Shocking poll reveals that 37% of Americans believe in creationism

originally posted by: Vermilion
a reply to: Venkuish1

This paper was written by an activist LoL
Here’s the TL;dr…

‘Admission policies for biology professionals, particularly teachers, to promote evolution must be made.’ 🤡

The paper I linked was written by two scientists and not two religious creationists.

Genet Mol Biol. 2019 Jan-Mar; 42(1): 120–124. Published online 2019 Feb 28. doi: 10.1590/1678-4685-GMB-2018-0086
PMCID: PMC6428117PMID: 30816905
Science and evolution
Claudia A.M. Russo 1 and Thiago André 2

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Venkuish1

You rely too heavily on NASA lol.

You don't need to rely on NASA at all. The age of our planet, solar system, galaxy, and the universe are well known for long time now and are not state secrets. It's just basic school knowledge.

But if you wanted to rely on something or someone it would be way better to rely on NASA and the scientists rather than rely on online conspiracy theorists/theories.

education.nationalgeographic.org...

Earth is estimated to be 4.54 billion years old, plus or minus about 50 million years. Scientists have scoured the Earth searching for the oldest rocks to radiometrically date.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Xtrozero

There was a god for everything until year 0 with Jesus. Before Him, time was measured by moons and harvests.

Unsubstantiated claims that lack evidence. Actually there is not a shred of evidence for what you just claimed.

Get in the time machine your scientists use to measure time and go tell the Greeks that they don't pray to Jupiter, Zeus, Poseidon, Hades, etc. as their gods.

ETA: While you're there, ask them what year it is...

Anyone can pray as they wish and they can believe in whatever Gods they want. It doesn't make the beliefs true though.

According to the facts the age of the planet is approximately 4.5billion years. That is the age of the planet.

Listen to yourself... According to the "facts", this planet is 4.5 billion years old. You're not even trying anymore and it's getting boring. What "facts" tell you how old this planet is? It could be 13 billion years old and nobody will ever know for certain. Don't try to tell me it's 4.5 billion years old and state that as a fact.

See numerous posts of mine and post above.

www.livescience.com...

Scattered across the vacuum of space are stars, galaxies, stellar remnants and other objects that are billions upon billions of years old. The age of the universe is now thought to be about 13.8 billion years — almost unfathomable. But how do we know that?

We can determine the age of the universe (to an extent) by analyzing light and other types of radiation traveling from deep space, but scientists haven't always agreed on the universe's age, and they continue to refine the answer as telescopes level up.

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: whereislogic

Well I was attempting to defend creationism by showing that we can manipulate life. Now you want to argue what is artificial lifeforms.

Nah, my points were about other things. Related to the topic of impressions. James Tour probably explains it better than I did.

a reply to: MrGashler

Again. Science does not deal in facts. Science deals in explanations that best fit observations.

I'm actually interested in this statement.

Like how would you apply it to astronomy?

Take these statements.

"The planets have a consistent duration to travel around the host star"

"The Milky Way is a Spiral Bar Galaxy."

"Jupiter is gas giant composed mostly of hydrogen with over 80 natural satellites"

"The Saturnian planet Enceladus has cryovolcanic H2O jets that shoot up to 100 KM over the surface of the icy moon"

"based on the ubiquitous dating of multiple samples to the same age, the solar system has been determinied to be 4.55 billion years old(+/- 100 MY)"

Are these facts? Does it change without our observation of it?

I think the Zen tree falls regardless if there's anything there to see it happen. The planets go around the sun. Stars explode. Life in distant galaxies thrives and dies.

But it can't be 'science' until we get the contact Hitler signal from Vega.

And there is the apologists field day. Because SETI operates on hope other life exists it can openly be conflated with a religious approach. Despite it being scientists listening for signals.

It comes off like you're saying because science gets amended, like how Jupiter had 60 less moons when I was a kid, it can't get closer to that "ultimate truth".

Science is the pursuit of truth through observation. A truth that can't be known until conclusive observation is made.

Like with the age of the solar system. That's not a guess. That's thousands of extraterrestrial samples being dated to the same age.

But it sure as hell is a lot closer to that 'truth' then the purely idea-driven (theology-first) answer.

a reply to: ashisnotanidiot

"CORRECTION: Evolutionary theory does encompass ideas and evidence regarding life’s origins (e.g., whether or not it happened near a deep-sea vent, which organic molecules came first, etc.), but this is not the central focus of evolutionary theory. Most of evolutionary biology deals with how life changed after its origin. Regardless of how life started, afterwards it branched and diversified, and most studies of evolution are focused on those processes."

This. I am no Creationist and have often decided their nonsense but, I do have some problems with evolution in its widest application.

Apparently fish developed lungs over millions of years or whatever when their ponds or lakes dried up.

But, if a pond or lake dries up, the fish all die?

And, can anyone explain the life cycle of dragonflies , that spend years under water as something that looks like something out of Alien, before morphing into a completely different creature that flies, brilliantly?

Sorry, but this has always puzzled me, and no, I don't have any answers.

originally posted by: Degradation33
a reply to: MrGashler

Again. Science does not deal in facts. Science deals in explanations that best fit observations.

I'm actually interested in this statement.

Like how would you apply it to astronomy?

Take these statements.

"The planets have a consistent duration to travel around the host star"

"The Milky Way is a Spiral Bar Galaxy."

"Jupiter is gas giant composed mostly of hydrogen with over 80 natural satellites"

"The Saturnian planet Enceladus has cryovolcanic H2O jets that shoot up to 100 KM over the surface of the icy moon"

"based on the ubiquitous dating of multiple samples to the same age, the solar system has been determinied to be 4.55 billion years old(+/- 100 MY)"

Are these facts? Does it change without our observation of it?

I think the Zen tree falls regardless if there's anything there to see it happen. The planets go around the sun. Stars explode. Life in distant galaxies thrives and dies.

But it can't be 'science' until we get the contact Hitler signal from Vega.

And there is the apologists field day. Because SETI operates on hope other life exists it can openly be conflated with a religious approach. Despite it being scientists listening for signals.

It comes off like you're saying because science gets amended, like how Jupiter had 60 less moons when I was a kid, it can't get closer to that "ultimate truth".

Science is the pursuit of truth through observation. A truth that can't be known until conclusive observation is made.

Like with the age of the solar system. That's not a guess. That's thousands of extraterrestrial samples being dated to the same age.

But it sure as hell is a lot closer to that 'truth' then the purely idea-driven (theology-first) answer.

It's the usual nonsensical claims circulated by creationists online. Take a look at the link above which I have linked so many times for them to see but it seems invisible to them.

Evolution is both a fact and a theory. Evolution is widely observable in laboratory and natural populations as they change over time. The fact that we need annual flu vaccines is one example of observable evolution. At the same time, evolutionary theory explains more than observations, as the succession on the fossil record. Hence, evolution is also the scientific theory that embodies biology, including all organisms and their characteristics

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

originally posted by: LSU2018

There was a god for everything until year 0 with Jesus. Before Him, time was measured by moons and harvests.

If we simulated Earth from 4 billion years ago all life we see today would be different. Any else and that is a scary thought that we are just running a script of some intelligent design. The universe is their ant farm but with the ability to control all. Oh, what fun that reality would be.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Venkuish1

You rely too heavily on NASA lol.

You don't need to rely on NASA at all. The age of our planet, solar system, galaxy, and the universe are well known for long time now and are not state secrets. It's just basic school knowledge.

But if you wanted to rely on something or someone it would be way better to rely on NASA and the scientists rather than rely on online conspiracy theorists/theories.

education.nationalgeographic.org...

Earth is estimated to be 4.54 billion years old, plus or minus about 50 million years. Scientists have scoured the Earth searching for the oldest rocks to radiometrically date.

Why do you keep quoting that the earth is 4.5 billion years old? I've mentioned it several times in here lol.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Xtrozero

There was a god for everything until year 0 with Jesus. Before Him, time was measured by moons and harvests.

Unsubstantiated claims that lack evidence. Actually there is not a shred of evidence for what you just claimed.

Get in the time machine your scientists use to measure time and go tell the Greeks that they don't pray to Jupiter, Zeus, Poseidon, Hades, etc. as their gods.

ETA: While you're there, ask them what year it is...

Anyone can pray as they wish and they can believe in whatever Gods they want. It doesn't make the beliefs true though.

According to the facts the age of the planet is approximately 4.5billion years. That is the age of the planet.

Listen to yourself... According to the "facts", this planet is 4.5 billion years old. You're not even trying anymore and it's getting boring. What "facts" tell you how old this planet is? It could be 13 billion years old and nobody will ever know for certain. Don't try to tell me it's 4.5 billion years old and state that as a fact.

See numerous posts of mine and post above.

www.livescience.com...

Scattered across the vacuum of space are stars, galaxies, stellar remnants and other objects that are billions upon billions of years old. The age of the universe is now thought to be about 13.8 billion years — almost unfathomable. But how do we know that?

We can determine the age of the universe (to an extent) by analyzing light and other types of radiation traveling from deep space, but scientists haven't always agreed on the universe's age, and they continue to refine the answer as telescopes level up.

Link to the name of the man who traveled back 4.5 billion years to see when the Earth was formed, please. If you can't provide that then stop wasting my time.

a reply to: Degradation33

I have my doubts about Jupiter. Has anyone ever sent a craft to its surface to see that most of the planet is made of gases? For all we know, the surface is normal.

originally posted by: MrGashler

I love seeing people add things to my comments that I never said. I love it.
Facts do not change. Truth does not change. Science changes. Science does not deal in facts. Science deals in explanations that best fit observations. If a 'fact' changes, then it was never a fact to begin with.

OK, so there are no absolutes, what is your point again? We can "what if" every "fact" into question. You think of facts as an irrefutable truth, but I think we can call something a fact based on replicable and falsifiable evidence until it is proven otherwise. We could say instead that we have replicable and falsifiable evidence to support our views. but that is a long ass way to say what I know is as close to a fact as we can get today. I find your fascination with the use of the word "fact" kind of boring, but what I think is more important is how people use non-falsifiable statements as their main point in a debate and think since it cannot be falsified then that is the proof in some way it is true.

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Degradation33

I have my doubts about Jupiter. Has anyone ever sent a craft to its surface to see that most of the planet is made of gases? For all we know, the surface is normal.

Based on?
Your creationist and religious views?
Do you consider start reading science even at the basic level?

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Venkuish1

You rely too heavily on NASA lol.

You don't need to rely on NASA at all. The age of our planet, solar system, galaxy, and the universe are well known for long time now and are not state secrets. It's just basic school knowledge.

But if you wanted to rely on something or someone it would be way better to rely on NASA and the scientists rather than rely on online conspiracy theorists/theories.

education.nationalgeographic.org...

Earth is estimated to be 4.54 billion years old, plus or minus about 50 million years. Scientists have scoured the Earth searching for the oldest rocks to radiometrically date.

Why do you keep quoting that the earth is 4.5 billion years old? I've mentioned it several times in here lol.

You doubt it. I was the one to mention it several times after you had your usual 'doubts'.

a reply to: LSU2018

Yes, we have.

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018

originally posted by: Venkuish1

originally posted by: LSU2018
a reply to: Xtrozero

There was a god for everything until year 0 with Jesus. Before Him, time was measured by moons and harvests.

Unsubstantiated claims that lack evidence. Actually there is not a shred of evidence for what you just claimed.

Get in the time machine your scientists use to measure time and go tell the Greeks that they don't pray to Jupiter, Zeus, Poseidon, Hades, etc. as their gods.

ETA: While you're there, ask them what year it is...

Anyone can pray as they wish and they can believe in whatever Gods they want. It doesn't make the beliefs true though.

According to the facts the age of the planet is approximately 4.5billion years. That is the age of the planet.

Listen to yourself... According to the "facts", this planet is 4.5 billion years old. You're not even trying anymore and it's getting boring. What "facts" tell you how old this planet is? It could be 13 billion years old and nobody will ever know for certain. Don't try to tell me it's 4.5 billion years old and state that as a fact.

See numerous posts of mine and post above.

www.livescience.com...

Scattered across the vacuum of space are stars, galaxies, stellar remnants and other objects that are billions upon billions of years old. The age of the universe is now thought to be about 13.8 billion years — almost unfathomable. But how do we know that?

We can determine the age of the universe (to an extent) by analyzing light and other types of radiation traveling from deep space, but scientists haven't always agreed on the universe's age, and they continue to refine the answer as telescopes level up.

Link to the name of the man who traveled back 4.5 billion years to see when the Earth was formed, please. If you can't provide that then stop wasting my time.

Why not read the links I provided? Sources are very credible, NASA, various universities, National Geographic and some other I can't remember. Unless you think there is a huge conspiracy theory to cover up the truth of creationism.

originally posted by: Oldcarpy2
a reply to: ashisnotanidiot

"CORRECTION: Evolutionary theory does encompass ideas and evidence regarding life’s origins (e.g., whether or not it happened near a deep-sea vent, which organic molecules came first, etc.), but this is not the central focus of evolutionary theory. Most of evolutionary biology deals with how life changed after its origin. Regardless of how life started, afterwards it branched and diversified, and most studies of evolution are focused on those processes."

This. I am no Creationist and have often decided their nonsense but, I do have some problems with evolution in its widest application.

Apparently fish developed lungs over millions of years or whatever when their ponds or lakes dried up.

But, if a pond or lake dries up, the fish all die?

And, can anyone explain the life cycle of dragonflies , that spend years under water as something that looks like something out of Alien, before morphing into a completely different creature that flies, brilliantly?

Sorry, but this has always puzzled me, and no, I don't have any answers.

I dunno.

What I do know is it is just as dangerous to be so single-mindedly blind for science as is to be so single-mindedly for creationism.

Especially when creationism is not incompatible with science.

a reply to: randomuser2034

Genesis was written by Moses. Rabbinical Judaism calculated a lifespan of Moses corresponding to 1391–1271 BC; Jerome suggested 1592 BC, and James Ussher suggested 1571 BC as his birth year. My question is, how did he come to have information regarding what happened in the beginning?

a reply to: strongfp

Or maybe that universe could be the said God...

a reply to: Degradation33

This is the kind of discussion I enjoy.

I want to first reiterate that I am in no way trying to devalue science or the scientific method. Based upon some of the replies that I’ve received so far, it very much seems like everyone is taking it as though I’m diminishing the value of science. I’m not. Science has been an integral part of my life since I was a kid.

It also seems like many people are having a knee-jerk reaction to my statements and assuming that because I dare question science, or even worse that I would dare say evolution is not a fact, I must support the creationist ideology. That I must be swinging in support of religion. This is false. Neither science nor religion have the answers, and both are filled with blind zealots.

With that being said....in order to properly respond to what you’ve said and asked I need to understand how you define certain things.

Is classifying and/or sorting things Science? For example, I’ve played Magic The Gathering for 22 years. I keep the cards that aren’t in decks very well organized and sorted. Am I engaging science when I sort through a stack of cards and place them in organized binders based upon certain properties?
Another example is classification of polygons. Is it science to identify the classification of a trapezoid as a quadrilateral but not as a rhombus? Is defining the properties of a triangle as acute or obtuse science?

Is creating definitions and grouping things based on their properties as they correspond to those definitions science? Is a definition a fact?
Is the truth mutable? Or is our understanding of the truth mutable?