You can be two out of three, and that ain't bad, but you can be prosperous, and you can be industrious, but you can't believe in creationist nonsense and be "rational" all at the same time.
I do know how this works though, and I can see some sort of caveat coming up, so let's have it. What do you mean by "creationist"?
I know you don't think the earth is 10,000 years old, or any other of the common creationist weirdness. I know you don't think that's rational. So what do you mean?
__________________
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to RougeUnderoos For This Useful Post:
I simply don't believe the numbers. There's no way that over a third of Albertans are creationists. The demographics don't support it. Catholics are being taught evolution in school, not taught creationism. Public schools are taught evolution in school, not creationism.
The poll itself surveyed 1,510 Canadians in 2012. If we assume that it's relative to population (which could be very incorrect), we're looking at less than 200 Albertan's polled. Furthermore, the surveys themselves are conducted by people who go on and take multiple surveys and after doing enough they earn $50 cheques. That very concept skews the results, I would say you're much less likely to get a survey conducted by say a downtown professional as compared to certain other demographics.
Every poll it's conducted in regards to Alberta's politics has been favoured for the Wildrose Party. In 2012 (note that it says 2011, but that's wrong), it had the Wildrose over the PC with 41% to 32% when the PC party got 44% the very next day (difference of 12%). http://angusreidglobal.com/wp-conten...olitics_AB.pdf
An election wasn't around the time, so it can't be directly compared, but the next election saw them get under 25% of the vote.
And then there's the weird discrepancies in some of their polls that don't really have much reasoning. 70% of males believe in evolution to 55% of females in the same area? What's up with that. http://angusreidglobal.com/wp-conten....05_CreEvo.pdf
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Oling_Roachinen For This Useful Post:
It doesn't mean that 35 percent of Albertan believe only in Creationism, I don't think. It could mean people believe in Evolution and God creating the universe at the same time.
FYI. The big bang and Evolution are not Proven Science. They are theories.
It doesn't mean that 35 percent of Albertan believe only in Creationism, I don't think. It could mean people believe in Evolution and God creating the universe at the same time.
FYI. The big bang and Evolution are not Proven Science. They are theories.
Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
The options were:
"Human beings evolved from less
advanced life forms over millions of
years"
And
"God created human beings in their
present form within the last 10,000
years"
Participants were expected to pick the option that came closest to the their beliefs. Picking the latter is clearly a vote for Creationism. I do agree that the options were limited but if you believe in intelligent design and evolution, as is taught by Catholicism and many other Christian sects, then the first option was clearly the choice meant to be selected because it is not ruling out God's intervention. The second option very clearly rules out any form of evolution.
For what it's worth, Christian ≠ creationist... as this post seems to imply. My church is one of several that accepts evolution as an entirely valid explanation for all living things.
Carry on.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Acey For This Useful Post:
I knew one creationist in high school. It was public school too... she tried to claim dinosaur bones were planted by someone for some reason and that the carbon dating evidence could have been skewed due to "the environment".
It was really embarrassing to hear.
I wonder if we knew the same person....unless..shudder...there is more than one. She believed dinosaurs were made up by the government and their fossils planted to hide all the oil. Or something like that, I could never figure out the details or motive.
I wonder if we knew the same person....unless..shudder...there is more than one. She believed dinosaurs were made up by the government and their fossils planted to hide all the oil. Or something like that, I could never figure out the details or motive.
I worked with a guy like this as well. Said the dinosaur bones were planted, govt conspiracy, etc.
I simply don't believe the numbers. There's no way that over a third of Albertans are creationists.
Tend to agree with you on this. At least in urban settings in a country like Canada, standard polling methods are an outdated way of figuring out public opinion on something. It's getting more and more inaccurate as time goes on. Don't know if this is also true elsewhere but it seems to be the case here.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
You can be two out of three, and that ain't bad, but you can be prosperous, and you can be industrious, but you can't believe in creationist nonsense and be "rational" all at the same time.
I don't know that this is true. It's actually amazing how much the human brain can compartmentalize. A person can hold downright insane beliefs about one particular thing (or even a series of absurd crazy beliefs about a particular subject or area of life), and in all other spheres operate perfectly intelligibly.
__________________ "The great promise of the Internet was that more information would automatically yield better decisions. The great disappointment is that more information actually yields more possibilities to confirm what you already believed anyway." - Brian Eno
The Following User Says Thank You to CorsiHockeyLeague For This Useful Post:
FYI. The big bang and Evolution are not Proven Science. They are theories.
Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk
Ya, lets not go down that road of talking about "proven science" vs scientific theories, because most people (creationists) that bring this up actually have no clue what a scientific theory is- I think they assume it is an unsubstantiated guess or something, when it is actually a well substantiated explanation based on observation and experiment
Here is a theory for example- you wrote your post using Tapatalk on an SM-G920W8.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Flabbibulin For This Useful Post:
They say it was an online survey, and that 1510 Canadians were surveyed, who are Angus Reid Forum Panelists...whatever that means. It also doesn't really give any demographic of the people surveyed. In fact, other than the supposed data they collected, they really gave no other information about those surveyed.
Quote:
The results have been statistically weighted according to the most current education, age, gender and region Census data to ensure a sample representative of the
entire adult population of each country.
I've lived in Alberta my whole life and I've never met a creationist. I've met people who think the dinosaurs were a big conspiracy theory, but it was more linked to the person being a tin-foil hat warrior rather than a religious view.
I know someone who believes that Dinosaur bones were planted by the devil to lead us astray. I'm not surprised by the numbers, there's still plenty of older people and bible thumpers pumping their kids heads full of this stuff.
So you should have the right to limit their Charter-guaranteed rights because... why?
It isn't a guaranteed right to teach such ideas in public school. If they want to disadvantage their community by teaching things that allow them to aspire to stone age living standards in their churches and private schools then so be it. Heck, establish a class on mythology and teach all of the world's creation myths, the importance to the numerous cultures that sprouted them, how they've influenced art and storytelling and so on... but never, ever pretend that creationism holds equivalence to any sort of evidence based theory until there is proper evidence to support it. It is irresponsible and even dangerous to teach children creationism on the same level as evolution.
Science isn't a collection of subjects like chemistry and biology, it is a way of thinking. Teaching our children to be curious, to challenge established authority in a healthy fashion, thinking logically but also being able to make leaps of intuitive creativity to break barriers, communicating challenging concepts effectively, bearing the burden of repeatability, being able to change one's mind (or indeed, very many minds) in the face of strong evidence, and giving them the tools to do all of these wonderful things is the very basis of every significant piece of progress in our culture and standard of living in the modern Era. Take that away, risk that, and we regress.
Carl Sagan said it far better than I ever could:
When people are allowed to influence public health and well being with phrases like "the science isn't settled" and then point to narrow data sets that obfuscate opinion, and worse, action, on critical issues you can be assured that it isn't the data sets or the theories that aren't settled, it is the very way the public grasps the scientific method. It is no longer acceptable to lack an understanding of science, based on the technological capabilities of our civilization. Those aren't slowing down.
This isn't a statement about ignorance. Indeed, for every question science answers, many more get created. Therfore science actually is better at growing the amount of things we do not know. So it is true, science expands our collective ignorance. However, it also expands out awareness.
To not accept basic fact and join the rest of cultured civilization eventually will result in a scenario which could ruin us. And frankly, I don't trust that those who would lead us down this path wouldn't welcome it as an inevitable judgement of their God. Sorry, but f that. You see this time and again with folks who refuse medical treatments for themselves or their children as a means to put up collateral on their beliefs that they won't get into Heaven without following the rules. Great... do that to yourself but the second that starts to extend beyond that tiny circle it is a problem that needs to be discussed.
This sacred cow of believing faith and theocratic teachings of faith to be forever static and unwavering on the extreme right, and the subsequent sacred cow of political correctness to defend the right to do so on the extreme left has got to be one of the greatest risks to our society and frankly it comes down to poor thinking. It's not because we aren't capable of thinking clearly either, it is becuase we are taught or lead to think otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos
I don't know about "normally".
You can be two out of three, and that ain't bad, but you can be prosperous, and you can be industrious, but you can't believe in creationist nonsense and be "rational" all at the same time.
Not true. It's perfectly rational provided you have the requisite beliefs. If you BELIEVE that you cannot get into Heaven if you challenge the idea that God created all of the Universe as prescribed in the text, then it is perfectly rational to be a creationist. So in my mind there is a 4th character trait on top of industrious, rational and prosperous for these folks - AFRAID.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Biff
If the NHL ever needs an enema, Edmonton is where they'll insert it.
The Following User Says Thank You to SeeGeeWhy For This Useful Post:
