Thread: Gallup Poll: 4 in 10 believe man created by God 10,000 years ago

Originally Posted by Bruno

They can do what they want and I don't care.
However, these people are also influencing things like what is taught at schools. And in some schools (like in Texas ?) they are now teaching Creationism as 'science' alongside evolution. As a result, they are spreading their stupidity.

Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on how those who don't believe in Creationism are less stupid?

Originally Posted by JimmyHAD

It would be interesting to see if the OP had some thoughts on wet shaving with straight razors once in awhile rather than thread after thread on "hot button" issues that seem to be calculated to generate controversy and divisiveness.

Ever the optimist

I'm surprised that it is as low as 40%. You don't have to have a higher education to see that the world has a design.

It's kind of weird that we can look at anything at all in this world that has a design and will attribute it to a designer but when it comes to the most complicated designs of all like the human brain we somehow have fooled ourselves in to thinking that it could have come about by accident.

That's like if we went to Mars and found Mount Rushmore and started arguing on how long it took for wind errosion to make such a formation.

Originally Posted by volleykinginnc

I'm surprised that it is as low as 40%. You don't have to have a higher education to see that the world has a design.

It's kind of weird that we can look at anything at all in this world that has a design and will attribute it to a designer but when it comes to the most complicated designs of all like the human brain we somehow have fooled ourselves in to thinking that it could have come about by accident.

That's like if we went to Mars and found Mount Rushmore and started arguing on how long it took for wind errosion to make such a formation.

Ah yes, but sir, by the use of my faculties I've determined that you are arguing that humans are NOT the most intelligent beings in the universe. Tsk, tsk, I'll be a monkey's uncle.

Chris L

Originally Posted by ChrisL

Ah yes, but sir, by the use of my faculties I've determined that you are arguing that humans are NOT the most intelligent beings in the universe. Tsk, tsk, I'll be a monkey's uncle.

Chris L

Actually, I'm arguing that it has nothing to do with intelligence. My 2 year old can distinguish whether a bench or a rock was made by a person.

It's really very simple, no science, no logic, no thinking really. If you believe you accept what the book says literally and to the tee and you don't question it and your quest is to do whatever it takes to make everyone like you no matter the means.

The Bible never was or IS a book of science. It does not describe methods or systems very clearly.

The person in Genesis writing about the creation was (most likely) Moses, who...let's face it...wasn't there at the time. He'd seen the creation of the world (most likely in a vision or such) and in a few simple verses describes what he'd seen.

That's like describing an hour and a half football match as: "First one team had the ball and was doing well, then the other team got the ball....and won"

It's not a description of the plays/strategy they used, the players that were in the game or anything like that.

There's a LOT of gaps in Moses descriptions. He mostly describes who did it....and that it happened (and a little about the order of creation). Nothing more. Not the how which is what science tries to explain.

The Bible isn't enough to explain creation. It never claimed to be either. It focuses on other (more important) stuff like how to make the best out of your life.

Science is important as well. Just not for the same things that the Bible focuses on.

Originally Posted by Navaja

Perhaps you'd like to elaborate on how those who don't believe in Creationism are less stupid?

We have science. Science has a lot of proof that the earth is older than 10000 years. Science also has convincing evidence that evolution is a real and verifiable mechanism that change species over time, and which can be used to explain the fossil records and other findings.

Therefore there are very good reasons that men and apes alike had a common ancestor which itself evolved from even more primitive species, all the way down cellular life, whereever that came from. I don't even see that as conflicting with a religious belief or with the idea that the biblical creation myth is a suitable parable, written down in a time when noone had any understanding of biology, physics, etc...

What I do think is stupid is believing, against the vast collection of evidence and sound theories, that a supreme deity snapped his fingers, and lo and behold, in a span of 7 days we had the earth, and we appeared in the form that we now have. Science may not be perfect. Aye. And it cannot explain everything. Aye. But on the whole, there are enough reasons to believe that a) humans as they exist now evolved from the cavemen, which evolved from other species, and b) the earth and the universe are older than 10000 years.

Even if we disagree on the previous paragraphs, even the you should agree that teaching creationism in science class is really stupid, since creationism requires the complete abandonment of the entire scientific process and all the evidence on which it is based.

Note that NOWHERE am I saying that the bible is a worthless document, or God doesn't exist, or that I don't believe in god, or anything of that nature. I just say that using the bible as a scientific factbook is silly.

Originally Posted by LX_Emergency

The Bible never was or IS a book of science. It does not describe methods or systems very clearly.

The person in Genesis writing about the creation was (most likely) Moses, who...let's face it...wasn't there at the time. He'd seen the creation of the world (most likely in a vision or such) and in a few simple verses describes what he'd seen.

That's like describing an hour and a half football match as: "First one team had the ball and was doing well, then the other team got the ball....and won"

It's not a description of the plays/strategy they used, the players that were in the game or anything like that.

There's a LOT of gaps in Moses descriptions. He mostly describes who did it....and that it happened (and a little about the order of creation). Nothing more. Not the how which is what science tries to explain.

The Bible isn't enough to explain creation. It never claimed to be either. It focuses on other (more important) stuff like how to make the best out of your life.

Science is important as well. Just not for the same things that the Bible focuses on.

+1. This is exactly how I see the coexistence between the bible on one hand and science on the other. I see the bible as an (incomplete) set of documents that can be used for inspiration and for transferring ideas and beliefs. I don't see it as a book of scientific facts.

Originally Posted by volleykinginnc

I'm surprised that it is as low as 40%. You don't have to have a higher education to see that the world has a design.

It's kind of weird that we can look at anything at all in this world that has a design and will attribute it to a designer but when it comes to the most complicated designs of all like the human brain we somehow have fooled ourselves in to thinking that it could have come about by accident.

That's like if we went to Mars and found Mount Rushmore and started arguing on how long it took for wind errosion to make such a formation.

Otoh, there is a very simple set of mathematical equation that describe the entire working of electro magnetism, gravity and quantum physics. When I was still majoring in engineering, I could write them on the back of a napkin.

Out of these equations, there are many solutions where you can set up pseudo random input, and end up with perfectly symmetrical output, like snow flake crystals, galaxy spiral arms and the rings of saturn.

On the biological front, we have DNA, and evolution which can explain why we end up with eyes. Simulations have shown that you can get from a light sensitive surface to a fully functioning eye in about 600 generations.

The mechanisms are there to create beaty from chaos. Imo, if you want to look for a creator, then marvel at the beautiful simplicity of the laws of nature that govern such a magnificent world, and consider them the primary work of the creator. This is pretty much how I consider them.

I don't, for a second, believe that God had to make an effort for each and every single thing, deciding upon cerebral hemisphere structure, and cornea size while ALSO making sure he wasn't violating the laws of physics. True genius would be to set up the principles and then letting the entire thing take care of its own, and not having to manually structure everything.