Only a third? I would expect more (even amongst the US population in general).
Templeton likes having big-name scientists and secular academics on its panels and in its published discussions, for their presence lends an air of versimilitude to an otherwise bald and unconvincing enterprise.
I have had my say about materialism and the persistent attempt by religious spokespeople to muddy the waters by claiming, without a shred of support, that materialism (in the sense I have defended for my entire career) is any obstacle to meaning, or to an ethical life.
Sova:Cause everything else in religion is perfectly reasonable? We either have standards or we don't, but it's not as though the whole "dinosaurs lived with humans" thing is the first time a religious person has believed something just a little bit cakey.
Republican members of Congress do not believe in climate change.
The First Republican  Presidential Debate: Three Of Them Don't Believe In Evolution.
Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN): I’m Not ‘Anti-Science’…But I Don’t Believe In Global Warming, Stem Cell Research, Or Evolution.
CallMeJayThey're like hosts without immune systems waiting for people to deliberately infect them.
they even managed to add a line requiring books to give space to conservative icons, “such as Newt Gingrich, Phyllis Schlafly and the Moral Majority,” [...]
three of the six people appointed [to help write the textbooks] were right-wing ideologues, among them Peter Marshall, a Massachusetts-based preacher who has argued that California wildfires and Hurricane Katrina were God’s punishment for tolerating gays, and David Barton, former vice chairman of the Texas Republican Party.
With great care, attention to the scientific evidence and a wonderfully accessible style, Coyne, an evolutionary geneticist at the University of Chicago, presents an overwhelming case for evolution.
Ranging from biogeography to geology, from anatomy to genetics, and from molecular biology to physiology, he demonstrates that evolutionary theory makes predictions that are consistently borne out by the data—basic requirements for a scientific theory to be valid.
Additionally, although fully respectful of those who promote intelligent design and creationism, he uses the data at his disposal to demolish any thought that creationism is supported by the evidence while also explaining why those ideas fall outside the bounds of science. Coyne directly addresses the concept often advanced by religious fundamentalists that an acceptance of evolution must lead to immorality, concluding that "evolution tells us where we came from, not where we can go."
Readers looking to understand the case for evolution and searching for a response to many of the most common creationist claims should find everything they need in this powerful book, which is clearer and more comprehensive than the many others on the subject.
Texas, as comforting as it may be to believe, is not the root of the problems in America. We may be a point of convergence, we may be a large and powerful state, but the problem is in all of us, everywhere. It is simply biology -- we did not evolve in a friendly world. Let's try to make the world better so our descendants may have that luxury instead of finding reasons to get angry at or mock each other.
« Older ZDNet(!) reports on a strange case of technology j... | "The reality is that the post-... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt