Hey, who’s up for a contentious new poll about evolution?

posted at 4:01 pm on December 31, 2013 by Allahpundit

It’s not New Year’s Eve without some fireworks. Per the new Pew poll, the share of the public that believes in some form of human evolution (divinely guided or not) stands at 60 percent, about the same as it was in 2009. Dig down into the partisan splits, though, and you find some movement.

gop2

Democrats and indies have held roughly steady but Republicans have moved fairly dramatically against evolution in just four years, from majority support in 2009 to near-majority opposition now. Is that number accurate? I looked around to see what other polls have said about GOP views on evolution lately. Here’s what Gallup found in 2007:

gopgal07

And here’s what Gallup found five years later, in 2012:

gopgal12

Gallup detected movement away from the creationist position among Republicans over roughly the same span that Pew was detecting movement towards it. Is that a bona fide trend, though, or a function of Gallup wording the question slightly differently in its two polls? In 2007, the evolution question didn’t mention God; in 2012, they refined it so that evolution by divine guidance was an option. It may be that the numbers were more or less consistent in both polls but that some chunk of people who wanted to answer “evolution supervised by God” felt they had no choice in 2007 but to say no when given a binary choice between evolution and no evolution. “Evolution” is, after all, associated with Darwinism, and Darwinism is typically understood to mean evolution without divine guidance. If you don’t give some religious believers an option involving God, they might assume the pollster’s version of evolution is an atheistic one and that nudges them into the “no” category.

More data? Okay. When YouGov asked about evolution in July of this year, the numbers they got were strikingly similar to Gallup’s from 2012: 55 percent of Republicans said God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years; 30 percent said humans evolved over millions of years and that God guided the process; and five percent said humans evolved over millions of years without divine guidance. The Harris Poll on faith from a few weeks ago didn’t get into the weeds on this subject, but when they asked whether people believe in “Darwin’s theory of evolution,” 36 percent of Republicans said they did — a number that’s right in line with the other polls I mentioned although a bit surprising in that “Darwin” evidently did not equal “atheist” for the Harris respondents.

So, what’s it all mean? Gallup, YouGov, and Harris all see ~35 percent of GOPers backing evolution in some form and 55-60 percent favoring creationism; Gallup in particular found numbers along those lines all the way back in 2007, albeit with a bit more creationist support than recent polls. Pew’s numbers over time have deviated from that baseline wildly, so much so that not only do their 2009 figures show a majority of Republicans backing evolution, even their new 2013 numbers show the GOP as being comparatively more supportive of evolution than other pollsters do. That’s ironic since all the headlines yesterday were about Pew detecting a trend back towards creationism among Republicans. Even if that’s accurate, with a split of 43/48 between evolution and creation, Pew finds GOPers to be several points more sympathetic to evolution than other major poll outfits do. Maybe they’re just an outlier.

Or maybe they’re not. Maybe Pew’s the most accurate pollster here, in which case what explains the Republican tilt back towards “God created man in his present form within the last 10,000 years”? There’s been no major religious revival in the last four years that would explain it. My hunch is that, as strange as it may seem, it might be a partisan reaction. I’ve seen polls on abortion and gun control that show pro-life and pro-gun positions spiking as O entered the White House. Some people who’d normally be on the fence on those subjects are nudged over to one side by the prospect of a federal government run by liberal Democrats taking a renewed, possibly regulatory interest in them. It may be that some people who are tentatively in the “evolution is real but God guided it” camp are taking a more absolutist position because they’re worried that the government under O will teach only the atheistic version of Darwinism in schools. Or maybe schools have nothing to do with it; maybe this is a simpler partisan impulse, where contempt for the political worldview as personified by the president bleeds over into some people’s judgments about perennial cultural disputes too. Wouldn’t surprise me to find support for evolution among Democrats rising a few points once the next Republican president takes office. It’s a defensive impulse against a political opponent who’s taken power, whether that impulse is really justified or not.

By the way, in both the YouGov poll and the new Pew poll, one of the few groups to rival Republicans in support for the “man created by God in his present form” thesis is blacks. In YouGov, 49 percent take that position; in Pew, which slightly refines the sample to black Protestants, 50 percent take that position versus 44 percent who believe in evolution. Rarely will you see those numbers flagged in the usual look-at-these-Republican-rubes media pieces.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 15 16 17

Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but … the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today… Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity.~Michael Ruse

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 5:59 PM

Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today… Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity.~Michael Ruse

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 5:59 PM

Also a substitute for Buddhism.

oh wait, Buddhism and evolution aren’t in any conflict. Never mind.

DarkCurrent on January 6, 2014 at 6:12 PM

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 5:06 PM

Theistic creationist.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 5:49 PM

Not a theistic creationist at all.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 6:36 PM

mollymack on January 6, 2014 at 5:42 PM

Anyone who denies global warming or global cooling is an idiot, for if the globe is getting warmer that would imply that it was cooler before, and when the globe starts cooling that implies it was warmer before.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 6:39 PM

You claim to be a deist.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 6:40 PM

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 5:59 PM

“Dr Ruse,” Mr. Gish said, (Duane T. Gish was the author of “Evolution: The Fossils Say No!”) This is the same Duane Gish of Gish Gallop fame… Mr Gish said,

“the trouble with you evolutionists is that you just don’t play fair. You want to stop us religious people from teaching our views in schools. But you evolutionists are just as religious in your way. Christianity tells us where we came from, where we’re going, and what we should do on the way. I defy you to show any difference with evolution. It tells you where you came from, where you are going, and what you should do on the way. You evolutionists have your God, and his name is Charles Darwin.

That sound just like you davidk…

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 6:46 PM

You claim to be a deist.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 6:40 PM

I’m sort of a deist. I can see it as very possible but if you want to be precise, I’m an agnostic deist (at best).

If I was to be a full fledged deist I would call it deistic cosmology/evolutionist.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 6:48 PM

You claim to be a deist.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 6:40 PM

I’m sort of a deist. I can see it as very possible but if you want to be precise, I’m an agnostic deist (at best).

If I was to be a full fledged deist I would call it deistic cosmology/evolutionist.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 6:48 PM

Give it a rest. You are becoming a laughingstock.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 7:04 PM

That sound just like you davidk…

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 6:46 PM

Thank you.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 7:07 PM

Give it a rest. You are becoming a laughingstock.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 7:04 PM

Coming from the top laughingstock on HA that means very little to me.

Just because you don’t understand the terms of the discussion doesn’t mean it’s not legitimate.

Maybe if you got out of your comfort zone and actually tried to learn about this stuff you wouldn’t BE such a laughingstock my friend.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 7:13 PM

oh dear.

Murphy9 on January 6, 2014 at 7:16 PM

Thank you.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 7:07 PM

That you’d thank me shows just how ignorant you are. ;-)

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 7:19 PM

oh dear.

Murphy9 on January 6, 2014 at 7:16 PM

LOL!

oh bear

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 7:19 PM

Mr. Gish

Gish, a twin, was born in White City, Kansas, the youngest of nine children. He served in World War II, attaining the rank of captain, and was awarded the Bronze Star. He earned a B.S. degree from UCLA in 1949 and a Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of California, Berkeley in 1953. He worked as an Assistant Research Associate at Berkeley, and Assistant Professor at Cornell University Medical College performing biomedical and biochemical research for eighteen years, joining the Upjohn Company as a Research Associate in 1960.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duane_Gish

“Mr.” – - – not a real scientist.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 7:56 PM

Mr. Gish

Gish, a twin, was born in White City, Kansas, the youngest of nine children. He served in World War II, attaining the rank of captain, and was awarded the Bronze Star. He earned a B.S. degree from UCLA in 1949 and a Ph.D. in biochemistry from the University of California, Berkeley in 1953. He worked as an Assistant Research Associate at Berkeley, and Assistant Professor at Cornell University Medical College performing biomedical and biochemical research for eighteen years, joining the Upjohn Company as a Research Associate in 1960.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duane_Gish

“Mr.” – - – not a real scientist.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 7:57 PM

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 7:57 PM

Plenty of highly intelligent folks/scientists are religious believers.

I would never and could never question their intelligence.

Their intellectual honesty and consistency are an entirely different matter.

Newton was arguably one of the smartest men to have ever lived and he was overtly Christian. He devised Calculus to help understand how god operated the heavenly bodies… That takes “smarts”… I admit it.

Gish was likely a very smart person.

Look, the discovery that Newton made, calculus, is just one of many discoveries that religious folks have made through the eons, but the scientific laws they are famous for are the very things that make gods getting teenage Jewish girls pregnant and angels whispering to Arabic prophets in caves look infantile.

That YOU can’t also see them as infantile, that Gish can’t see them as infantile, is just another example of delusion getting in the way of intelligent/highly intelligent humans seeing things for as they are…

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 8:13 PM

Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a population over time. That this happens is a fact. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of living organisms from shared ancestors. The evidence for historical evolution — genetic, fossil, anatomical, etc. — is so overwhelming that it is also considered a fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory.

http://www.talkorigins.org/

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 8:25 PM

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 8:25 PM

davidk <—- like an ostrich, sticks his head back into the sand, but not before throwing more crap up on the forum wall, and doesn't respond at all to my comment with anything of substance.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 8:29 PM

the very things that make gods getting teenage Jewish girls pregnant and angels whispering to Arabic prophets in caves look infantile.

Hey, look, pal, that Mary was a hot little number. Us gods are only human, sort of, and she was all praying to me and stuff, on her knees. It’s not my fault. You try to resist that kind of temptation, smartass. How was I supposed to know I could get her pregnant?

So cut it out with the ‘infantile’ talk, or I shall smite thee.

- God

fadetogray on January 6, 2014 at 8:40 PM

fadetogray on January 6, 2014 at 8:40 PM

;-)

Bring it!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Welp, I’m still here. Oh wait, I got a little cramp in my leg… and now my balls hurt… plus I think I’m going blind…

Wait, nevermind, everything back to normal.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 8:47 PM

still here…

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 8:50 PM

;-P

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 8:51 PM

Cut it out, lowly human smartass. You can’t expect a busy god running a big universe to smite just at any old time at a moment’s notice. I’ll get this working …

…………………..

I don’t understand it. I’ve never had this problem before.

- God

fadetogray on January 6, 2014 at 9:05 PM

fadetogray on January 6, 2014 at 9:05 PM

Here, try this Smiteagra

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 9:10 PM

Smiteagra – 15 minutes and you’re good to go. But come see me if it lasts for more than 4 hours.

;-P

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 9:12 PM

The chilling revelations of a recent [1993] television documentary1 expose the disturbing consequences of evolutionary ways of thinking. Beginning in the 1920s, many thousands of people in the United States were sterilised against their will and without their consent, to prevent ‘undesirable breeding’. Over 8,000 of these procedures took place at a major centre to which such ‘undesirables’ were sent, in Lynchburg, Virginia.

The documentary stated that the entire effort was based upon the notion of eugenics. The eugenics movement was started by Sir Francis Galton (a cousin of Charles Darwin), who wanted to encourage ‘survival of the fittest’ within human society. The ‘humane’ way to do this was by compulsory sterilisation of those deemed ‘unfit’. The idea seduced ‘social reformers from the right and the left’—among them George Bernard Shaw, and Winston Churchill.

As soon as Hitler (who campaigned on a platform of naked evolutionism—the survival of the fittest race) came to power in 1933, eugenics laws became one of his first acts. Not only was the Nazi program of forced sterilisation for the ‘unfit’ lauded in the U.S.—it was actually modelled after the law framed by Laughlin, who was awarded an honorary doctorate by Hitler’s government. As the Nazis moved on to the euthanasia-murder of entire wards full of mental patients, ‘scientific’ admiration for their ‘racial hygiene’ policies was unabated. One U.S. evolutionist actually stated, ‘The Germans are beating us at our own game’.1

Once it was seen as ‘moral’ to take active steps to ‘purify the German race’, it was just a short, logical step from there to the even greater horrors of the Holocaust5

After World War II, the horrified reactions of a stunned U.S. public to the unimaginable atrocities done in the name of evolutionary ‘racial hygiene’ forced eugenics practices to go underground. The names of the practice changed, but it continued, right down past 1970. All in all, a grand total of some 70,000 people suffered involuntary sterilization.

http://creation.com/the-lies-of-lynchburg

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 9:22 PM

Religiously unaffiliated subjects had significantly more lifetime suicide attempts and more first-degree relatives who committed suicide than subjects who endorsed a religious affiliation. Unaffiliated subjects were younger, less often married, less often had children, and had less contact with family members. Furthermore, subjects with no religious affiliation perceived fewer reasons for living, particularly fewer moral objections to suicide. In terms of clinical characteristics, religiously unaffiliated subjects had more lifetime impulsivity, aggression, and past substance use disorder. No differences in the level of subjective and objective depression, hopelessness, or stressful life events were found.

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article.aspx?articleid=177228

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 9:27 PM

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 8:25 PM
davidk <—- like an ostrich, sticks his head back into the sand, but not before throwing more crap up on the forum wall, and doesn't respond at all to my comment with anything of substance.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 8:29 PM

Yeah, Davy and Listens2Glenda both swing a mean purse.

Bandit13 on January 6, 2014 at 9:29 PM

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 9:22 PM

Only idiots take scientific theories and use them as a basis for a moral act just as religious people are who use ancient poetry novels written by bronze aged savages as the basis for theirs.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 9:34 PM

“You can’t be a rational person six days of the week and put on a suit and make rational decisions and go to work and, on one day of the week, go to a building and think you’re drinking the blood of a 2,000-year-old space god,” comedian and atheist Bill Maher said earlier this year on “Late Night With Conan O’Brien.”

The reality is that the New Atheist campaign, by discouraging religion, won’t create a new group of intelligent, skeptical, enlightened beings. Far from it: It might actually encourage new levels of mass superstition. And that’s not a conclusion to take on faith — it’s what the empirical data tell us.

“What Americans Really Believe,” a comprehensive new study released by Baylor University yesterday, shows that traditional Christian religion greatly decreases belief in everything from the efficacy of palm readers to the usefulness of astrology. It also shows that the irreligious and the members of more liberal Protestant denominations, far from being resistant to superstition, tend to be much more likely to believe in the paranormal and in pseudoscience than evangelical Christians.\\…

This is not a new finding. In his 1983 book “The Whys of a Philosophical Scrivener,” skeptic and science writer Martin Gardner cited the decline of traditional religious belief among the better educated as one of the causes for an increase in pseudoscience, cults and superstition. He referenced a 1980 study published in the magazine Skeptical Inquirer that showed irreligious college students to be by far the most likely to embrace paranormal beliefs, while born-again Christian college students were the least likely.

Surprisingly, while increased church attendance and membership in a conservative denomination has a powerful negative effect on paranormal beliefs, higher education doesn’t. Two years ago two professors published another study in Skeptical Inquirer showing that, while less than one-quarter of college freshmen surveyed expressed a general belief in such superstitions as ghosts, psychic healing, haunted houses, demonic possession, clairvoyance and witches, the figure jumped to 31% of college seniors and 34% of graduate students.

But it turns out that the late-night comic is no icon of rationality himself. In fact, he is a fervent advocate of pseudoscience. The night before his performance on Conan O’Brien, Mr. Maher told David Letterman — a quintuple bypass survivor — to stop taking the pills that his doctor had prescribed for him. He proudly stated that he didn’t accept Western medicine. On his HBO show in 2005, Mr. Maher said: “I don’t believe in vaccination. . . . Another theory that I think is flawed, that we go by the Louis Pasteur [germ] theory.” He has told CNN’s Larry King that he won’t take aspirin because he believes it is lethal and that he doesn’t even believe the Salk vaccine eradicated polio.

Anti-religionists such as Mr. Maher bring to mind the assertion of G.K. Chesterton’s Father Brown character that all atheists, secularists, humanists and rationalists are susceptible to superstition: “It’s the first effect of not believing in God that you lose your common sense, and can’t see things as they are.”

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB122178219865054585

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 9:39 PM

Bandit13,

I believe in the Triune God of the Bible: God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Now when you said

“you god raped his mother, condones slavery, is a misogynist and slauthered thousands. What a pu$$y!

your god is a pu$$y.

it neuters that sissy god of yours.

You’re really on a heavy duty period this month, huh Davina, just like your fictional god was when he flooded the earth. What a little bi+ch move that was.”

were you refering to the Triune God of the Bible?

Just want to be clear.

Thank you,

davidk
.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 9:41 PM

Yeah, Davy and Listens2Glenda both swing a mean purse.

Bandit13 on January 6, 2014 at 9:29 PM

.
Any woman’s purse trumps your sneering. That’s all you’ve done.
.

Glenda claims to be a christian, but listens to Beck, a polytheist. Of course, Glenda, like the good christian he is, doesn’t want to believe this and refuses to take any ownership in learning the beliefs of Mormonism himself. Are you equally ignorant an all other subjects as well?

Bandit13 on December 19, 2013 at 10:05 PM
.

I asked you to explain on what ‘grounds/basis’ you made that claim against the Mormon Church, and you never explained it.

Are you up to trying, now?

listens2glenn on December 19, 2013 at 10:14 PM

.
C’mon Bandit’ ! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . still waiting for your explanation, here.

listens2glenn on December 19, 2013 at 11:15 PM

.
Still waiting here, Bandit’.

The burden’s not on me to prove that they are. They seem to recognize Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord Of All. If that perception on my part is correct, then they qualify as Christian believers.
If you know it NOT to be true, then the burden IS on you to present your evidence.

Take your time … I’ll check back every so often.

listens2glenn on December 21, 2013 at 7:49 AM

listens2glenn on January 6, 2014 at 9:56 PM

Darwin’s book of Natural Selection. Although it is developed in the crude English style, this is the book which contains the basis in natural history for our view … Darwin’s book is very important and serves me as a basis in natural science for the class struggle in history.~Karl Marx

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 10:10 PM

We call our dialectic, materialist, since its roots are neither in heaven nor in the depths of our “free will”, but in objective reality, in nature. Consciousness grew out of the unconscious, psychology out of physiology, the organic world out of the inorganic, the solar system out of nebulae … Darwinism … was the highest triumph of the dialectic in the whole field of organic matter.~Leon Trotsky

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 10:12 PM

You know, they are fooling us, there is no God … I’ll lend you a book to read; it will show you that the world and all living things are quite different from what you imagine, and all this talk about God is sheer nonsense … Darwin. You must read it.~Joseph Stalin

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 10:15 PM

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 10:10 PM

Karl Marx was an idiot for using a scientific theory in such a way.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 10:17 PM

Karl Marx was an idiot for using a scientific theory in such a way.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 10:17 PM

But, there you are.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 10:44 PM

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 9:22 PM

Creationists claim to believe in “micro-evolution.”

Couldn’t “micro-evolution” claims just as easily be used to justify eugenics and Nazism?

yelnats on January 6, 2014 at 10:49 PM

Creationists claim to believe in “micro-evolution.”

Couldn’t “micro-evolution” claims just as easily be used to justify eugenics and Nazism?

yelnats on January 6, 2014 at 10:49 PM

Creationists don’t believe in “micro-evolution.”

It is an observed phenomenon, testable, repeatable, and falsifiable.

No. And if macro-evolution could be shown to be true it would not justify eugenics or Nazism.

What “justifies” those atrocities is atheism.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 11:02 PM

No. And if macro-evolution could be shown to be true it would not justify eugenics or Nazism.

What “justifies” those atrocities is atheism.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 11:02 PM

Now I’m confused. Your quote mentions evolution several times and never mentions atheism.

yelnats on January 6, 2014 at 11:16 PM

Now I’m confused. Your quote mentions evolution several times and never mentions atheism.

yelnats on January 6, 2014 at 11:16 PM

That doesn’t surprise me.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 11:26 PM

Creationists don’t believe in “micro-evolution.”

It is an observed phenomenon, testable, repeatable, and falsifiable.

No. And if macro-evolution could be shown to be true it would not justify eugenics or Nazism.

What “justifies” those atrocities is atheism.

davidk on January 6, 2014 at 11:02 PM

So much wrong about you… I’m glad you accept micro-evolution but the “leap” to macro is very simple to understand. Let me try again…

Macro-evolution is just an arbitrary point in a timeline of micro-evolutions david. Humans are macro-evolved right now. Every animal species alive today is a macro-evolved species.

If every human were to fossilize today in an instant and some aliens were to come along and find us they would consider us a macro-evolved species.

EVERY fossil we have collected and added to the overall collection of fossilized remains we’ve found so far are macro-evolved species.

Some of them a few thousand years old, a few of them are a few million years old , and the majority of them are millions to hundreds of millions of years old.

Atheism doesn’t exhort it’s followers to commit atrocities. That takes humans of all persuasions… theists, deists, and atheists alike. Unless you’re denying that Christians, Muslims, Hindus, et al haven’t been at the helm when atrocities were committed.

SauerKraut537 on January 6, 2014 at 11:44 PM

I’m just trying to figure out what David believes.
He posts a claim from creation.com that says evolutionary thinking leads to eugenics and Nazism.

I call him out on it.

He says Evolutionary thinking doesn’t lead to eugenics and Nazism, it’s atheism.

yelnats on January 6, 2014 at 11:57 PM

yelnats on January 6, 2014 at 11:57 PM

I don’t know why I keep trying. You can’t reason somebody out of something they weren’t reasoned into in the first place.

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 12:07 AM

I’m just trying to figure out what David believes.
He posts a claim from creation.com that says evolutionary thinking leads to eugenics and Nazism.

I call him out on it.

He says Evolutionary thinking doesn’t lead to eugenics and Nazism, it’s atheism.

yelnats on January 6, 2014 at 11:57 PM

.
I don’t know why I keep trying. You can’t reason somebody out of something they weren’t reasoned into in the first place.

SauerKraut537

on January 7, 2014 at 12:07 AM

.
I can’t speak to the “evolution” angle on eugenics, but I agree that all “pro-eugenics” people have to be atheists.

But NOT all (or even most) atheists are “pro-eugenics.”

listens2glenn on January 7, 2014 at 12:25 AM

listens2glenn on January 7, 2014 at 12:25 AM

Some of them are theists as well, even to this day.

“That’s right, in the early 20th century a majority of clerics in the US did support eugenics.”
Rod Dreher, The American Conservative online

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 12:32 AM

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 12:32 AM

.
Well ….. that was an interesting experience.
(shaking head in disbelief)

Need to call Dave’s attention to it tomorrow.

That’s a link worth saving. … Thanks !

listens2glenn on January 7, 2014 at 2:29 AM

Fully support and believe evolution. Those polls will always change depending on who, where and when they ask. You ask in New Hampshire and you will get very different answers than if you ask in Alabama.

Freeloader on January 7, 2014 at 8:25 AM

blink on January 7, 2014 at 2:39 AM

I think we can all agree that we know a hell of a lot more about the Universe than these bronze aged bedouins and sheepherders did, that much is for sure.

That’s not egotistical to say or think, despite your attempt to make it appear as such, but just because we don’t know everything means we need to abnegate our will and our mind to the musings of those simple minds that wrote these ancient poetry novellas.

I’m not sure I understand your question in the second to last paragraph. My brain can’t fathom it because it doesn’t make any sense. Try again…

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 11:14 AM

I’m just trying to figure out what David believes.

yelnats on January 6, 2014 at 11:57 PM

David is still trying to figure out what David believes. His mind is distorted with superstitions that are inconsistent with the real world and he is completely resistant to change. I am grateful that there are people out there like SK537 who have the knowledge and patience to lend clarity to this subject without being overcome with emotion and anger. Me, I’d just as soon stick a fork in David and be done with him.

Bandit13 on January 7, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Bandit13 on January 7, 2014 at 11:54 AM

.
Ready YET ?
.

Still waiting here, Bandit’.

The burden’s not on me to prove that they are. They seem to recognize Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord Of All. If that perception on my part is correct, then they qualify as Christian believers.
If you know it NOT to be true, then the burden IS on you to present your evidence.

Take your time … I’ll check back every so often.

listens2glenn on December 21, 2013 at 7:49 AM

listens2glenn on January 7, 2014 at 12:13 PM

I did not say that the belief of macro-evolution leads to eugenics. I did not say that atheism leads to eugenics.

Further, atheism does not necessarily lead to evolution. Many atheists are intelligent design proponents. I don’t know how they square that circle.

However, atheism does not provide any foundation for any kind of morality (or immorality). Saying that morality evolved is interesting. One has to argue from the metaphysical to a non-metaphysical physicalism (redundant phrase) back to a metaphysics.

But under atheism morality is, “Whatever I say it is.” The marriage of atheism and evolution provides an environment in which the atrocities of eugenics, forced sterilizations, and gas chambers can flourish.

In the minds of many evolutionists mankind is on the same level as any other species, and, like cattle or cotton, selective breeding is acceptable and undesirable results discarded.

Eugenics is absolutely antithetical to Christianity. The notion of “Christian eugenics” is beyond being an oxymoron, and I would call out anyone who would suggest otherwise.

Many atrocities have been committed under the guise of Christianity. However, what one does in the Name of Christ does not necessarily reflect the teachings of Jesus.

Many Christians are in praxis atheist. So when listens2glenn said, “that all ‘pro-eugenics’ people have to be atheists” he is, in reference to Christianity, correct. (Other theisms may allow for eugenics. I don’t know.)

Micro-evolution does not involve the creation of new genetic information. Macro-evolution requires new information.

Macro-evolution suffers from the same problem as the origin of cells containing information (among other issues). Where did information come from? Not from an informationless, non-sentient cosmos.

Maybe aliens.

davidk on January 7, 2014 at 2:07 PM

Bandit13,

I believe in the Triune God of the Bible: God the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Now when you said

“you god raped his mother, condones slavery, is a misogynist and slauthered thousands. What a pu$$y!

your god is a pu$$y.

it neuters that sissy god of yours.

You’re really on a heavy duty period this month, huh Davina, just like your fictional god was when he flooded the earth. What a little bi+ch move that was.”

were you refering to the Triune God of the Bible?

Just want to be clear.

Thank you,

davidk

davidk on January 7, 2014 at 2:10 PM

David is still trying to figure out what David believes. His mind is distorted with superstitions that are inconsistent with the real world and he is completely resistant to change.

Bandit13 on January 7, 2014 at 11:54 AM

No, he’s not. David believes what he was taught in Sunday school and always will, until he passes out of his current iteration of existence and is reborn into a Muslim family.

DarkCurrent on January 7, 2014 at 2:13 PM

I do not understand how eugenics can ever receive a Christian imprimatur. Indeed, the return of eugenic thought under more culturally acceptable terms (e.g., “genetic engineering”) is and will become a principal threat to human life and dignity, and something that the churches must be fighting with all we have.

http://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/christian-eugenics-anathema-sit/

davidk on January 7, 2014 at 2:16 PM

Three generations of imbeciles is enough.~SCOTUS Justice Oliver Wendall Holmes

davidk on January 7, 2014 at 2:27 PM

Bandit13 on January 7, 2014 at 11:54 AM

Thanks Bandit. I try. I don’t know why I try anymore so some could, and likely would, call me crazy. I know that people like Grace is Sufficient and many others just think I’m an overly obsessed buffoon who just can’t let it go but I’m more interested in what is true than what I might wish to be true.

Evolution is true, ID just is not. ID just takes what it wants from evolution and then distorts it to suit it’s own political/religious ends… Keeping the sheep in the flock.

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 2:38 PM

A
L
I
E
N
S

Murphy9 on January 7, 2014 at 5:06 PM

Bandit13,

I believe my god raped his mother, condones slavery, is a misogynist and slauthered thousands. What a pu$$y!

my god is a pu$$y.

it neuters that sissy god of mine.

I’m really on a heavy duty period this month, just like my fictional god was when he flooded the earth. What a little bi+ch move that was.”

Thank you,

davidk

davidk on January 7, 2014 at 2:10 PM

Glad to see you have finally come to your senses.

Bandit13 on January 7, 2014 at 6:31 PM

blink on January 7, 2014 at 4:59 PM

We know enough to discount the various fables espoused in our historical infancy, we know that much. Heck, religious people are already 90-99% of the way there already… They discount all the other fables that were foisted on us in our historical infancy, they just need to get 100% intellectual honesty and 100$ intellectual consistency to see that their own is just as discountable as all the ones they discount already.

Your point, as I see it, is to try to salvage what little there is left of the idea that because we don’t know enough we can continue to believe in fairy tales…

My brain read what you wrote and only couldn’t fathom it because it was poorly worded tripe, not because my brain lacked the ability to think broadly enough…

Let see, how do I know that other organisms (that you don’t understand) don’t exist? What other organisms, that I don’t understand, don’t exist?

How do you know that there aren’t other organisms we interact with yet don’t understand?

You need to step away from the bong…

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 7:10 PM

And again, it’s amazing to me how little we know about the universe. Why do you have any confidence of our current understanding? It surprises me.

blink on January 7, 2014 at 5:01 PM

I suppose you think that because we haven’t been there yet (the rest of the universe) that you think that somehow limits our understanding?

Sweetheart, the laws of physics are universal. The same processes that brought us about are in play across the entire universe. There is no Gamma quadrant physics, and Sagitarius quadrant physics… They are all alike and the same everywhere.

It surprises YOU because you’re not thinking broadly enough.

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 7:20 PM

I’m more interested in what is true than what I might wish to be true.
SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 2:38 PM

David and others can’t accept that, because their Bible them that you reject God and his commands so you can live a life of sin.

yelnats on January 7, 2014 at 7:45 PM

David and others can’t accept that, because their Bible them that you reject God and his commands so you can live a life of sin.

yelnats on January 7, 2014 at 7:45 PM

I know… I quit the faith because I was looking to make a career change from a godly person to a satanly person… ;-P

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 7:52 PM

Oh, looks like I a word.

David and others can’t accept that, because their Bible tells them that you reject God and his commands so you can live a life of sin.

yelnats on January 7, 2014 at 8:15 PM

missed? ;-) Looks like I ‘missed’ a word?

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 8:16 PM

missed? ;-) Looks like I ‘missed’ a word?

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 8:16 PM

Where did you miss a word?

yelnats on January 7, 2014 at 9:54 PM

blink on January 7, 2014 at 10:17 PM

blink on January 7, 2014 at 10:19 PM

I know how little I know, but I also know enough to know that these religions are bullshit, what’s truly funny is that you think you don’t.

I don’t claim to understand all the physics in my own backyard, but you acting like you’re my superior and claiming you’re going to school me is even funnier.

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 11:11 PM

blink on January 7, 2014 at 11:40 PM

LOL! You’re a hoot!

SauerKraut537 on January 7, 2014 at 11:43 PM

If pressed about man’s ancestry, I would have to unequivocally say that all we have is a huge question mark. To date, there has been nothing found to truthfully purport as a transitional specie to man, including Lucy, since 1470 was as old and probably older. If further pressed, I would have to state that there is more evidence to suggest an abrupt arrival of man rather than a gradual process of evolving.~Richard Leaky

davidk on January 8, 2014 at 2:04 PM

All these trees of life with their branches of our ancestors, that’s a lot of nonsense.~Mary Leaky

davidk on January 8, 2014 at 2:20 PM

Dear Mr. Nelson

I have your letter and the best thing I can do is refer you to my published works, both scientific and popular. The Creationist movement is lead by a dishonest bunch of operators and misquotation is the hall mark of their work. Responding to them is time wasting and a letter would not be adequate to put your questions to rest. There are some things best ignored and the stupidity of these so called religious fanatics continues to astonish me. My list of publications is attached.

Yours sincerely

Richard Leakey

yelnats on January 8, 2014 at 7:23 PM

In science it often happens that scientists say, ‘You know that’s a really good argument; my position is mistaken,’ and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn’t happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.

-Carl Sagan

Allahs vulva on January 9, 2014 at 12:31 AM

Comment pages: 1 15 16 17