I believe that the Universe came about through the mechanism of the Big Bang and I believe that much of life on Earth may indeed have developed via Evolution.
But I believe IN The Creator God Who triggered the Big Bang & directed Evolution.
Thanks Pohjonen, I copied and pasted your post.
But there’s no such distinction, outside of Creationist lies.
The point is that even most creationists understand that antibiotic thing, which someone always brings up if you mention the lack of relevance evolution has to our everyday lives.
Creationists are able to create godless enemies who simply exist to attack them and take away their freedoms. After the Commies ,they still can dig up enemies that actually care little about American lives, but we can pretend that they want to kill us for no reason… If you want to be afraid, it is not hard to do.
They “understand it” because they lost that fight. That didn’t keep them from doing their best to retard progress on the matter. Give them enough power though and I’m sure they pass laws insisting everyone ignore the evolution of antibiotic resistance and and other such sinful realities.
Only after ‘Pasteur-gate’[sup]*[/sup] let’s em brand it Snake Oil Science:
“America does not need this snake oil science stuff.”
[sup]*[/sup]Or possibly ‘Fleming-gate’.
Yup. It’s how my cousins can reconcile evidence of evolution with their absolute refusal to believe in it.
Forget evolution. Check out the polls for whether the Earth goes around the Sun or vice versa. Then you’ll be really sad.
It took a while*, but ultimately… yes.
*[SUB]About 13.75 billion years or so.[/SUB]
Why? Did you need an example of a strawman argument?
To be fair, you are exhibiting faith in science. To you, truth about facts can change but science remains unassailable.
Not that I disagree, I just don’t think it’s all that black and white.
I can’t agree with that kind of attitude. We can observe that evolution exists. In fact, I maintain a certain skepticism about everything, including whether I am human, the existence of matter, and if science actually does anything besides trick peope into believing that it works (which, ironically may makes it work sometimes). If someone proposes the existence of the Flying Spagetti Monster, I do not dismiss it. I see no evidence of it, but it may exist, and in the infinite vastness of space and time and the very plausible, and probably probable, existence of infinite alternative dimensions, such a thing certainly does exist somewhere.
In fact, there are only two things I am really quite sure of: I exist, and I also believe in God. Many dismiss the latter, but my logic ultimately requires some being and/or force, of which we cannot really conceive, which set all things in motion. If nothing existed, nothing ever would exist, anywhere, because nothing would or could exist. Whether you believe this is Christ, as I do, or not, is really irrelevant here. I believe that for certain reasons, but it’s not the topic here.
Ok, deep breath , this means I couldn’t really answer positively to the quesitons posted by the OP. The former is probable but not certain, and even within the framework of science is highly technical in its definitions. The latter seems likely now, but is still essentially saying “Something we don’t understand exploded we reasons we don’t know and in a manner we can’t quite grasp, with implications we haven’t remotely explored, and which we still can’t adequately predict.”
The majority of people don’t know much about the Big Bang and Evolution and don’t care. They believe what they were taught in school or in Church. When pressed against a wall those who believe the Big Bang happened will be unable to reference any proof beyond ‘scientists told me this was so in high school’. How is that really different from ‘I know Evolution didn’t happen because my priest told me so in sunday school.’
Science has a proven track record, priests don’t?
The analytical is only one patch on the quilt of the human condition, like it or not your parents had a powerful influence over what kind of adult you became using dictates “because I said so”.
Yeah, but I got better.
I’m going to have to answer that one the “wrong” way as well. It’s all relative motion. We go aroung the sun, the sun goes around us, the galaxy goes around that…
Why people insist that we go aroung the sun, and not vice versa, I’ll never understand.
But how do we know that? Again, it’s usually just “a teacher told me that” or “I read it on the SDMB”. You can cite a source, but then that cite needs a cite. For most people, on most topics, it’s turtles all the way down. Eventually, you’ve just got to “cut the cord” and let the evidence convince you. So it comes as no surprise that people pick the option that a priest told them vs what a teacher told them, especially when the option is contrary to the rest of the world. Picking evolution makes you feel smart. Picking creationism lets you feel smart and special!
And I believe in pre-god who made all gods that we have in religion. I am not quite sold on pre-pre god yet. I am leaning that way though.
To believe otherwise is to suggest that we’re just very, very lucky that machines work and predictions often turn out to be true. Are you suggesting the measured cosmic microwave background agrees with theory to ridiculous accuracy is just luck, or do you think the people who said it ought to be so are on to something?