Interesting article on evolution
 

Somehow I feel like I'm posting evidence that the world is round, but apparently there are still doubters out there. Here is a pretty good article about much of the evidence which supports evolution.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29166602/

Eric,

You're the conspiracy theorist...

I'd bet a $1 that you believe the moon landings were actually shot on a soundstage in Burbank.
I'd bet $2 that you believe that Roswell was a martian ship that crash landed.
I'd bet $3 that you still believe Cheney and Bush planned and executed 9/11.
I'd bet $4 that you think JFK wasn't killed by a lone gunman.
I'd bet $5 that you probably do believe the earth is flat.

I watched the Nova program Intelligent Design On Trial just last night. It's about the Dover School Board's attempt to introduce ID into the science curriculum and the ensuing court battle. The program delves into the topic of transitional species. Highly recommended viewing.

The $5 bet doesn't belong with the others. The "conspiracy theory" was that the world was round. The world being flat was what was believed by the non-theorizing masses. The world being round is one of many cases of the conspiracy theory eventually becoming accepted fact.

Another "conspiracy theory" becoming accepted fact is the original claim that the USS Maine was sunk by the Spanish. This event was used to sell the Spanish American War to the American public. The "conspiracy theory" at the time was that the Spanish did not sink the ship and that it was an inside job done to sell war to the American public. There were books written promoting this "conspiracy theory" in the years following the war, but the majority of Americans believed the official story until many decades later. In the early 1970s congress finally did a new investigation where they determined that the Spanish were not responsible, and that the "conspiracy theory" was indeed fact. By the time I was in public school in the 1980s, there were already sections in my American History text books on this, and we learned about how this war was sold to the American public and the part William Randolph Hearst and "yellow journalism" played.

As for your $4 example, the official government investigation in the 1970s by the House Select Committee determined that JFK was not assassinated by a lone gunman, and that there was a conspiracy. So yes, I believe that.

Your $1, $2, and $3 examples you would be wrong about. If you want to send me the $6, I'll give you my paypal account. :D

Seems that was the last showing of that Nova program, but it is available to watch online in 12 separate chapters:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/id/program.html

http://i235.photobucket.com/albums/e.../Evolution.jpg

Excerpt:

Q: Can you accept evolution and still believe in religion?

A: Yes. The common view that evolution is inherently anti-religious is simply false. All that evolution tells us is that life on this planet could have arisen by natural processes. For many people of various faiths, showing that something is due to a natural process doesn't take it outside the realm of the divine. Religious thinkers across the ages have written that merely showing that something is natural puts it within the influence of God, the creator of all nature. By definition science cannot address supernatural causes because its methodology is confined to the natural world. Therefore science has nothing to say about the nature of God or about people's spiritual beliefs. This does not mean science is anti-religious; rather, it means science simply cannot engage in this level of explanation.