International creationism

[Robert]

You still do not get that nowhere have I stated that evolution is an absolute truth. Evolution can be falsified, of course. It is just the most plausible theory we have at the moment, while creationism is superstition taking an old text of literature literally.

Than people should not insult people who do not follow the theory. And that's something that's done by several people in this thread.

[Roland]

Did I say anything against anyone who doubts evolution ? No.

Creationism is another matter.

[Ironikinit]

If you have an objection to the way I worded the original post, please feel free to say so. I didn't really expect to run into creationists here and so I probably worded my post too strongly for this forum. I have no objection to folks airing a complaint if they feel I insulted their pet idea. OTOH, if you can't follow a simple request to NOT debate evolution vs. creationism (and I have to agree with Urban Ranger that intelligent design equates to creationism, so I ask that we not debate ID vs. evolution either, please) I'll have little choice but to ignore your posts. This goes for people on both sides of the question. There are hundreds, probably thousands or tens of thousands, of books and sites devoted to the subject that I can go read that are generally much more interesting and better written than the average online forum evolution debate. I must admit I've enjoyed (more or less) taking part in such debates in the past, but I'm interested in something else at the moment.

Right now, I'm mainly interested in creationist belief outside the United States. Posters who live outside the USA who do believe in creationism are of great interest, and a simple post affirming your belief, noting your country (if not given in the space under your handle or screen name), some background information on how you came by those beliefs, and the name of the creationist organization(s) to which you belong (if any) would be appreciated. If the geographic information provided under your handle is your city or state/province, it would probably be helpful if you mentioned your country as well. Thank you.

[Gods Pet Monkey]

Greetings Ironikinit, I hope you find Australia to your liking, even if it has been a little too dry lately.

Anyway, to the topic at hand, I don’t think its that odd for creationists to exist all over the world, but I should suspect they are in the minority, but then again you are in Queensland, and QLD is notorious for bringing out the nut in people (are you familiar with one-nation?), so I wouldn’t be too alarmed. Where I live I can imagine there are a few that question evolution, but they would probably question a lot of things (BTW, i live just south of the QLD/NSW border, near Byron Bay).
Another thing that may contribute to your discovery of the creationists is exactly where you live or met them, I'm sure there is a stark contrast in beliefs between the rural and city regions.

As for your remarks concerning the court case about creationism and the education system, I wouldn't get to worried, one of Australia’s major pluses is our education system, and its pretty tightly controlled, at least the public system anyway, what the private schools do beyond the state set curriculum is their choice, and I should highly doubt something of this nature would slip into the curriculum, or at least as a compulsory component (actually, I don’t think evolutionary theory is compulsory either).

[Urban Ranger]

I am an evolutionist, and here is Hong Kong.While Christians here tend to be convervatives, there isn't any noise wrt Creationsim.

[Kepler]

Creationism is just one American flavor of antimodernization. Every culture has its dodges against the moral and intellectual hard work raised by facing reality. Creationism isn't anything special -- it's just one of ours.

As far as debates with creationist pseudo-science, it's the same deal as UFOlogy or flat earthers or Marxists or Randians -- it is not possible to reason with people arguing from an a priori assumption of infallibility. They will always either find a way to weasel out of the argument or change the subject. The alternative is to give up their entire frame of reference, and nobody does that without a helluva fight.

The most useful function creationism has is that of a warning. This is where society goes if it fails to educate a large enough percentage of any given generation in logic and reason. Weimar Republic, and all that. There is a built-in bias of "leaders" to try to make their subject populations as uncritical as possible, so there is a genuine danger that political decisions tend to favor ideologies that dumb-down the population and make them easier to manipulate.

The whole idea of presenting a religious myth as in any way equivalent to a well-tested scientific hypothesis is grotesque, but obviously there are going to be places where that plays well at the voting booth. It could be worse -- it could be Osama's brand of antimodernization hysteria.

[Ironikinit]

One other note, in response to Combat Ingrid. While Swedes I've talked to have said that creationism has little hold in Sweden, one person mentioned that "Alf Svensson, leader of the Swedish Christian Democrats (c. 10% of the vote) said in a radio interview before the election that he felt that Creation and Evolution should have "equal weight" in the curriculum. He was forced to retract the statement later."

[Saint Marcus]

few creationists here. Cybershy is an exception. 95+% of the population disagrees with him.

[Robert]

few creationists here. Cybershy is an exception. 95+% of the population disagrees with him.

I'm not a creationist,
I'm an anti-evolutionist.

[Saint Marcus]

please clarify...

if you are not a creationist
and not an evolutionist

then what are you?

[Robert]

A creationist is someone who scientific wants to prove that this world has been created by God as described in the Bible.

I do believe God created the universe, but I have no clue how he did that. I think Genesis only gives us a brief description of God's work, easily explained to ancient people.

Pherhaps God used evolution to make this world what it is. With God as the natural selector we don't need much time to achive that.

But again, pherhaps it's totally different than we think.
Conclusion, I do not have a scientific theory on how God created this universe. I believe he's the one who did it though.

That means I'm not a creationist.

[Saint Marcus]

so you don't take Genesis as the literal truth? (God created the earth in 6 days, etc)

[Rogan Josh]

Hmmmm.... Cybershy's post has almost persuaded me that I am a creationist (ie. as a matter of semantics).

I believe that God created the universe, so does that make me a 'creationist'? I don't believe that He did it in the way that traditional creationists say, as in 6 (standard) days et al. (I don't imagine an omnipotent God being that amateurish, and quite frankly I would go so far as to say that traditional creationist are being blashmemous by claiming God is an idiot), but does that matter?

[Saint Marcus]

Josh: even Einstein believed what you believe.

and it's possible God triggered the Big Bang. Though we'll never know, since we have no way of determining the real "first cause".

[Robert]

so you don't take Genesis as the literal truth? (God created the earth in 6 days, etc)

there's not much to be token leteral in the Genesis creation story besides the 6 days and "God did it".

I believe "God did it"
And I believe he did in in 6 phases. I think the '6 days' thing doesn't need to be token literal. I think God does not have to obey to time.

The creation story in Genesis is very thin and hardly explains anything.

Cybershy's post has almost persuaded me that I am a creationist

Pherhaps I was not clear in my post, I said that people who want to prove scientific that God created this world are creationists. Not those who believe that God created the universe as a believe.

and it's possible God triggered the Big Bang. Though we'll never know, since we have no way of determining the real "first cause".

If it's true that all matter + all anti-matter = 0,
than God's creation force must be the force to split nothing into matter and anti-matter.

Besides that is there a good possibility that God created an adult-universe (like he created two adults, Adam and Eve, and not two children)

Besides that there are possibilities that there are huge periods of time between the creation of the stars and the creation of human life. Not because God needed that time, but because God is independant to time.

Those are all answers I can't answer.
And I think I don't have to answer them. That's the difference between me and a creationist.

Of course now and than I can use creationist-arguments, because they oftenly fall together with anit-evolutionistic argumentation. I just don't believe that natural selection can do such a job in such a relative short period.