[PatrickHenry]

The fact is, it takes more faith to believe in evolution than to believe in God.

In discussions like this, we should be careful about our terminology, so that we're all using words in the same way. I've posted this before, but not for at least 6 months, and I think it's useful:

One can "believe" in the existence of the tooth fairy, but one does not -- in the same sense of the word -- "believe" in the existence of his own mother. Belief in the first proposition (tooth fairy) requires faith, which is the belief in something for which there is no evidence or logical proof. The second proposition (mother) is the kind of knowledge which follows from sensory evidence. There is also that kind of knowledge (like the Pythagorean theorem) which follows from logical proof. In either case, that is, belief in things evidenced by sensory evidence or demonstrated by logical proof, there is no need for faith.

In between mother and the Pythagorean theorem are those propositions we provisionally accept (or in common usage "believe"), like relativity and evolution, because they are scientific theories -- logical and falsifiable explanations of the available data (which data is knowledge obtained via sensory evidence).

Useful website in this context: Do You Believe in Evolution?.

[balrog666]

Tooth fairy placemarker.

[whattajoke]

Also, I've previously posted this over 6 months ago:

I shall remind you that the scientific enterprise is not in the ‘belief’ business. Science’s primary mission is to understand the reality of how things work in nature. This is purely an intellectual activity and does not require the operation of any faith or belief system. I use a broom to sweep out my garage because it’s the best tool for dealing with the reality of grunge on my garage floor. But I don’t ‘believe’ in brooms. I consider the reality of the broom in terms of my dirty garage floor.

Scientists seek the best tools to help them comprehend the reality of the natural world in which they live. To the extent that a theory is useful, it will be used. To the extent that a theory is not useful it won’t be used. Scientific theories are the tools for scientists like wrenches are the tools of mechanics. We use tools in our lives where they are most appropriate but we are not required to ‘believe’ in them.

[longshadow]

"vastly improving signal-to-noise ratio" placemarker

[=Intervention=]

" faith, which is the belief in something for which there is no evidence or logical proof"

When people speak of having "faith" in someone else, they don't mean that there is no evidence or logical proof for that person to do something or to behave a certain way. Faith is much more like "trust" based on sufficient evidence. As long as faith is defined as being wholly without reason and counter-rational, it becomes an easy way to shuffle off those those with whom you disagree to the small rooms in the intellectual asylum.

[King Prout]

you expect folks to know the difference between scio, cogno, and credo?