Republicans: Please Raise Your Hand If You Do Not Believe In Evolution

[Pekka]

No real scientist will discuss ID. Period. Those who do are not welcome and rightly so.

[DRoseDARs]

That was my second choice of response, Pekka. My first was, "Besides it being a stupid statement? Nothing wrong with it, nothing wrong at all."

[Robert]

Originally posted by Pekka
No real scientist will discuss ID. Period. Those who do are not welcome and rightly so.

You're absolutely ignorant.
When I'm debating with some of you guys I feel like I'm debating with people who know nothing, but just follow the dominant idea.
I've watched debates here in Holland with Cees Dekker and Ronald Meester (the last one is an agnost) who are both respected professors overhere in Holland. Both believe in ID, both are scientists, both are working on secular universities.

You know nothing and you aren't anything different then those people in the middle ages who believed everything the men in the white coats (priests in their days) told them.

I tell you, sometimes I can't sleep because I'm worrying and thinking about evolution, about science and our origins. I doubt myself and my own believes. There are days that I'm reading hours on the web on all web sites about these themes.
My heart is beating and halve of the beats say: "You're a fool, evolution is a fact, everybody believes it" and then the other beat says: "Evolution is a joke, from a once cell organism to an intelligent human?"

When I think about a God in the air somewhere who hears all prayers and who cares about me, then I wonder and I doubt myself. It's hard for me sometimes to not consider it to be a fairy tale.

And then again I think about how absurd it is that we are here anyway. I think about the first cause, I try to think outside the box of our universum, and then I think how normal it is that our origins are absurd and outside the box.

Everyday there's pain in my heart because I at one side have all faith in God and in Jesus, I feel him in my heart. I read his words and I look at myself and see that his words are right and true. But I also know about the scientists, their facts and their truths, and I know that there are big problems between the Bible and science. I know that half of it is BS but even if 10% of it is true, then there are still big problems.

My life is one big pondering, thinking, debate in my head.

And then there are some dudes on some website and they claim they know everything. They know the facts. They know that they are right and the others are wrong. They know what happend 15 billion years ago and everything. They have no doubts. They are arrogant and they make huge claims.

yeah, sure.
I really have no respect for people who believe to know everything. Who think that they can know everything with their silly small human brains and their limited views and insights, since we all, humans, have limited insights and see so little from everything.

And they come with large claims: "No scientist believes in ID" and if a name is called, then on before they already know that he's not a real scientist.

Bah. Go suit yourself.
Fundamentalist.

Come back if you dare to doubt yourself, as long as you can't do that your opinion can't be token seriously. People who don't doubt themselves can't be trusted.

[Koyaanisqatsi]

*sigh*

The statement that 'no real scientist will discuss ID' is imprecise. It should really read 'no real scientist will accept ID as a valid scientific theory.' They may accept it on faith, and if so, that's their decision. But it fails to hold up to the standards of a scientific theory for a number of reasons (the most basic is that it isn't falsifiable.) That is what has set off the scientific community about ID more than anything; it's an attempt to justify faith using science, but the 'science' part doesn't meet the criteria applied to every other scientific theory.

So, sorry to bump into your existential angst, but it's pretty basic. If you want to accept ID as faith, go for it. But if you want to accept ID as science, you're just fooling yourself.

[Robert]

But if you want to accept ID as science, you're just fooling yourself.

ID is not an alternate scientific origins theory, to me.
It just shows to me that evolution has problems, big problems. And it doesn't matter to me if the (current) ID arguments are invalid or valid, it's clear to me that science on the level of our origins is very complicated. Looking back billions of years is not an simple thing to do. As a logical rational thinking person, as a computer programmer, I have big doubts by 'brainless' random mutations leading to intelligent beings like you and me.

That's what ID is, imho. Not an alternative science, it's morely a group of scientists that show that we with the developing technologies not only reveal new answers, but also create more questions.

[dannubis]

That is the difference between you and a scientist: you see your intelligent sentience as some kind of a divine interference.

Who not accept that your brain itself, and not some fancy "soul" in it is sentient.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by b etor


catholics are supposed to believe in evolution?

Catholics, or rather, a catholic priest by the name of LeMaitre, came up with the 'Big Bang' theory too, even before it was accepted by mainstream science by winning out over other theories.

Catholics do science.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by snoopy369
I absolutely do not believe in evolution.

I think it is the most likely scenario that has been hypothesized to date to explain how the species Homo Sapiens Sapiens came into being [and other modern species]. There are other reasonable theories out there, including intelligent design, but I am of the opinion that the general theory of evolution is a more likely theory, particularly as it is simpler (Occam's razor etc.) when explaining fossil records etc.

I however most certainly do not 'believe' in it, nor do I 'have faith' in it. Faith and belief are things you have in something you do not understand, but simply believe.

Sadly, as CS mentions earlier, far too many Americans "believe" in evolution, to the point that they're no better than the Sam Brownbacks who believe in creationism. No true scientist would tell you that Intelligent Design is "false" or "impossible" because, well, it's not; it is certainly not provably false, and there are aspects that it explains in a more consistent manner than Darwinian evolution. I do not think it is the most accurate; but saying it's not true or impossible is just not something a real scientist would do.

Well don't just believe it, read up on it. I am pro-evolution, as you would put it. But I have a biological education, a degree that covers a significant amount of molecular biology. I recommend you read a bit more closely. Darwin was the beginning - he empirically described evolution and theorised. In the time since we have been able to put 'meat on the bone' if you will, we now understand how it works. If you think it is some flimsy theory with no other support than observation of a few finches on the Galapagos Islands, then you are sadly mistaken.

[Elok]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
WTF?

Yep; in Dante's works, Hell is a deep, deep pit with Satan at the very center of it. He and Virgil have to climb down Satan's body to get past Hell and start climbing Mount Purgatory. Note that, under this theory, the absolute center of the Earth is Satan's crotch...

[Pekka]

Originally posted by CyberShy


You're absolutely ignorant.
When I'm debating with some of you guys I feel like I'm debating with people who know nothing, but just follow the dominant idea.
I've watched debates here in Holland with Cees Dekker and Ronald Meester (the last one is an agnost) who are both respected professors overhere in Holland. Both believe in ID, both are scientists, both are working on secular universities.

Sure, former scientists have flipped into it. That's why they can't be respected no more. I can give you 1000 against 1 for every scientist you name. Sure, that's kind of like.. quantitative argument, however, that only means, that the scientific community is in agreement with it. That is, there is no debate. ID is not science, even if you make it sound like it is. Just because someone shows you stuff that resembles science or the methods of it, it doesn't make it _science_.

You know nothing and you aren't anything different then those people in the middle ages who believed everything the men in the white coats (priests in their days) told them.

Blaablaablaa go cry to someone who actually takes this **** seriously. That someone should be able to understand your emotions of WTF, because most likely they have no grasp of science either.

You can claim all you want about me. But the fact is, your "scientists" stand alone, where as the community, and I should add the community I take part actively as well as I'm having my first article published as well as getting to be a speaker soon, so you know, I do know something about science. And I'm backed up by what.. all the rest, 99% of scientists, and 100% of real scientist.

And as I've ventured in the scientific community and in researches, doing them, you know, actually doing some science which you claim I know nothing of, I've also bumped into several idiots in my field. Yeah, there are even people who are widely agreed to be idiots. Why? JUst because they have a title and they wrote something doesn't make it so, doesn't make it valid, you know there's a process involved. ID is like reverse engineering with God fills the gaps. That is never science and if you claim so, or your scientists whose bandwagons biggest nuthugger you seem to be, you know good for you. Maybe we can name your group as the village idiots.

The reason why the rest of us seem so ARROGANT and even IGNORANT is because there is no reason to debate whether what some people claim is real science or not. It obviously is not. Taking part to it would almost like be a legit show that it has some merit. It doesn't, and that's why you are alone and no one gives a **** how hard you cry. Yes, we think you're stupid. You can think I'm stupid if you want to, if it makes you feel better.

[Pekka]

That's right, it's a big joke. It's not a question if ... do you believe in God, do you.. think there might be a better theory than evolution. THe question now is whether ID has merit or not.

Here's the answer, it's not real science, so it doesn't have any merit in scientific community, thus when you start pushing your Jesus agenda into it, you know, you are actually invading the domain of science. Don't come to my job and try to know **** you obviously can't grasp and scream God fills the gaps and these are the 'scientific methods' we used and we actually started from conclusions first and kind of assumed stuff like.. well God.

So, keep your theories, believe in them all you want, but it's not science, and when you claim we are arrogant, well **** you, because you are coming to our domain and crapping on every principle that makese science.. well science. So go running circles, that's why the door is shut. Scream arrogance and ignorance. It goes both ways.

[Provost Harrison]

Pekka sums it up very well in his own way. If you don't know, don't claim to know or have an opinion...

[Pekka]

Yes, I was aggressive. I apologize to CyberShy, I could have been more polite.

The point is, it's not science even if some scientist claims so. It's not. It's like these mathematicians who are real religionistas in their work. The odds people are the worst. They always start with "Assume the chance for God existing is 50%. But we can even make it 25%, so we are not biased"....

I mean, the rest, you don't even have to read it. This guy might have gotten a degree in math from somewhere, but it should be taken away retroactively for abusing his authority.

Or the documentary about the grave of Jesus, the one with Spielberg. The mathematician, odds expert, was a joke. It wasn't real mathematics, even when it was claimed he was an expert at it. It was a joke. His reputation as a mathematician should be crushed as well.

Now you can say, well that's real math because he and he says so, but, the difference here is, we don't actually believe when someone says so with 'authority'. In fact you said we believe it because men in white coats.... Nope. We don't have to believe it, we can just state that the research followed proper research process and the quality of it was top notch, and thus this research is good. We can actually evaluate them, you know?

ID has no merit, doesn't have to be evaluated, because it isn't a product of science. It only claims to be. And we aren't going to debate why it would be science. We don't have to have faith in it. It's actually pretty explicit. That is, if you claim otherwise, you just don't get it, and we shouldn't waste our times with you. It's like trying to explain why 1+1=2 and sometimes even 3. If you say no, it's not like that... you know, go ahead. We aren't going to waste time with you.

And that's the arrogance part I guess then. And yes, in science, you can call me fundamentalist. I figure that's actually a good thing.

The thing about scientists and the community is that people have other things to do, like their real jobs. There's some real research and debate about issues that are interesting and in the scientific domain. So no, there's no reason to start debating and crushing to ID side and waste so much time when we can just state that the issue is trivial, because it really is. Debating it would do no good. Try debating 'God fills the gaps' and changing stories when ever it seems to fit the picture. You know.. that's not science. If you come running into an F1 event, we arent' arrogant because we won't time you. It's just that you were doing something else, not F1.

I might sound harsh, but you did give an answer that deserves nothing less. Give me one good reason why scientific community should even enter to the debate about ID? Why? Why would they debate about something that isn't their domain, they do _science_. It's not arrogance, it's just doing what you're paid to do. And tehre won't be a debate in the future either, because why? Because the community is in agreement!!!!!!

It's not about 'they don't dare to really debate', it's about 'there's nothing to debate about'. This is really difficult for some to understand.

And please, science is not excluding religions. They just aren't overlapping like that. Let's respect science as it is, the quality of science that makes our lives better. Keep religion out of it. That's why they call it a faith, you need faith in religions. I'm not saying someone is stupid because they believe in God. I'm a Christian myself. I'm saying, let's not mix things up. Keep the faith strong and you know, respect the religion enough so you don't have to tarnish it like this. This is degrading to religion in my opinion.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Dauphin

Catholics do science.

Gregor Mendel

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison


Well don't just believe it, read up on it. I am pro-evolution, as you would put it. But I have a biological education, a degree that covers a significant amount of molecular biology. I recommend you read a bit more closely. Darwin was the beginning - he empirically described evolution and theorised. In the time since we have been able to put 'meat on the bone' if you will, we now understand how it works. If you think it is some flimsy theory with no other support than observation of a few finches on the Galapagos Islands, then you are sadly mistaken.

QFT

furthermore molecular biology owes much of it's progress in nearly every area of investigation to application of the principles of evolution.