In my opinion, the new Gallup Poll results do not bode well for the future of the USA. While the members of the GOP are in the forefront of being anti-knowledge and anti-scientific learning, sadly the rest of the American public is not too far behind. No wonder foreign science achievements are projected to surpass those of this country! For the full poll results, go to: http://www.galluppoll.com/content/?ci=27847. Meanwhile, here are some highlights of the poll results:
GALLUP NEWS SERVICE
PRINCETON, NJ -- The majority of Republicans in the United States do not believe the theory of evolution is true and do not believe that humans evolved over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. This suggests that when three Republican presidential candidates at a May debate stated they did not believe in evolution, they were generally in sync with the bulk of the rank-and-file Republicans whose nomination they are seeking to obtain.
PRINCETON, NJ -- The majority of Republicans in the United States do not believe the theory of evolution is true and do not believe that humans evolved over millions of years from less advanced forms of life. This suggests that when three Republican presidential candidates at a May debate stated they did not believe in evolution, they were generally in sync with the bulk of the rank-and-file Republicans whose nomination they are seeking to obtain.
Independents and Democrats are more likely than Republicans to believe in the theory of evolution. But even among non-Republicans there appears to be a significant minority who doubt that evolution adequately explains where humans came from.
The data from several recent Gallup studies suggest that Americans' religious behavior is highly correlated with beliefs about evolution. Those who attend church frequently are much less likely to believe in evolution than are those who seldom or never attend. That Republicans tend to be frequent churchgoers helps explain their doubts about evolution.
Republicans are much more likely to be religious and attend church than independents or Democrats in general. Therefore, it comes as no great surprise to find that Republicans are also significantly more likely not to believe in evolution than are independents and Democrats.
Personally, I do not see where the two theories are mutually exclusive unless one takes the Bible literally. None of us knows what a "day" is to God/Allah and never will. Simply, do not impose the limits of human knowledge on God and both theories can work.
7 comments:
Presumably, you mean creationism and evolution when you state that both theories aren't incompatible, right?
First, there is no such thing as "both theories". You are using equivocation to imply that both are on equal standing in regards to validity, which is clearly not the case. Evolution is a scientific theory, while creationism does not even achieve hypothesis status (because it's not testable).
Secondly, if you did mean what I think you meant, creationism is the very opposite of evolution. Creationism is a word that encompasses a lot of ideas... but at the very least, they all believe evolution is wrong, and that instead of evolution some higher being created humans and possibly different "kinds" of organisms (whatever that means). By the very definition, creationism and evolution are not compatible.
Now, there are other equally nonsensical ideas... such as theistic evolution and all that other crap, which technically ARE compatible with evolution... but are still not science.
My comments were in more general terms as opposed to strict definitions. My point is that none of us knows for sure all there is to know and surely one cannot apply the Bible literally. I guess I am more inclined towards what you call theistic evolution, if anything.
Well, if you simply meant that religion and science are compatible then I would still have to disagree, although not as strongly.
First, two quotations:"The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason." ~ Benjamin Franklin
"Every religion, as far as reason will help them, makes use of it gladly - and where it fails them, they cry out: 'It is a matter of faith, and above reason!'" ~John Locke
Religion and science are two ways of getting answers to questions about how the universe works. Religion is based on faith, which says you can know the truth by... not having any reasons. Science on the other hand is the philosophy which is completely opposed to faith. The whole purpose of science is to eliminate faith from the process of acquiring knowledge (hence evidence, testing, more testing, even more testing, double blind studies, etc). You cannot both adhere to the belief that faith is a legitimate way of acquiring knowledge AND adhere to the philosophy that means to eliminate it from the process.
My view is that the universe originated from something, be it a creator or some other source. Some may call that source God, Allah, or whatever. That being said, how the universe - including the earth - developed is simply unknowable in full. Anyone who claims otherwise is a liar or delusional. It may have been through theistic evolution or some other mechanism.
Is that source of origin the God of the Bible? Probably not. Given the huge expanse of the the universe I doubt that the self-center human account of the Bible is accurate. It was merely an ancient culture's attempt at an explanation.
That doesn't mean I cannot believe in some higher being or source.
Interesting. If you think it was probably not the god of the bible, then why do you call yourself a christian? Maybe Deist or simply theist would be a better word?
I don't think such questions are inherently unknowable. We WON'T ever know how the earth formed with exact detail, but we CAN know a great deal about it. We can also know that it DIDN'T happen certain ways, and even if we were never sure between two or more possibilities, it doesn't mean that the likelihood of them happening is evenly distributed.
For example, from what we know already about the universe, it is technically possible that some omnipotent being destroys and recreates the universe every tuesday, taking pains to make it SEEM like it's older, implanting false memories, etc. However, that doesn't mean that the probability of that being true is the same as our current understanding of time and the universe.
I recommend you read Richard Dawkins' "The God Delusion". Right now I'm in the process of reading it, and he makes a very good case for not believing that the "source of origin" is an omnipotent, omniscient, etc. god.
Oh, and besides, evolution has nothing to do with the origin of either the universe, the earth, or even life. Evolution simply describes the process that led from simple chemical replicators to every species in this planet.
I was merely applying evolution in terms of the earth and how life developed. I do not claim to be a biologist or a theologian. Just a a formerly closeted gay guy trying to find his way through life.
Post a Comment