Palin is a young earth creationist who believes that we are in the end times.

[Firefly]

Young earth creationism is used as an excuse to oppose environmental protection.

George W. Bush was 'unsure' about evolution.

How about Al Gore who is a creationist?

Is he using creationism to justify not protecting the environment?

I believe the more shocking part of this claim (merely hearsay at the moment) about Palin's beliefs is the "young earth" part, not the "creationist" part.  Al Gore is certainly not a young-earth creationist, and neither are 82% of Americans.  

You didn't read the post carefully.  I didn't say 82% of Americans are young earth creationists.  I said 82% of Americans believe in some form of creationism.

And Al Gore is a young earth creationist.  He believes Adam and Eve were created 200,000 years ago in the Garden of Eden and has said so publicly and repeatedly.

I read both of your posts very carefully and was responding to both of them.  My comment was mostly in response to your writing, "I would also say that the cultural elitism of Forum members is showing right now."  You then went off on a spiel about how prevalent a belief in creationism is in America and how Al Gore is one.  I was pointing out that the reaction of people in this thread is due to the "young-earth" part, not the "creationist" part.  You also don't seem to be aware of quite what "young-earth creationism" is.

In other words, no one is surprised that a conservative, evangelical Republican governor is a creationist.  They are a bit surprised (if it's true), that she is a young-earth creationist.

[Ebowed]

Young earth creationism is used as an excuse to oppose environmental protection.

George W. Bush was 'unsure' about evolution.

How about Al Gore who is a creationist?

Is he using creationism to justify not protecting the environment?

Very disingenuous for you to suggest that Gore, a theistic evolutionist, is the same thing as a young earth creationist.

If you say that 82% of Americans are creationists, by using an overly broad definition of 'creationist', what you are really doing is making this a theist vs. atheist debate - which it is not.

[Ebowed]

And Al Gore is a young earth creationist.  He believes Adam and Eve were created 200,000 years ago in the Garden of Eden and has said so publicly and repeatedly.

Ah, never mind.  I figured you knew what a young earth creationist was.

[The Duke]

Very disingenuous for you to suggest that Gore, a theistic evolutionist, is the same thing as a young earth creationist.

Gore believes humans were created by God in their present form.

He does not believe in theistic evolution of humans.

And Al Gore is a young earth creationist.  He believes Adam and Eve were created 200,000 years ago in the Garden of Eden and has said so publicly and repeatedly.

Ah, never mind.  I figured you knew what a young earth creationist was.

Are you really going to suggest that because Gore believes humans were created 200,000 years ago instead of 6,000 years ago means he is not a young earth creationist?  Believing in either is to explicitly reject any and all scientific evidence on the subject and believe the human race is vastly younger than it actually is.

[Ebowed]

Gore believes humans were created by God in their present form.

He does not believe in theistic evolution of humans.

Someone can believe in the evolution of humans while also believing that humans, in their present form, were created by God in His image.  That's why the poll you mentioned earlier presented some rather poorly worded options, but as far as Al Gore is concerned, he clearly believes in evolutionary science as well as a very old age of the universe (seen An Inconvenient Truth?, which I am aware you regard as junk science).  I think it's quite reasonable to assume that he does believe in the evolution of humans, as a matter of scientific practicality / necessity, and he is able to reconcile his religious views with that as many other theists do.  It is not a difficult view to hold as long as one does not take the Bible absolutely literally.

Are you really going to suggest that because Gore believes humans were created 200,000 years ago instead of 6,000 years ago means he is not a young earth creationist?

Pay close attention to words - 'young earth' creationist means someone who thinks the earth is extremely young, somewhere in the ballpark of 6,000 to 10,000 years.

Al Gore cannot believe this, regardless of when he thinks homo sapiens came into existence, simply because he makes it clear on many occasions that he agrees with the scientific consensus when it comes to the age of the earth - billions of years old, not thousands.

[Firefly]

Very disingenuous for you to suggest that Gore, a theistic evolutionist, is the same thing as a young earth creationist.

Gore believes humans were created by God in their present form.

He does not believe in theistic evolution of humans.

And Al Gore is a young earth creationist.  He believes Adam and Eve were created 200,000 years ago in the Garden of Eden and has said so publicly and repeatedly.

Ah, never mind.  I figured you knew what a young earth creationist was.

Are you really going to suggest that because Gore believes humans were created 200,000 years ago instead of 6,000 years ago means he is not a young earth creationist?  Believing in either is to explicitly reject any and all scientific evidence on the subject and believe the human race is vastly younger than it actually is.

I don't know if Ebowed is going to suggest it, but I will.  Young earth creationists believe that the earth and all life on it was created between 6,000 and 10,000 years ago.  Believing that God created Adam and Eve 200,000 years ago does not necessarily reject all scientific evidence on the subject.  One could, for instance, believe that the earth is about 4.5 billion years old, and that life has been evolving for several of those billion, but that God specially created the ancestors of modern humans about 200,000 years ago.  I think such a description is probably close to Gore's thinking on the subject.  By the way, 200,000 years is not "vastly younger than" the scientific consensus on the age of modern humans.  DNA research, for instance, shows that our species developed in Africa about... wait for it... 200,000 years ago.  From what I've heard from Gore, it sounds like he has tried to reconcile his religious belief in God the Creator with his love of science.  This is what he came up with.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

Very disingenuous for you to suggest that Gore, a theistic evolutionist, is the same thing as a young earth creationist.

Gore believes humans were created by God in their present form.

Well, that is a crazy view, but much less crazy than Palin's views, and not one that should affect his policies. Palin doesn't care about the long-term future of this planet, thanks to her crazy views, and she will be 1 72-76 year-old heartbeat away from the Presidency.

[The Duke]

Gore believes humans were created by God in their present form.

He does not believe in theistic evolution of humans.

Someone can believe in the evolution of humans while also believing that humans, in their present form, were created by God in His image.  That's why the poll you mentioned earlier presented some rather poorly worded options, but as far as Al Gore is concerned, he clearly believes in evolutionary science as well as a very old age of the universe (seen An Inconvenient Truth?, which I am aware you regard as junk science).  I think it's quite reasonable to assume that he does believe in the evolution of humans, as a matter of scientific practicality / necessity, and he is able to reconcile his religious views with that as many other theists do.  It is not a difficult view to hold as long as one does not take the Bible absolutely literally.

Are you really going to suggest that because Gore believes humans were created 200,000 years ago instead of 6,000 years ago means he is not a young earth creationist?

Pay close attention to words - 'young earth' creationist means someone who thinks the earth is extremely young, somewhere in the ballpark of 6,000 to 10,000 years.

Al Gore cannot believe this, regardless of when he thinks homo sapiens came into existence, simply because he makes it clear on many occasions that he agrees with the scientific consensus when it comes to the age of the earth - billions of years old, not thousands.

Someone can only believe that humans evolved yet were also created in their present form if they want to believe in two obviously contradictory ideas.  If humans appeared in their present form by evolving from lower life forms, then they obviously were not created in their present form.

I understand your point about Gore and the age of the Earth, I just don't agree with it.  I think you're trying to get Al off the hook for his scientifically unsupportable views by claiming he does not fit a narrowly drawn definition of young earth creationism.

[The Duke]

And where do you guys get this idea that Gore is merely trying to "reconcile" his religious and scientific views?

He explicitly rejects the idea that humans evolved from lower life forms, claiming we were created in our present form by God.

This "reconciles" the two approaches in much the same way Germany "reconciled" itself with Poland in 1939.

[Firefly]

Gore believes humans were created by God in their present form.

He does not believe in theistic evolution of humans.

Someone can believe in the evolution of humans while also believing that humans, in their present form, were created by God in His image.  That's why the poll you mentioned earlier presented some rather poorly worded options, but as far as Al Gore is concerned, he clearly believes in evolutionary science as well as a very old age of the universe (seen An Inconvenient Truth?, which I am aware you regard as junk science).  I think it's quite reasonable to assume that he does believe in the evolution of humans, as a matter of scientific practicality / necessity, and he is able to reconcile his religious views with that as many other theists do.  It is not a difficult view to hold as long as one does not take the Bible absolutely literally.

Are you really going to suggest that because Gore believes humans were created 200,000 years ago instead of 6,000 years ago means he is not a young earth creationist?

Pay close attention to words - 'young earth' creationist means someone who thinks the earth is extremely young, somewhere in the ballpark of 6,000 to 10,000 years.

Al Gore cannot believe this, regardless of when he thinks homo sapiens came into existence, simply because he makes it clear on many occasions that he agrees with the scientific consensus when it comes to the age of the earth - billions of years old, not thousands.

Someone can only believe that humans evolved yet were also created in their present form if they want to believe in two obviously contradictory ideas.  If humans appeared in their present form by evolving from lower life forms, then they obviously were not created in their present form.

I understand your point about Gore and the age of the Earth, I just don't agree with it.  I think you're trying to get Al off the hook for his scientifically unsupportable views by claiming he does not fit a narrowly drawn definition of young earth creationism.

The problem is that, as with most dogmas, the definition of young earth creationism is inheritantly narrowly drawn.  Young earth creationists get their 6,000-10,000 year figure (for creation of the earth and humans) from their interpretation of lists of descendants in the Bible.  Gore obviously get his 200,000 year figure (for just modern humans) from scientific research.

[Firefly]

And where do you guys get this idea that Gore is merely trying to "reconcile" his religious and scientific views?

He explicitly rejects the idea that humans evolved from lower life forms, claiming we were created in our present form by God.

This "reconciles" the two approaches in much the same way Germany "reconciled" itself with Poland in 1939.

I'm not saying that his beliefs aren't somewhat contradictory, but he obviously does not believe so.  He has said publicly that he sees no conflict between religion and science.

[Firefly]

By the way, congrats on turning a thread about Palin into a thread about Gore.  That was pretty slick.

[The Duke]

By the way, congrats on turning a thread about Palin into a thread about Gore.  That was pretty slick.

Yes, I'm pretty proud of that.

[exopolitician]

I love how the hacks on this forum constantly complain about how we ought to be discussing the most important issues of the day...and then resort to this.

This is suppose to be the most important issue of the day...?

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

I love how the hacks on this forum constantly complain about how we ought to be discussing the most important issues of the day...and then resort to this.

No one seems interested in replying to this thread on the economy.
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=83454.0

[Lunar]

I love how the hacks on this forum constantly complain about how we ought to be discussing the most important issues of the day...and then resort to this.

No one seems interested in replying to this thread on the economy.
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=83454.0

Who complains constantly about how we ought to be discussing the most important issues of the day?  I can't think of anyone, hack or not that complains constantly.

[Likely Voter]

I wonder if any reporter is going to ask her about dinosaurs

[Firefly]

I wonder if any reporter is going to ask her about dinosaurs

They would have to actually have access to her first.

[Lunar]

I wonder if any reporter is going to ask her about dinosaurs

Tina Fey prompted them, they might.  SNL prompted a reporter to hand Obama a pillow once, if y'all remember.  He wasn't amused.

[Keystone Phil]

I love how the hacks on this forum constantly complain about how we ought to be discussing the most important issues of the day...and then resort to this.

This is suppose to be the most important issue of the day...?

...

That's my point. It isn't important.

I love how the hacks on this forum constantly complain about how we ought to be discussing the most important issues of the day...and then resort to this.

No one seems interested in replying to this thread on the economy.
https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=83454.0

Who complains constantly about how we ought to be discussing the most important issues of the day?  I can't think of anyone, hack or not that complains constantly.

Not about what we ought to be discussing here but in public on the campaign trail.

[Stranger in a strange land]

If 82% of Americans are creationists, then why are creationists voted off of school boards whenever they try to implement the teaching of creationism?

That is a valid question, but the poll shows what it shows.  Also, this poll is national, and doesn't necessarily tell us what the numbers are in the particular school districts where the battles are being waged.

One explainaition may be that creationists don't always want their views taught in science class.  Palin, who I think is a creationist, has said creationism should not be in the school curriculum.  Is it really hard to believe that many creationists don't want their own religion taught as science even if they believe their religion is true?

the other thing is that believing that "God created humans as they are now" doesn't require one to believe that the Earth was created in seven days 6,000 years ago.

[Robespierre's Jaw]

    Why do I feel that she's just a female Huckabee?

Sarah Palin's quite like Governor Huckabee isn't she? Well there is one obvious difference between Sarah Palin and Mike Huckabee my friend and its quite noticable. Palin was crowned Miss Wasilla and Mike Huckabee was not.