Most Americans Believe In Creation

Originally posted by madnessinmysoul
.

No, I already said I'm not going to get into a debate about the atheist vs. religion thing. I don't care about your little war on religion,

have fun hating people and feeling victimized.

[edit on 30-1-2008 by NewWorldOver]

dblpost.

[edit on 30-1-2008 by NewWorldOver]

This is my first post on this sight and I have really only been aware of this website for less than a week now, so forgive me if I don't appear as one of the "regulars" that I have noticed on this board.
As I find much interest in a topic of this kind because it is so sensitive and can cause many people to become very opinionated towards religion (understandably so) I would like to throw my two cents in and give my own opinion, which I believe we are all entitled to.
First off I am a Christian and talk with God daily. I am by NO MEANS a saint as we all have our faults ( I have plenty of my own). I would just like to point out a few simple scriptures from the Bible and some theories regarding translations that may help shed some sort of light on this subject.
As far as a translation that could be misinterpreted is a theory that I learned about many years ago but never really hear about is the Gap theory (and if anyone disputes this I honestly would love to hear because I could very well be missing the boat on this). In Gen. 1:2 the Bible states that the earth WAS without form and void. I learned that the word "was" could actually be translated into BECAME. Well, I really don't need to explain much more because "became" carries a whole different meaning, where I speculate that something went on before the Creation. Theories suggest that this was Lucifer's domain (before the fall). Maybe this was the time of dinosaurs or something else. (Again, ALL speculation on my part). Also, in the same verse it states that "...darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters". Well, that sounds like earth was obviously already here, and I could assume that there was something going on before the Creation that we are discussing.
Another theory of mine, and others of course, is that God and evolution could very well be connected. The Bible states that " A day unto God is as a thousand years is to man". Well, I'm no mathematician, but that sounds like seven thousand years if you include the week long creation cycle, could that be enough time for evolution in some sort of way? I know it's a stretch, but one theory holds just as much weight as another if it can't truly be proven right?
I know this post has gone long, but man, I love these types of discussions, and I am not so close-minded to be able to listen to other ideas (aliens, the idea of humanity being created in a "lab" by a higher being), but when it all comes down I do believe in God and everyone is entitled to there own religious beliefs.

I'd just like to start by saying: Cambrian77 - you are bang on, I would have said everything you said as you said it if you hadn't beaten me to the punch! Nice one.

Originally posted by ThreeNF

What natural need could lead antelopes or wild goats to develop curled horns? Or birds to have blue or red feathers? And what about exotic fish?

All that is the work of our artists. Do not forget the artists when you create life. Imagine a world without them - no music, films, paintings or sculptures ... Life would be very boring and animals very ugly if their bodies corresponded only to their needs and functions.

This is, unfortunately, complete fiction.

Animals with curled horns, the nautilus, flowers, pine cones and many many other living things that grow in circular patterns follow the Fibonacci sequence.

This is basically nature's golden rule for balanced growth, and follows a 0, 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89...etc sequence, where the next number is the sum of the two preceeding numbers.

What this means is that when a creature grows in a spiral way it's centre of gravity does not change.

The reason a goat needs spiral horns is so the strain on it's neck (the centre of gravity) remains in the same place at each stage of its growth.

Animal functions correlate with appearance do contribute to their individual needs. Birds need exotic plumage to attract mates. Lions need great manes to impress other lions. Fish have glimmering sets of streamlined scales to help them swim faster, and attract mates (thats basically what it all comes down to - getting it on).

I'm afraid your man Rael should have been a science fiction author (go Scientology!) instead, because his knowledge of biology is severely lacking. At least in fiction, you can claim artistic license.

Originally posted by ThreeNF

In short, the plants, animals, people we see is nothing more than living art, created by an advanced race for the purpose of pleasing themselves. They did because they could, just as we will create and design life ourselves someday.

Now, is it that farfetched to think that we could create and design life on day? Isn't that where science is leading us? And once we do, don't you have to question evolution and say, "We'll if we are capable of creating and designing life then was the life we see and know today created by someone?” Many call that someone "God". I recognize them as the Elohim.

No, it isn't farfetched, but even if it is true (and to be honest, there are large parts of me that think humans probably were genetically engineered) Rael doesn't know anything about it or the reasons for it. All he's done is read a sci-fi book, had a brainwave (ka-ching!) and waffled on. and on.

Ultimately, saying "the Elohim did it" doesn't change the fact we still need to pinpoint the source of life. It just changes the target of the question, that's all.

I realise you will probably think "this does not correspond to my belief's, so even in the face of empirical evidence I'll ignore it" but what I have told you is based on fact. You can research all these things for yourself, they are right on google.

Anything that doesn't provide proof and claims to be an absolute truth is, for want of a better word, bull#.

Carl

Originally posted by WraothAscendant
reply to post by cambrian77

 

Unfortunately, facts aren't something you can vote on.

And what is peer review if not a form of voting?

Peer review is far from a form of voting. It is a group of experts who's job it is to make sure that your stated methodology is sound, and that you don't make logical leaps on the way to your conclusion. Papers are published containing data that conflicts with other studies, but peer review (usually and ideally) doesn't reject one or the other on the reviewer's prefrences. It's job is to make sure that the people who conducted the study conducted a study that would yield meaningful results. If there's no control group, if the conclusion doesn't mesh with the data, if the equations are wrong, then the paper is rejected.

It isn't a vote, it's quality control.

This has to be the most idiotic thread topic I’ve ever come across……….
I simply can’t believe this sort of ignorance exists in the world…….

The truth is that Christians are not forcing their beliefs on anyone.

Mormonism is partly Christian also the K.K.K. - Jehovah's Witnesses, Evangelical fundy’s etc, these denominations of Christianity do nothing but force their beliefs onto ‘unbelievers’

Christians share their faith with people and then people can choose if they want to believe it or not.

I don’t see how people can choose when they’re being hassled at their doorstep every other day….I had Jehovah's Witnesses at my door about a month back, I told them I wasn’t interested and they show up again two weeks later. How do we have any freedom from you damn Christians CONSTANTLY attempting to convert none-believers? Where’s the choice?

It's not like Christians are putting a gun to your head and making you believe it.

What’s more deceitful then a gun to my head? How about Bush putting his personal Christian beliefs into political matters – steam cell research, creation taught in schools etc. Certainly forcing Christian views onto the American people….

Besides, people including Christians can say whatever they want. It's called freedom of speech and democracy.

It sure is, but where’s the democracy when religion becomes apart of the system? Is there not something about this in the constitution….?

If creation was taught in schools before evolution then evolutionists must have forced their 'science' on the majority of people who happen to be Christians.

So……America is the world? When creation was taught in schools in America back then – the practises of Hinduism where taught in India, Islam was (and still is) taught in the Middle East etc. You can’t honestly believe creation was taught around the entire world? The majority weren’t Christian in the world…..it didn’t take a few persuaded Christians for evolution to kick off…..

Let me get this straight…. You believe creation was the only concept that was taught in schools before evolution – so the rest of the world doesn’t exist…Creation wasn’t taught around the world, different countries taught different beliefs. ‘Evolutionists’ didn’t force anything – they presented evidence that was accepted as a plausible theory… those who accepted evolution weren’t just Christian.

So what's wrong with the majority of Americans trying to bring back creation to the majority?

Christians never were the majority

Also most Americans believe in creation and God.

Complete BS…..you’ve got to look at all the different religions in America the cultures and the definition of what god is. As well as Christians themselves agreeing on what they all believe is god in the first place.

This means that they are the majority and democracy serves the majority.

Only, when the majority are hopelessly ignorant then the populous have no say because they aren’t smart enough to make intelligent decisions and so only then does democracy serve the minority.

So if 15% of the population doesn't accept creation and God, that's fine, but they are the minority and should not rule the media and schools as they already are.

So if 15% of the population doesn’t accept science books claiming the world is flat but the majority do, then we should by all means have science books claiming such, but the rest of the developed world doesn’t believe what the majority of American do….

[edit on 18-4-2008 by andre18]

Originally posted by andre18
This has to be the most idiotic thread topic I’ve ever come across……….
I simply can’t believe this sort of ignorance exists in the world…….

People exposing evolution shouldn't worry you so, it's not like we're stalking you.

Mormonism is partly Christian also the K.K.K. - Jehovah's Witnesses, Evangelical fundy’s etc, these denominations of Christianity do nothing but force their beliefs onto ‘unbelievers’

When was the last time you heard of an American Christian obtaining a conversion by force??? By Knife, or gun?

I don’t see how people can choose when they’re being hassled at their doorstep every other day….I had Jehovah's Witnesses at my door about a month back, I told them I wasn’t interested and they show up again two weeks later. How do we have any freedom from you damn Christians CONSTANTLY attempting to convert none-believers? Where’s the choice?

So, if the Democratic or Republican party comes to your door twice in two weeks, you yell BIGGOTRY and are forced to give them money and a signature?


Our government officials can Be religious and I don't think stem-cell research is illegal JUST because of Christians. Growing humans to harvest cells is VERY WRONG. (Look at the movie, The Matrix)

Christians never were the majority

I think we're talking about Western society, mainly America?
Yes, the majority of these have historically been Christian.

Complete BS…..you’ve got to look at all the different religions in America the cultures and the definition of what god is. As well as Christians themselves agreeing on what they all believe is god in the first place.

We are getting SOO MUCH multiculturalism day-by-day. Through legal and illegal means.
It depends.

Only, when the majority are hopelessly ignorant then the populous have no say because they aren’t smart enough to make intelligent decisions and so only then does democracy serve the minority.

What?

So if 15% of the population doesn’t accept science books claiming the world is flat but the majority do, then we should by all means have science books claiming such, but the rest of the developed world doesn’t believe what the majority of American do….

Where do you get this? The dark age Roman church?
The Bible does NOT say that the Earth is F-L-A-T.

Originally posted by ppkjjkpp
America grew into the most powerful nation on earth based on Christianity and 'ignorant' people and it could definitely continue to survive without the atheistic/evolutionist minority.

If I may, I would like to ask those who believe in various iterations of "Christian creation" a rather basic but exceptionally serious question.

No matter your religious position, you must concede that an overwhelming majority of scientists attribute the diversity of life on this planet to biological evolution. What that in mind, combined with your belief in your God, why not consider that evolution was created by your God? It would stand to reason that if you believe God created "the heavens and earth," and there is significant physical evidence for evolution, then God created evolution.

Such a notion would suddenly make the two concepts compatible and bring peace to the debate.

reply to post by Clearskies


My point is…..if creation is taught in schools how would the rest of the developed world cope? You couldn’t have parents coming from say Europe expecting a quality education for their children when schools are teaching creation. Also…if you really were to seriously have creation taught in schools, you’d have to have every other religious concept taught in schools as well - Hinduism, aboriginal dream time etc…it wouldn’t be practical to teach creation but not any other religions ideologies.

Also….creation has no evidence to back it up – no proof, nothing. Evolution is taught because it has supported fact to back up its claims. If you want creation taught in schools you’re going to have to produce evidence for those claims…..obviously there is none so it can’t be taught in schools..

Evolution is a theory because we can observe it and can be proven to exist through experiments over and over again eg: Dogs and different breeds and viruses adapting to antibiotics.

Cambrian 77

I don't usuall take the time to get involved in silly online debates, however you made a couple of comments I could not pass up. You stated that evolution was good theory. In fact, Darwinian Evolution is not only a bad theory it is one that is being debunked over and over again by scientists in many fields, most of which have no stake in the debate about creation. For the past twenty odd years a Chinese scientist has been leading a dig exploring the Cambrian age fossil record in China. This time is historically called the Cambrian explosion. The fossil record clearly calls into question the primary tenet of Darwinian evlolution, that being that life developed slowly over vast periods of time. The Cambrian explosion is so named because the fossil record clearly shows that millions of species of life appeared on earth during that period in a relatively short period of time.

Further evidence against evolution is also shown in the lack of intermediate speices of life in the fossil record. With all of the vast fossil finds that have been made there has never been a mid-point species recovered even though there have been different era of fossils found in the same location. In areas rich with fossil finds from different eras it would be logical and scientific to find intermediate species between those strata that depict different eras, however, the fossil record goes from era to era with individual species and no record of any midpoint or transition species.

Finally it is not Christians that are silencing the debate, on the contrary it is those who espouse the tenets of evolution. In Washington state a biology teacher attempted to introduce his students to new scientific data that calls evolution into question. He wasn't teaching anything at all to do with creation, he simply introduced highschool biology students to all the facts that science has developed. He was run out of his job and replaced with a P.E. teacher. Not for teaching creation but for teaching that science calls evolution into question. So I ask you, who is really trying to force an opinion on society?

I totally agree "most Americans believe in Creation" in fact it is quite odd to meet any otherwise around my neck of the woods.

Alot of the people I know have families, for instance those in my family, their children (and most all children) know of God before ever hearing one thing about Evolution.

ask one of them sometime... "hey where did we come from" or "where did mom and dad come from"

the answer is almost universal and pre-evolutionary racial science...

they have to reduce the Earths population somehow, why not make us all view eachother as animals ?

makes sense in a way...

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact


So you're just going around resurrecting old threads in this forum?

they have to reduce the Earths population somehow, why not make us all view eachother as animals

This only make sense if you're a heartless person who doesn't think an animal's life has value. I don't know many people who would kick a puppy let alone kill a human being simply because we humans are also animals. This sort of statement only comes from those who don't understand Evolution. Yes Evolution says we're animals but then again we are animals, to deny that, whether you accept Evolution or not, is ludicrously stupid.

So we're animals, does that mean that suddenly our lives have no value? Does that mean that we tear off our clothes and start throwing our feces and tossing people into mass graves? It seems to me that animals as intelligent and social as we are wouldn't be wise to start acting that way.

We eat, we defaecate, we reproduce, we die. You wouldn't deny that a cow has udders and a woman has breasts and both serve the same biological purpose would you? We would still be animals even if Evolution weren't true.

Just reading interesting topics I agree with and leaving comments...

I did not realize these topics were dead in anyway, humm

I am finding alot of good information here in this section of bts.

reply to post by ppkjjkpp


Evolution does not "clearly show there is no god." that's a myth.

Science text books don't mention god. That is true. Do you know why they don't mention god? Because god was un-available for comment or examination. Science has no evidence for or against god, they only have a theory the neither includes or occludes god.

If you don't like Evolution in our text books I suggest you find a better theory.

evolution is probably one of the most broken theories ever created (for explanation as to why we are here that is...)

nobody has addressed the absolute smallest level of matter when it comes to evolution... well not THE smallest but I'm talking about a cellular level. where did these cells develop the ability to evolve? there has to be some kind of forming point where the ability to evolve was installed in the reproduction/growth of these cells that make up organisms that can "evolve". evolution is not a starting theory like creation is. i believe evolution definitely exists...but it doesn't prove a damn as to why we showed up on this rock....

this one perfect rock, that science is continuing to prove is the only one out there that can sustain life like us. life so perfect and unique, on a planet that is perfectly set on a perfect run around a star, in a perfect solar system that is set up to catch most danger floating our way.

creation is a good thing. it gives inspiration to be a good person and to share with one another. atheism and science is all full of haughty and pompous people who can't handle an answer that is so benevolent... being a good person? who would want that. it always disheartens me to see a dispute between "creationists" and "evolutionists" because the only point is to disprove the other but ridiculous reasoning such as "you can't prove that" or "it is SO totally forced".

religion and science can work hand in hand. we are just figuring the answers out in our own minds that we were given before the full answers are shown to us when we pass to the ultimate existence. when I say we were "given" our minds, I'm stating that it is very hard to explain how our consciousness evolved, when no other organism currently possesses our level of self awareness... our knowledge that we will die some day and that we do definitely exist. and to be honest creation seems to ring a few more bells than evolution in this category.

and why are [most] people driven to live good lives? to give to others in a world where giving to others gets you no where. this world is full of greed, and it is the greatest way to get to the top. why would anyone care about helping someone cross the road today if it doesn't matter at all? don't you think we are semi aware of some sort of cosmic justice that exists beyond this existence?

sorry for the rapid explosion of different points... this thread got me excited and I love hearing everyone's thoughts

reply to post by Cosmic.Artifact

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact
I totally agree "most Americans believe in Creation" in fact it is quite odd to meet any otherwise around my neck of the woods.

Geographic isolation doesn't exactly prove any statistical points. In my neck of the woods when I lived stateside it was more uncommon to reject evolution than anything else.

Alot of the people I know have families, for instance those in my family, their children (and most all children) know of God before ever hearing one thing about Evolution.

Yay for the indoctrination of youth!

ask one of them sometime... "hey where did we come from" or "where did mom and dad come from"

And they'll get a preprogrammed answer that they cannot understand and would crumble to pieces upon further examination. Why? Because children aren't supposed to be asked such questions. That's why they aren't given full scientific education all at once.

the answer is almost universal and pre-evolutionary racial science...

Another question for the list
Question 6: How is evolution a racial science?

they have to reduce the Earths population somehow, why not make us all view eachother as animals ?

We aren't plants. And nobody is trying to reduce the Earth's population. Though it would be beneficial, it's not going to happen by telling people the factual information that we're animals rather than plants, In fact, the idea that humans are apes predates the ideas of Darwin and is instead found in Linnaeus and his early taxonomy.

reply to post by Myollinir

Originally posted by Myollinir
evolution is probably one of the most broken theories ever created (for explanation as to why we are here that is...)

I'm sorry, but it's one of the most robust and well supported theories in the biological sciences. It is confirmed by the entire branches of science known as genetics, phylogeny, paleontology, and anthropology.

nobody has addressed the absolute smallest level of matter when it comes to evolution... well not THE smallest but I'm talking about a cellular level. where did these cells develop the ability to evolve?

Genetic mutation in copying. There is no 'ability to evolve'. Evolution is a byproduct of errors in genetic replication.

there has to be some kind of forming point where the ability to evolve was installed in the reproduction/growth of these cells that make up organisms that can "evolve".

Well, the first organisms that evolved were actually single-celled organisms. And no, it didn't have to be installed. This is a mild display of ignorance in the biological sciences, something that's sadly common in the creationist community. Mutations are the foundations of evolution. You, me, every other single person on this board, we have about 180 unique mutations, genetic code that is not present in either of our parents. This genetic variation is what leads to evolution.

evolution is not a starting theory like creation is.

Creationism is not a theory as it is entirely unsupported by any sort of scientific inquiry. It is, at best, a hypothesis. It is also a hypothesis that tries to explain multiple scientific concepts that are wholly unrelated, which is actually a bad thing in scientific terms, not a good thing.

i believe evolution definitely exists...but it doesn't prove a damn as to why we showed up on this rock....


Because that is not what evolution explains. It is a theory that explains the diversity of life, not the origins of it. For the origins of life see the theory of abiogenesis, which is a far younger idea than evolution and is thus far less supported, but it is the subject of rigorous scientific inquiry as of now.

this one perfect rock, that science is continuing to prove is the only one out there that can sustain life like us.

Perfect? You mean aside from meteorological and geologic disasters, right? And the massive swaths of largely uninhabitable areas, at least for us.

And no, science is doing just the opposite. The more we study of the cosmos, the more we find that the chances that our planet is unique are startlingly low.

life so perfect and unique,

Perfect? I'm sorry, but how is life perfect? How is e.coli perfect? How is any infectious disease perfect? How are birth defects that cause the instant death of babies perfect? How is cancer perfect?

I'll agree that life has a level of uniqueness...but that's because of the evolutionary mechanisms.

on a planet that is perfectly set on a perfect run around a star,

In an elliptical orbit that will eventually either decay or intersect with the coronasphere of the sun...

in a perfect solar system that is set up to catch most danger floating our way.

Except for asteroids that come from the asteroid belt. I mean, we've had several near misses in my lifetime alone.

creation is a good thing.

No, it's not. It's an unsupported, unscientific hypothesis.

it gives inspiration to be a good person and to share with one another.

How? Also, since when do scientific truths have to have positive sociological impacts? The truth is the truth, whether it does good things or not.

atheism and science is all full of haughty and pompous people who can't handle an answer that is so benevolent... being a good person? who would want that.

Ok, there is so damn much wrong with this sentence that I'm going to have to ask you to hold on while I type a good ol' wall-o-text.

Atheism and science are not equivalent. There are many atheists who are not scientists and many scientists who are not atheists. Two of my favorite defenders of science are Ken Miller (a devout Roman Catholic) and Robert T. Bakker (a Pentecostal preacher). Several of my favorite luminaries on the subject of atheism and freethought are not scientists, including Christopher Hitchens (a journalist), Daniel Dennet (a philosopher...there are various other philosophers, I'm not going to include them all), Robert G. Ingersoll (a Civil War era politician, veteran, and orator), Samuel Clemens (better known as Mark Twain, also a Civil War era individual, highly influenced by the works of Ingersoll), etc.

Now, as for calling atheists and scientists 'haughty and pompous', how is Bill Gates, the world's number one philanthropist, 'haughty and pompous'? I could just run down a list of all the great atheist individuals in the world and all the great scientists in the world, but that would just be ridiculous because it's just bigoted for you to say such a thing.

As for benevolence? We don't need science to show us benevolence, we can find reasons to be benevolent from philosophy. If you actually look closely at modern atheistic thought it tends towards benevolence, tolerance, human cooperation and progress, etc. It's not some sort of nihilistic, selfish school of thought these days.

it always disheartens me to see a dispute between "creationists" and "evolutionists" because the only point is to disprove the other but ridiculous reasoning such as "you can't prove that" or "it is SO totally forced".

Except that the dispute is actually over science. Namely that evolution, one of the greatest scientific discoveries of the 19th century, is being challenged by creationism, a concept that it replaced quite readily. What's more, creationism, which is a purely religious concept, is attempting to force its way back into the classroom under various guises like "intelligent design" or "teach the controversy". Crazy thing, there is no controversy.

religion and science can work hand in hand.

How? How can the scientific method, the only method by which humanity has achieved an understanding of the natural world, work in hand with religion, which has brought nothing towards understanding of anything in the world.

Now, saying science and philosophy can work hand in hand makes sense, as they're both based in reason. But science and religion cannot. Not because they are enemies, but because they are not concerned with the same things. Science cares for discovery, religion cares for other things.

we are just figuring the answers out in our own minds that we were given before the full answers are shown to us when we pass to the ultimate existence.

No, our minds are not given, they evolved. And I'm assuming you mean life after death, another unsupported hypothesis.

when I say we were "given" our minds, I'm stating that it is very hard to explain how our consciousness evolved, when no other organism currently possesses our level of self awareness... our knowledge that we will die some day and that we do definitely exist.

Well, coincidentally enough our brains are on an entirely different level when compared to those of any other creatures in the animal kingdom, save our own evolutionary ancestors. The only creatures that get anywhere close are the great apes, and even they don't have similar brain composition.

Now, since we have a clear line of evidence showing the development of our brain mass, how is it that you conclude we were 'given' our consciousness?

and to be honest creation seems to ring a few more bells than evolution in this category.

No, creation doesn't ring any bells. It's the statement that 'goddidit' rather than the exploration of the natural answers, many of which we've found.

and why are [most] people driven to live good lives?

Society, culture, evolutionary psychology which ingrains a sense of morality for the betterment of the species, philosophical morality.

to give to others in a world where giving to others gets you no where.

I'm sorry, but having people view you as a kindhearted, generous individual gets you somewhere in this world. If people have a positive opinion of someone they are more willing to cooperate with them.

this world is full of greed, and it is the greatest way to get to the top.

No, greed is but one of many paths to get there.

why would anyone care about helping someone cross the road today if it doesn't matter at all?

Because we only have one life, it's best to make the best of it. And helping others, isn't that what we would want others to do for us? It just makes sense to help people out and be more cooperative if you only have one brief moment in this universe.

don't you think we are semi aware of some sort of cosmic justice that exists beyond this existence?

Nope, I'm not aware of anything like that. And I would argue that any religious sense of 'cosmic justice' isn't particularly just.

Originally posted by Myollinir
evolution is probably one of the most broken theories ever created (for explanation as to why we are here that is...)

I believe in Creation too, I do not know if I personally am the definition of most Americans, but as I have responded I have noticed this 'fact' just about everywhere I go.

Mind you I live in a very diverse and non secular society being American, we have so many different ethnicities here one could hardly shake a stick at it. I have noticed across all these groups of Americans living and working here. or raising their families ect that Creationism runs in the heart felt desires of nearly everyone (not just Caucasian english speaking peoples) like Atheism does.

Atheism seems to be dominated by this said group of Caucasians who only know one language and this is another 'fact' I have noticed.

sad but true yes, I guess it is all in ones upbringing and how much love this group must have been show in their youth ?

another thing I have noticed about American Caucasians is they are generally Creationist too, so this Atheistic group I am referring to must be from somewhere else on a seemingly dismal planet earth.

I totally believe that a majority believes God created stuff...but if anything, I believe that's very sad and shows how much the school system is failing those people. I mean, we have uneducated people who seriously believe the earth to be 6,000 or 10,000 years old, or that we don't have a common ancestor with apes. When asked to back up their claims, they all fail miserably as the only sources they can quote are those ridiculous creationist pseudo-science websites like the Creation Science (lol) Institute.

Also, not how the US is the western country with the highest amount of creationists, only beaten by hardcore Muslim countries. At least over here in Europe people generally start laughing out loud if you claim the earth is only 6,000 years old...when the subject came up at a 4th July party in Pasadena last year, one college student (politics major) looked me in the eye and said there's "undeniable scientific proof" that the earth is only 10,000 years old. I couldn't believe he ever got past highschool...and that guy gets to work in politics and spread his stupidity. Those people are harming the country so much by dumbing it down...

Originally posted by Cosmic.Artifact


Atheism seems to be dominated by this said group of Caucasians who only know one language and this is another 'fact' I have noticed.

sad but true yes, I guess it is all in ones upbringing and how much love this group must have been show in their youth ?

another thing I have noticed about American Caucasians is they are generally Creationist too, so this Atheistic group I am referring to must be from somewhere else on a seemingly dismal planet earth.

So first atheists are white Caucasians....but then American Caucasians aren't atheists because.well...they're American, lol. What a bunch of hogwash!

I went to a school with 86 different nationalities, I got tons of Asian/African and even Middle Eastern atheist friends. Your comment regarding "only 1 language" is beyond laughable too. I speak English, French, German, Swiss German, Spanish, Italian, and a bit of Norwegian and Portuguese. I can also ask for the toilet, tell the stewardess my seatbelt on the airplanes is broken, or order another beer in Creole

Also, my gf speaks fluent Russian and I'm working on that as well...of course that makes me a total communist

Originally posted by MrXYZ
So atheists are white Caucasians...

yes as (I) have observed...

I have stated in other topics just how to identify one of these said self-proclaimed gods also.

in my opinion they are a lowly crowd, lost and unguided... I can only imagine the upbringing this particular group of Deist must have had.

it is horrible and they only need education to be able to see we are all Created equal, Racism runs amok in the Atheistic faith.