Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum Why doesn't America believe in evolution?

they as you call them , only know what they have learned.

and they have learned form partial exploration.

they have a thorough understanding of partial exploration not a thorough understanding of thorough exploration.

they have been excluded from things they could have learned from by people much like yourself , who have hidden things that would contridict evolution.



just like they accept their paycheck and the job they have.

you think that might have something to do with it?



LOL

So scientists accept evolution in order to be payed? That's your explanation? Scientists have an extraordinarily wide range of religious, political, and other opinions. Some of them experience extreme forms of manipulation for expressing themselves. And you think they're afraid to speak their minds or learn the truth with regards to evolution?

yea thats right.

I think that the peer pressure involved would endanger there economic situation and all the time and money that they put into their education.

they might become thought of as one of those CREATIONIST that do not comply with the norm.

Paul wrote:
"they might become thought of as one of those CREATIONIST that do not comply with the norm."

That is a silly thing to say. In order to be a creationist all you need to do is believe that there is a god who created the world and the living things inhabiting it, as outlined in Genesis. There is NO science involved. That's OK, if a little ridiculous-- but if that's someone's belief who am I to stop them.

Scientists on the other hand require proof, and the proof for the validity of the Theory of Evolution contiues to gather scientific strength. It is not merely scientists who have decided that this theory is helpful in deciding what is the origin of species that inhabit our planet. It is a view accepted by many people of diverse religions, or those without such beliefs, because it is able to answer the question of the origin of the variety of species and the variety within those species. Creationism does not do this. Instead it denies that humans have a place in the development of the living things on this planet, preferring to use only one ancient religious book as source material. By asserting that Man was made by God in his own image creationists deny the species Homo Sapiens, the right to evolve further- as the original blueprint was, necessarily, perfection!

"Creationism does not do this. Instead it denies that humans have a place in the development of the living things on this planet,"

You're right. Evolution does not "contradict" the existence of God(s). Here's a critical difference between the real scientists and the pretenders: The real scientists are trying to find out while the pretenders are trying to justify what they think they already know.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/about/faith

The real scientists don't take loyalty oaths to defend their preconceived intellectual biases. They tend to actually do their homework before coming to their conclusions - and not spend their careers trying to justify what they want to believe is true. Real scientists don't credulously accept random religious screeds and then cavil to ignore the actual evidence.

I know , and any proof that might lessen its strenght has and will be ignored.

and through your own words "most PRACTICING scientist believe in evolution" not creation.


so its not like we have a democratic party and a republican party we just have a bunch of non-partisan scientist that all think the same way.

so any evidence that is found would be found by scientist that dont believe in creation and if they did find something that would lean in creations favor , well under the rug it would go.

what about the california gold mine tunnels?

have you looked into that covered up evidence?
have any "scientist" explored these tunnels?

or would it be too risky a venture for evolution?

read this about covering up evidence that conflicts with evolution

10 - 55 million year old HUMAN REMAINS covered up because of the theory ( THEORY ) of evolution.

Who the heck will ever believe evolution when evolutionist do this type of cover up.

Scientists look at evidence. They reject things that are silly. The people who say silly things get offended that THEIR silly thing has been rejected.

myriad manifestations of creationism
various relativity deniers
Electric sun
911 truthers
moon hoaxers
atomic bomb hoaxers
alien overlords

That's just some what has been purveyed in SAGG. It *never* ends. When their errors are pointed out to them, they invariably assert that the real scientists are dishonest or are too scared to speak out or are just stupid.

There is no end to "leads" all of which invariably show nothing except that the perpetrators don't understand basic science, don't have any reasonable skepticism towards their "data" and they accuse the scientists of producing and promulgating bad information! It's incredible. They think scientists have nothing better to do than track down every stupid thing they ever say - when it's a forgone conclusion that anything other than complete acceptance of their "evidence" just means that the scientists are lying.

This is pretty much par for the course for fundamentalist religionists. They are told from very early ages that the evil one is trying to mislead them. Any logic or science that leads them away from god is false to begin with.

and "silly things" being things that would discredit evolution no doubt.

I say that a silly thing is a science such as evolution that is built upon a foundation that is riddled with falseties and cover ups , one that choses its data as it deems necessary for its strenghts.

why have we not been given the oppurtunity to view the artifacts that were found in the california gold mine tunnels where million year old human skeletons and artifacts were discovered just around the time that evolution was TAKING hold.

read from page 266 from the above link I posted and see if you can find these million year old skeletons that were found in million year old riverbeds , enclosed inside mountains as tunnels were dug in the search for gold.

here is a link to more info

http://www.mcremo.com/california.html

and here also

Recent investigations bearing on the qu...e Sierra Nevada



you left out one very important one







I believe that par for the evolutionist course is one that skips a few holes in order to insure that evolution wins the game.
they are told from a very early age that truthfull people are trying to lead them away from evolution by using such thing as facts and ancient writtings , drawings and carvings that would discredit evolution.

Creation happened - yes it did.

However what right does that give creationists, to validate a bibles version of it. The bible has so many contridictions that it is surprising that it doesn't self-combust.

On what authority did Moses have to write 3000 years of history back to Adam & Eve. Be real with yourself. Not just the dogma of the bible. The bible has history - but it is history and ancient politics inspired by man. And man often gets things wrong.

What independent 3rd party authority did Moses have? Really? Himself - after all he wrote a lot of history. Did he have even one other person to validate his writings?

It is clearly understood from those that really learn about the evolution of religion that Moses borrowed stacks of material from the religions of the day.

I heard one idiot say the other day. "If the bible said Jonah swollowed the whale he would beieve it". What can I say??

Religion makes idiots of people who are actually quite smart and hides idiots that really are idiots. The bible is right - you have to 'believe' like a little child.

What happens when you grow up and start to think for yourself like an adult should. Many try for the rest of their days explaining in huge depth how the round peg is still going to fit in the square hole.

Just believe. Aha - Creationists - be brave and grow up in your thinking.

sir's. people in general (American or otherwise)do believe in basic evolution. but as anybody who keeps up with developments knows evolution theory as postulated by Darwin and slavishly followed by most "scientists" is wrong in nearly all aspects i.e. Cambrian explosion, the dawk. generation changes. etc.etc.etc.
secondly most none thinking "scientists" and their groupie followers blindly dismiss some form of creation with all the none scientific rigor one would expect from religious fundamentalists. nobody with a degree or otherwise can in any way prove their was no creation, and evolution in any form does not invalidate this, as of course nothing can.
Classical mechanistic thinking has held back progress in all areas, from quantum theory to how/why are we here telepathy, healing, UFOs, NDE, OBE. the non thinking say they do not exist, the thinkers say they may exist let's find out we may learn something.
people not willing to look for and find the truth openly with out following their peers, need to search for what they themselves are afraid of.

george etc. wrote
'Their groupie followers blindly dismiss some form of creation with all the none scientific rigor one would expect from religious fundamentalists. nobody with a degree or otherwise can in any way prove their was no creation, '

George etc: I think that you have missed the point. Creationism states that the origin of life on earth occurred as it does in the book of Genesis in the bible. That is the man (and presumably when god got round to it woman) was created in the image of god. Humanity was thus different to any other living thing on the planet. In order to believe in the truth of this it is necessary to accept that an ancient text, written by some one thousands of years ago, is divine truth, and also that there is in fact a god for us to be the image of in the first place.

No one is denying creation, as in the existence of life. At some stage life developed on this planet. If you believe that a god (and remember george that there are many many creation myths referring to many gods in many many cultures,) created a man one day then that's fine for you. In my country the native people believed that a huge rainbow coloured serpent was the originator of life on the planet. Also fine. However evidence is against these ideas. In answering the question---what is the origin of species?---ie how did the earth manage to have so many living creatures (including humans) develop on it, evolution is providing many answers, more everyday.

Now I agree it is easier to say, "Well they are wrong and creationism is right so shut up and sit down", but that is not the answer that will enable us to unravel the question. george--you cannot stop people wanting to uncover truth, belief is not enough now.

Ellis,thank you,
I said "some form of creation". nobody can in any way show or prove that the ultimate source of "the" or any universe is not a thought of a god. Any form of creationism just gets back to who created god but the evidence is strongly in favour of some intelligent agent at work even if this is the universe it's self. The only credible alternative would be Everett's many world theorem leading to the anthropic principle.which still leaves the very beginning to account for.There are two kinds of scientists 1. I call scientists 2. I call real scientists. the scientist say ah Darwin that explains it all, the real scientist says that explains somethings, but as I pointed out the flaws in the theory are very large. Also the universe did not begin with life on earth (If the universe exists at all) which of course Darwin does not explain any more than the big bang theory or any other current or future theory. It only takes the problem back to the same point as any creation theory. (as above).
Scientists, religious people and anybody who just says my way is right because heres the proof or it says so in the bible, koran etc. logically are making no point at all.
Only people who genuinely have an experience, be that miracle, UFO, expanded consciousness etc. can believe something themselves which should not as scientist do be dismissed out of hand. it is solid evidence of something even if that something is just mundanely, evidence of how the mind works. It should be investigated as it is by real scientists.
The only lines of research of any use to forward our knowledge is the lines of real scientists, that is any paranormal, trans personal, quantum etc etc. research everything else is stamp collecting.

Aaah george--- that is a slightly different stance from the one which you argued earlier. Then you were insisting that evolution was WRONG. Now you are retreating to the idea that something created life on earth, what exactly you do not suggest, just some vague intelligence "maybe the universe itself". It is this point that enables many who are scientists and also religious to believe that evolution, as a suggestion, has much to contribute to the debate, because they can acknowledge the original creator. The really annoying thing about this Theory of Evolution is that as further knowledge is expanding the theory is also expanding becauses so many discoveries have supported the ideas which were merely speculation when I was a child.

Creationism on the other hand has insisted that the Genesis myth is the truth, and it must be believed. Science does not insist on belief. On the contrary scientists spend their lives examining belief, even a cherished one. The history of world religions is littered with the persecution of people who discovered truths that were against doctrinal law. Belief is not enough without truth!

Not just believed but known thru experience for its eternal and absolute Truth.
This is what separates the myths from inexperience and mixed belief systems that argue points of interest from relative truths.

Genesis 1:27

So God created man in his own image , in the image of God
created he him ; male and female created he them.

on the sixth day.

how do we know how long a day is for God?

a single day for God might be a thousand , a million , a billion years or longer.

there are life forms that live only a few seconds and in that time they live and multiply / breed and die.

so how long would 1 of our 24 hour days be to them when their entire life is only a few seconds?

George,
your type I scientist is a phantom made up by creationists to justify why they themselves almost universally don't do real science.

There are no "Darwinian" scientists who say that evolution explains everything. The great majority of scientists who work in evolution are trying to figure out the details. Of course the creationists and other pseudo-scientists establish yet another false criterion - that there are 'holes' so it can't be right.



All theories have holes. The criticism is asinine, but creationists tend to not have the slightest idea what they're talking about. They have about a third grade understanding of science, which explains why they are so confused by the real article. They know so little about how real science works that they don't even recognize that their criteria don't exist anywhere else in science.

Americans (and others) reject evolution for one reason - they have a comic book understanding of science and evolution.


Evolution doesn't say there is or isn't a god. neither evolution nor any other science is capable of addressing the subject of God. But the cultists can't handle that - they want to be able to claim that their cult is supported by science.

So what is real?

Thank you all. please excuse English spelling.

having different views on things is a very positive way of moving forward with any subject, but first any possible unmovable
axioms must be agreed.

1, We exist. (individual consciousness only certain) Descarte "I think therefor I am" etc.

2,For this discussion assume other people and this universe exists. Allowing for holographic universes etc. which in no way alters the discussion.

3, we can only look at things with the minds we have, any possibilities beyond our understanding are mute and can not help the discussion.

4,It follows that some thing made the universe exist to us.
(if that something has always been there or was in some way made by something else cannot be answered at present by science and is unimportant to the discussion)

5,There is either an intelligence involved in the universe or there is not.(this is not answerable by science and if one wants to do further research then you must move to the only possible clues to that answer. all of which are essential to try and answer the question. quantum, reincarnation, OBE,NDE UFO,miracles, healing all of which give clues to further possible understanding.

Anybody who does not wish to follow this course is saying I do not want an answer I am going to believe what I want with no evidence to support it of any kind. Of course they are free to do this and nobody should blame them as long as their beliefs do no harm to any one. but they should also accept that that point of view ends any useful further contribution they can make.

The human race in general has a strong archetype (Jung) belief in an afterlife and guiding influence. this is part of our makeup. We also have a very powerful conscience ethic. If you put these together you have "A good god" which many people rightly place there faith in. The benefits of believing in a good god are enormous both to the individual and society as a whole.

The problem always has been and still is that people also have a very strong following instinct (jungle days) that allows all kinds of religious manipulates, past and present to dupe good meaning people into following sects (mainline and obscure)into keeping religious leaders in an exulted position where they control people to there own ends.

The only religion anybody should follow is, never harm other people in any way, forgive as best you can. endeavor to increase wisdom. this covers everything all other rules and regulations are man made.

Because America and many other countries try to restrict access to the longing in people to move forward with there beliefs by ridiculing research into all metaphysical and meta personal research people are forced to follow the established religions which at least offer a feeling of peer acceptance. if all the areas described where opened to serious and accepted research, the only way of becoming wiser of the deep things in life would be opened and the world would be a much happier place.
people have an instinctive knowledge that Darwinism is of very minor concern to the overall picture and has no real bearing on the overall picture.

Scientist follow this head burying road for many reasons, peer pressure, financial backing which will not be given to those who try to follow an open path, arrogance. governments of nearly all colours try to keep people under there control by ridiculing any out of the norm research.

Darwinism and creationism (not the bible. creationism in any form) like most things is not a matter of one or the other Darwinism is a very minor side line to the matters being discussed and whether it is 10% correct or 20% correct is irrelevant.

It is the going round in circles arguing some minor topic (how many angels on a pin head) which keeps the human race from moving on to find out with every means possible, is there something more or not.(and not just blindly saying there is or there is not)

May I congratulate everybody for voting in your new president a forward looking seemingly not self serving man who if allowed can hopefully help better the entire world.

By AWT only gradients and changes are observable by human, by the same way, like you can see only density fluctuations from gas, not the gas itself. We are such fluctuation, too a and the appearance of Universe is given by geometry, by which one random fluctuation can interact with others.

"... quantum, reincarnation, OBE,NDE UFO,miracles, healing all of which give clues to further possible understanding. "

Obscurantists the world over have for centuries have attempted to lump together various non-scientific fancies with scientific ideas. Scientific-sounding words give legitimacy to their ideas and claims.

So they talk about energy and force and ether and the like. Of course the use they put to those words bears no relation to its scientific meaning, but their followers are not aware of this - and in fact do not care. Further, the promulgators of these ideas are very often unaware that their use of the terms is non-scientific.

Quantum mechanics is legitimate science and it yields many bizarre insights into how the universe may work - and therefore any bizarre thing that any crackpot postulates must be worth public recognition and investment. Well, that's the idea. However, in most of these cases - OBE, NDE, faith-healing, etc. - they not only aren't science, their primary evidences are thoroughly refuted. OTOH, no matter how much effort that real investigators invest in the subject,
1) a "nay" finding is ignored or outright rejected by the true-believers, and
2) there's always recourse to "Well, here's these other 10 guys you haven't tested! Maybe one of THEM is not a fake and, so, if you're REALLY HONEST, you HAVE to research them, too."

This is part of the comic book understanding of the scientific process where all ideas are assumed to have equal merit and scientists have an infinite amount of time and funding and they also have a strong moral aegis to disprove absolutely even the most absurd claim, before discounting it.