More Americans accept theory of creationism than evolution

RolandTD20Kdrummer

What are you talking about!? Republicans are proof of evolution!

There's your missing link right there...

lucylespian

MLC2006 wrote:

if God created man and thought, then it is science that hijacked religion, not vice versa.

So, if god owns and provides all our thoughts, we can never sin, because we only ever do what he makes us do ??

MLC2006

lucylespian wrote:

So, if god owns and provides all our thoughts, we can never sin, because we only ever do what he makes us do ??

I didn't say God controls what thoughts come into someone's head. I said, if God created "thought" as in "the ability to think".

the anti-religion people love talking about science this and science that. the thing is that science has become a religion in itself. and it hasn't proven or disproven anything regarding God. as I asked early, where did "being" come from? how did the first matter that sparked the universe ever come into existence? science never has and never will answer those questions. so then, "God" is as good an answer as anything else.

Alex_Coe

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

What are you talking about!? Republicans are proof of evolution!

There's your missing link right there...

I think I'm missing the joke.

sponger

I don't think it's really that americans don't believe in evolution; I think it's that americans don't like the idea of having anything in common with apes. They like to think that they're special and gifted moreso than any living thing on the planet. It's not a matter of a lack of evidential support for evolution; it's just that they'd rather believe the bedtime stories.

Bu2

sponger wrote:

I don't think it's really that americans don't believe in evolution; I think it's that americans don't like the idea of having anything in common with apes. They like to think that they're special and gifted moreso than any living thing on the planet. It's not a matter of a lack of evidential support for evolution; it's just that they'd rather believe the bedtime stories.

I like to think that we are all from nature, we are all with nature, we are all for nature.

The fact that the rest of my fucked up country doesn't believe that, is not my fault.

But that doesn't mean that I don't plan to do something about it.

And my monkey friends agree with me, wholeheartedly. They are busy printing out the "Impeach Bush and Cheney" bumperstickers as I speak.

PaperPlates

lucylespian wrote:

Now this really pisses me off, fucking religion hijacking scientific knowledge, saying it's part of the grand plan. It's not, it's bloody theft. Sod off and come up with your own ideas.

Bloody worse than saying he buried dinosaur bones to trick us.

How do you really feel about it?

And they say "creationists" are touchy. Sheesh!



By the by, I'm not a "creationist", nor a religious man.

Sod off? You guys are so cute when you're angry.

PaperPlates

Bu2 wrote:

And my monkey friends agree with me, wholeheartedly. They are busy printing out the "Impeach Bush and Cheney" bumperstickers as I speak.

its not nice to call liberals monkeys.

Bu2

PaperPlates wrote:

its not nice to call liberals monkeys.

to call monkeys nonliberals.

Songburst

MLC2006 wrote:

I didn't say God controls what thoughts come into someone's head. I said, if God created "thought" as in "the ability to think".

the anti-religion people love talking about science this and science that. the thing is that science has become a religion in itself. and it hasn't proven or disproven anything regarding God. as I asked early, where did "being" come from? how did the first matter that sparked the universe ever come into existence? science never has and never will answer those questions. so then, "God" is as good an answer as anything else.

"God" is the easy answer for those questions. If god was accepted as the answer to everything, the little date on your stone tablet computer would read "dark ages" instead of June 14. People who are told to believe that God is responsible for everything in the world (except the bad stuff) for their whole lives tend to believe just that. Not too many people who say they believe in god actually do believe in god. They just say it because they have been told that it is bad to say that you don't.

PaperPlates

Bu2 wrote:

to call monkeys nonliberals.

touche.

Purple Hawk

baraka wrote:

I ran across this article this morning and found it, well, interesting to say the least................

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=27847

Majority of Republicans Doubt Theory of Evolution
More Americans accept theory of creationism than evolution

by Frank Newport

GALLUP NEWS SERVICE

PRINCETON, NJ -- The majority of Republicans in the United States do not believe the theory of evolution is true and do not believe that humans evolved over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. This suggests that when three Republican presidential candidates at a May debate stated they did not believe in evolution, they were generally in sync with the bulk of the rank-and-file Republicans whose nomination they are seeking to obtain.

Independents and Democrats are more likely than Republicans to believe in the theory of evolution. But even among non-Republicans there appears to be a significant minority who doubt that evolution adequately explains where humans came from.

The data from several recent Gallup studies suggest that Americans' religious behavior is highly correlated with beliefs about evolution. Those who attend church frequently are much less likely to believe in evolution than are those who seldom or never attend. That Republicans tend to be frequent churchgoers helps explain their doubts about evolution.

The data indicate some seeming confusion on the part of Americans on this issue. About a quarter of Americans say they believe both in evolution's explanation that humans evolved over millions of years and in the creationist explanation that humans were created as is about 10,000 years ago.

Broad Patterns of Belief in Evolution

The theory of evolution as an explanation for the origin and development of life has been controversial for centuries, and, in particular, since the 1859 publication of Charles Darwin's famous The Origin of Species. Although many scientists accept evolution as the best theoretical explanation for diversity in forms of life on Earth, the issue of its validity has risen again as an important issue in the current 2008 presidential campaign. Two recent Republican debates have included questions to the candidates about evolution. Three candidates -- Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, and Tom Tancredo -- indicated in response to a question during the May 3 debate that they did not believe in the theory of evolution, although they have attempted to clarify their positions in the weeks since.

Several recent Gallup Polls conducted in May and June indicate that a significant number of Americans have doubts about the theory of evolution".

I also found a nice chart of a survey presented by national geographic comparing the acceptance of evolution theory in different countries. The chart is a little less in depth than the Gallup poll but its gives an illustration of the broad trends between countries.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/bigphotos/21329204.html

question: does it occur to anyone that most people might actually believe in both? are we allowed to have that discussion? that most normal people have faith but also believe in science and aren't literalists...

seriously, "stories" like this is why talk radio exists.

but to hell with what we all actually have in common, so long as we distort the point b/c it's so fun to pile on those heyseed hillbilly bible thumpin' sister-marryin' low life racists in the south.

Bu2

I believe in a creation that happened, long ago. It brought about the planets, it brought to life our universe.

It was intelligent in design, of that I'm sure.

Where that intelligence is now, I'm not so sure.

PaperPlates

Bu2 wrote:

I believe in a creation that happened, long ago. It brought about the planets, it brought to life our universe.

It was intelligent in design, of that I'm sure.

Where that intelligence is now, I'm not so sure.

Out to lunch perhaps.

Or perhaps, it had to get a day job.

Purple Hawk

Bu2 wrote:

Where that intelligence is now, I'm not so sure.

Higher than at any point in human history...but we can still do better

ClimberInOz

PaperPlates wrote:

Can't evolution simply be the "tool" or method by which a creator did his/her creating?

Not if god created evolution with 'us' in mind. Evolution does not have a direction- it occurs due to random mutations which are acted on by selecting presures. So if you are saying that god created the universe, then put evolving life onto this planet to end up with us, and that he had humans in mind when he created life, then that is 'guided evolution', which is fundamentally different to the theory of evolution that is based upon a huge accumulation of solid scientific evidence.

Bu2

means that cockroaches stand a better chance than we do, of surviving.

MLC2006

Songburst wrote:

"God" is the easy answer for those questions. If god was accepted as the answer to everything, the little date on your stone tablet computer would read "dark ages" instead of June 14. People who are told to believe that God is responsible for everything in the world (except the bad stuff) for their whole lives tend to believe just that. Not too many people who say they believe in god actually do believe in god. They just say it because they have been told that it is bad to say that you don't.

God says your stone tablet computer is 10 days off, because today is June 24. I don't even know what your point is with that, you trying to say that all the great inventions throughout time were made by people too "smart" to believe in God? that would be a silly assumption.

did you take a poll of all the people who say they believe in God? because it's a very very very high percentage of people who say they do. and that's not just the US, that's throughout the entire world.

bake me a cake without any ingredients, utensils, stove. bake a cake for me out of thin air, and then you'll have proven for me that there is no God. because SOMETHING existed in the beginning to create the universe. no answer? no theories?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

The "universe" or "all that is" just was.... there can be no "point of creation", or creation of everything observable out of thin air (or from nothing)

....it's a hopelessly flawed scenario.

ClimberInOz

MLC2006 wrote:

there are scientific explanations that can't be denied. but there are things that science can't deny either. you can't bake a birthday cake out of nothing. and the universe cannot be created out of nothing except by a greater intelligence. the universe may stem from a million trillion gazillion years of evolution. but at some point, there was nothing. and somehow, that nothing came into being and set into motion the things that we see today. and that was a plan. and science cannot disprove that.

You are completely correct- the universe did not evolve from nothing, for even a 'thought' of a universe is a 'something'. But to use god to fill this gap does not answer the question- it is just a guess that has some attractive qualities (the after-life and a big granddad that loves us all living up in the sky) that people have become very attached to. It is no more valid then the flying spag monster or any other random idea that we might create to explain it.

But this idea of a higher power has one major flaw. It transfers the question of our origins and in the process makes the question harder to answer. God, as the creator, must inherintly be more complex then what he or she or it has created. So now we still have a question about where something comes from, only now the something is even more complex and thus harder to explain.

An alternative to procalaiming god as the creator is to suggest that this universe is just a continuation of eternal physical existance. When god's origins are questioned the most common answer is that god is eternal. Why not extend this privelage to the universe, or to some form of physical existence? As you have already acknowledged a physical universe cannot be created out of nothing. So why not just eliminate the 'nothing'?

We have no evidence of a state of non-existence. Even the purest of vaccums are hives of quantum excitement. So if we abondon this idea of 'nothing' we are left with a universe that is part of eternal existence. A universe that began with a 'big bang', but with a 'big bang' that was not the begining of all physical exitence. Maybe the form of this existence changes, maybe we are even more insignificant then we could have imagined and our share of existence is a tiny part of a tiny part. But eternal existence in one shape or form is as parsimoneous an answer as I think you will get to this question of where we came from.

I am not arguing that this is really where our origins lie. Also, as an atheist and a scientist I am the first to acknowledge that it is not possible to disprove the existence of god. Maybe god does exist and maybe god is the answer to this question. It is certainly a possability, albeit with a very similar probability as the flying spag monster et al. For me, God is simply not yet relevant to this question, and for him, her or it to attain relevance many, many other more parsimoneous ideas would first have to be disproved.

Anyway, sorry for sidetracking the thread...