NationStates Jolt Archive

Saw this on BBC.co.uk and I have to say it suprised me. I'd have thought that more of my countrymen would have had more braincells.


More than half the British population does not accept the theory of evolution, according to a survey.
Furthermore, more than 40% of those questioned believe that creationism or intelligent design should be taught in school science lessons.

The survey was conducted by Ipsos MORI for the BBC's Horizon series.

Its latest programme, A War on Science, looks into the attempt to introduce intelligent design into science classes in the US.

Over 2000 participants took part in the survey, and were asked what best described their view of the origin and development of life:

22% chose creationism
17% opted for intelligent design
48% selected evolution theory
and the rest did not know.
Intelligent design is the concept that certain features of living things are so complex that their existence is better explained by an "intelligent process" than natural selection.

Education questioned

Andrew Cohen, editor of Horizon, commented: "I think that this poll represents our first introduction to the British public's views on this issue.

"Most people would have expected the public to go for evolution theory, but it seems there are lots of people who appear to believe in an alternative theory for life's origins."

When given a choice of three theories, people were asked which ones they would like to see taught in science lessons in British schools:

44% said creationism should be included
41% intelligent design
69% wanted evolution as part of the science curriculum.
Participants over 55 were less likely to choose evolution over other groups.

"This really says something about the role of science education in this country and begs us to question how we are teaching evolutionary theory," Andrew Cohen added.

The findings prompted surprise from the scientific community. Lord Martin Rees, President of the Royal Society, said: "It is surprising that many should still be sceptical of Darwinian evolution. Darwin proposed his theory nearly 150 years ago, and it is now supported by an immense weight of evidence.

"We are, however, fortunate compared to the US in that no major segment of UK religious or cultural life opposes the inclusion of evolution in the school science curriculum."

In the US, a recent high profile court case ruled that the intelligent design movement is motivated by a desire to introduce God into the classroom after parents in Pennsylvania took a school board to court over its demand that biology classes should not teach evolution as fact.

It makes sense there are a lot of holes in the evolution theory that other theories don't have, as they havent found any solid evidence of genetic leaps from one species to another.

This is terrifying, I thought the madness was limited to the US.:eek:

Some people suggest yet another theory, because of the many ways in which the human body can malfunction: 'Bloody stupid design'... ;)

Damn. Whoda thunk that a European country would be as backwards as the USA?

I'm not being sarcastic. I really didn't see this one coming.

Course if I had to pick ONE European country to agree with the US in such a manner, it would have been Britain. So perhaps I'm not that suprised. More disappointed.

I've been wondering something, how do you teach ID? The whole theory can be explained to it's deepest level in 1 or 2 sentences.


But yeah, aren't us Americans supposed to be the stupid ones? Or is our percentage even higher?

Its latest programme, A War on Science, looks into the attempt to introduce intelligent design into science classes in the US.
.

Wow.. that's a real fair-minded documentary title from your State-run media.. :p "Cheers" to that, as they say.

It makes sense there are a lot of holes in the evolution theory that other theories don't have, as they havent found any solid evidence of genetic leaps from one species to another.

The 'other theories' aren't even scientific.

That's pretty poor.

I didn't even know what Intelligent Design was until I started posting here, so I'm pretty surprised it gets even 17%.

It makes sense there are a lot of holes in the evolution theory that other theories don't have, as they havent found any solid evidence of genetic leaps from one species to another.

Well, consdering it can even have holes, would suggest it's one of the theories that's actually scientific....

[QUOTE=Dinaverg]I've been wondering something, how do you teach ID? The whole theory can be explained to it's deepest level in 1 or 2 sentences.
/QUOTE]
I studied intelleigent design in university (part of biological antropology) and it took us about 5 minutes :p

I've been wondering something, how do you teach ID? The whole theory can be explained to it's deepest level in 1 or 2 sentences.


But yeah, aren't us Americans supposed to be the stupid ones? Or is our percentage even higher?

I think your percentage is about 51% which means we might actually be beating you. :(

It makes sense there are a lot of holes in the evolution theory that other theories don't have, as they havent found any solid evidence of genetic leaps from one species to another.
It depends what you mean by solid evidence. Does a mutation that allows a bacteria to survive on a man made food source like plastic count? Does the appearance of a new species of catterpillar on an island that coincides with the introduction of a new food source count? Do ring species count? If so, and I believe that they do, then there is plenty of solid evidence.

Well, consdering it can even have holes, would suggest it's one of the few theoriesthat's actually scientific....
Ahem... the presence of holes only means that the big cheese is Swiss. ;)

I think if you ask people directly about something that involves religion, they get all defensive and start saying what they think they 'should' say. However, I don't think that this reflects an actual desire to change science in the UK.

Furthermore, I think that the best way for science to continue in the UK is to try not to stir up any kind of debate as to whether intelligent design should be taught or not, because the more that people feel their religion as being threatened, the more defensive they become.

On the bright side intelligent design is sometimes used to refer to evolution with divine guidance so it might not be as bad as it sounds.

You know, I was prepared to accept that much people don't accept evolution... it's not necessarily proof that they DO accept creationism. Except it seems that I'm only partially correct. I'm rather disappointed that bronze age mythology* holds so much sway.

*yes, I did watch "root of all evil?" a few nights ago.

So the Ol'Brits are backwards too....

As a Citizen of the United States of America(I refuse to say I am an American) I see the whole Evolution vs Creationism as people unable to seperate RELIGION from SCIENCE. My Biology Professor here at UF put it best when he told us his ideas on Intelligent Design within the first 20 minutes of our first class:

"And this whole Intelligent Design Idea...Complete Trash. It has no basis in the scientific communtiy for it holds facts in the Unseeable and Intangible. Science is a process of Making a Hypothesis, Testing a Hypothesis, and then doing it again. With Intelligent Design, you make a Hypothesis, but you cannot test it, because you can not see or feel its effects.

Science is How it Works
Religion is Why it Works "

A great man he is, in my book

That's pretty poor.

I didn't even know what Intelligent Design was until I started posting here, so I'm pretty surprised it gets even 17%.
*nods*

its sad but frankly i don't believe it. i've known FOUR people who were christians in my entire life - at school, at uni, through work...

On the bright side intelligent design is sometimes used to refer to evolution with divine guidance so it might not be as bad as it sounds.

Or the reference might be propaganda.

Incidently how many British people here have actually met any British creationists in real life? I haven't, all the Christians I know are evolutionist.

That's pretty poor.

I didn't even know what Intelligent Design was until I started posting here, so I'm pretty surprised it gets even 17%.

See, that's the problem. Many people aren't familiar with the actual theory, and they think the theory itself simply says that God is responsible for our design. Many don't realize that it actually requires and active hand rather than simply setting a process into motion that would result in humans. The latter is completely scientifically reasonable (although it cannot be supported or contradicted by science) while the former requires one to reject science. I imagine the 'study' was engineered to provoke just such numbers and that they real percentages would be much different if one were to explain the ideas to the people being polled.

See, that's the problem. Many people aren't familiar with the actual theory, and they think the theory itself simply says that God is responsible for our design. Many don't realize that it actually requires and active hand rather than simply setting a process into motion that would result in humans. The latter is completely scientifically reasonable (although it cannot be supported or contradicted by science) while the former requires one to reject science. I imagine the 'study' was engineered to provoke just such numbers and that they real percentages would be much different if one were to explain the ideas to the people being polled.

Most likely, I find it hard to believe that Britain is more backwards than us....you know...the ones with Kansas? "Evolution is just a theory" disclaimers on books? and spreading from there...

See, that's the problem. Many people aren't familiar with the actual theory, and they think the theory itself simply says that God is responsible for our design. Many don't realize that it actually requires and active hand rather than simply setting a process into motion that would result in humans. The latter is completely scientifically reasonable (although it cannot be supported or contradicted by science) while the former requires one to reject science. I imagine the 'study' was engineered to provoke just such numbers and that they real percentages would be much different if one were to explain the ideas to the people being polled.

Even so 22% is still a worrying figure.

Most likely, I find it hard to believe that Britain is more backwards than us....you know...the ones with Kansas? "Evolution is just a theory" disclaimers on books? and spreading from there...

Even that stuff is just because of a vocal minority doing things that most people aren't aware of enough to fix. I don't believe the majority of Americans do not believe in evolution in some form, regardless of what skewed polls and 'studies' suggest.

Oh dear god, it's spreading. I thought this had been contained in Kansas and stopped at Dover, but apparently not. Well, this is rather worrying. I swear to god if someone starts campaigning to put ID or Creationism in schools, I'm emigrating to bloody New Zealand ahead of schedule.

It makes sense there are a lot of holes in the evolution theory that other theories don't have, as they havent found any solid evidence of genetic leaps from one species to another.

Somebody needs to study some biology rather then reading a theologians page.

Please tell me you are not referencing drdino!

This is terrifying, I thought the madness was limited to the US.:eek:

we're all human though, aren't we. despite appearances, the UK's just as revolting as the rest of us.

they don't believe in something what’s your point?

its nice to see some variation in the public a clear indicator that we have the freedom to voice are own views and that people can decide there own beliefs

Vegetarianistica']we're all human though, aren't we. despite appearances, the UK's just as revolting as the rest of us.

Yes but I'd hoped we were disgusting in a slightly more suave and intellectual way.:(

Isn't ID the new "version" of Creationism? In other words, Creationism has Evolved to become ID.

LOLirony.

they don't believe in something what’s your point?

its nice to see some variation in the public a clear indicator that we have the freedom to voice are own views and that people can decide there own beliefs

Fascist. :mad:

Incidently how many British people here have actually met any British creationists in real life? I haven't, all the Christians I know are evolutionist.is that really something you care to explore in your relationships? "hey, what is your favourite food? do you do any sports? what do you work as? how do you think the different species on earth emerged?"

Saw this on BBC.co.uk and I have to say it suprised me. I'd have thought that more of my countrymen would have had more braincells.

mmmm.. let me get this straight. 2,000 people are polled.. and suddenly 50% of the population doesn't believe in evolution. right. that's like political surveys here in the US: democrats only ask democrats and republicans only ask republicans. yeah, the BBC.. well. when they lost the BBC English, i stopped trusting them anyway ;) . i don't like statistics, and even if it is true that you Britishers don't believe in evolution, so what. it's a theory. look around at humanity. do you want to think that we've _evolved into this? ug! :p

Fascist. :mad:

I never said anything about creating a self sufficient nation though the idea seems to be popping up far too much for an Englishman’s safety!

So anyway stop killing the Fascism what has a theorized utopia that was never achieved even done to you (unless someone throw a book about it at you)

I never said anything about creating a self sufficient nation though the idea seems to be popping up far too much for an Englishman’s safety!

So anyway stop killing the Fascism what has a theorized utopia that was never achieved even done to you (unless someone throw a book about it at you)

:confused:

Wow.. that's a real fair-minded documentary title from your State-run media.. :p "Cheers" to that, as they say.

I was wondering when someone would say this. The BBC is state-funded, not state-run. The government doesn't run them, it just gives them money and keeps them neutral (often unsucessfully).

On the bright side intelligent design is sometimes used to refer to evolution with divine guidance so it might not be as bad as it sounds.

Yes it is. You can't force people to believe in god in science class. God and religion are used by many to understand things they can't otherwise explain, but sadly used by most so they can be blissfully ignorant of the huge possibility that their existence may be merely a matter of chance.

Science class should not teach ignorance.

:confused:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facism

I was wondering when someone would say this. The BBC is state-funded, not state-run. The government doesn't run them, it just gives them money and keeps them neutral (often unsucessfully).

Same difference.. you're paying for media with an agenda, whether the people producing it are government workers or merely paid by the government.. doesn't sound like unbiased reporting to me.. I don't even support "ID" and I wouldn't want PBS producing something like that.

is that really something you care to explore in your relationships? "hey, what is your favourite food? do you do any sports? what do you work as? how do you think the different species on earth emerged?"

lol, you do tend to find out people's views on matters such as this if you know them for very long, it'll just pop up in chance conversation, prompted by something else.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Facism

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humor :)

I was wondering when someone would say this. The BBC is state-funded, not state-run. The government doesn't run them, it just gives them money and keeps them neutral (often unsucessfully).

actually since this is a Constitutional Monarchy the Queen funds it but she's so restricted in her powers that the BBC really is free from any control

I'd completely ignore this until I got my hands on the nature of the survey, participants, etc. Results can be horrendously skewed by such factors.

I find this rather hard to believe, i've only known a few christians in my life and none of them beleived in the 7 day creationism thang. Maybe the survey only questioned some rather strange people.

I'd completely ignore this until I got my hands on the nature of the survey, participants, etc. Results can be horrendously skewed by such factors.

note my post above.

that most people aren't aware of enough to fix.

Eggs-actly. I expected more awareness from British people than us.

Same difference.. you're paying for media with an agenda, whether the people producing it are government workers or merely paid by the government.. doesn't sound like unbiased reporting to me.. I don't even support "ID" and I wouldn't want PBS producing something like that.

Would it make any difference if I told you that the past few conservative and labour governments have all wanted to change the BBC because they think they are being criticised too much?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humor :)

smilies as they are seen:

:mad: = Anger
:p = joke
:D = funny
:fluffle: = internet hug type thing
:gundge: = please delete me
:rolleyes: = sarcasm/here we go again
:headbang: :eek: :sniper: = use smiles correctly since they mean expression

smilies as they are seen:

:mad: = Anger
:p = joke
:D = funny
:fluffle: = internet hug type thing
:gundge: = please delete me
:rolleyes: = sarcasm/here we go again
:headbang: :eek: :sniper: = use smiles correctly since they mean expression

THANX, MOM !! ;)

Same difference.. you're paying for media with an agenda, whether the people producing it are government workers or merely paid by the government.. doesn't sound like unbiased reporting to me.. I don't even support "ID" and I wouldn't want PBS producing something like that.
You seem to be under the impression that this TV program will be attacking science and supporting ID.

What's 99.9% more likely is that it will examine the "war on science", not support it.

Oh dear god, it's spreading. I thought this had been contained in Kansas and stopped at Dover, but apparently not. Well, this is rather worrying. I swear to god if someone starts campaigning to put ID or Creationism in schools, I'm emigrating to bloody New Zealand ahead of schedule.

There's one of the 'city academies -- in Gateshead, I think -- whose syllabus at one stage included Creationism (of the "Young Earth" variety, i.e. taking all biblical dates literally so that creation is held to have occurred only about 4004 years BC...) rather than Evolution: I don't know whether that situation has changed since it was mentioned in the papers...

You seem to be under the impression that this TV program will be attacking science and supporting ID.

What's 99.9% more likely is that it will examine the "war on science", not support it.


Umm wait...do you mean that it's likelyhood is 199.9% relatively? or that it's 99.9% as likely, and thus less likely?

Sorry, but that's complete bollocks - despite the fact that our official religion is Church of England and they get seats in Parliament, something I resent.

That survey asked 'which do you believe in' and 'then tick the correct box'. From experience from living in a strongly conservative christian area is that almost everyone accepts evolution and a form creationism as a explanation of that.

You can believe in both, although i choose not to (I'm an atheist)! There are lies, damn lies, and statistics. Even unbiased statistics don't show the truth.

There's one of the 'city academies -- in Gateshead, I think -- whose syllabus at one stage included Creationism (of the "Young Earth" variety, i.e. taking all biblical dates literally so that creation is held to have occurred only about 4004 years BC...) rather than Evolution: I don't know whether that situation has changed since it was mentioned in the papers...

See? It's all Bliar's fault!

There's one of the 'city academies -- in Gateshead, I think -- whose syllabus at one stage included Creationism (of the "Young Earth" variety, i.e. taking all biblical dates literally so that creation is held to have occurred only about 4004 years BC...) rather than Evolution: I don't know whether that situation has changed since it was mentioned in the papers...

This is exactly why I oppose the plan to semi-privitise schools.

Umm wait...do you mean that it's likelyhood is 199.9% relatively? or that it's 99.9% as likely, and thus less likely?
That the likelihood of the programme being in favour of a war on science is 0.1%, but the likelihood of the programme examing a war on science is 99.9%

Which adds up to 100%.

That the likelihood of the programme being in favour of a war on science is 0.1%, but the likelihood of the programme examing a war on science is 99.9%

Which adds up to 100%.

then why say 99.9% more likely? If you wanted to keep the word more, why not 99.8?

I dunno why I'm doing this...just felt like pointing that out.

Excuse me, but why the hell does belief in Creationism or ID make a Country/people who believe in it backward?

If you really think Evolution is the 'correct' theory, then please tell me why, in over 10,000 years of recorded human history, there has never been an instance of a creature having evolved.

despite the fact that our official religion is Church of England and they get seats in Parliament, something I resent.

Why? They don't vote on legislation, they are there purely on a ceremonial basis. Mind you, have you ever seen the Commons? There's hardly ever anyone in it. Non-government Bills or ones that aren't deemed 'important' are often scrutinised or voted on in the House of Commons with about 10 MPs in the House!

then why say 99.9% more likely? If you wanted to keep the word more, why not 99.8?

I dunno why I'm doing this...just felt like pointing that out.

Becauase that's what you say. There's no basis in anything.

It's a colloquial expression.

Excuse me, but why the hell does belief in Creationism or ID make a Country/people who believe in it backward?

If you really think Evolution is the 'correct' theory, then please tell me why, in over 10,000 years of recorded human history, there has never been an instance of a creature having evolved.
Before somebody rips you apart (because somebody is bound to come crashing in and help wreck the thread), you could try doing two things;

1. Actually reading about evolution, and the evidence behind it.
2. Going and finding one of the many evolution v. creationism threads that there are, and argue in that instead.

Excuse me, but why the hell does belief in Creationism or ID make a Country/people who believe in it backward?

If you really think Evolution is the 'correct' theory, then please tell me why, in over 10,000 years of recorded human history, there has never been an instance of a creature having evolved.

Prepare to get examples of no less than 3 and no more than 7 species that have evolved.

despite the fact that our official religion is Church of England and they get seats in Parliament, something I resent.

Why? They don't vote on legislation, they are there purely on a ceremonial basis. Mind you, have you ever seen the Commons? There's hardly ever anyone in it. Non-government Bills or ones that aren't deemed 'important' are often scrutinised or voted on in the House of Commons with about 10 MPs in the House!
And what's that got to do with anything?

Excuse me, but why the hell does belief in Creationism or ID make a Country/people who believe in it backward?

For the same reason believing the cure for epilepsy is an exorcism is a strong indicator that you're backward...

If you really think Evolution is the 'correct' theory, then please tell me why, in over 10,000 years of recorded human history, there has never been an instance of a creature having evolved.

Why would anyone try to explain something which is so incredibly untrue?

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html

And that's in a heck of a lot less than 10,000 years.

If you really think Evolution is the 'correct' theory, then please tell me why, in over 10,000 years of recorded human history, there has never been an instance of a creature having evolved.

Em.... Man?

Excuse me, but why the hell does belief in Creationism or ID make a Country/people who believe in it backward?
If you really think Evolution is the 'correct' theory, then please tell me why, in over 10,000 years of recorded human history, there has never been an instance of a creature having evolved.

i think they're a little backwards anyway, despite their views on evolution. ;) but uhh.. otherwise you need serious help. like.. attend school or.. read or something.

Excuse me, but why the hell does belief in Creationism or ID make a Country/people who believe in it backward?

Believing a supreme being created everything does not make you backward. Thinking that ID and the methods it uses is scientifically sound does.

If you really think Evolution is the 'correct' theory, then please tell me why, in over 10,000 years of recorded human history, there has never been an instance of a creature having evolved.

Please buy a basic textbook on evolution, written by objective scientists instead of people with a religious agenda. All will become clear - and you will actually know what you are dismissing.

Excuse me, but why the hell does belief in Creationism or ID make a Country/people who believe in it backward?

If you really think Evolution is the 'correct' theory, then please tell me why, in over 10,000 years of recorded human history, there has never been an instance of a creature having evolved.


Just because you believe bullshit doesn't mean its true.


Human beings are taller, have bigger feet, have bigger heads, and live longer. They are more susceptible to disease and no longer have any use for their appendix since they eat far less plants than they used to since they have bred farm animals. We have bred wolves in to hundreds of breeds of dogs, though they have not evolved to an extent enough to be separate species. Pigeons, rats, and other pests have become adapted to life in cities better than they ever were in the wild, and animals which can not live in cities die off while other animals change and become better suited to the changes brought on by humans. Viruses such as the common cold and HIV evolve so quickly that we can not create vaccines to cure them, and HIV even so that we can not create medicines to treat it that it doesn't become immune to. The influenze virus evolves so fast that every year a new vaccine must be created because the old one no longer works on the more advanced flu.


I could keep going if you need more proof.

Ahem... the presence of holes only means that the big cheese is Swiss. ;)

This is absolutely correct. And as both physicist and biologist, I would like to point out that in fact there is as much proof of gravity as evolution.

http://www.theonion.com/content/node/39512

Wow.. that's a real fair-minded documentary title from your State-run media.. :p "Cheers" to that, as they say.

The BBC is not state run.

I think the 2000 asked, is not a lot considering the pop of England is 60 mill.

Plus you dont know how the question was slanted.

Wow.. that's a real fair-minded documentary title from your State-run media.. "Cheers" to that, as they say.

Of course, if you had waited and actually watched the thing your opinion on it might have had some value...

It just finished and I must say it was reasonably balanced. The ending arguments were definately in favour of evolution, but the ID position got a far more elaborate and detailed explanation than the science rebuttals.

Over 50% of Britons do not Accept Evolution Theory.

Saw this on BBC.co.uk and I have to say it suprised me. I'd have thought that more of my countrymen would have had more braincells.

Bugger. I hate the world.

It makes sense there are a lot of holes in the evolution theory that other theories don't have, as they havent found any solid evidence of genetic leaps from one species to another.
No, but they have found genetic steps.

It makes sense there are a lot of holes in the evolution theory that other theories don't have, as they havent found any solid evidence of genetic leaps from one species to another.

Actually, evidence of 'genetic leaps' would be evidence against the theory. It's not a process of leaps, but a process of gradual change, which may range is how accelerated it is, an evolution, if you will.

Depends where you are. The outer Hebrides are full of religious nuts, as is quite a bit of the far north, and there's plenty of Catholic-Protestant conflict on the west side of Scotland which is brimming over from Northern Ireland. I don't know about the rest of Britain, but I'm not surprised by the results. Does make me wonder where they surveyed it though.

Depends where you are. The outer Hebrides are full of religious nuts, as is quite a bit of the far north, and there's plenty of Catholic-Protestant conflict on the west side of Scotland which is brimming over from Northern Ireland. I don't know about the rest of Britain, but I'm not surprised by the results. Does make me wonder where they surveyed it though.

Croyden, Brixton, Bradford....:p

It makes sense there are a lot of holes in the evolution theory that other theories don't have, as they havent found any solid evidence of genetic leaps from one species to another.

How can you punch holes on a 'theory' that states something like "a superior being created everything and that's that"? There's not even enough space on the text...

Poor britons.

How can you punch holes on a 'theory' that states something like "a superior being created everything and that's that"? There's not even enough space on the text...

Actually it is more accurately summarised as "I do not see how A is possible, therefor B must be true". And punching holes in *that* is trivial.

Actually it is more accurately summarised as "I do not see how A is possible, therefor B must be true". And punching holes in *that* is trivial.

No, it's worse than that. It's "I don't understand how it happened or even your theory of how it happened, therefore God performed a miracle and if you say otherwise, you're attacking my religion."

No, it's worse than that. It's "I don't understand how it happened or even your theory of how it happened, therefore God performed a miracle and if you say otherwise, you're attacking my religion."

i still maintain that creationism and evolutionism can live happily together. is it that difficult to imagine a "higher being" setting the ball in motion? i think it makes more sense than picking one or the other. that's just me though.

Vegetarianistica']i still maintain that creationism and evolutionism can live happily together. is it that difficult to imagine a "higher being" setting the ball in motion? i think it makes more sense than picking one or the other. that's just me though.

There is no problem with a higher being setting the ball in motion - except that it doesn't actually explain anything. But, if it makes you happy... it doesn't conflict with evolution. It just doesn't add anything either.

ID however goes much, much further than that.

Vegetarianistica']i still maintain that creationism and evolutionism can live happily together. is it that difficult to imagine a "higher being" setting the ball in motion? i think it makes more sense than picking one or the other. that's just me though.

This is actually what I believe. However, this is not the form of Creationism that is being referred to. And your view and mine regarding Creationism is not scientific. Our view of evolution is.

The 'other theories' aren't even scientific.

that's right, they just can't measure up to King Science.

Vegetarianistica']i still maintain that creationism and evolutionism can live happily together. is it that difficult to imagine a "higher being" setting the ball in motion? i think it makes more sense than picking one or the other. that's just me though.

For one thing evolution has never set out to prove or disprove the existence of God.

Another thing is you can't test to prove or disprove his involvement so it's a question that is not asked.

that's right, they just can't measure up to King Science.

If we're talking about science, then, yes, how scientific it is, is how we measure it. The person we were replying to suggested the theory has more holes than other theories. If we're not talking about evidence then it's impossible for a scientific theory to have less holes than one based on no evidence because I just fill in the gaps with, um, well, God did it.

that's right, they just can't measure up to King Science.

Nope, his excellency inndeed dwarfs them.

that's right, they just can't measure up to King Science.

In a science setting no they can't especially ID.

IDers have brought up Big Bang theory and how it was not accepted and thought insane. Basically saying "hey give us a chance"

However, the Big Bang theory proponents did not hire a publicity firm to help their cause. They did not write endless op-ed pieces attacking opposing theories. They did not get envolved in politics and school boards trying to force their views into the classrooms.

They kept testing and others found the same results which led to it's acceptance.

I finished reading Dembskis Intelligent Design. It spent about 100 pages telling who Theism was dropped from Science. He made a silly claim that naturalism and agnosticism were basically created so Huxley would not have to answer for Sin.

There was no examples of tests to prove an "Intelligent Designer" It had many analogies, a few points how evolutlion has it wrong, that ID doesn't abolish evolution, and many references to God, Jesus Christ, and the Creator . And yet he would still say that the "Intelligent Designer" doesn't mean it's God.

So far I am getting the picture that ID is based on the ignorant stance of if we can't explain it, there must be an Intelligent Designer.

Ummm well Britain is not exactly a country with a majority of atheists...so its reasonable to assume that some people will pick ID over pure evolution theories.

Ummm well Britain is not exactly a country with a majority of atheists...so its reasonable to assume that some people will pick ID over pure evolution theories.

Don't let NS fool you, the US certainly doesn't have a majority either, and I'm not sure about every other country in the world, but I doubt there's many that do.

Don't let NS fool you, the US certainly doesn't have a majority either, and I'm not sure about every other country in the world, but I doubt there's many that do.
Oh I know the US doesn't have one. Estonia though has an atheist majority I believe.

It makes sense there are a lot of holes in the evolution theory that other theories don't have, as they havent found any solid evidence of genetic leaps from one species to another.
There is plenty of proof. In fact there was just a post about how humans are still evolving.

Well at least you have more smart people than here.

I find the results very hard to believe. I bet the research was skewed - in my whole life I cannot remeber meeting a single person ever who didn't take evolution for granted, and i've travelled around the country enough. They probably phrased the questions something like "Do you accept that evolution is completely and undeniably true and always correct?" and "Do you think it is possible that a God might have had personal influence over designing the world?"

Or possibly they had an unrepresentive sample, like a lot of muslims and older folks. They're the only big groups of people I can see who don't believe in evolution. Hell, even my local vicar believed in it - I went to a christian school and was taught evolution.

This thread really upsets me. I saw a news thing about a creationis museum in the US and everyone thought it was stupid showing dinosaurs and humans together. INfact Iv never even met anyone who even thought evolution was something that they could disbelieve. It is like trees or the sun. Its just a fact. How can over 50% of people be so fucking stupid? Its times like this I think eugenics might be the only answer.

Saw this on BBC.co.uk and I have to say it suprised me. I'd have thought that more of my countrymen would have had more braincells.
Haha.
We’re not the only stupid ones. Fuck you Britain. You suck too!

Haha.
We’re not the only stupid ones. Fuck you Britain. You suck too!
Yeah and posts like this just go to show how you're not the stupid ones ;) :rolleyes:

I find the results very hard to believe. I bet the research was skewed - in my whole life I cannot remeber meeting a single person ever who didn't take evolution for granted, and i've travelled around the country enough. They probably phrased the questions something like "Do you accept that evolution is completely and undeniably true and always correct?" and "Do you think it is possible that a God might have had personal influence over designing the world?"

Or possibly they had an unrepresentive sample, like a lot of muslims and older folks. They're the only big groups of people I can see who don't believe in evolution. Hell, even my local vicar believed in it - I went to a christian school and was taught evolution.
Maybe they do the same kind of the thing with the US polls, perhaps.

Yeahm and posts like this just go to show how you're not the stupid ones ;) :rolleyes:Profanity is beautiful, damn it!

Maybe they do the same kind of the thing with the US polls, perhaps.

I wish....

Profanity is beautiful, damn it!

Actually...no....not really. Not to me anyways.

Actually...no....not really. Not to me anyways.
Seconded.

If this is true, which I hope Allah it's not, then this is sadder than the day I first listened to Air Supply. :(

~Alan Smithee
Puppet of [Censored]~

Some people suggest yet another theory, because of the many ways in which the human body can malfunction: 'Bloody stupid design'... ;)

http://www.venganza.org/

bow down and worship your true creator

http://www.venganza.org/

bow down and worship your true creator

I think this should be crossed-over to the thread about ascribers to non-mainstream religions. I believe in Logic. The Flying Spaghetti Monster is logical. Thus, I believe in the Flying Spaghetti Monster. FSM!!

Actually...no....not really. Not to me anyways.
Well that’s your damn opinion and its your fucking right to hold that opinion, but I also have the right to be as profane as I damn well please.

OT:What does anyone involved have to gain by manipulating data so that it appears that more people are fundamentalists? The BBC doesn’t need to worry about ratings.

Actually it is more accurately summarised as "I do not see how A is possible, therefor B must be true". And punching holes in *that* is trivial.

Good point

Some people suggest yet another theory, because of the many ways in which the human body can malfunction: 'Bloody stupid design'... ;)

Did you meanIncompetant Design? (http://www.seedmagazine.com/news/2005/11/the_other_id.php)

*sigh*

I wish I had thought of that. :mad:

I must say I'm glad we're not the only country with morons...

I don't get why the British and other opinions think (from what I've observed, prove me wrong please...I beg of you) that they are, for some odd reason, immune to any and all opinions held by Americans. That if an American has a stupid opinion, no person in greater Britain will ever hold that opinion.

I remember a thread a while back where the original poster was shocked that sex-traffiking was also done in Britain, and thought that stuff like that only happened in the U.S.

Is it an education problem in Britain? A social problem? Or am I just looking too much into this?

It's really worrying if a country thinks that its so much above a country when the numbers say otherwise. I mean, that can't lead anywhere pretty for Britain.

It's just that Americans are usually credited with (read: hated for) being beer-guzzling unrefined brutes, while Englishmen sit around drinking tea, extending pinkies, having crumpets and often use the words fancy, quite and indeed.

Course, you could probably put most of the blame on hollywood for what we think of the Brits, I think we earned our streotype ourselves.

It's just that Americans are usually credited with (read: hated for) being beer-guzzling unrefined brutes, while Englishmen sit around drinking tea, extending pinkies, having crumpets and often use the words fancy, quite and indeed.

Course, you could probably put most of the blame on hollywood for what we think of the Brits, I think we earned our streotype ourselves.
Living in Britain, that stereotype truly makes me wonder what the hell they teach you over there :confused:

Evolution is one of the most robustly supported theories of all time. There are two reaons for this:

1.) Idiots who deny conclusive evidence.

2.) How many disciplines of science Evolution spans, and how many applications the theory has. It is the unifying concept behind all biological sciences.

Justifiable and useful argument continues as to how specific species interconnect and what SOME transitionary specimens were like. Those gaps don't weaken evolution, much like lack of fingerprints wouldn't weaken a murder investigation that has 5 witnesses, DNA evidence, videotape and a signed confession.


B-b-but there were no fingerprints!!!

Hey evolution experts, anyone care to help me out with my evolution hw?
Can someone give me a one sentance definiton of reproductive isolation?

Hey evolution experts, anyone care to help me out with my evolution hw?
Can someone give me a one sentance definiton of reproductive isolation?

The search for one-sentence definitions of extremely complex ideas is one of the reasons why my fellow Americans are so often blithering idiots.

Here's a good start though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=reproductive+isolation&fulltext=fulltext&sourceid=mozilla-search

The search for one-sentence definitions of extremely complex ideas is one of the reasons why my fellow Americans are so often blithering idiots.

Here's a good start though.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=reproductive+isolation&fulltext=fulltext&sourceid=mozilla-search
Blame the school curriculum not me- it has half a line to right the definition.

I'm a Christian. I believe in evolution. I also believe in gravity.

Well you know in most polls the people who answer are those with too much time on their hands, such as home bound religious freaks. People who actually DO stuff, and are more rational, wouldn't bother to answer such a stuipd poll. So around 1300 of those polled were bored religious nuts, at least that's what they do in the US, ask the retired Old Bible ladies and, lo and behold, religion wins.

Participants over 55 were less likely to choose evolution over other groups. Yep see here. I wonder how many were over 55, 80%?

I wonder what the religious groups will do when all their hard core supporters end up in nursing homes. I know the neo-cons in the US will suffer greatly, considering they alienated everyone else.

I'm a Christian. I believe in evolution. I also believe in gravity.

Don't believe in evolution (reserve that for God), aknowledge it as fact

I've been wondering something, how do you teach ID? The whole theory can be explained to it's deepest level in 1 or 2 sentences.

I suppose the only way to do so would be to teach evolution and when finished turn around and say that its just a fairy-tale.Seriously how would you even go about designing a syllibus.Or would one have to evolve or maybe God could just say let it be so*rambling*or or or...

Your probably right.Easiest credit in history.The entire course covered in 20 sec.If it went any futher it becomes Philosophy and that would open the door for evolution to entre the debate.

It makes sense there are a lot of holes in the evolution theory that other theories don't have, as they havent found any solid evidence of genetic leaps from one species to another.
If they found evidence of genetic leaps, the Theory of Evolution would be dead : it doesn't work in leaps; it works in tiny incremental changes.

And yes, evidence for speciation (changing from one species to another) has been found : it has been observed.

The other "theories" are not theories in the scientific sense. They are based on the existence of a creator whose existence cannot be observed or tested, which means that the "theories" are one big hole, which ultimately explain nothing.

That's pretty poor.

I didn't even know what Intelligent Design was until I started posting here, so I'm pretty surprised it gets even 17%.
I doubt that most of the respondents really understand what either ID or the Theory of Evolution really is, either. Many of those who actively argue against Evolution quickly demonstrate that they don't understand what they're arguing against (or are deliberately creating straw men).

Incidently how many British people here have actually met any British creationists in real life? I haven't, all the Christians I know are evolutionist.
I have. Nice, intelligent, professional people, who swtich off their critical faculties when they go into religion-mode.

:headbang:

you know the more I find out about humans the more I want to go on a killing spree with an axe.

i'll get back to my plants then *goes back to horticulture lab*