Is evolution denial any different than global warming denial, holocaust denial, or the flat earth society?

Question

Why do laymen think the know better than the entire scientific community?

So you read a book by Michael Behe, Duane Gish or Kent Hovind, does that make you an expert?

If 99% of scientists subscribe to evolution and 1% subscibe to creationism, and you've red a book by one of the 1% of creationists, doesn't that mean that you should read 99 books on evolution to be sure that you have a balanced perspective?

The pope gets it, why don't you?

Answer 1

I quite honestly don't know. You'd think it would make sense to people to realize that scientists just might know a bit more about a subject than they do, but no. Its too hard to understand so they won't even bother because it involves *gasp* work.

I think they do it simply because its easier.

The weird thing is that they expect you to take the word of a 2000 year old book written by a small group of sheepherders who thought the earth was flat over the word of hundreds of thousands (possibly millions by now) of scientists around the world, who have studied this for hundreds of years, who have made it their sole existance, and just might understand things you never will in a detail you never thought of.

Yet somehow, the book is right and all those scientists are wrong. its completely idiotic.

Answer 2

"Is evolution denial any different than global warming denial, holocaust denial, or the flat earth society?"
Yes. Global warming- deals with repeatable, observable processes in the present.
Holocaust- deals with historical evidence of the recent past
Earth- based on observations that can be made now

The Fairy Tale of Evolution- based on speculation about the unobservable and unrepeatable past.

"Why do laymen think the know better than the entire scientific community?"
First, "the entire scientific community" does not believe in the Fairy Tale of Evolution. Second, a large percentage that do believe in it do so because of an a priori philosophical adherence to methodological naturalism. As far as many of them are concerned, it doesn't matter where the evidence leads, any explanation that isn't naturalistic isn't acceptable.

"So you read a book by Michael Behe, Duane Gish or Kent Hovind, does that make you an expert?"
Never claimed to be an expert, so what's your point? Are you an expert just because you've read some books by evolutionists?

"doesn't that mean that you should read 99 books on evolution to be sure that you have a balanced perspective?"
Plenty of evolutionist material on the internet, why should I pay them to print drivel?

"The pope gets it, why don't you?"
I get "argument from authority", why don't you?

Answer 3

Evolution has taken a bed rep over the years by getting lumped into the category of the missing link search. Darwinism, Natural selection, and Evolution require definitions. Natural selection is the most intuitive. Survival governs future population growth. Makes sense. Evolution within a species occurs year after year. Common example, farmer sprays his field, but bugs return a later period immumne. Evolution between Generas or Families has not been demonstrated. It is still conjecture, most likely a myth. We'll have to wait until the big annoucement on CNN. Darwinism is the latter form of evolution. While Darwinsim is attractive scientifically for it's succinct explanation of life history, it has flaws. It can neither predict nor explain (except in hindsight) what generations will come to understand. Science is the foundation for understanding. Fantasy is the foundation for weaving a tale. Evolution happens. Darwinism is fake.

Answer 4

Evolution is not a scientific theory, it is a faith-based concept attempting to explain the relationships between different populations of organisms.

Global warming has been occurring since the end of the last Ice Age about 10,000 years ago on average and fluctuates in between. It is primarily caused by the change in the sun's radiation levels/temperature, earth's orbit and tilt, and major natural catastrophes (like Krakatoa).

The Holocaust denial is based on the delusion created by people who live in cites with or near large Jewish populations, some residents there begin to think that this percentage is consistent for all metropolitan areas; however, in reality most of the Jewish population lives in Israel and a few major American cities thus it is small worldwide and those that died in the Holocaust were predominantly Jews from Germany and Poland, places where most Ashkenazi Jews lived prior to the Holocaust.

Flat Earth is simply a rejection of truth like most atheistic concepts and should be considered a valid form of expression by other science based people.

Answer 5

Science is difficult to study, so there is a divide between highly trained experts and the rest of us, the laity. This, coupled with generally poor science education, has led to widespread suspicion toward science. Science isn't glamorous, it is often wrong, slow and requires patience. Many ignorant people want quick flashy simple answers, which creationist showmen can offer.

I have read numerous books about science, and I will not waste a moment with a book on creationism. There's no evidence for it and no practical applications from it. It's politically motivated feel good rubbish for the masses.

.

Answer 6

if you believe in evolution then your calling GOD a liar.if 99% of the world believed the earth was flat does that make it true?truth is truth weather you want to believe it or not.yes there is absolute truth.the scientific community does not have concrete evidence for evolution.they use words like'maybe,we suppose,looks like,our theroy,etc...just last thursday in the new york times (a very liberal paper)a story on how human evolution is way off on there current theroy,i just laugh,because between evolutionist THEY can't even agree.hawkins admitts there might be intelligence in the creation of this universe.gould(now dead)says the evolutionary trees in our text books is a bunch of nonsense,i could go on and on and on.get a book it's called so there words may be used against them.

Answer 7

precise Ten regulations had to be sure a worldwide Apocalypse Following are the main pressing coverage prescriptions had to maximise the prospect of a collapsed worldwide atmosphere. they're listed so as of value. To have any threat of hastening the top we actually could get at it. No. a million - inhabitants - Human inhabitants isn't suitable to our contemporary concern. we are able to make as a lot of human beings as we want and there will be no effect. Human ingenuity can resolve any achieveable issue. as quickly as we run out of room here we are able to colonize the Moon, then Mars, then the full Universe! No. 2 - GREENHOUSE GASES – worldwide Warming is the applicable hoax ever perpetrated. The Environmentalist / Socialist / Secular Humanist Axis of Evil could be destroyed in any respect value. No. 3 - defend ECOSYSTEMS? –Nature will regenerate itself with no lead to sight no count what we do. assorted the stuff we do is extra effective than nature besides. No. 4 - intake – we've a God given financial suitable to consume what we want. era. I worked troublesome for my money and that i’ll spend it as I please. No. 5 - AGRICULTURE - God gave us dominion over the earth. it is ours to apply as we see extra healthy. we are able to tinker with the genes of our foodstuff, and heck with each little thing else for that count. whilst all it somewhat is left is eco-friendly slime, see you later because it is nutritious and tastes stable, who cares! No. 6 - ECONOMIES - Markets are the purest sort of organic regulation. enable the cream upward push to the precise and enable the rest consume cake. No. 7 - technologies - technologies is the Holy Grail. via God, what guy could ever prefer to adhere his hand down into the grimy Earth, the pungent slimy Sea. the top state of humanity could be to stay in a hermetically sealed bubble with all his needs and needs artificially presented. No. 8 - ECOLOGICAL restoration? – We already supply up too plenty to the crazed hippy environmentalists. we've a God Given suitable to take the final 2% of worldwide that hasn't been spoiled and make some extra money off it. whilst Antarctica unfreezes, i desire first dibs there too. No. 9 - POVERTY- poor each physique is lazy and deserve their lot. No. 10 – DEMILITARIZATION? - If i will’t defraud you out of what you have, I’ll make rules that make cheating you out of it felony. And whilst that fails I’ll purely kill you and take it.

Answer 8

You are 99% incorrect about 99% of scientists subscribing to evolution, where the dickins do you get your inaccurate source of information?

Answer 9

I have read more books by evolutionist including Richard Dawkins then creationists, and I still believe in the creation. Maybe I'm just too dumb to accept evolution, but I don't think so.

As far at the Pope is concerned, I see him as just another man.

Answer 10

Wow. Global Warming? You are ignorant on many accounts aren't you?

Have you looked at the historical facts about temperature? We have risen maybe 1 degree in the past hundred or so years.

Secondly, your scientists know that the earth goes on a heating and cooling cycle.

Thirdly, when Al Gore is your official spokesperson, you know you'd be better off joining the Helter Skelter movement.