One-third of Americans reject evolution, poll shows

  • Thread starter Thread starter gilliam
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
edwest2 said:
Very well said. Repetition is a key part of Propaganda 101.
Click to expand...
Repetition is a key part of teaching as well.
And your last sentence sums up, based on the posts here, that people rejecting evolution “must be stopped at all costs” because Creationists are allegedly always wrong. So they must ALL be lying? That’s the part I can’t understand. The fear appears to be that religious people will NOT be convinced that God, who apparently did literally nothing as recorded in Genesis, just decided to let “chance” take over. More fun, as you wrote. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Well, they ARE always wrong. Since evolution has been proven true, anyone claiming it is not true is de facto WRONG.
 
Judas_Thaddeus said:
You started it by accusing what our fears are.
I then took the step to correct you on that.
So you can’t just appeal to the “just a scare tactic” excuse.
Click to expand...
I am unaware of any Creationists or those that write about Intelligent Design blocking access to science labs or infiltrating classrooms. This appears to be a conspiracy without foundation. I’ve read some good Creationist arguments, with good references, and bad. The same with ID. If schools are not compliant about teaching certain things, whose fault is that?

Peace,
Ed
 
buffalo said:
We can start here:

In the begining (time)
God created the heavens - (space)
and the earth (matter)

Science has only confirmed these recently what was Revealed thousands of years ago.
Click to expand...
Science so did not confirm that. I confirms that there was a beginning, of time,
space, and matter, but no where does it demonstrate that God had anything to
do with it. I’m not saying God didn’t, but science cannot touch that area.
 
Farsight001 said:
No. I’m competent enough to know you’re playing a game and not actually interested in an honest reply.
Click to expand...
You haven’t given a reply, honest or otherwise. You refused to.

We could let a jury of our peers (aka others in this forum) determine whether or not my rebuttal to your rendition of Miller is “playing a game” or effectively deals with the argument.

There, we have a “peer reviewed” process to curtail “game playing” and promote honesty.

You were all for “peer review” in previous posts. Perhaps it DOES depend upon who the peers are, then?
 
buffalo said:
  1. There is ID, the philosophy - if design is found by ID the science, who it was. Could be humans, aliens, or God, or some other intelligent agent.
Click to expand...
What you fail to realize is that its still evolution, even if we were designed. The theory of evolution is the body of evidence and the best explanation we have for the observed fact that evolution happens. If we discover one day that we were designed through quantum mechanical methods by aliens, then the theory of evolution will be tweaked to explain that THAT is how we evolved. ID still isn’t science, and still doesn’t win. This is how theories work.
  1. There is ID the science, reasoning design as the best explanation using the scientific method. If design is found, go to 1.
Click to expand...
Really? they use the scientific method? That’s interesting because I have asked half a dozen times before for an example of laboratory experimentation and no one has been able to come up with on. If you don’t test the idea, its not really scientific.
 
edwest2 said:
I am unaware of any Creationists or those that write about Intelligent Design blocking access to science labs or infiltrating classrooms. This appears to be a conspiracy without foundation. I’ve read some good Creationist arguments, with good references, and bad. The same with ID. If schools are not compliant about teaching certain things, whose fault is that?
Click to expand...
Never heard of Creationists infiltrating classrooms? Can’t be that clueless, can you?
bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aVeLoLOEyMEI

And why do you think Of Pandas & People revise their textbooks to sound MORE
scientific when at first they sounded more religious? Creation to Intelligent Design.
Creator to Intelligent Agency. What’s up with that?
 
buffalo said:
Is that what happened when Catholics started modern science? Do I have to list all the Catholic scientists contributions?

I submit evolution has corrupted science and medicine. Imagine all the so called vestigial organs removed because evolution said they were useless leftovers. Now we know different.
Click to expand...
You can submit whatever you want and post all the links to your blog that you want. That doesn’t make you right. Case in point - evolution doesn’t say that vestigial organs are useless leftovers. The very term means reduced usefulness, not useless.
 
Judas_Thaddeus said:
Science so did not confirm that. I confirms that there was a beginning, of time,
space, and matter, but no where does it demonstrate that God had anything to
do with it. I’m not saying God didn’t, but science cannot touch that area.
Click to expand...
You asked - what Revelation? Genesis - right there at the start gives us this Revelation. Science has confirmed them. So here we see an area where faith and reason are in harmony.
 
edwest2 said:
I am unaware of any Creationists or those that write about Intelligent Design blocking access to science labs or infiltrating classrooms. This appears to be a conspiracy without foundation. I’ve read some good Creationist arguments, with good references, and bad. The same with ID. If schools are not compliant about teaching certain things, whose fault is that?

Peace,
Ed
Click to expand...
I saw yellow tape on a lab door the other day. Creationists put it up so no science could be done. :rotfl:

My Catholic education did not barr the doors to science class.
 
I still wonder why a thread on evolution is allowed here when this is supposed to be a completely banned topic on CAF.
 
buffalo said:
You asked - what Revelation? Genesis - right there at the start gives us this Revelation. Science has confirmed them. So here we see an area where faith and reason are in harmony.
Click to expand...
No, that is inserting your own personal beliefs into what science says about the beginning.
You didn’t refute what I said, you just denied it. Science does not confirm God, that which
claims to confirm God or a Designer is not Science.

So the Revelation you gave was Genesis. Genesis comes from the Bible. The Bible comes
from Christianity. Christianity is a religion, not a science. So the position you are holding is
not a science.
 
buffalo said:
  1. There is ID the science, reasoning design as the best explanation using the scientific method. If design is found, go to 1.
Click to expand...
How does one determine if “design” is present? What methodology does one apply to decide if a particular creature is of purposeful design or mutations whose cause is beyond the purview of science and are therefore referred to as “random”? What are the criteria for figuring out if - for example - the recently found conjoined Gray Whales were by design or through “accident”?
 
Judas_Thaddeus said:
No, that is inserting your own personal beliefs into what science says about the beginning.
You didn’t refute what I said, you just denied it. Science does not confirm God, that which
claims to confirm God or a Designer is not Science.

So the Revelation you gave was Genesis. Genesis comes from the Bible. The Bible comes
from Christianity. Christianity is a religion, not a science. So the position you are holding is
not a science.
Click to expand...
You missed the point in answer to your own question.

I did not anywhere say science confirmed God. (although we might discuss quantum physics and God on another thread)

You asked about Revelation. I answered.
 
livingwordunity said:
I still wonder why a thread on evolution is allowed here when this is supposed to be a completely banned topic on CAF.
Click to expand...
Moderators have been coming here occasionally to give us
warnings instead of deleting the whole thing, so I guess we
are all being a bit more respectful in here.
 
Monkey1976 said:
How does one determine if “design” is present? What methodology does one apply to decide if a particular creature is of purposeful design or mutations whose cause is beyond the purview of science and are therefore referred to as “random”? What are the criteria for figuring out if - for example - the recently found conjoined Gray Whales were by design or through “accident”?
Click to expand...
First off - can we agree design exists?
 
Monkey1976 said:
How does one determine if “design” is present? What methodology does one apply to decide if a particular creature is of purposeful design or mutations whose cause is beyond the purview of science and are therefore referred to as “random”? What are the criteria for figuring out if - for example - the recently found conjoined Gray Whales were by design or through “accident”?
Click to expand...
If one cannot personally believe that aliens had nothing
to do with the structure of something, they call it “com-
plex design,” therefore there’s a “Designer,” is the posi-
tion of ID-ists.
 
buffalo said:
First off - can we agree design exists?
Click to expand...
He was asking you about tests that provide evidence that design exists and you want to start off from the assumption that design exists? That seems to be very circular logic.
 
buffalo said:
You missed the point in answer to your own question.

I did not anywhere say science confirmed God. (although we might discuss quantum physics and God on another thread)

You asked about Revelation. I answered.
Click to expand...
So the Bible suggests that God created time, space, & matter.
Science proves that time, space, & matter did in fact begin.

That’s not the Revelation and Science intersecting,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top