Shocking poll reveals that 37% of Americans believe in creationism

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Venkuish1

... pushing the theory of evolution as a fact. I'm not sure what your rub is with that since you're all about it.

Some people are just infatuated with ancient religious pagan mythology (especially when it's posing and marketed as "science" or "fact"*):

The Pagan Religious Roots of Evolutionary Philosophies and Philosophical Naturalism (part 1 of 2)

*: A book of popular quotations lists this one among them: “If you tell a big enough lie and tell it often enough, many will believe it.” For decades the statement has been made again and again, like some mystical chant: “Evolution is a fact.” It qualifies as effective brainwashing propaganda, and with repetition it reaches the status of a slogan​—and slogans everywhere repeated are soon programmed into brains and tripped off tongues with little critical examination or skeptical dissection. Once a theory has been sloganized into community thinking, it no longer requires proof, and any who dissent are scorned. If such dissenters present rational refutation of the slogan’s validity, they are especially irritating and subjected to the only available response, namely, ridicule.

“For there will be a period of time when they will not put up with the wholesome* [Or “healthful; beneficial.”] teaching, but according to their own desires, they will surround themselves with teachers to have their ears tickled.* [Or “to tell them what they want to hear.”] They will turn away from listening to the truth and give attention to false stories.” (2 Timothy 4:3,4) ("myths" is a synonym for "false stories")

“So we should no longer be children, tossed about as by waves and carried here and there by every wind of teaching by means of the trickery of men, by means of cunning in deceptive schemes.” (Ephesians 4:14)

“Propaganda will not lead to success unless a fundamental principle is considered with continually sharp attention: it has to confine itself to little and to repeat this eternally. Here, too, persistency, as in so many other things in this world, is the first and the most important condition for success. . . . The masses . . . will lend their memories only to the thousandfold repetition of the most simple ideas. A change must never alter the content of what is being brought forth by propaganda, but in the end it always has to say the same. Thus the slogan has to be illuminated from various sides, but the end of every reflection has always and again to be the slogan itself.”​—Mein Kampf, by Adolf Hitler.

Stephen Jay Gould wrote an essay on evolution in the January 1987 issue of the science magazine Discover. Intent on overkill, in this five-​page article he proclaimed evolution to be a fact 12 times! At one point in the article, Gould said: “I don’t want to sound like a shrill dogmatist shouting ‘rally round the flag boys,’ but biologists have reached a consensus . . . about the fact of evolution.” But really, does that not sound like “a shrill dogmatist shouting ‘rally round the flag boys’”?

Molecular biologist Michael Denton referred to this glib talk about evolution’s being a fact and dismissed it with these words: “Now of course such claims are simply nonsense.” It’s much more than nonsense. It’s fraud. It deceives and misrepresents. It perverts the truth to induce another to part with something of great value—their faith in God as their Creator.​—Romans 1:25. Newspapers, radio, TV, nature series, science programs, schoolbooks from second grade on​—all drum this evolution-​is-a-fact litany into the public mind.

Fraud is defined as “an act of deceiving or misrepresenting.” It is the “intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value.”​—Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary.

So people are swept along by the repetitious mantras (a very appropiate term if you consider its Hindu roots as discussed in the video earlier) recited by evolution’s propagandizers. The theory becomes dogma, its preachers become arrogant, and dissenters reap disdainful abuse. The tactics work.

Coming back to the quotation from Hitler's Mein Kampf. This four-​word propaganda line, ‘Evolution is a fact,’ is little (little in content), is a simple sentence (easily said), and is repeated persistently (even 12 times in one short essay).

You know what the sad part is, no matter how obvious it is what is going on here, those taken in by propaganda, still either cannot see it, or when they do, they don't want to admit to it (perhaps because it's too embarassing, even if they only have to admit it to themselves). As exemplified by what happened in this subforum once I started asking some very simple questions concerning the topic of "hollow bones" and the drawing that was used to give people the impression that certain types of dinosaurs (therapods) have "hollow bones". Not even close (the reality/truth/fact of the matter). Using the term "hollow bones" to describe the bones of dinosaurs is laughably deceptive and blatantly propagandistic. It's almost as obvious as someone claiming that 2+2=5. Come on people, how can you fall for that? (the Bible explains how by the way, so not a genuine question for me, it's a rhetorical question; I'm obviously also not referring to all people) What's the big deal in at least admitting to yourself that you've been taken for a fool.

“A fool will believe anything.”—PROVERBS 14:15, TODAY’S ENGLISH VERSION.

Source: Do Not Be a Victim of Propaganda! (Awake!—2000)

Proverbs 14:15 is quoted in its entirety from another translation in my signature. Here's another proverb with a clue regarding my earlier rhetorical question.

Proverbs 29:1:

A man who stiffens his neck* [Or “who remains stubborn.”] after much reproof

Will suddenly be broken beyond healing.

No way around it:

Note that rather than denoting a person who is lacking in mental ability, the word “fool,” as used in the Bible, generally refers to an individual who spurns reason and follows a morally insensible course out of harmony with God’s righteous standards. It is the opposite of wisdom.

a reply to: LSU2018

and I don't know why it bothers you so much that others don't believe what you do

LOL...militant atheists are funny. A young lady who did Uber ride service once told me that there were 2 types of people who always made a point of letting you know their ideology. Vegans and atheists. She said one woman told her within about 30 seconds of getting in the car. "I'm going to a friend's house. I'm an atheist."

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: LSU2018

The difference between science and religion is pretty much their methodologies and goals.

Science relies on empirical evidence, experimentation, and the scientific method to investigate and understand natural phenomena, whereas religion relies on faith, revelation, holy texts, and tradition as sources of knowledge.

They serve different purposes and employ different methods for understanding the world.

Right, so what's the problem in believing in one and not the other? Why would I believe that humans started out as single celled organisms when that's never been proven? It's a lot easier to believe we were created, and we don't have to spend our lives overanalyzing, rewriting, and changing everything. On top of that, guess what... If I'm wrong, when I die then I'll end up in the same place as y'all. But, if I'm right.... well...

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: MykeNukem




One thing is CERTAIN; mankind as we are today was not miraculously made in our current form by some omnipotent entity in his own image.
We evolved from other life forms over billions and billions of years....and we are still evolving - though polls and threads like this make me seriously think we are actually de-evolving as a species.

That's not certain... That's a theory and a theory isn't a proven fact.

You are confused desire the fact there are a lot of posts explaining the difference between scientific theory and scientific hypothesis or speculation.

You keep dismissing making erroneous statements.

I'm not confused. I'm questioning how you can push a theory as a fact. Your explanations are boring and remind me of someone using common core math and a whole sheet of paper to explain how 4 has evolved and now 2+2=5. At the end of the day, 2+2 still equals 4 just like it did 4.3 billion years ago.

You are still unable to distinguish between scientific theory and a scientific hypothesis or even what is pure speculation.

We haven't evolved from the monkeys. People who claim we have just show how irrelevant they are with the subject. They re going further by arguing that if we have evolved from monkeys then why do monkeys don't evolve to become humans.

Total confusion!

A theory is an idea. A hypothesis is an explanation based on limited evidence.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Venkuish1

I don't need "peer reviewed" crap to know a theory is an idea. Peer reviewed BS is what got us to where we are now, meaning people like you trying to tell us that a theory is a fact. That's herd mentality in its purest form.

That says it all !!!

I suppose you don't even read anything related to science not even if it's at a basic level.

That should say it all !!! I love science, I love learning and watching how water rusts metal or how salty, humid air causes an unoccupied castle near the sea to dilapidate and fall apart, or how wind and sand cut through rocks in the desert and change their shapes, etc.. I just don't buy into the evolutionary side of humanity. If that aggravates you, I don't know what to tell you. Doesn't bother me a bit that you believe something I don't, and I don't know why it bothers you so much that others don't believe what you do. That's a little on the creepy side to be honest.

You say you live science?! That must be a joke considering you are adopting creationist views and sound exactly like a creationist who is unable to distinguish between a scientific theory and a speculation and between fact and fiction arguing on the top of this that if we are coming from the monkeys why monkeys haven't evolved to become humans.

I think you said the following in a reply to me

I don't need "peer reviewed" crap to know a theory is an idea. Peer reviewed BS is what got us to where we are now, meaning people like you trying to tell us that a theory is a fact. That's herd mentality in its purest form.

You are calling the peer reviewed process as BS and 'crap'. Doesn't seem you are in love with science but mostly you want to believe in some outdated erroneous ideas.

a reply to: LSU2018

Right, so what's the problem in believing in one and not the other?

I don't have an issue with you doing so LSU2018.

As to the theory of evolution, just like with QFT, it's widely accepted within the scientific community.

And is supported by a vast amount of evidence from various fields such as genetics, paleontology, comparative anatomy, and molecular biology.

There are also key pieces of evidence that support evolution including the fossil records, molecular evidence, and biogeography.

Evolutionary theory(natural selection) is supported by an extensive body of evidence and is considered one of the most robust theories in science.

Possibly worth considering that the theory does not necessarily discount the notion of a creator and many people who are religious don't see a conflict between their religious beliefs and evolution.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Freeborn
a reply to: MykeNukem




One thing is CERTAIN; mankind as we are today was not miraculously made in our current form by some omnipotent entity in his own image.
We evolved from other life forms over billions and billions of years....and we are still evolving - though polls and threads like this make me seriously think we are actually de-evolving as a species.

That's not certain... That's a theory and a theory isn't a proven fact.

You are confused desire the fact there are a lot of posts explaining the difference between scientific theory and scientific hypothesis or speculation.

You keep dismissing making erroneous statements.

I'm not confused. I'm questioning how you can push a theory as a fact. Your explanations are boring and remind me of someone using common core math and a whole sheet of paper to explain how 4 has evolved and now 2+2=5. At the end of the day, 2+2 still equals 4 just like it did 4.3 billion years ago.

You are still unable to distinguish between scientific theory and a scientific hypothesis or even what is pure speculation.

We haven't evolved from the monkeys. People who claim we have just show how irrelevant they are with the subject. They re going further by arguing that if we have evolved from monkeys then why do monkeys don't evolve to become humans.

Total confusion!

A theory is an idea. A hypothesis is an explanation based on limited evidence.

A scientific theory is not an idea.
Perhaps you should try again. It's like a game and you have been given so many attempts.

a reply to: LSU2018

If i have a stab at the difference colloquially a "theory" implies an idea or speculation.

However, in scientific terms, a theory is a well-established and thoroughly supported explanation of natural phenomena.

That can be tested and confirmed through observations and repeatable experiments.

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: LSU2018

Scientific theory isn't the same as me having a theory of how my cat got stuck in a tree or something.

I know, I understand that possibly over 27 decades of research have gone into the scientific theory of evolution. What I don't believe, is that scientists have proven that a human can eventually evolve out of an organism that began as an amoeba. They haven't even scratched the surface of proving that. In my opinion, that's a lot of time wasted when they could have been living life and focusing on far more important things. Who really cares HOW we got here, it's not that serious.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: LSU2018

Scientific theory isn't the same as me having a theory of how my cat got stuck in a tree or something.

I know, I understand that possibly over 27 decades of research have gone into the scientific theory of evolution. What I don't believe, is that scientists have proven that a human can eventually evolve out of an organism that began as an amoeba. They haven't even scratched the surface of proving that. In my opinion, that's a lot of time wasted when they could have been living life and focusing on far more important things. Who really cares HOW we got here, it's not that serious.

It's not a matter of belief.
Beliefs exist when there is no evidence around like religious beliefs about creationism or even flat earth.

You can believe whatever you want but science is a process that doesn't deal with beliefs in the supernatural world and beliefs in general.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: nugget1
There's an increasing distrust of 'the science' these days, and not without reason. When academia partners with government 'the facts' can get muddy as they're mixed in with agenda.

.
That's something very different to what I am describing. Creationism is not a modern view of the origin of humans or the world and the universe. Evolution is a fact and not a product of corrupt science/scientists.

Evolution is a theory, just like the Big Bang.

Clearly you don't know what you are talking about. If you think a scientific theory is some kind of speculation based on beliefs or a speculation broadly speaking.

And we didn't evolve from the monkeys. I see you are asking yourself the same ridiculous questions other creationists have been asking over various threads.

'if we evolved from the monkeys then why don't monkeys evolve to become humans'

This is why the educational system has been failing for a number of years.

A scientific theory is based on ideas that can't be proven, thus remaining a theory.

I never said "if we evolved from monkeys then why don't monkeys evolve to become humans", though I'm starting to slowly question that.

You clearly don't know what are you talking about just like al creationists who completely disregard science, evidence and facts.

I don't disregard science. I think you have such a disdain for God and religion that you spend way too much time pushing theories in an attempt to make you think you're right.

a reply to: LSU2018

Who really cares HOW we got here

The question of how we got here is of vast importance.

It's not only a matter of scientific curiosity but also holds significant implications for various aspects of human life, society, and understanding of the universe in general mate.

Everybody wants to know the answer to that question on some level whether they realise it or not.

a reply to: LSU2018

like the theoretical missing link. Its there we just can not find it. Trust us though we could never be wrong.

a reply to: LSU2018

Name one thing in science that is known with absolute certainty.

a reply to: LSU2018

I don't think anyone who is serious about attempting to explain how life began on this planet will tell you for sure come from an amoeba, or a pile of goo or slime on a rock.

But, they can give a good hypothesis, based on the piles of scientific evidence- facts - that life could have started off as something similar to that.
Now you as the individual can either take it as a scientific fact, based on evidence. Or you can not accept it.

It's up to you really.

a reply to: Phantom42338

Name one thing in science that is known with absolute certainty.

"Dont eat yellow snow"

Science simply is not about absolute certainty or if so, is rarely, if ever, attainable.

Scientific knowledge is based on evidence, experimentation, and observation, and the conclusions are always subject to revision in light of new evidence or improved understanding.

It's the best guess based on the information available at the time.

With scientific theories being subject to revision as new and better information becomes available.

It's also the only tool humanity has in her box that will allow us to attempt to understand the universe and reality we think we experience.

originally posted by: ColeYounger2

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: ColeYounger2
a reply to: Venkuish1

So tell me, when exactly did science debunk creationism, as you claim? Sorry, but a dogmatic belief in evolution as the
catch-all answer doesn't cut it anymore.

Why can scientists look at a relatively simple machine, like an outboard motor, and every one of them would agree that someone obviously designed it, but show them something infinitely mote complex, like DNA, and they'll scoff if you suggest that there is a creator behind it.

Do some research on irreducible complexity. It's all over the place in the natural world. Whether you want to assign it a name, like "God" or not, something is designing it.

I didn't make a claim but stated a fact.
Evolution is a fact.

Creationism is an outdated end debunked view and this is a fact.

Creationism has been asserted by religious people without a shred of evidence to support the claims made in its favour. But basic high school science shows exactly the opposite of what creationists have claimed over centuries if not millennia.

I am not disagreeing that evolution exists. Adaptation and speciation is Biology 101.
I'm debating your statement that "creationism has been debunked". Who debunked it, and when? You don't even seem to be aware that a large number of scientists believe that intelligent design exists.

It's strange how an internet search for "intelligent design" brings up numerous sites that immediately make the "it's pseudoscience" argument. For instance, here's Wikipedia:
Intelligent design is a pseudoscientific argument for the existence of God, presented by its proponents as "an evidence-based scientific theory about .

Yet, I can find lenghty, scholarly discussions from scientists who will state outrightly that they believe in God.
[...]

Creationism is an unsubstantiated belief with no merits at all. The burden of proof is on those who claim creationism is true but the problem is the absence of evidence for their claims.

The progress of science has already shown creationism to be false. But even if we hadn't progress that much creationism is still based on personal but baseless opinions. It has never gone beyond what it was always, a belief.

a reply to: Venkuish1

I believe your math is wrong....

37% of non evolution, and 24% of God-directed evolution is 61%.

And that's right in line with how many people worldwide believe in a God.

I don't see what's shocking about that.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: midicon
a reply to: Venkuish1

We live in an open air asylum.

It's really worrying that a large number of adults in the US dismiss science altogether in favour of some debunked medieval view of the origin of humans.

But I don't think the situation is the same let's say in Europe or other parts of the world. In the US these Biblical views are embedded strongly in the educational system and traditionally followed by a good number of American families from generation to generation.

2/3 of the world believe in intelligent design of some sort.

And who debunked God? Surely not something like the big bang theory, which a) is a theory, and b) was created by a Catholic priest....

And if religion preceeded the medieval age, how is it a "medieval" view?

I think you need to explore the world some.