Darwin vs The Bible

[Stu Monty]

Stu. As much as I am an atheist and as much as I generally agree with your posts, I can't let your assertion of "a huge proportion" go.

 

In my experience, most people of faith are tolerant of other views, including other religions and non-believers. It is, unfortunately, the intolerant that shout the loudest

 

Just under half the population in the US believe the old testament nonsense. Fact. So that's a huge proportion that refuse to listen to reason on their specific fantasies.

 

That's before you get into possibly even less critical thinking nations that go with other cults.

[PestiRed]

Just under half the population in the US believe the old testament nonsense. Fact. So that's a huge proportion that refuse to listen to reason on their specific fantasies.

 

That's before you get into possibly even less critical thinking nations that go with other cults.

Yep but there's a difference between believe and ram down your throat, which is where you start to have a problem.

[Stu Monty]

Yep but there's a difference between believe and ram down your throat, which is where you start to have a problem.

 

Not if the point you are making is an inability to sort information, and make decisions based on it, being a problem for a society. Or the placing of more emphasis on defending the opinions you have been fed by your chosen mouthpiece rather than challenging them when new information arrives at your door.

[PestiRed]

Not if the point you are making is an inability to sort information, and make decisions based on it, being a problem for a society. Or the placing of more emphasis on defending the opinions you have been fed by your chosen mouthpiece rather than challenging them when new information arrives at your door.

I see your issue but I honestly don't believe that it is the problem that it you appear to think it is. The vast majority of believers that I have come into contact with are balanced and accepting of society and it's values. For Christians, they take the view that they follow Christ's teachings regardless of the societal majority (give Ceaser what he is due and give God what he is due - badly paraphrased). Obviously there are nut cases like the Tea Party but I genuinely do not believe that these people form enough of a threat to society that we should condemn the majority of believers

[FanchesterCity]

The be fair, MOST of us believe what we are told when 'the system' tells us so.

If many Americans are brought up being told that creationism is realistic, with a bit of pseudo science to try and bolster support for the order of creationism, and a bit of creative license on the '6 day' interpretation, then many will believe it.

 

How many of us are world experts on other creation theories? we simply buy into what we are told, and even those of us who like to think we've made our own decisions, we've generally done that on a BIT of science knowledge, then an educated guess based on what the scientific experts of the day tell us and who sounds the most plausible. 

People bought into the sun orbiting the earth, and the leading scientists of the day seemed quite sure of it - therefore most of the population did too. 

 

We've got body parts that we can't fully explain.... I'm sure as hell not going to be buying into someone explaining the life, the universe and everything! I'd wager a fair bet every creation theory in existence is wrong.

[FanchesterCity]

I see your issue but I honestly don't believe that it is the problem that it you appear to think it is. The vast majority of believers that I have come into contact with are balanced and accepting of society and it's values. For Christians, they take the view that they follow Christ's teachings regardless of the societal majority (give Ceaser what he is due and give God what he is due - badly paraphrased). Obviously there are nut cases like the Tea Party but I genuinely do not believe that these people form enough of a threat to society that we should condemn the majority of believers

 

I think the general issue with Christians (massive generalisation of course), is that the prominent ones we see - clergy, or churchgoers etc tend to be a bit 'happy clappy' and lends itself to us assuming they are aren't great thinkers or well versed in the sciences etc, or worse, they are indoctrinated and can't see the wood for the trees. 

It's a dangerous generalisation to make, since the vast majority of people are indoctrinated in some way. Be it how we dress, how to judge status (job, car, house) etc etc. 

I know plenty of Christians ('born again' for clarity), and most are fairly decent and normal. The 'abnormal' aspects of them are simply the way they CHOOSE to live certain aspects of their life which seem a little odd or extreme to us. It's not really abnormal, just a bit unsettling for us. It might be something as simple as abstaining from drink (plenty DO drink), or a sex before marriage issue, or anti-abortion etc. Or something as harmless (but highly uncomfortable) as praying over issues.

You'd be surprised at just how uncomfortable people get when a Christians says 'let's pray about it'. Makes you wonder who has the bigger issues! 

 

I've met some totally eccentric, whacky, over the top Christians too, and many other Christians will tell you how much damage this does. Much as any extremist creates entirely the wrong impression of the mainstream (be it Christian, Islamic, or otherwise).

[Stu Monty]

I see your issue but I honestly don't believe that it is the problem that it you appear to think it is. The vast majority of believers that I have come into contact with are balanced and accepting of society and it's values. For Christians, they take the view that they follow Christ's teachings regardless of the societal majority (give Ceaser what he is due and give God what he is due - badly paraphrased). Obviously there are nut cases like the Tea Party but I genuinely do not believe that these people form enough of a threat to society that we should condemn the majority of believers

 

I'm not condemning everyone based on a few nutters. I'm condemning the massive proportion of the mainstream of the religion based on their actual views and actual inability to discern utterly ridiculous information from truth. Hundreds and hundreds of millions of people at the very lowest estimate.

 

The tea party aren't fringe nut-cases. They represent a lot of people.

 

We're not talking values here. We're talking capability to assess information and to remove yourself from the attachment to information from specific sources that you have decided are true, regardless of the facts staring you in the face. It's corrosive for a functioning democracy. Deeply corrosive. 

[Strontium]

We've got body parts that we can't fully explain....

 

 

That's your Special Purpose.

[FanchesterCity]

 

 

That's your Special Purpose.

 

Ah, I've worked out what one part is for... it's a Man United shirt smearer

[Stu Monty]

The be fair, MOST of us believe what we are told when 'the system' tells us so.

If many Americans are brought up being told that creationism is realistic, with a bit of pseudo science to try and bolster support for the order of creationism, and a bit of creative license on the '6 day' interpretation, then many will believe it.

 

How many of us are world experts on other creation theories? we simply buy into what we are told, and even those of us who like to think we've made our own decisions, we've generally done that on a BIT of science knowledge, then an educated guess based on what the scientific experts of the day tell us and who sounds the most plausible. 

People bought into the sun orbiting the earth, and the leading scientists of the day seemed quite sure of it - therefore most of the population did too. 

 

We've got body parts that we can't fully explain.... I'm sure as hell not going to be buying into someone explaining the life, the universe and everything! I'd wager a fair bet every creation theory in existence is wrong.

 

Why can't you discern the difference between the best explanation available to you that none of the facts contradict and believing utter nonsense? Between continuing to search for an answer instead of just going "Magic does it, innit".

 

If the best evidence available (often provided by people who are actively trying to DISPROVE what is common knowledge) is that the sun goes around the earth then it is not detrimental to society that many think that. It's when there's new evidence available and you refuse to change your views (or deliberately persecute those that attempt to change others' views) that you have an issue.

[magicrat]

The be fair, MOST of us believe what we are told when 'the system' tells us so.

If many Americans are brought up being told that creationism is realistic, with a bit of pseudo science to try and bolster support for the order of creationism, and a bit of creative license on the '6 day' interpretation, then many will believe it.

 

How many of us are world experts on other creation theories? we simply buy into what we are told, and even those of us who like to think we've made our own decisions, we've generally done that on a BIT of science knowledge, then an educated guess based on what the scientific experts of the day tell us and who sounds the most plausible. 

People bought into the sun orbiting the earth, and the leading scientists of the day seemed quite sure of it - therefore most of the population did too. 

 

We've got body parts that we can't fully explain.... I'm sure as hell not going to be buying into someone explaining the life, the universe and everything! I'd wager a fair bet every creation theory in existence is wrong.

 

You're falling into the trap that Creationists set . The line seems to be invariably that their theories should be taken as a credible alternative to evolution. On the fringes are the nutters that believe every word in Genesis but the bulk of them want the "controversies" with Darwinian evolution to be held up for scrutiny. The game plan is for Creationism to be placed on equal footing with Evolution ,

Its very seductive to say wherever there are things science can't explain to invoke a Creator. It's nothing short of mind boggling that in the space of a few thousand years human beings have discovered the age and size of the Universe and the structure of matter itself. That's the true miracle of life not the stories our ancestors invented and committed to religious doctrine to explain the world and are still being peddled as the truth by Creationists today.    

Yes there are probably all sorts of things in scientific theories that are wrong and things we cant explain but its much more logical to say we will discover the answers in time .No one doubts the Sun orbits the Earth today and in time the so called " inconsistencies " with evolution that Creationists love to talk about will be dispelled . God's room for manoeuvre where evolution is concerned will become more and more limited

They confuse faith with science and should stick to churches and temples and get to fuck out of schools and colleges

[Strontium]

Interesting graph showing how much opinions can vary even within one country:

 

 

As you can see, the more reliably Democratic states tend to be top where acceptance of reality is concerned, and the more reliably Republican states tend to be nearer the bottom. That alone ought to demonstrate the very real and detrimental impact that religious thinking has on the wider world.

[VladimirIlyich]

To use the USA as typical of what religious people actually believe is way off the mark. Putting aside the fact that the country is a bit mental in the first place,i honestly think that lots of the so called believers are nothing of the sort. Due to the use of the word 'God' into everyday US language,i reckon lots of people simply give it lip service and little more than that.

The biggest problem is that the loudest,eg the Politicians,are the ones given the most publicity and therefore give a view disproportionate to actual brainwashed people.

I think its completely unfair to blame man's troubles on religion in the main.

During the height of British f***ball hooliganism in the 70s and 80s it was often said,quite rightly in my opinion that,if those idiots werent causing trouble in and around sports stadiums that they would find somewhere else to cause mayhem. I believe this applies to religious bigots too.

[mattyq]

Interesting graphic. SD

I'd wager that graph was directly correlated to income as well

[KopOut]

Fuck the Bible. 'The Vedas' make far more sense, and they dont make much sense at all.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

No they aren't, just a huge proportion of them, and on specific issues.

 

Try convincing a non-religious person that one bloke can build a wooden boat for the ecosystem of the planet to live on , see how it goes. It trains people to unquestioningly accept information once they have settled on their trusted sources and it's deeply corrosive for society. It's not the only thing that does it but as far as I know kids aren't sent to "Fox School" on a Sunday to indoctrinate them with the opinions of idiot Tea Party members, they are sent to Sunday School.

 

Half the people in the US think that the planet came into being just before the Battle of Hastings because of religion. Nothing else. Take away the religion and they might not be brain surgeons but they have no reason to doubt scientific facts about the earth, and are not indoctrinated to do so.

A few centuries before the Battle of Mahabharata, maybe, but long, long before Hastings!

 

Very few of the religious people I know believe in any of the cutesy ickle stories from the Old Testament.  A huge proportion do have the rational capacity to realise that the Creation, the Tower of Babel, the Flood, the story of Moses, Joseph and his Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat are fairy stories and that the laws of Leviticus are bonkers and should be dismissed as such.  Nevertheless, they believe in the existence of God and they hope that there is a life after this one and that there is some sort of direction and purpose to all this unpleasant mess... basically, they're hoping for a happy ending.  I don't feel any need to be churlish or sneer at them on those grounds.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Interesting graph showing how much opinions can vary even within one country:

 

 

As you can see, the more reliably Democratic states tend to be top where acceptance of reality is concerned, and the more reliably Republican states tend to be nearer the bottom. That alone ought to demonstrate the very real and detrimental impact that religious thinking has on the wider world.

It's not enough on it's own to prove the malign influence of religion.  Anti-scientific madness doesn't have to be based on religion.  Take a look at the Conspiracy Theory thread to see what cobblers people are prepared to buy into.

 

I'd guess that if, for example, you asked about the acceptance of the efficacy of vaccinations, for example, you could pretty much turn that chart upside down.

[FanchesterCity]

Nobody's falling into a 'trap'. I'm offering you a plausible reason why a sizable number of US folks believe in creationism. It's no more strange than why half the world believes in socialism and the other half believes in capitalism, or why some believe homosexuality is fine, and others don't.

 

Trying to explain why a group believes what they belief is NOT the same as believing it yourself.

 

Take religion out of it, and you still have the same issues over global warming. A majority believe one thing, and a minority believe something else, but both sides claim the science is on their side. So the average man in the street tends to take the majority view because that's what's being pedaled by the media and education.

 

Go to parts of the USA, and creationism is given far greater exposure and seeming validity. 

Exactly the same issue happens with gun law in the USA. No amount of scientific evidence about the sensibility of guns will trump the 'right to bear arms' in some people's minds. The gun lobby's 'belief' is their belief.

 

And that's the problem 'science' has. You can provide scientific proof until the cows come home, but if you can't make people believe the science, it counts for nothing.

99% of us here have accepted gravity. We've seen apples fall, and someone's come up with some scientific explanation of why it works. Many of us will explain it's mass attracting mass, causing a gravitational pull.... because we learned it in school. Very few of us will really grasp why at a detailed level.... it just 'is'. We accept it because we're told to accept it, it all seems to stack up, and we let others carry on figuring new stuff out and telling us how that works too.

 

Creationists do the same thing, only their bubble is a different (and smaller) bubble to ours. They are told there's a God, and that there's plan to creation and evolution is by design. For every piece of science that works against creationism. there's always going to be the argument 'science has gotten so much wrong before', and that helps the creationists. It's a trump card that works for them just as much as 'I can prove gravity exists because apples fall from trees' proves gravity.... only it doesn't prove either does it? If we WANT to believe in gravity, it's a good enough indication for us (not proof), and if we want to believe in creationism, the incessant correction of 'science' is a good enough indication for them to carry on believing God's behind it all.

 

Eventually, creationism will probably die out, but there's no way on (God's?) earth that all believers will change their view in an instant based on science. It'll take generations as their views become more and more marginalised.

 

The vast majority of religious believers aren't whacky 6 day creationist types, they accept most of the science, but try to resolve how the creation story maps onto evolution. Possibly cherry picking parts that seem to line up well, and bending other parts to fit the science, but they seem to be saying "we accept the science, but believe the science is just filling in the blanks of creationism!'

 

i.e.

They might claim that God made light from darkness - which maps to the big bang (God's big bang!)

God created the land and sea... which maps into the evolution of earth

God then created creatures (before man) .... again tying in with the science

God then created man .... again tying into man being a bit of a latecomer!

 

This is (in part) how creationism has managed to survive - because they've managed to loosely map the timeline against the science and argue science hasn't disproven a damn thing.

 

It's like the gun lobby being convinced if EVERYBODY had a gun, there'd be less deaths. There's a certain plausible logic to it. But erm, they're almost certainly wrong. Regardless, plenty believe it and will die believing it.

[FanchesterCity]

You're falling into the trap that Creationists set . The line seems to be invariably that their theories should be taken as a credible alternative to evolution. On the fringes are the nutters that believe every word in Genesis but the bulk of them want the "controversies" with Darwinian evolution to be held up for scrutiny. The game plan is for Creationism to be placed on equal footing with Evolution ,

Its very seductive to say wherever there are things science can't explain to invoke a Creator. It's nothing short of mind boggling that in the space of a few thousand years human beings have discovered the age and size of the Universe and the structure of matter itself. That's the true miracle of life not the stories our ancestors invented and committed to religious doctrine to explain the world and are still being peddled as the truth by Creationists today.    

Yes there are probably all sorts of things in scientific theories that are wrong and things we cant explain but its much more logical to say we will discover the answers in time .No one doubts the Sun orbits the Earth today and in time the so called " inconsistencies " with evolution that Creationists love to talk about will be dispelled . God's room for manoeuvre where evolution is concerned will become more and more limited

They confuse faith with science and should stick to churches and temples and get to fuck out of schools and colleges

Why is it mind boggling? We are the ones who've discovered these things, but why would that be mind boggling? what have we to compare it to to say out evolution is rapid, or slow? intelligent or stupid? We have no comparison, so it's not mind boggling is it?

 

We like to call it mind boggling because it boosts our ego, but we still die. We still have millions starving.... I mean really, STARVING???

So, yeah, we could say some things we've done impress ourselves! meanwhile, we keep brushing under the carpet the list of crap we've not yet figured out!

 

Man on the moon - tick

Cure the common cold - nope

 

Mind boggling success if you want to impress yourself. Nobody else is measuring us though.

 

You say people confuse faith with science, but people have faith IN science, and science is a faith. For 99% of the population, we accept science with an almost blind faith, because it's too complex for us to understand and we defer to others who we believe are probably smarter.

 

I can't even show you conclusive proof that gravity exists. I can only show you what I believe the effects are, then end up claiming Newton discovered it (he didn't, but that's another story), and it must be true because everybody says so.

 

Of course I DO believe it's true.... I'm just demonstrating how all the 'science' people stand by is largely adopted in blind faith by most of us. We just accept what we are told. It's not THAT different than religion really.

[magicrat]

Why is it mind boggling? We are the ones who've discovered these things, but why would that be mind boggling? what have we to compare it to to say out evolution is rapid, or slow? intelligent or stupid? We have no comparison, so it's not mind boggling is it?

 

We like to call it mind boggling because it boosts our ego, but we still die. We still have millions starving.... I mean really, STARVING???

So, yeah, we could say some things we've done impress ourselves! meanwhile, we keep brushing under the carpet the list of crap we've not yet figured out!

 

Man on the moon - tick

Cure the common cold - nope

 

Mind boggling success if you want to impress yourself. Nobody else is measuring us though.

 

The comparison is that for hundred of millions of years life existed on earth and couldn't use the simplest of tools yet  in the relative blink if an eye human beings have gone from ape like creatures to being able to split the atom and map the universe. I do think that's mind boggling yes.

Your point about the common cold is what Creationists do in pointing to gaps in evolutionary theory and claiming its evidence for intelligent design and as a result they should be given equal status . The answer to both is what we don't know yet but will probably discovery the answers in time. We shouldn't be giving any scientific credibility to a faith based theory of evolution . It belongs in a church as I said earlier

[Stu Monty]

Why is it mind boggling? We are the ones who've discovered these things, but why would that be mind boggling? what have we to compare it to to say out evolution is rapid, or slow? intelligent or stupid? We have no comparison, so it's not mind boggling is it?

 

We like to call it mind boggling because it boosts our ego, but we still die. We still have millions starving.... I mean really, STARVING???

So, yeah, we could say some things we've done impress ourselves! meanwhile, we keep brushing under the carpet the list of crap we've not yet figured out!

 

Man on the moon - tick

Cure the common cold - nope

 

Mind boggling success if you want to impress yourself. Nobody else is measuring us though.

 

You say people confuse faith with science, but people have faith IN science, and science is a faith. For 99% of the population, we accept science with an almost blind faith, because it's too complex for us to understand and we defer to others who we believe are probably smarter.

 

I can't even show you conclusive proof that gravity exists. I can only show you what I believe the effects are, then end up claiming Newton discovered it (he didn't, but that's another story), and it must be true because everybody says so.

 

Of course I DO believe it's true.... I'm just demonstrating how all the 'science' people stand by is largely adopted in blind faith by most of us. We just accept what we are told. It's not THAT different than religion really.

I think you're deliberately getting this arse over tit.

 

We are talking about the ability to recognise parent nonsense when presented with it. Not gravity.

 

If you can back up your claim that the majority of religious believers don't believe in the most farcical of ideas then I'd be interested to see those figures.

 

As I say about 40% of the supposedly modern and civilised US believe in late earth creationism. Fact.

[FanchesterCity]

The comparison is that for hundred of millions of years life existed on earth and couldn't use the simplest of tools yet  in the relative blink if an eye human beings have gone from ape like creatures to being able to split the atom and map the universe. I do think that's mind boggling yes.

Your point about the common cold is what Creationists do in pointing to gaps in evolutionary theory and claiming its evidence for intelligent design and as a result they should be given equal status . The answer to both is what we don't know yet but will probably discovery the answers in time. We shouldn't be giving any scientific credibility to a faith based theory of evolution . It belongs in a church as I said earlier

 

What you're doing is selectively choosing which part of evolution was the most successful, like saying we won the league in the last 4 games.

The process of human evolution didn't start with man, so to get to where we are today actually DID take millions of years.

 

Another issue is the measure of 'progress'. So we developed tools? and what of it, it's not gotten us anywhere really.

We build houses, cars, factories and erm.... what? live in a seemingly sophisticated and highly intelligent society.

But does that make it any more progress than the fish in sea who may very will exist long after us? and have evolved in different ways.

 

This is the same argument that humans are the most intelligent species on the planet. Unfortunately, we measure it in ways that suit our own perceptions of intelligence, so it becomes self-fulfilling.

 

But regardless, it's neither impressive, nor unimpressive.

More people have existed in the last 150 years than since all the rest combined before it, so you may as well claim much of our progress is by brute force of numbers. Admittedly, a lot is brainpower, but 6 billions brains is going to give you a far bigger return than 6 million.

 

I still cannot see how splitting the atom is mind boggling. How much harder is splitting the atom than discovering fire? or developing speech?

You're using specific human breakthroughs as mind-boggling, because you're human and it impresses yourself.

 

Is animal camouflage less impressive? or the durability of bacteria any less impressive?

[FanchesterCity]

I think you're deliberately getting this are over tit.

 

We are talking about the ability to recognise parent nonsense when presented with it. Not gravity.

 

If you can back up your claim that the majority of religious believers don't believe in the most farcical of ideas then I'd be interested to see those figures.

 

As I say about 40% of the supposedly modern and civilised US believe in late earth creationism. Fact.

 

Most religious believers are in the east, not the west.

Farcical is subjective. If you're an atheist, then any notion of a God is farcical to you, and so you'll argue it's the most farcical of ideas.

However, since a large percentage of the world believes in a God of some sort, it's perhaps not so farcical a belief.

 

Mankind (regardless of religion) HAS believed in farcical ideas. Usually they were only considered farcical in retrospect, once new evidence came to light.

 

Additionally, I never made a claim that religious believers don't believe in the most farcical of ideas. What I did say was the vast majority are normal people who believe in science and accept it and are seeking to reconcile what science discovers with what their religion teaches. Some can't reconcile it, the majority do, and usually by adapting their religious interpretations to match the science.

Some say it's bending the rules, or twisting their faith etc. Call it what you will, but that's effectively what happens.

 

Religions adapt, some more quickly than others, but almost all are 'slow' by secular standards. They can be conveniently vague on science, and more clear on morality, but will adapt their morality when science creates too much of a problem.

 

Examples of such -

 

1) the literal 6 day creationist theory is only held by a few, the vast majority of Christians now believe the creation story is more symbolic than literal (but still believe the general order is 'about right' and obviously, it's by design). It's not seen as creationism VS evolution, it's an attempt to have them coexist. Why? well, there's three reasons:

 

a) The literal creation story is a nigh on impossible sell (for all but the most extreme nutters)

b) The complete denial of evolution is equally as hard a sell

c) Finding a few holes (unanswered issues) in creationism and trying to sell evolution as not contradictory with creationism is a smart way of using evolution to SUPPORT creationism.

 

2) Homosexuality has long been considered 'wrong' by most religions. In recent years, when faced with the prospect of science saying it MIGHT be genetic, Christianity has bent enough to say 'erm erm, well, the BE gay isn't so bad, but to practice it is wrong'. That's where they've adapted their stance due to the threat of science.

 

 

My point about gravity is that we accept it exists, because we're socially conditioned to accept it. Our teachers tell us it's right (but very few of us are capable of proving it), so we take it 'on good authority'.

Precisely the same happens in parts of the USA where creationism is heavily pushed, and for those that never venture outside of their bubble, they're more likely to believe it. Americans who step outside of those bubbles will then be far more exposed to evolution, and plenty will change their views.

 

We live in a culture where we are told science is everything. I don't have a problem with that.

But we also live in a culture were we accept the science given to us (because we aren't capable of actually understanding it). That's where I'm arguing that we are buying into 'fact' because conventional wisdom say so (not our own wisdom). In THAT regard, we're just as sheeplike as creationists are.

 

We have people spouting that the big bang theory is much more plausible than any God, and yet do they REALLY understand the big bang theory? or have they just been told so by Brian Cox on a 30 minute science program and it seems to be what everybody else is saying.

[Stu Monty]

Sorry. I'm going to ask again.

 

Where is the evidence supporting the idea that the vast majority of Christians see creationism as just stories.

 

40% of the whole of the US, not of the Christian population don't think it's just stories. And that's a fuckload of Christians.

[FanchesterCity]

Sorry. I'm going to ask again.

 

Where is the evidence supporting the idea that the vast majority of Christians see creationism as just stories.

 

40% of the whole of the US, not of the Christian population don't think it's just stories. And that's a fuckload of Christians.

 

And I'll tell you again, they don't see it as just stories, but they don't take it literally as a 6 day event. They believe it's a generally accurate parable of what happened, and clearly not over 6 days.

There's a difference between 'just stories' and 'a sort of truth'. They keep it vague because they don't want to explicitly challenge evolution, they prefer to make it fit evolution (and vice versa) aka Theistic Evolution... because that's the easiest, and most successful sell of all.