Majority of Republicans believe in literal creationism

PostmodernProphet said:
a shame you decided not to share that with us....

no problem though, I found it.....

http://www.gallup.com/poll/145286/Four-Americans-Believe-Strict-Creationism.aspx

unfortunately, the dimwitted pollsters only gave the respondents three possible choices and asked which was closest to what they believed....hard to tell then whether they chose the option because of the "God created" or the "10,000 years"......though it should be obvious that WM's conclusion based on the actual data would be wrong.....and that we should continue to give him flack.....

egqoo3sa4ksftdt5itigsg.gif


I did find it interesting that only 8% of Republicans and 20% of Democrats believed that God played no part in the process....apparently atheists are only about twice as likely to be Democrats as Republicans....
Click to expand...

duh, sorry, but talk about pointing out the obvious!
 
Dixie said:
Is there a such thing as a "figurative" creationism, which I'm not aware of?
Click to expand...


The stories in the Bible weren't meant to be taken literally or to be a science book, so there is in fact figurative creation, I think, not a good word choice.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
Why is that Skidmark? I mean first, creationism, from a scientific standpoint, is an empty bag of wind. It makes no useful predictions that can be tested or independently verified so there's not really a whole hell of a lot a Biologist can do with it even if they were inclined to do so. From a practical scientific stand point it's useless and provides no scientific value.

So with that being the case and as long as us biologist are allowed to teach by the standards of our profession with out undue interference from uninformed lay people, as far as I'm concerned, Creationist have the right to believe whatever their empty little heads want.
Click to expand...

The problem arises when they want it taught in school instead of biology! or along with biology! It isn't a good thing in my opinion when this happens.
 
Rana said:
The problem arises when they want it taught in school instead of biology! or along with biology! It isn't a good thing in my opinion when this happens.
Click to expand...

Exactly. The problem is with them saying it's an "alternative scientific explanation" when there's no science involved.

If they must then teach it as a comparative religion , but don't try to bamboozle us that it's science.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
I mean first, creationism, from a scientific standpoint, is an empty bag of wind. It makes no useful predictions that can be tested or independently verified so there's not really a whole hell of a lot a Biologist can do with it even if they were inclined to do so. From a practical scientific stand point it's useless and provides no scientific value.

So with that being the case and as long as us biologist are allowed to teach by the standards of our profession with out undue interference from uninformed lay people, as far as I'm concerned, Creationist have the right to believe whatever their empty little heads want.
Click to expand...

So we should avoid teaching about black holes, dark energy, anti-matter, and quantum physics? Because these are also things that we can't make useful predictions, test, or independently verify. From a biological standpoint, your imagination can not be proven to physically exist, does that mean it doesn't? e=mc2 doesn't seem to apply to worm holes, does that mean we should stop teaching it?

You're right, the existence of a spiritual being is beyond the capacities of Biology, so there is little you can do with it. However, a biologist has to recognize the results of independently verified tests and predictions. In every species of life we have ever studied, inherent behavior is defined by fundamental purpose, and this does not waiver. No living thing does something inherently, without a fundamental purpose. It's been tested over and over, with millions of living things, it has been verified and confirmed independently by thousands of peer reviews. Human beings have the propensity to worship a supreme power or spiritual entity. They have had this apparent trait for as long as we can find remains of human civilizations. It is something we are inherently drawn to as humans, and while it has taken many forms, it has not diminished over time, as a fundamental human behavior. How can a biologist explain this, without supposing the inherent behavior serves a fundamental purpose in function? To deny that, is to defy everything we understand about the scientific methodology and biology.
 
Last edited:
CERVIXCRUSHER9000 said:
7cif29obvuo4qpgmj_idsq.gif


I was given a lot of flack by proles on this site like Yurt and PMP and butthurt embarrassed Republicans like Damo for statistically inferring that it was unlikely that most Republicans weren't creationist. Now there's hard number proving that you belong to the party of idiocy, fucking idiots.
Click to expand...

wtf...i've never said that, you're confused
 
Rana said:
The problem arises when they want it taught in school instead of biology! or along with biology! It isn't a good thing in my opinion when this happens.
Click to expand...

but this has never been proposed.....there were attempts to teach it as an alternate description of origin, but never as a substitution for biology.....that was nothing more than a liberal fantasy.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
but this has never been proposed.....there were attempts to teach it as an alternate description of origin, but never as a substitution for biology.....that was nothing more than a liberal fantasy.....
Click to expand...


It has been proposed but not adopted, and not biology, I should have said evolution.
 
Rana said:
It has been proposed but not adopted, and not biology, I should have said evolution.
Click to expand...

Evolution theory does not address origin. It is entirely possible for creation theory to be absolutely true, and evolution theory still be absolutely true as well. One doesn't negate the other, one doesn't preclude the other. They are two different theories dealing with two different things. No one (that I am aware of) has ever suggested we stop teaching biology or replace teaching of evolution theory with creationism. It has been suggested we teach creation theory as a legitimate theory of origin. Whether you teach it or not, it is knowledge, and we should be teaching knowledge, regardless of our personal viewpoints of that knowledge.
 
This discussion could only take place in two places. One would be an institution for the mentally challenged, the other would be America.........


mmm.....yup.
 
Mott the Hoople said:
The only thing 3D supports is cheap beer and free pussy (or is that free beer and cheap pussy? I get confused about that 3D).
Click to expand...

Actually, I support expensive beer and free pussy. However, if one must pay for pussy, one should probably not buy that one cheap at all. Cheap beer is managable.
 
Oh I see , the independents and dems are basically the same makeup.

The republicans are 52% creationists.

Its a party of religious doctrine compared to the rest of Americans.

Seems that will make it hard for them to pick up more votes from dems and independents if they push to please this religious base.


Funny the party of god is the one who hates to help their struggling fellow Americans.
 
evince said:
Oh I see , the independents and dems are basically the same makeup.

The republicans are 52% creationists.

Its a party of religious doctrine compared to the rest of Americans.

Seems that will make it hard for them to pick up more votes from dems and independents if they push to please this religious base.


Funny the party of god is the one who hates to help their struggling fellow Americans.
Click to expand...


Religion has a rich history of being perverted to condone cruelty. It takes delusions and suspensions of disbelief to believe the leaders of society are good.
 
Organized religion usually stinks.

Someone organized it for a reason and those reasons are often not truely good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top