Anglo-Saxon attitudes: Polls show US and UK may have less in common than they think

[Praxius]

Uhm, last I knew evolutionary theory stated that species adapted to their environments as environmental pressures caused different traits to have more or less success with mating. How does that apply to the earth forming from rock exactly? I see what you're saying, but, you're totally wrong...

Of course I'm totally wrong when it comes to the Animal connection.... once again.... interpretation ;-) I took that explination, along with a varried slew of other concepts for my overall understanding of things.

Even the Earth, other planets, the sun, moons, etc. are all affected and change based on their surrounding environments. I just took it to the next level

edited to add.... there is no 'open for interpretation' with an actual scientific theory. Either a process fits the theory as science accepts it, or it does not. :lol:

Um.... that's a theory though... not proven. Therefore if it is not able to be proven, it is open for interp. That's how the scientific process works.... it in its own evolves its scientific understanding over time as new things are discovered and understood better. If science is going to dictate to us what something is and it's not open for further study or interpretaion, then it's no better then a religion

(See previous posts from me on this matter in other threads in regards to connections between religion and science.)

Am I saying what I am explaining is the right answer? Nope.... of course nobody has the right answers yet either, as we are seeing in this thread.

The one thing that seperates Science from Religion at this point in our humanity, is that Science is still "evolving" and growing too... it is still a young human understanding which is only a couple of centuries old or so.

For me, evolution means change. Counter-Evolution for me means going back to the way things were.

 

[karrie]

You have to look too though at the fact that it's a survey. And being a survey, they are often very slanted by 'social desirability bias'... ie, people answering (even subconsciously), the way they think will make them look good, not necessarily with the full truth.

One could argue that the Americans are simply more arrogant and answer more truthfully. :lol:

 

[Praxius]

You have to look too though at the fact that it's a survey. And being a survey, they are often very slanted by 'social desirability bias'... ie, people answering (even subconsciously), the way they think will make them look good, not necessarily with the full truth.

One could argue that the Americans are simply more arrogant and answer more truthfully. :lol:

Well you hit on the point in why I don't follow statistics/surveys very much (Or follow it losely)

Then again, thinking about that, why wouldn't someone answer truthfully? I haven't seen a survey or statistic that said "Pearl Wiltkinson said she thought the world was flat, HA HA HA..... " When the public views these, they don't see someone in paticular in these.

Meh.... of course some people probably do think about what they might say, even if it goes against their honest viewpoint in their minds
(Silly people.... be free like me .... you might not have many friends when you do, but at least you'll make people think.)

 

[DurkaDurka]

Hey, if you question the word of God you are sinning. Are you a Chreaster? One of those pretend Christians who attends Church at only Christmas and Easter?

wow, so people like you aren't a myth.

 

[DurkaDurka]

Hey lone wolf,Christianity is defined as the belief in Christ and God, if you dont believe in them then you are less of a Christian than the people who do, your argument doesn't even make sense

Do you believe the new testament to be the literal word of god?

 

[Dexter Sinister]

Ah, but the Earth too evolved itself from a molten pile of rock, to what we have now.... evolution isn't just locked to living creatures per say.

You're using two different meanings of evolution. The theory of evolution is indeed about living things and only about living things, there's no natural selection at work on geological processes. That was karrie's original objection: the theory of evolution and the creation of the earth have nothing to do with each other, and if the survey actually put it in the terms suggested by the way the results were reported, it was a deeply ignorant question.

 

[karrie]

Ah, how I love Dexter when he's on my side... lol... ;-)

 

[Zzarchov]

Hey, if you question the word of God you are sinning. Are you a Chreaster? One of those pretend Christians who attends Church at only Christmas and Easter?

Wait, so you read the King James version?

So your basing that to be christian you need to read a newer version of the bible that different than older versions, because it has to be taken literally?

Question 2.) Literal according to who. Who decides what word means what?

The whole point of the reformation was to end stuff like that.

Perhaps your religious views would be better served by converting to becoming a Catholic demonination or an Eastern Orthodox christian.

In the mean time, Protestantism is all about the fact that you don't get to decide if someone else is christian, or if they are interpreting the bible right, thats there job.

Also, stop focusing on sin, you exist in sin and sin is irrelevant, if you are a KJV you should know sin doesn't matter, only faith in Jesus Christ as your personal saviour.

 

[thomaska]

i am just trying to help you see the error of your ways so that you may try to correct them in order to get to heaven, im sorry if i insulted you, but sining is sining, and needs to be identified as such so the sinner mey correct him or herself and so that others do not fall into the same trap

You need to be a little more sneaky with the trolling. This level of transparency provides only short term, shot from the hip, entertainment.

I have to sit in front of this computer all day. Make the drama more fun please.

 

[Praxius]

You're using two different meanings of evolution. The theory of evolution is indeed about living things and only about living things, there's no natural selection at work on geological processes. That was karrie's original objection: the theory of evolution and the creation of the earth have nothing to do with each other, and if the survey actually put it in the terms suggested by the way the results were reported, it was a deeply ignorant question.

Perhaps I should have clarified that I don't personally follow any explinations, guidelines or understands exactly as most do.

To me, based on your explination above, you pointed out two different meanings of evolution.... so I am assuming you believe what I explained about everything evolving sorta makes sense (Just not in regards to the evolution of species theory alone which Karrie was referring to.)

So if that is the case and the term of evolution, depending on the term in which one uses, can be applied to how the Earth was created.

Does this mean Karrie was incorrect or are you claiming she is correct on her pet peeve of people using that term? Or was she specifically referring to people using the theory of evolution itself (Based on it's general classification on living creatures) for reference to the planet? I haven't met too many people who did that.

But.... on the flip side, depending on who you ask, some would considder the planet alive.... Mother Nature and all. If some considder the planet itself as alive, then the theory of evolution could still apply.

(Further down the rabbit hole we go)

 

[Colpy]

Umm, im sorry, but you cant be a Christian if you dont believe the Bible.In the book of Genesis in the King James version of the Bible 1:1 "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth"

Perhaps it would be best if you did not set yourself up as the judge of who is, or is not Christian..........as that is a very UNChristian thing to do.

There are many Christian philosophies, some contradictory, so yes, some have to be wrong. Do yourself a favour......accept those who (within reason) claim to be Christian.....leave the judgement to God.

 

[MikeyDB]

OH I get it...

The yellow label Church of NO-Name dogma. "We'll pick and choose between the various prejudices until we find one we're comfortable with then that's the "truth"....

That makes things so much simpler.... good for you Mr. McCaulley!

When we decide the bible is relevant...weeeeelllll then we'll use it...

When we decide the bible is antithetical to our prespectives then we'll reject it...

HINT: Dogma is based on some specific and particular coalescence of conditions and interpretations that fits the attitudes and perspectives of the adherent.

By the way, do you own a gun?

 

[Colpy]

OH I get it...

The yellow label Church of NO-Name dogma. "We'll pick and choose between the various prejudices until we find one we're comfortable with then that's the "truth"....

That makes things so much simpler.... good for you Mr. McCaulley!

When we decide the bible is relevant...weeeeelllll then we'll use it...

When we decide the bible is antithetical to our prespectives then we'll reject it...

HINT: Dogma is based on some specific and particular coalescence of conditions and interpretations that fits the attitudes and perspectives of the adherent.

By the way, do you own a gun?

The guy is FIFTEEN years old , DB. Give him a break.

I'm curious.....why the last question?

 

[MikeyDB]

Hey Colpy..

Just seeing if I can incite an answer or opinion to my earlier question about kids attitudes when it comes to school slayings.... in another thread that didn't go anywhere...