53% of Americans Believe in Evolution...66% of Americans Believe in Creationism

Originally posted by gallopinghordes
Whether we evolved or where created or as I believe both it is still a miracle that Earth exists and supports the vast abundance of life it does. I fail to see what the debate is. Evolution clearly happened but I believe it happened because of God.

Very well said and to the point.

What I have a problem with is why is it does the Bible (or any other religious text) have to be taken literally... especially when so much of it is much richer and far more complex when seen as metaphors for our relationship with the divine?

I believe in both, evolution happens nowadays.

But to think that we weren't created by some higher power is ridiculous to me.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
I personally believe evolution and creation both are correct.I have never understood the debate, too be quite honest. Evolution is simply the mechanism God used to create.

Physical evidence left behind that God used evolution to create new life forms or did you just basically pull that completely out of left field?

[edit on 6/9/07 by RedDragon]

Originally posted by mnmcandiez
I believe in both, evolution happens nowadays.

But to think that we weren't created by some higher power is ridiculous to me.

Your emotions have no bearing on reality. Physical evidence does.

Originally posted by RedDragon
Your emotions have no bearing on reality. Physical evidence does.

Well said

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
This is a minor point, but 53% believe in evolution and 66% believe in creationism that makes 119%!!!!!!

I have explained this twice now, how about reading my posts. You all are making it more complicated than it is.

[edit on 11-6-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

[edit on 11-6-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Originally posted by RedDragon

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
I personally believe evolution and creation both are correct.I have never understood the debate, too be quite honest. Evolution is simply the mechanism God used to create.

Physical evidence left behind that God used evolution to create new life forms or did you just basically pull that completely out of left field?

[edit on 6/9/07 by RedDragon]

Why attack?? The debate honestly does not make sense to me...That's all I stated. It's senseless.

[edit on 11-6-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Why attack?? The debate honestly does not make sense to me...That's all I stated. It's senseless.

but it's equally senseless to add the extra step of "god" to evolution. the science behind how life evolved, how it formed, and how the universe formed and began is there and requires absolutely no sort of cosmic intelligent being

I am willing to concede that the funymentalist have not evolved if they are willing to concede that the rest of us have.


Speaking of.... who saw 60 minutes last night? The segment about the sea gypsies of the bay of Bengal? These people have been living on (and in) the water for so long that they can hold their breaths far longer and see twice as well underwater than us landlubers. That is how evolution works in incraments.

For example what do the Shepas of Nepal and the indians of Peru have in common? Short statute and barrel chests, both developed for life at high altitudes and little oxygen... the short stature enables blood (and oxygen) to flow to the extremities more easily and the barrel chests allow them to get more oxygen with each breath. Both traits developed independently due to very simliar circumstance. That is how different species eventually evolve, one small adaptive step at a time... it helps them to survive and so is passed on... if the change does not help them to survive that individual and their genes die out. Simple and very elegant.

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul

but it's equally senseless to add the extra step of "god" to evolution. the science behind how life evolved, how it formed, and how the universe formed and began is there and requires absolutely no sort of cosmic intelligent being

Well, madness, if one tries to say that evolution "disproves" that there is a God, then I have to call them out on it. It doesn't. I have heard several people, including yourself, insinuate that because evolution is true there cannot be a God. That, excuse my French, is hoakam.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Well, madness, if one tries to say that evolution "disproves" that there is a God, then I have to call them out on it. It doesn't.

that's clearly obvious... evolution merely explains how life developed.

I have heard several people, including yourself, insinuate that because evolution is true there cannot be a God. That, excuse my French, is hoakam.

i've done no such thing...
now, evolutionary theory combined with the whole of science point to a universe where there is no need for a deity. it adds nothing to our understanding to throw god in there.

The idea that all scientists don't believe in God is no more true than the idea that all Christians are opposed to science. There are die hards on both sides; for every Richard Dworkin and Jerry Falwell there are far more that believe that science either doesn't address the God issue because that is not its focus, or that science exposes the wonderful complexity of God's creation.

Originally posted by grover
The idea that all scientists don't believe in God is no more true than the idea that all Christians are opposed to science.

That is certainly true. Although, most scientists probably have a bit of a different view as to what God is than what most religious people conceive.

In the Baha'i Faith we are taught that what we call God is so beyond human conception that in essence it is beyond words as to being pointless to discuss it.

If you read the Buddhist texts, the writings of Rumi and that of the most profound mystics, the same idea holds sway.

To paraphrase Joseph Campbell in his work "The Hero with a Thousand Faces" (paraphrased because I have loaned my copy out) each of these refer to in oblique manner to that ineffable ground of being out of which all things rise, which supports them during their manifestation and back into which they must ultimately dissolve. And in oblique manner because the senses that we need to precieve that ground of being are the very senses that get in our way, hence the need for symbolism, ritual and myth to allow us to step beyond ourselves and experince the infinite.

In contexts such as these science has nothing to add or for that matter to subtract from the issue.

evolution is evident but who's to say an unknown, conscious force interfered to create this very existance and it's natural evolution. evolution is evident in more ways than one, it doesn't discredit anything, it's just something we're aware of. what we are not aware of, however is a higher power, enery or consciousness.. we simply cannot rule that out because the knowledge we have as far as the universe goes is but a fraction compared to what is out there. we know so little, and that's a very large understatement.. we're one bubble in a sea of seas, we don't know how we got here, what we're doing here, why we have the ability to feel, express creativity and advance as a race. yes they can be broken down scientifically, but science simply identifies the situation, it does not explain how it came to be.

Originally posted by grover
... "to that ineffable ground of being out of which all things rise, which supports them during their manifestation and back into which they must ultimately dissolve."

When we envision such matters as creation and the origin of life we are really stuck because there is only so much we can say, after all we are inside of it. Take that quote from Joseph Campbell (that part of my former post was an actual quote, the rest was the paraphrase)... it is as far as it goes an adequate description of things. From a spiritual viewpoint we rise out of God, who supports us and to we return. From the scientific stance; if we are to take Quantum mechanics at its word, at the most basic level, all of existence is made of a thin mist of sub-atomic particles that periodically self organize themselves into patterns that we recognize as the material world before dissolving back into the fog of random particles. AND on top of this some of these material patterns periodically become alive, and some of those develop consciousness. It is a very interesting and very elegant idea but it is ultimately unsatisfying because is doesn't and cannot answer the fundamental questions of why the fog of particles organizes into patterns in the first place, why some of those patterns become alive and why some of those develop consciousness... much less questions like why existence exists.

That on the most basic level why religious belief still has such a strong pull... it offers answers for the things that science merely offers more questions.

Either way the fact that we exist at all and can even contemplate the nature of our existence is a miracle beyond words for which the only proper and decent stance is one of gratitude.



[edit on 13-6-2007 by grover]

speakeroftruth, the reason religous fanatics bash evolution is becuase it goes against what the bible says. Its easy to see where there coming from. They see evolution as a threat to their religeon/God

i agree with you its stupid- they should be a towing a more sensible line like "well you cant prove God didnt cause the big bang". Which is absolutely true so its even weirder the religous folks are against it.

No matter what there's always room for god as its unlikely we will ever explain the origin of the big bang and how it came to be.

But these ID folks arnt interested in anything but the bible and defending its 100% "authenticity". Including things like Noahs Ark, the earth is 6000 years old etc.


[edit on 18-6-2007 by yeti101]

how can they generalise like that? a sample of a few thousand people doesn't neccessarily convey the thoughts of an entire nation.
i hate polls, they always portray the results as applying to an entire group when only a relatively small sample is used

and how come there wasn't an option for both? evolution could be thought of the method god used to create us. a poll with this answer could produce some interestingly high results for it and show that people aren't as divided as this poll is trying to insinuate

Originally posted by owzitgarn

and how come there wasn't an option for both? evolution could be thought of the method god used to create us. a poll with this answer could produce some interestingly high results for it and show that people aren't as divided as this poll is trying to insinuate

If you add the results up of the poll it is more than 100%. So I think there are some people that do indeed think as you stated that evolution could be the the design used by the creator.

Originally posted by owzitgarn
and how come there wasn't an option for both? evolution could be thought of the method god used to create us. a poll with this answer could produce some interestingly high results for it and show that people aren't as divided as this poll is trying to insinuate

because there's no reason to insinuate god was behind it. the system works out perfectly without the inclusion of god.

occams razor, removing supernatural deities for over 500 years