Scott Walker On Evolution: 'I Am Going To Punt On That One'

[NYcarbineer]

Walker politicized this by giving a politician's answer. If you disagree, ask yourself this...

...if you were talking with friends or whatever and someone asked about what you believe about Evolution,

would you lapse into a song and dance? Of course you wouldn't,

because you're not a politician.

Walker politicized it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Limbaugh: Scott Walker Should Say He Quit College Because He 'Didn't Want To Be Accused Of Rape'
So Scotty does not end up like Jerry Sandusky at Penn State

Limbaugh should quit going to the Dominican Republic so we don't know he's into underage prostitutes.

 

[peach174]

1. You're trying to move the goalposts. Don't make this about what the so-called dastardly motives of what you want to call creationist groups are. You made a sweeping statement that an individual who believe in creationism is not qualified to be president. That's your bigoted standard for individuals. The groups isn't even a factor in that bottom line you presented.

No sir, I am not moving any goalposts. Creationists are not qualified to be president for the simple fact that they have repeatedly stated that they stated intend is to destroy our education system, which will also destroy our economy. anyone who believes they have a right to force their religious beliefs on others is not fit to govern in a free society. This has nothing to do with bigotry. Obviously you don't even know what the word means.

2. Creationism is not a denial of science. Your logic in that regard is fallacious. And your sweeping statement that those who believe in creationism is bigoted and offensive. If you had 'common sense' or rather if you drained yourself of your hateful bigotry, you'd not being spouting your dogma.

Absolutely, it is a denial of science. Don't be naive. Anyone who believes the universe is 6,000 years old is not fit to govern an advanced technological society such as ours. Anyone who believes that the Flintstones is a documentary is not fit to govern. Period.

3. I don't think that a history of the presidents' religions and beliefs in creationism are a serious topic of dispute. If anyone has anything to prove on that front it would be you.

You are the one who claimed that most of our presidents are creationists. It's your claim to prove. have at it.

Just because people believe in Creationism does not mean that they believe the Earth is 6,000 years old.
Very few Christians who believe in Creation believe that.

 

[orogenicman]

In the words of that little hymn that says so much in a few simple words..

"The man whose joy it is to discover the world.
And meet the eyes of God in the beauty that is his.
Will sing of peace."

Could be the Anthem of all Scientists quite frankly!!

And who says one MUST be religious to see that beauty that God has created??

Greg

Hmm. 85% of all members of the AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) do not hold to any religious belief. How many of these do you believe would sing such a silly anthem?

A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power, according to a survey of the general public conducted by the Pew Research Center in July 2006. Specifically, more than eight-in-ten Americans (83%) say they believe in God and 12% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. Finally, the poll of scientists finds that four-in-ten scientists (41%) say they do not believe in God or a higher power, while the poll of the public finds that only 4% of Americans share this view.

Scientists and Belief Pew Research Center s Religion Public Life Project

Not sure where your 85 percent came from.

The 85% I got came from a survey of AAAS scientists as quoted by someone I heard, maybe Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Those were the scientists I was referring to since they consists of the best scientists we've got. It may not be accurate but the survey definitely shows that the percentage of scientists who believe in religion or some supreme being or deity is substantially less than what we see in the general public. Even your bottom pie chart shows this to be true.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

In the words of that little hymn that says so much in a few simple words..

"The man whose joy it is to discover the world.
And meet the eyes of God in the beauty that is his.
Will sing of peace."

Could be the Anthem of all Scientists quite frankly!!

And who says one MUST be religious to see that beauty that God has created??

Greg

Hmm. 85% of all members of the AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) do not hold to any religious belief. How many of these do you believe would sing such a silly anthem?

A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power, according to a survey of the general public conducted by the Pew Research Center in July 2006. Specifically, more than eight-in-ten Americans (83%) say they believe in God and 12% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. Finally, the poll of scientists finds that four-in-ten scientists (41%) say they do not believe in God or a higher power, while the poll of the public finds that only 4% of Americans share this view.

Scientists and Belief Pew Research Center s Religion Public Life Project

Not sure where your 85 percent came from.

The 85% I got came from a survey of AAAS scientists as quoted by someone I heard, maybe Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Those were the scientists I was referring to since they consists of the best scientists we've got. It may not be accurate but the survey definitely shows that the percentage of scientists who believe in religion or some supreme being or deity is substantially less than what we see in the general public. Even your bottom pie chart shows this to be true.

41 percent is hardly a consensus though. Wouldn't you agree?

 

[orogenicman]

1. You're trying to move the goalposts. Don't make this about what the so-called dastardly motives of what you want to call creationist groups are. You made a sweeping statement that an individual who believe in creationism is not qualified to be president. That's your bigoted standard for individuals. The groups isn't even a factor in that bottom line you presented.

No sir, I am not moving any goalposts. Creationists are not qualified to be president for the simple fact that they have repeatedly stated that they stated intend is to destroy our education system, which will also destroy our economy. anyone who believes they have a right to force their religious beliefs on others is not fit to govern in a free society. This has nothing to do with bigotry. Obviously you don't even know what the word means.

2. Creationism is not a denial of science. Your logic in that regard is fallacious. And your sweeping statement that those who believe in creationism is bigoted and offensive. If you had 'common sense' or rather if you drained yourself of your hateful bigotry, you'd not being spouting your dogma.

Absolutely, it is a denial of science. Don't be naive. Anyone who believes the universe is 6,000 years old is not fit to govern an advanced technological society such as ours. Anyone who believes that the Flintstones is a documentary is not fit to govern. Period.

3. I don't think that a history of the presidents' religions and beliefs in creationism are a serious topic of dispute. If anyone has anything to prove on that front it would be you.

You are the one who claimed that most of our presidents are creationists. It's your claim to prove. have at it.

Just because people believe in Creationism does not mean that they believe the Earth is 6,000 years old.
Very few Christians who believe in Creation believe that.

Then they don't believe in creationism. I don't know where you people have been living these past 30 years, but it is clear that many creationists hold to a silly notion of very young Earth. We've been fighting them, actually, since Darwin published Origin of Species.

 

[orogenicman]

In the words of that little hymn that says so much in a few simple words..

"The man whose joy it is to discover the world.
And meet the eyes of God in the beauty that is his.
Will sing of peace."

Could be the Anthem of all Scientists quite frankly!!

And who says one MUST be religious to see that beauty that God has created??

Greg

Hmm. 85% of all members of the AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) do not hold to any religious belief. How many of these do you believe would sing such a silly anthem?

A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power, according to a survey of the general public conducted by the Pew Research Center in July 2006. Specifically, more than eight-in-ten Americans (83%) say they believe in God and 12% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. Finally, the poll of scientists finds that four-in-ten scientists (41%) say they do not believe in God or a higher power, while the poll of the public finds that only 4% of Americans share this view.

Scientists and Belief Pew Research Center s Religion Public Life Project

Not sure where your 85 percent came from.

The 85% I got came from a survey of AAAS scientists as quoted by someone I heard, maybe Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Those were the scientists I was referring to since they consists of the best scientists we've got. It may not be accurate but the survey definitely shows that the percentage of scientists who believe in religion or some supreme being or deity is substantially less than what we see in the general public. Even your bottom pie chart shows this to be true.

41 percent is hardly a consensus though. Wouldn't you agree?

Even your pie chart comes up with a figure of 48%. But I was referring to AAAS scientists. Did you not understand this?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

In the words of that little hymn that says so much in a few simple words..

"The man whose joy it is to discover the world.
And meet the eyes of God in the beauty that is his.
Will sing of peace."

Could be the Anthem of all Scientists quite frankly!!

And who says one MUST be religious to see that beauty that God has created??

Greg

Hmm. 85% of all members of the AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) do not hold to any religious belief. How many of these do you believe would sing such a silly anthem?

A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power, according to a survey of the general public conducted by the Pew Research Center in July 2006. Specifically, more than eight-in-ten Americans (83%) say they believe in God and 12% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. Finally, the poll of scientists finds that four-in-ten scientists (41%) say they do not believe in God or a higher power, while the poll of the public finds that only 4% of Americans share this view.

Scientists and Belief Pew Research Center s Religion Public Life Project

Not sure where your 85 percent came from.

The 85% I got came from a survey of AAAS scientists as quoted by someone I heard, maybe Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Those were the scientists I was referring to since they consists of the best scientists we've got. It may not be accurate but the survey definitely shows that the percentage of scientists who believe in religion or some supreme being or deity is substantially less than what we see in the general public. Even your bottom pie chart shows this to be true.

41 percent is hardly a consensus though. Wouldn't you agree?

Even your pie chart comes up with a figure of 48%. But I was referring to AAAS scientists. Did you not understand this?

This was as a survey of AAAS scientists. Did you not read that? Still 48% isn't a consensus.

 

[orogenicman]

Hmm. 85% of all members of the AAAS (American Association for the Advancement of Science) do not hold to any religious belief. How many of these do you believe would sing such a silly anthem?

A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June 2009, finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1 Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power, according to a survey of the general public conducted by the Pew Research Center in July 2006. Specifically, more than eight-in-ten Americans (83%) say they believe in God and 12% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. Finally, the poll of scientists finds that four-in-ten scientists (41%) say they do not believe in God or a higher power, while the poll of the public finds that only 4% of Americans share this view.

Scientists and Belief Pew Research Center s Religion Public Life Project

Not sure where your 85 percent came from.

The 85% I got came from a survey of AAAS scientists as quoted by someone I heard, maybe Neil DeGrasse Tyson. Those were the scientists I was referring to since they consists of the best scientists we've got. It may not be accurate but the survey definitely shows that the percentage of scientists who believe in religion or some supreme being or deity is substantially less than what we see in the general public. Even your bottom pie chart shows this to be true.

41 percent is hardly a consensus though. Wouldn't you agree?

Even your pie chart comes up with a figure of 48%. But I was referring to AAAS scientists. Did you not understand this?

This was as a survey of AAAS scientists. Did you not read that? Still 48% isn't a consensus.

48% as opposed to 95% of Americans in general is a significant difference. But my point remains that anyone who believes in a 6,000 year old Earth, or else rejects the most fundamental tenents of science is not fit to govern this country.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

No, Democrats elect community agitators with zero experience at anything.

Spare us your condescending bullshit... you people will elect anybody promising "free-shit" and to soak the "evil one-per centers" or whatever such idiocy.

Gee.. that's poignant.

What are you, like five?

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

1. You're trying to move the goalposts. Don't make this about what the so-called dastardly motives of what you want to call creationist groups are. You made a sweeping statement that an individual who believe in creationism is not qualified to be president. That's your bigoted standard for individuals. The groups isn't even a factor in that bottom line you presented.

No sir, I am not moving any goalposts. Creationists are not qualified to be president for the simple fact that they have repeatedly stated that they stated intend is to destroy our education system, which will also destroy our economy. anyone who believes they have a right to force their religious beliefs on others is not fit to govern in a free society. This has nothing to do with bigotry. Obviously you don't even know what the word means.

2. Creationism is not a denial of science. Your logic in that regard is fallacious. And your sweeping statement that those who believe in creationism is bigoted and offensive. If you had 'common sense' or rather if you drained yourself of your hateful bigotry, you'd not being spouting your dogma.

Absolutely, it is a denial of science. Don't be naive. Anyone who believes the universe is 6,000 years old is not fit to govern an advanced technological society such as ours. Anyone who believes that the Flintstones is a documentary is not fit to govern. Period.

3. I don't think that a history of the presidents' religions and beliefs in creationism are a serious topic of dispute. If anyone has anything to prove on that front it would be you.

You are the one who claimed that most of our presidents are creationists. It's your claim to prove. have at it.

The idea that a creationist is about destroying education is Reductio ad absurdum.

Creationists believe that the universe is 6,000 years old? No.

You are willfully obstinate. You don't have to go any further than the founding fathers to see how entrenched creationism is into this great nation.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

But my point remains that anyone who believes in a 6,000 year old Earth, or else rejects the most fundamental tenents of science is not fit to govern this country.

You're not fit to have a rational argument.

 

[orogenicman]

1. You're trying to move the goalposts. Don't make this about what the so-called dastardly motives of what you want to call creationist groups are. You made a sweeping statement that an individual who believe in creationism is not qualified to be president. That's your bigoted standard for individuals. The groups isn't even a factor in that bottom line you presented.

No sir, I am not moving any goalposts. Creationists are not qualified to be president for the simple fact that they have repeatedly stated that they stated intend is to destroy our education system, which will also destroy our economy. anyone who believes they have a right to force their religious beliefs on others is not fit to govern in a free society. This has nothing to do with bigotry. Obviously you don't even know what the word means.

2. Creationism is not a denial of science. Your logic in that regard is fallacious. And your sweeping statement that those who believe in creationism is bigoted and offensive. If you had 'common sense' or rather if you drained yourself of your hateful bigotry, you'd not being spouting your dogma.

Absolutely, it is a denial of science. Don't be naive. Anyone who believes the universe is 6,000 years old is not fit to govern an advanced technological society such as ours. Anyone who believes that the Flintstones is a documentary is not fit to govern. Period.

3. I don't think that a history of the presidents' religions and beliefs in creationism are a serious topic of dispute. If anyone has anything to prove on that front it would be you.

You are the one who claimed that most of our presidents are creationists. It's your claim to prove. have at it.

The idea that a creationist is about destroying education is Reductio ad absurdum.

Creationists believe that the universe is 6,000 years old? No.

You are willfully obstinate. You don't have to go any further than the founding fathers to see how entrenched creationism is into this great nation.

OMG! You are willfully ignorant and don't even know it.

THIS is creationism in all its shameful glory:

www.creationism.org

 

[Kosh]

1. You're trying to move the goalposts. Don't make this about what the so-called dastardly motives of what you want to call creationist groups are. You made a sweeping statement that an individual who believe in creationism is not qualified to be president. That's your bigoted standard for individuals. The groups isn't even a factor in that bottom line you presented.

No sir, I am not moving any goalposts. Creationists are not qualified to be president for the simple fact that they have repeatedly stated that they stated intend is to destroy our education system, which will also destroy our economy. anyone who believes they have a right to force their religious beliefs on others is not fit to govern in a free society. This has nothing to do with bigotry. Obviously you don't even know what the word means.

2. Creationism is not a denial of science. Your logic in that regard is fallacious. And your sweeping statement that those who believe in creationism is bigoted and offensive. If you had 'common sense' or rather if you drained yourself of your hateful bigotry, you'd not being spouting your dogma.

Absolutely, it is a denial of science. Don't be naive. Anyone who believes the universe is 6,000 years old is not fit to govern an advanced technological society such as ours. Anyone who believes that the Flintstones is a documentary is not fit to govern. Period.

3. I don't think that a history of the presidents' religions and beliefs in creationism are a serious topic of dispute. If anyone has anything to prove on that front it would be you.

You are the one who claimed that most of our presidents are creationists. It's your claim to prove. have at it.

The idea that a creationist is about destroying education is Reductio ad absurdum.

Creationists believe that the universe is 6,000 years old? No.

You are willfully obstinate. You don't have to go any further than the founding fathers to see how entrenched creationism is into this great nation.

OMG! You are willfully ignorant and don't even know it.

THIS is creationism in all its shameful glory:

www.creationism.org[/QUOTE]

This from a far left drone that showed they do not understand evolution. They believe so much in evolution they have no clue what it is.

Then again the far left does not believe in evolution..

 

[Papageorgio]

1. You're trying to move the goalposts. Don't make this about what the so-called dastardly motives of what you want to call creationist groups are. You made a sweeping statement that an individual who believe in creationism is not qualified to be president. That's your bigoted standard for individuals. The groups isn't even a factor in that bottom line you presented.

No sir, I am not moving any goalposts. Creationists are not qualified to be president for the simple fact that they have repeatedly stated that they stated intend is to destroy our education system, which will also destroy our economy. anyone who believes they have a right to force their religious beliefs on others is not fit to govern in a free society. This has nothing to do with bigotry. Obviously you don't even know what the word means.

2. Creationism is not a denial of science. Your logic in that regard is fallacious. And your sweeping statement that those who believe in creationism is bigoted and offensive. If you had 'common sense' or rather if you drained yourself of your hateful bigotry, you'd not being spouting your dogma.

Absolutely, it is a denial of science. Don't be naive. Anyone who believes the universe is 6,000 years old is not fit to govern an advanced technological society such as ours. Anyone who believes that the Flintstones is a documentary is not fit to govern. Period.

3. I don't think that a history of the presidents' religions and beliefs in creationism are a serious topic of dispute. If anyone has anything to prove on that front it would be you.

You are the one who claimed that most of our presidents are creationists. It's your claim to prove. have at it.

Just because people believe in Creationism does not mean that they believe the Earth is 6,000 years old.
Very few Christians who believe in Creation believe that.

Then they don't believe in creationism. I don't know where you people have been living these past 30 years, but it is clear that many creationists hold to a silly notion of very young Earth. We've been fighting them, actually, since Darwin published Origin of Species.

Most the people that I know don't believe in your version of creationism. Most of those that I know don't believe in creationism is a denial of science, nor do they state that they want to destroy the education system. I'm not sure,where you are getting your info but I believe it is wrong.

 

[rdean]

My question from post 158:

If you owned a business and someone applied for a job and during the application process, they said evolution is a lie, climate change a conspiracy, science is a faith and education is for snobs and they dropped out of school, would you hire them? For what?

From these posts, it seems if you are right leaning, the answer would be either CEO or political leadership position. But if you are left leaning, the answer would be "start by emptying that".

If the job entailed scientific work or making policy decisions regarding science, you bet your sweet ass I would not hire him

But doesn't every job require some kind of decision making? Being able to reason a decision based on facts?
People who believe science is a faith have no reason. There is no reason in magical creation. It's based on a "feeling" with zero credible information or fact.
And anyone who believes education is for snobs, like Rick Santorum, is a fool.
I would have no problem with insisting all my employees have their children vaccinated. It is certainly a reasonable question when hiring. If your children aren't vaccinated, you won't want to work here.

With all the scientific evidence available for evolution and someone comes to the conclusion that we were shimmered into being from a pile of dirt by a man looking spirit in wizard robes and sandals is someone I would never trust with anything. Certainly no decisions more important than picking out the pattern for my toilet paper. And even then............

The president of the U.S. makes significant policy decisions regarding science in this country, and regarding science education, both of which are significant issues impacting our future. The country can ill afford a president who is clueless about what is essentially basic science.

Bush did. And top notch scientists fled. These types are jobs are not filled overnight.

Scientists Say Bush Stifles Science and Lets Global Leadership Slip

Remember when McCain and Palin made fun of the Honeybee's dying off? How stupid can you get? How many right wingernuts on this site say scientists live off their degrees and add nothing to the country? That scientists are stupid and are over educated and can't take care of themselves and have no common sense. I've heard it all here at the USMB. The most ignorant are the ones who say they have scientist friends or co workers and are constantly correcting them because they really don't know that much after all.

 

[rdean]

1. You're trying to move the goalposts. Don't make this about what the so-called dastardly motives of what you want to call creationist groups are. You made a sweeping statement that an individual who believe in creationism is not qualified to be president. That's your bigoted standard for individuals. The groups isn't even a factor in that bottom line you presented.

No sir, I am not moving any goalposts. Creationists are not qualified to be president for the simple fact that they have repeatedly stated that they stated intend is to destroy our education system, which will also destroy our economy. anyone who believes they have a right to force their religious beliefs on others is not fit to govern in a free society. This has nothing to do with bigotry. Obviously you don't even know what the word means.

2. Creationism is not a denial of science. Your logic in that regard is fallacious. And your sweeping statement that those who believe in creationism is bigoted and offensive. If you had 'common sense' or rather if you drained yourself of your hateful bigotry, you'd not being spouting your dogma.

Absolutely, it is a denial of science. Don't be naive. Anyone who believes the universe is 6,000 years old is not fit to govern an advanced technological society such as ours. Anyone who believes that the Flintstones is a documentary is not fit to govern. Period.

3. I don't think that a history of the presidents' religions and beliefs in creationism are a serious topic of dispute. If anyone has anything to prove on that front it would be you.

You are the one who claimed that most of our presidents are creationists. It's your claim to prove. have at it.

The idea that a creationist is about destroying education is Reductio ad absurdum.

Creationists believe that the universe is 6,000 years old? No.

You are willfully obstinate. You don't have to go any further than the founding fathers to see how entrenched creationism is into this great nation.

OMG! You are willfully ignorant and don't even know it.

THIS is creationism in all its shameful glory:

www.creationism.org[/QUOTE]

This from a far left drone that showed they do not understand evolution. They believe so much in evolution they have no clue what it is.

Then again the far left does not believe in evolution..

You said: Then again the far left does not believe in evolution..

That's bullshit and you know it. The Democratic Party is a coalition. Sure some don't believe in evolution or climate change. But the Democrats aren't 90% white and don't insist their political leaders be as stupid as possible.

For people who hate science and education, it's weird the way Republicans insist most scientists are Republican.

 

[peach174]

1. You're trying to move the goalposts. Don't make this about what the so-called dastardly motives of what you want to call creationist groups are. You made a sweeping statement that an individual who believe in creationism is not qualified to be president. That's your bigoted standard for individuals. The groups isn't even a factor in that bottom line you presented.

No sir, I am not moving any goalposts. Creationists are not qualified to be president for the simple fact that they have repeatedly stated that they stated intend is to destroy our education system, which will also destroy our economy. anyone who believes they have a right to force their religious beliefs on others is not fit to govern in a free society. This has nothing to do with bigotry. Obviously you don't even know what the word means.

2. Creationism is not a denial of science. Your logic in that regard is fallacious. And your sweeping statement that those who believe in creationism is bigoted and offensive. If you had 'common sense' or rather if you drained yourself of your hateful bigotry, you'd not being spouting your dogma.

Absolutely, it is a denial of science. Don't be naive. Anyone who believes the universe is 6,000 years old is not fit to govern an advanced technological society such as ours. Anyone who believes that the Flintstones is a documentary is not fit to govern. Period.

3. I don't think that a history of the presidents' religions and beliefs in creationism are a serious topic of dispute. If anyone has anything to prove on that front it would be you.

You are the one who claimed that most of our presidents are creationists. It's your claim to prove. have at it.

Just because people believe in Creationism does not mean that they believe the Earth is 6,000 years old.
Very few Christians who believe in Creation believe that.

Then they don't believe in creationism. I don't know where you people have been living these past 30 years, but it is clear that many creationists hold to a silly notion of very young Earth. We've been fighting them, actually, since Darwin published Origin of Species.

Yes we do believe in Creation.
There is a difference in the belief of Creation and Creationists ( who are a small number of people that believe the Earth is only 6,000 years old)

http://ncse.com/rncse/30/3/americans-scientific-knowledge-beliefs-human-evolution-year-

The earth is less than 10,000 years old. 18%- True 69% - False

 

[NYcarbineer]

1. You're trying to move the goalposts. Don't make this about what the so-called dastardly motives of what you want to call creationist groups are. You made a sweeping statement that an individual who believe in creationism is not qualified to be president. That's your bigoted standard for individuals. The groups isn't even a factor in that bottom line you presented.

No sir, I am not moving any goalposts. Creationists are not qualified to be president for the simple fact that they have repeatedly stated that they stated intend is to destroy our education system, which will also destroy our economy. anyone who believes they have a right to force their religious beliefs on others is not fit to govern in a free society. This has nothing to do with bigotry. Obviously you don't even know what the word means.

2. Creationism is not a denial of science. Your logic in that regard is fallacious. And your sweeping statement that those who believe in creationism is bigoted and offensive. If you had 'common sense' or rather if you drained yourself of your hateful bigotry, you'd not being spouting your dogma.

Absolutely, it is a denial of science. Don't be naive. Anyone who believes the universe is 6,000 years old is not fit to govern an advanced technological society such as ours. Anyone who believes that the Flintstones is a documentary is not fit to govern. Period.

3. I don't think that a history of the presidents' religions and beliefs in creationism are a serious topic of dispute. If anyone has anything to prove on that front it would be you.

You are the one who claimed that most of our presidents are creationists. It's your claim to prove. have at it.

The idea that a creationist is about destroying education is Reductio ad absurdum.

Creationists believe that the universe is 6,000 years old? No.

You are willfully obstinate. You don't have to go any further than the founding fathers to see how entrenched creationism is into this great nation.

So there are no Young Earth proponents?

So there are no Americans who believe the Bible is the infallible word of God?

 

[NYcarbineer]

1. You're trying to move the goalposts. Don't make this about what the so-called dastardly motives of what you want to call creationist groups are. You made a sweeping statement that an individual who believe in creationism is not qualified to be president. That's your bigoted standard for individuals. The groups isn't even a factor in that bottom line you presented.

No sir, I am not moving any goalposts. Creationists are not qualified to be president for the simple fact that they have repeatedly stated that they stated intend is to destroy our education system, which will also destroy our economy. anyone who believes they have a right to force their religious beliefs on others is not fit to govern in a free society. This has nothing to do with bigotry. Obviously you don't even know what the word means.

2. Creationism is not a denial of science. Your logic in that regard is fallacious. And your sweeping statement that those who believe in creationism is bigoted and offensive. If you had 'common sense' or rather if you drained yourself of your hateful bigotry, you'd not being spouting your dogma.

Absolutely, it is a denial of science. Don't be naive. Anyone who believes the universe is 6,000 years old is not fit to govern an advanced technological society such as ours. Anyone who believes that the Flintstones is a documentary is not fit to govern. Period.

3. I don't think that a history of the presidents' religions and beliefs in creationism are a serious topic of dispute. If anyone has anything to prove on that front it would be you.

You are the one who claimed that most of our presidents are creationists. It's your claim to prove. have at it.

Just because people believe in Creationism does not mean that they believe the Earth is 6,000 years old.
Very few Christians who believe in Creation believe that.

Then they don't believe in creationism. I don't know where you people have been living these past 30 years, but it is clear that many creationists hold to a silly notion of very young Earth. We've been fighting them, actually, since Darwin published Origin of Species.

Most the people that I know don't believe in your version of creationism. Most of those that I know don't believe in creationism is a denial of science, nor do they state that they want to destroy the education system. I'm not sure,where you are getting your info but I believe it is wrong.

Belief in creationism is a belief that has no scientific support whatsoever, so whatever creationism is, it's not science.