Shocking poll reveals that 37% of Americans believe in creationism

originally posted by: ashisnotanidiot

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: ashisnotanidiot

Then your science teacher was wrong in your school. The bug bang theory is about inflation and not how the universe was created. The big bang was an event that happened in the existing universe. What we don't know is what actually creates the universe. It is suspected one possibility may be vacuum fluctuons. However there currently is not any evidence to support this as far as i know.

So from a sci ce aspect they just don't know how the universe was created only what we can see happen after it was. And now even the standard model of cosmology is showing cracks do to the James Webb telescope we see things happened much earlier then we thought such as the formation of galaxies

Yep, Stephen Hawking was wrong too when he discussed the big bang, and how the universe came from nothing.

LMAO.

You guys are amazing.

Enjoy your circle jerk.

He might be his ideas have not been proven. But I'm not sure of why this is important
. He thought he had an idea of thr cause problem is he can't provide any evidence to prove it. This is what happens when scientists speculate to sell books. His speculations cannot be confirmed do to the fact anything that happened before the universe existed would leave no evidence or proof of any kind.

Speculation is fine but you can't take it as scientific fact which obviously you have done. You continue to bash away with your imaginary club not realizing science never ever said this is what happened. You have built up a straw man argument either by accident or on purpose making claims on what science believes.

originally posted by: dragonridr

originally posted by: ashisnotanidiot

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: ashisnotanidiot

Then your science teacher was wrong in your school. The bug bang theory is about inflation and not how the universe was created. The big bang was an event that happened in the existing universe. What we don't know is what actually creates the universe. It is suspected one possibility may be vacuum fluctuons. However there currently is not any evidence to support this as far as i know.

So from a sci ce aspect they just don't know how the universe was created only what we can see happen after it was. And now even the standard model of cosmology is showing cracks do to the James Webb telescope we see things happened much earlier then we thought such as the formation of galaxies

Yep, Stephen Hawking was wrong too when he discussed the big bang, and how the universe came from nothing.

LMAO.

You guys are amazing.

Enjoy your circle jerk.

He might be his ideas have not been proven. But I'm not sure of why this is important
. He thought he had an idea of thr cause problem is he can't provide any evidence to prove it. This is what happens when scientists speculate to sell books. His speculations cannot be confirmed do to the fact anything that happened before the universe existed would leave no evidence or proof of any kind.

Speculation is fine but you can't take it as scientific fact which obviously you have done. You continue to bash away with your imaginary club not realizing science never ever said this is what happened. You have built up a straw man argument either by accident or on purpose making claims on what science believes.

Actually the poster has repeatedly rejected a number of scientists from the links I provided who stated that evolution is a fact calling it 'an appeal to authority'. It seems he doesn't realise the difference between stating facts and making a hypothesis or just a speculation. But even in this case they have misunderstood what Hawkins said.

a reply to: whereislogic

I understand you like the Bible and preaching but quoting large parts of it not only takes a lot of space but it makes it difficult for others to see where your comments are as most of your long posts is copy paste passages from the Bible which are irrelevant to the topic.

What is relevant to the topic is preaching itself !! It's because of preaching and childhood indoctrination a large number of adults are dismissing science and favour religious dogma and stories for which there is not a shred of evidence to support them.

originally posted by: Maybenexttime
So 37% of Americans are religious nut jobs. Shocker.

Proof the education system is failing.

Oh and leave children's penis' alone.

What the ???!!!!! I’m not usually verbal in this way, but if you don’t mind if I fight fire with fire then, seeing as I have been a practitioner of both martial arts and yoga/ meditation….
Do you mind if I am vocal about secular humanism, since you are intent on ridiculing not just “”37 % of Americans” but probably 99% Hindus who study the Vedas….
But of course Darwin must have been smarter than the ancient Hindu texts …..all sarcasm aside …

Any theory of creation is incomplete without estimating the age, shape and size of universe. Vedas say that our universe is about 155.52 trillion human years old, and its total life span is 311.04 trillion human years (which is equivalent to 100 years of Brahma). In Srimada Bhagwata 5.20.38, the diameter of the universe is quoted as 500,000,000 yojanas (1 yojanas is equal to approx 9 miles, so its 4.5 trillion miles). The shape of the universe is egg shaped (brahmanda = brahma+anda). It may be interesting to observe that distance traveled by light in one day (186,000,000 * 3600 * 24 =~ 16 trillion miles) is equal to the perimeter of (vedic) universe (approximating ellipse to circle, perimeter of universe = 4,500,000,000 * 3.1416 =~ 14 trillion miles). References: I have given references from Srimada Bhagvatam and Bhagvata Gita. Their online versions can be found at vedabase.net... and vedabase.net...

www.cs.ubc.ca...
Now then, I do agree that American education has failed. I’m not sure what you believe the reason is…. since you have an obvious bias against Christians, do you agree or disagree with the current woke agenda of confusing children from kindergarten age about gender ? I am not sure, since you are biased against Christians who believe in a Creator the very people who are actively opposed to the woke agendas ….
Since you and the OP both seem to believe in dialectical materialism(which actually was embraced by Marx) maybe we need to further explore the origins of creation.

This characterization of the metaphysical principle misses the boat by a long shot. It is an a priori metaphysical principle whose truth is wholly independent of our experience. A mere reflection on the notions of “nothing” and “something” makes it clear that something cannot come from nothing. Nothing is the absence of any and all things: no matter, no energy, no substance, no potential. For something to come into being, it has to at least have the potential to do so. Since nothingness lacks even potentiality, it is not possible for something to come into being from absolutely nothing.
thinkingtobelieve.com...

edit on 2-3-2024 by EyeoftheHurricane because: Fighting AI auto correcting from its false perception of what I am trying to say.

originally posted by: YouCanCallMeAl
Is it possible that a divine spark started the "Big Bang"?
Calling creationism a debunked theory seems a bit premature

Creationism has to do with everything being created instantly with all current animals in play. To suggest Evolution was God's tool is not creationism as per what people see it as.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: YouCanCallMeAl
Is it possible that a divine spark started the "Big Bang"?
Calling creationism a debunked theory seems a bit premature

Creationism has to do with everything being created instantly with all current animals in play. To suggest Evolution was God's tool is not creationism as per what people see it as.

This is called guided evolution and like I said earlier is a new position that many people have as revealed in the survey. More likely a realization that evolution is true but let's keep God alive... A poster argued it's the same thing as creationism but that's not true.

I think you said the this survey may not be representative.

The sample is very small (1,000 people were asked) but this isn't the only survey conducted. I have linked another from 2019 and the results were very similar and it makes me think that if we were to survey hundreds of thousands of people from all over the states then the results are likely to be very similar again.

a reply to: ashisnotanidiot

If people believe in a God then that's their choice as they have every right to believe in whatever they want. But consensus based on beliefs has no real weight or credibility as the conclusions are not evidenced based.

The scientific theory of evolution is a fact and not a hypothesis or a speculation. The evidence is overwhelming and that's why it is a scientific theory.
Just a reminder because you don't seem to be able to accept science as it contradicts your religious beliefs

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

Evolution is both a fact and a theory. Evolution is widely observable in laboratory and natural populations as they change over time.

Well established and factual.
But if you are a creationist it definitely contradicts your narrative and dogma. I understand you want hold on to your views/beliefs but science has debunked creationism long time ago.

a reply to: ashisnotanidiot

Theory is facts . In Science a theory is a group of experiments and facts all leading to the same conclusion. If you want to disprove evolution it's very easy just find one fact that contradicts it. Show how evolution isn't possible because of this and it all disappears.

A scientific theory only stands up if it can be shown correct in experiments and factual evidence. Fails just once and it is discarded

originally posted by: Venkuish1

This is called guided evolution and like I said earlier is a new position that many people have as revealed in the survey. More likely a realization that evolution is true but let's keep God alive... A poster argued it's the same thing as creationism but that's not true.

I think you said the this survey may not be representative.

The sample is very small (1,000 people were asked) but this isn't the only survey conducted. I have linked another from 2019 and the results were very similar and it makes me think that if we were to survey hundreds of thousands of people from all over the states then the results are likely to be very similar again.

1,000 is a good amount of people if the sampling is done correctly. for a population of 300 million, you only need a sample size of 1254 to get a 99% with an error of 3.5%, for 99% with an error of 1% you need 16586.

Personally, I see something like guided evolution as OK.

The other part is the questions asked, and that is where people tend to skew the results if they have an agenda and then post some crazy numbers. Anytime there is a survey result I like to view the questions.

I could not find the poll as they didn't link it at the bottom as they should, but below is a 2019 Gallop poll, and in there 40% believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old so that is spontaneous creationism.

a reply to: Venkuish1

When was Spontaneous Generation debunked? Yet you have built a whole theory on top of debunked science, and smuggly chastise those who disagree. God bless you, and may we both enjoy his mercy

originally posted by: Onthelowdown
a reply to: Venkuish1

When was Spontaneous Generation debunked? Yet you have built a whole theory on top of debunked science, and smuggly chastise those who disagree. God bless you, and may we both enjoy his mercy

The scientific theory of evolution is one of the most successful produced.

Creationism has been debunked as a result of the progress of science (i have mentioned this many times). But most importantly it was always a religious belief having no merits just like the flying spaghetti monster belief.

a reply to: Venkuish1

Yet it relies on the theory of Spontaneous Generation. Someday you will get it

originally posted by: Onthelowdown
a reply to: Venkuish1

Yet it relies on the theory of Spontaneous Generation. Someday you will get it

It relies on religious belief and dogma. The 'world' wasn't created in six days as it's claimed in the Bible and the planet isn't a few thousand years old. These claims are debunked and only creationists accept them. It takes billions of years for organisms to evolve and they were not ''spontaneously generated'.

a reply to: dragonridr

I put a cat in a box, waited a month, and when I opened it... well damn, schroedinger was right. FACT! I have created multiple realities to conclude that I am always right. Now that is brilliant, or atleast narcissistic

a reply to: Venkuish1

I believe you have misconstrued what I posted and missed the point of the question

a reply to: Venkuish1

1858

originally posted by: Onthelowdown
a reply to: dragonridr

I put a cat in a box, waited a month, and when I opened it... well damn, schroedinger was right. FACT! I have created multiple realities to conclude that I am always right. Now that is brilliant, or atleast narcissistic

Probably both lol.

originally posted by: Onthelowdown
a reply to: Venkuish1

I believe you have misconstrued what I posted and missed the point of the question

What does 'spontaneous generation' has to do with creationism. And what is spontaneous generation? In what context you are using the term? Did you mean abiogenesis?

I mean how many attempts creationists do you need to make your point? Can you tell if science at the moment accepts this hypothesis or it it long abandoned?

originally posted by: Onthelowdown

Yet it relies on the theory of Spontaneous Generation. Someday you will get it

Not really, what the bridge is for us is to just figure out how certain chemical reactions happen at the start to make protocells. Everything comes down to chemical reactions and Earth 4 billion years ago was a much different place than the one today.

This article is from Feb 29 this year. I'm not posting it to debate it as I do not have a PhD as all the people involved do, but as I said before we are getting close. The interesting part is we are talking about a very small number of chemicals involved. What happens when (not if) we figure it all out?

Beginning of Life