4 ms·

> Turning that into "40% of people think that the earth is 6000 years old" is called twisting your statistics. You clearly did not read what I linked you. Ask

by lbrandy 17y ago

> Turning that into "40% of people think that the earth is 6000 years old" is called twisting your statistics. You clearly did not read what I linked you. Asked whether it was true that "God created the world sometime in the last 10,000 years", 32 per cent agreed, 60 per cent disagreed and eight per cent did not know. 32% of UK are young earth creationists and 8% "do not know". So please do not sit there and tell me that this "does not approach" 40% of people anywhere but in America. Your statement is simply false. This is NOT uniquely an American phenomenon.

run4yourlives 17y ago
I hate to link to faux news, but see here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207858,00.html http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207858,00.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Views_on_Evolution.svg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Views_on_Evolution.svg
- lbrandy 17y ago
  Why are you changing the subject? How is this relevant? You said young earth creationism was uniquely an American phenomenon. You said that nowhere in the Western world does young earth creationism approach 40%. Except.. that's -exactly- what is happening in the UK (32% + 8% "don't knows"). I've provided you with the evidence. The reason I chimed into this conversation is because you were making statements that were simply false. You don't think I'm acutely aware of the US acceptance of evolution? Why is that relevant? Did you somehow read into my statements that the US didn't have a major problem? Dawkins statement is SLIGHTLY exaggerated, statistically. Your response, however, was substantially more inaccurate.
  - run4yourlives 17y ago
    The graph I linked to clearly shows that a majority of the western world have only small minorities that disagree with the statement that we have evolved from another species. In other words: evolution. I know you would like to continue to belabour the point that 40% of the population of most western nations are young earth creationists, but that simply isn't supported. Dawkins' statement is a distortion of the facts. Most people in modern countries - with the exception of the US - have accepted the basic tenets of evolution. Like I've said elsewhere, it is only Dawkins that attaches to this the condition that in order to believe evolution you must not believe in a god.

by lbrandy 17y ago

run4yourlives 17y ago

I hate to link to faux news, but see here: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207858,00.html http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,207858,00.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Views_on_Evolution.svg http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Views_on_Evolution.svg

lbrandy 17y ago
Why are you changing the subject? How is this relevant? You said young earth creationism was uniquely an American phenomenon. You said that nowhere in the Western world does young earth creationism approach 40%. Except.. that's -exactly- what is happening in the UK (32% + 8% "don't knows"). I've provided you with the evidence. The reason I chimed into this conversation is because you were making statements that were simply false. You don't think I'm acutely aware of the US acceptance of evolution? Why is that relevant? Did you somehow read into my statements that the US didn't have a major problem? Dawkins statement is SLIGHTLY exaggerated, statistically. Your response, however, was substantially more inaccurate.
- run4yourlives 17y ago
  The graph I linked to clearly shows that a majority of the western world have only small minorities that disagree with the statement that we have evolved from another species. In other words: evolution. I know you would like to continue to belabour the point that 40% of the population of most western nations are young earth creationists, but that simply isn't supported. Dawkins' statement is a distortion of the facts. Most people in modern countries - with the exception of the US - have accepted the basic tenets of evolution. Like I've said elsewhere, it is only Dawkins that attaches to this the condition that in order to believe evolution you must not believe in a god.