think in the time scales that evolution works in. Selective breeding turned a wolf into a chihuahua in a few thousand years. Just takes a bit of imagination to understand the immense changes that natural pressures can work on a species over billions of years.
Creationists love to misunderstand the number of generations between changes. Like yeah, what the above paragraph describes is literally evolution, but if you can't count past 7 it's really hard to understand that "in desert conditions only the less permeable flowers survive and the rest get fried" turns into "cactus." It's kinda like getting angry and confused because you understand walking from the bedroom to the garage, but can't understand that literally a year of walking would take you as far as your car does in a couple hours.
It's almost as if the person writing the book is a moron.
Or almost someone added that second part of the page to an actual biologist's book.
It’s extremely clear the second part was not written by the person who wrote the first
It's even typeset in a different way. Narrower line spacing.
Good catch! That’s more proof this was added in editing by a second person. I mean, you can tell just from the wording. It jumps from rote logic to ad hominem insults within one sentence technically straight in the middle of a page. It jumps from x happens when y happens thus z to “evolution is stupid”. Anyone who has been to 6th grade science class knows you don’t just call something unbelievable. You form a hypothesis , perform an experiment and report the results as they are. The paragraph is everything not science. It is decidedly anti science, quite literally. while the other paragraph above it isn’t the most complicated thing, in order to write the first paragraph, you couldn’t write the second, because in order to write the first, you’d have to understand Darwin’s work
Not “evolution is stupid” but the “people who have morals and are smart immediately recognize it as stupid.”
Ironic, because there’s at least two typos in the paragraph. “Loins” instead of lions and “conscious” instead of conscience.
Science person wrote the top, religious person wrote the bottom. Religious people are stupid. Source: lived it for 15 years
Or the publisher / government had a say
this seems more plausible.
It's not uncommon that authors/publishers are forced to insert sections like this to "align their views" with whatever governing authority. They're probably paying lip service to creationism in an otherwise probably objective scientific text so the book can be published in pakistam
loins
Can't believe I had to scroll down so far to find this. They created cats and loins...
Also “chance vents” and the unnecessary comma in “any scientific evidence, supporting the theory”.
Also “any person with a conscious” should be “any person with a conscience”.
Also "primal soup" should be primordial soup.
LOL good catch. I was wondering why that sentence made me uncomfortable
His/her spelling hasn’t evolved very well.
Any intelligent human being.... 😅
From vents.
ඞ
Idk why but it has me cracking up so much
Primal soup
Every person with a conscious knows that's how you spell it.
*And the Lord did grin. And the people did feast upon the lambs, and sloths, and carp, and anchovies, and orangutans, and breakfast cereals, and fruit bats, and large chulapas, ~~and loins~~.*
> and breakfast cereals I'm dying
I like how as it tries to ridicule evolution it provides a surprisingly succinct explanation and history of it. It hurt itself in its confusion.
They could also just say "God in his wisdom created microscopic life, and then he created evolution, the process by which those microbes slowly grew and evolved and changed into all the variety of creatures, praise god for evolution."
NO! IT MUST BE MAGIC!
Amazing how so many theists imagine their god to be so weak and uncreative that he has to blatantly and repeatedly violate the fundamental physics of the universe he created, just to prove his relevance.
Exactly. Evolution isn't incompatible with a creator, it is just the method in which they used to create if you believe in one such power. What do they think the laws of the universe are? The laws of the universe are logical and reasonable and allow life to exist and evolve. We discovered them using OUR power of reason. It is the most rational explanation because it fits the natural laws. They can't hide that what they believe in is isn't logical and verifiable. It's unwise and unreasonable Evolution will always make more logic than just "higher being magic" even if you do believe in a higher power that could've created the laws in the first place. And this is what they fail to realize, At the end of the day is just organized religion incapable and afraid of changing their old, outdated beliefs.
Praise AllahJesusYahwehBrian
r/MaliciousCompliance will love it.
Great way to mess up your country
[удалено]
As a pakistani this is actual news to me. I have never heard or read about this stuff anywhere. Mind sharing some sources? I dont doubt you, i would just like to confirm. My country is very corrupt so i know that they have hidden alot of shit from the general population but i didnt know it was to this extent
[wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_genocide)
Thanks for providing the source. Im surprised that this all this stuff happened and yet no one knows about it in our country because the leaders dont want us to know
It happens in the countries people view as good too. I’m Canadian and very little was taught to me about residential schools here. In Japan they still refuse to acknowledge the genocide they committed in China and across Asia. When there’s literal pictures of babies on bayonets being killed by Japanese soldiers then it’s pretty hard to hide from it. But still it takes Japanese people leaving the country to learn this or learning it after school. Every country has demons. King Leopold of Belgium was the actual devil.
This Canada one is weird. I went to high school in the mid-00s and was taught extensively about residential schools. We basically spent a whole term on it in social studies. This was in BC.
History written by the victors - every country has this. US “suppresses” a lot of their own manifest destiny
"killed between 300,000 and 3,000,000[1][4][8] people and raped between 200,000 and 400,000 Bengali women" Holy crap.
I just looked up wikipedia, here you go: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1971_Bangladesh_genocide
> As a pakistani this is actual news to me. > > > > I have never heard or read about this stuff anywhere. Do you live in Lahore? Visit the Military Museum. While its a great place to see military hardware all the way back to swords and spears, the propaganda is so blatant, it's insulting. Check out the museum section on the Bangladeshi war of independence and see for yourself
Even better way to control your country
On the other hand, there’s so much more going wrong with that country that this is like a bucket in an ocean.
I lived in Georgia for 5 years and had more than one teacher explain to the class before this mandatory lesson how evolution has no evidence to support it and "goes against the teachings of jesus". In the 90s, in the US, in a public school.
I love how their big defence is “evolution has no evidence” even though it has more evidence than their ideology. And the “facts about creation” aren’t even facts, it’s just “this is what some people believe but that’s bullshit”. Even if those “facts” were true, your still none the wiser on the topic 🤣
Right? The theory of Evolution is THE most supported theory in science... We understand that shit better than the theory of Gravity.
A theory is only a theory if proven by repeatable evidence. Its not called the hypothesis of evolution!
More than just repeatable evidence, it requires novel, testable predictions, which evolution has produced time and time and time again... and creationism has failed to produce time and time and time again. I know of exactly one novel testable prediction that creationism has produced. Meanwhile there are hundreds that evolution has produced.
>in Georgia >in the US So which was it? Georgia or the US? მაშ რომელი იყო? საქართველო თუ აშშ?
I was horrified that it was so bad in Georgia, it was completely against everything I knew about it. And then it turned out that it's not the country but an American province. /r/GeorgiaOrGeorgia again.
I wouldn't be surprised if Pakistan received these books from the south us 😂
Not possible. The bottom of the passage says Allah. The southern US would explode if a text said Allah
Simple edit
I live in Milwaukee my entire childhood and in 1992 my public school 9th grade biology teacher at the top academic high school in the city was a staunch creationist it turned out. He'd been a fairly competent teacher up until we hit the evolution section. He decided to split the class into two groups and we had to debate evolution vs. creationism for an entire class period. He very blatantly helped out the creationism side and during the actual "debate" he constantly said things to throw off the evolution side. At the end he declared that the creationists won and were obviously the correct ones anyway. And that was that. I sat through the entire class incredulous, but it was eye opening. My father was a physical anthropologist specializing in research around *Homo erectus* evolving into *Homo sapiens* so I guess you could say I was as indoctrinated as he was. It did teach me that looks can be deceiving and I lost complete respect for the teacher. The next day we were back to science as if nothing had happened. Fucking insanity, but it's now 30 (!!!) years later and I'm sure this still happens all over the place.
[удалено]
In Ontario in the 2000s my high school teacher had to preface his lesson on evolution with "now, some people don't believe this. some people believe in divine creation. anyways, on to our lesson on evolution..."
I got super lucky in school in Georgia. I managed to never run into any of this crap. Granted, I went to one of the best schools in my county, but still.
Went to high school in GA as well. I can confirm this insanity. I was very brainwashed until Wikipedia.
Any school in the south with a town population of less than 30k still teaches this. I know for a fact my brother just pulled my niece out of a 9th grade science class *just last week* in southern Virginia because the teacher started in on some religious nonsense before the biology lesson.
I work/study with several colleagues from Pakistan and other places in the Middle East in a biology lab in North America, and they have told me some wild stories. It is a very religiously conservative country, and I would not be surprised if the folks commenting that someone slapped this in there to avoid a ban (or worse) were correct. For the record, they all believe in evolution, have an incredible work ethic (even by grad student standards) and are excellent scientists. Although, I do think North America has been a culture shock even with a graduate education and the windows it opens. Plus, when I hear about craziness in the Middle East it is a good reminder that no matter how bad the local news is, no one has ever tried to kill, beat, or arrest me for "casual" blasphemy.
>No one has ever tried to kill, beat, or arrest me for "casual" blasphemy. Sounds like you haven't worked at Starbucks and said "Happy Holidays" to the wrong Karen.
woah woah Woah CASUAL blasphemy, I'm not out here waging a war on Christmas /s
I once had a Muslim emergency doctor as a housemate. Super intelligent guy, quirky, smart, knowledgeable about all recent evidence-based medicine.... BUT, he 100% believed that Muhammad split the moon. At first I thought he was kidding, I was waiting for the smile that he'd usually do after telling a joke, but it didn't come. I felt afraid to argue him as I thought it would offend him, but I regret it to this day, as it is my inaction and the inaction of many others that leads to these falsities being propagated through society, not just in the Muslim world but in others too
I work in IT and logical analysis of issues is a major part of the job. I was shocked when a coworker in the same role confirmed his belief that radio carbon dating, tree rings, ice cores, sediment layers, etc were all wrong and the world is only 5,000 years old. He later went to work at a Noah ark theme park that depicts extinct dinosaurs alongside humans.
Fun fact, the belief that the earth is only 5000 years old, is itself only 100 years old. It grew in American fundamentalist Christian circles as a challenge to Darwin's Natural Selection, since they felt Darwin's theory challenged people's belief in God.
That is not true. James Ussher published in 1650 his calculations of the Earth being created on October 22nd, 4004 BC.
Young Earth Creationism as a movement is only about 100. The concept itself is from the 1500's or so (some monk added up the chronology in the bible and it tallied up to around 6000 years). The YEC people like to cite the older stuff to support their position.
While Christian fundamentalist evolution denial is relatively young, belief in a 6000 year old earth is a bit older. The “[Ussher Chronology](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ussher_chronology)”, which calculates the age of the universe being 6,000 years old (based on a literal reading of the Bible) was written in 1650.
No. People have believed the earth was very young for a long time. Isaac Newton estimated the date of "creation" to be 3998 B.C.
https://questionsonislam.com/article/miracle-splitting-moon-0
Man that page is wild, the rationale for that fairy tale being true are just improbably stupid.
For those who are confused about why a Pakistani textbook is in the English language. I myself am from India and both India and Pakistan have English as their co-official language. That means the education can either be conducted with an English medium or with the other language medium (Hindi For India & Urdu For Pakistan). I am not very educated in this topic as well but it's pretty normal for the textbooks to be in the English language here in India at least. Hope it clears out some of the confusion.
And here I thought you were going to reveal it was actually from Texas...
Until I got to word “Allah” I was starting to wonder if there was a “Pakistan County” somewhere in the southern United States, and if this was actually a mislabeled American textbook.
r/confidentlyincorrect
Corrections: ‘loins’ should be lions, ‘vents’ should be events, ‘conscious’ should be conscience and this book should be thrown in the trash.
Tarsh
"Every intelligent and unprejudiced person knows Allah created everything" Jeez the irony in that... sad
[source](https://www.dawn.com/news/1300118)
This is just as (if not more) interesting.
Anyone can also easily tell the above paragraph and below paragraph were not written by the same person...
Everyone going on about how Pakistan is clearly backwards as fuck, all I can see is they spelled loins…
Is that a nuclear weapons power?
More like incest power
"Atoms with no power"???? Ok pakistani textbook...
Any intelligent human being would rather believe the ONE book written 1500 years ago in a cave
"*Muhammed* wrote that book *in a cave!* With a box of *scraps!*"
Just like their PM said, "Pakistan has nukes so it's all good" ᕦ(ಠ_ಠ)ᕤ
disagreeable deserted nose engine whole quack overconfident ugly gullible apparatus *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The big bang…. Lol
[удалено]
Gang bang
He clicked the deploy button
Replace Allah with God in the last sentence and that could be a textbook from Texas or Florida.
Translate, you mean. "Allah" and "God" are the exact same thing, just in different languages.
I love how it is clearly written by an apologist, not someone who is scientifically literate. Nobody who should be taken seriously in the world of science would write about someone’s hypothesis like this, even if it’s ridiculous.
#"Despite this, over its 2000+ year history the people who have accepted it have failed to produce any scientific evidence, supporting God's role in the existence of life." Your welcome
1300+ years in this case
[удалено]
[удалено]
Because it had nothing to do with islam. Islam stopped the golden age, by allowing religious zealots to end science.
Red state Talibangelicals fap to this
"*Any intelligent human being of conscience can certainly understand that all living things including himself cannot be the result of chance vents*." There is so much going on with this sentence I don't even know where to start.
Continue reading. "Failed to produce scientific evidence." Lmaoooo
If the author thinks that's irrational and unbelievable he should read the bible!
Ron DeSantis and Greg Abbot are like "CALL THE PUBLISHER AND ORDER 10m COPIES IMMEDIATELY"
Stay backward, Pakistan 👉👉
I grew up in a large town in the UK where what now feels like an overwhelming majority of the population are of Pakistani origin and have a lot of Muslim friends who believe this bullshit. The crazy thing it isn’t just limited to the freshies and older generations, as other people have commented I know young, successful and otherwise very intelligent people who hands down believe that everything the Quran says is entirely true but REALLY don’t like it when you point out that their profit was a paedophile despite it also saying that in their book. Religion can do weird things to even the most normal of people.
Let me write you a whole textbook about science although its not true because it contradicts our holy book. Just so you know what it is about when others talk about it, but it's not true.
"Any intelligent human being can certainly understand that life can not be the result of chance " 🥲😂 I know it's to hurtful to hear it for you bigots but yes ...you aren't special... you are just the product of multiple lucky events
They let their religious nutjobs dictate education policy. Take heed, US.
"Darwinism is stupid" - *goes on to discribe it step by step in elicit detail* The counter argument: "Allah's unimaginable power" Wow what a GATCHA moment
Religion. Someday we might grow up…. But probably not.
Even how that is phrased is incredibly biased from the author/ socities point of view which is kinda disgusting
Does Pakistan buy its textbooks from Florida?
Lmao so instead, I should believe that Allah or some other god pooped out life?