More Americans Are Finally Coming Around to Accepting The Science of Evolution

gfm7175 said:
What about it is unclear? What words aren't you understanding?
Click to expand...

"A religion is an initial circular argument with additional argumentation stemming from it."

That is what a tautology is. Then you said it wasn't so therefore your statement makes no sense if it isn't a tautology.

No, it isn't.

While religion CAN involve a belief in some sort of deity, such a belief is NOT necessary. That's part of the reason why the definition you're providing is very incomplete.
Click to expand...

So in a nutshell, a religion is a belief in anything?
 
PoliTalker said:
It would never have been possible to take two of each of today's creatures into an ark, along with all the food and water each required for 40 days and nights.
Click to expand...

Seven pairs would have been even harder.

"Genesis 7:2, NASB: "You shall take with you seven pairs of every clean animal, a male and his female; and two of the animals that are not clean, a male and his female;"
 
Hello Flash,

Flash said:
Seven pairs would have been even harder.

"Genesis 7:2, NASB: "You shall take with you seven pairs of every clean animal, a male and his female; and two of the animals that are not clean, a male and his female;"
Click to expand...

Koalas only eat eucalyptus. That would be nearly impossible to take enough for 7 pairs for 40 days and nights. They would starve. The plants would not live that long.

How would it be possible to take enough water for all the animals? Two humans could not possibly even distribute the water and food daily to all the various animals, numbering in the hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, much less keep the stalls clean.

Has anyone calculated just how many animals there were? And the physical dimensions of the ark? And if it was even possible to fit them all? Much less take food and water? Too fantastic. Not possible. Total fantasy. A fairy tale.
 
Between 1985 and 2010, roughly 40 percent of surveyed adults in the US agreed that "human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals". Taking into account the small number of fence-sitters, this suggests much of the nation was evenly divided on the theory.

By 2016, that percentage had, at last, become a majority, reaching 54 percent.
Click to expand...

ignorance is pandemic......
 
gfm7175 said:
I don't use the word tautology to express that, but yes, I think you're on the right track there... An "initial circular argument" (or a circular argument in general) is
"A -> A" (A, therefore A).
Click to expand...

Correct. So your definition of religion is a tautology.
 
AProudLefty said:
Correct. So your definition of religion is a tautology.
Click to expand...
No. It involves a "tautology" (as you're calling it) but it is not in and of itself one.

Religion is simply an initial circular argument with other arguments stemming from it.

One such initial circular argument could be "Jesus Christ exists and is who he says he is". This circular argument forms the basis of Christianity, a religion. Any additional argumentation relating to Christianity stems back to the basis argument that Jesus Christ exists and is the Son of God. Such a basis argument need not involve any sort of deity or deities, spirits, demons, or the like.
 
gfm7175 said:
No. It involves a "tautology" (as you're calling it) but it is not in and of itself one.

Religion is simply an initial circular argument with other arguments stemming from it.

One such initial circular argument could be "Jesus Christ exists and is who he says he is". This circular argument forms the basis of Christianity, a religion. Any additional argumentation relating to Christianity stems back to the basis argument that Jesus Christ exists and is the Son of God. Such a basis argument need not involve any sort of deity or deities, spirits, demons, or the like.
Click to expand...

So in other words - A religion is a set of circular beliefs therefore a set of circular beliefs is a religion.

Got it.

Now tell me how that applies to the Theory of Evolution.

Are fossils "circular beliefs"?
 
AProudLefty said:
So in other words - A religion is a set of circular beliefs therefore a set of circular beliefs is a religion.
Click to expand...
No.

AProudLefty said:
Got it.
Click to expand...
No, you don't.

AProudLefty said:
Now tell me how that applies to the Theory of Evolution.
Click to expand...
Okay. As I said, a religion is an initial circular argument with other arguments stemming from it. In the case of Evolution (the theory), that initial circular argument would be: "life as we see it today evolved from some more primitive form". All other arguments for the Theory of Evolution directly stem from this "foundational belief that is assumed to be true", or this "initial circular argument".

AProudLefty said:
Are fossils "circular beliefs"?
Click to expand...
No.
 
gfm7175 said:
No.
Click to expand...

You just defeated your own assertion. You defined religion then tell me it isn't the definition. That's circular.

No, you don't.
Click to expand...

Yes I do. You made a circular definition of religion.

Okay. As I said, a religion is an initial circular argument with other arguments stemming from it. In the case of Evolution (the theory), that initial circular argument would be: "life as we see it today evolved from some more primitive form". All other arguments for the Theory of Evolution directly stem from this "foundational belief that is assumed to be true", or this "initial circular argument".
Click to expand...

So the adult humans we see were once fetuses is a circular argument. :thinking:
 
guno said:
More Americans are coming to accept Charles Darwin's "dangerous idea" of evolution, according to thirty years' worth of national surveys.


Between 1985 and 2010, roughly 40 percent of surveyed adults in the US agreed that "human beings, as we know them today, developed from earlier species of animals". Taking into account the small number of fence-sitters, this suggests much of the nation was evenly divided on the theory.

By 2016, that percentage had, at last, become a majority, reaching 54 percent.


As it turns out, education has played a crucial role in that shift. When researchers began to analyze the demographics of survey respondents over the past thirty years, they noticed the completion of one or more college science courses was the strongest predictor of evolution acceptance.

"Almost twice as many Americans held a college degree in 2018 as in 1988," says Mark Ackerman, who studies collective intelligence at the University of Michigan.


"It's hard to earn a college degree without acquiring at least a little respect for the success of science."

n the current analysis, the proportion of American adults with scientific literacy increased from 11 percent in 1988 to 31 percent in 2019.


https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/tech...accepting-the-science-of-evolution/ar-AANQU0u
Click to expand...

Hey If I ever needed evidence we evolved from monkeys your it buddy
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top