"Why doesn't America believe in evolution?" - NewScientist.com

[dazzleman]

When I read such tripe I don't know whether the author is a fool or deliberately misleading the audience in an effort to fuel an unnecessary debate, but it's a false premise.  This must be incredibly frustrating to your science teachers who undoubtedly take great efforts to teach you the scientific method.  When you start to say you "believe in" things like evolution or the Standard Hot Big Bang model of the origin of the elements, you show them that you have entirely missed the point.  There is no reason ever to couch science in the language of faith, and it is an insult to both reason and religion to do so.

I have a colleague who fumes shrilly at times, arguing with students over these points.  I cannot for the life of me see how he has convinced himself that this is ever appropriate.  I have explained to him, in painstaking detail, that science and religion need never be in conflict.  (While I recognize that it is possible that I have missed the point of religion since I practice no religion or any other form of spirituality, I have to think that my own informal study of the religions of the world have informed me that they need not ever compete with science, and vice versa.  this conclusion is supported by the fact that I have met many faithful catholics, jews, hindus, etc., who are good scientists and who do not doubt the evidence for modern scientific theory.  but who similarly understand that current interpretations are tentative, at best.)  And this colleage invariably will admit to me that he realizes that he is in great philosophical and professional error when he stoops to that level, he still cannot help himself.  The need for him is not unlike a drug to which he is addicted, I suppose.  I drink too much myself, and formerly used too much weed and cocaine, so I should be more sympathetic to his rantings, which is his own form of self-abuse.  Except that it's not just self abuse!  He makes all scientists look bad when he does that, and that does affect me, dammit!  So it's not just himself that he's harming so I do care.  It's society.  And the fact that you are all so confused about this further convinces me that scientists like him have abdicated their duties in favor of arguing with biblical literalists.

Science doesn't ever ever ask you to "believe"  For to believe is to maintain a faith.  And if you have faith in evolution, or the big bang, or any of that, then you are as guilty of the blindness which you ascribe to the religionists.  This makes you a hypocrit, in addition to being a fool.  Science merely asks that you rationally sort data, and if a preponderance of data convinces you that life forms evolve, then you accept that.  I certainly accept that the data shows that life forms evolve, and that dating suggests an approximate age, and that Penzias and Wilson's cosmic background radiation points toward an expanding universe which is about 10^13 years old, but I also know that I understand all this within the limits of my mathematical abilities.  I never claim to believe such things.  I imagine that my species may one day evolve the ability to communicate non-verbally, with thoughts, and look forward to that time, but I certainly do not "believe" that this will happen.  Nor do I disbelieve that it will happen, for to disbelieve is as certainly faithful as to believe.

The point of my rant, and I have made it often, is not that there's anything wrong with faith or religion, and at times, for example when my mother lay in her bed dying a slow and painful death a long time ago, I envy those spiritual types.  I certainly bear them no grudge, but I will not make a pretense of being among them.  But what really bothers me isn't so much the abject bigotry showed the spiritual types by those who claim to understand science but use language which makes it clear to me that they do not.  No that's not the real source of my frustration.  The source is the fact that those who do are hypocrites. And it ought to frustrate you as well.  Once you cross that line by saying you "believe in" things, then you cannot impugn those who claim to "believe in" anything else.  Fortunately, science never asks you to "believe in" phenomena such as evolution.

So, if you support the premise of the article you are either a fool or a vandal.  Take your pick.  Maybe it's not your fault.  Maybe your science teachers were too busy competing with religion to teach you science, but anyone who claims to understand science should immediately recognize your premise is false, and your language is misleading, and your conclusions are not supported logically.  I'll leave it to those who claim to understand religion to make their own rants, but I'll assume that they're just as compelling. 

Alrdlkk, 099 

oKAY, THE BOY'S JUMPING UP AND DOWN ON THE KEYBOARD, SO i'LL HAVE TO CONTINUE THIS RANT AT ANOTHER TIME, BUT YOU CAN BE GODDAMNED SURE THAT i WILL.

Awesome post, angus.  Great example of why you're one of my favorite posters.

[dazzleman]

Because we sold out our free will for a little comfort.

Can you explain TCash101?  I'm trying to figure out what your statement means in relation to the question.

[dazzleman]

Because we sold out our free will for a little comfort.

Can you explain TCash101?  I'm trying to figure out what your statement means in relation to the question.

The little comfort is religion.  he is saying many Americans don't examine the facts and use free will to make decision, but instead go for the comfort they get from religion's simple answers.

TCash can correct if I'm wrong, but that's what I got.

JCar is somewhat right. Americans prefer religion's easy answers and the comforts of believing that an omnipotent, benevolent being is "in charge." I didn't mean to say that "Americans don't examine the facts." And perhaps "sold out" is a little unfair.

That could also explain the prevalence of wacko conspiracy theories.  It's actually more comforting to believe that bad things that happen require a large appartus to plan and execute, than to believe that they can be totally random.