Belief in evolution by country - % of population

You stu are such a liar.

I may not be able to find any evidence of design but as you know nobel prize winners and founders of string theory have said that if this is our only universe than there is evidence our universe appears designed.

although the odds are almost infinite against the universe winding up being able to sustain life.... according to you it just so happens that it did and you are willing to abandon all you skepticism to make that conclusion.

So - when you wish to acknowledge that Nobel Prize winner Stephen Weinberg has more credibility on this subject than you let me know.

And as you know - he is not the only top scientists or nobel prize winner that sees design. (in our Universe). If you wish to speculate there are almost infinite other universes be my guest.
 
Quote from jem:

You stu are such a liar.

I may not be able to find any evidence of design but as you know nobel prize winners and founders of string theory have said that if this is our only universe than there is evidence our universe appears designed.

although the odds are almost infinite against the universe winding up being able to sustain life.... according to you it just so happens that it did and you are willing to abandon all you skepticism to make that conclusion.

So - when you wish to acknowledge that Nobel Prize winner Stephen Weinberg has more credibility on this subject than you let me know.

And as you know - he is not the only top scientists or nobel prize winner that sees design. (in our Universe). If you wish to speculate there are almost infinite other universes be my guest.
More...
You previously, wrongly assigned a Nobel Prize to what you referred to as a " top scientists".

The "top scientists" stated himself , in a video you clumsily supplied in support of your infantile argument, that he doesn't agree the universe is due to intelligent design.

So then you introduced a "top nobel prize winner" whose name you can't even be bothered to check you've spelt correctly, who you say has more credibility on this subject than you , but who in a video, doesn't support the idea of a (intelligent) "designer".

And because you are making all these false claims , you call me a liar.


Generations of humanity can stand on the shoulders of giants, but all you want to do is crawl around in a fetid undergrowth of misleading deceitfulness feeding on a diet religious ignorance.
 
Quote from jem:

What evidence do you have that the universe we observe it is not designed.

To answer the question please support your answers with peer reviewed science or experts on the subject.
More...


What is the largest living organism on this planet?



Fungus, is the correct answer.
Yep, fungus.

All evidence points to "god" the creator, in fact being a single celled and highly adaptable amoeba, or spore.. Perhaps, from outer space-perhaps, from god's tennis shoes, it matters not.

The necessary chemicals and minerals were there, at the dawn of creation, to supply this evil manipulator, (god) to twist and distort his sick experiment to his wiles.
 
Quote from stu:

You previously, wrongly assigned a Nobel Prize to what you referred to as a " top scientists".

The "top scientists" stated himself , in a video you clumsily supplied in support of your infantile argument, that he doesn't agree the universe is due to intelligent design.

So then you introduced a "top nobel prize winner" whose name you can't even be bothered to check you've spelt correctly, who you say has more credibility on this subject than you , but who in a video, doesn't support the idea of a (intelligent) "designer".

And because you are making all these false claims , you call me a liar.


Generations of humanity can stand on the shoulders of giants, but all you want to do is crawl around in a fetid undergrowth of misleading deceitfulness feeding on a diet religious ignorance.
More...


you are liar.... and a zealous one.

I not only gave you quotes from one of the founders of string theory... but I gave you quotes from nobel prize winners.

you are too foolish to accept plain english.

and now you try and twist my statements....

I did not say these scientists who are atheists say - they have proof of God... I said they pointed out evidence of design. They counter the evidence by stating we have almost infinite other universes or regions of space. (regions we can not observe - and must be posited on faith).

That is the difference between you and me Stu -- I write things which are accurate - you like to mis -state the argument on purpose.
 
Quote from FeenixRizin:

define "evolution"


predicated on your nonsensical-response, the next question logically follows: is that your final answer about "the origin of life"
More...

I suspect people who were part of this research filled in questionnaires with their answers. I do not know the definition of ''evolution'' that was used in this poll.

Please don't ask me now to define ''poll'' and ''questionnaire''.

Regards
 
Quote from Tresor:

I suspect people who were part of this research filled in questionnaires with their answers. I do not know the definition of ''evolution'' that was used in this poll.

Please don't ask me now to define ''poll'' and ''questionnaire''.

Regards
More...


touche' ... being a smart ass gets you only so far


you didn't answer my question..... DOES DARWINIAN EVOLUTION EXPLAIN LIFE AS IT EXISTS TODAY?


ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION
 
Quote from FeenixRizin:

touche' ... being a smart ass gets you only so far


you didn't answer my question..... DOES DARWINIAN EVOLUTION EXPLAIN LIFE AS IT EXISTS TODAY?


ANSWER THE FUCKING QUESTION
More...

Chillout man. I only posted a graph.

There are two major oposing theories: evolution and creationism. Neither was debunk fully, meaning both have equal rights to exist, till one gets knocked down.

And people in some countires favour creationism over evolution more, e.g. Iran and US - they are called either deeply religious societies or religious fanatics.

And in some countries people favour evolution over creationism - such countries are called devilish / perverted or enlightened / liberal.

That's all.
 
Quote from Tresor:

Chillout man. I only posted a graph.

There are two major oposing theories: evolution and creationism. Neither was debunk fully, meaning both have equal rights to exist, till one gets knocked down.

And people in some countires favour creationism over evolution more, e.g. Iran and US - they are called either deeply religious societies or religious fanatics.

And in some countries people favour evolution over creationism - such countries are called devilish / perverted or enlightened / liberal.

That's all.
More...





it's a serious topic ... expect a strong emotional response when you presume to have some kind of answer
 
Quote from FeenixRizin:

it's a serious topic ... expect a strong emotional response when you presume to have some kind of answer
More...

Frankly speaking I expected to have a non-emotional sociological discussion (if any) over the graph I posted, e.g.:

(i) why in country X more people believe in evolution than in country Y?
(ii) why should Iran be called a fanatic country if it has similar % of religiosness as the US?
(iii) etc....

But my hopes were not fulfilled.

But you guys are welcome to throw mud at each other.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top