The religion of Evolution(ism)

[toff]

Evolution is a religion.
I think if you have read my post you would clearly see that it is.

For the umpteenth time, please address the thread topic and support your statement, using dictionary definitions.

 

[toff]

ev·o·lu·tion·ism Pronunciation Key (v-lsh-nzm, v-)
n.

1. A theory of biological evolution, especially that formulated by Charles Darwin.
2. Advocacy of or belief in biological evolution.


*grins* Well, what do you know... belief in, huh?

Ummm...yes, someone who is aware of evolutionary theory "believes" in it. So what? Someone who is aware of gravitational theory "believes" in it, too. This does not make either evolution or gravity a religion. Please see the numerous definitions of "religion" previously posted in this thread and actually address the issue at hand.

 

[Hydra009]

Science can be expressed and examined in both directions.
I do it all the time.

As a quick example you can examine a vehicle accident from looking at the skidmarks and broken glass or you can examine the accident by listening to eyewitnesses then seeing if the peices fit.

Durango, you don't seem to understand Nathan's post. He said that science analyzes the data and then comes up with the conclusion that most closely fits the data. The conclusion is further tested by experimentation. Creationists do the opposite, come up with the conclusion (that every word of the bible is the literal truth) and then try to manipulate the data to fit the conclusion.

This is NOT the same thing as your example of looking at an event backwards in time.

 

[sparklecat]

Ummm...yes, someone who is aware of evolutionary theory "believes" in it. So what? Someone who is aware of gravitational theory "believes" in it, too. This does not make either evolution or gravity a religion. Please see the numerous definitions of "religion" previously posted in this thread and actually address the issue at hand.

I was just curious as to whether or not it would be in the dictionary.

I'm well aware of what religion is, thanks.

As to belief in something true... I'll go with Terry Pratchett on this one. Belief isn't for facts... reality just is. I certainly don't "believe" in gravity.

 

[toff]

I was just curious as to whether or not it would be in the dictionary.

I'm well aware of what religion is, thanks.

As to belief in something true... I'll go with Terry Pratchett on this one. Belief isn't for facts... reality just is. I certainly don't "believe" in gravity.

Then why did you post the above?

And regardless of whether or not you believe in gravity, it exists. Just like evolution.

be·lieve ( P ) Pronunciation Key (b-lv)
v. be·lieved, be·liev·ing, be·lieves
v. tr.
To accept as true or real: Do you believe the news stories?
To credit with veracity: I believe you.
To expect or suppose; think: I believe they will arrive shortly.

 

[sparklecat]

Then why did you post the above?

And regardless of whether or not you believe in gravity, it exists. Just like evolution.

be·lieve ( P ) Pronunciation Key (b-lv)
v. be·lieved, be·liev·ing, be·lieves
v. tr.
To accept as true or real: Do you believe the news stories?
To credit with veracity: I believe you.
To expect or suppose; think: I believe they will arrive shortly.

Because I found the definition amusing I suppose.

"Belief" generally has a different connotation... just as "evolutionism" does.

And yes, I'm well aware that both exist.

 

[toff]

Because I found the definition amusing I suppose.

"Belief" generally has a different connotation... just as "evolutionism" does.

And yes, I'm well aware that both exist.

Make up your mind...ten minutes ago you didn't believe in it.

 

[sparklecat]

Make up your mind...ten minutes ago you didn't believe in it.

Oh no? Care to quote where I state that?

*finds herself wondering what exactly this discussion is about...*

 

[toff]

Oh no? Care to quote where I state that?

*finds herself wondering what exactly this discussion is about...*

No, never mind, you're right, I'm being extremely pedantic and picking an argument. I apologise, and can only plead that Durango's repeated evasions and lies have put me in a bad mood.

 

[sparklecat]

No, never mind, you're right, I'm being extremely pedantic and picking an argument. I apologise, and can only plead that Durango's repeated evasions and lies have put me in a bad mood.

*smiles* No problem... I've done the same sort of thing myself at times.

 

[Aggie]

Belief isn't for facts... reality just is. I certainly don't "believe" in gravity

My attitude about this may be different from that of most people, because I don't distinguish between scientific theories and religious ones at all. Whatever I believe about both the physical world and the spiritual world is whatever is best-supported by the available evidence, and I will alter any theory I have about either the physical or spiritual world if the evidence ever supports a different theory more strongly then the one that I currently hold, or if a new theory is proposed that explains the evidence better than any existing theory.

This method enables me to falsify theories about both the physical and spiritual world. I now consider Christianity to be falsified in the same manner as the geocentric model of the solar system.

It also means that theories about the physical world are no different to me from theories about the spiritual world. Gravity, evolution, the Copernican model of the solar system, and my current Deist/Agronstic religion are all theories I believe because I think they explain the available evidence better than any of the alternatives.

I've explained here that I think it's a good idea to extend the scientific method to the spiritual world. http://www.christianforums.com/t87930&page=3 . If you are willing to do this, then the distinction between science and religion is no longer meaningful.

However, if a religion is selected on the basis of something other than evidence, it doesn't qualify as science. Evolution and gravity only belong in the same category as a religion if the religion is selected in the manner that I am recommending.

 

[notto]

Show me how creation science doesn't follow the basic principles of science.

Scientists and their organizations do not have statements of faith.
The statements from the main creation ministries certainly show that they do not follow the basic principles of science. They make a statment of faith and absolutely (and admittedly) ignore evidence to the contrary.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/about/faith.asp
By definition, no apparent, perceived or claimed evidence in any field, including history and chronology, can be valid if it contradicts the Scriptural record. Of primary importance is the fact that evidence is always subject to interpretation by fallible people who do not possess all information.

http://www.icr.org/abouticr/tenets.htm
The Biblical record of primeval earth history in Genesis 1-11 is fully historical and perspicuous, including the creation and fall of man, the curse on the creation and its subjection to the bondage of decay, the promised Redeemer, the worldwide cataclysmic deluge in the days of Noah, the post-diluvian renewal of man's commission to subdue the earth (now augmented by the institution of human govemment) and the origin of nations and languages at the tower of Babel.


Now, how is evolution a religion again?

 

[Arthur Dietrich]

Sadly, the above is nonsense. Evolutionary theory is not an "acknowledged ultimate reality". It is a scientific theory, on precisely the same level as gravitational theory. Would you call gravity a religion?

You mean 'gravityism'

*still waiting along with toff and the rest*

 

[toff]

Durango, we're all STILL waiting for you to provide ANY support for your claim that evolution is a religion. Do you have any? Or should we put you down as just a troll who doesn't even attempt to support his ridiculous claims?

 

[Godzman]

What is this claim by creationists that evolution(ism) is a religion? Do they not know the meaning of the word 'religion'? Or are they so desparate to equate creationism and evolutionary theory that, having failed to get creationism recognised as a science, they are now trying to get evolutionary theory recognised as a religion?

To all those who claim, or have claimed, evolutionary theory to be a religion, I challenge any of you to demonstrate it is a religion via a dictionary definition (and no, if you define it to be a religion in the same way that bowling can be defined as a religion, ie., an activity pursued with zeal and enthusiasm, that doesn't count. ).

actually evolution is only a way that creation could have come about.

 

[Arthur Dietrich]

[ Or should we put you down as just] a troll

[who] doesn't [even attempt to ]support his ridiculous claims?

Isn't that a bit redundant?

 

[DURANG0]

Durango, you don't seem to understand Nathan's post. He said that science analyzes the data and then comes up with the conclusion that most closely fits the data. The conclusion is further tested by experimentation. Creationists do the opposite, come up with the conclusion (that every word of the bible is the literal truth) and then try to manipulate the data to fit the conclusion.

This is NOT the same thing as your example of looking at an event backwards in time.

Your right irish, those that worship evolutionism don't manipulate the data.

They test everything.

 

[DURANG0]

It's quite obvious that evolution is a religion. Perhaps they don't have churches, but the concept is a belief that is held onto with a fervent attitude zeal, and a conscientious devotion.
Those that worship evolutionism attribute the god of chance and natural selection as the power of creation. They accept this as a higher power which controlls and is an influence for the good in one's life as one species proves over time to be fitter than the other.
The salvation of evolutionism is the concept that there is no need for salvation. Those that worship evolutionism find great joy and release in the notion of no need for salvation. The concept of bowing before nature rather than god is an accepted and encouraged practice.
Evolutionism is a bigoted religion as only their views are allowed and no other voice can be heard.

And that's just the beginning.

 

[MartinM]

It's quite obvious that evolution is a religion. Perhaps they don't have churches, but the concept is a belief that is held onto with a fervent attitude zeal, and a conscientious devotion.
Those that worship evolutionism attribute the god of chance and natural selection as the power of creation. They accept this as a higher power which controlls and is an influence for the good in one's life as one species proves over time to be fitter than the other.
The salvation of evolutionism is the concept that there is no need for salvation. Those that worship evolutionism find great joy and release in the notion of no need for salvation. The concept of bowing before nature rather than god is an accepted and encouraged practice.
Evolutionism is a bigoted religion as only their views are allowed and no other voice can be heard

Cobblers.

 

[Nathan Poe]

It's quite obvious that evolution is a religion. Perhaps they don't have churches, but the concept is a belief that is held onto with a fervent attitude zeal, and a conscientious devotion.

Only to scientific study...

Those that worship evolutionism attribute the god of chance and natural selection as the power of creation. They accept this as a higher power which controlls and is an influence for the good in one's life as one species proves over time to be fitter than the other.

Considering the existence of Theistic Evolutionists, your post is utter nonsense.

The salvation of evolutionism is the concept that there is no need for salvation. Those that worship evolutionism find great joy and release in the notion of no need for salvation. The concept of bowing before nature rather than god is an accepted and encouraged practice.

And we sacrifice virgins, pray before a shrine of Charles Darwin, and sprout tails when the moon is full.

What else do we do?

Evolutionism is a bigoted religion as only their views are allowed and no other voice can be heard.

Excuse me while I mop up the puddle of molten slag which was once my Irony Meter...

And that's just the beginning.

More incoherent ramblings to come?