On ‘Darwin Day,’ many Americans beg to differ | csmonitor.com — There will be a lot of Darwin stuff going on for this anniversary.
This Thursday, celebrations are under way worldwide to mark Charles Darwin’s 200th birthday. From Argentina to Australia, people are gathering for film screenings, quiz contests, and museum exhibits on “Darwin Day” – along with at least one “survival of the fittest” cake-eating contest.
In the US, though, Darwin remains a controversial figure. Two centuries after the famed naturalist’s birth, more than 40 percent of Americans believe human beings were created by God in their present form, according to recent polls from Gallup and the Pew Research Center – a view impossible to reconcile with evolution propelled by natural selection.
Such creationist beliefs lack scientific merit, educators say, and in classrooms evolution reigns supreme.
You have to wonder what is wrong with this picture if evolution has been taught in the schools without complaint for 50 or more years, how only 60-percent think it is true and 40 go with creationism which is not taught at all.
Others born on Feb. 12 listed here include, oddly enough, Abe Lincoln and footballer Lincoln Kennedy.
I wonder how far the idea for a holiday would get?
#23 asked, “Is it true that atheists all take evolution for granted? I ask because it seems that any time evolution is the topic all the atheists make comments and tend to religion bash in the process.”
The most logical reason to discount evolutionary theory would be an alternate, contradictory theory. That theory would need to be equally or better supported by all of the same evidence that now seems to support evolution. It’s too late to throw away our mountain of facts, so whatever alternate theories arise would have to either fit with existing evidence or show why that evidence is all unreliable.
As for the religion bashing, I can’t speak for the atheists. For me, it’s just a combination of good clean fun plus the desire to marginalize the kind of people who operate on unreliable beliefs based largely on the writings of long-dead people who could very well have been acting on their own agendas at the time.
Hey, google.com doesn’t have the Darwin theme for me either. I emptied my cache and tried again… same result.
For the record. I am not an atheist. I am not a gentile or an infidel either. I’m normal.
If religions want to categorize me by calling me by their terms, that is their problem, not mine. We have many derogatory words in our language that originated as insults for other people.
For example, Sioux means “a bad snake” in Chippawa. Eskimo means “eater of raw fish” in Cree.
#29 asked “That leaves bashing religion because you think it’s dangerous and needs to be combated, right?”
Isn’t it dangerous? Isn’t one of the central themes in some religions that if your conscience and your god are at odds, you must ignore your conscience and obey your god? Be wary of those who claim the authority to interpret god’s will. It’s not always dangerous, but it certainly has the potential to be, and historically has resulted in bloodbaths from time to time.
#8, >< stupid google.com. Sometimes it comes up and it doesn’t…it’s now up on .COM, wasn’t a minute before when I was refreshing 😛 Guess they caught on to me hahaha Send hate mail to google.com for doing this 😛
#10, It’s Darwin because he did most of the work and brought them to public and got the scientific community to agree. Sure there are plenty but you give credit to those that actually did something to prove what coming out of his/her mouth
I do sometimes laugh at church goers when they take the bible and preacher literally. Indeed 2000 must have been a longer time than 4 billion years ago. But most of all, I hate every single one of them for covering their ignorance and poor excuse of a life on God itself. Whatever the case may be I know that I should stay as far away from these particular types of people even if they are “good” 90% of the time. I have a few friends like this that I no longer have ties with. It’s because when that 10% comes out it’s when you really see one of their true natures and it’s not very pretty. As I stated above, no amount of discussion will do any good as all answers lead to “God.” All of the ones I met I’m pretty confident don’t even see the cynicism, parody, irony or what have you in what they are saying. So just leave these types be and slowly move from them.
But then we have the scientific fanatics as well. Thankfully most of them can be refuted by science itself as more data is properly gathered and analyzed
I’m an Engineer but I’m also a non-practicing Catholic. Well, I believe there is a higher being that one could call for help…but this being can be God or a super Alien Doesn’t matter to me since it’s not proven yet so it’s just a last minute, long shot chance to ask for help 😛 And if you call not gambling, having sex with everyone, doing good, all church things then I guess I’m very Catholic. I did however, learn what I have taken from the Church and that is my reasoning for including myself as a Catholic. Heck, I do this with being half Buddist. It’s like the song of that one show that Al Bundy hates…
“You take the good, you take the bad…” and I prefer to take just the good and live my life base on them
Oh sure, everyone is fine with Darwin until they realize it’s all about who is surviving to breed the most.
RBG
To #23, gooddebate… it’s ironic that you complain about the distaste atheists apparently have with theists, when theists have treated atheists and used the word ‘atheist’ for hundreds of years as a KKK member would tread blacks and use the word ‘nigger’.
It’s no wonder, when asked, that an non believer would be reluctant to admit in a survey that they didn’t believe in any god. One could be disowned from a family, or lose a job or job opportunities over it by a brainwashed employer.
Fortunately, there is a finally movement (bus ads are just the beginning) happening to enlighten the remaining religiously brainwashed that there are other more logical and more likely possibilities based on at least some factual evidence, rather than the perpetuation of a mythical story that has been around in it’s various permutations for 7000 years.
#23, can’t be all to serious though or else we won’t have things like LOTR! 🙂
Might want to look into Darwin’s connection with Galton’s eugenics; you’ll find a lot less scientific revolution and more self-perpetuating elitism.
@gooddebate
actually the reason religion gets slandered whenever the topic of darwin comes up is because
a.) it’s only Christians who want the bible taken literally who dispute darwin.
and
b.) the only thing that Christians do is look for holes in evolution theory, they do this to disguise the fact that theirs is strictly a religious belief which is not rooted in science.
i hold these people in contempt as a Christian, for they are the modern day Pharisees who want to live by the letter of the Word and treat the Holy Scripture as nothing but a legal document, cheapening its deeper meaning.
40,
It’s not just Christians.
#41 they’re the only ones i know of creating huge lobbying groups to push the book of genesis into the science curriculum of state boards of education.
#40, 41
For me it’s been mostly Christians. I don’t have a single Catholic friend but mostly Christian friends. Been to several of their Christian camps as well and was very disturb by the kids.
Catholics are Christians.
Regardless, there are Muslims who reject evolution as well, they just aren’t a vocal group about it in the USA at the moment.
grog,
I’m not that religious either but I thing the debate is worthy.
Shouldn’t scientists do what you’re accusing Christians of doing? Science should look for the holes. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say here because you could turn it around and get roughly how many see evolution. (it’s only [proponents of evolution] who want [the theory] to be taken literally who dispute [Christianity]. I submit that it’s everyone’s obligation to ‘look for holes’ in the theory.
JimR, So, my mild complaint (which it’s not) is equivalent to the KKK and slavery?
Gary TDI, Show me where you read that Godly people must ignore their conscience. There is no denying that many people through out history have misused their religious belief to affect change on the world by force. But that doesn’t mean that their version is the truth or even what the religion teaches. I would think that a person would want to take an honest look without the assumptions of guilt.
BTW, I wouldn’t contribute if it wasn’t fun.
Fuse,
Well said, God can’t be proven by experimentation. Let me get your take on this though; there are some concepts that exist that are hard to explain how they came to exist. Like the concept of zero. I understand what it is, but it doesn’t need me to exist. As a matter of fact, if none of us were here it would still exist. What I can’t wrap my head around is the idea that without a universe does zero exist?
Math is not “of” the universe and “exists” in or out of it independently. Some say do does God.
I was quite taken a few days ago with a tv show on Darwin and was reminded he formed his theory with no knowledge of genetics.
Almost “mystical” how his theory gained strength of this whole new field of biology.
It hasn’t appeared in this thread, but I am always taken by how much of Darwin is completely misunderstood==like the whole “pure chance won’t create a watch on the beach” type of analysis. People don’t understand what “selection” means and they don’t understand “design.”
If its dumb enough, ignorance can be quite powerful.
#46 gooddebate wrote, “Show me where you read that Godly people must ignore their conscience.”
I’m going out on a limb here, but wouldn’t killing innocent people, including children, go against one’s conscience, assuming they even have one? Read the Bible again. It’s full of “God’s messengers” claiming the authority to speak for God, and when they did, it was all too often to pronounce a death sentence on innocent people. The ethnic cleansing of the Promised Land sometimes even included specific instructions to kill children.
But since you said “show me” (and did so nicely), I will comply with this scripture link that shows where the Israelites chose to obey God rather than their own conscience. At least I hope this killing of children violated their consciences. Anyway, the Lord didn’t give them a deed to uninhabited land, so I guess a few heads had to roll.
One last point — you did ask for an example showing that believers “must” ignore their conscience, and technically I only showed where they did ignore their conscience, and were then blessed by God for having done so. There are also passages where they showed too much mercy and were punished for it.
Oh gosh, something just occurred to me… What if the leaders of the ethnic cleansing were acting on their own agenda, and their instructions didn’t really come from the Creator?
#46, Re: “So, my mild complaint (which it’s not) is equivalent to the KKK and slavery?”
No, you’ve completely attached meaning to my post that is not there. In essence I said that christians have historically despised and repressed atheists like the KKK have despised and repressed people of colour and the backlash of that is just starting to surface. There may be other similarities, but I didn’t mention slavery at all.
Your response is a a typical thinly veiled attempt to avoid or confuse the real issue as a brainwashed victim of Christendom.
Honestly, what has Darwin’s theory got to do with atheism? Unless you believe every word of the bible as if it was written by God him/her/itself, his work is completely compatible with religion. It seem that only the dogmatists have trouble with it.
#47 bobbo, I saw that same episode of Nova to which I think you’re referring (“Judgment Day: Intelligent Design on Trial”). With my new digital converter, I got a cleaner copy of it than my last analog copy.
One of the good parts was where a witness on the side of Intelligent Design had to admit in court that using the same definition of “theory” that qualified ID to be mentioned as an alternative theory to evolution, astrology also qualified as a theory. Good stuff.
“..how only 60-percent think (evolution) is true and 40 go with creationism which is not taught at all?”
Belief in creationism springs for most people, from the heart, not the mind.
I think all people (me included) need to believe that there is a higher purpose to this life, that we are not just glorified apes. That’s why people continue to believe in creationism.
I think both philosophies (creationism and belief in evolution) have some validity, and that together they contain the truth.
I continue to believe in creationism because I consider my life to be a small-scale model of the entire Universe. Everything I have worthwhile was made by me, or another person, and requires my constant attention to keep it all from breaking down. Scale this philosophy up and apply it to all things; this idea requires the presence of a God.
And when I look at something like an orangutan, I see kin…
Plus I fervently hope there is a God and that we are not alone…that may be the scariest possibilty of all.
I saw a video of an elephant painting a self-portrait today. Proof of evolution right there… or is it.
To me, creation and evolution can coexist and complement each other. Few things in life are simply black and white.
I’ll stick to the Day1 philosophy that embraces whatever people need to stay motivated and improving life day to day.
http://www.liveday1.com
RE: Rich,“Belief in creationism springs for most people, from the heart, not the mind.”
The meaning of ‘heart’ is intuition, feeling, or emotion, which do ‘spring’ from the mind as you put it. Unfortunately, the ‘story’ of Christ was started at least 7000 years ago, long before rational scientific thought evolved enough to explain existence. It was an ignorant and flamboyant way to explain all the wonders when the subject of science barely existed.
Sure, there might be a higher power, but there is no evidence whatsoever that there is… in fact the opposite is true. A being of such power would have to be cruel or alarmingly indifferent to all the daily atrocities we have on our planet… completely contrary with a being who would care about the detail in a butterflies wings for instance. To believe in a higher power requires a lot of excuses on it’s behalf.
“Plus I fervently hope there is a God and that we are not alone…that may be the scariest possibilty of all.”
And there you have it… a completely irrational fear. Why not bask in the very real indication that we evolved by our own trial and error and have been very successful so far. It explains everything around you without excuses.
How many people can name the nine planets?” Can you? Then check below.
How many know if asked that question that Pluto is no longer considered to be a planet.
If you didn’t know does this lack of knowledge mean anything on your job? If you did know does it actually help you in any fashion?
0 JCD: “…how only 60-percent think it is true and 40 go with creationism which is not taught at all.”
39% think it is true according to the recent Gallup http://tinyurl.com/cpa8ja
52 Rich: “I think all people (me included) need to believe that there is a higher purpose to this life, that we are not just glorified apes.
You and nearly all ancient humans. That’s why they made sacrifices to their deities. Superstition (making connections where there are none) is not just a human trait, it is found in animals as well.
Sometimes it’s hard to override your gut feeling for reason. But people can be seen demonstrating this kind of fortitude in scenarios such as amusement parks all the time.
We are not glorified apes any more than apes are glorified humans. We came from a common ancestor. For that matter, we’re glorified algae.
RBG
“To me, creation and evolution can coexist and complement each other. Few things in life are simply black and white.”
This is the sentiment of many people here and elsewhere. My only question is, what does belief in creationism buy you? Frankly, I’m baffled.
@gooddebate
okay, let’s begin again.
evolution makes the rather obvious prediction that physical traits which promote survival in any given species will be amplified over many generations, as those members of the species not possessing that trait die off, sometimes so much so that entirely new species are created. this can happen in isolation in response to local environmental changes so that erstwhile brethren continue to breed elsewhere unaltered in anyway.
in my lifetime, i have seen the rise of ddt-resistant flies, drug-resistant bacteria, new speamong other things. this makes a compelling argument for selection.
now, if you trust the science of geology, the earth is about 4 billion years old, and life has been around for many hundreds of millions of years at least. on those time scales, it’s easy to imagine even complex species undergoing specialization in response to various environmental conditions to the point where zebras are no longer horses, etc.
are there somethings that appear to contradict the theory of evolution? sure, but not that many.
there are more holes in general relativity, chiefly that it doesn’t square with quantum physics, but if you don’t use the predictions put forth in relativity, then the global positioning system we rely on so heavily any more is impossible.
no one really knows why or how sedatives work to suppress human consciousness, but i ain’t having surgery without their predictable effects.
gravity is seriously ill-defined, but i still ain’t going to jump off a building because there are are holes in that theory.
the germ theory of disease is just that, a theory, but i’ll glad take antibiotics, etc. because that theory produces predictible results.
all theories rooted in observation of the physical world that produce predictable results that in turn also match with observation tend to be proven right, even if as was the case when newton upended galileo, he only modified the helio-cenric model, he didn’t disprove it.
besides, from a common sense point-of-view, merely pointing out holes in someone else’s theory does not support your own theory. you could call me an asshole, and even be correct, but that doesn’t prove that you’re a better man than i.
i can point out holes in the theory that lee harvey oswald acted alone until i’m blue in the face, but that doesn’t support my theory that it was a mob hit one bit.
you see my point? if you have a better theory, then prove it. otherwise you don’t really have anything to bring to the debate.
if you would like to see more examples of speciation actually being observed, please examine the paper at this link
#57 My only question is, what does belief in creationism buy you? Frankly, I’m baffled.
a lot of people are comfortable feeling superior to animals and find it distasteful to think of themselves as animals.
creationism puts its adherents at the pinnacle of this realm because their god gave them dominion over the animals.
it’s an ego thing mainly, but it also makes it okay to kill animals for sport.
the reason preachers like creationism is because it makes them source of enlightenment, giving them an unquestioning flock that gives them boatloads of money.
check the balance sheet of most evangelical churches — they ain’t hurting.
59 grog: “the reason preachers like creationism is because it makes them source of enlightenment, giving them an unquestioning flock that gives them boatloads of money.”
And not because it’s the first chapter of the bible? You’re thinking preachers are actually atheists and don’t really believe in God and the bible? I’ll tell you, I don’t know about you, but if I thought a real God actually could get pissed off at me and deny me sure eternal life, I think it would be “yes sir” all the way. What, you’d do something different, like negotiate or try hiding?
RBG
58 grog. You don’t seem to understand that most religious people don’t have a problem with the idea that plants and animals change, but they believe a zebra will always be a horse-like animal and a bird a bird, a cow a cow. They believe animals can’t change from “type” to “type.”
RBG