One-third of Americans reject evolution, poll shows

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
vz71 said:
I do not recall anyone in this thread doing that.
Click to expand...
I recall a few people arguing against evolution based on the assumption that we will come up with a better explanation at a later date.
 
Farsight001 said:
It is poor science to try to study or factor in the supernatural. God is supernatural.
Click to expand...
God is.

Too often those that advocate evolution attempt to ignore this.

Such faith is placed into that theory that many believe we would be here without God’s direct intervention.
 
vz71 said:
God is.

Too often those that advocate evolution attempt to ignore this.

Such faith is placed into that theory that many believe we would be here without God’s direct intervention.
Click to expand...
Well such people are wrong, I don’t think anyone here has said that we are here without God, so you’re barking up the wrong tree
 
Gricken said:
Actually we’ve given quite a few arguments, if you think we’ve done nothing but call people ignorant, you either are in fact being willfully ignorant, lying, or haven’t read this thread very much. Also, you go from saying you won’t listen to us because we don’t have a PhD to saying that you don’t believe what people who have PhD’s say anyways
Click to expand...
You are the one who said that Beirlinski doesn’t know what he’s talking about because he is not an expert in the field and has a PhD in Philosophy. Why should we listen to you? Why do you know what you’re talking about? And you’re attitude has been very condescending to those who disagree with the dogma of evolution.
 
Gricken said:
Well such people are wrong, I don’t think anyone here has said that we are here without God, so you’re barking up the wrong tree
Click to expand...
Not barking up any tree. Just pointing out the obvious.

In any case, within this thread, there are those claiming God to not be involved.
 
vz71 said:
More headway could be gained if you responded to what is actually written.
Click to expand...
Was it not you actually who didn’t sufficiently address the issue.
You said,
Originally Posted by vz71 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif Bad science.
The speaker proposes the only reason for what is seen is evolution.
Click to expand...
How else am I supposed to respond, say you’re right?
vz71 said:
Again, more headway could be gained in responding to what is actually written.
I have never specified how exactly I interpret the bible.
Click to expand...
No, you said,
Originally Posted by vz71 forums.catholic-questions.org/images/buttons_khaki/viewpost.gif I see.
So in asking for proof I should accept anything at all whether or not it is truth.
Click to expand...
You gave no reason as to why you rejected the video,
that’s it, rejected, no reason. What was actually writ-
ten that I need to respond to please?
vz71 said:
I knew a very wise statistics teacher that taught me that one does not equal a trend.
Perhaps if I reacted in the fashion you describe to multiple explanations, you may have a point.
But as it sits, you have a blind accusation that benefits no one.
Click to expand...
You know, that’s a fair point, I’m sorry then.
vz71 said:
No, your own preconceived notions of what I am led you to believe that.

It is funny that those that advocate evolution claim to be following science.
But when that theory is challenged, All of the scientific principles go out the window.
They suddenly ‘know’ all about other people.
They never actually read the replies and learn who it is they are accusing of whatever.
They simply run on with whatever canned response there is to bible literalists…creationists…whatever.
It does not matter if those they are debating are in fact any of these.
They KNOW. And science didn’t have anything to say about it.

There is a word for those that claim one thing but do another.
I pray it is not the case but is more a case of people simply being too close to the argument.
Click to expand...
You didn’t answer the question. Science has done sufficiently
to prove evolution is perfectly reasonable. The only reason one
would call evolution bad science is because he is a Creationist.
If I’m wrong, please tell me your position.
 
OK, just a quick question for all of the advocates of evolution that we have here…

What are the vehicles for change?

How exactly does any creature gain the attributes it has?
 
vz71 said:
God is.

Too often those that advocate evolution attempt to ignore this.

Such faith is placed into that theory that many believe we would be here without God’s direct intervention.
Click to expand...
No, the “No God” idea is indeed one conclusion which a believer in evolution can potentially
make, but that is not the only conclusion. Nature testifies of God, Paul says to the Romans,
so when I see evolution, I see the incredible Hand of God working in creation.
 
vz71 said:
Not barking up any tree. Just pointing out the obvious.

In any case, within this thread, there are those claiming God to not be involved.
Click to expand...
No again, you are just enforcing atheism into evolution.
 
Judas_Thaddeus said:
You know, that’s a fair point, I’m sorry then.
Click to expand...
Not an issue.
But thanks.
Judas_Thaddeus said:
You didn’t answer the question. Science has done sufficiently
to prove evolution is perfectly reasonable. The only reason one
would call evolution bad science is because he is a Creationist.
If I’m wrong, please tell me your position.
Click to expand...
You did not account for those that see sufficient flaws in evolution to decide not to take stock in the theory at all.

It was asked earlier in the thread if I had a better explanation.
I said no at that time.
I still do.

And I also stand by the simply fact that not having a better explanation does not lend any more truth to anything.
 
vz71 said:
OK, just a quick question for all of the advocates of evolution that we have here…

What are the vehicles for change?

How exactly does any creature gain the attributes it has?
Click to expand...
You will love this answer!
GOD!
Can science ultimately say that without evidence? Of course not.
God, however, is not someone who can be scrutinized by science.
When things APPEAR “random,” God just MIGHT be there in the
background. Shame that Creationists deny God’s right to that.
 
vz71 said:
…You did not account for those that see sufficient flaws in evolution to decide not to take stock in the theory at all.
It was asked earlier in the thread if I had a better explanation.
I said no at that time.
I still do.
And I also stand by the simply fact that not having a better explanation does not lend any more truth to anything.
Click to expand...
You think there are flaws in evolution? I know of none. Scientists who use evolution
do not always make accurate conclusions within the field of evolution, but such are
always revised in the light of new data, because Evolution WORKS.
 
Judas_Thaddeus said:
You will love this answer!
GOD!
Can science ultimately say that without evidence? Of course not.
God, however, is not someone who can be scrutinized by science.
When things APPEAR “random,” God just MIGHT be there in the
background. Shame that Creationists deny God’s right to that.
Click to expand...
Closet ID’r:)

However I think you are shortchanging creationists.

It is a monumental task to build everything all at once as it should be.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top