39% of Americans Believe in Evolution

[jet_porkins]

I need a facepalm pic.

So if you don't believe in evolution, or creationism, what the hell do you believe? That the world just popped out of thin air?

For the record: the monkey comment came off ignorant, but it was not my direct point. My point was, in the grand scheme of things, I do not personally believe the human species was derived from anything. I believe God created the universe, but not in seven literal days.

 

[Eejit]

in the grand scheme of things, I do not personally believe the human species was derived from anything.

Based on what evidence?

 

[jet_porkins]

Based on what evidence?

I have no empirical evidence to show you. I guess you would call that faith.

As a side note, the bible is pretty vague when it comes to the physical process that happened when man was created. I have no scientific answer for you.

 

[Solaris]

I have no empirical evidence to show you. I guess you would call that faith.

As a side note, the bible is pretty vague when it comes to the physical process that happened when man was created. I have no scientific answer for you.

Your saying you refuse to believe something that has tons of evidence. That is universally agreed by all reputable biologists. And you have no evidence to show this idea might be untrue?

I belive, sir, you are insane.

 

[Sledgehammer]

God was never a scientific concept, it's a theological and philosophical. Although the concept of it does have ramification that would appear to contradict certain empirical discoveries in the natural sciences, that could easily be dismissed by claiming that religious texts such as the bible should be seen as allegories. Thus, God, even in its biblical form, can never be disproved by science, as it's supporters can always claim that its stories (the Garden of Eden, Noah's Ark etc.) all should be seen as allegories.

Although in neurology, the concept of "God" can be viewed as a scientific concept. It can also be viewed as "religiosity", not to be confused with spiritualism.
My point was that God is invalid and unworkable argument, as it's impossible to disprove. If an experiment shows that it doesn't exist, the supporters of it can just claim their god didn't show it's true nature. Any proper scientific theory should be testable by experiments, which God is not.

 

[jet_porkins]

Your saying you refuse to believe something that has tons of evidence. That is universally agreed by all reputable biologists. And you have no evidence to show this idea might be untrue?

I belive, sir, you are insane.

That's why it's called faith.

 

[Xevrex]

' Well I believe in creationism, so I'm not one of the shamless siners who has to sit here and try to figure this out
Source(s):
*rEaD a BiBlE fOlKs!*'

Found this on Yahoo Answers. This was written by a teenage American girl. Goes to show how ignorant America's youth is and how subsceptible they are to [strike]brainwash[/strike] [strike]mind control[/strike] disproven religious theories.

I'm sorry, that's the best way I could put it.

 

[Sledgehammer]

' Well I believe in creationism, so I'm not one of the shamless siners who has to sit here and try to figure this out
Source(s):
*rEaD a BiBlE fOlKs!*'

Found this on Yahoo Answers. This was written by a teenage American girl. Goes to show how ignorant America's youth is and how subsceptible they are to [strike]brainwash[/strike] [strike]mind control[/strike] disproven religious theories.

I'm sorry, that's the best way I could put it.

I did not get that at all.

And, religion does not brainwash. Cults brainwash. Taleban brainwashes. Kamikaze pilots were brainwashed. But not religion, and no one ever claimed they did (except ultra-conservative people from other religions).

 

[Polaris]

Catholics, baptists or muslims, they all doing brainwashing at some level. Major religions are just cults with more people. That's it.

 

[Tyguy]

I did not get that at all.

And, religion does not brainwash.

How on earth do you figure?

 

[Eejit]

I have no empirical evidence to show you. I guess you would call that faith.

As a side note, the bible is pretty vague when it comes to the physical process that happened when man was created. I have no scientific answer for you.

But there is evidence to the contrary, in favour of evolution. How can you just dismiss all of that? Do you think your God gave you a brain and reason without wanting you to use them?

 

[jet_porkins]

But there is evidence to the contrary, in favour of evolution. How can you just dismiss all of that? Do you think your God gave you a brain and reason without wanting you to use them?

The topic no longer interests me. Make no mistake, I am wildly fascinated with the creation of the universe and how life all got started. I find it fascinating that I am standing on a planet, probably smaller in proportion to the universe as a speck of sand is to the entire world. I find it unbelievable that we have to measure the far-reaching areas of our universe in the distance that light travels in a year, and the fact that the number of light years go well into the millions and billions into the universe, not just length-wise but in all directions possible within a spherical space, and in that universe exists beauty no eye has seen before. Now, my point is that I have found a truth that is substantial for me: God created it. I don't disbelieve the possibility of the evolving of a species, I just don't believe that humans are derived from some sort of evolution, because of my belief in certain scripture. Before you throw down the "delusional," "ignorant," or "brainwashed" card, I'll say a few words.

I don't believe what I believe because I wasn't given a brain without reason. I wasn't born a believer. I believe because I have observed and witnessed miracles in my life as a result of following the irrational side of faith that wouldn't have happened in a rational world. VERY long story short, I made a personal decision to pursue that faith. It was a choice, with my very own brain. Believing that God created life and the universe is enough satisfaction for me. The bible that I believe as a result of witnessing miracles in my life tells me only so much...it doesn't answer clearly every single question that life has to offer. I will happily take comfort in my faith beyond that point, just as you are taking comfort in the faith that human scientists are right.

 

[PvtRyan]

That's why it's called faith.

And that's why it's stupid.

 

[Sledgehammer]

faith
   /feɪθ/ [feyth]
–noun
belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.

 

[Escaep]

' Well I believe in creationism, so I'm not one of the shamless siners who has to sit here and try to figure this out
Source(s):
*rEaD a BiBlE fOlKs!*'

Found this on Yahoo Answers. This was written by a teenage American girl. Goes to show how ignorant America's youth is and how subsceptible they are to [strike]brainwash[/strike] [strike]mind control[/strike] disproven religious theories.

I'm sorry, that's the best way I could put it.

Way to generalize.

 

[Stigmata]

The topic no longer interests me. Make no mistake, I am wildly fascinated with the creation of the universe and how life all got started. I find it fascinating that I am standing on a planet, probably smaller in proportion to the universe as a speck of sand is to the entire world. I find it unbelievable that we have to measure the far-reaching areas of our universe in the distance that light travels in a year, and the fact that the number of light years go well into the millions and billions into the universe, not just length-wise but in all directions possible within a spherical space, and in that universe exists beauty no eye has seen before. Now, my point is that I have found a truth that is substantial for me: God created it. I don't disbelieve the possibility of the evolving of a species, I just don't believe that humans are derived from some sort of evolution, because of my belief in certain scripture. Before you throw down the "delusional," "ignorant," or "brainwashed" card, I'll say a few words.

I don't believe what I believe because I wasn't given a brain without reason. I wasn't born a believer. I believe because I have observed and witnessed miracles in my life as a result of following the irrational side of faith that wouldn't have happened in a rational world. VERY long story short, I made a personal decision to pursue that faith. It was a choice, with my very own brain. Believing that God created life and the universe is enough satisfaction for me. The bible that I believe as a result of witnessing miracles in my life tells me only so much...it doesn't answer clearly every single question that life has to offer. I will happily take comfort in my faith beyond that point, just as you are taking comfort in the faith that human scientists are right.

You have all the right in the world to believe that, and I respect your decision. But I have to say, isn't it a little stubborn, or even narrowminded, of you to come to a conclusion and never revisit it? Is it really enough for you to just believe it, in the face of contradictory evidence?

 

[theotherguy]

I don't believe what I believe because I wasn't given a brain without reason. I wasn't born a believer. I believe because I have observed and witnessed miracles in my life as a result of following the irrational side of faith that wouldn't have happened in a rational world. VERY long story short, I made a personal decision to pursue that faith. It was a choice, with my very own brain. Believing that God created life and the universe is enough satisfaction for me. The bible that I believe as a result of witnessing miracles in my life tells me only so much...it doesn't answer clearly every single question that life has to offer. I will happily take comfort in my faith beyond that point, just as you are taking comfort in the faith that human scientists are right.

Please elaborate on the "miracles" you observed, and why they were so compelling as to necessitate the belief in a deity.

Also, I am not taking comfort in "faith" that human scientists are "right." I believe in science because science shows evidence for the claims that it makes, and backs up these claims with experimental verification. If evidence points towards a proposition, and I have nothing to contradict it, then it would be reasonable for me to believe in it. However, science often gets things wrong (see phlogiston, ether, etc.) But the beauty of science is that it is self-correcting.

And I don't mean self-correcting in the way that religion is self-correcting. Religion self-corrects by claiming what was believed earlier to be an allegory, but which was still the truth (you just have to look at it the right way, damnit!) While science completely throws out ideas that are not backed up by evidence.

For example, Newtonian mechanics were shown to work for hundreds and hundreds of years, but when Einstein came along and made new claims and provided new experiments, Newton was shown to be completely false. Now, Newtonian mechanics are still used in modern engineering and calculations, but only because they are a reasonable approximation of general relativity. Scientists don't say that Newton had an "allegory" for general relativity or that he was "secretly hinting" at it. They admit that Newton was wrong, or at least that he hadn't come up with the experimental evidence needed to verify his theory fully.

More to the point, scientists used to think that burning was caused by a substance called phlogiston, which would leave objects when they were burning. They called burnt air "phlogistated air", and proposed that the flow of phlogiston was responsible for many things, like reduction, oxidation, etc. It was later shown by a simple experiment that as magnesium burned, it gained, rather than lost mass; even though it was supposed to have lost phlogiston. From there, they deduced that phlogiston did not exist, and instead called the substance causing these reactions "oxygen." For a long time, there was contention between the phlogiston-supporting scientists and the oxygen-supporting scientists, but many experiments later verified that it was oxygen, not phlogiston, causing burning and oxidation. Phlogiston is not seen as an "allegory" for oxygen, and we don't try to reconcile phlogiston and oxygen theories; science simply threw out phlogiston when it didn't meet experimental criteria.


The point I am trying to make is that my belief in science isn't taken on faith. Faith would require me to believe in something without, or in spite of, evidence. But I have already shown that by definition, when science encounters contrary evidence, it completely changes. Science doesn't go on believing in something when the evidence doesn't support it.

Religion, on the other hand, will instruct its followers to continue to believe in its assertions, simply by changing the way they look at the assertions. The "not literal days" baloney is a perfect example of this. When it was discovered that the earth was not formed in 7 days at all, and that it was MUCH older than 6,000 years, embarrassed creationists simply could not reconcile their beliefs with the truth. In order to preserve the credibility of their creation story, they pick and choose certain assertions to be "allegorical", so that they can be interpreted as anything, while leaving assertions that are not contradicted by evidence as "literal." In this way, creationists preserve the authority of their scripture, while seemingly sidestepping the obvious factual contradictions therein.

It simply doesn't matter what evidence is found, creationists (and religions in general) will continue to sidestep the issues by making their scriptures "not literal." But, I hope you can see, this makes them meaningless. It means that they can be interpreted, rather than obeyed. It means that the scriptures don't actually dictate what you should think and do. It means that you decide what is true and false, and fit the scripture to you.

Why not just cut out the middle-man and forget about the scriptures all-together?

EDIT: Just realized you might cite science as doing the same thing with Newton as religion did with 7-days. Please note that Newton is used because his theories are a good approximation of the truth at low speeds. In fact, newtons laws remain accurate to within %3 up to speeds at .5(c). On Earth, we almost never see these speeds, so his laws can be used as a fairly good approximation. Note though, that 1 day is not a very good approximation for 1 x 10^8 years (the time between the formation of the sun and the formation of the earth).

 

[xcellerate]

This was written by a teenage American girl. Goes to show how ignorant America's youth is and how subsceptible they are to [strike]brainwash[/strike] [strike]mind control[/strike] disproven religious theories.

Exactly, I completely forgot that america is the only country with people who believe in creationism. -_-

edit: This argument is a stupid one, the only argument that is more useless is abortion, and just like abortion you will never convince anybody, ever, to give up their beliefs and believe what you believe. There is no great statement you can make and no evidence you can present that's going to work, yet people keep trying....

 

[CptStern]

The topic no longer interests me. Make no mistake, I am wildly fascinated with the creation of the universe and how life all got started. I find it fascinating that I am standing on a planet, probably smaller in proportion to the universe as a speck of sand is to the entire world. I find it unbelievable that we have to measure the far-reaching areas of our universe in the distance that light travels in a year, and the fact that the number of light years go well into the millions and billions into the universe, not just length-wise but in all directions possible within a spherical space, and in that universe exists beauty no eye has seen before. Now, my point is that I have found a truth that is substantial for me: God created it.

there's a disconect from what you're saying and the tenents of your faith. if the universe is as you say; massive on a scale we humans cant really understand, doesnt it stand to reason that the likihood of the earth being the centre of the unvierse (figuratively speaking; god created man in him image, we are the "chosen ones") is so remotely slim that it would defy any sort of measurement? I mean, why create everything else, if everything is contained on this rock? a more likely scenario (if you were to take the major tenant of all religions; the followers are "chosen") is that the earth and solar system is pretty much all that there is? Religion certainly holds no room for anything outside of our solar system from a creationist pov

I don't disbelieve the possibility of the evolving of a species, I just don't believe that humans are derived from some sort of evolution, because of my belief in certain scripture.

you mean your faith in certain scripture; there's absolutely zero evidence to support any scripture pertaining to the origin of the universe whereas there's some pretty sound evidence in a non creationism origin of the universe. in other words your faith doesnt allow room for fact because it doesnt gel with your own pov. to dismiss something simply on gut feeling is by definition close minded. now that's a loaded term that can be negative but it is accurate based on what you've said

Before you throw down the "delusional," "ignorant," or "brainwashed" card, I'll say a few words. I don't believe what I believe because I wasn't given a brain without reason. I wasn't born a believer. I believe because I have observed and witnessed miracles in my life as a result of following the irrational side of faith that wouldn't have happened in a rational world. VERY long story short, I made a personal decision to pursue that faith. It was a choice, with my very own brain. Believing that God created life and the universe is enough satisfaction for me. The bible that I believe as a result of witnessing miracles in my life tells me only so much...it doesn't answer clearly every single question that life has to offer. I will happily take comfort in my faith beyond that point, just as you are taking comfort in the faith that human scientists are right.

there is no "faith" in science; you either take the evidence as is or you ignore it. faith plays no part in science

 

[jet_porkins]

Please elaborate on the "miracles" you observed, and why they were so compelling as to necessitate the belief in a deity.

Check your inbox.

there's a disconect from what you're saying and the tenents of your faith. if the universe is as you say; massive on a scale we humans cant really understand, doesnt it stand to reason that the likihood of the earth being the centre of the unvierse (figuratively speaking; god created man in him image, we are the "chosen ones") is so remotely slim that it would defy any sort of measurement? I mean, why create everything else, if everything is contained on this rock? a more likely scenario (if you were to take the major tenant of all religions; the followers are "chosen") is that the earth and solar system is pretty much all that there is? Religion certainly holds no room for anything outside of our solar system from a creationist pov

Hah I was wondering when you'd jump in Stern. While the bible says nothing specific about anything outside our solar system, the "tenets of my faith" do not deny anything outside our solar system either. In fact, the simple fact that the size of the universe is incomprehensible to the human mind helps rather than hinders the side of God, if you ask me. As far as why He made everything outside our solar system, from a scriptural standpoint, it was for his own joy. "God created ______ and it was good." It was simply because He liked his creations. I don't know why there's a vast amount of space out there, I just accept and know that there is (in addition to the possibility of life out there).

you mean your faith in certain scripture; there's absolutely zero evidence to support any scripture pertaining to the origin of the universe whereas there's some pretty sound evidence in a non creationism origin of the universe. in other words your faith doesnt allow room for fact because it doesnt gel with your own pov.

Well I did just admit the universe is a lot bigger as a result of observing modern-day cosmological discoveries, and that the creation of the universe and all life did not occur in 7 literal days. That's a moderate answer compared to what most people here claim the majority of Christians believe, if we're in consensus that most Christians are conservative creationists. It seems like either way I'd argue this, I am paradoxically wrong. On the one hand, someone said "Because science disproved scripture, your belief in scripture has to be 'interpreted,' so therefore is wrong." On the other hand, if I choose to dismiss scientific discovery I'm ignorant.

to dismiss something simply on gut feeling is by definition close minded. now that's a loaded term that can be negative but it is accurate based on what you've said

I never said evolution within a species is impossible, nor do I follow the sentiment that evolution is wrong because it contradicts some principles of my faith. I simply don't know.

If there's a specific line that I will draw in accordance with my beliefs, it is that humankind is not a species derived or evolved from previous living organisms. I don't think any amount of human discovery will dissuade me from my fundamental belief that man was created in God's image. I am willing to call myself close-minded over that.

there is no "faith" in science; you either take the evidence as is or you ignore it. faith plays no part in science

There is faith in men that they can find the all the right answers, however. And as previously argued, answers discovered by men are subject to human error. Part of being human is that everyone is subject to mistake or miscalculation. The scientific conclusions of today can be contradicted on a whim by tomorrow. This argument is a dead-end street though because I do believe that science should always be doing something to make the world a better place (cloning organs, and what not).

 

[Citadel]

Jet, I too am interested in the anecdotal evidence that you think dismisses 200 years of unbiased study, which has amassed a mountain of empirical evidence. What miracles have you witnessed? Don't get me wrong, if I sound sarcastic it is likely due to the ignorance that, frustratingly, many who share your faith demonstrate. Honestly, if you feel they aren't too personal, please divulge them via PM.

But really, how can you possibly justify faith in scripture. Believing blindly is not a virtue. What puts the whole "image of God" passage above other so-called metaphors in your holy book? What makes this set in stone, when contradictory to scripture, you think the world wasn't made in 7 days? Isn't it more likely that your God kick-started evolution? There has been huge enquiry into evolution over the past 150 years, yet apparently, the metaphors of a 2000 year old book, written by men who hadn't discovered the atom, cells, DNA... who didn't comprehend much at all really, seems to make this impossible. The Bible and evolution are not irreconcilable. If you are to believe in a God, then I'm sorry, you have to base your belief around reality. When you've done this, there is so little left that the concept of God collapses in on itself.

Why is being made in God's image so important to you. So much so, that you disregard a megaton of evidence. You do know, that humans are not perfect correct? Well it is the imperfections that make us special. Just because we weren't made by fairies doesn't make life any less beautiful. In my opinion, evolution only makes the word more beautiful, something so complex, yet so simple... It is a truly amazing theory, with interminable evidence to boot.

What gives that passage, regarding the origin of life, so much, undue in my view, attention. Why is that part less of a "metaphor?" What "miracles" have you seen? Why is evolution so irreconcilable in your view?

You seem to pick and choose parts which are literal, and others for interpretation. This is one slippery slope to be on. There is just so much evidence to the contrary to any scripture. Your religion is based around ancient ideas. How you think these have any relevance in the modern world is beyond me.

P.S It's late, forgive me for any repetition in this post. I find it hard to articulate myself at 3:00am.

 

[Great Grizzly]

This is a ****ing disgrace:



http://www.gallup.com/poll/114544/Darwin-Birthday-Believe-Evolution.aspx

200 years after Darwins birth and this is the thanks he gets. I'm so ****ing pissed right now I don't know what to do with myself. America is an embarrassment to the entire world. I can't take being surrounded by such gullible assholes 24/7.

This country is ****ed.

I am actually surprised it is that high. I was thinking more in the area of 10 percent.

 

[Qonfused]

Anyway, these threads always led no where. Nothing is accomplished with these threads.

Let him have is faith. I don't think anyone really cares, actually. They're just looking for someone to bark at. He's not going to "see the light" or what have you, so why the hell attack him for his beliefs? Because you don't agree? How religious of you.

I do have to say though, this is one of the most well mannered religious threads. But since CptStern popped his head in here, only God knows...

 

[Absinthe]

Xmas is for dum fuks

 

[jet_porkins]

I've only chosen to respond to the following:

Jet, I too am interested in the anecdotal evidence that you think dismisses 200 years of unbiased study, which has amassed a mountain of empirical evidence. What miracles have you witnessed? Don't get me wrong, if I sound sarcastic it is likely due to the ignorance that, frustratingly, many who share your faith demonstrate. Honestly, if you feel they aren't too personal, please divulge them via PM.

I'll give an example very personal to me. Expect a PM.

But really, how can you possibly justify faith in scripture. Believing blindly is not a virtue. If you are to believe in a God, then I'm sorry, you have to base your belief around reality.

Is true happiness and satisfaction in life not a justifiable cause for belief? This path has opened many doors in my life, healed wounds in my family, has shown me the purpose that I was made on this world for, and through it I know I will be used like a tool, spent like a coin, to do great things and change the world for the better.

Everyone here has only ever focused on the bickering of fact trumping faith. Evidence shows this, modern science proves that, this concept is a paradox, belief without reason is irrational and delusional.

If you won't accept anything as truth before everything can be proven logically to its fullest extent, good luck. That's a risk I have chosen to take, because I've discovered that it's that worth it. I didn't just wake up and say "I'm a Christian now." THAT is blind belief. Something powerful took place within me that coerced me to answer its call. Metaphorically, I was blind, and my eyes finally opened for the first time, as it were.

If you are to believe in a God, then I'm sorry, you have to base your belief around reality.

I base my reality around my faith. It's my reason to live for and my cause to die for. That's all I can really say on the matter.

 

[Sulkdodds]

There is faith in men that they can find the all the right answers, however.

Not really. Scientists just believe the method can help them find out some things on the strength of all the discoveries it has assisted with in the past.

EDIT: Guys, please try and restrict your debate to the question of evolution. That would be more interesting. I should like to see Porkins reply to some of the points raised in its favour, eg ERVs. Of course, I imagine he will merely persist in the "not between species" arbitrary nonsense, but hey.

 

[kineaesth]

I belive, sir, you are insane.

That's why it's called faith.

Okay this got me, I cracked up.

Also I think this should make Krynn happy.

 

[Citadel]

I base my reality around my faith. It's my reason to live for and my cause to die for. That's all I can really say on the matter.

So you... change reality when it suits you? Some would call that delusional.

P.S Reading PMs. Thanks for letting me understand this better.