U.S. Buddhists, Hindus Back Evolution, Says Study
India West, News Report, Ashfaque Swapan, Posted: Mar 13, 2009
Despite virtually unanimous support in the scientific community, there is considerable public skepticism in the U.S. about Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution, with 39 percent believing in the theory, according to a Gallup poll.
Hindus in the U.S., however, overwhelmingly accept the scientific consensus, with four out of five Hindus agreeing that evolution best explains the origin of human beings, according to a recent study by the Pew Center.
Buddhists, edging Hindus by a slight margin, were the greatest supporters among different religious groups, the survey found.
As the world celebrated the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin Feb. 12, his legacy is a study in contrasts: While there is virtual unanimity among biologists regarding the validity of his theory of natural selection, public opinion continues to show surprising pockets of resistance in some nations.
The resistance has come almost entirely from religious groups, led by Christian groups, who support an alternative theory called intelligent design, which accepts the existence or agency of a supreme being.
The International Society for Krishna Consciousness has recently joined in the fray.
“As an organization that represents the Vaishnava tradition – the largest denomination within the Hindu faith – ISKCON reaffirms the reality that the concept of an intelligent designer is not limited to Christians,” the organization said in a statement. “We join other Hindus, Muslims, people of other faiths, and those who profess no particular faith, in calling for a more balanced and objective exploration of the theory of evolution and its alternatives.”
“The theory of evolution should continue to be taught, because it is a fact that most scientists today accept evolution,” contends Michael Cremo, an ISKCON member and scholar of Hinduism’s response to evolution. “But it is also a fact that other scientists, admittedly in the minority, accept some version of intelligent design. Educational institutions should reflect this reality, by making room for a neutral presentation of the alternatives to the Darwinian theory. Let people make up their own minds.”
However, skepticism among scientists about intelligent design in unanimous.
The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that "creationism, intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life or of species are not science because they are not testable by the methods of science." The U.S. National Science Teachers Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have termed it pseudoscience. Many in the scientific community have been less kind, bluntly calling it junk science.
Public opinion in the U.S., however, continues to be surprisingly resistant to Darwin’s theory. According to an August 2006 survey by the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life and the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, 63 percent of Americans believe that humans and other animals have either always existed in their present form or have evolved over time under the guidance of a supreme being. Only 26 percent said that life evolved solely through processes such as natural selection.
Hindus in the U.S., however, do not share this view. In advance of the 200th anniversary of Charles Darwin's birthday on Feb. 12, the Pew Research Center's Forum on Religion & Public Life released a report exploring the evolution controversy in the U.S. The Pew Forum's U.S. Religious Landscape Survey found that views on evolution differ widely across religious groups.
Buddhists and Hindus led the study with 81 percent of Buddhists and 80 percent of Hindus agreeing that evolution is the best explanation of the origin of human life on earth, followed by Jewish (77 percent) and unaffiliated (72 percent) groups. Muslims (45 percent) were the fifth least enthusiastic about Darwin’s theory in the 12-group study, with Jehovah’s Witnesses (7 percent), Mormons (22 percent) and evangelical Protestants (24 percent) being the least enthusiastic religious groups.
Page
1 of 1
|
User Comments
Mars Bonfire on Mar 15, 2009 at 12:47:23 said:
tfagan said (three times, no less :)
> "a judge in Dover, Pennsylvania decided that Evolution is true and that Intelligent Design is Creationism. He knows this because the ACLU told him so."
No, Judge Jones decided that ID is creationism because a lightening strike piece of evidence at trial showed that in their cut-and-paste attempt to swap each occurrence of the word "creationism" with the words "intelligent design", the fundamentalists had screwed up and left one occurrence to say "creintelligent designism" or some similar smoking gun crazy phrase exposing their deceit.
The rest of your diatribe is too full of ignorant errors to waste much time on (why get into a kicking contest with a jackass?), but you also said:
> "No Catholic ,Protestant, Atheist, Evolutionist, Hindu, Buddhist or professor of philosophy has been able to demonstrate that breeding can produce a new species from another different species."
Speaking of jackasses, have you ever heard of a MULE?
Mars Bonfire on Mar 15, 2009 at 12:36:52 said:
tfagan said (three times, no less :)
> "a judge in Dover, Pennsylvania decided that Evolution is true and that Intelligent Design is Creationism. He knows this because the ACLU told him so."
No, Judge Jones decided that ID is creationism because a lightening strike piece of evidence at trial showed that in their cut-and-paste attempt to swap each occurrence of the word "creationism" with the words "intelligent design", the fundamentalists had screwed up and left one occurrence to say "creintelligent designism" or some similar smoking gun crazy phrase exposing their deceit.
The rest of your diatribe is too full of ignorant errors to waste much time on (why get into a kicking contest with a jackass?), but you also said:
> "No Catholic ,Protestant, Atheist, Evolutionist, Hindu, Buddhist or professor of philosophy has been able to demonstrate that breeding can produce a new species from another different species."
Speaking of jackasses, have you ever heard of a MULE?
Mars Bonfire on Mar 15, 2009 at 12:36:06 said:
tfagan said (three times, no less :)
> "a judge in Dover, Pennsylvania decided that Evolution is true and that Intelligent Design is Creationism. He knows this because the ACLU told him so."
No, Judge Jones decided that ID is creationism because a lightening strike piece of evidence at trial showed that in their cut-and-paste attempt to swap each occurrence of the word "creationism" with the words "intelligent design", the fundamentalists had screwed up and left one occurrence to say "creintelligent designism" or some similar smoking gun crazy phrase exposing their deceit.
The rest of your diatribe is too full of ignorant errors to waste much time on (why get into a kicking contest with a jackass?), but you also said:
> "No Catholic ,Protestant, Atheist, Evolutionist, Hindu, Buddhist or professor of philosophy has been able to demonstrate that breeding can produce a new species from another different species."
Speaking of jackasses, have you ever heard of a MULE?
tfagan on Mar 14, 2009 at 18:21:09 said:
The usual arguments; Intelligent Design is Creationism; more scientists believe in Evolution than not; even though Evolution is a theory it is true based on the evidence. All those that have been brain washed into believing in Evolution offer the same tired arguments of the past. Its as though they don’t know the horse and buggy has been replaced by the automobile.
Finally the one I like most is; a judge in Dover, Pennsylvania decided that Evolution is true and that Intelligent Design is Creationism. He knows this because the ACLU told him so. Judge Jones, as far as I can determine, has no expertise in Philosophy, Biology, Palentology, Mathematics, Theology or any science whatsoever. In addition he has no expert knowledge in Evolution or Intelligent Design. This is proven by his contention that Intelligent Design is Creationism, a contention that is entirely false.
Intelligent Design is not about religion, in fact it is a scientific theory about the generation of new species and about the origin of life. It attempts to answer the question can a new species be generated by accidental mutations. Is there a more strenuous requirement for the generation of a new species. Intelligent Design looks at the scientific limits of mutations and survival of the fittest. Intelligent Design looks at the DNA, RNA, Genes, proteins, amino acids, and other components of the living cell in addition to the programming code found in every cell. The programming code that permits a single cell to build a complete animal without outside help except for food and in the case of humans a little sunshine. As it turns out there is more science in the theory of Intelligent Design then in the theory of Evolution.
The best Evolution has to offer is Micro-evolution (breeding). We now know that the variation within a species (breeding) is already designed into the genes and you cannot breed beyond the gene limits (no dogs the size of elephants) . No Catholic ,Protestant, Atheist, Evolutionist, Hindu, Buddhist or professor of philosophy has been able to demonstrate that breeding can produce a new species from another different species.
Keep in mind Darwin’s Macro-evolution has never been observed or in any way proven to have occurred. There has never been any real evidence of transitional fossils. There should be millions upon millions of such fossils if Darwin’s theory were true. (All past transitional fossils have been shown to be mistakes or frauds.)
We now know that to evolve from one species into another would require thousands of spontaneous helpful mutations. We know that science has not proved that three (3) spontaneous helpful mutations has ever occurred. (see Dr Behe’s book “Edge of Evolution” for details)
We know that Hitler and Stalin believed in Evolution. (They killed tens of millions of inferior humans.)
We know that RNA & DNA could not be accidently produced in a billion billion years by a mindless accident of Evolution and without DNA all life would cease to exist.
tfagan
tfagan on Mar 13, 2009 at 19:08:02 said:
The usual arguments; Intelligent Design is Creationism; more scientists believe in Evolution than not; even though Evolution is a theory it is true based on the evidence. All those that have been brain washed into believing in Evolution offer the same tired arguments of the past. Its as though they don’t know the horse and buggy has been replaced by the automobile.
Finally the one I like most is; a judge in Dover, Pennsylvania decided that Evolution is true and that Intelligent Design is Creationism. He knows this because the ACLU told him so. Judge Jones, as far as I can determine, has no expertise in Philosophy, Biology, Palentology, Mathematics, Theology or any science whatsoever. In addition he has no expert knowledge in Evolution or Intelligent Design. This is proven by his contention that Intelligent Design is Creationism, a contention that is entirely false.
Intelligent Design is not about religion, in fact it is a scientific theory about the generation of new species and about the origin of life. It attempts to answer the question can a new species be generated by accidental mutations. Is there a more strenuous requirement for the generation of a new species. Intelligent Design looks at the scientific limits of mutations and survival of the fittest. Intelligent Design looks at the DNA, RNA, Genes, proteins, amino acids, and other components of the living cell in addition to the programming code found in every cell. The programming code that permits a single cell to build a complete animal without outside help except for food and in the case of humans a little sunshine. As it turns out there is more science in the theory of Intelligent Design then in the theory of Evolution.
The best Evolution has to offer is Micro-evolution (breeding). We now know that the variation within a species (breeding) is already designed into the genes and you cannot breed beyond the gene limits (no dogs the size of elephants) . No Catholic ,Protestant, Atheist, Evolutionist, Hindu, Buddhist or professor of philosophy has been able to demonstrate that breeding can produce a new species from another different species.
Keep in mind Darwin’s Macro-evolution has never been observed or in any way proven to have occurred. There has never been any real evidence of transitional fossils. There should be millions upon millions of such fossils if Darwin’s theory were true. (All past transitional fossils have been shown to be mistakes or frauds.)
We now know that to evolve from one species into another would require thousands of spontaneous helpful mutations. We know that science has not proved that three (3) spontaneous helpful mutations has ever occurred. (see Dr Behe’s book “Edge of Evolution” for details)
We know that Hitler and Stalin believed in Evolution. (They killed tens of millions of inferior humans.)
We know that RNA & DNA could not be accidently produced in a billion billion years by a mindless accident of Evolution and without DNA all life would cease to exist.
tfagan
tfagan on Mar 13, 2009 at 18:57:32 said:
The usual arguments; Intelligent Design is Creationism; more scientists believe in Evolution than not; even though Evolution is a theory it is true based on the evidence. All those that have been brain washed into believing in Evolution offer the same tired arguments of the past. Its as though they don’t know the horse and buggy has been replaced by the automobile.
-->Finally the one I like most is; a judge in Dover, Pennsylvania decided that Evolution is true and that Intelligent Design is Creationism. He knows this because the ACLU told him so. Judge Jones, as far as I can determine, has no expertise in Philosophy, Biology, Palentology, Mathematics, Theology or any science whatsoever. In addition he has no expert knowledge in Evolution or Intelligent Design. This is proven by his contention that Intelligent Design is Creationism, a contention that is entirely false.
Intelligent Design is not about religion, in fact it is a scientific theory about the generation of new species and about the origin of life. It attempts to answer the question can a new species be generated by accidental mutations. Is there a more strenuous requirement for the generation of a new species. Intelligent Design looks at the scientific limits of mutations and survival of the fittest. Intelligent Design looks at the DNA, RNA, Genes, proteins, amino acids, and other components of the living cell in addition to the programming code found in every cell. The programming code that permits a single cell to build a complete animal without outside help except for food and in the case of humans a little sunshine. As it turns out there is more science in the theory of Intelligent Design then in the theory of Evolution.
The best Evolution has to offer is Micro-evolution (breeding). We now know that the variation within a species (breeding) is already designed into the genes and you cannot breed beyond the gene limits (no dogs the size of elephants) . No Catholic ,Protestant, Atheist, Evolutionist, Hindu, Buddhist or professor of philosophy has been able to demonstrate that breeding can produce a new species from another different species.
Keep in mind Darwin’s Macro-evolution has never been observed or in any way proven to have occurred. There has never been any real evidence of transitional fossils. There should be millions upon millions of such fossils if Darwin’s theory were true. (All past transitional fossils have been shown to be mistakes or frauds.)
We now know that to evolve from one species into another would require thousands of spontaneous helpful mutations. We know that science has not proved that three (3) spontaneous helpful mutations has ever occurred. (see Dr Behe’s book “Edge of Evolution” for details)
We know that Hitler and Stalin believed in Evolution. (They killed tens of millions of inferior humans.)
We know that RNA & DNA could not be accidently produced in a billion billion years by a mindless accident of Evolution and without DNA all life would cease to exist.
tfagan