A few 'scientific' polls to compare OOT to the rest of the US

[john voight]

poll is too black and white. There are instances when I do not agree with any options. That said, I sided w/ the religion options, besides the ones that do not acknowledge evolution.

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
wacki,

I think guids' point is that the questions in the poll seem to juxtapose religion and science to a degree that most people do not in their personal lives (?)

also guids, you may be working with a somewhat broader definition of ID than wacki who might be thinking of the more specific forms of ID, one of which was rejected by a court in PA last year

[/ QUOTE ]

Im thinking of ID in the same terms that teh general population of America would think.

[mbillie1]

[ QUOTE ]
Im thinking of ID in the same terms that teh general population of America would think.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I mean ID is exclusive to the theory of natural selection, it posits a completely different hypothesis for the reasons organs and features change. What I meant was, I thought you said you voted for ID because you assumed that the evolution option implied atheism, but I may have been wrong.

[esad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I fail to see the difference between universe created by "god" and one created by "big bang".

hrm........ I should have phrased it:

"the universe was created:

A) 6,000 years ago
B) at the big bang"

[/ QUOTE ]

You know Wacki you really seem to be clueless on this sort of stuff. Someone could believe in God and still believe in the big bang. The way you write these questions is similar to the question "Do you still beat your wife?"

[/ QUOTE ]

The question didn't stack up believing in God vs. thinking the universe started with the big bang. It set against each other believing the universe started 6000 years ago and thinking it started with the big bang. Significant difference.

[/ QUOTE ]

The problem with his re-worded question is it basically is just the initial question. If you answer "6,000 years ago" you are basically answering that you believe that God created the universe. A properly worded question would be:


"the universe was created:

A) Through the direction of a God. Whether that be via a big bang or some other act, God had some hand in it.
B) I don't believe in God and accept that the universe was created via the currently scientifically accepted theory of the big bang.

That's a much better question. But, of course the question is superfluous anyway. All you have to ask is: "Do you believe in God?"

[wacki]

[ QUOTE ]
I cant stand it when people say things under the "guise" of information gathering etc, when all they are really doing is making a political statement.

[/ QUOTE ]

guids, I promise you I'm not trying to make a political statement. I'm just trying to figure out what kind of people poker players are. I like to know who populates my favorite forums.

[ QUOTE ]
I think there are a TON of people that believe there is a god, and he created something, but we dont know what it is, and man did go through the scientific evolution process.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vagueness doesn't help me. Either man evolved or he didn't. Either evolution occurs or it doesn't. Either the earth is 6K years old or it is older. They either support the CO2 consensus or they don't. I'm trying to keep it stupid simple.

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Im thinking of ID in the same terms that teh general population of America would think.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I mean ID is exclusive to the theory of natural selection, it posits a completely different hypothesis for the reasons organs and features change. What I meant was, I thought you said you voted for ID because you the evolution option implied atheism, but I may have been wrong.

[/ QUOTE ]


ID is the proposition that certain features of the universe and of living things can be better explained by an intelligent cause rather than natural processes such as natural selection.[1]

Discovery Institute, Center for Science and Culture

[Inso0]

"Evolution" in itself is a loaded term.

I certainly believe that we see a variation between the same KIND of animal (Micro Evolution), but I most certainly do NOT believe that I am the end-game offspring of some rocks that were rained on for a few billion years. (Macro Evolution)

[mbillie1]

[ QUOTE ]
ID is the proposition that certain features of the universe and of living things can be better explained by an intelligent cause rather than natural processes such as natural selection.[1]

Discovery Institute, Center for Science and Culture

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is the commonly accepted understanding of ID. I realize it is linguistically possible to reconcile the two, but it seems like quite a reach to say you accept evolution/natural selection and ID. I think religion/belief in god and evolution/natural selection are quite compatible, but ID is essentially (in any instance of it) an attempt to offer an account for a biological organ or process contrary to the currently held scientific view.

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I cant stand it when people say things under the "guise" of information gathering etc, when all they are really doing is making a political statement.

[/ QUOTE ]

guids, I promise you I'm not trying to make a political statement. I'm just trying to figure out what kind of people poker players are. I like to know who populates my favorite forums.

[ QUOTE ]
I think there are a TON of people that believe there is a god, and he created something, but we dont know what it is, and man did go through the scientific evolution process.

[/ QUOTE ]

Vagueness doesn't help me. Either man evolved or he didn't. Either evolution occurs or it doesn't. Either the earth is 6K years old or it is older. They either support the CO2 consensus or they don't. I'm trying to keep it stupid simple.

[/ QUOTE ]


If you want to gather information about the people who frequent this forum, your wording of all these quesitions basically makes about 90% of the general "poker" population skewed. Word your questions correctly, and you might actually get a real answer.

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
ID is the proposition that certain features of the universe and of living things can be better explained by an intelligent cause rather than natural processes such as natural selection.[1]

Discovery Institute, Center for Science and Culture

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think this is the commonly accepted understanding of ID. I realize it is linguistically possible to reconcile the two, but it seems like quite a reach to say you accept evolution/natural selection and ID. I think religion/belief in god and evolution/natural selection are quite compatible, but ID is essentially (in any instance of it) an attempt to offer an account for a biological organ or process contrary to the currently held scientific view.

[/ QUOTE ]


That was taken from wiki, I just cited the source that wiki used, and imo, most people believe ID is exactly what I posted, hence the bias I am talking about.