It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Finally, Most Young Americans Now Accept Evolution Over Creationism

page: 1
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   
November 25, 2015 | by Robin Andrews

Controversy over evolution has been a mainstay of American public life throughout much of the 20th century.

The new survey shows 51 percent of young American adults accept evolution in its entirity.

According to a recent Pew Research Center survey. 65% of adults surveyed believe humans have evolved over time, as well has other creatures.

Some have said of Creationism

...nothing short of an anti-scientific superstition...
However, there is a persistent distrust in scientists, which has led the public to eschew the theory of evolution, with adults choosing to believe religious scripture over scientific fact. However, a recent Pew Research Center survey shows that most of the younger generation of Americans accept evolution as fact, perhaps marking a change in this trend.


Creationists commonly argue that life is so complex it requires a Creator. Evolutionists have the same right to argue that life began from a spark of unknown origin. Some have proposed it is possible that the Lord may have existed for so long even He has lost track of His own beginning. Opponents of evolution say we live in a 'silent universe,' since all the scanning of the electromagnetic spectrum has resulted in zero return signals (SETI).

The lack of chatter from outer space does not disprove evolution, but it does cast doubt on the idea that evolution is a nature process
There may be life on other planets that has not yet mastered electronic communications. There are a number of reasons why an intelligent, space-faring civilization would not make first contact with Earth.

Here's a few figures and statistics from the Pew Research Center:

-36% of women say humans have existed in their present form since the beginning of time, compared to men 26%
-Women are more likely than men to say that evolution was guided by a supreme being
-Younger adults are more likely than older adults to say that evolution has occurred
-Those under age 30 are especially likely to say that evolution is due to natural processes (51% of all those ages 18-29 say this)
-22% of adults ages 65 and older say that evolution has occurred due to natural processes
-25% of seniors say that evolution was guided by a supreme being and 37% say that humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning

-African Americans are less likely than are whites to say that evolution has taken place. I find this statistic interesting. I easily understand the differences in opinion between ages, that's apparent to me, however, the differences between races I do not readily understand. I wonder if this figure coincides with similar differences between blacks and whites in regards to those who are religious versus those who are agnostic? I probably shouldn't ASSume, but I'm going to be presumptuous here.
-75% of all college graduates, 81% of those with a postgraduate degree, believe that humans have evolved over time. By comparison, 56% of those with a high school diploma believe evolution has occurred
-76% of those with more science knowledge say that humans have evolved, compared to 54% with less science knowledge...I'm curious to know how this was determined. How did they arrive at these numbers? What dictates More or Less science knowledge?

The article continues to cite differences in statistics among religious groups and political party groups.

I have personally been on journey of spirituality my entire life. I have spent much of my life justifying religion and science. As a child I attended two Catholic schools, however, always possessed a strong interest in science, specifically the beginnings of the universe, Earth, evolution, and Darwinism. While I was attending Catholic school, my father converted to Methodist. In my younger years I was a staunch creationist, only later, say in junior high, that I started doubting my religious beliefs. Before turning to science, I was agnostic, not having strong beliefs in either creationism or evolution. Later, as my interest in science developed, confusion developed in my personal beliefs, unable to negotiate religion in my new-found scientific discoveries. Throw in dinosaur fossils and I was all messed up!

As an adult, after learning so much about science, learning about evolution, and taking several anthropology classes, I was even more confused about my personal beliefs. Recently, withing the last year or so, I've been on a personal and spiritual journey. I have finally arrived at a personal conclusion regarding my own faith. Like many other people, I have chosen a spiritual journey rather than a religious journey, which I believe, has allowed me to mesh what I've learned about science and physics into what my religious beliefs are.

Personally, what used to cross my eyes previously
was the question, "Where did it all begin?" Who created God? What started the Big Bang? These were questions that used to boggle my mind! However, in the Here and Now, spiritually speaking, I don't need these questions answered. Or I should say, I've answered these questions myself. I've found peace between my spiritual and scientific beliefs. Whether it was divine intervention of the Lord, or the Universe and cosmos bringing together a specific set of organic and inorganic ingredients, I do not really care, what I do care about, is that something greater than me is the reason I exist today.

I suppose my personal beliefs, while not wholly defined, can be helped along the way by the following quotes...

"A wise man has the power to reason away what a fool believes he sees." Don't swallow what you've been 'fed' our entire lives. Question everything around us. We know that what we learn in the classroom is not always the truth, or 100% truth.

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost" (Tit. 3:5).

"And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for He who comes to God must believe that he is, and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him" (Heb. 11:6). As is the belief that we arrived where we are as a result of the cosmos, either directed or undirected, by a knowing hand greater than myself.

The following is too much of an absolute, and I don't succumb to absolutes. Our place in this world and the cosmos is much more than that....With faith being given out freely to all who seek truth, Christians have no need to be in the business of mixing science with religion. With prayer, we have the ability to supernaturally win over even the most stubborn evolutionists.

One piece of evidence will not sway the debate. The question of our place in the universe is much more than that. It is said, "It may take an unknown amount of time and prayer, but for diligent seekers God always provides answers." The same can be said of the universe, the cosmos, and all we've learned about, and have to learn, about science and physics, and the known and unknown world and space around us.

God has set up a very clever system for revealing himself to mortal man: He discloses the truth to people who humble themselves and hides it from those who are proud. As does the Universe!
edit on 11.26.2015 by Kandinsky because: fixed italics




posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 11:43 AM
link   
Thank GOD for that.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 11:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: EnigmaAgent
Thank GOD for that.


No, thank PROGRESSIVE LIBERALISM for that.

They aren't even competing theories, so why do you guys insist on making people choose between one or the other?



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 12:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bone75

originally posted by: EnigmaAgent
Thank GOD for that.


No, thank PROGRESSIVE LIBERALISM for that.

They aren't even competing theories, so why do you guys insist on making people choose between one or the other?


I concur. I created this thread to convey that my personal search has led me to that very conclusion. In fact, I have immersed each concept within the two. That probably goes against mainstream theory that a person needs to chose one or the other. I don't believe in absolutes, therefore I cannot chose one or another. There's too much grey area for me.

I cannot support a schism of One or the Other. I know others can and have no problem doing so.
edit on 26-11-2015 by Cosmic911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 12:12 PM
link   
+10 Faith in humanity




posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 12:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Cosmic911

"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." —Albert Einstein

Astronomy has come together so that we're now able to tell a coherent story of how the universe began. This story does not contradict God, but instead enlarges [the idea of] God.
edit on 26-11-2015 by Cosmic911 because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-11-2015 by Cosmic911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   
I think that we've finally turned the corner. I anticipate a science-based Utopia within half a century.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 12:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Robert Reynolds
I think that we've finally turned the corner. I anticipate a science-based Utopia within half a century.


LOL!

That is a good one.

'The Dumbest Generation' by Mark Bauerlein
"The Dumbest Generation," "the intellectual future of the United States looks dim."

Do you think it is a coincidence that the dumbest generation of the youth in America believe whatever they are told?

edit on 26-11-2015 by infolurker because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 12:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Cosmic911

www.theguardian.com...


newrepublic.com...


Einstein wasn't a fan of religon.
Context is always key.

Glad you guys think they are not comepteing theories, but many in the nation think they are. Hence why we have the debate all the time if it should be in school.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 12:43 PM
link   
The Millennials are just not falling for the myths, it's impossible to keep the information out their hands. Unlike their grandparents, Millennials can simply Google questions that prove magic is a lie when trying to pass for truth.


“The increasing acknowledgement that religion is not consistent with scientific understanding understanding of the universe may lead to a decrease in religion,” they note, “but the conflict between scientific knowledge and many religious teachings goes back hundreds of years, and therefore cannot explain the recent timing of the decline. It is possible, however, that the re-emergence of the science-religion conflict with debates about teaching creationism or intelligence design in U.S. schools pushed some young people away from religion. Another possibility is (the influence of) increasing high school graduation rates and college attendance, as more education is linked to lower religiosity.”

www.psmag.com...

The Lesson.. Don't lie to your kids about science! If anything, tell them to just have faith, in this way the lie "may" last another generation.

Creationist! Evolve or face extinction!




posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 12:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Cosmic911



Finally, Most Young Americans Now Accept Evolution Over Creationism


You know, there was a time back in the early 1980s when the same thing was said... in complete reverse.

My first impression then is as it is now; when we reach a point that we are so consumed by what the next person thinks and believes, we become like thought police.

Back then, many called it 1984 happening right on time... here we go again, just a few decades late.

...



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 01:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Cosmic911

Yet you ignore all the branches of the sciences that disprove it.

*but that's none of my business*



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 02:08 PM
link   
My faith in the American population has just gone up, yay for this news!

Still, as the article states, according to a 2014 poll, 50% of Americans over 65 are young earth creationists..

At least the younger generations have their heads screwed on properly.

Oh yeah, and regarding Einstein and people making claims about and misrepresenting his religious views, stop it. He was a follower of Spinoza and, if anything, a pantheist:

”The word God is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this."

”It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly."

”I am not an Atheist. I do not know if I can define myself as a Pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. May I not reply with a parable? The human mind, no matter how highly trained, cannot grasp the universe. We are in the position of a little child, entering a huge library whose walls are covered to the ceiling with books in many different tongues. The child knows that someone must have written those books. It does not know who or how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child notes a definite plan in the arrangement of the books, a mysterious order, which it does not comprehend, but only dimly suspects. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the human mind, even the greatest and most cultured, toward God. We see a universe marvelously arranged, obeying certain laws, but we understand the laws only dimly. Our limited minds cannot grasp the mysterious force that sways the constellations. I am fascinated by Spinoza's Pantheism. I admire even more his contributions to modern thought. Spinoza is the greatest of modern philosophers, because he is the first philosopher who deals with the soul and the body as one, not as two separate things." —Albert Einstein


originally posted by: Cosmic911
a reply to: Cosmic911

"Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind." —Albert Einstein


You have, like many before you, cosmic, taken this quote completely out of context. Here is the full quote:

“Though religion may be that which determines the goal, it has, nevertheless, learned from science, in the broadest sense, what means will contribute to the attainment of the goals it has set up. But science can only be created by those who are thoroughly imbued with the aspiration toward truth and understanding. This source of feeling, however, springs from the sphere of religion. To this there also belongs the faith in the possibility that the regulations valid for the world of existence are rational, that is, comprehensible to reason. I cannot conceive of a genuine scientist without that profound faith. The situation may be expressed by an image: science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.”

He likened the pursuit of truth in science to a religious conviction, that is all.

"The further the spiritual evolution of mankind advances, the more certain it seems to me that the path to genuine religiosity does not lie through the fear of life, and the fear of death, and blind faith, but through striving after rational knowledge. In this sense I believe that the priest must become a teacher if he wishes to do justice to his lofty educational mission."

This is what he meant by the quote if you keep it in context:

“Science without profound curiosity won’t go anywhere, and religion without science is doubly crippled.”

Einstein didn’t believe in a personal God, and saw theistic religion as a man-made fiction. End of story.
edit on 26-11-2015 by spygeek because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: Learningman

This is a poorly constructed rebuttal (no offense). Your post 'suggests' I authored the study, furthermore, it suggests I have declared an opinion of either one or the other, again, which I have not. Based upon your response, I do not believe you appropriately gleaned the message I was sending. Thanks for replying to the thread.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 02:33 PM
link   
a reply to: spygeek

If you gleaned the idea of what I was conveying, you'd recognize the quote was implicitly relevant, and no way taken out of context. You fail to recognize that because you responded to the thread with your own biased opinion on the subject matter.



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 02:36 PM
link   
a reply to: redoubt

Thanks for that reply! It's a substantive concept that history repeats itself, if not exactly the same way. You see this trend in medicine, certain medical treatments are in favor one day, then fall out of favor the next. There are many reasons for this, of course, but the idea is the same. Great point!



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 02:39 PM
link   
I guess it matters which way you look for information on the two opposing ideas
pt1 of a 3pt interview www.youtube.com...



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 02:58 PM
link   
just food for thought... im public school educated.. in Florida of all places, graduated high school in '91... I never heard of the creationist theory till probably a decade later... yet it was rife through the 20th century?



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 03:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: Cosmic911
a reply to: spygeek

If you gleaned the idea of what I was conveying, you'd recognize the quote was implicitly relevant, and no way taken out of context. You fail to recognize that because you responded to the thread with your own biased opinion on the subject matter.


Not biased at all, just pointed out that the quote was apparently misrepresented as saying science requires religion, or that the two go hand in hand, which they don't. Your statement that astronomy's discoveries about the beginning of the universe don't contradict God is a bit weird, they contradict the Abrhamic God, amoung other Gods, pretty clearly.. They don't really "enlarge" the idea of God, if anything, they complicate to the point of irrationality any idea of a monotheistic personal God.

Again, I'm not biased, I just see no logic in using Einstein's quote about the scientific pursuit for a rational understanding of the universe being like a religious conviction, when trying to make a point about science's contribution to religious ideas about God.


edit on 26-11-2015 by spygeek because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 26 2015 @ 03:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Irishhaf

In some places sure, whether it worked under the moniker 'Intelligent Design' or creationism.

Currently there's even a creationist presidential candidate....

Folk simply didn't want to come to terms with the mountains of evidence for evolution and were given an easy out with ID and creationism.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join