Do you ever get frustrated with scientifically uneducated fundamentalists?

Question

Who consistently come on here and completely misrepresent scientific theories?

For example:
"If man came from monkeys..."
"Evolution is based on randomness..."
"The Big Bang says that the universe had a beginning and is running down..."
"The 2nd law of thermodynamics prohbits evolution..."
"Evolution implies racism..."
"Radioactive isotope dating isn't reliable..."
"Mutations are always harmful..."


Mind you, I'm being generous by referring to them as scientifically uneducated. The above statements are factually wrong, and I'm choosing to attribute their false statements to a lack of knowledge.

The alternative, of course, is that they KNOW that these things are lies, but choose to lie anyway.


I'm giving them the benefit of the doubt.

Beta, the key word in natural selection is "selection".

That is the NON-random selecting of genetic traits, which is what evolution is based on.

Chico, come back with evidence.
Opinions, even by someone like Einstein are still opinions.

Science is based on evidence.

And when opinion and evidence conflict... opinion loses.

stronzo, I do find it easy (very easy) to swat down these flies. But ignornace knows no bounds, and the number of flies seems limitless sometimes.

oh, and science IS TO BE QUESTIONNED. That's the whole fcking point of science!!! Science ALWAYS questions and challenges itself. Are you honestly under the impression that science just decided to accept evolution, and then defend it????? Holy cow you couldn't have it more backward

seeking answers is a perfect example below.

she probably doesn't know that nearly everything she said is false.

maybe she'll educate herself:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

then again, maybe she'll keep repeating things that are untrue because she's too lazy or scared to educate herself.

OOH! And S.B. tells me to take a science course.

cute.

but though it is true that mutations occur at random:
mutations =/= evolution, dumbass.

evolution is fueled by natural SELECTION, a non-random process.


get a grip and an education, son.

Answer 1

Yeah, it's really annoying. I mean, I'm a sophomore in college. I study film, not science. I haven't taken a science related class since physics my senior year of high school. And even I know what they're saying is wrong! Where did these guys go to school?

Answer 2

What really bothers me is for evolutionists to continue calling evolution scientific fact when it isn't.

It is strange how evolutionists keep moving the post. One theory plays out then they just create another theory to replace the former theory. How convenient.

It is hard to keep up with the new theories without being told how ignorant we are. Evolution began showing the picture of a critter crawling out of the goo then evolving into another critter with man being at the end the evolutionary scale. Apparently evolution theory had evolved too. :o)

Now the argument is that man did not evolve from Apes and those who say that are now ignorant. Now how can that be ignorant when it was the evolutionists who first put this theory in the classrooms?

Wait, what am I saying? It was the ignorance of some who did put this in the classroom.

Ok, so we now hadn't evolved from Apes and man is just another branch of the Primate tree. Fine, but can we now explain what Primates were before they became Primates and where are the Primates of today heading into the evolutionary future? Oh I know, just more questions resulting from my ignorance of evolution.

Big bang huh! Now lets see if this is still the same or has the goal post moved on this too? The last theory I remember is that all the matter in the universe was compressed into an area the size of a pinhead. Eventually the outward pressure became so great that it went BOOM! and here we are.

How many of you "scientists" actually believe that and still call it science?

Who again is ignorant and gullible?

Answer 3

Random mutations occur in all species. Sometimes these mutations can benefit the species. The critters that were born with these mutations that better equip them for survival, thrive. Most mutations are passed on threw generations. Since the mutated critters are thriving, they breed more. The more there are, the more they breed. Eventually, if the mutation is that essential to survival, it will become a permanent fixture of the species. Like why flies became so small. The mutation is random, but if it keeps the critters with the mutation alive while the rest of the species is dying out, it becomes part of the species.

Could you all please go take a science course?

Answer 4

I am a fundamentalist... and whether I'm 'scientifically' uneducated is not for me to decide.

Let me explain.

1.) It is *FAAAAR* easier to say "Man came from monkeys" than it is to say "Man came from intermediary pseudohominids, which came from primates". Now... you tell me why you say "sunrise" and "sunset" when you know as well as I do that the sun doesn't rise or set, but the earth goes around the sun in such a manner that the sun points at the opposite side of the earth and can no longer be seen. Simplicity, right?

2.) "Evolution is based on randomness"... For a photosensitive cell to appear for the first time, it must be based on completely new information, that is, DNA not previously available, and is incapable of being 'weeded forward' through selective breeding (ie if "knowing light" betters survival, and none has that trait, none have a better chance of passing on the DNA, hence, no improvement over the previous generation's DNA). Hence, only by random chance, could a photosensitive cell evolve. Hence, the driving force behind upward evolution is indeed randomness.

3.) That is true, unless you hold to the "rebounding universe" theory (which very few scientists take seriously, and even that theory holds to the premise that eventually, it too, will cease rebounding). Energy can be held as potential energy, until it is released. Once it becomes kinetic energy, it will continue to act until the energy has run out. The initial energy from the Big Bang has run out the moment it was used, and the energy transferred to all the "space stuff" (galaxies, gas, etc) remains (like those nifty little balls that bounce back and forth). The movement of everything in the universe evidences (oh... which law is it... "An object in motion will remain in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. An object at rest will remain at rest... etc") <- that law. Space dust acts, in the universe, as the air does on earth, as the causer of entropy. And eventually, the kinetic energy used, will all be transferred to the space dust, and disappate.

4.) Can't recall what it is, and my potatoes are boiling... hopefully someone else can answer this...

5.) Too wordy for my potatoes. In essence, Man came from Africa. Differently-evolved man used lots of tools, original man saw no need beyond a few. Tool-happy man saw himself to be more evolved than Tool-apathetic man. Tool-happy man enslaved Tool-apathetic man. End of story.

6.) Potatoes are done... must go soon... 8th grade science class... recently dead slug+mineral rich waterfall=10,000 years old (while in truth the slug died 6 months prior).

7.) No, they're not always harmful. But they provide no new information. Just more of the same old info. Sometimes lots more. Or, they eliminate old info. Hence, it is harmful... that is, to the theory of swordtail-to-shark evolution. Not to swordtail-to-platy evolution.

It's not that we're scientifically uneducated. It's just a lot of "wordy concepts" are easier to talk about with simplified concepts.

And now my potatoes are burning.

Answer 5

Thank you. Every now and then, I'll either see this kind of crap on the Internet, or worse, thrown out by idiots on TV who completely misrepresent very simple scientific principles in order to try to discredit it. They don't look into any of it because they don't really want to know -- if they actually knew the scientific explanations (or even the scientific method, really) they would have to "play fair," and when they have to play fair, they'll lose. Thanks for airing my private vents. :-)

Response to Beta: The mutations themselves are random. The effects are not, though. The random, harmful mutations are just that -- harmful. They hurt or kill the organism so that it cannot reproduce. The helpful mutations are just that -- helpful. The organism does better in its environment, and produces more children, which then carry or display the trait. So, mutations are random, but natural selection is not. Evolution is simply natural selection over millions of years -- the small changes become big ones, and species change.

Response to Seeking: Evolution is slow. We can't really have definitive proof, as that would necessarily involve watching one species become another. And that was not a list of observations. It was a list of huge misconceptions about simple concepts.

Answer 6

Its funny, I have heard every one of those statements from fundamentalists as well. And yes, the extreme lack of knowlege combined with arrogance does get annoying. How do adults manage to complete high school with a third grade science education? I don't get it.

Answer 7

Yes!!! What really drives me nuts is when they insist that their faith is as valid as science, or that Intelligent Design should be given equal time in our classrooms! All of the "supposed" conflicts with evolution for example have been debunked long ago.
Even if there was NO fossil evidence at all, evolution would still be valid. Evolution realize as much on DNA as anything else. There are many examples of Human DNA and the DNA from bacteria being identical for long changes of molecules.

Answer 8

I am a Christian. Not only do I get slightly frustrated with scientifically uneducated fundamentalists, I also get frustrated with theologically uneducated people. In addition, I get frustrated with people who believe they are scientifically educated but are not--people who believe that they understand the theory of evolution, e.g., just because they know what the word is.

Undereducation is frequently frustrating. One solution is to change your values so that your values may one day be better reflected in your government. That is, the poor education in the U.S. is more or less the fault of everyone who believes that cash, material and career success, and prestige are the goals in life. Therefore, we have a government that values cash, material and career success, and prestige. While education is underfunded and mostly ignored.

Stop griping. Change your own life. Revolution starts small. But if it doesn't start with you, it shall never start at all.

Answer 9

It makes it VERY hard for me to answer a question in a civil manor. Just reading your question got me all worked up. Obviously they don't get scientific information unless it has been processed, twisted, and has been misquoted or (just only partially quoted leaving out a statement that modifies the first one) by their preacher/church/religious publication . I generally find that said holes they find in scientific theory are just holes they put in the theory themselves to make it fit their beliefs better.

I don't really care how ignorant they choose to be though, it's when other people actually listen to them that I start getting upset. When more than one of them joins in it just strengthens their skewed beliefs and makes them even harder to educate.

Answer 10

the sciences point very much to a religious basis. I’ve never met a world-class physicist who doesn’t think there’s more to the universe than just atoms bumping together, something mind-like at work, some intelligence. Even Einstein believed that. In the last 20 years, there has been an intellectual revolution in thinking in Britain. God has become an option again but it’s just that it hasn’t quite filtered down to everybody else yet.’
It’s like a reverse enlightenment, I think. The intellectuals are coming round to religion, leaving the masses under the dark cloud of reflex rationalism and neo-Darwinism.

Answer 11

Yeah, I went from militant atheist/anti-theist to Christian 2 years in the past. in actuality, I ignored Him for 3 years; I *knew* He replaced into there; He saved attempting to realize me in limitless procedures, and it have been given to the factor the place i eventually had to renowned that i replaced into being hypocritical. i replaced into claiming i did no longer have self assurance via fact i replaced into too logical and psychological, and yet actively ignoring each and every thing He replaced into doing replaced into intellectually cheating. So i finished being hypocritical. No fireworks, no thunder-claps. It replaced into in basic terms the functional ingredient to do. interior 3 days He proved Himself previous a shadow of a doubt, and then I grew to become greater responsive to the non secular component of all of it, however the rather conversion replaced into quiet, and comfortable, and the only way i'd desire to shelter any degree of psychological integrity.