U.K. Citizens Doubt Darwinism And Richard Dawkins Is Upset About It »
Posted By Revelation1412 10 months, 3 weeks ago in Religion
A new poll reveals that even in the U.K., the public seriously doubts Charles Darwin's theory of evolution, and prominent atheist Richard Dawkins is seriously upset about it.
Read Full Story at thefinalhour.blogspot.com »
732 Views Share Story 93 Comments Report
Submitted By:
Revelation1412
I am just learning how to use Propeller so feel free to stop by and say "hello"!
Who Also Submitted: All »
- 3The Senate Health Care Bill: 4 Health Plan Templates – 2 Places To Buy Them – 1 Giant Socialist Mess
- 3The Equality Bill: Will A New Law Essentially Outlaw Evangelical Christianity And Roman Catholicism In The U.K.?
- 6Children Across The United States Are Being Coerced Into Taking The H1N1 Swine Flu Vaccine
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentShowing 92 of 93 Comments (view all)
-
29%
Dionys10 months, 3 weeks ago
-
-
30%
Mutainia10 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
If I were an atheist, I'd want to keep it to myself and hope EVERYone was trying to be good to please a sky daddy who says "thou shalt not", so I could be a wolf in sheep's clothing. I'd be HAPPY that people were losing faith in Darwin, meaning that they may not be as sneaky and evil as I, which, I think, I WOULD be IF I were an atheist, due to my cutting off feelings of love to survive. And, it WOULD be just to survive, with a mixture of a never ending biting question of ..."why should I survive?" going through my mind when realizing ithe high probability of it being a humiliating losing game in the end for me anyway. But, I'm not an atheist, and, unlike an atheist, I think love is MORE than just a chemical reaction inside the brain. That love and caring of one's fellow beings, and reverence for God, is where it's at, and, IS, really, where all meaning comes from. I really don't see how a REAL atheist makes it without cutting off his feelings toward those loved ones of whom he WILL, eventually, lose forever to the ticking sands of time.
Reply -
100%
memestryker10 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The usual crock from the indoctrinated.
Reply
Ignorance knows no bounds--and now research suggests humans want to believe what everyone else believes. They just want to. Probably offers survival value--a vestige of evolution.
I've always thought that given the average intelligence, the percentage falling below it, and the gullibility of humans generally, there is a huge soft market for brainwashing.
Why would anyone think the Brits are any less gullible, or any more intelligent, than the Americans?
Richard Dawkins is just so much brighter than most people, he sees through a lot more of the cultural smoke and mirrors. Most people don't even look. -
100%
oneironaut42010 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Please provide evidence that atheism generates more anger in people than any religions do. Links to behavioral websites will do, or psychology websites. I'll be happy to read the reports of studies conducted on people which conclude that atheists have higher rates of anger problems than anyone else.
Reply
Oh...except that you're not going to be able to find any. Well, thanks anyhow for your opinion, it has been filed away exactly where it belongs. 8D
-
-
100%
gamahuche10 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This hotch-potch of misinterpretation evoked no responses at its point of origin - "the final hour" blogspot and hardly seems worth bringing to propeller.
Reply
As far as it makes a case it seems that the "thinking'" is that all of these fossils existed and then suddenyl G_d apppeared and "did" evolution.
But if G_d made the world in 7 days or whatever, who the heck made the original fossils - and if it was "Him" why did he need a nap for so many eons?
He couldn't just have just reincarnated a couple of million years later.
As for Richard Dawkins' demeanour - is that relevant to anything in the story?
That said I found the results of the survey astounding and assume that it was poorly conducted or that all the smart people have left.-
100%
dissent10 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"As for Richard Dawkins' demeanour - is that relevant to anything in the story?"
Reply
only in so far as it is, in some overly contrived and desperate way, being used as some kind of evidence of the existence god, convincing only to the, eh.... converted.
but even the claim that he is "upset" appears to be greatly exaggerated
-
-
-
100%
Tangent00110 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Ah, yes:
Reply
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TSqkdcT25ss -
-
-
13%
Endoscopy10 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
This story points out some of the problems that evolution has. Back when all we knew about cells was that they existed it was easy to conjecture that life came out of the primordial goo and that things could change from one species to another. The more we learn about DNA and how the organism uses it and how incredibly complex a cell is the more impossible that evolution becomes. Atheists put the blinders on and come up with what are really red herring issues to answer. Christian evolutionists have a much more believable way of defending it. God caused the changes.
Reply
Darwin himself said that if the fossil record did not show the gradual transition then his idea was false. Atheistic evolutionists ignore that.-
-
-
-
100%
Tangent00110 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"God caused the changes."
Reply
So let me get this straight: God created a planet with enough 'eccentricities' built in to ensure the climate radically changes every several thousand years or so, necessitating 'tweaks' within the set of species He created? Seems terrible inefficient to me.
95% of the species that have even drawn breath on this planet are extinct. -
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user3 Replies
-
-
100%
CRYMTYPHON10 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Why call evolution 'darwinism'?
Reply
it is a field beholden to no one man, however great.
Why not call belief in electricity 'faradaism'?
And the creed of gravity, 'newtonism'?
And the affirmation of the period table 'Mendeleevianism' ?
And let's call the faith that pressure and volume of a gas trapped in an enclosure are inversely proportional, 'Boylism' !
Darwin never heard of DNA, nor most of the math and methods we use to understand genetic selection. The amusing insistence of
creationists in referring to Darwin, is solely because it is easier to attack a man, than a science.
At least, when you are wrong. -
100%
quackpot10 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
The problem with trying to explain the natural world by rejecting all rational thought and ascribing the unknown to the hand of God is that the hand of God explanation offers no opportunity to advance ones knowledge.
Reply
The scientific discoveries that enrich all of our lives are based on the process of seeking a rational explanation for natural phenomena. To attempt to discredit the scientific approach on because we do not know everything about the natural world is just silly.
People who set up an artificial competition between science and religion are either too ignorant of their ignorance (i.e. Dawkins) or are insecure about their own religious beliefs.-
75%
Dionys10 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"People who set up an artificial competition between science and religion are either too ignorant of their ignorance (i.e. Dawkins) or are insecure about their own religious beliefs."
Reply
THANK YOU!
I never understand why the same people who expect religion to stay out of science require that religion, faith, spirituality, belief be REQUIRED to conform to empiric proof and scientific thought.
-
-
50%
antibrainwasher10 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I understand Dawkins frustration with ignorant morons who think the baby jew god floating invisible head of charleton Heston created the universe from a cloud of flatulence 5000 years ago. What an insane thing to teach children, but that's what creationists do, they poison the minds of children.
Reply
Creationists are a ball and chain on humanity, dragging society into the festering crap filled toilet of their mega churches. Religion is a steaming cauldren of liquid crap.
Creationists are the scum of the planet.-
capecoralMComment removed: Retracted by user6 Replies
-
-
-
0%
pc2510 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaGgpGLxLQw
Reply-
100%
CRYMTYPHON10 months, 3 weeks ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Things that should make you cautious:
Reply
-candy left on the bench by a stranger.
-email from the treasury of Nigeria.
-anonymous notes on your windsheild.
- the strange box abandoned in the airport.
-friendly strangers on the phone who know your first name.
-an unexplained link from Pc25.
-
-
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.