2009.09.10
Clark: Don't diminish the Bible in favor of science
Evolution isn't even a good theory
David W. Clark
Clark, of Blacksburg, is on the Campus Bible Fellowship staff at Virginia Tech.
In his column "What lies beneath" (Aug. 12), Cal Thomas contrasts two distinctly different world views: The one views "human beings as unique creations," and the other says "we are evolutionary accidents." He demonstrates that a choice between them leads logically to different conclusions regarding health care. He is right: There are two opposing world views; the one based on biblical creation and the other on naturalistic evolution. However, there are many who try to combine the Bible and evolution. As evidenced by recent letters and commentaries in this paper, this results in the Bible being modified and minimized to fit under the authority of science.
Read more.
RSS feed 
How do you spell Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha?!!!!
Is this guy on the State payroll? He needs to be gone!
Comment by Robert S. — September 10, 2009 @ 9:39 am
I think that is a private organization whose only affiliation with VT is that it's located near VT.
Comment by Other John — September 10, 2009 @ 10:15 am
No,
This guy is not on the State payroll. He bought a house in Blacksburg and says he's associated with Virginia Tech. Of course if your cat crawls in the oven and has kittens, you don't call them biscuits.His ministry mainly seems focused on proselytizing to foreign students who come to Virginia Tech.
http://www.cbf.org.vt.edu/
His is my favorite local creationist because he is so uncompromising on biblical interpretation. Course I'm sure he picks and chooses too, or he'd be beating his slaves and recommending throwing rocks at kids for misbehaving..
Comment by Mike Scott — September 10, 2009 @ 10:27 am
Anyone who says "evolutionists say we are evolutionary accidents" has already outed themselves as either lacking in comprehension of what the Evolutionary Theory really says (there is some randomness involved, but it is not accidental), or they know exactly what it says and choose to build strawmen versions which is easier to ridicule and impress their followers.
Comment by Rob Miles — September 10, 2009 @ 11:50 am
I wonder if he wears any blended fabrics in his clothing.
"You shall not wear a garment of different sorts, such as wool and linen mixed together." - Deuteronomy 22:11, (New King James Version)
After all, you can't pick and choose what parts of the bible to follow, right? I'm not even going to get into all the other laws he probably ignores (like most people).
Unless he follows every rule and law in the bible, his argument rests on hypocrisy.
Comment by Jake — September 10, 2009 @ 12:40 pm
This is getting tedious. Yet another diatribe from someone without a cursory understanding of the relevant science, who wouldn't recognize a base pair if it bit him on the bum.
As for relying on the opinion of a civil engineer, what, were the heads of the music or literature departments unavailable? The obvious logical fallacy is an appeal to authority, for the interested reader.
And for what I hope is the last time, though I know it will almost certainly not be, a scientific theory is not baseless conjecture, but as the National Acadamy of Science states, "refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature supported by facts gathered over time."
Was the goal of printing the piece to expose wanton ignorance, or to spread it?
Comment by Painless — September 10, 2009 @ 12:49 pm
Sadly, the author has taken a topic that could be the subject of a serious, intelligent and respectful debate and presented it such that only a lunatic would repeat his premises as fact. The responses he has gotten are pretty much what he deserves. Is there a possibility that the life, universe and everything are the work of an intelligent act of creation? Yes it is. Did the Bible chronicle that act? Not a chance. The Bible itself is a creation of man. Divine in intention, maybe. Worth reading and considering as a guide to make getting along here on Earth a better experience, probably. A directive to follow blindly, regardless of human reason and intellect, only for those who would choose to believe that mankind is a slave race with no potential to do better for ourselves. The author may believe this for himself, but he can be more if he chooses. If that change is possible, then evolution is not such a impossible thing.
Comment by MikeC — September 10, 2009 @ 12:58 pm
This guy has published similar tripe before on the op-ed page, and self-identified as being associated with Tech then as well. It would be natural to assume ( based on his calling himself part of the "staff at Virgnia Tech) that he's on the Tech payroll. I wonder if anyone at Tech would take issue with having the Tech imprimatur on his published musings.
From his opening paragraph I was looking forward to a monograph on how Biblical teachings would be against health care reform, but he meandered through several different "topics" before citing a civil engineer's support (40 years ago) for creationism over godless science. For a guy on staff at an engineering school, he seems perpetually surprised that "evolution" hasn't yet won the day there.
Comment by Kristen — September 10, 2009 @ 1:10 pm
Hey David, thank you for a well-reasoned and factual article. You hit the nail on the head when you pointed out that, even though information is carried by material, it can only originate from intellect. That scientific fact alone negates evolution. You were also dead right micro-evolution results from a loss of genetic information. (I.e., you can breed from a wolf down to a poodle, but you can't breed from the poodle back to the wolf because the information has been lost.)
I believe the modern knowledge of genetics and DNA will eventually mean the death of evolution. What a happy day for mankind that will be!
Comment by Tom Taylor — September 10, 2009 @ 1:12 pm
Tom@#9
Finally something that can be argued. Neither you nor David have proved that the information in DNA was created by some intellect. Saying it is so, doesn't make it so.
There is no loss of genetic information from the wolf to a poodle. Somehow you've got it in your head that pieces of the wolf's genome must have been removed to produce something more like a wimpy dog and less like a wolf. That's just not correct. Essentially, there's as much genetic information used in the production of a poodle as there is for a wolf.
Modern genetics and molecular biology continue to provide more proof of our common ancestry, not less.
Comment by Mike Scott — September 10, 2009 @ 2:14 pm
Tommy Taylor!!!!! How you doin'????
Comment by Robert S. — September 10, 2009 @ 2:18 pm
As many of you know, I'm a fairly conservative fellow. However, the theory of evolution is well founded while religion (any religion)is nothing more than wishful thinking. The two are not comparable.
Comment by Jim W. — September 10, 2009 @ 4:37 pm
Sandi Saunders! I saw your picture on Voices of the Valley. You look far too nice to be a liberal.....;0p
Comment by Jim W. — September 10, 2009 @ 4:38 pm
Good grief....
Here we go again.
Why does it matter how we got here? This debate is more worthless than I can begin to imagine.
If it makes you feel good to believe in creationism..then belive it.
If it makes you feel good to believe in evolution..then believe it.
I don't care which way we got here...I'm more concerned with the journey that's yet to be made.
Comment by Will — September 10, 2009 @ 4:55 pm
Why, thank you Jim W! I try to be nice, honest. I was certainly not raised that way, but I am a voracious reader and read WAY above my grade and age level (which means: things I was probably too young to shrug off) and much of the injustice, inequity and downright unfair things I read about resonated in a primal way and I ended up being what I am. I freely admit I am liberal to the bone; shirt off my back. Are those people over on VOV super smart or what? I am not remotely in their league, but I love many of them.
Comment by Sandi Saunders — September 10, 2009 @ 4:57 pm
Sandi...
Saw your picture too. You look very nice....See Jim, we look normal!
Comment by Will — September 10, 2009 @ 4:59 pm
I don't care which way we got here...I'm more concerned with the journey that's yet to be made.
Comment by Will — September 10, 2009 @ 4:55 pm
let the mystery be
which happens to be a song about the same thing... by iris demint (strange voice)
Comment by pammala — September 10, 2009 @ 5:42 pm
To Mike #10.
Human DNA, the human genome, contains some 3 billion letters of coded information. According to Dr. Francis Collins, head of the National Institute of Health, if we tried to read all the letters of our DNA, it would take 31 years reading 24/7.
If you really believe this code was not intelligently designed, but came into being by chance mutation, you have left rational thought far behind.
Regarding wolves to poodles, researchers have deciphered the wolf genome, and have determined all breeds of dogs today came from the wolf or dingo. The poodle is thought to have originated in Germany or France approx 700 years ago, and like all dogs, resulted from a series of harmful mutations to the wolf genome along with selective breeding to bring out those characteristics. If you want to start with the poodle and go back to the wolf, you will somehow have to reverse the mutations that changed the genome. You can't do it because the necessary genetic information has been lost.
To Jake, #5:
The laws in Leviticus and other books of the Old Testament were the civil code given by God to the only legitimate theocracy in history, ancient Israel. They are not directly given to any other nation or time. Thus a literal reading of the Bible does not forbid us to wear mixed cloth, or require that we stone adulterers or slay the Amalekites.
These laws do, however, serve to show the things God approves and those he pronounces sinful. Much of the common law of Western Civilization was derived from those books, according to Blackstones "Commentaries on the Laws of England."
You have to approach the Scriptures with a bit of intelligence, Jake. I trust that doesn't exclude you.
Comment by Tom Taylor — September 10, 2009 @ 6:12 pm
WOW, would you look at that pammala, I am a big Iris Dement fan! I think her unique voice and song writing are great! "My Life" is my favorite:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cc6dQoJGL4E a better sounding cover is here
Comment by Sandi Saunders — September 10, 2009 @ 6:52 pm
Cool,
Who would have thunk it, pammala and Sandi are both Iris Dement fans..let the mystery be indeed.
Tom@18... That's nice information, but it doesn't substantiate the claim you originally made. All that info about DNA and the linage of poodles from wolves doesn't explain what genetic information was lost. It wasn't. You seem to be passing along a common creationist argument, which never actually says what information is missing. What information is missing in your example of microevolution from a wolf to a poodle.
Comment by Mike Scott — September 11, 2009 @ 6:05 am
To Mike #20: Okay, begin with the poodle genome (take two poodles) and try to breed back up to a wolf. Let me know how far you get in a few decades.
Comment by Tom Taylor — September 13, 2009 @ 9:46 am