Difference between revisions of "Belief in evolution"
Conservative (Talk | contribs) |
Conservative (Talk | contribs) (→Belief in evolution and sexual immorality) |
||
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
*[[Social effects of the theory of evolution#Belief in evolution and sexual immorality|Belief in evolution and sexual immorality]] | *[[Social effects of the theory of evolution#Belief in evolution and sexual immorality|Belief in evolution and sexual immorality]] | ||
| + | |||
| + | === Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality === | ||
| + | |||
| + | See: [[Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality]] | ||
== See also == | == See also == | ||
Revision as of 00:30, August 20, 2019
Belief in evolution usually takes any of three forms. If "evolution" is defined as any hereditary change at all in a group of similar living things, then everyone in the world believes in this; you may as well say "I believe in water." All scientists and nearly all religious people accept the concepts of mutation and inheritance (see Genetics).
If "evolution" means the appearance of major new forms of life during pre-Biblical times, then around half of Americans believe in this;[1] a substantial minority of 40% of Americans reject this aspect of evolution since it contradicts their religious belief that God created all forms of life less than 10,000 years ago.
Critics of the theory of evolution state that many of today's proponents of the evolutionary position have diluted the meaning of the term "evolution" to the point where it defined as or the definition includes change over time in the gene pool of a population over time through such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.[2] Dr. Jonathan Sarfati states the following in relation to the diluted definition of the word "evolution":
| “ | ...many evolutionary propagandists are guilty of the deceitful practice of equivocation, that is, switching the meaning of a single word (evolution) part way through an argument. A common tactic, ‘bait-and-switch,’ is simply to produce examples of change over time, call this ‘evolution,’ then imply that the GTE [General Theory of Evolution] is thereby proven or even essential, and creation disproved. The PBS Evolution series and the Scientific American article are full of examples of this fallacy.[3] | ” |
So when someone is reported to "believe in evolution", you need to be sure what sort of belief is being discussed.
Contents
Social effects of the theory of evolution
See: Social effects of the theory of evolution
Belief in evolution and sexual immorality
Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality
See: Evolution, Liberalism, Atheism, and Irrationality
See also
References
- ↑ According to the aggregated data, 47% of Americans agree that God created humans pretty much in their present form either exactly as the Bible describes it or within the last 10,000 years. That leaves about half of Americans who agree that humans developed or evolved, either with or without God's help in the process. Gallup Poll
- ↑
- ↑ Jonathan Sarfati,Ph.D., F.M. Refuting Evolution 2, Chapter 1, Argument: Creationism is religion, not science
