Posted on 02/12/2009 6:54:08 AM PST by metmom
A new poll released just in time for Charles Darwin's 200th birthday found only 39 percent of Americans say they "believe in the theory of evolution" and just 24 percent of those who attend church weekly believe in the explanation for the origin of life.
The Gallup survey, released Wednesday, found a quarter of those polled do not believe in evolution, and 36 percent say they don't have an opinion either way.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Global warming is a reality. Data is data, whether you choose to believe it or not. Temperature measurement is a pretty well refined scientific method. The real question that needs to be asked before asking anyone to change their lifestyle is global warming due to human activity, or is it simply random variation that has been happening for billions of years.
Yes, me too. I think for a lot of people, "no opinion either way" probably means "I'm tired of reading about this, I'm tired of hearing about this, I sure don't feel like answering a question about it, please leave me alone."
Frankly, I'm just happy to see that the "believe in evolution" number is so much higher than the "do not believe" number.
I've also seen many photos of "temperature monitoring sites" which have been placed next to heating exhausts and other "convenient" man-made devices.
Lastly, the famous "hockey stick" graph is a great example of data manipulation in order to show a pre-determined outcome.
In conclusion: the data associated with Global Warming is of such suspect quality that I do not think it is at all possible to declare that Global Warming is a reality.
LOL. It all fits the profile of justification of self - relentlessly and dogmatically building theories to support one's own presuppositions, while ignoring what would routinely be considered facts.
In a conversation CM didn't start, somebody asked for support for the idea that such "Christians" existed. CM posted a link to an article about Dominionism. It was a perfectly reasonable response to the question. At least one leader of that movement claims they have 20 million followers. You make it sound like he brought the subject up himself, and that there's no factual basis for his concern. Neither of those things are true.
So what part of Scripture did Christ say was in error, what part do you say is in error?
For the ban on science accusations, see here and the conversation following.
For the Dominionist accusations see here and the conversation following it.
That covers the stuff I said.
And really, why would Coyoteman mock your religion when you agree with him on the subject at hand?
Why don't you go look in a dictionary and find out the difference? Heck, here's a website where you can look it up so that you don't even have to get out of your chair: www.dictionary.com
Because Americans saved them from extinction /sarc (sorry - couldn't resist)
He'd been running around with his hair on fire about theocracies and scientists being burned at the stake for weeks, if not months.
He started it quite some time before that incident.
Seeing the hand of God in dna would point to the fact of intellgent design. You are confusing natural selection with evolution.
Evolution at its core teaches that one species transformed or evolved into another. Natural selection presupposes that all creatures were created and the ones with the most beneficial traits, ie best night vision on owls, survived thrived and bred with one another to continually improve that trait.
Natural selection is in perfect harmony with scripture, therefore is scientifically proven as fact. Evolution is still a theory no matter how bad you wish it to be fact. Don’t burst a blood vessel trying to prove it here. I am no more a flat earther than you. I don’t need to convince myself that the theory I held to that disclaimed the hand of God for all this time, now has to find a way to insert him. I just believe in the scientific principle of the simplist answer must be true.
I don’t have to do backbends and try to site all these things that darwin has to to prove my point. The more science uncovers, the more intellegent design and natural selection fit the pieces of the puzzle..... I guess since the evolutionists have “disproved” their own theory, they now have to find a way to incorporate God in evolution, just like global warming is now “climate change” cause the earth is once again cooling due to its cyclical nature. Yikes
People like to quote Scripture at Christians to force compliance to their standards when some Christian says something that the non-Christian takes offense at.
With the thousands of anti-religionist and atheistic books and pamphlets that use evolution to attack Christianity and its teachings contradicting your statement (”No one is using evolution to mock Chrisitianity”)...do you still want to stand by your statement? Do you wonder why I had to ask what you have been smoking?
Besides, many Christians understand the notions of evidence, what they disagree with are the great announcements that crop up periodically(usually not by scientists but by politically motivated “agents of change”) that science has killed God and evolution has driven a stake thru his heart!
The 20th century saw the great holocausts by regimes citing atheism and evolutionary based ideologies as justifications for their mass murders!
There may be an arguement for God directed change over punctuated periods in time that would show some compatibility with the teachings of the Bible as a whole. But the notion that God had nothing to do with the creation of life and its development never will be compatible with Christianity.
Genesis itself depicts a much more intimate creation of man by God directly by His own hand and spiritual essence. The previous levels of creation has God declaring....”Let there be and Let the Earth bring forth...” as though he stood some distance away(spiritually or other wise) impersonally commanding. Evolutionary musings may have some support in those biblically described processes!
When it came to man...the emphasis changes...”Let US create man in our image and likeness”...and God created man from the dust directly breathing life into this being who became a living soul.” It is a very intimate creation. Here is where the compatability arguement for the possible evolution of man and the teachings of Christianity falls apart!
Now for a little science lesson....Moses states that God called the man “Adam” which means red man,blushing man, man of the red mud, or red clay man!
Iron oxide colors red clay...it is also iron that forms the active oxygen binder in the hemoglobin in our blood stream.
Moses would not have known the science of blood when he compiled Genesis...but we understand now how hemoglobin works. God formed man from the red dust of the earth and used the iron in it to form our blood. The OT even teaches us that “blood is the life of a man” . How about that science lesson from 4000 years ago?
You have a pretty low threshold for what constitutes running around with your hair on fire.
So that means you believe that the information in the bible about Jesus could be wrong. Interesting. Not sure you'd have a clue who you are placing your faith in then.
He ranted about it incessantly whenever the opportunity presented itself.
Anyone can look at his posting history and see for themselves.
Here, for the lurkers.....
http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/by:coyoteman/index?brevity=full;tab=comments
I found exactly one use of "theocracy" in the first 6 pages of those posts, and two uses of "stake." Ironically, one of those was in reply to a poster who'd said that Darwinists needed to be punished for their beliefs. Oh yeah, he was just being paranoid.
Anyone can look at the description of the “sea” vat and notice that it was neither a straight sided container nor a perfect half sphere so statements about the the Bible being wrong about Pi because the measurements given don’t equal that ratio are ignorant at best.
Anything to give them an excuse to reject the Bible.
If you can make one part of it out to be a lie, then you can make the rest out to be a lie. Then you don’t have to accept what it has to say in any other area; like your need for a Savior.
If the writers of the bible state that God created us from dirt, that is different from what evo's say?
Christianity says we are made in God's image, Darwinism teaches no, we are a collection of mutations and the result of a struggle for life.
Is there a difference between a body and a soul? Could it be possible the soul is in the image, and the body is merely a vessel?
Christianity says the Bible is a record of God's dealing with mankind, Darwinism has no need of a God to explain man's place in the cosmos and the Bible is myth and legend.
Does that make either less so in your mind?
My father (may he rest in peace) once shared with me a story. There was a man standing on the beach, with 1/2 a walnut shell in his hand, and the other hand repeatedly using the other half of the walnut shell to pour sea water into the first half held level in his hand. A passerby aked what he was doing, to which he replied," I am going to empty the ocean into this half shell."
The half shell is the mind of humanity, the ocean is God.
I don't think He spends too much time worrying about being dissed be darwinists or evil evo's.
But then, that is just my opinion. Perhaps I give too much credit?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.