Evolution and Religion
-
thereal
- Established Member
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 9:40 am
- Christian: No
- Location: Carbondale, IL
Very interesting, I must say. While it's hard to argue with someone as important to science as Mayr and the like, I would hope it was simply a poor choice of words. I can't say what the motives of these folks are, but it sounds like maybe a hasty response to all the allegations that there are gaps in the knowledge of evolution. By its definition, the theory of evolution cannot be fact (it IS after all a theory), and I have seen many instances in which the popular media "translates" what a scientist says of evolution into citing them as saying evolution is fact. Not saying that's what happened here, but it has happened. What you cited about scientists no longer debating whether or not evolution is true is correct in my experience, though...for those in the field, the evidence is overwhelming and alternative explantions for observations do not even come close. I do agree that explaining creationism alongside evolution would be confusing, as one approach to explaining observations is scientific and the other is not...if you're trying to teach kids science, why would you give them an approach that is intrinsically unscientific?
-
August
- Old School
- Posts: 2402
- Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 7:22 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Day-Age
- Location: Texas
- Contact:
Did you read that whole interview with Mayer? It certainly seems that he is very convinced, and surely that must translate into their teaching.thereal wrote:Very interesting, I must say. While it's hard to argue with someone as important to science as Mayr and the like, I would hope it was simply a poor choice of words. I can't say what the motives of these folks are, but it sounds like maybe a hasty response to all the allegations that there are gaps in the knowledge of evolution. By its definition, the theory of evolution cannot be fact (it IS after all a theory), and I have seen many instances in which the popular media "translates" what a scientist says of evolution into citing them as saying evolution is fact. Not saying that's what happened here, but it has happened. What you cited about scientists no longer debating whether or not evolution is true is correct in my experience, though...for those in the field, the evidence is overwhelming and alternative explantions for observations do not even come close. I do agree that explaining creationism alongside evolution would be confusing, as one approach to explaining observations is scientific and the other is not...if you're trying to teach kids science, why would you give them an approach that is intrinsically unscientific?
As for the motives, that is what the argument has been about. When biology figureheads like Mayer, and textbooks like Futuyama's, start making religious claims, there seems to be no problem with it, but when the reverse happens, with theologians criticize that, suddenly there is a huge outcry.
Acts 17:24-25 (NIV)
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. [25] And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else."
//www.omnipotentgrace.org
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. [25] And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else."
//www.omnipotentgrace.org
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com
-
puritan lad
- Esteemed Senior Member
- Posts: 1491
- Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:44 am
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Undecided
- Location: Stuarts Draft, VA
- Contact:
Which is what? Maybe they just appeared out of nowhere. There is a huge difference between any homo sapiens and any homo erectus.Depends on what you call a "man." Our particular species (and Neanderthals, which have a common ancestor with us)
Based on what?evolved from Homo erectus.
OK, I'm going to hold you to this. Show me these abundant transitions. Note: They must be true transitions, showing the gradual change from one to the other.The transitions in the past millon years or so are pretty abundant, considering how rarely humans actually fossilize.
the first example of directly observed macroevolution was the evolution of a new species of primrose by DeVries early in the last century.
New Species? DeVries discovers a variation in the Evening Primrose (Oenothera lamarcklana). This is the similar to fruit flies, the color changes in Peppered moths, etc. If this is the best example of “macroevolution” that has been observed, than “macroevolution” has never been observed. What we need to see is something like an amphibian becoming a reptile (I mean the whole transition over a period of time).
I don't see any limit. New breeds are constantly being produced. Speciations in mammals takes a long time, but the Faroe Island mouse evolved in a few hundred years, an eyeblink in the Earth's history.
You don't see any limit? With force selective breeding of dogs, we have never seen any result other than a dog. Yet you conclude that, in natural selection, the dog can eventually become a horse. That is the problem that most of us have with evolution, that these types of conclusions are jumped to without any evidence whatsoever.
I was referring to animal phyla, sorry for the conclusion.No. There are phyla for which we have no record until well after the Cambrian, and there are phyla which arose before the Cambrian. The Ediacaran fauna was widespread and varied, and some of those phyla have survived to modern times.
This is a weak connection. Maybe you can explain the evolution from scales to hair (via feathers), and the development of mammary glands. These animals are quite different, despite the similarities in the jaws.Natural selection, speciation, ring species, and many other things. Here's a few specific ones:
In therapsid reptiles, (as in all reptiles) the bones in the lower jaw are connected to the ear, and transmitt vibrations from the ground to the "stapes." Over time, we see the bones becoming smaller in these animals, eventually the formation of a second, mammalian jaw joint and the disarticulation of the back bones from the dentary occurs. These small bones then reduce even further in size, but continue to be attached to the stapes, forming the malleus and the incus.
How so? Is T-Rex a bird or a reptile? If anything, this discovery shows how different even reptiles are from each other.Not long ago, I was surprised and pleased to see that these tiny bones are attached to the jaw of a fetal opossum precisely as they are in the therapisid reptile Thrnaxodon. Later in development, they migrate to the usual mammalian place.
And a little while ago, in the bones of a T-rex, scientists found a little hemoglobin. Injected into a lab animal, it produced antibodies that reacted most strongly with that of a bird, rather than other reptiles. Precisely what evolutionary theory predicts.
I'm aware of these “accumulated facts” and many others. I'm saying that it is a big jump to go from changes in mice to changes from reptile to bird. It is a jump that you have taken, and naysayer says that the evidence does not support it.There are hundreds of little facts like that, woven into a tough, durable fabric that makes any naysaying pointless. The more one learns, the more facts like this accumulate.
"To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect." - JOHN OWEN
//covenant-theology.blogspot.com
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com/
//covenant-theology.blogspot.com
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com/
-
thereal
- Established Member
- Posts: 116
- Joined: Thu Nov 17, 2005 9:40 am
- Christian: No
- Location: Carbondale, IL
Of course, I'm not going to try and convince you that these transitions are real based on my own information, for it sounds like your mind is already made up. However, if you are interested in making an informed decision then I recommend you investigate the data concerning the following species for starters:puritan lad wrote:OK, I'm going to hold you to this. Show me these abundant transitions. Note: They must be true transitions, showing the gradual change from one to the other.
Sahelanthropus tchadensis
Orrorin tugenensis
Ardipithecus ramidus
Australopithecus anamensis
Australopithecus afarensis
Kenyanthropus platyops
Australopithecus africanus
Australopithecus garhi
Australopithecus aethiopicus
Australopithecus robustus
Australopithecus boisei
Homo habilis
Homo georgicus
Homo erectus
Homo ergaster
Homo antecessor
Homo heidelbergensis
Homo neanderthalensis
Homo floresiensis
Homo sapiens sapiens
If you can look at these species and still maintain your conclusion that there are no transitions...well, more power to you. I also got the feeling that you believe that all homonid species evolved from one into another in a linear fashion, but this is not the case. Splits occurred in the phylogeny of "man".
-
August
- Old School
- Posts: 2402
- Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2004 7:22 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Day-Age
- Location: Texas
- Contact:
I will let PL answer for himself, but can you maybe answer a few questions? As I mentioned before, for the fossil record to have any value as proof for evolution, it needs to show lineage. To merely show shared morphological similarities without also discussing lineage does not add value.thereal wrote:Of course, I'm not going to try and convince you that these transitions are real based on my own information, for it sounds like your mind is already made up. However, if you are interested in making an informed decision then I recommend you investigate the data concerning the following species for starters:
Sahelanthropus tchadensis
Orrorin tugenensis
Ardipithecus ramidus
Australopithecus anamensis
Australopithecus afarensis
Kenyanthropus platyops
Australopithecus africanus
Australopithecus garhi
Australopithecus aethiopicus
Australopithecus robustus
Australopithecus boisei
Homo habilis
Homo georgicus
Homo erectus
Homo ergaster
Homo antecessor
Homo heidelbergensis
Homo neanderthalensis
Homo floresiensis
Homo sapiens sapiens
If you can look at these species and still maintain your conclusion that there are no transitions...well, more power to you. I also got the feeling that you believe that all homonid species evolved from one into another in a linear fashion, but this is not the case. Splits occurred in the phylogeny of "man".
Questions:
1. Which australopithecine was the predecessor to homo?
2. Can you show what established evolutionary relationships exist among Australopithecus and Paranthropus species? What about the evolutionary relationships between the various Homo's?
3. Which of those Homo's is the direct ancestor to Homo Sapiens Sapiens?
Acts 17:24-25 (NIV)
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. [25] And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else."
//www.omnipotentgrace.org
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com
"The God who made the world and everything in it is the Lord of heaven and earth and does not live in temples built by hands. [25] And he is not served by human hands, as if he needed anything, because he himself gives all men life and breath and everything else."
//www.omnipotentgrace.org
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com
-
puritan lad
- Esteemed Senior Member
- Posts: 1491
- Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 6:44 am
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Undecided
- Location: Stuarts Draft, VA
- Contact:
Also:
Where is the "common ancestor"?
Where are the "transitions", ie. on what basis do you claim that Australopithecus africanus is a transition? It looks like a hairy ape to me.
No one is denying that these creatures existed (although there have been a good number of hoaxes as well). We need to see a pattern in the fossil record where one changed into another. Even Richard Leakey was convinced that this pattern would never be established. I remember when one of the Leakeys discovered what was known as "1470 man", which eliminated at least half of the so-called "transitions" being proposed at that time (The fossil was older than many of the purported human "ancestors"). August is correct. We need to see the pattern, and it just isn't there.
Where is the "common ancestor"?
Where are the "transitions", ie. on what basis do you claim that Australopithecus africanus is a transition? It looks like a hairy ape to me.
No one is denying that these creatures existed (although there have been a good number of hoaxes as well). We need to see a pattern in the fossil record where one changed into another. Even Richard Leakey was convinced that this pattern would never be established. I remember when one of the Leakeys discovered what was known as "1470 man", which eliminated at least half of the so-called "transitions" being proposed at that time (The fossil was older than many of the purported human "ancestors"). August is correct. We need to see the pattern, and it just isn't there.
"To suppose that whatever God requireth of us that we have power of ourselves to do, is to make the cross and grace of Jesus Christ of none effect." - JOHN OWEN
//covenant-theology.blogspot.com
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com/
//covenant-theology.blogspot.com
//christianskepticism.blogspot.com/
-
BGoodForGoodSake
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 2127
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 9:44 am
- Christian: No
- Location: Washington D.C.
Having estabilished that these creatures did indeed exist, where did they come from if they were not the result of evolution?puritan lad wrote:Also:
Where is the "common ancestor"?
Where are the "transitions", ie. on what basis do you claim that Australopithecus africanus is a transition? It looks like a hairy ape to me.
No one is denying that these creatures existed (although there have been a good number of hoaxes as well). We need to see a pattern in the fossil record where one changed into another. Even Richard Leakey was convinced that this pattern would never be established. I remember when one of the Leakeys discovered what was known as "1470 man", which eliminated at least half of the so-called "transitions" being proposed at that time (The fossil was older than many of the purported human "ancestors"). August is correct. We need to see the pattern, and it just isn't there.
It is not length of life, but depth of life. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Yehren wrote: It's true. The vast majority of biologists are evolutionists. Right now, it appears that about 2% of all scientists reject evolution, with the figure much lower for biologists.
LOL! ARE you claiming this as evidence for evolution? This is the comedy of absurdity that I love so much. Science has successfully kept any alternative biological explanations out of science, by courts, laws, and brainwashing textbooks, and now you wan't to claim that as independant evidnece for evolutionary biology?
You know what stop the presses here!!! Is this another empty claim? Do you personally know all the biologists, and ahve you polled them? Their are wildife biologists, maine biologists, experemental biologists, and practicing biologists, and I think you are throwing another abstract claim at me that isn't remotely evidence based.
Claims, I'm sure there are lots of people making them. So you on top of that wan't to claim that the popular thing is the right things. Wait long enough and perhaps the things that you don't do because they are wrong and perhaps it will become acceptable because then you can sleep easy.
(Yehren observes that the vast majority of biologists accept evolution)
Project Steve:
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articl ... 6_2003.asp
To be included, you have to have a doctorate in biology or a related field, be named "Steve" or a variant thereof, and agree to a statement outlining modern evolutionary theory. There are about 630 Steves on the list right now.
Next time you see one of those creationist lists, cross off all the people who aren't named Steve and/or lack a doctorate in biology or a realted field. Count the remainder and compare them to the Project Steve list.
Great fun, and educational, too!
Their are wildife biologists, maine biologists, experemental biologists, and practicing biologists, and I think you are throwing another abstract claim at me that isn't remotely evidence based.
Claims, I'm sure there are lots of people making them. So you on top of that wan't to claim that the popular thing is the right things. Wait long enough and perhaps the things that you don't do because they are wrong and perhaps it will become acceptable because then you can sleep easy.
When I want my car repaired, I don't go to an accountant. Silly as it sounds, I have this idea that people who understand the subject are more likely to know it.ARE you claiming this as evidence for evolution?
It appears you don't know much about the way science works. From time to time, someone challenges evolutionary theory. Every now and then, he makes it stick, and the theory gets changed to reflect the evidence he's brought to light.This is the comedy of absurdity that I love so much. Science has successfully kept any alternative biological explanations out of science, by courts, laws, and brainwashing textbooks, and now you wan't to claim that as independant evidnece for evolutionary biology?
Here's a good poll that takes a playful poke at those "scientists who deny evolution" scams:You know what stop the presses here!!! Is this another empty claim? Do you personally know all the biologists, and ahve you polled them?
Project Steve:
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/articl ... 6_2003.asp
To be included, you have to have a doctorate in biology or a related field, be named "Steve" or a variant thereof, and agree to a statement outlining modern evolutionary theory. There are about 630 Steves on the list right now.
Next time you see one of those creationist lists, cross off all the people who aren't named Steve and/or lack a doctorate in biology or a realted field. Count the remainder and compare them to the Project Steve list.
Great fun, and educational, too!
Their are wildife biologists, maine biologists, experemental biologists, and practicing biologists, and I think you are throwing another abstract claim at me that isn't remotely evidence based.
Claims, I'm sure there are lots of people making them. So you on top of that wan't to claim that the popular thing is the right things. Wait long enough and perhaps the things that you don't do because they are wrong and perhaps it will become acceptable because then you can sleep easy.
-
BGoodForGoodSake
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 2127
- Joined: Mon Aug 29, 2005 9:44 am
- Christian: No
- Location: Washington D.C.
No he's just claiming that the more one knows about biology the less likely one is to reject it. Don't let your frustrations color your senses.Jbuza wrote:LOL! ARE you claiming this as evidence for evolution? This is the comedy of absurdity that I love so much.Yehren wrote: It's true. The vast majority of biologists are evolutionists. Right now, it appears that about 2% of all scientists reject evolution, with the figure much lower for biologists.
you can review the conversation below.
Yehren wrote:The record is pretty clear on that. The more you know about biology, the less likely you are to reject evolution.
Jbuza wrote:Nope sorry, not true. The more I have learned about biology, the more sure I have become that It is a marvelous creation.
http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/rncse_ ... 0_1899.aspYehren wrote:It's true. The vast majority of biologists are evolutionists. Right now, it appears that about 2% of all scientists reject evolution, with the figure much lower for biologists.
It is not length of life, but depth of life. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
Yes, Bgood, IF only I could see clearly I would accept evolution, I know. He is caliming that being subjected to a bunch of biology courses, all of which will tell you that eovlution happened, that you will be more likely to believe evolution happened. There is nothing there. I am not arguing that it isn't true, I really don't know how all the biologists feel, but I am stating that it isn't even remotely worth considering as an evidence that evolution actually took place.
I got 7,000,000 hits when I googled "Doctors that believe in God"
HealthCHICAGO - A survey examining religion in medicine found that most US doctors believe in God and an afterlife -- a surprising degree of spirituality in a ...
http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ article?AID=/20050628/LIFE01/506280305/1023/life01 - 39k - Cached - Similar pages
David's Journal: How Many Doctors Believe in God?--76 percent of US doctors say they believe in God. --About 60 percent believe in some kind of afterlife. --90 percent attend religious services at least ...
http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/comments/ david/2005/07/how-many-doctors-believe-in-god.html - 37k - Cached - Similar pages
Most Doctors Surveyed Believe in $DEITY || kuro5hin.orgIn the survey of 1044 doctors nationwide, 76 percent said they believe in God, 59 percent said they believe in some sort of afterlife, and 55 percent said ...
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/6/23/0236/62671 - 38k - Cached - Similar pages
Most US doctors believe in God and afterlifeSpirituality - IndiatimesA survey examining religion in medicine found that most US doctors believe in God and an afterlife - a surprising degree of spirituality in a science-based ...
spirituality.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1150393.cms - 27k - Cached - Similar pages
Business of Life™: Most doctors believe in GodSurprisingly, most doctors believe in God and in an afterlife a recent survey reveals that will appear shortly in the Journal of General Internal Medicine. ...
http://www.estatevaults.com/bol/archives/001661.html - 6k - Cached - Similar pages
Offering Abortion, Rebirth - Los Angeles Times"Oh, God, doctor," the woman said. "I was hoping it was cancer." ... I really believe God has a plan for us all. I have a choice, and that's part of my plan ...
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/ nation/la-na-abortion29nov29,0,2003322,full.story - Similar pages
Success Forums - Doctors Believe In GodDiscuss the Action Prciniples and our free courses.
http://www.success.org/discuss/showthread.php?t=740 - 37k - Cached - Similar pages
Inside Chris's Head » Most US Doctors Believe in GodMost US Doctors Believe in God. Many people think that people become a Doctor because they want to play God. They might be surprised by a recent survey from ...
chris2x.com/?p=256 - 18k - Cached - Similar pages
HealthCHICAGO - A survey examining religion in medicine found that most US doctors believe in God and an afterlife -- a surprising degree of spirituality in a ...
http://www.floridatoday.com/apps/pbcs.dll/ article?AID=/20050628/LIFE01/506280305/1023/life01 - 39k - Cached - Similar pages
David's Journal: How Many Doctors Believe in God?--76 percent of US doctors say they believe in God. --About 60 percent believe in some kind of afterlife. --90 percent attend religious services at least ...
http://www.hollywoodjesus.com/comments/ david/2005/07/how-many-doctors-believe-in-god.html - 37k - Cached - Similar pages
Most Doctors Surveyed Believe in $DEITY || kuro5hin.orgIn the survey of 1044 doctors nationwide, 76 percent said they believe in God, 59 percent said they believe in some sort of afterlife, and 55 percent said ...
http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/6/23/0236/62671 - 38k - Cached - Similar pages
Most US doctors believe in God and afterlifeSpirituality - IndiatimesA survey examining religion in medicine found that most US doctors believe in God and an afterlife - a surprising degree of spirituality in a science-based ...
spirituality.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1150393.cms - 27k - Cached - Similar pages
Business of Life™: Most doctors believe in GodSurprisingly, most doctors believe in God and in an afterlife a recent survey reveals that will appear shortly in the Journal of General Internal Medicine. ...
http://www.estatevaults.com/bol/archives/001661.html - 6k - Cached - Similar pages
Offering Abortion, Rebirth - Los Angeles Times"Oh, God, doctor," the woman said. "I was hoping it was cancer." ... I really believe God has a plan for us all. I have a choice, and that's part of my plan ...
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/ nation/la-na-abortion29nov29,0,2003322,full.story - Similar pages
Success Forums - Doctors Believe In GodDiscuss the Action Prciniples and our free courses.
http://www.success.org/discuss/showthread.php?t=740 - 37k - Cached - Similar pages
Inside Chris's Head » Most US Doctors Believe in GodMost US Doctors Believe in God. Many people think that people become a Doctor because they want to play God. They might be surprised by a recent survey from ...
chris2x.com/?p=256 - 18k - Cached - Similar pages
I got half as many when I googled "Doctors that believe in evolution".
urwhatu: 63% of Doctors Believe in Evolution63% of Doctors Believe in Evolution. In other, more disturbing news, 37% of doctors believe intelligent design is a legitimate scientific inquiry. ...
andre.stechert.org/urwhatu/2005/09/63_of_doctors_b.html - 12k - Cached - Similar pages
Poll: Most doctors favor evolution theoryPhysOrg news: Poll: Most doctors favor evolution theory. ... I hope my doctor would "believe" in science!` There are 6 replies in that topic. ...
http://www.physorg.com/news6847.html - 34k - Cached - Similar pages
HCD Research Inc.The majority of all doctors (78%) accept evolution rather than reject it and, ... Half of the doctors (50%) believe that schools should be allowed (but not ...
hcdi.net/News/PressRelease.cfm?ID=93 - 12k - Cached - Similar pages
Majikthise : Warning labels for doctorsHowever, I wouldn't go to a doctor or a nurse practitioner who didn't believe in evolution. I just wouldn't trust anyone to practice an applied biological ...
majikthise.typepad.com/majikthise_/ 2005/01/warning_labels_.html - 76k - Cached - Similar pages
Mailbag: Evolution vs. CreationismActually, many people believe that evolution is the means which a "Divine ... Perhaps prospective doctors should be expected to know something about science ...
atheism.about.com/b/a/041817.htm - 31k - Cached - Similar pages
Is the theory of evolution just a theory?Most biologists believe that evolution is more than a theory; ... bullet, Bacterial cause of ulcers: In the past, doctors had been treating ulcers with ...
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_stat.htm - 31k - Cached - Similar pages
How to write an evolution assignment when you don't believe in ...How can I write an assignment on evolution if I don't believe in evolution? ... But he has to write a story saying that a two-day doctors' conference aimed ...
http://www.users.bigpond.com/rdoolan/assignments.html - 13k - Cached - Similar pages
Louis Finkelstein Institute for Religious and Social Studies, The ...By contrast, less than half of Protestant doctors (46%) believe that God ... The majority of all doctors (78%) accept evolution rather than reject it and, ...
http://www.jtsa.edu/research/ finkelstein/surveys/evolution.shtml - 9k - Cached - Similar pages
Survey: Protestants Back Intelligent Design | Christianpost.com ...Moreover, half of doctors surveyed believe that schools should be allowed, ... Majority of all doctors (78%) accept evolution rather than reject it and, ...
http://www.christianpost.com/article/education/ 822/section/survey.protestants.back.intelligent.design/1.htm - 67k - Cached - Similar pages
Daily Kos: Evolution and the road to the White HouseThat's right, more than half of Protestant doctors believe more in ... This author seeks to explain part of the evolution/intelligent design battle as a ...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/10/22163/921 - 39k -
urwhatu: 63% of Doctors Believe in Evolution63% of Doctors Believe in Evolution. In other, more disturbing news, 37% of doctors believe intelligent design is a legitimate scientific inquiry. ...
andre.stechert.org/urwhatu/2005/09/63_of_doctors_b.html - 12k - Cached - Similar pages
Poll: Most doctors favor evolution theoryPhysOrg news: Poll: Most doctors favor evolution theory. ... I hope my doctor would "believe" in science!` There are 6 replies in that topic. ...
http://www.physorg.com/news6847.html - 34k - Cached - Similar pages
HCD Research Inc.The majority of all doctors (78%) accept evolution rather than reject it and, ... Half of the doctors (50%) believe that schools should be allowed (but not ...
hcdi.net/News/PressRelease.cfm?ID=93 - 12k - Cached - Similar pages
Majikthise : Warning labels for doctorsHowever, I wouldn't go to a doctor or a nurse practitioner who didn't believe in evolution. I just wouldn't trust anyone to practice an applied biological ...
majikthise.typepad.com/majikthise_/ 2005/01/warning_labels_.html - 76k - Cached - Similar pages
Mailbag: Evolution vs. CreationismActually, many people believe that evolution is the means which a "Divine ... Perhaps prospective doctors should be expected to know something about science ...
atheism.about.com/b/a/041817.htm - 31k - Cached - Similar pages
Is the theory of evolution just a theory?Most biologists believe that evolution is more than a theory; ... bullet, Bacterial cause of ulcers: In the past, doctors had been treating ulcers with ...
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_stat.htm - 31k - Cached - Similar pages
How to write an evolution assignment when you don't believe in ...How can I write an assignment on evolution if I don't believe in evolution? ... But he has to write a story saying that a two-day doctors' conference aimed ...
http://www.users.bigpond.com/rdoolan/assignments.html - 13k - Cached - Similar pages
Louis Finkelstein Institute for Religious and Social Studies, The ...By contrast, less than half of Protestant doctors (46%) believe that God ... The majority of all doctors (78%) accept evolution rather than reject it and, ...
http://www.jtsa.edu/research/ finkelstein/surveys/evolution.shtml - 9k - Cached - Similar pages
Survey: Protestants Back Intelligent Design | Christianpost.com ...Moreover, half of doctors surveyed believe that schools should be allowed, ... Majority of all doctors (78%) accept evolution rather than reject it and, ...
http://www.christianpost.com/article/education/ 822/section/survey.protestants.back.intelligent.design/1.htm - 67k - Cached - Similar pages
Daily Kos: Evolution and the road to the White HouseThat's right, more than half of Protestant doctors believe more in ... This author seeks to explain part of the evolution/intelligent design battle as a ...
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/10/22163/921 - 39k -