Shop Mobile More Submit  Join Login

Details

Closed to new replies
November 29, 2012
Link

Statistics

Replies: 728

Creationism Is Not Real!

:iconkiwi-punch:
Kiwi-Punch Featured By Owner Nov 29, 2012  Student Digital Artist
I live in Georgia, and despite how badly I want to throttle some of these creationists on sites like Twitter, Facebook, etc, I always calmly ask them to provide factual evidence to support their opinions. Opinions may not be facts, but they are based, by definition in some kind of logical ground, i.e., if you believe in Evolution, you have a pretty damn good chance of factual evidence that would back you up.

The theory of Intelligent Design is just a bunch of religious malarkey disguised as science when there's no way to scientifically TEST the theory, nor are their any significant finds that point to any factual proof of the theory. Keep in mind, Theories are not facts. Theories are scientifically backed up statements that allow them to be expanded upon making new discoveries related to the theory in question.

Scientists are discovering new fossils all of the time, which is why the Theory of Evolution is ever-expanding. Scientists are constantly digging up evidence to support their claims. The same could be said about the Theory of Relativity. The more phenomonon uncovered related to it, the more things that can be added to it.

The key point here is OBSERVATIONS and TESTING using data. Creationism, in and of itself CANNOT be a scientific theory because it is not based on actual observation, but rather, passing the ideas of how Earth's organisms were created as "God did it". I swear, the next time someone brings up that creationism is real...:iconfffuuuplz:

What do you think about creationism?
Reply

You can no longer comment on this thread as it was closed due to no activity for a month.

Devious Comments

:iconoprahwinfreyx:
OprahWinfreyX Featured By Owner Dec 26, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
God planted dinosaur bones to test our faith and/or because he's a convoluted asshole.
Reply
:iconfoxelbox:
Foxelbox Featured By Owner Dec 25, 2012  Student Digital Artist
As long as it's not taught at schools, I don't mind. Everyone has their beliefs, and I think that everyone should be entitled to freedom on that part. A problem arises when it's fed to kids at their learning age. School subjects are made to prepare you for your future job. Not many jobs are based off creationism. Most are based on science.

I would get your aggression if this affected your life in any way, but dude. Let 'em be.
Reply
:iconmcdenis09:
McDenis09 Featured By Owner Dec 24, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
You --> [link]
Reply
:iconsaeter:
Saeter Featured By Owner Dec 23, 2012
I suggest anyone who really cares to understand why creationism is not real you should watch The Foundational Falsehoods of Creationism. [link]
Reply
:icontheliarwolfram:
TheLiarWolfram Featured By Owner Dec 23, 2012  Student Filmographer
So... how can you possibly disprove the existence of a god? How can you say "there is no God who created everything," when nobody knows? Fuck, even Carl Sagan was an agnostic because he believed that, in the huge expanse of the universe, a god was possible. But he didn't know. I don't really know the answer to whether there's a god either, but I'm not an asshole about my beliefs. This is a bigoted and spiteful representation of why people don't like atheists.

Not that all atheists are bad. Not even a lot of them. But you, my dear, are an example of an atheist I want nothing to do with.
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Dec 25, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Hi,

this little graph may help you clarify the situation, [link]

The vast majority of atheists I have met are agnostic atheists...interestingly most theist I have met are also agnostic theists (they accept they can't know for sure, they chose to believe). I know of very few gnostic theist or atheist.

A case could be made that for _specific_ gods from _specific_ religions (Baal, Elohim, Zeus, Jupiter), we find many gnostic atheist (even among people who are otherwise theists), since those gods/religion make specific claims that can be falsified. But when it comes to a generic form of deism, I have met extraordinarily few people claiming to be gnostic. However, gnostics tend to be an annoyingly vocal and obnoxious breed, on both sides of the argument.

VE.
Reply
:iconbobcat303:
bobcat303 Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
Peoples' beliefs are not your business. Don't you have things to do?
Reply
:iconsmkiller:
Smkiller Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012  Hobbyist
When the people try to force those beliefs on others as if they're fact, then it becomes our business.
Reply
:iconbobcat303:
bobcat303 Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
I think you're doing just the same thing.
Reply
:iconsmkiller:
Smkiller Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012  Hobbyist
Promoting facts isn't exactly the same as forcing beliefs. Nice try though.
Reply
:iconbobcat303:
bobcat303 Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012  Student Traditional Artist
They think that they are promoting facts.
You are doing the same thing as them in that you think they're wrong, I'm right, Creationism is wrong, they need to change themselves.

That's what they think of you, though.
You are all the same. You're blowing up your beliefs on a DeviantArt forum, challenging any person who isn't an atheist to an argument

I do believe that there is a lot more to life than lancing everyone and challenging them to a duel on how they think the world was formed.
Reply
:iconedwardspaghetti:
EdwardSpaghetti Featured By Owner Dec 17, 2012
Intelligent design is not just a bunch of religious malarkey. If you were the first person on Mars and found a series of 13 identical rectangular rocks arranged in a perfect circle, would you believe those rocks had arranged themselves?

You say that there (you used the wrong pronoun, by the way) are no significant scientific finds attributable to the intelligent design theory. This is true enough -- so far. But it's a new idea, and it's just getting started.

You mention evolution and the finding of new fossils. The fossil record does indeed seem to bear out evolution, to the point where it would be insane to deny it.

But please do not lump intelligent desing with young-earth creationism. Obviously the creationists like the intelligent design ideas, but the questions of intelligent design will keep cropping up long after creationism has been laughed out of the building.
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Intelligent design is nothing _but_ a bunch of religious malarkey. When asked this specific question, here is what the US courts found:

A significant aspect of the IDM [intelligent design movement] is that despite Defendants' protestations to the contrary, it describes ID as a religious argument. In that vein, the writings of leading ID proponents reveal that the designer postulated by their argument is the God of Christianity.

The evidence at trial demonstrates that ID is nothing less than the progeny of creationism.

The overwhelming evidence at trial established that ID is a religious view, a mere re-labeling of creationism, and not a scientific theory.

You should read [link] in all its details, it is a damning indictment of ID as a movement, and how thinly veiled of a religous malarkey it is.

But my favorite evidence to this is [link] , a show that ID is nothing but a botched "search and replace" on creationism...isn't that Hilarious...

VE.
Reply
:iconragerancher:
Ragerancher Featured By Owner Dec 20, 2012
ID is widely accepted to be just a rebranding of Creationism and created as an attempt to circumvent various laws in the USA prohibitting the teaching of Creationism in schools. Look up "Intelliegent Design on Trial" by NOVA to see the full extent of the humiliating court case where a highly conservative and creationist believing judge refused to defend ID as being non-religious.
Reply
:iconedwardspaghetti:
EdwardSpaghetti Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012
Who cares which side had the better lawyers? The Intelligent Design argument hasn't gone away because there is actually some merit to its central claims.
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Dec 24, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
ID is a bunch of thinly veiled religion malarkey. It has no merit as a scientific theory, and is a mere relabelling of Christian creationism.

Read [link] to see and understand why.

VE.
Reply
:iconragerancher:
Ragerancher Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012
ID hasn't gone away because there are stubborn fools who refuse to recognise they are wrong. There I no merit whatsoever to it's claim. Every argument they have made has been soundly refuted. You know why they don't push irreductable complexity any more? Because it was blasted apart.
Reply
:iconedwardspaghetti:
EdwardSpaghetti Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012
Meanwhile, attempts to recreate life in the laboratory have and continue to fail miserably, marking fifty years of zero progress, and as the understanding of how life functions at the molecular level increases, explanations of how life on earth began become increasingly bizarre, convoluted, and farfetched.
Reply
:iconragerancher:
Ragerancher Featured By Owner Dec 21, 2012
You really don't see the problem with creating life in a lab do you? You know what people like you would say if we created life in a lab? "Well that proves you need an intelligence for life to form." It's a no-win situation with people like you. Whether we create life or don't create life, you will see both outcomes exactly the same way.

As it is, we've been getting closer and closer to understanding an manipulating the fundamentals of biology. Our understanding of genetics is souring and we are compiling more and more gene sequences in animals. It took us all this time to get to where we are now, it's not beyond belief that in a few more years we will have even more understanding, unless you want to try to claim that science is static and we have made no advances?
Reply
:iconi-stamp:
i-stamp Featured By Owner Dec 18, 2012
First let me say that 'creationism' is not limited to Young-Earth creationism and that Intelligent Design is, in fact, creationism. Just because they leave the creative 'force' unnamed doesn't mean they're not talking about something antithetical to naturalism.
Second, Intelligent design as its inception is a bunch of religious malarkey. It was created by creationists attempting to use it as a wedge to get creationism in school systems by painting it a different color.
But it's also malarkey because its primary tenant is that x-attribute is too complex to have evolved on its own. That's a begging the question argument, because unlike rocks on Mars we can see the steps between less complex and more complex and no wall that would have prevented them moving in that direction. And the very idea that complex things do not arise out of less complex things is demonstrably wrong. Re: Explosions compressing carbon into diamonds, water droplets forming complex ice crystals, salt flats drying into complex hexagonal tessellations, and so on and so on.

Last, let me just add that there are things we initially thought were man made that turn out to be natural all the time. Including perfect geometric rock formations. Heck we constantly have people bringing glass tubes that look like sculpted glass into archaeology facilities thinking they have some ancient artifact. When it turns out they're actually fulgurites, which are formed when lightning strikes sandy sediment and fuses it into glass tubes. Anyway, that was more an aside, in a 'nature is pretty damn cool' kinda way.
Reply
:iconedwardspaghetti:
EdwardSpaghetti Featured By Owner Dec 17, 2012
I wish there was some way to edit these comments.

I was going to say about the rocks on Mars that deciding that they were arranged deliberately would not be the end of your inquiries, but rather the beginning of them.
Reply
:icontimehasanend:
TimeHasAnEnd Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2012  Hobbyist
The truth of the matter is....Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools!
The universe was created to reveal from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men. For the invisible things of Him from the creation of the world is clearly seen, being understood by the things are made by GOD, so at the end of time, they will have no excuses.

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousness. Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed it unto them. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse. Because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were thankful; but became vain in their imaginations, and their foolish heart was darkened. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools...Romans 1:18-22.
Reply
:icondoesnotgiveadamn:
doesnotgiveadamn Featured By Owner Dec 16, 2012
Weird, didn't read that part on harry potter.
Reply
:iconebolabears:
EbolaBears Featured By Owner Dec 14, 2012
:rofl:
Reply
:iconsaeter:
Saeter Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2012
"for the INVISIBLE things of him is CLEARLY SEEN''
Reply
:iconkiwi-punch:
Kiwi-Punch Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2012  Student Digital Artist
*cough**cough*Bullshit*cough**cough*
Reply
:iconsmkiller:
Smkiller Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2012  Hobbyist
I swear, sometimes, it's like you fully believe what you're saying!
Reply
:iconragerancher:
Ragerancher Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2012
It's one of those times where you actually really wish someone is just trolling for the sake of humanity.
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
>What do you think about creationism?

Pitting one's Faith against Scientific theories is a confusing way to live. I can only feel empathy those people who, for some mysterious reason to me, feel the need to do so.

VE.
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Dec 17, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Edit: I can only feel empathy for those people who, for some mysterious reason to me, feel the need to do so.
Reply
:iconscottahemi:
ScottaHemi Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
"because it is not based on actual observation"

but for many of religion it actually is observation. though not of creation itself but of the existance and the works of a higher power. this is why they will believe in creationism.

though even still there are debates among how creation went about. did god just POOF there's a turtle. POOF there's a Zebra, or did he just spark the first life into existance and let nature do it's dirty work untill a species inteligent enoughf to comprehend him came about. and about anything in between! ignore the scientologics XD they're stuck in the 1980s
Reply
:iconebolabears:
EbolaBears Featured By Owner Dec 14, 2012
"actually is observation"

Not real observation, just emotional investment in blind faith.
Reply
:iconscottahemi:
ScottaHemi Featured By Owner Dec 14, 2012  Hobbyist Digital Artist
which is what some librals do with their policies so whats the problem?

:trollface:
Reply
:iconvulpimo:
Vulpimo Featured By Owner Dec 9, 2012
What if I told you that you made a very basic mistake thinking that Creationism and Evolution contradict each other?

'when there's no way to scientifically TEST the theory' true, but claiming that something can't be proven doesn't mean it's false. Before discovering oxygen, people wouldn't believe that they actually breathe in something, and breathe out something else. Does that mean oxygen didn't exist? No, they just didn't know how to explain it.
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Dec 11, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Creationism of this form, [link] undoubtedly contradicts Evolution theory [link] and Modern Physics [link].

Now, you may want to define your own creationism, and I am keen to hear, but the OP was quite justifed in his statement, esp. if he indeeds lives in the Bible belt.

VE.
Reply
:iconvulpimo:
Vulpimo Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2012
'Creationism of this form, [link] undoubtedly contradicts Evolution theory'

bullshit.

Bible creationism shows only that God created, or 'started' the universe. HOW did God create animals and plants-> He could as well 'evolve them'. If you read the Genesis book, you'll see. OP's lack of understaning of written text doesn't make it justified.
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
Again, the OP is correct in that much of the creationism out there flatly contradict Evolution theory, did you read [link] at all?

I care not for your individual worlview right now, I care about establishing the form of Creationism facing the OP in his current residence in Georgia, US. That is a form of creationism undoubtdely contradicting evolution.

If you with to expand on your personal view of creationism, fine by me, but that does not invalid the OP's first comment. As for Genesis book, there are no references to Evolution in it (unless one contorts semantically), nor are there any tidbits of any scientific value in it. It is pragmatically speaking a creation myth from the Bronze age. Many people take it literally and therefore fight at every opportunity with the science that contradicts it. Many other people (to which you seem to belong) take it metaphorically in order to combine their faith with modern Scientific knowledge.

VE.
Reply
:iconvulpimo:
Vulpimo Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2012
OP isn't correct, and neither are people saying that creationism contradicts evolution. Creationism is the same process as evolution, only with God as catalyst, so if you say that they contradict each other, you don't know the definition of either. I did read it, but it's flawed.

And why would I care about one guy in Georgia, US, who doesn't know the definition of what he is talking about?

'but that does not invalid the OP's first comment' So he doesn't know what he is talking about, but I can't say that it's invalid because it's his opinion?

'Many people take it literally' and that is wrong interpretation. I don't care how many people believe it, if it's wrong, no amount of people can make it 'right' just by believing in bullshit. Even Vatican said something about this, I'm quite surprised that nobody thought of that.
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Dec 14, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
>OP isn't correct, and neither are people saying that creationism contradicts evolution. Creationism is the same process as evolution, only with God as catalyst, so if you say that they contradict each other, you don't know the definition of either. I did read it, but it's flawed.

You live in denial, [link] . Much of YEC, and some of OEC beliefs are in direct contradiction with evolutionary theory. The fact your belief are not does not represent a statistically valid sample, nor a proof that OP is incorrect in his statement.

In particular, But the issue of evolution and the origins of life remains highly divisive. Specifically, the views of white evangelical Protestants are very different from those of other groups, with a majority (65%) rejecting the notion that humans and other living things have evolved over time, and espousing the view that life has existed in its present form since the beginning of time. Just 28% of evangelicals believe in evolution, and only 6% think evolution occurred through natural selection. which represents millions of people.

>And why would I care about one guy in Georgia, US, who doesn't know the definition of what he is talking about?

As mentionned, see [link] . We are talking 42% of americans, or ~ 140 million people who think humans and other species have never evolved. That is a bit more than one, enough to be worrysome to someone like me who thinks Scientific litteracy is key to the future of a country.

Given a lot of those people are baptist and evangelist, dominant Christian denominations in Georgia, the OP is absolutely correct. And, as a side note, you were wrong in your initial reply.

'Many people take it literally' and that is wrong interpretation.

We (just you and I) might agree on that, but those 140 million of people do not. Instead of wasting your breath against the inevitability of the fact that many people in Georgia indeed do believe Creationism and Evolution are opposed, you might want to contact those people and let them know their religious belief are "wrong". Expect some push back.

I find it, on the personal side, always puzzling that moderate Christians are so prompt to decry the secularists, while completely fail to address the (large numbers of ) extremists within their ranks.

I don't care how many people believe it, if it's wrong, no amount of people can make it 'right' just by believing in bullshit.

This test is most useful in Science. For your own sanity, I recommend you never apply it to religion(s).

Even Vatican said something about this, I'm quite surprised that nobody thought of that.

Since August 1950, the Church dropped its (previously vehement) opposition to evolutionary theory ( [link] ).

Note however this does not translate into a clear individual figure, given [link] , we can see 58% of catholics agree with Evolution, indicating 42% do not.

Of course, Catholics do not represent the whole of Christianity, far from it. So hardly a winning argument from you there either.

VE.


Reply
:iconvulpimo:
Vulpimo Featured By Owner Dec 15, 2012
'You live in denial, [link] '

You didn't even read the link you provided, lol. Want a quote? "Theistic evolution - A belief held by some religious groups, including the Catholic Church, that God is the guiding force behind the process of evolution." Again, lol.

'Much of YEC, and some of OEC beliefs are in direct contradiction with evolutionary theory'

Why would I care? It's not a voting poll.

'The fact your belief are not does not represent a statistically valid sample, nor a proof that OP is incorrect in his statement. '

So let me get this straight, if I say that the definition of house is 'a building in which people live' and 5 other people will say that house is 'a type of bird with 3 wings', does that make THEM correct because I don't represent a statistically valid sample? ^^

'We are talking 42% of americans, or ~ 140 million people who think humans and other species have never evolved'

Yeah you keep throwing numbers, unaware of the fact that it doesn't change a thing. As I said before, FACTS are NOT dependent on the majority. If you asked 100 people whether the Earth is round or flat, and 95 would say it's flat, would that make Earth flat?

'And, as a side note, you were wrong in your initial reply.'

Kinda big words considering your argumentatnion

'I find it, on the personal side, always puzzling that moderate Christians are so prompt to decry the secularists, while completely fail to address the (large numbers of ) extremists within their ranks. '

Then you don't know Christians at all. Plus you are assuming that I have anything to do with them.

'This test is most useful in Science. For your own sanity, I recommend you never apply it to religion(s). '

Why? Because in that case we should drop the facts and call a 'loudest bullshit screaming contest' to determine that? Not very logical.

'Note however this does not translate into a clear individual figure, given [link] , we can see 58% of catholics agree with Evolution, indicating 42% do not. '

And for the 100th time, this isn't presidential election, numbers are kinda irrelevant here.

'Of course, Catholics do not represent the whole of Christianity, far from it. So hardly a winning argument from you there either. '

Oh, you can even say that they represent 100% of it. Since secularists spit enormous amount of bullshit. But I can call that a 'winning argument' just by saying that this is the official church of Christianity, and if they know the most basic history, they would agree. If they don't know history at all, then I don't really care about it.
Reply
:iconvictorianexcentric:
VictorianExcentric Featured By Owner Dec 15, 2012  Hobbyist Traditional Artist
You clearly can not process text, even in its simplest form,

Recent public opinion polls indicate that challenges to Darwinian evolution have substantial support among the American people. According to an August 2006 survey by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 63 percent of Americans believe that humans and other living things have either always existed in their present form or have evolved over time under the guidance of a supreme being. Only 26 percent say that life evolved solely through processes such as natural selection.

Creationism - The belief that the creation story in the Old Testament or Hebrew Bible book of Genesis is literally true and is akin to a scientific explanation for the creation of the Earth and the development of life.

Creation science - A movement that has attempted to uncover scientific evidence to show that the biblical creation story is true. Some in the creation science movement, known as "young Earth creationists," reject not only evolution but also the idea that the universe and the Earth are billions of years old.

All from the information I provided you. Even the extract section you carefully selected out of context does little to back your argument that Creationists are not opposed in large numbers to Evolutionary theory. At this point, I have ridiculed your statement denying the existence of significant numbers of YEC in Georgia to the degree of absurdity...and you are hiding in denial in order to avoid having to change your worldview...

Why would I care? It's not a voting poll.

Actually, tallying the existence of YEC christians in Georgia is very much a matter of poll, the same way tallying the number of libertarian in Kansas, or of Jehovah Witnesses in New-York are matters of number.

In this case, it is a trivial fact that many Christians believe Creationism to be opposed to Evolution. Your denial of this simple fact borders the ridicule. And again, whether you believe those people right or wrong in their Creationists beliefs does not change the fact that they exist, in vast numbers. You are also failing to address them, the extremists and fundamentalists in your ranks, and rather focus on the wrong people. Sad.

So let me get this straight, if I say that the definition of house is 'a building in which people live' and 5 other people will say that house is 'a type of bird with 3 wings', does that make THEM correct because I don't represent a statistically valid sample? ^^

In this case, I have amply shown you that the definition of Creationism adopted by hundred of million of people opposes Evolution theory. In this case, it is you who are attempting, and failing, at recreating a definition of Creationism that is opposite to its common understanding in the OP's Georgia. This makes you indeed sound ridiculous, in that you seem unable to fathom that others, whose existence is well documented, have different beliefs than you. But luckily, there is ample literature and information out there showing that the conventional definition of creationism among large swathes of Christians is indeed one drastically opposed to Evolution theory.

And for the 100th time, this isn't presidential election, numbers are kinda irrelevant here.

Not when you deny the existence of YEC. Numbers are eminently relevant in that they prove you wrong. YEC exist, by the bucketful, and especially in Georgia.

Your last two statement border on the non-sensical. You might want to rewrite them, I think you hodge-podged several thoughts together, and while it may have made sense when you were thinking it, it is not so when one reads it. Albeit, as expected, you fail to address the fundamentalists within your rank. That continued failure of the moderate is really a fascinating topic to observe. You remind me of Poe's law suddenly...

VE.
Reply
(1 Reply)
:iconcake-fiend:
cake-fiend Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
Did you miss the parts in genesis where God created birds before land animals and vegetation before the sun?
Reply
:iconebolabears:
EbolaBears Featured By Owner Dec 14, 2012
:icontrophyplz:
Reply
:iconvulpimo:
Vulpimo Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2012
no.
Reply
:iconcake-fiend:
cake-fiend Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
So you're just conveniently ignoring them then.
Reply
:iconvulpimo:
Vulpimo Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2012
Actually, no.
Reply
:iconcake-fiend:
cake-fiend Featured By Owner Dec 13, 2012  Hobbyist General Artist
All you can say is no? What a well formulated argument! :roll:
Reply
(2 Replies)
:iconmimer:
mimer Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2012
You do realise that the major creationist movement in for example the US is one that claims evolution is false.

There are creationists who simply say "evolution is guided by god" but please don't act like there is not a major movement in some countries, including the US, where evangelical christians are pushing to incorporate a religious doctrine in schools that claims evolution is false. it's even been up for trial, more than once.
Reply
:iconebolabears:
EbolaBears Featured By Owner Dec 14, 2012
Theistic evolution is not as widespread as assbutt magic creation by fundies.
Reply
:iconvulpimo:
Vulpimo Featured By Owner Dec 12, 2012
'You do realise that the major creationist movement in for example the US is one that claims evolution is false. '

do you realize that most of the people in us are quite dumb? It's not about opinions, but fact. If a major group of people says the Earth is flat, that does not make Earth flat.

'There are creationists who simply say "evolution is guided by god" ' Actually that is what creationism is. If you say creationism does not involve evolution, you are simply wrong. It's written in the definition.

And I don't care how many people believe in bullshit, they don't believe in creationism, but in some twisted, mutilated version of it. Most of them are not even Christians, since they didn't read their book.
Reply
Add a Comment: