Evolution (please don't take offense to this topic)

[mcdonaldliamp]

Why are so many people offended by the Theory of Evolution?  I'm not saying you have to believe it, but it's just the facts.  It's the year 2012, and it just seems silly to believe that we literally came from Adam and Eve, and we were merely plopped here by God.  Just look at how many fossils they've found over the years.  This is not an anti-religious post.  Thank you

[Falconer02]

Why are so many people offended by the Theory of Evolution?

The problem is that the ancient abrahamic religions are still unusually popular in the present and people still want these myths to be true (much like the overused example of children finding out santa is fake, but still cling to the idea). When scientists discover something that ends up contradicting mythology that people still believe in, it causes a ruckus among society. Scientists aren't out to disgard religions- they're just trying to get a better understanding of ourselves and the universe surrounding us. It's unfortunate that the evidences of what should be a completely positive facts are disregarded by ignorant people who prefer mythology over reality. Saying evolution is "just a theory" or that "we came from apes" shows an absurd amount of naivety on the subject.

tl;dnr version- The truth hurts sometimes, and that's why they get offended.

[falcon9]

Why are so many people offended by the Theory of Evolution?

The problem is that the ancient abrahamic religions are still unusually popular in the present and people still want these myths to be true (much like the overused example of children finding out santa is fake, but still cling to the idea). When scientists discover something that ends up contradicting mythology that people still believe in, it causes a ruckus among society. Scientists aren't out to disgard religions- they're just trying to get a better understanding of ourselves and the universe surrounding us. It's unfortunate that the evidences of what should be a completely positive facts are disregarded by ignorant people who prefer mythology over reality. Saying evolution is "just a theory" or that "we came from apes" shows an absurd amount of naivety on the subject.

tl;dnr version- The truth hurts sometimes, and that's why they get offended.

Does that mean that few like to feel stupid and/or that some are just too stupid to know that they're too stupid to know this?

[barbme1972]

This is a tricky subject.  There are a lot of scientific facts out there that evolution happened and is happening.  Creatures evolve all the time.  I am a believer in God, but I also pay attention to scientific facts.  There are things that show that evolution isn't a theory.  The people that are afraid of the theory of evolution are afraid because if they buy into evolution then they are afraid that it will completely disprove that God exist, but if they are strong in their faith then they shouldn't have to be afraid.

[Falconer02]

Does that mean that few like to feel stupid and/or that some are just too stupid to know that they're too stupid to know this?

Sry for the late reply- but I would vote for the second.

This is a tricky subject.  There are a lot of scientific facts out there that evolution happened and is happening.  Creatures evolve all the time.  I am a believer in God, but I also pay attention to scientific facts.  There are things that show that evolution isn't a theory.  The people that are afraid of the theory of evolution are afraid because if they buy into evolution then they are afraid that it will completely disprove that God exist, but if they are strong in their faith then they shouldn't have to be afraid.

I'm glad you're intelligent enough to understand evolution, but I'm uncertain if you're a believer in religion as well (from how u worded this, maybe...agnostic?). I apologize in advance if I'm wrong for assuming that you're christian, but if this is so I'd like to ask you a question if this is the case-

If one believes in evolution and xtianity, you have to believe that mankind, in our current form, has been around for atleast 100,000 years. For the large majority of that time, there is no mention of the Abrahamic god anywhere. Human lifespan was extremely low, disease was rampant, infant-death rates were phenomenally bad, we were prone to predatory attacks, etc. This goes on for that long with no deity showing up, and then suddenly +/-10,000 years ago Yahweh suddenly shows up in a very barbaric and superstitious part of the world and no where else (Chinese cultures being completely left out for instance). Does this raise a few red flags in your mind? A god who disappears for that extraordinarily long period of time and then suddenly reappears in this one area and then starts doing stuff?

(Like you said, a tricky subject)

[falcon9]

Does that mean that few like to feel stupid and/or that some are just too stupid to know that they're too stupid to know this?

Sry for the late reply- but I would vote for the second.

After due consideration, I'm going with a combination of both however, with the caveat that some of the first part may be more due to ignorance than overt stupidity.

This is a tricky subject.  There are a lot of scientific facts out there that evolution happened and is happening.  Creatures evolve all the time.  I am a believer in God, but I also pay attention to scientific facts.  There are things that show that evolution isn't a theory.  The people that are afraid of the theory of evolution are afraid because if they buy into evolution then they are afraid that it will completely disprove that God exist, but if they are strong in their faith then they shouldn't have to be afraid.

I'm glad you're intelligent enough to understand evolution, but I'm uncertain if you're a believer in religion as well (from how u worded this, maybe...agnostic?). I apologize in advance if I'm wrong for assuming that you're christian, but if this is so I'd like to ask you a question if this is the case-

If one believes in evolution and xtianity, you have to believe that mankind, in our current form, has been around for atleast 100,000 years. In that time, there is no mention of the Abrahamic god anywhere. Human lifespan was extremely low, disease was rampant, infant-death rates were phenomenally bad, we were prone to predatory attacks, etc. This goes on for that long with no deity showing up, and then suddenly less than 10,000 years ago Yahweh suddenly shows up in a very barbaric and superstitious part of the world and no where else (Chinese cultures being completely left out for instance). Does this raise a few red flags in your mind? A god who disappears for that extraordinarily long period of time and then suddenly reappears in this one area and then starts doing stuff?

(Like you said, a tricky subject)

The Chinese precurser civilizations weren't the only ones who'd never heard of that particular monotheist "g-d".  The ancient Aegyptians, Sumerians, norse Odinist nor Zoasterians never heard of that particular belief system before either.  This is because the xtian religion began as a very obscure jewish cult, nearly 2,000 years ago.  Others had alternate polytheistic, pantheistic, animistic and even 'oneg-d' belief systems in place thousands of years before that 'cult' sprouted up.  Interestingly, when the judeo-xtian religion was establishing itself back then, its founders apparently decided to plaguarize other religious beliefs from that time period and beyond, (as xtianity began its 'absorb-and-assimulate' campaign against pagan religions worldwide).  Such xtian 'absorb-and-assimulate' policies were active as recently as this century.  Last century, such
'missionary' practices as soup kitchens, (absorb-and-assimulate, nominally redefined by xtians as 'convert the natives'), began shifting to a slightly less overt pogram of 'feed the starving poor' - not just food but, religious superstitions.  Within the last two centuries, abundant evidence of xtians running a more overt absorb-assimulate-and-destroy native/indigenous cultures resulted in reservations and all that followed from "indian schools".

What does this all have to do with "evolution" you might ask?  For one thing, history has shown that some religions 'evolve' while some don't and die-off.  Even xtianity has 'evolved' in outer aspect, (while retaining an inner aspect of plaguarism, intolerance for other belief systems or, for those who lack a belief system), and deception by promoting self-deceptions such as 'blind faith'.

[sigmapi1501]

Carbon Dating is highly inaccurate
- Kirk Cameron (AKA Mike Seaver)

[falcon9]

Carbon Dating is highly inaccurate
- Kirk Cameron (AKA Mike Seaver)

"Dating a non-carbon-based life-form is highly-unusual."
-- anon

[barbme1972]

I'm glad you're intelligent enough to understand evolution, but I'm uncertain if you're a believer in religion as well (from how u worded this, maybe...agnostic?). I apologize in advance if I'm wrong for assuming that you're christian, but if this is so I'd like to ask you a question if this is the case-

I am a Christian and believe in God and Jesus and what not.  I am not an agnostic....I just know that there is more out there as well.  My pastor is a scholar of theology.  He knows the Bible forwards, backwards and inside out.  He learned Greek, Hebrew and even Latin so that he could be a true scholar and be able to read the old texts that are in the original languages to help us understand it better.  I have learned a lot from him since joining the church.

If one believes in evolution and xtianity, you have to believe that mankind, in our current form, has been around for atleast 100,000 years. For the large majority of that time, there is no mention of the Abrahamic god anywhere. Human lifespan was extremely low, disease was rampant, infant-death rates were phenomenally bad, we were prone to predatory attacks, etc. This goes on for that long with no deity showing up, and then suddenly +/-10,000 years ago Yahweh suddenly shows up in a very barbaric and superstitious part of the world and no where else (Chinese cultures being completely left out for instance). Does this raise a few red flags in your mind? A god who disappears for that extraordinarily long period of time and then suddenly reappears in this one area and then starts doing stuff?

(Like you said, a tricky subject)

No, that doesn't raise any red flags.  Who knows why there were no accounts of Christianity back then.  It was a different time and life was hard.  People turned their backs on religion.

[falcon9]

I am a Christian and believe in God and Jesus and what not.  I am not an agnostic.

If one believes in evolution and xtianity, you have to believe that mankind, in our current form, has been around for atleast 100,000 years. For the large majority of that time, there is no mention of the Abrahamic god anywhere. This goes on for that long with no deity showing up, and then suddenly +/-10,000 years ago Yahweh suddenly shows up in a very barbaric and superstitious part of the world and no where else (Chinese cultures being completely left out for instance). Does this raise a few red flags in your mind? A god who disappears for that extraordinarily long period of time and then suddenly reappears in this one area and then starts doing stuff?

(Like you said, a tricky subject)

No, that doesn't raise any red flags.  Who knows why there were no accounts of Christianity back then.  It was a different time and life was hard.  People turned their backs on religion.

What, you are unable to even consider that there was no mention of xtianity before 2,000-some-odd years ago because xtianity didn't exist before then?

It's neither rational nor logical to tacitly maintain that a religion which began as a 'cult' 2,000ish years ago can somehow 'retroactively' encompass the eons of time before that.  A much more straight-forward application of Occam's Razor would mean that there was no religion of xtianity nor, a xtian deity until belief in such things began about 2,000 years ago.  Further, it is extremely pretentious and presumptious of those holding such a 'retroactively-encompassing' belief to try and subsume other cultures and beliefs which never heard of xtianity pre-2000 years ago, (because it wasn't around yet). 

Several cultures were extant 2,000 years ago and even further back.  They had their own religious beliefs which were around for several thousand year longer than xtianity and none of them were  remotely 'xtian' or concerned belief in any 'xtian deities'. The Aegyptians, (a culture that predated xtianity by several thousand years), were quote fond of carving lots of things they believed into stone, yet they don't mention a 'xtian deity' among their pantheon of neteru.

People who go around saying that their 'johnny-come-lately' "deity" was always around appear to have an umitigated gall and general inability to reason accurately.  If the religion and religious beliefs of xtianity did not exist prior to 2,000 years ago, (and until evidence can be produced to fill the void of evidence stretching back 100,000+ years), then any claim which retroactively posits a religion/deity raises a huge red flag of  , not only mere doubt.

[barbme1972]

Um, the earth is more than 2,000ish years old, Jesus was on the earth before 2, 000ish years ago.  We are in 2012 AD....which is for after his death, right?  But there is the before his death, BC, so unsure where you are getting the idea that I think the earth is only 2,000ish years old?  Or am I misreading your post.  But you know what, I don't have the answers, no one does.  So I am not going to argue God and Christianity with you.  This thread is about evolution, not relgion believes.  So yes, I know that evolution is a real thing and can not explain why others are afriad of the theory of evolution.   

[falcon9]

Um, the earth is more than 2,000ish years old ...

Yes, there is substantial evidence to support that conclusion.
 

Jesus was on the earth before 2, 000ish years ago. 

The has been no evidence whatsoever presented to substantiate that claim. Have you got any hidden away perhaps in your 'hope chest'?
 

But there is the before his death, BC ...

"B.C." is an archaic term meaning "before christ", which means in a time before such a concept existed, (and what that means is that, without a "christ", there was a time without subsequent xtians).

... unsure where you are getting the idea that I think the earth is only 2,000ish years old?  Or am I misreading your post.

Since you don't quote, (or apparently, follow), context, it's nearly certain that you've misread my reply.  Nothing about the _earth_ being "only 2,000ish years old" was stated.  What was previously mentioned was that xitanity is no older than that.
 

But you know what, I don't have the answers, no one does. 

Until you or anyone else can produce some evidence that xtianity and the hypothetical xtian deity were extant prior to circa two millenium ago, such claims that they were remain well beyond dubious.  So, that's not the "answer" and neither is reason-blinding 'faith' the "answer".

So I am not going to argue God and Christianity with you.

Rather, you had begun arguing "g-d" and xtianity's origins with me and then decided to bail out once your arument began 'sustaining massive casualties'.

This thread is about evolution, not relgion believes.

The subject-drifts occurred because of various viewpoints which saw connections between the original subject and related tangents.  That happens commonly enough that complaining when it does occur is somewhat futile.  For instance, would you chastise your mother for seguing into another subject if the one you were talking about was related, (or even unrelated)?  If not, then your point is moot and more likely results from in inability to defend or support your religious contentions.
 

So yes, I know that evolution is a real thing and can not explain why others are afriad of the theory of evolution.   

It may be that the excuse, (not reason), others may be "afriad[sic] of the theory of evolution" is due to a related "fear" that this would mean no 'creator deity' would be needed if teh theory were true.

[barbme1972]

   I don't understand why in varies threads you seem to be attacking me.     You seem to think that I am some fanatic Christian is isn't willing to listen to other's opinions.  I am not...I haven't pushed my religion on anyone in any of these threads.  You seem to have a problem with me having faith, what is wrong with that?  What did I do to make you think these things?  I just don't get it.  Maybe you are afraid or unsure of what might be out there and have decided to attack those of us that believe in something because of that fear.  What is wrong with believing a higher power like God? 

[walksalone11]

  I don't understand why in varies threads you seem to be attacking me.     You seem to think that I am some fanatic Christian is isn't willing to listen to other's opinions.  I am not...I haven't pushed my religion on anyone in any of these threads.  You seem to have a problem with me having faith, what is wrong with that?  What did I do to make you think these things?  I just don't get it.  Maybe you are afraid or unsure of what might be out there and have decided to attack those of us that believe in something because of that fear.  What is wrong with believing a higher power like God? 

What's wrong with just keeping it to yourself? I am not atheist/agnostic, but I don't post about my beliefs.

Ones faith, beliefs and relationship with what ever higher power they subscribe to is a very personal one, why is that xtians feel the need to blab about it all over the place. Who are you really trying to convince?

[falcon9]

  I don't understand why in varies threads you seem to be attacking me. 

I've replied, (not 'attacked'), to  a few of your posts, (among several other replies to other posts in other threads), in exactly two threads. Why is it when a religious adherent is manifestly unable to support the empty assertions which they initiated by first posting them, that replies to those posts are characterized as "attacking"?  Nominally, that would be a rhetorical question except for the common occurance of such false characterizations by religious adherents.

  You seem to think that I am some fanatic Christian is isn't willing to listen to other's opinions.  I am not...I haven't pushed my religion on anyone in any of these threads.

Unless the archived record of the posted exchanges is inaccurate, I haven't characterized you as a fanatic or a fundie, (as yet).  The most I'd adjudge initially is that you're a religious adherent, (which is not an overtly derrogatory term).
 

You seem to have a problem with me having faith, what is wrong with that?

No, any such self-delusions are your specific choice.  My objection is to mind-blinding "faith" in general, (which means, not specifically with yours).  That practice is counter to reason and it's hypocritically-inconsistant to apply some reasoning to other aspects of one's life and not to any religious aspects of that same life.

What did I do to make you think these things?  I just don't get it. 

Obviously, you posted some "faith-based" religious opinions concerning a subject which I was already commenting on in this thread and I replied.  It's as simple as that - no need to falsely impute such replies as "attacking" since you chose to respond to this thread, didn't you?

Maybe you are afraid or unsure of what might be out there and have decided to attack those of us that believe in something because of that fear.

Maybe you've chosen to randomly and incorrectly speculate?  On second thought; no maybes about it.

  What is wrong with believing a higher power like God? 

Such specious beliefs perpetuate specious superstitions which divert energy and resources away from more viable pursuits.  Also, they can and do negatively impact others who do not adhere to such religious beliefs.