Post Punk Kitchen Forum

No offense taken at all. I am not easily offended, and I understand everyone's knee-jerk reaction to christians. I can't stand Christians either. Many don't even really know what they believe. They buy into this whole "Christian Culture" thing without a second thought.

My grandparents and uncle are creationists. I'm not sure about my cousins. It makes for me wanting to smack them.

I'm pretty sure this guy is a troll...some of his videos include "PROOF THAT GOD = FLYING SPAGHETTI MONSTER" and "PROOF THAT I MET JESUS!" but then again, maybe it's just wishful thinking on my part.

ETA: Some other examples: "I was beating my slaves the other day..." and "A haircut in the name of the Lard..."

I'd just like to add that somehow in my short education career I have had at least two creationist bio lab partners. Awful!

I rarely get involved with any discussion of the validity of the theory of evolution or of creationism. Mostly because it is such an emotionally charged issue. I am, however, generally curious to hear the opinion of folks on the subject. I listen, without judgment, to see where they stand. Usually, they will state their opinion on the subject and throw in a few personal attacks on the opposition. The issue to them seems pretty black and white. You are either a genius or a fool.

Somewhere in the middle of the evolution vs creation argument you'll find those that believe in theistic evolution. Alfred Russel Wallace, who in a joint paper with Charles Darwin, proposed the theory of evolution by natural selection was a deist. Apparently, not too long ago, Gallup did a poll and found that 40% of scientists believed in god guided evolution. Of course the origins of the universe and life are not decided by poll. Ultimately, Truth is not a popularity contest.

In short, I think I could ride in a carpool with just about anyone and not get offended. I think people's differences are far more interesting than their similarities.

Just my two cents.

No matter what is true when it comes to evolution, there is no—and can be no—evidence for a deity-guided or -inspired evolution.

And when evidence pointing to a naturalistic evolution by means of natural selection can be refuted by saying, "It only looks natural," argument and debate are impossible.

And scientists believing things isn't what makes them true.

I guess I don't see much reason to remain impartial on the issue, anymore than I would on the issue of Obama's citizenship. Creationist arguments are roundly uninformed, and a God that is indistinguishable from no God at all isn't a very useful concept to introduce into matters of biology.

My problem with theistic evolution is that nature is full of hackneyed, inefficient solutions, examples of "bad design." I mean, what deity would create a mutation that confers resistance to malaria in some individuals (forget inventing malaria in the first place) but causes a debilitating, fatal disease in others? The deity of theistic evolution would be at best short sighted, if not a straight up mustard.

I always figured God (or whatever) must be really bad at playing The Sims.

Gallup only polls people with landlines. Since more older conservatives and religious fundamentalists still have landlines, while more younger liberals and progressives have only cell phones, Gallup's polls are automatically skewed older and more conservative.

Evolution is not a matter of belief. It requires no leap of faith in an unseen being. Anyone who refuses to accept that evolution occurs is a wilfully ignorant clod.

One thing that really gets up my nose is that religious fundamentalists have managed to completely miss the fact that Darwin does not address how life began. Darwin addresses how species differentiated themselves from one another.

Gallup polls landlines and cellphones.http://www.gallup.com/poll/101872/How-does-Gallup-polling-work.aspx

I know what you mean, and people always ask if I'm sure the kids weren't just messing with me. But these kids were not clever enough to pull off such a spontaneous utterance with such conviction. I remember the evolution of a character thing and it took me by such surprise that the kids laughed at my reaction because my face clearly read what the fizzle. And they laughed, but the student stayed indignant and insistent about it. She told me that people might grow, but they can't evolve.



Yeah, it took every ounce of self control to not talk down to this kid.

I heard the phrase "I ain't no monkey" more times than anyone should have to in her lifetime.

Kind of like those obnoxious omnivores who attack you for no other reason than being vegan... hmm....



sigged

That seems quite unlikely to me, but I'd be interested to see the context of that poll.

I'll have to search around more later, but as I recall, it included a broad selection of scientific disciplines including mathematicians and engineers. Polls more specifically of biologists have yielded a much lower number.

Do you have a source for this? The closest thing I can find was this:

"Of the scientists and engineers in the United States, only about 5% are creationists, according to a 1991 Gallup poll (Robinson 1995, Witham 1997). However, this number includes those working in fields not related to life origins (such as computer scientists, mechanical engineers, etc.). Taking into account only those working in the relevant fields of earth and life sciences, there are about 480,000 scientists, but only about 700 believe in "creation-science" or consider it a valid theory (Robinson 1995). This means that less than 0.15 percent of relevant scientists believe in creationism. And that is just in the United States, which has more creationists than any other industrialized country. In other countries, the number of relevant scientists who accept creationism drops to less than one tenth of 1 percent. "

Okay. A little odd, but who wants vegans to all be the same?

I'm sure its the real life equivalent of removing the ladder while we're in the pool.

I always said that if I was God, I'd be a crasshole too.

Why do you believe in micro-evolution but not macro-evolution? If the mechanism (process may be a better word) is essentially the same, how do you differentiate?

And how do you sustain your non-belief in evolution in the face of evidence like that posted by h-dog?

Sigged!

You just popped my sigged cherry! Yay!

I, um...oh my.

Your regular old, run-of-the-mill creationist is one thing; it's the young earth creationists that really make me want to jump off a bridge.
One entire half of my family is full of young earth creationist, tea-bagging, F150-driving Texans who hate all brown people and anyone living in a city larger than 200,000 people. A number of people have told me that these kind of loonies are actually quite rare and give Christians a bad name, but I don't buy it. I meet people like this all the time, and I live in the Bay Area, supposed New Sodom. Furthermore, none of the Christians I know are doing anything to temper the fundamentalism and loonitude in their communities, so my sympathy for their alleged mis-characterization is rather limited.

Hurrumph.

you need go no farther