Evolution

[CardiacCoug]

I think accepting (or "believing in") evolution is one of those litmus tests that distinguishes intelligent, educated people from ignorant religious fanatics.

Sorry, just being honest.

[LA Ute]

I think accepting (or "believing in") evolution is one of those litmus tests that distinguishes intelligent, educated people from ignorant religious fanatics.

Sorry, just being honest.

Good, this is what I want in an interventionalist: decisiveness and strong, well-formed opinions. None of that chin-stroking internal medicine diagnostician nonsense.

[DU Ute]

I think accepting (or "believing in") evolution is one of those litmus tests that distinguishes intelligent, educated people from ignorant religious fanatics.

Sorry, just being honest.

I agree.

[LA Ute]

I agree.

We expect this of Ute fans. Dog bites man. Yawn.

[creekster]

I think accepting (or "believing in") evolution is one of those litmus tests that distinguishes intelligent, educated people from ignorant religious fanatics.

Sorry, just being honest.

I think saying you 'believe' in evolution shows that you have missed the mark a bit. I also think it likely does not correlate with intelligence, but it likely does correlate with education. The best evidence supports evolution. It really has little to do with belief or intelligence, but with an understanding and explanation of the best evidence. IMO.

[CardiacCoug]

I think saying you 'believe' in evolution shows that you have missed the mark a bit. I also think it likely does not correlate with intelligence, but it likely does correlate with education. The best evidence supports evolution. It really has little to do with belief or intelligence, but with an understanding and explanation of the best evidence. IMO.

Agreed -- it's not a belief at all. That's why I said accept and then put the word believe in quotes, because that's the way lay people often express it (like Jon Huntsman in his tweet).

[creekster]

Agreed -- it's not a belief at all. That's why I said accept and then put the word believe in quotes, because that's the way lay people often express it (like Jon Huntsman in his tweet).

I know you didn't say "believe" for yourself, I was just making a comment. OTOH, I think the distinction I drew between intelligence and education did apply to your comment.

[CardiacCoug]

I know you didn't say "believe" for yourself, I was just making a comment. OTOH, I think the distinction I drew between intelligence and education did apply to your comment.

Boy talk about splitting hairs. I'm pretty sure evolution is taught in 8th grade biology (even in Utah!). So sure I will concede that intelligent people who don't complete junior high may not be educated enough to accept evolution.

[Dwight Schr-ute]

Boy talk about splitting hairs. I'm pretty sure evolution is taught in 8th grade biology (even in Utah!). So sure I will concede that intelligent people who don't complete junior high may not be educated enough to accept evolution.

This is a highly educated and intelligent comment. As the Brits would say, "Brilliant."

[creekster]

Boy talk about splitting hairs. I'm pretty sure evolution is taught in 8th grade biology (even in Utah!). So sure I will concede that intelligent people who don't complete junior high may not be educated enough to accept evolution.

It is a meaningful distinction to me. I didn't really mean to complain about your post, but by nature I tend to react against things that strike me as intellectually elitist. I am not comfortable implicitly ridiculing people who don't understand evolution as being less intelligent than me. That is rarely the case. Most people I have encountered who do not accept evolution will, after a reasonable discussion, accept the factual predicates. It isn't that they are too stupid, it is that they simply weren't properly educated. I think sometimes (and I do not mean you necessarily) we are far too ready to assume people are stupid when, in fact, they simply haven't been educated properly. Again, this wasn't meant to attack you personally, but it was meant to point out that we should be moderate in our criticism of anyone we think doesnt accept facts that we find well established.

ANd, btw, what some science teachers teach kids about evolution is far from adequate to combat some of the hair-brained ideas they will encounter elsewhere. In fact, sometimes they present those hair-brained ideas to the kids. So, yes, from your POV I guess it is a split hair. from my POV it is important to remember that almost all people are intelligent enough to understand these things, they just need to be educated.

[Spicy McHaggis]

This guy then td the class that the Telestial kingdom was going to be full of liars, adulterers, and scientists.

If the adulterers are hot women, I'm all for the Telestial Kingdom.

[Flystripper]

I realize that this is a thread about Calvin and Hobbs but I've been waiting fir evolution to be discussed on the board for awhile now. I did a search for it and was stunned that nothing came back in the search.

As a biologist, evolution essentially underlies every principle that I studied in college. Needless to say, the study and merger of science and religion was always an interesting process. One thing was for sure though. I always belived the science first. Which is to say that I was trying to stretch the scriptures into the science opposed to squeezing the science into the dogma.

I remember taking ainstitute class while at Utah State about the Pearl of Great Price. In discussing the creation, the instructor spent some significant time talking about evolution. This guy then td the class that the Telestial kingdom was going to be full of liars, adulterers, and scientists.

I td him that me and the Eyrings thought he was an idiot and then walked out.

Search for posts by woot

[Moliere]

I haven't watched it yet, but looks like the debate between Bill Nye and Ken Ham didn't go so well for science....

http://www.thedailybeast.com/article...r-science.html

In one all-too-typical two-minute span, Nye started out by explaining how evolutionary biologists make predictions. He then veered into the sexual habits of minnows, suddenly jumped to the number of bacteria in the human gut, discussed the amount of energy required for roses to produce fruit, told the story about how his first cousin (once removed) died from the flu, and then bounced back to the horny minnows, with reference to certain fish diseases. All of this talk about sex and germs will make sense if you’re familiar with the Red Queen hypothesis. If you’re not, good luck. Five topics in two minutes, with extensive prior knowledge assumed: science communication in action!

I wonder if the biggest issue at play here is that scientists, in general, are not salesmen/politicians while evangelists are trained in that sort of thing. Too bad Bill Nye didn't just let the science talk.

[tooblue]

Mathematical Challenges to Darwin’s Theory of Evolution

with Berlinski, Meyer, and Gelernter

[MartyFunkhouser]