International creationism

[Saint Marcus]

An American family came on a mission of conversion to my hometown, handing out leaflets about how humans co-existed with dinosaurs and other improbabilities.

the worst thing is, a lot of Americans go to mission in Europe to (re)convert us. when they come here, they're truly amazed how a rich and western country (whatever west-european nation they go to) could be so non-christian. And they can't understand why we don't believe the earth was created in 6 days, and why we don't want to be "saved".

It's sad that so many protestant American missionaries in Europe have no clue what place they landed in.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by TheStinger
If you asked every Biology PHD in the world what theory they thought was correct not many would say creationism (or whatever its called)

of course

I don't think you can get a credited Biology PHD without beleiving in evolution

they wouldn't pass you (basically)

Jon Miller

[CyberGnu]

In repsonse to the orginal point of the thread:

While I lived in sweden, I don't think I met a single creationist. Then again, I went to the science high school program and an engineering college after that, so my anecdotal evidence doesn't count for much.... I have yet to meet a creationist here at Caltech.

[Saint Marcus]

I met one YEC-family here in Holland. Just one.

[CyberGnu]

Jon, of course they would pass you. As long as you passed the class where evolution was taught, you could theoretically get a PhD. The problem is more fundamental: If you still believe in creationism, you are not PhD material... You have obviously not learned to think critically, to evaluate sources and theories. As such, you should not get a PhD.

[Bosh]

so a lot of Americans have the same view as people had in the middle ages?

They take the bible a lot more literally and don't have all kinds of extra-biblical traditions and fables and the rhetoric is kind of that of Baconist science and dual-revelation scientific philosophy (that the natural world and scripture both give testament to the same thing), but basically yeah

[Saint Marcus]

like I said...sad state America is in

[GePap]

We can see immense amounts of evidence when it comes to the truth of sexual and natural selection at work: We have lots of paleontological evidence of mass extinctions and of countless species that exist at one point in time, and not in another: we have genetic evidence of mutations, of mistakes in copying of DNA, we have genetic evidence that many species share many genes, and that almst all species share somehting akin to 40% of genes: we have huge amaounts of eivdence about the long age of the earth, about significant climatological change, about huge shifts in the earths geography....

In short, the amount of evidence that in one way or another points to some sort of evolutionary process at work on earth is immense- a vast Everest of evidence to shift through. Fine, not all the pieces fit with each other as orthodox, Darwinian evolution theory would predict, but heck, the man was working without any knowledge of genetics.

I have never understood how in the face of such montains, people would negate the notion that at least some form of evolution has occured on earth over the last 4 billion years. If man in 15,000 years of hard selective breeding can take one species of canine and out of it produce both Chihuhuas and Great Danes, then why could such things not happen in 10 milions years without man, i light of possibly huge shifts in the climate and food supply that specific sub-populations would have to adapt to or die.

A simple question for creationists: Assuming God to be omnipotent, why would different species share such a large proportion of genes? God is not hampered by what came before: if he wanted, each species could have 100% different genes, even to carry out the same general process, since I assume more than type of protein shape or set of portein complexes could achieve the same aim, just as a dozen enginneers could come up with different designs for the basics of a bridge, even as they all fulfill the basics of physics.

[CyberGnu]

SM,

the worst thing is, a lot of Americans go to mission in Europe to (re)convert us. when they come here, they're truly amazed how a rich and western country (whatever west-european nation they go to) could be so non-christian. And they can't understand why we don't believe the earth was created in 6 days, and why we don't want to be "saved".

It's sad that so many protestant American missionaries in Europe have no clue what place they landed in.

There was a documentary on swedish television about two Mormons missionaring in Sweden. This was my favourite part:

Interviewer:"Do you like it here?"

Mormon: "No, this is horrible"

Interviewer: "What? If you have to go abroad for five years, where could be better? Canada?"

Mormon: "Oh no. You see, we come here to teach. Do you realize how many people we convert in Sweden? None!"

Interviewer: "So you would prefer to go to, say, Somalia?"

Mormon: "Oh yes"

[Kepler]

As an evolutionist, I can attest that very few people who claim to be evolutionists understand more than the broadest outlines of evolutionary theory.

There are people who still believe Lamarkian evolution (if I cut off a salamander's tail then its children will have no tails), or they believe that individual behavior is explicable according to principles of species survival (it isn't, except so indirectly as to be meaningless), or they believe a hodgepodge of silly myths about evolution. like that it disproves the existence of a god, (which is doesn't because by definition it can't --#1 god is a concept of faith and is untestable by any means, and #2 a theory is an attempt to describe reality and as such neither proves not disproves anything. What disproves a thing, such as the Genesis creation myth, is the evidence of the physical record -- the same thing that disproved the Ptolemaic geocentric view of the universe and other falsehoods that once enjoyed the religious seal of approval).

I'm inclined to wonder what CyberShy's problem is with evolution. There is nothing whatever in evolutionary theory that conflict with the view that the world has a maker. You can call the mechanics of creation "god's will" or "superstring theory" or "a bad trip by a time-travelling, drug-addled Mick Jagger" -- it's all the same from the standpoint of hard evidence.

Evolution is religion-neutral, as far as religion answers the "who's behind it?" and "why?" questions. Evolution is just an attempt to answer "by what means?"

[CyberGnu]

BTW, Kepler, your post on page 2(?) was great. Best post on this thread, by far.

[germanos]

I don't know how many creationist there are in Holland, but I expect it to be just a few.
Most Dutch consider themselfes to be non-religious, and certainly even less people go to church or other places of worship, so definitaley the creationists are a minority.

We have the most weird school system on Earth propably, which means that all religeous groups can found there own schools. They are however required to teach their students government-instructed 'programs', meaning the students should have certified(?) knowledge in the end. Evolution theory is among it. I guess that at certain schools the students do get books stating that evolution is bullocks, but that they are required to know the theory in order to pass their final exams.

Most Christian schools however do acknowledge evolution theory, and propably take a stand like Boris explained.
In general, I would say, most christian people here take the bible more as a philosophical or social guide, and just a few take it very literally.

They should, since there is nothing more easy than proving the bible is full of inconsequenses. But that is for another thread.

[Saint Marcus]

evolution was thought in my (catholic) high school. it was debunked.

I have never understood how in the face of such montains, people would negate the notion that at least some form of evolution has occured on earth over the last 4 billion years.

creationists accept micro evolution.

[germanos]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
evolution was thought in my (catholic) high school. it was debunked.

Ah yes, catholics...

IIRC, they only recently accepted Kepler's laws and acknowledged that Galileo was right after all?

They'll admit Darwin was right in the 22nd century , just give 'em time.

[CyberGnu]

Ackording to my (catholic) girlfriend, the pope has accepted evolution... And from what I've seen in the states, creationists are mainly protestant.