Do 6 Out of 10 Americans Really Not Believe In Evolution?

reply to post by Darth Lumina

Eeeep wrong answer.
That is not electricity you are describing. Thats light. And in the bible it says that god made light (pretty much before anything else) and not some electricity. Please tell me how you prove that the theory of electricity is correct. Verification of isolated facts (light bulb shines when circuit is closed) doesn't cut it.

Nobody ever claimed a dog would turn into a dolphin (why should he?). BUT: you use your body every day (i imagine). And like the lightbulb shines every time i close the circuit (so far) we assume that your body evolved like anything else around it.

Don't miss the important point here: until we close the circuit we can only assume that the lightbulb will shine this time too (like electric theory predicts)

first i'd liek to say... whenever someone starts a post like this, they should define their version of "evolution". that word gets thrown these threads as if all people agree on one meaning.

Originally posted by Darth Lumina
reply to post by Kaytagg

 

Evolution isn't proven, it's only a Theory. Yes, microevolution is proven, but that's not enough evidence to say that it is or has been done on a large scale. So there isn't proof that a dog was once a dolphin, or anything like that. It's not close minded for many people to not buy into the evolution theory, just people need solid proof. Yes, it is stupid of someone to reject the theory all together because of religion and it's stupid for die hard evolutionists to assume everyone is stupid for not believing in the same thing they do. So it's arrogance on both sides. I'm not religious at all, so I don't have a church or god affecting my thought process on this subject. I'm all for a change of mind, but I don't jump on the bandwagon just because it's popular. I'd rather make up my own mind on it.

seems like Darth is the only person here who isn't ignorant...
microevolution is the only thing that has been proven.

evolution takes a blind leap of faith, just as big as religion

science is a religion just as much as any other belief system

just because you were raised to believe that evolution is a fact doesn't make it a fact. any less than a Christian saying God created everything.

if anyone has ANY evidence of evolution that isn't microevolution i'd like to see

The "ignorant believers" versus the "godless evolutionists" is just one more trick being used to divide society.

A divided house is weak, and cannot stand against an oppressor.
The oppressors are afraid of Americans, so they neuter them by polarising all debates until they become shouting matches of sloganised hatred.

Anyone feeling contempt, bitterness or hatred toward those on the other side of an established argument like this is a victim of the elite's brainwashing, and is doing the elite's work of shattering the supportive structures of society.

Two-party politics, global warming, evolution, class hatreds, racism, abortion . . .

These are all tools of the elite, who saw how baseball could polarise a crowd, and then modelled social thought on every issue they could affect to polarise us into smaller and smaller subgroups, afraid to think for ourselves.
The internet is used to intensify the program, with websites full of smug and senseless "talking points" being repeated over thousands of pages of repetitively inane "debate".

Yes, there is a wise and wonderful god whose laughter is the underlying substance of our universe. But tell people with scientific minds that they can't both believe in scientific evidence and believe in a god that they happen to be unaware of, and of course they will reject god.

Likewise, tell people who have experienced god that evolution proves god does not exist, and those who have known god will close their minds to this branch of science.

We have done a lot of evolving to get this far. To keep evolving healthily and strive toward an ever greater potential we must explore all the exciting frontiers of science, while keeping our hearts open to any spiritual insights that may make themselves known to us.

reply to post by Kailassa


amen brother

the only way any of it makes sense is if the two ideas are brought together.

alone they have so many pitfalls

reply to post by debunky


You are actually the one who is missing the points I'm trying to get at. The "theory of electricity" gets used everyday. Evolution on a larger scale, doesn't. Maybe I'm just incapable of explaining what I'm trying to get at, that is obviously my fault.

www.google.com...

I agree, the scale is different.
The proven/unproven status however is not.

Edit for malformed urls and to add:
Both are one falsification away from being proven wrong.

[edit on 30-6-2009 by debunky]

I think - what bothers me most - is that most people who debate Creationism versus Evolutionary Theory do not have a firm grasp of either.

Please, people, educate yourselves on both sides of this argument before you go running into the fray.

As for me, one who has been extensively trained at a University level in the scientific method and in evolutionary theory, I firmly believe in Intelligent Design.

And this is after a thorough investigation of the evidence - before I attended University I was a Trans Humanist.

I would encourage all truth Activists here on ATS to thoroughly explore both sides of this debate before coming to a conclusion - just like we do with all issues.

Do not let your emotion get the best of you - but - at the same time - it is okay to recognize that Human intuition plays a part in all matters of Faith.

reply to post by debunky


I suppose I'm just someone whos more interested in solid proof and facts. I have been told this is one of my weaknesses, which is true because sometimes that leads me to be close minded. I used to believe in evolution but then i realized that i was taking everyones word for it rather than reading up on it myself. I then decided to have a neutral stance on it. The proof of microevolution is why I keep an open mind about the subject, but it's just hard for me to accept something that's not proven to be fact. Then again that's why I don't practice religion for the same reason.

reply to post by debunky

Don't miss the important point here: until we close the circuit we can only assume that the lightbulb will shine this time too (like electric theory predicts)

This is an interesting debate in Quantum Mechanics, and it should be in statistics and pollsters as well. Does the Act of Observation change the scenario. I.E. Will God only exist once it is observed? Does observing evolution change the very nature of it?

The debate started with Schrodinger's Cat. I really don't want to type the whole scenario here, you can research it. Quickly, the cat is put into a box where there is a random chance of it a poison being released. The randomness depends on quantum mechanics, but suffice to say that according to popular modern theories, the poison exists in both states. It was released, and it was not released in equal probability, so the cat is both alive and dead, and only the act of observing one or the other makes it so!

OK, that is pretty technical for this forum, but I think it is relavent. We can never "observe" Macro-evolution because of the shear time it takes, and whether or not we "observe" God is relative, so neither can exist with any certainty!

Here is one of the more fun links explaining the paradox.
www.phobe.com...

5 out of 10 Americans still believe a 2000 year old guy that preached meditation and reincarnation is going to come save them, even though it's clear his messages were altered completely 800 years later by some guy named Paul.

Yes, the majority of Americans are slightly retarded.
Does this really surprise you?

reply to post by TruthMagnet

As for me, one who has been extensively trained at a University level in the scientific method and in evolutionary theory, I firmly believe in Intelligent Design.

What a cop out! J/K See my earlier post. I think you have proven my point. By adhering to Intelligent Design, you are saying that you believe in both a "Creation" and "Evolution" at the same time. And that you do not believe in either theory in totality.

Isn't that about right? And isn't that about the most intelligent view any of us could come up with? And isn't that along the lines of Schrodinger's cat? And aren't the pollsters messing things up by trying to observe this phenomenon of belief?

Originally posted by Darth Lumina
reply to post by debunky

 

You are actually the one who is missing the points I'm trying to get at. The "theory of electricity" gets used everyday. Evolution on a larger scale, doesn't. Maybe I'm just incapable of explaining what I'm trying to get at, that is obviously my fault.

On this note...

"Theory" is more important in science than fact.

Gravity is still only a theory, and there are multiple anamolies within our own solar system that seem to say what we know about gravity is wrong.

Evolution may only be a theory, but facts are based around theory until the theory is changed.

And as far as the other side of the argument goes - religion - at least with evolution there's some evidence to back it up.

Your OP said
February marked the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin, and to my chagrin, a quick google search reveals that only 4 in 10 Americans believe in evolution. This startles me greatly, as evolution is a well established theory (some of you don't know what a theory is, and that's part of the problem) that's been kicking around for quite some time now.

I didn't read the entire thread, so I wouldn't be suprised if this has already been pointed out, but at the time of Galileo a 'flat earth' was a 'well established theory.'

Finally, anybody who has a problem with the 'alternative view' to evolution really needs to take a good hard look at their own 'infantile trust' in authority, so called 'science' being only one 'face' of this authority ...

Why are you all so afraid of thinking for yourselves ?

Is it because of PTSD caused by the 'severe trauma' you were subjected to during your early 'childhood training' ( read : school ) when you were 'corrected' for moving toward the 'edge of the herd', when you were detected expressed your 'own views' instead of exactly what the teacher said ?

Just asking ...

Originally posted by thegagefather
5 out of 10 Americans still believe a 2000 year old guy that preached meditation and reincarnation is going to come save them, even though it's clear his messages were altered completely 800 years later by some guy named Paul.

Yes, the majority of Americans are slightly retarded.
Does this really surprise you?

haahaha, that is the best post i've ever seen

this thread should be closed based on that statement alone

The Torah says before there was anything there was wisdom and all things were created by him. What is Wisdom. It is the plan put in place before the creation. The Design. This Universe was tuned for life. If this universe expaned any faster or slower there would be no life. It had one less element it would have NO life. If the earth rotated on it's axis any faster or slower, there would be no life. If it revolved around the Sun any faster there would not be life as we know it. What you people call evolution is really just the progression of the creation. The progression of the creation is described in the book of Genisis. Mankind existed before et ha adam, or the man. Adam was the first Hominid that God gave a spirit too. He was the next in Gods progression of the Creation. Thats why the Sons of God had to fall to earth so they could rule mankind. There old ways of ruling as the watchers of Enoch passed away with the creation Adam. Adam was unique and was to be greater than previous hominid creation and didn't need the ruling of the lesser gods anymore because he had a spirit which connected him directly to the Creator. This is why Satan corrupted Adam and his wife in the garden. He was jealous because his kind was not going to be needed anymore in the way previously. Thats why the sons of god fell to earth and corrupted them to make them covet thier flesh more than thier spirits so thier spirits would deminish and atrophy and then they could be corrupted and ruled over and the next step in Gods creation would then also be corrupted. They were out of a job they obviously liked a lot. comon guys wake up. Look around. How can anyone believe this all by chance? I know how. Those who do are still deeply in love with thier flesh and are afraid if they chose to believe in a Creator they will have to give up thier flesh and all its pleasures. Truly those that chose to deny the creator are extremely dead in thier spirit and have no contact with it at all. Because if they did they would know just by breathing that there is a Creator. This is where the false ideas of of many christian sects come, that once you open your heart to Christ he comes in. No, its an awareness of ones own spirit that comes in and that spirit is in direct contact with the Creator and when the relationship between spirit and ones flesh is nurtured, one begins to come alive to the greater Spirit and understanding of things that are and the understanding that we live in a facade of flesh centered reality created by the sons of God to lead us and the Creators purpose for us astray. There is no conflict between science and Creation Guys. The only conflict is in you and your desire to be independent of anything external. It truly is a very desire to be a god yourself just like the master of this earth and it puts you at odds with the Creator. Its what the fallen ones want for you.

reply to post by Barkster


oh man they are gonna fire you up for starting a post with "the torah says..."

but your post wasn't filled with religious mumbo jumbo so it was bearable to read. but i'm waiting to see what others think of what u said...

Microevolution is plausible.

Macroevolution is bogus.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

Originally posted by NoJoker13
reply to post by Lannock

 

What about the missing links of religion??? You'll say that they require faith to believe in but then again so does a theory... Faith that it is fact just like God.

I am anti-religion, so I don't care about that. What I DO care about is evolution, mainly because evolutionists dismiss creation because of lack of proof even though evolution is unproven itself. My biggest problem with evolution is that evolutionists want it to be taught to our kids as FACT when there is NO PROOF. My son has started school this year so this is quite close to my heart.

What I want to be taught in schools is: We do not know how it all came about, BUT we have TWO main theories, Creation and Evolution. Teach them where these theories come from but also teach them that NEITHER can be proven conclusively. However, this might cause problems with kids coming from religious homes.

[edit on 30-6-2009 by Lannock]

reply to post by Lannock

What I want to be taught in schools is: We do not know how it all came about, BUT we have TWO main theories, Creation and Evolution. Teach them where these theories come from but also teach them that NEITHER can be proven conclusively.

EXACTLY! And, make sure the teachers do not have any agendas or axes to grind. Make sure that whatever information is available, is available to kids in school. Encourage them to seek more information if they have strong feelings!

This should not cause any problems in religious households. If someone's faith is so weak as to be afraid of differing opinions or asking questions, then they really have no faith at all.

I would think that religious parents of a child being taught evolution or anything else would welcome questions, and be more than willing to explain how it fits into their faith!

Originally posted by Lannock
. . .
What I want to be taught in schools is: We do not know how it all came about, BUT we have TWO main theories, Creation and Evolution. Teach them where these theories come from but also teach them that NEITHER can be proven conclusively. . . . .

That's like teaching kids in a cookery class - -
Good morning children.
Today we are going to learn about making pancakes.
Now first I need to explain that there are two theories of pancakes.
One is that pancakes are made by mixing flour, milk and eggs to a batter and frying it.
The other theory is that Mother did it.