Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Politics and Political Issues Board => Topic started by: Dos Equis on June 12, 2007, 08:54:16 AM
-
Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:17 a.m. EDT
Poll: 68% of GOP Voters Reject Evolution Theory
The three Republican presidential candidates who indicated last month that they do not believe in evolution may have been taking a safe stance on the issue when it comes to appealing to GOP voters.
A Gallup poll released Monday said that while the country is about evenly split over whether the theory of evolution is true, Republicans disbelieve it by more than 2-to-1.
Republicans saying they don't believe in evolution outnumbered those who do by 68 percent to 30 percent in the survey. Democrats believe in evolution by 57 percent to 40 percent, as do independents by a 61 percent to 37 percent margin.
The poll also said that those who go to church often are far likelier to reject evolution than those who do not. Republicans are likelier than Democrats or independents to attend church services, according to Frank Newport, editor in chief of the Gallup Poll.
At the GOP's first presidential debate last month, the 10 candidates were asked which of them did not believe in evolution. Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo raised their hands.
The Gallup survey, conducted May 21 to 24, involved telephone interviews with 1,007 adults. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/6/12/72000.shtml?s=ic
-
*yawn*
-
*yawn*
Plagiarizer! :D
-
Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:17 a.m. EDT
Poll: 68% of GOP Voters Reject Evolution Theory
The three Republican presidential candidates who indicated last month that they do not believe in evolution may have been taking a safe stance on the issue when it comes to appealing to GOP voters.
A Gallup poll released Monday said that while the country is about evenly split over whether the theory of evolution is true, Republicans disbelieve it by more than 2-to-1.
Republicans saying they don't believe in evolution outnumbered those who do by 68 percent to 30 percent in the survey. Democrats believe in evolution by 57 percent to 40 percent, as do independents by a 61 percent to 37 percent margin.
The poll also said that those who go to church often are far likelier to reject evolution than those who do not. Republicans are likelier than Democrats or independents to attend church services, according to Frank Newport, editor in chief of the Gallup Poll.
At the GOP's first presidential debate last month, the 10 candidates were asked which of them did not believe in evolution. Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo raised their hands.
The Gallup survey, conducted May 21 to 24, involved telephone interviews with 1,007 adults. It had a margin of sampling error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.
http://newsmax.com/archives/ic/2007/6/12/72000.shtml?s=ic
And these republicans wonder why the rest of us are laughing.
-
And these republicans wonder why the rest of us are laughing.
Laughing all the way to the polls?
-
Laughing all the way to the polls?
No laughing at theiir Taliban-like hostility to science for the sake of religious expediency. That's highly entertaining stuff to educated people.
-
A Confederacy of Dunces
Why is this question even part of the political discourse?
This question is really just a proxy for what they'd really like to ask which is something along the lines of
"do you pledge to pander to the hive-mind of the radical religious right"
Either that or it's an intelligence test
-
No laughing at theiir Taliban-like hostility to science for the sake of religious expediency. That's highly entertaining stuff to educated people.
You mean like the 40 percents of scientists who believe in God (according to a poll cited by Camel)? Or the "educated people" who have written books discussing the gaping holes in evolution?
I saw Huckabee being interviewed by Chris Mathews last night and Mathews spent about 5 minutes trying to make Huckabee look like a nut over this creation vs. evolution thing. No specifics, just the general "how could you not believe we descended from apes" stuff. Talk about a red herring.
Huckabee looks like a good candidate BTW. Too bad he won't get much play.
-
You mean like the 40 percents of scientists who believe in God (according to a poll cited by Camel)? Or the "educated people" who have written books discussing the gaping holes in evolution?
I saw Huckabee being interviewed by Chris Mathews last night and Mathews spent about 5 minutes trying to make Huckabee look like a nut over this creation vs. evolution thing. No specifics, just the general "how could you not believe we descended from apes" stuff. Talk about a red herring.
Huckabee looks like a good candidate BTW. Too bad he won't get much play.
Belief in God has nothing to do with intentional ignorance.
If by 'educated people' you mean Dr. Kent Hovind, then my answer is yes. I have attended Hovind's creation seminars. I have met the man. He's a lunatic.
Here are a couple of websites that will help you get over your idea that somehow evolution is on shaky ground and that creation science offers a compelling alternative explanation.
http://www.kent-hovind.com/
http://talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/
-
Belief in God has nothing to do with intentional ignorance.
If by 'educated people' you mean Dr. Kent Hovind, then my answer is yes. I have attended Hovind's creation seminars. I have met the man. He's a lunatic.
Here are a couple of websites that will help you get over your idea that somehow evolution is on shaky ground and that creation science offers a compelling alternative explanation.
http://www.kent-hovind.com/
http://talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/
Let's not forgot Michael Behe who had his head handed to him in court when he tried to defend Intelligent Design
I like Dawkins response to Behe and other "educated people" like him:
"He's a straightforward creationist. What he has done is to take a standard argument which dates back to the 19th century, the argument of irreducible complexity, the argument that there are certain organs, certain systems in which all the bits have to be there together or the whole system won't work...like the eye. Darwin answered (this)...point by point, piece by piece. But maybe he shouldn't have bothered. Maybe what he should have said is...maybe you're too thick to think of a reason why the eye could have come about by gradual steps, but perhaps you should go away and think a bit harder."
-
Look dude the average Republican is a centerist..most of us on the board claim to be Conservatives. Most of the country is Center right whether they be republican or democrate..your lumping us all in with evangelicals...i won't for one minute defend the bible as some sort of science text book...I think when BB mentions evolution and the holes in it..i'm sure he does not mean that they can and will be plugged by faith or God, rather by more hard science.
-
Belief in God has nothing to do with intentional ignorance.
If by 'educated people' you mean Dr. Kent Hovind, then my answer is yes. I have attended Hovind's creation seminars. I have met the man. He's a lunatic.
Here are a couple of websites that will help you get over your idea that somehow evolution is on shaky ground and that creation science offers a compelling alternative explanation.
http://www.kent-hovind.com/
http://talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind/
I'm familiar with both. If you're interested, here is a book that I found very interesting: "Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution." http://www.amazon.com/Darwins-Black-Box-Biochemical-Challenge/dp/0743290313/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-9359477-2415957?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1181674049&sr=1-1
I highly recommend it. It will challenge, on a scientific level, much of what you were taught growing up.
I'm also going to read this one: "Billions of Missing Links: A Rational Look at the Mysteries Evolution Can't Explain." http://www.amazon.com/Billions-Missing-Links-Mysteries-Evolution/dp/0736917462/ref=sr_1_1/104-9359477-2415957?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1181674386&sr=8-1
I heard Dr. Simmons on the radio and he sounded great. I'll post a book report in a couple months. :)
-
Look dude the average Republican is a centerist..most of us on the board claim to be Conservatives. Most of the country is Center right whether they be republican or democrate..your lumping us all in with evangelicals...i won't for one minute defend the bible as some sort of science text book...I think when BB mentions evolution and the holes in it..i'm sure he does not mean that they can and will be plugged by faith or God, rather by more hard science.
Ding! :) Although I must say that some of the gaping holes (like irreducible complexity) do lead to the logical conclusion that someone or something had to design those systems. But I don't believe the Bible is a science book.
Many people are just really afraid, paranoid even, to question what we have been taught for years. This is particularly true of anti-religious extremists.
-
I'm familiar with both. If you're interested, here is a book that I found very interesting: "Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution." http://www.amazon.com/Darwins-Black-Box-Biochemical-Challenge/dp/0743290313/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/104-9359477-2415957?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1181674049&sr=1-1
I highly recommend it. It will challenge, on a scientific level, much of what you were taught growing up.
I'm also going to read this one: "Billions of Missing Links: A Rational Look at the Mysteries Evolution Can't Explain." http://www.amazon.com/Billions-Missing-Links-Mysteries-Evolution/dp/0736917462/ref=sr_1_1/104-9359477-2415957?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1181674386&sr=8-1
I heard Dr. Simmons on the radio and he sounded great. I'll post a book report in a couple months. :)
I appreciate all the work you put into your posts Beach Bum, thanks...I'll look into the Black Box Book.
-
Ding! :) Although I must say that some of the gaping holes (like irreducible complexity) do lead to the logical conclusion that someone or something had to design those systems. But I don't believe the Bible is a science book.
Many people are just really afraid, paranoid even, to question what we have been taught for years. This is particularly true of anti-religious extremists.
BB always does a good job clarifing my convoluted points so i figured I'd do him a favor and help him since to me, it was obvious he wasn't disagreeing with you guys so much.
-
Ding! :) Although I must say that some of the gaping holes (like irreducible complexity) do lead to the logical conclusion that someone or something had to design those systems. But I don't believe the Bible is a science book.
Many people are just really afraid, paranoid even, to question what we have been taught for years. This is particularly true of anti-religious extremists.
Bum, to the best of my recollection you've never suggested that the holes in evolution would be "filled in" by future science. In fact you've repeatedly suggested the opposite and used that as a specious argument in support of creationism (again - best of my recollection but I will gladly concede if you can show me otherwise)
Honesty, I'm not even sure that you actually understand the theory of evolution when you make comments like this:
No. A bird evolving into another species of bird still leaves you with a bird. A bird evolving into a dog is another story.
irreducible complecity is not a gaping hole.
It's a term that Behe invented to say that he can't understand how evolution works and then he uses that as some sort of proof of Creationism. His own university has put out an official statement in complete opposition to his claims.
Behe's claims about the irreducible complexity of key cellular structures are strongly contested by the scientific community. The Department of Biological Sciences, at Lehigh University, published an official position statement which says "It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific." [1] His claims about intelligent design have been characterized as pseudoscience
-
I appreciate all the work you put into your posts Beach Bum, thanks...I'll look into the Black Box Book.
you can read about Behe and his "theories" here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Behe
Behe had a chance to make his argument in Court in Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District and got his ass kicked.
-
You mean like the 40 percents of scientists who believe in God (according to a poll cited by Camel)? Or the "educated people" who have written books discussing the gaping holes in evolution?
Only about 7% of the scientists in the National Academy of Sciences believe in god.. And this number was higher in 1914 at about 28%.. So this shows people becoming less religious. ;D
References:
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html
-
The judge in his final ruling relied heavily upon Behe's testimony for the defense, citing:
"Consider, to illustrate, that Professor Behe remarkably and unmistakably claims that the plausibility of the argument for ID depends upon the extent to which one believes in the existence of God."[5]
'As no evidence in the record indicates that any other scientific proposition's validity rests on belief in God, nor is the Court aware of any such scientific propositions, Professor Behe's assertion constitutes substantial evidence that in his view, as is commensurate with other prominent ID leaders, ID is a religious and not a scientific proposition."[5]
"First, defense expert Professor Fuller agreed that ID aspires to "change the ground rules" of science and lead defense expert Professor Behe admitted that his broadened definition of science, which encompasses ID, would also embrace astrology. Moreover, defense expert Professor Minnich acknowledged that for ID to be considered science, the ground rules of science have to be broadened to allow consideration of supernatural forces."[6]
"What is more, defense experts concede that ID is not a theory as that term is defined by the NAS and admit that ID is at best "fringe science" which has achieved no acceptance in the scientific community."[7]
"We therefore find that Professor Behe's claim for irreducible complexity has been refuted in peer-reviewed research papers and has been rejected by the scientific community at large."[8]
"ID proponents primarily argue for design through negative arguments against evolution, as illustrated by Professor Behe’s argument that “irreducibly complex” systems cannot be produced through Darwinian, or any natural, mechanisms. However, … arguments against evolution are not arguments for design. Expert testimony revealed that just because scientists cannot explain today how biological systems evolved does not mean that they cannot, and will not, be able to explain them tomorrow. As Dr. Padian aptly noted, “absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.”… Irreducible complexity is a negative argument against evolution, not proof of design, a point conceded by defense expert Professor Minnich."[30]
"Professor Behe’s concept of irreducible complexity depends on ignoring ways in which evolution is known to occur. Although Professor Behe is adamant in his definition of irreducible complexity when he says a precursor “missing a part is by definition nonfunctional,” what he obviously means is that it will not function in the same way the system functions when all the parts are present. For example in the case of the bacterial flagellum, removal of a part may prevent it from acting as a rotary motor. However, Professor Behe excludes, by definition, the possibility that a precursor to the bacterial flagellum functioned not as a rotary motor, but in some other way, for example as a secretory system."[31]
"Professor Behe has applied the concept of irreducible complexity to only a few select systems: (1) the bacterial flagellum; (2) the blood-clotting cascade; and (3) the immune system. Contrary to Professor Behe’s assertions with respect to these few biochemical systems among the myriad existing in nature, however, Dr. Miller presented evidence, based upon peer-reviewed studies, that they are not in fact irreducibly complex."[32]
"...proponents assert that they refuse to propose hypotheses on the designer’s identity, do not propose a mechanism, and the designer, he/she/it/they, has never been seen. … Professor Behe’s only response to these seemingly insurmountable points of disanalogy was that the inference still works in science fiction movies."[33]
-
Let's not forgot Michael Behe who had his head handed to him in court when he tried to defend Intelligent Design
I like Dawkins response to Behe and other "educated people" like him:
"He's a straightforward creationist. What he has done is to take a standard argument which dates back to the 19th century, the argument of irreducible complexity, the argument that there are certain organs, certain systems in which all the bits have to be there together or the whole system won't work...like the eye. Darwin answered (this)...point by point, piece by piece. But maybe he shouldn't have bothered. Maybe what he should have said is...maybe you're too thick to think of a reason why the eye could have come about by gradual steps, but perhaps you should go away and think a bit harder."
That's a great point. I'd almost forgotten about that case. It's devastating to creationists.
-
I appreciate all the work you put into your posts Beach Bum, thanks...I'll look into the Black Box Book.
No problem. :) You may not agree with his conclusions, but if you read the book it will cause you to think much deeper about what we have been taught. It isn't a religious book at all. Don't just rely on the review of others, many of whom haven't read the book, try it yourself. I'd love to hear your comments after you've read it.
-
BB always does a good job clarifing my convoluted points so i figured I'd do him a favor and help him since to me, it was obvious he wasn't disagreeing with you guys so much.
Thanks mang. :)
-
Many people are just really afraid, paranoid even, to question what we have been taught for years.
Bum - you are absolutely correct in this statement but it applies much more to religious thought (aka 2000 year old superstition) and not to 21 century science
-
Bum - you are absolutely correct in this statement but it applies much more to religious thought (aka 2000 year old superstition) and not to 21 century science
I think it can apply to both religious and anti-religious thought. You have paranoid extremists on both sides. But one thing I've learned is tradition can trump most anything. People get comfortable with certain beliefs and practices and don't like to challenge them.
-
The last 2-day seminar given by Dr. Hovind which I attended struck me this way: it was insulation.
The show opened w/ a big projected image of a monkey changing, pic by pic, into Bill Clinton. Funny stuff. Insulates one from true thinking on politics.
Hovind appeared (in a puff of smoke...I kid) stating that he believed the bible to be the literal inerrant word of god. Insulates one from any independent thinking.
He talked about floods and dinosaurs and monsters and mammoths. Fascinating stories, which is why my brother and I went, but stories nonetheless. Insulates from science and counter arguments.
On the final day there was a palpable feeling of a cocoon of well-being. Why after Dr. Hovind showed us how to shoot a rubber band AND a paper airplane through the air effectively, everyone was having fun.
At the end of the day, man was 6000 years old and co-existed with dinosaurs. All geology is explained by a cataclysmic flood and the devil is the source of evolution b/c he's trying to discredit the bible as history, ethics, science, sociology, psychology all in one, the inerrant word of God.
I loved the show though and I gave $20 at both of his "love offerings" when the plate was passed.
-
I think it can apply to both religious and anti-religious thought. You have paranoid extremists on both sides. But one thing I've learned is tradition can trump most anything. People get comfortable with certain beliefs and practices and don't like to challenge them.
Bum I said your statement was more applicable to religious thought (aka superstition) than it was to 21st century science.
I said nothing about anti-religious thought
science is not anti-religious (not saying you suggested that but I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to imply).
-
i dont believe that poll
-
Tuesday, June 12, 2007 7:17 a.m. EDT
Poll: 68% of GOP Voters Reject Evolution Theory
If I'm not mistaken, these are the same wacko's who elected the BIGGEST presidential failure in US history.
And your point is?
-
If I'm not mistaken, these are the same wacko's who elected the BIGGEST presidential failure in US history.
And your point is?
hahaha, exactly.
-
man oh man, the devil sure has control of democrats does he not?
I guess I should pray for every democrats soul's, they are so lost. For once I was blind but now I see.
Dems, go to church, find peace within yourself. Must be awful to be a democrat and live in such confusion.
I truly feel very sorry for all democrats, I love them as my brothers but they are so lost.
-
If I'm not mistaken, these are the same wacko's who elected the BIGGEST presidential failure in US history.
And your point is?
That the majority of those polled reject the evolution theory.
Also, those who don't believe in God make up a tiny minority in this country. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17879317/site/newsweek/
-
That the majority of those polled reject the evolution theory.
Also, those who don't believe in God make up a tiny minority in this country. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17879317/site/newsweek/
At one time in history I'm sure the majority of the people on the planet thought the world was flat but today we just laugh at stupid they were.
The Catholic church imprisoned Galileo for suggesting that the Earth was in motion around the Sun and their reasoning....."The proposition that the sun is in the center of the world and immovable from its place is absurd, philosophically false, and formally heretical; because it is expressly contrary to Holy Scriptures", and the converse as to the Sun's not revolving around the Earth.
Sheesh, all you have to do is read the bible. God explains it all right there:
Psalm 93:1, Psalm 96:10, and Chronicles 16:30 state that "the world is firmly established, it cannot be moved." Psalm 104:5 says, "[the LORD] set the earth on its foundations; it can never be moved." Ecclesiastes 1:5 states that "the sun rises and the sun sets, and hurries back to where it rises."
-
Here is another one from 2005. Pretty consistent:
Poll: Majority Reject Evolution
51 Percent Believe God Created Humans
(CBS) Most Americans do not accept the theory of evolution. Instead, 51 percent of Americans say God created humans in their present form, and another three in 10 say that while humans evolved, God guided the process. Just 15 percent say humans evolved, and that God was not involved.
These views are similar to what they were in November 2004 shortly after the presidential election.
VIEWS ON EVOLUTION/CREATIONISM
Now
God created humans in present form
51%
Humans evolved, God guided the process
30%
Humans evolved, God did not guide process
15%
Nov. 2004
God created humans in present form
55%
Humans evolved, God guided the process
27%
Humans evolved, God did not guide process
13%
This question on the origin of human beings, asked both this month and in November 2004, offered the public three alternatives: 1. Human beings evolved from less advanced life forms over millions of years, and God did not directly guide this process; 2. Human beings evolved from less advanced life forms over millions of years, but God guided this process; or 3. God created human beings in their present form.
The results were not much different between the answers to that question and those given when a specific timeline was included in the final alternative: God created human beings in their present form within the last 10,000 years.
Americans most likely to believe in only evolution are liberals (36 percent), those who rarely or never attend religious services (25 percent), and those with a college degree or higher (24 percent).
White evangelicals (77 percent), weekly churchgoers (74 percent) and conservatives (64 percent), are mostly likely to say God created humans in their present form.
. . . .
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml
-
Fuck polls.
Smarter scientists are right. 8)
-
Here is another one from 2005. Pretty consistent:
Poll: Majority Reject Evolution
51 Percent Believe God Created Humans
(CBS) Most Americans do not accept the theory of evolution. Instead, 51 percent of Americans say God created humans in their present form, and another three in 10 say that while humans evolved, God guided the process. Just 15 percent say humans evolved, and that God was not involved.
These views are similar to what they were in November 2004 shortly after the presidential election.
VIEWS ON EVOLUTION/CREATIONISM
Now
God created humans in present form
51%
Humans evolved, God guided the process
30%
Humans evolved, God did not guide process
15%
Nov. 2004
God created humans in present form
55%
Humans evolved, God guided the process
27%
Humans evolved, God did not guide process
13%
This question on the origin of human beings, asked both this month and in November 2004, offered the public three alternatives: 1. Human beings evolved from less advanced life forms over millions of years, and God did not directly guide this process; 2. Human beings evolved from less advanced life forms over millions of years, but God guided this process; or 3. God created human beings in their present form.
The results were not much different between the answers to that question and those given when a specific timeline was included in the final alternative: God created human beings in their present form within the last 10,000 years.
Americans most likely to believe in only evolution are liberals (36 percent), those who rarely or never attend religious services (25 percent), and those with a college degree or higher (24 percent).
White evangelicals (77 percent), weekly churchgoers (74 percent) and conservatives (64 percent), are mostly likely to say God created humans in their present form.
. . . .
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/10/22/opinion/polls/main965223.shtml
Bum,
I'm sure if they did a similar poll in India they would find a majority of people believe that Brahma (or Vishnu) was the creator of the universe(and maybe like in the US, those with more education would be less likely to hold such a belief or perhaps more likely to view it as a metaphor rather than a factual reality).
The same is probably true of Allah in a muslim country. If you go to a predominantly Buddhist country you might find that the majority believe that all forms are and continue to be created out of emptyness and are inherently void in and of themself (interestingly this is most in line with modern quantum theory).
Regarding christians and their peculiar book of stories I think Jonathon Swift had the right idea when he wrote:
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into"
-
68%.......... where was this survey done.......... in a church!
i also don't believe that poll.
68% are wrong!!!
............. yeah sure the earth is not older than 6000 years... ::)
-
man oh man, the devil sure has control of democrats does he not?
I guess I should pray for every democrats soul's, they are so lost. For once I was blind but now I see.
Dems, go to church, find peace within yourself. Must be awful to be a democrat and live in such confusion.
I truly feel very sorry for all democrats, I love them as my brothers but they are so lost.
Shut the fuck up already. ::)
-
Here is one from 2000:
Overall, the center's survey of surveys confirms that America truly is one nation, under God—or at least Americans say it is. In survey after survey, overwhelming majorities say they believe in God. More than nine in 10 Americans—95 percent—told ABC News polltakers that they believe in God. A Gallup Organization survey for CNN and USA Today last December found much the same thing: Nearly nine in 10—86 percent—said they believed in God, while another 8 percent said they believe in some form of "Universal spirit or higher power."
What's more, nearly eight in 10 adults—78 percent—say they've always been believers, and another 6 percent say they hadn't believed but now do.
. . . .
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/polls/wat/archive/wat042400.htm
-
Bum,
Is your point that a majority of American's are basically stupid?
For some reason I have serious doubts about most of these polls.
As of last summer ~ 43% of Americans believe that Saddam Hussein was personally involved in 9/11 (http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/06/iraq.poll/index.html)
According to a Harris poll conducted by telephone between July 5-11, 2006, 50% of American adults said they believe weapons of mass destruction (WMD) existed in Iraq before the U.S. invaded and toppled Saddam Hussein's regime
Here the rub - In October 2004 Harris Interactive found that only 38 percent of Americans believed the weapons existed. By February 2005, the percentage had dropped even further - to 36.
The latest poll - indicating that the mood has shifted and half of American adults believe Saddam possessed WMDs - surprised the polling firm (http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200607/NAT20060725a.html)
Here's more - A Zogbypoll of various branches of the military (in late 2005 or early 2006 I think) revealed that 85% said the U.S. mission is mainly “to retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9-11 attacks,” 77% said they also believe the main or a major reason for the war was “to stop Saddam from protecting al Qaeda in Iraq.” (http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075)
-
Bum,
Is your point that a majority of American's are basically stupid?
The point is that you and your ilk are a small minority in this country and your claim that people who believe in God are "stupid" or have a mental illness is just plain silly. The U.S. has the greatest number of religious groups than any other country in the world. You are out of step with mainstream America:
"Most Americans adhere to Christianity. According to the 2001 American Religious Identification Survey (discussed below), 80% of the U.S. is Christian and 15% do not adhere to a religion. Other religions comprise 5% of the U.S. population. According to the CIA World Factbook, the U.S. is 78% Christian and 10% no religion, while other religions comprise 12% of the U.S. population."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_States
That said, we have a big tent in this country and you every right to believe in nothing. It's one of the things that makes our country so great.
-
The point is that you and your ilk are a small minority in this country and your claim that people who believe in God are "stupid" or have a mental illness is just plain silly. The U.S. has the greatest number of religious groups than any other country in the world. You are out of step with mainstream America:
"Most Americans adhere to Christianity. According to the 2001 American Religious Identification Survey (discussed below), 80% of the U.S. is Christian and 15% do not adhere to a religion. Other religions comprise 5% of the U.S. population. According to the CIA World Factbook, the U.S. is 78% Christian and 10% no religion, while other religions comprise 12% of the U.S. population."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_States
That said, we have a big tent in this country and you every right to believe in nothing. It's one of the things that makes our country so great.
vexations of a frustrated Jesus Freak.
Who's my ilk? People with an education? People who haven't had their capacity for critical thought blinded by religious dogma? That's fine with me and I couldn't give a rat's ass if that's out of line with mainstream America (so you say - I have my doubts). It does however put me in the same catetgory as ~ 95% of the scientific community. (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm)
BTW Bum - don't put words in my mouth. To the best of my recollection I've never written that people who simply believe in God are stupid. I do think that some of the beliefs of fundamentlist extremes (Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and others) are akin to mental illness but I do'nt believe I have ever said this about a general belief in God. For example, I do think that Christians who believe that the earth is 10,000 years old and/or man appeared in his present form on earth about 6,0000 years are stupid (or keeping themselves intentionally ignorant)
Bum, here's a link to the poll on Gallup's site: http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27847
I'm not going to post the entire thing but here are some of the salient points:
It might seem contradictory to believe that humans were created in their present form at one time within the past 10,000 years and at the same time believe that humans developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. But, based on an analysis of the two side-by-side questions asked this month about evolution and creationism, it appears that a substantial number of Americans hold these conflicting views.
The majority of these responses are clearly religious in nature. It is fascinating to note that some Americans simply justified their objection to evolution by statements of general faith and belief. Although the New Testament does not include many explicit references to the origin of humans in the words of Jesus, 19% of Americans state that they do not believe in evolution because they believe in Jesus Christ. Other religious justifications focus on statements of belief in God, general faith concerns, references to the Bible, and the statement that "I'm a Christian."
------------------------------------------------------------
Personally, I couldn't care less if someone wants to believe in God or believe that they were created by their God. This is quite common in ALL religions. The only problem I have is when they start making absurd claims such as the earth in only 10,000 years old or homosapien appeared on the planet in it's present form about 6000 years ago. These claims are ludicrous and can easily be proven false. Even more hilarious, when asked how these figures we determined we given an explanation such as the following:
The following timeline by Theodore Pederson appeared in The Christian News, March 26, 2001, page 18.
How old is the earth?
If we go back 500 years, we come to the time of Martin Luther (born in 1483), and Columbus, who “sailed the ocean blue in 1492.”
If we go back 1000 years, we come to the time of Leif Ericson, Christian explorer, who preached Christ to pagans. (World Book, 1983, vol.6, page 270.)
If we go back 2000 years, we come to the birth of Jesus Christ. Our calendar is dated from His birth.
If we go back 3000 years, we come to the time of David and Solomon; they ruled Israel about 1000 BC.
If we go back 4000 years, we come to the time of Abraham (2000 BC), ancestor of Arabs and Jews.
If we go back 5000 years, we come to the time of Enoch, who “walked with God 300 years … and God took him [into Heaven].”
If we go back 6000 years, we come to the time of Creation, and Adam and Eve (4004 BC). Luke, evangelist and historian, records Adam as the first man (Luke 3:38).
The earth is about 6000 years old. Let God's people rejoice in Him who made them! (Psalm 149:2)
We would add that although many people don't accept this timeline of history, they have difficulty deciding exactly when they would start to disagree with it.
Was Jesus Christ real? The Bible says he was, and no serious historian doubts it.
Was King David real? The Bible says he was. Again, there is no reason to doubt it.
Was Abraham real? The Bible says he was. There seems no reason to doubt this either.
Was Enoch real? The Bible says he was. There is no reason to think the Bible has suddenly lapsed into fiction when the other people were genuine historical figures.
Was Adam real? Well, Enoch was a son of Cain, who was a son of Adam. So if Enoch was real there is no reason to think that his father Cain wasn't, or that his grandfather Adam wasn't. They were only two generations away.
And Adam was the first man, created in the first week of the earth's existence.
He lived about 6000 years ago.
------------------------------------------------------
Gee how scientific And these are the same genius's who don't believe in carbon dating. If Christians really want to "prove" their belief regarding the age of earth or man (especially to non-Christians) they're going to have to do a lot better than that.
Then again, belief in Creationism is negatively correlated with education (i.e the less education you have the more likely you are to believe in Creationism) so I guess it shouldn't be any suprise.
Frankly, I'm not even sure you understand the theory of evolution when you make comments like this:
No. A bird evolving into another species of bird still leaves you with a bird. A bird evolving into a dog is another story.
You're either being intentionally disingenous (I know how you hate that) or unintentionally stupid.
As I've pointed out previously, a poll conducted last year concluded that amost half of the respondents (all presumably adults with normal brain function) believed that Saddam Hussein was responsible for the attacks on 9-11.
In spite of their belief they are 100% wrong and given the fact that this is common knowledge they are also 100% stupid.
Just because a poll shows that people believe something doesn't lend one ounce of proof or credibility to that which they claim to believe.
-
vexations of a frustrated Jesus Freak.
Who's my ilk? People with an education? People who haven't had their capacity for critical thought blinded by religious dogma? That's fine with me and I couldn't give a rat's ass if that's out of line with mainstream America (so you say - I have my doubts). It does however put me in the same catetgory as ~ 95% of the scientific community. (http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm)
BTW Bum - don't put words in my mouth. To the best of my recollection I've never written that people who simply believe in God are stupid. I do think that some of the beliefs of fundamentlist extremes (Christian, Muslim, Jewish, and others) are akin to mental illness but I do'nt believe I have ever said this about a general belief in God. For example, I do think that Christians who believe that the earth is 10,000 years old and/or man appeared in his present form on earth about 6,0000 years are stupid (or keeping themselves intentionally ignorant)
lol. The Queen is protesting too much. Here is what you think about people who believe in "religion":
Quote
quote author=Straw Man
I never debate religion and I've never post on the religion board (I've only looked at it once or twice)
In my opinion it's pointless to debate with someone who holds a position without evidence or in contrary to evidence.
Besides, my personal belief is anyone who holds a fundamentalist belief in any religion is mentally ill (for real) which again makes for a pointless discussion
[/quote]
That makes you weird Straw Man. It also puts you out of step with:
- Every president in our nation's history
- Every legitimate presidential candidate
- Likely every current Governor in the United States
- All or substantially all of our U.S. House and Senate members
- The minister on the Congressional payroll
- A significant number of our state and city council members
- The more than 10,000 parochial schools in the United States
- The numerous religious colleges and universities in the United States
Etc., etc.
But this is America. You are free to keep believing that "anyone who holds a fundamentalist belief in any religion is mentally ill." I just wouldn't share that in public too often. It makes you sound like a weirdo.
-
lol. The Queen is protesting too much. Here is what you think about people who believe in "religion":
Quote
quote author=Straw Man
I never debate religion and I've never post on the religion board (I've only looked at it once or twice)
In my opinion it's pointless to debate with someone who holds a position without evidence or in contrary to evidence.
Besides, my personal belief is anyone who holds a fundamentalist belief in any religion is mentally ill (for real) which again makes for a pointless discussion
That makes you weird Straw Man. It also puts you out of step with:
- Every president in our nation's history
- Every legitimate presidential candidate
- Likely every current Governor in the United States
- All or substantially all of our U.S. House and Senate members
- The minister on the Congressional payroll
- A significant number of our state and city council members
- The more than 10,000 parochial schools in the United States
- The numerous religious colleges and universities in the United States
Etc., etc.
But this is America. You are free to keep believing that "anyone who holds a fundamentalist belief in any religion is mentally ill." I just wouldn't share that in public too often. It makes you sound like a weirdo.
Bum, thanks for affirming my point. I said people who hold FUNDAMENTALIST BELIEFS that are contrary to evidence and not merely a belief in a God or higher power.
Do you believe the earth is 10,000 years old or that man is 6000 years old?
If so what led you to draw this conclusion?
Please don't pull you usual crybaby response and declare that my questions is disingenous so that you can avoid answering. Act like a big boy and if you hold this belief (common among Creationists) and then stand up proud and explain it to us.
Who know, you might win over a convert or two.
-
Bum, thanks for affirming my point. I said people who hold FUNDAMENTALIST BELIEFS that are contrary to evidence and not merely a belief in a God or higher power.
Do you believe the earth is 10,000 years old or that man is 6000 years old?
If so what led you to draw this conclusion?
Please don't pull you usual crybaby response and declare that my questions is disingenous so that you can avoid answering. Act like a big boy and if you hold this belief (common among Creationists) and then stand up proud and explain it to us.
Who know, you might win over a convert or two.
You crack me up. And what exactly is a "fundamentalist belief"?
Okay, Weird Al, what does my belief in the earth's age have to do with what I posted? ??? I have no idea how old the earth is. Don't have an opinion. How old are you? ::)
-
You crack me up. And what exactly is a "fundamentalist belief"?
Okay, Weird Al, what does my belief in the earth's age have to do with what I posted? ??? I have no idea how old the earth is. Don't have an opinion. How old are you? ::)
IMO - fundamentalist belief = extreme view contrary to evidence acceptable to the majority of intelligent adults
For example - one can certainly identify with a form of Christian thought (or belief in God, higher power, organizing principle etc..) without having to believe that the earth is 10,000 years old or that man arrived on earth in his present form 6000 year ago. Both of those views have nothing to do with a belief in God or the idea that there is an organizing intelligence in the universe/multiverse. In fact those beliefs (creationist views on age of earth/man) are easily refuted by modern science. To believe something like that is akin to a mental illness (IMO).
I'm glad to see you don't believe such nonsense.
Keep in mind the very poll that is referenced in the story with which you started this thread, posed the following statement:
Creationism, that is, the idea that God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years
39% said definitely true and another 27% said probably true.
I'm glad to hear that you're not in either of these two groups and I have to assume that you think the idea is ridiculous too.
-
IMO - fundamentalist belief = extreme view contrary to evidence acceptable to the majority of intelligent adults
For example - one can certainly identify with a form of Christian thought (or belief in God, higher power, organizing principle etc..) without having to believe that the earth is 10,000 years old or that man arrived on earth in his present form 6000 year ago. Both of those views have nothing to do with a belief in God or the idea that there is an organizing intelligence in the universe/multiverse. In fact those beliefs (creationist views on age of earth/man) are easily refuted by modern science. To believe something like that is akin to a mental illness (IMO).
I'm glad to see you don't believe such nonsense.
Keep in mind the very poll that is referenced in the story with which you started this thread, posed the following statement:
Creationism, that is, the idea that God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years
39% said definitely true and another 27% said probably true.
I'm glad to hear that you're not in either of these two groups and I have to assume that you think the idea is ridiculous too.
I see. So you're not saying that the approximately 90 percent of the adult American population who believe in God are not those who hold "extreme view contrary to evidence acceptable to the majority of intelligent adults"? Who exactly are these people? Anyone who follows a particular religion?
And what exactly did you mean by this comment:
Straw Man
Bum,
Is your point that a majority of American's are basically stupid?
Also, I said I don't know what I believe regarding the earth's age. I don't know how old the earth is. Neither do you.
-
Also, I said I don't know what I believe regarding the earth's age. I don't know how old the earth is. Neither do you.
Bum,
the article you started this thread with was about a survey of GOP voters and there lack of belief in evolution.
Also, what you wrote yesterday was that you had no opinion on the age of the earth.
what does my belief in the earth's age have to do with what I posted? ??? I have no idea how old the earth is. Don't have an opinion.
This is odd because the last time you started a thread about evolution/creationism you repeatedly brought up the origin and age of the earth but when I asked you what specific point you were trying to make you just ran away
If you recall, I answered your question (see below) and then asked you what point you were trying to make and then you just avoided the question.
Even funnier - you now claim to have no opinion. Who repeatedly brings up a question about something they have no opinion about? http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=153590.75
Who created the earth, ocean, and organism that evolved into all life was we know it today?
Riiight. ::) And the theory of evolution doesn't do the same thing? An explosion created a perfectly formed earth that rotates on its axis every 24 hours and revolves around the sun every 365 days, and created an organism that spawned all life on planet earth? How did this happen? It cannot be proved. Don't try and tell me that God existing is an "unprovable" conclusion, but the sudden existence of our earth and an organism that created everything we see today CAN be proved.
Camel where did the earth, ocean, and oganism that spawned all life on planet earth come from?
Where did the earth and the organism that spawned all life on planet earth come from?
What's the answer? Where did the earth and the organism that created life on earth come from?
And you never answered my question about the origin of the earth and the organism that resulted in life on planet earth.
my response and follow up question which you would/could not answer
your question was "Where did the earth and the organism that spawned all life on planet earth come from?"
and the answer is obvious - I have no idea
that being said doesn't constitute any sort of proof of the existence of God or Creationism.
I've made the same point over and over.
That is the basic flaw in ALL of your arguments.
Let's try this one more time. If you don't understand this maybe you can take it to one of your childrens grade school teachers and they can explain it to you.
The two most common forms of the argument from ignorance, both fallacious, can be reduced to the following form:
- Something is currently unexplained or insufficiently understood or explained, so it is not (or must not be) true.
- Because there appears to be a lack of evidence for one hypothesis, another chosen hypothesis is therefore considered proved.
What's the point of the question in the first place?
You're trying to set up a form of negative argument which is specious.
No one can answer that question definitively but that does not IN ANY WAY constitute an affirmation or proof of God
At this point you just declared my question disengenous and didn't respond.
Why is it that you run away from your own arguments when faced with a challenge.
Why not just address my question head on
What point were you trying to make by constanting brining up the origin and age of the earth?
Even more - why pretend now that you don't even have an opinion given your obvious interest (presumably with some point) in your prior posts
-
Bum,
the article you started this thread with was about a survey of GOP voters and there lack of belief in evolution.
Also, what you wrote yesterday was that you had no opinion on the age of the earth.
This is odd because the last time you started a thread about evolution/creationism you repeatedly brought up the origin and age of the earth but when I asked you what specific point you were trying to make you just ran away
If you recall, I answered your question (see below) and then asked you what point you were trying to make and then you just avoided the question.
Even funnier - you now claim to have no opinion. Who repeatedly brings up a question about something they have no opinion about? http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?topic=153590.75
my response and follow up question which you would/could not answer
At this point you just declared my question disengenous and didn't respond.
Why is it that you run away from your own arguments when faced with a challenge.
Why not just address my question head on
What point were you trying to make by constanting brining up the origin and age of the earth?
Even more - why pretend now that you don't even have an opinion given your obvious interest (presumably with some point) in your prior posts
Once again, all over the friggin map. ::) Get a grip dude. I don't usually repeatedly answer the same question. If you can't figure out that I answered your question, then that's your problem. Go back and read slowly. The answer is right under your nose, grasshopper.
You didn't respond to my questions regarding your belief that the people who hold "fundamentalist beliefs" are "mentally ill." Who are these people? I won't keep asking and it's okay if you don't respond. It's a weird opinion anyway. :)
Also, in response to my post that the overwhelming majority of Americans believe in God, you responded with the following:
"Is your point that a majority of American's are basically stupid?"
I asked for a clarification, because it certainly sounded as though you were calling anyone who believes in God stupid. That's my interpretation anyway.
-
Once again, all over the friggin map. ::) Get a grip dude. I don't usually repeatedly answer the same question. If you can't figure out that I answered your question, then that's your problem. Go back and read slowly. The answer is right under your nose, grasshopper.
You didn't respond to my questions regarding your belief that the people who hold "fundamentalist beliefs" are "mentally ill." Who are these people? I won't keep asking and it's okay if you don't respond. It's a weird opinion anyway. :)
Also, in response to my post that the overwhelming majority of Americans believe in God, you responded with the following:
"Is your point that a majority of American's are basically stupid?"
I asked for a clarification, because it certainly sounded as though you were calling anyone who believes in God stupid. That's my interpretation anyway.
Bum - you seem to be the only one that can't follow along.
You've repeatedly brought up the question of the origin and age of the earth and when I asked you what point you were trying to make you avoided the question.
You seem to think that if you just reject modern science regarding the age of the earth then you somehow have only one other choice and that is that it was created by your Christian God.
As I've tried to explain - even if our current theories are proven totally wrong it still wouldn't bring you one step closer to proving your point.
See if you can recognize all of your arguments in these two fallacies. They form the crux of most of your arguments:
The two most common forms of the argument from ignorance, both fallacious, can be reduced to the following form:
- Something is currently unexplained or insufficiently understood or explained, so it is not (or must not be) true.
- Because there appears to be a lack of evidence for one hypothesis, another chosen hypothesis is therefore considered proved.
------------------------
Bum, honestly why do you even bother trying to "prove" creationism or the existence of a Christian God.
If you could prove it then your religion would become a science.
Also, if you could prove it then what would be the value of faith?
Why do Christians go to such absurd lengths (like counting up the generations in the bible as proof of the age of man)
Why not just say your faith is what tells you something is true and don't even bother with the weak and totally false arguments.
-
Once again, all over the friggin map. ::) Get a grip dude. I don't usually repeatedly answer the same question. If you can't figure out that I answered your question, then that's your problem. Go back and read slowly. The answer is right under your nose, grasshopper.
You didn't respond to my questions regarding your belief that the people who hold "fundamentalist beliefs" are "mentally ill." Who are these people? I won't keep asking and it's okay if you don't respond. It's a weird opinion anyway. :)
Also, in response to my post that the overwhelming majority of Americans believe in God, you responded with the following:
"Is your point that a majority of American's are basically stupid?"
I asked for a clarification, because it certainly sounded as though you were calling anyone who believes in God stupid. That's my interpretation anyway.
Bum - I directly answered your question and even gave you an example. What about it don't you get and I'll try to clarify it for you.
Regarding my comment about people being stupid - it was in reference to the original poll on this thread and not the poll that you posted about belief in God in general. I do understand why you might be confused on this since my post was immediately after your post regarding the belief in God poll. If you go back you'll notice that my post was not a response to your post. It just happened to immediately follow it.
Just to be clear - I don't think people who believe in God are stupid (ANY GOD) and I don't believe people who don't believe in God are stupid either. Neither position can be proven and it makes perfect sense to me that some people choose to believe in God or even just a higher power, an organzing intelligence or even just a holistic sense of self as one with the universe.
Virtually all societies have religious beliefs and it makes perfect sense that someone growing up in a western culture might be indoctrinated in Christian thought (I was) just like someone who is born in India might be a Hindu and someone in Iran/Iraq might be a Muslim.
What I do think is ridiculous is when Christians start making lame arguments like counting up the generations in their story book (aka the Bible) and then pretending that's somehow science. It's also interesting that they reject Evolution (generally accepted by all mainstream scientists) but the only "reason" they can give is that they are a Christian (go back and read the actual Gallup Poll). Even more lame is the arguments that you repeatedly make where you simply reject something and then pretend that by virtue of your rejection of one hypothesis that you've proven your point. Keep doing this and I'll keep pointing out that it's stupid. If you disagree then try addressing it directly.
Here's another wacky example that I learned being raised as a Catholic. Fundamentalist Catholics believe that the communion wafer and the wine Literally become the physical body and the blood of Jesus. This is their literal belief. It's called transubstantiation. I thought that was stupid when I was 7 years old and learned about it when getting ready for my first communion. Guess what - I still think it's stupid today I could go on with these examples all day long
IMO - fundamentalist belief = extreme view contrary to evidence acceptable to the majority of intelligent adults
For example - one can certainly identify with a form of Christian thought (or belief in God, higher power, organizing principle etc..) without having to believe that the earth is 10,000 years old or that man arrived on earth in his present form 6000 year ago. Both of those views have nothing to do with a belief in God or the idea that there is an organizing intelligence in the universe/multiverse. In fact those beliefs (creationist views on age of earth/man) are easily refuted by modern science. To believe something like that is akin to a mental illness (IMO).
I'm glad to see you don't believe such nonsense.
Keep in mind the very poll that is referenced in the story with which you started this thread, posed the following statement:
Creationism, that is, the idea that God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years
39% said definitely true and another 27% said probably true.
I'm glad to hear that you're not in either of these two groups and I have to assume that you think the idea is ridiculous too.
-
Let's see. (A) Try and respond to 50 fifty questions, most of which don't make any dang sense or (B) ignore.
I'll take (B) for 300 Alex . . . .
-
Let's see. (A) Try and respond to 50 fifty questions, most of which don't make any dang sense or (B) ignore.
I'll take (B) for 300 Alex . . . .
Sorry Bum, I'm used to having these types of conversations with my friends, all of whom are intelligent adults and are capable of dealing with more than one question at time.
I'll try to keep this post short so it won't tax your attention span
Let's go back to the original theme of this thread which you started.
The poll referenced in the article can be found here: http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27847
The basic premise of the article (based on the poll) is that 68% of GOP REJECT evolution.
If you read the poll you'll notice that the results varied depending on how the question was posed and what options were available to choose for answers.
It seems that a large group held the mutually exclusive belief that humans were created in their present form at one time within the past 10,000 years and at the same time believe that humans developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life
The pollsters comments: Without further research, it's not possible to determine the exact thinking process of those who agreed that both the theory of evolution and creationism are true.
More comments from the same poll:
Thus, it is not surprising to find that many of those who do not believe in the theory of evolution justify that belief with explicitly religious explanations:
(Asked of those who do not believe in evolution) What is the most important reason why you would say you do not believe in evolution? [OPEN-ENDED]
2007 May 21-24
I believe in Jesus Christ: 19%
I believe in the almighty God, creator of Heaven and Earth: 16%
Due to my religion and faith: 16%
Not enough scientific evidence to prove otherwise: 14% (btw bum - this is seems to be your reasoning - I've already pointed out the flaws in this but you've never chosen to address my argument directly)
I believe in what I read in the Bible: 12% (???)
I'm a Christian: 9%
I don't believe humans come from beasts/monkeys: 3%
Other: 5%
No reason in particular: 2%
No opinion: 3%
from the pollsters "The majority of these responses are clearly religious in nature. It is fascinating to note that some Americans simply justified their objection to evolution by statements of general faith and belief"
I think it's safe to assume that these respondents were Christians (and not Muslims, Hindu's etc..)
OK Bum - hopefully you've made it this far without getting lost
Here are the questions (sorry I know it's more than one question):
1. Why do Christians believe that the human species is only 10,000 years old
2. How did they arrive at this #
-
Sorry Bum, I'm used to having these types of conversations with my friends, all of whom are intelligent adults and are capable of dealing with more than one question at time.
I'll try to keep this post short so it won't tax your attention span
Let's go back to the original theme of this thread which you started.
The poll referenced in the article can be found here: http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27847
The basic premise of the article (based on the poll) is that 68% of GOP REJECT evolution.
If you read the poll you'll notice that the results varied depending on how the question was posed and what options were available to choose for answers.
It seems that a large group held the mutually exclusive belief that humans were created in their present form at one time within the past 10,000 years and at the same time believe that humans developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life
The pollsters comments: Without further research, it's not possible to determine the exact thinking process of those who agreed that both the theory of evolution and creationism are true.
More comments from the same poll:
Thus, it is not surprising to find that many of those who do not believe in the theory of evolution justify that belief with explicitly religious explanations:
(Asked of those who do not believe in evolution) What is the most important reason why you would say you do not believe in evolution? [OPEN-ENDED]
2007 May 21-24
I believe in Jesus Christ: 19%
I believe in the almighty God, creator of Heaven and Earth: 16%
Due to my religion and faith: 16%
Not enough scientific evidence to prove otherwise: 14% (btw bum - this is seems to be your reasoning - I've already pointed out the flaws in this but you've never chosen to address my argument directly)
I believe in what I read in the Bible: 12% (???)
I'm a Christian: 9%
I don't believe humans come from beasts/monkeys: 3%
Other: 5%
No reason in particular: 2%
No opinion: 3%
from the pollsters "The majority of these responses are clearly religious in nature. It is fascinating to note that some Americans simply justified their objection to evolution by statements of general faith and belief"
I think it's safe to assume that these respondents were Christians (and not Muslims, Hindu's etc..)
OK Bum - hopefully you've made it this far without getting lost
Here are the questions (sorry I know it's more than one question):
1. Why do Christians believe that the human species is only 10,000 years old
2. How did they arrive at this #
Sorry. You lost me. ::)
-
Sorry. You lost me. ::)
Gee, why does that not suprise me.
You started this thread by posting an article that makes reference to a Gallup Poll.
Did you ever consider actually reading the poll itself or do you normally just draw grand conclusions from headlines without ever reading the references??
You can read the poll here:
http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27847
-
The same article could just as easily been titled "Majority of Independents and Democrats Believe in Evolution"
One of only two bar charts from the actual Gallup Poll
-
Belief in creation is not going to be proved or not through scientific fact thats a metaphysical issue.
True, although belief in the origins of life based on any theory is not going to be proved through scientific fact.
-
isnt that what i said? thats what i mean youre not going to prove through SCIENCE, its pre science, is a philosophical issue Darwin has nothing to do with this area nor any other scientist this is for philosophy and religion.
No, your comments were limited to "Belief in creation." But I see now that you intended to say any theory, so we're in fact saying the same thing.
-
Re: Poll: 68% of GOP Voters Reject Evolution Theory
YOU'RE KIDDING????
The evolution theory makes no money... only organized religion does. ;)
Beach, this is your board...comments? :)
-
True, although belief in the origins of life based on any theory is not going to be proved through scientific fact.
Bum, let me first just say that I honesty couldn't care less about evolution, creationism, etc... It has zero effect on my life (like everyone else I imagine). Having said that, the fact is the majority of scientist around the world do accept evolution as scientific fact and regardless of the "gaps" you constantly complain about maybe they're all just using Bum logic and saying: We can't prove Creationism...THUS....th e only other answer must be evolution (I'm joking of course but I'm pretty sure you won't get it).
Even if you reject evolution as a theory how can you assert that modern science (really only ~ 150 years old) will never be able to prove something (anything) in the future?
Even the way you state this is silly. What scientific fact are you talking about.
Oh shit, that's two questions. I hope you're not lost again.
Here's # 3 - Why do Christians always assume their god is the Creator. Why not a Hindu God or an African God or maybe some new "god" that some prophet will reveal to us in the 23rd century?
-
Re: Poll: 68% of GOP Voters Reject Evolution Theory
YOU'RE KIDDING????
The evolution theory makes no money... only organized religion does. ;)
Beach, this is your board...comments? :)
Not my board Deedee (belongs to Ron), but I'm not sure what you're asking me to comment on. You asking for my comments on the story or your evolution/religion money statement?
-
Bum, let me first just say that I honesty couldn't care less about evolution, creationism, etc... It has zero effect on my life (like everyone else I imagine). Having said that, the fact is the majority of scientist around the world do accept evolution as scientific fact and regardless of the "gaps" you constantly complain about maybe they're all just using Bum logic and saying: We can't prove Creationism...THUS....th e only other answer must be evolution (I'm joking of course but I'm pretty sure you won't get it).
Even if you reject evolution as a theory how can you assert that modern science (really only ~ 150 years old) will never be able to prove something (anything) in the future?
Even the way you state this is silly. What scientific fact are you talking about.
Oh shit, that's two questions. I hope you're not lost again.
Here's # 3 - Why do Christians always assume their god is the Creator. Why not a Hindu God or an African God or maybe some new "god" that some prophet will reveal to us in the 23rd century?
::)