piscian: There's too much at stake politically for creationists to accept evolution as anything but flights of fancy. It's as simple as that. Evolution isn't rocking the foundations of anyone's faith. It's the idea that if you're wrong about the ancestry of man what else might you be wrong about? This is purely an American issue that hasn't quite made it's way out of the puritanism which brought it to popularity originally. I hate directing the conversation this way but I've yet to see evidence to show me otherwise. I've never personally met anyone who is adamantly against the theory of evolution and yet is pro gay marriage, pro choice, etc.
It goes hand in hand. I've yet to see otherwise. A rock is a rock unless your version of reality depends on it being a tea leaf.
I'm not against Faith. In a way the progression of science could not exist without it. It's rigid fundamentalism that is holding us back.
I wish you were right about it being only an American issue, i really do. Unfortunatly three out of the nine people I work with every day don't "beleive" in evolution. These are not stupid people. You need to be a smart person to do the job I do. Australia is not in as bad a state as America on this issue, but it is quite depressing that it is an issue here as well.
Snack Cake: There is almost no area where the Abrahamic tradition makes a falsifiable claim about the nature of the universe, which isn't directly contradicted by modern science. Germ theory, astrophysics, and geology all differ sharply with holy books of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Evolution is no more scientifically controversial than any of these other topics. However, none of these areas of science are under constant attack by the religious community, the way that evolutionary biology is.
Why?
At this point? Just to spite you for an easy laugh.
Because for those who are religious it is, essentially, a God-killer.
Besides, I was under the impression it had been fully proven - don't even get me started on the argument that God just put dinosaur skeletons and other fossils there as a test of faith or whatever other claims people make.
Many people I know, Intelligent and (usually) level-headed don't beleive in evolution because they don't like being thought of as, and I quote "Just Animals".
But This is senseless to me, as evolution makes sense and has plenty of evidence.
As in what type of evolution? I don't believe that we came out of a single celled organism from the sea because if you take a look at the complexities of even a single celled organism and how everything in it works together like clockwork, the idea that it was all an accident seems silly. It's like if a television just appeared out of nowhere on accident. I also believe that if something evolves, then what it evolves from should be completely gone. But I believe that people have gotten smarter over the course of time, but not due to a natural thing but due to learning from our past. It's sort of like a snowball effect. Think if every human started out completely new and didn't have anything to learn from the past or couldn't learn from the past or something. There would be no natural force to make him smarter and better because it hasn't been proven.
Also I don't want to get into a debate, so don't bother quoting me. And I'll say what I've always said: I'm not going to change my religious beliefs because some kid on a forum told me to.
piscian: There's too much at stake politically for creationists to accept evolution as anything but flights of fancy. It's as simple as that. Evolution isn't rocking the foundations of anyone's faith. It's the idea that if you're wrong about the ancestry of man what else might you be wrong about? This is purely an American issue that hasn't quite made it's way out of the puritanism which brought it to popularity originally. I hate directing the conversation this way but I've yet to see evidence to show me otherwise. I've never personally met anyone who is adamantly against the theory of evolution and yet is pro gay marriage, pro choice, etc.
It goes hand in hand. I've yet to see otherwise. A rock is a rock unless your version of reality depends on it being a tea leaf.
I'm not against Faith. In a way the progression of science could not exist without it. It's rigid fundamentalism that is holding us back.
I wish you were right about it being only an American issue, i really do. Unfortunatly three out of the nine people I work with every day don't "beleive" in evolution. These are not stupid people. You need to be a smart person to do the job I do. Australia is not in as bad a state as America on this issue, but it is quite depressing that it is an issue here as well.
I was going to mention Australia as having some disturbing political problems founded in fundamentalism, but beyond things like "Rabbit proof fence" I'm not well versed in it's history.
sgtshock: I do believe in evolution, although I do see how even some rational-minded people might question it. For example: how did eyes evolve? Eyes are an incredibly complex organ, I fail to see how an eyeless creature could either:
1) Be suddenly be born with eyes complex enough to give it an advantage at survival, or 2) Evolve two useless organs on its face that, over many generations, would eventually gain the ability to pick up light.
Now like I said, I still believe in evolution, and I'm totally open to the fact that science might one day explain this. And those people who reject evolution purely on the fact that it contradicts with the "6 days" story, are idiots. Especially considering that Darwin himself believed in God.
The answer to your question is out there. It is not even hard to find. Most people who have a problem with evolution or questions about it tend to do nothing about it other than doubt.
If you really think that science should not be questioned, then you have completely missed the point of science. Science is a tool, a method, a process by which humans explain worldly phenomena and make useful predictions based upon those observations. Science is not a culture, a belief system or some kind of creed.
I myself have had evolution debates on these very forums concerning some discrepancies and unexplained and inadequate evolutionary phenomena. I never said that evolution didn't happen, just that the conventional theory for natural selection doesn't work for some species, and so that theory needs work. Maze and I had a really good discussion on it that enhanced my own theories on the subject and made me learn something. Sometimes however, when I say "Hang on a minute chaps, what about this?", some people scream "HERESY! HE BELIEVES IN GOD!"
Irony incarnate. In fact double irony because I don't believe in god.
AhumbleKnight: I believe in logic, reason, and the scientific process. I believe that the laws of the universe are fixed and through observation, testing, and rational thought, we are able to eventualy understand them (one at a time). It bothers me that so many people don't "believe" in evolution when they don't even understand the basics of what it is. They use and trust all the advances in technology that the scientific process has given us yet chose to not to believe in evolution. They believe in gravity and would laugh at anybody who chose to not believe in gravity. They don't even realise that there is more evidence supporting the theory of evolution than the theory of gravity.
Firstly, logic isn't something to believe in, the same way that people don't believe in their fridge. It is something we use. If you believe that the laws of the universe are fixed then you are actually at odds with science (quantum mechanics?).
Secondly, I completely understand and agree with you if you say that the beliefs of other people bother you when they get in your face with those beliefs and try to shove those beliefs down your throat. However, if someone else quietly believing something different to you then that tells of an insecurity in ones own beliefs.
Woodsey: Because for those who are religious it is, essentially, a God-killer.
You need it, faith and hope are the only things making us seperate from the bad guys.
Dragon_of_red, highlighting one of the main points as to why religious people are hated by many. Give the man a biscuit.
OT: The big thing about evolution vs creation is that, whilst not disproving God, evolution being correct would take away his massive claim to fame (and, if God didn't create the world, who's to say he did all that other stuff? And if he didn't do that, who's to say that there even is a God?). That is why, I think, there is the schism.
EDIT: By the above, what I mean is, the whole story links together God creating the world, and God creating the plants, animals and humans. If you believe the story, it says God did all that, and all in 6 days, yadda yadda yadda. Point is, 'creation' is lumped into one story. However, If God didn't create the plants, animals, and humans, maybe he may not have created the world either (see: big bang theory. If evolution can be accepted, why not the big bang as the next logical step?), which means he may not either a) have the power, and then not be the god that Christians, Jews and Muslims etc. believe in, or b) exist in any way, shape or form.
popdafoo: As in what type of evolution? I don't believe that we came out of a single celled organism from the sea because if you take a look at the complexities of even a single celled organism and how everything in it works together like clockwork, the idea that it was all an accident seems silly. It's like if a television just appeared out of nowhere on accident. I also believe that if something evolves, then what it evolves from should be completely gone. But I believe that people have gotten smarter over the course of time, but not due to a natural thing but due to learning from our past. It's sort of like a snowball effect. Think if every human started out completely new and didn't have anything to learn from the past or couldn't learn from the past or something. There would be no natural force to make him smarter and better because it hasn't been proven.
Also I don't want to get into a debate, so don't bother quoting me. And I'll say what I've always said: I'm not going to change my religious beliefs because some kid on a forum told me to.
You don't have to debate this, but your analogy is wrong. Evolution is not like a TV just appearing out of nowhere on accident; it's like it gradually coming together, starting as a random mess of wires etc., gradually becoming the first prototype tvt, a shitty little 5 inch screen, etc., then gradually getting bigger and more advanced, until it hits 72" HDTV and settles, as there is no need for it to develop further. Of course, this analogy only works if you take it exactly as I just said, because usually this doesn't work, TVs not being alive and having to be built and all.
You need it, faith and hope are the only things making us seperate from the bad guys.
Dragon_of_red, highlighting one of the main points as to why religious people are hated by many. Give the man a biscuit.
You don't need faith. You do need belief. Not belief in god, but belief in concepts of good and evil. Science has nothing to say about morality, ethics, justice, or anything else like that. So yes, if someone relies only on science and logic they are amoral. Not evil or bad, but simply completely without morality. Note: That is DIFFERENT from being an atheist. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in god, not someone who doesn't believe in morality.
Lexodus: OT: The big thing about evolution vs creation is that, whilst not disproving God, evolution being correct would take away his massive claim to fame (and, if God didn't create the world, who's to say he did all that other stuff? And if he didn't do that, who's to say that there even is a God?). That is why, I think, there is the schism.
Why do you think that evolution contradicts religion? Surely you have the word "allegory" in your vocabulary? That is all one needs to understand that religion and evolution really don't have anything all to do with each other.
Lexodus: You don't have to debate this, but your analogy is wrong. Evolution is not like a TV just appearing out of nowhere on accident; it's like it gradually coming together, starting as a random mess of wires etc., gradually becoming the first prototype tvt, a shitty little 5 inch screen, etc., then gradually getting bigger and more advanced, until it hits 72" HDTV and settles, as there is no need for it to develop further. Of course, this analogy only works if you take it exactly as I just said, because usually this doesn't work, TVs not being alive and having to be built and all.
I used it as an analogy because it's complex and only a skilled craftsman could know how to make one. It doesn't just gradually come together with no help at all. It has to be thought out and built. Now take how complex it is to build a TV, and then multiply it by a thousand. That's about a fraction of how complex a cell is. I just have a hard time believing that intelligent design wasn't a factor is all.
popdafoo: As in what type of evolution? I don't believe that we came out of a single celled organism from the sea because if you take a look at the complexities of even a single celled organism and how everything in it works together like clockwork, the idea that it was all an accident seems silly.
Accident? Evolution is adapting purposefully, we don't just change and hope for the best - inevitably you'll get one sector of a species that adapts because it needs to (which will then branch into it's own seperate species) whilst another part of the species doesn't and remains the same(ish).
Oh and I quoted because its a debate, I don't care about changing your beliefs.
Im not sure if this is a fire extinguisher or a molotov but here goes: The evolution vs religion is mainly an American thing. The rest of the western world accepts it as fact and made it fit together with a reasonable religious belief. Hell (Fnar, Fnar), even my primary school teacher (who is the most conservatively religious non-american I have ever met) had no problem teaching us about evolution, and accepted it as a fact. Over here, anyone who outright rejects evolution is likely to be considered a nutcase.
You need it, faith and hope are the only things making us seperate from the bad guys.
Dragon_of_red, highlighting one of the main points as to why religious people are hated by many. Give the man a biscuit.
OT: The big thing about evolution vs creation is that, whilst not disproving God, evolution being correct would take away his massive claim to fame (and, if God didn't create the world, who's to say he did all that other stuff? And if he didn't do that, who's to say that there even is a God?). That is why, I think, there is the schism.
Evolution didn't create the world. At it's most basic level, gravity did.
I wish that these scientific types would actually read the theories they're supposed to believe in before spouting random lies as fact... (HA! I got to use it! Yay!)
sneakypenguin: I personally think my faith(christianity) and science intersect pretty well, but arguing that here is like trying to argue with a twilight fan girl that edward is creepy. So why bother eh.
This. While I am a creationist, I do not believe in literal creation. I think it took the thousands of years scientists say (maybe a little less) to create the earth, etc.
You need it, faith and hope are the only things making us seperate from the bad guys.
Dragon_of_red, highlighting one of the main points as to why religious people are hated by many. Give the man a biscuit.
You don't need faith. You do need belief. Not belief in god, but belief in concepts of good and evil. Science has nothing to say about morality, ethics, justice, or anything else like that. So yes, if someone relies only on science and logic they are amoral. Not evil or bad, but simply completely without morality. Note: That is DIFFERENT from being an atheist. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in god, not someone who doesn't believe in morality.
Lexodus: OT: The big thing about evolution vs creation is that, whilst not disproving God, evolution being correct would take away his massive claim to fame (and, if God didn't create the world, who's to say he did all that other stuff? And if he didn't do that, who's to say that there even is a God?). That is why, I think, there is the schism.
Why do you think that evolution contradicts religion? Surely you have the word "allegory" in your vocabulary? That is all one needs to understand that religion and evolution really don't have anything all to do with each other.
Also, what do you mean "create the world"?
What I mean is, the whole story links together God creating the world, and God creating the plants, animals and humans. If you believe the story, it says God did all that, and all in 6 days, yadda yadda yadda. Point is, 'creation' is lumped into one story. However, If God didn't create the plants, animals, and humans, maybe he may not have created the world either (see: big bang theory. If evolution can be accepted, why not the big bang as the next logical step?), which means he may not either a) have the power, and then not be the god that Christians, Jews and Muslims etc. believe in, or b) exist in any way, shape or form.
You need it, faith and hope are the only things making us seperate from the bad guys.
Dragon_of_red, highlighting one of the main points as to why religious people are hated by many. Give the man a biscuit.
OT: The big thing about evolution vs creation is that, whilst not disproving God, evolution being correct would take away his massive claim to fame (and, if God didn't create the world, who's to say he did all that other stuff? And if he didn't do that, who's to say that there even is a God?). That is why, I think, there is the schism.
Evolution didn't create the world. At it's most basic level, gravity did.
I wish that these scientific types would actually read the theories they're supposed to believe in before spouting random lies as fact... (HA! I got to use it! Yay!)
I actually just qualified that. What I meant is, if everything on the earth evolved and that is accepted as fact, surely the big bang theory (also denying that God created the earth as it says in Genesis) might not be so hard to accept either.
hmm.I dont believe in god, but i've decided not to try to persuade people who do to change their beliefs, i mean i hate it when some religious arsehole comes up to me and starts preaching to me when im really not interested.I know its probably done to ''save me from my sins'' but the fact is i wholeheartedly dont believe in it.Our reasons for arguing with theists are much the same, we want to save them from wasting their lives, however i understand how infuriating preachers are, so i refuse to put anyone else through that annoyance.
Our planet is around 4.5 Billion years old. That's an incredibly huge amount of time (and thus chances) that a living organism could be created that could replicate. I think it's incredibly likely that millions of other living cells were made during this period, but they died out for varying reasons.
The original cells might not have looked like anything we have today, evolution teaches us the strongest survive. A cell with a barrier that absorbs only useful nutrients will survive better compared to a cell with none. A cell that replicates itself exactly has advantages and disadvantages compared to a cell that can make mistakes when replicating (DNA). While the new DNA can be inferior, it can also occasionally be superiority making it survive better.
You need it, faith and hope are the only things making us seperate from the bad guys.
Dragon_of_red, highlighting one of the main points as to why religious people are hated by many. Give the man a biscuit.
You don't need faith. You do need belief. Not belief in god, but belief in concepts of good and evil. Science has nothing to say about morality, ethics, justice, or anything else like that. So yes, if someone relies only on science and logic they are amoral. Not evil or bad, but simply completely without morality. Note: That is DIFFERENT from being an atheist. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in god, not someone who doesn't believe in morality.
Lexodus: OT: The big thing about evolution vs creation is that, whilst not disproving God, evolution being correct would take away his massive claim to fame (and, if God didn't create the world, who's to say he did all that other stuff? And if he didn't do that, who's to say that there even is a God?). That is why, I think, there is the schism.
Why do you think that evolution contradicts religion? Surely you have the word "allegory" in your vocabulary? That is all one needs to understand that religion and evolution really don't have anything all to do with each other.
Also, what do you mean "create the world"?
What I mean is, the whole story links together God creating the world, and God creating the plants, animals and humans. If you believe the story, it says God did all that, and all in 6 days, yadda yadda yadda. Point is, 'creation' is lumped into one story. However, If God didn't create the plants, animals, and humans, maybe he may not have created the world either (see: big bang theory. If evolution can be accepted, why not the big bang as the next logical step?), which means he may not either a) have the power, and then not be the god that Christians, Jews and Muslims etc. believe in, or b) exist in any way, shape or form.
So you don't know what allegory means? From wiki:-
"Allegory (from Greek: αλλος, allos, "other", and αγορευειν, agoreuein, "to speak in public") is a figurative mode of representation conveying a meaning other than the literal. Allegory communicates its message by means of symbolic figures, actions or symbolic representation. Allegory is generally treated as a figure of rhetoric, but an allegory does not have to be expressed in language: it may be addressed to the eye, and is often found in realistic painting, sculpture or some other form of mimetic, or representative art."
This means that texts such as the Bible are not considered literal truth even by people who "believe" them. They are allegorical, metaphoric, symbolic, not literal. 'Art' rather than 'science'. Mythos, not Logos.
If not evolution, then why not the big bang as the next logical step? Well it could be that there is absolutely no logical connection between the big bang and evolution? This is rather like saying "If someone likes climbing mountains, won't they like raspberry pie as the next logical step?" It is a complete non sequitur.
Also, the Big Bang theory does not disagree with religion. Not at all. In fact the theory was created by a Catholic priest.
So trying to say that religious people don't believe in stuff like the big bang and evolution is as empirically false as creation itself, which is extremely ironic.
You need it, faith and hope are the only things making us seperate from the bad guys.
Dragon_of_red, highlighting one of the main points as to why religious people are hated by many. Give the man a biscuit.
OT: The big thing about evolution vs creation is that, whilst not disproving God, evolution being correct would take away his massive claim to fame (and, if God didn't create the world, who's to say he did all that other stuff? And if he didn't do that, who's to say that there even is a God?). That is why, I think, there is the schism.
Evolution didn't create the world. At it's most basic level, gravity did.
I wish that these scientific types would actually read the theories they're supposed to believe in before spouting random lies as fact... (HA! I got to use it! Yay!)
I actually just qualified that. What I meant is, if everything on the earth evolved and that is accepted as fact, surely the big bang theory (also denying that God created the earth as it says in Genesis) might not be so hard to accept either.
sneakypenguin: I personally think my faith(christianity) and science intersect pretty well
Agreed. Why there is a conflict is beyond me.
Which would be why the Anglican Church acknowledges that evolution did happen and that the Bible just used a metaphor that people could understand at the time. They agree that since science pretty much proved it, it must have happened that way, despite what the Bible says.
This is why the Archbishop of Canterbury rocks, cos he's an intelligent guy who knows when to adapt... which is funny, when you are talking about evolution :P
Because it doesn't fit their world view. They are happier to not believe it. That is all you need to know.
As a science-minded person, asking "why?" is a big part of what I do. If this question makes you uncomfortable, you are certainly free to ignore it. Trying to prevent others from learning, on the other hand, seems unnecessarily combative to me.
Ok, I can take another argument path. How do you feel about Jehovah's Witnesses or Catholics (not picking on anyone, just saying two sects that go out a preach) trying to tell you about the word of The Lord?
You need it, faith and hope are the only things making us seperate from the bad guys.
Dragon_of_red, highlighting one of the main points as to why religious people are hated by many. Give the man a biscuit.
You don't need faith. You do need belief. Not belief in god, but belief in concepts of good and evil. Science has nothing to say about morality, ethics, justice, or anything else like that. So yes, if someone relies only on science and logic they are amoral. Not evil or bad, but simply completely without morality. Note: That is DIFFERENT from being an atheist. An atheist is someone who doesn't believe in god, not someone who doesn't believe in morality.
Lexodus: OT: The big thing about evolution vs creation is that, whilst not disproving God, evolution being correct would take away his massive claim to fame (and, if God didn't create the world, who's to say he did all that other stuff? And if he didn't do that, who's to say that there even is a God?). That is why, I think, there is the schism.
Why do you think that evolution contradicts religion? Surely you have the word "allegory" in your vocabulary? That is all one needs to understand that religion and evolution really don't have anything all to do with each other.
Also, what do you mean "create the world"?
What I mean is, the whole story links together God creating the world, and God creating the plants, animals and humans. If you believe the story, it says God did all that, and all in 6 days, yadda yadda yadda. Point is, 'creation' is lumped into one story. However, If God didn't create the plants, animals, and humans, maybe he may not have created the world either (see: big bang theory. If evolution can be accepted, why not the big bang as the next logical step?), which means he may not either a) have the power, and then not be the god that Christians, Jews and Muslims etc. believe in, or b) exist in any way, shape or form.
So you don't know what allegory means? From wiki:-
"Allegory (from Greek: αλλος, allos, "other", and αγορευειν, agoreuein, "to speak in public") is a figurative mode of representation conveying a meaning other than the literal. Allegory communicates its message by means of symbolic figures, actions or symbolic representation. Allegory is generally treated as a figure of rhetoric, but an allegory does not have to be expressed in language: it may be addressed to the eye, and is often found in realistic painting, sculpture or some other form of mimetic, or representative art."
This means that texts such as the Bible are not considered literal truth even by people who "believe" them. They are allegorical, metaphoric, symbolic, not literal. 'Art' rather than 'science'. Mythos, not Logos.
If not evolution, then why not the big bang as the next logical step? Well it could be that there is absolutely no logical connection between the big bang and evolution? This is rather like saying "If someone likes climbing mountains, won't they like raspberry pie as the next logical step?" It is a complete non sequitur.
Also, the Big Bang theory does not disagree with religion. Not at all. In fact the theory was created by a Catholic priest.
So trying to say that religious people don't believe in stuff like the big bang and evolution is as empirically false as creation itself, which is extremely ironic.
Firstly, of course I know what a fucking allegory is, but some people out there *gasp* actually believe the Bible word-for-word, and these are generally the people the OP was referring to, i.e the people deny evolution at any cost. These people DO exist, so don't be an asshat. Secondly, evolution is still debated. It's generally accepted that it's correct, but there's still a lot of people that disagree. I mention the big bang only because it is accepted by a lot of people, like evolution, but, like evolution, many disagree. If one is accepted as the truth, even by the ignorant fundies that believe that Adam was nine hundred and thirty years old when he died, then why is it so hard to accept that they may be wrong on more counts than just one? Thirdly, yes it does. It denies that God created the universe as depicted in Genesis (BEFORE YOU SAY ANYTHING, THIS ONLY APPLIES TO THE BERKS THAT BELIEVE THAT THE WHOLE BIBLE IS LITERAL), which means God is not the creator, and, if he is not the creator, it isn't such a stretch to think that the Bible may have been wrong on more than one count, and, if he didn't do any of this stuff, he may as well not even exist as he has had approximately no contact with humanity, the earth or anything else.
Many 'normal' Christians have the view that God created the big bang, and I don't know quite what to say about that. It kind of seems like a cop out, but also that they're giving dues where necessary. There also (in all probability) has to have been something that kick-started the big bang, and if you want to call that God, that's probably fair. However, this disagrees with the traditional view of the magical beardy man living in the clouds, so, yes, it sort of contradicts religion- well, either that, or it redefines it, and makes it seem even sillier (in my opinion; after all, if you truly believe that whatever started the big bang is 'God', then you may just be worshipping an atom falling apart or something. The only way this retains the classic 'beardy man' image is if it wasn't that whatever the thing that started the big bang was God, but that God, as he is believed to be, was there and did it).
Anyway, cut that shit out. You didn't even try to read or understand my post and the context of such before you decided to bitch at me about allegories, did you?
The people who harass Christians for their beliefs don't have the strength of their convictions to question other faiths like Islam.
You'll note that in my original question, I explicitly included the whole of the Abrahamic tradition, not just Christianity. Creationism in the Jewish and Muslim communities is just as strange to me as it is amongst Christians. And frankly, in my experience, the modern atheist movement is much more critical of Islam than any other religion.
Oh Islam. Thank god we have Christians to make fun of for being stupid. Otherwise the only thing I'd hear was Jihad this, and woman's rights violations that.
that's way off topic though. People deny evolution because it shows that their god is a lie (along with a lot of other science witch is ignored as well)
Snack Cake: There is almost no area where the Abrahamic tradition makes a falsifiable claim about the nature of the universe, which isn't directly contradicted by modern science. Germ theory, astrophysics, and geology all differ sharply with holy books of Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Evolution is no more scientifically controversial than any of these other topics. However, none of these areas of science are under constant attack by the religious community, the way that evolutionary biology is.
The real question here is why does it bother you so much that other people believe something you don't ?
there has to be a god of some sort, why here why now and likfe could not just randomlly devlop there needs to be an outside source that was created by a god. But that god is like newton belived, a clock-work god he made the universe created a single spark of life and then will sit back a watch what happens mainly for shits and giggles
The people who harass Christians for their beliefs don't have the strength of their convictions to question other faiths like Islam.
You'll note that in my original question, I explicitly included the whole of the Abrahamic tradition, not just Christianity. Creationism in the Jewish and Muslim communities is just as strange to me as it is amongst Christians. And frankly, in my experience, the modern atheist movement is much more critical of Islam than any other religion.
Oh Islam. Thank god we have Christians to make fun of for being stupid. Otherwise the only thing I'd hear was Jihad this, and woman's rights violations that.
that's way off topic though. People deny evolution because it shows that their god is a lie (along with a lot of other science witch is ignored as well)
You... You didn't even try to read the rest of this thread before you decided to troll, did you?
I dunno I might be crazy but god can do anything so primordial ooze=religion=god=creation=-evolution=science=modern sheeple...er..ape....er..er...jelly bwains....er man :P
all i am going to say is it is arrogant to believe that any person, especially a scientist knows anything, beyond a shadow of a doubt, with any absolute. every 30 years, the scientific commmunity changes their mind on things they say were "absolutely true" as they learn more about "what really happens". religeon cannot be proved, and to a definitive conclusion: neither can evolution. those people that do not have faith in some form of religeon have faith in science. FAITH in science. now if you have seen and readon the many ways people screw up daily, how could you take anything said by "man" at face value?
Likely because the religious crowd tends to fear a "slippery slope" of accepting things that even mildly refute any part of their beliefs. They rationalize that ALL of it must be true, because their subconscious knows that once they start accepting certain parts of their scripture to be just plain wrong, the rest may fall apart as well.
And who can blame them for not wanting to lose their belief and faith? Religion is a hell of a comfort in a universe of uncertainty. I personally wish I could partake in it, myself... wouldn't have to spend yet another sleepless night just thinking about what the hell might be out there.
The people who harass Christians for their beliefs don't have the strength of their convictions to question other faiths like Islam.
You'll note that in my original question, I explicitly included the whole of the Abrahamic tradition, not just Christianity. Creationism in the Jewish and Muslim communities is just as strange to me as it is amongst Christians. And frankly, in my experience, the modern atheist movement is much more critical of Islam than any other religion.
Oh Islam. Thank god we have Christians to make fun of for being stupid. Otherwise the only thing I'd hear was Jihad this, and woman's rights violations that.
that's way off topic though. People deny evolution because it shows that their god is a lie (along with a lot of other science witch is ignored as well)
You... You didn't even try to read the rest of this thread before you decided to troll, did you?
nah read most of it, found a post that lets me make fun of Christians and Muslims at once and then summed up the "opposing argument" from creationists. it's only half trolling.
I wish you were right about it being only an American issue, i really do. Unfortunatly three out of the nine people I work with every day don't "beleive" in evolution. These are not stupid people. You need to be a smart person to do the job I do. Australia is not in as bad a state as America on this issue, but it is quite depressing that it is an issue here as well.