Britons unconvinced on evolution

[OwlHoot]

Not a Jehovah's Witness are you Chico? I can never understand their obsession with evolution. I cannot see how belief in god and belief in evolution are in any way mutually exclusive.

Exacty, and these fundamentalists never seem to get it do they, even though the Bible practically describes the creation as an evolutionary process anyway, and one or two of Jesus's sayings are consistent with that idea.

Chico, it's people like you who may end up roasting in hell for presuming to extrapolate the sketchy biblical account of creation, and dictate how God's choice was limited, based only on your own dogmatism and lack of imagination.

Chico, once and for all, a creator who could imbue inanimate matter with the potential to assemble into life spontaneously in the right conditions is _smarter_ than a micro-managing meddler who has to tinker at every step of the way. In denying evolution, you are implicitly claiming that God is not as smart as he might be, and lacking in foresight. In fact, you're practically calling him an idiot.

Damn, where's that glyph of a Christian burning in hellfire for all eternity!

[Lucifer Box]

Just another biased bit of BBC reporting. Looks like the majority support the Evolution Theory to me.

You could turn round and say:

"SHOCK HORROR!! A CATACLYSMIC DROP TO 22% OF GULLIBLE BRITONS WHO NOW BELIEVE IN CREATIONISM"

Still, every bit of propaganda counts, eh Chico?

Or how about: 'More People Who Expressed an Opinion Support Evolutionary Theory than all Other Choices Combined!!'

[hyperD]

Or how about: 'More People Who Expressed an Opinion Support Evolutionary Theory than all Other Choices Combined!!'

Or how about "22% of people in a United Reformed Church said they were awake and supported Creationism"...

[wendigo100]

22% chose creationism
17% opted for intelligent design
48% selected evolution theory
and the rest did not know.


Sounds like the don't knows fecked things up there. This is an argument for the tulipeness of the education system, not a case for the creationists.

Shirley those who opt for intelligent design also opt for evolution, because they believe that evolution is a result of intelligent design.

But what surprises me most is that nearly a quarter of the population believe in creationism.

[threaded]

Of course britons are unconvinced by evolution, it's a load of tosh innit.

[sasguru]

Shirley those who opt for intelligent design also opt for evolution, because they believe that evolution is a result of intelligent design.

But what surprises me most is that nearly a quarter of the population believe in creationism.

No such thing as Intelligent Design. That's just a catchphrase dreamt up by religious nutters to give their so called theory air-time and muddy the waters.
Science relies on the most parsimonious theory consistent with the evidence.
Claiming supernatural causes is tantamount to saying "we give up - must be the fairies"

[threaded]

most parsimonious theory consistent with the evidence

Stuff and nonsense, have you ever looked at quantum theory?

I have a much simpler explanation: we all live in the matrix. (Which incidentally can fit with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics)

[sasguru]

Stuff and nonsense, have you ever looked at quantum theory?

I have a much simpler explanation: we all live in the matrix. (Which incidentally can fit with the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum physics)

1) Why is quantum theory not parsimonious?

2) Why does "living in the matrix" preclude evolution as the mechanism by which complex creatures came to live in the matrix?

[hyperD]

Living in the Matrix vs Creationism vs ID are as good as each other - where's the proof?

Incidently, why did the BBC graphics team try to portray the movement of the flagella as some sort of outboard motor when this thing was like a whip being held by auntie maud with her tongue in the mains socket again?

[expat]

Living in the Matrix vs Creationism vs ID are as good as each other - where's the proof?

More to the point, what would be the disproof? If it cannot make assertions that could be disproved, it is not a theory, and does not say anything useful.

Only statements which could be wrong have any value in being right: only those statements actually say something.