This is a danged ugly poll, accompanying an interview with the slimy Ken Ham. It asks,
Regarding creation and evolution, I believe:
The universe was created in six days as described in Genesis.
Evolution is true, but God began and/or directs it.
Evolution is true, and religion has nothing to do with it.
Answer 2 is winning, with answer 3 dead last. Can you all fix that, please?
- Log in to post comments
Consider mine the first drop of water in the deluge to come.
Ah, skewing poll results, I love it.
How old is this interview? I'm seeing comments on the side of the page that are dated from May of last year, and I can't view the videos while I'm at work.
(I still voted my conscience, however, and gave evolution the big non-theistic thumbs up.)
Out of curiousity, how does poll crash rate on the evil scale? Specially, is it worse than Old Man Myers' cracker attack or merely worse than all prior acts of evil before the Great Crackercyclsm?
Done.
And dang, he really is an ugly old Aussie.
My pleasure.
That beard always creeps me the fuck out.
Thank you PZ, you could have warned us that the link sends us to a page with Ken Ham's smug smarmy face on it. Evertime I see that face I want to slap it.
On behalf of all Australians, everywhere and throughout known time, I would like to deeply apologise to the United States of America for foisting that prick upon you. Dogammit, we're supposed to be allies and we go and do that to you.....(but thanks anyhow for taking him off our hands)
The same poll worded a bit differently by Gallup shows that only 14% of Americans answer this question correctly. 86% of Americans either completely reject evolution or they invoke the magic man to invent and/or direct it. Americans want to stick their sky fairy into biology for some reason.
Actually, I just realised you did warn us. Maybe I should READ post titles before I get all cocky. *forehead slap*
Happy to help, I'm so worked up over Palin that I'm looking for anything I can to vent.......ahhhh, that's better.....
This is the first time I've gotten in on the ground-floor... how many poll hits do I need below me to get to the "inner circle"?
#4 - Poll crash can't be evil at all - God diths not smote for poll crashing... And the FSM probably approves, as it is almost an act of piracy...
"Evolution is true, but God began and/or directs it. "
Ok, this one is strange.
God began and/or directs it. Meaning either he began it and directs it, or he directs it but he DIDN'T BEGIN IT. hmmmm. Who did?
And of course that rules out the "God began it but doesn't direct it" option, which is silly but somewhat popular.
OOOH! I love to help in polls! Now we're tied with question #1. Keep it going!! :) PS. I'd never seen Ken Ham before...but EW!! One of God's creepier minions...
Done.
30/40/30
This kind of thing just fosters the very real belief that public opinion equals fact. Do not give in!
So, is it sexist to point out that he has a silly Amish beard, along with the fact that he's a lying sack of shit who's trying to destroy decent science education in this country?
Great... supper time and not hungry anymore... what an ugly guy (outside and inside)... in any case #3 is now 30%.
Done... 29/40/31
Like others... Palin has me in a mood.
Bugger! The poll only lets me vote once.
I voted, and then attempted to watch and listen to that creepy Hambone but could not get past five seconds of that insane drivel. Damn, what insane puke from something that evolution left by the swamp.
Done my duty and feel proud.
It isn't clear to me that flash-mobbing any online poll about evolution, religion, or climate change and stuffing votes from rationalists is helpful. Even if we got 20,000 people to click the little radio button for "God is dead", "Darwin had a point", or "What? You need to be ankle deep in rising ocean water in Kansas before you believe?", it doesn't help sell our case. It just makes us look like the smug jerks they want to believe we are.
Instead, we should be alert for these polls, and, though they are unscientific by definition (they do not have a random sample), watch for any trends towards sanity or clarity of thought. It would be nice if the numbers were to one day start swinging away from supernatural explanations for things and more towards natural explanations. We'll never spot such a shift if we're constantly diddling in the raw data.
Just a thought...
I have a problem with the very first line:
I don't believe in evolution, I accept it as fact. There is overwhelming evidence for it. Likewise; I don't believe in gravity or relativity. The evidence in each case makes simple belief irrelevant. They are facts, pure and simple.
What is it with these religious nuts and their belief that everyone has to have a belief system? I have something far better; a REALITY system!
Anyway, I voted for the last option of course.
No worries Bride! You'd have to send 50 of him to add up to Bush.
You may have to ship some vegamite over for me to ram down Pathetic Palins throat though. ;)
We hear and obey master.
:\
Between the theocrats and the creationists, I have little hope left for this country.
Could only get one vote in, damn it! Wish there was a way to insert your own questions.
Question: Is Ken Hambone one ugly fucker or:
1 Uglier than a bag of shit;
2 Uglier than a bag of assholes;
3 Uglier than a chacma babboon's ass with fungal rot;
4 All above, with the addition of being an ugly corpse that was shit out by a wart hog.
A place like beliefnet isn't going to be (normally) visited by those imbued with either sanity or clarity of thought. In fact, those who frequent such sites are generally unlikely to even be aware of the existence of a fair amount of opposing viewpoints, and as such, the point behind "skewing" these polls is to make it clear to those that might think everyone thinks the way they do and thus should have no reason to question it, that in fact many, many do, and perhaps they should... sitting back and looking for "trends towards clarity of thought" in a place like that is simply an effort in futility.
#24 El:
"I have something far better; a REALITY system!"
-lol-
Nice observation!
Americans are very slowly making some progress. If you look at the Gallup poll I linked to in #9, you will notice that in 1982 only 9% of Americans agreed that Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life, but God had no part in this process, but in 2008 14% agreed that people developed from other animals without any supernatural magic. 14% is disgraceful, but not as bad as 9%.
Voted twice... using 2 browsers. 32% now. Going to vote from my work PC now :-) Hey, maybe it's the time to try Chrome!
Turn off your TV, check out the Pacifica stream, it's much less gagging, and let's blog on Crash McPlane.
http://kpft.org
Personally I think he's pretty hot, and I'd do a three way with him and larry craig in any bathroom stall.
Every time I see a picture of Ken Ham it reminds me of my theory that he is a manikin from a museum's "Early Man" exhibit who came to life. Ever since he escaped from the museum he's devoted all of his time to getting even with his creators -- and found a particularly clever way of doing it.
Hey, it's as good a theory as any of Ham's!
oops wrong thread, see yall at the callipoe thread, sorry
Don't be hasty... poll crashing against the authority of gawdawful or The Church should merit you at least an abomination. I'll have to try harder to see if it garners you a stoning.
So if you poll crash while being gay or lesbian, shaved or bearded, wearing two different materials you get six possible abominations.
I did it while imagining giving gawd the finger so I got one extra. But I'm an abomination queen anyway. ;)
Is the Book of Genesis a Metaphor?
Metaphor for what? You mean the people who wrote Genesis knew the literal stuff but they made a bunch of metaphor stuff that was metaphor for the literal stuff? Or do you mean God told the writers of Genesis a bunch of metaphor stuff for the literal stuff, and then they wrote down the metaphor stuff, and then God told them the literal meaning of the metaphor stuff? Or did they write down a bunch of metaphor stuff about the literal stuff, but didn't know what literal stuff the metaphor stuff was metaphor for? I don't know what you mean.
Evolution is catching up! But the site does seem like the place mostly religious hangout.
"Regarding creation and evolution, I believe:
The universe was created in six days as described in Genesis.
28%
Evolution is true, but God began and/or directs it.
38%
Evolution is true, and religion has nothing to do with it.
33% "
The Genesis 29%
Evolution is true, but God began 39%
Evolution is true 33%
We're getting close. At least the literal interpretation is in third place now.
Ummm. Bride of Shrek -
No one blames the Ozzies for Ken Ham. We are more ashamed that he realized that in order to make money at what he does, he came to the U.S.
P.T. Barnum did not die a poor man.
We're getting close. At least the literal interpretation is in third place now.
Yeah but that doesn't mean it's a metaphor though. If metaphor ends up winning, it might be a metaphor for metaphor being in third place and for literal being in first! You never know what a metaphor's for!! Get in them votes people!!
Descend upon the believers mine legions!
UUUUUUUUGGGGGHHHHHHHH!
Scooter!
Gack! I gotta go brush my teeth, and rinse my eyes out.
The universe was created in six days as described in Genesis.
28%
Evolution is true, but God began and/or directs it.
38%
Evolution is true, and religion has nothing to do with it.
34%
I voted two more times with Mozzella and Safari.
Now I need to go to my gal's computer...
It is hard... Ham is ugly... Must vote more...
Voted three times- explorer, firefox and safari
I can't believe we are putting ad money in this site's pockets just to vote in a stupid poll.
But I can't help myself. Maybe it is the hand of God monkeying with my free will.
Not taking Genesis literally is a step towards rejecting the whole Bible, says the founder of the Creation Museum.
Yeah, well... duh! The the founder of the Creation Museum must be Mr. Captian Obvious or something!
Here's something else to crash. Is Ken Ham annoying? One of the reasons that they give for him not being annoying should be on the "why he may be annoying" list so maybe this site is annoying. Right now he's at 67.12% annoying, but we all know that he's far, far more annoying than that.
Currently,
YEC28%
OEC38%
Reality35%
I tried to vote but the "Submit" vote did not work, perhaps by "design".
Isn't Ham in prison?
Yipee! 'The way, the truth and the data' is winning.
Answer 3 isn't "dead last" anymore! :-)
Reality by 1% with skydaddy in second and YEC 10% back.
Hmmm... disable cookies.... moved that poll 3 points in a few minutes (yea that was me)
--A
Religion had nothing to do with it?
Not God, but religion?
they have no cookies. you can leave the page and revisit and vote over and over :)
We're up to 39% right now.
#1 26%
#2 35%
#3 39%
This is great.
Voted using Firefox, Seamonkey, Epiphany, and Konqueror.
oh nevermind :(
They do have a cookie detector. Back to clearing cookies :)
Hovind is in prison. Hovind is even more wacko than Ham if that's possible.
That dude really has one creepy chin strap.
[force] I will crash this poll. I serve my master well. I will be rewarded. [/force]
Voted from multiple computers as well. Still at 39% for the home team.
Gotta agree with Rev BigDumbChimp @#7, that beard is some kind of weird. I wonder if it's actually some kind of alien symbiote that's controlling him.
crane - 39%, skyhook - 33%, yec 28%. Still pisses me off it is that close. Add up sky hook and yec and you get 61%. This is not good.
crane - 39%, skyhook - 33%, yec 28%. Still pisses me off it is that close. Add up sky hook and yec and you get 61%. This is not good.
I'm not going to bother with this poll.
So I took the Belief-O-Matic (creative) quiz on BeliefNet, and I got 100% Secular Humanism. Sweet. I'm surprised they even offered it as a choice.
What I want to know is how I got 50% in agreement with New Age and 46% for Reform Judaism.
Most encouraging is that I was raised Roman Catholic and attending Catholic schools for 12 years, and I have the second least in common with Roman Catholicism. Needless to say, I was not offended by Crackergate.
Heh, why not actually watch those videos? They actually argue against the existence of God. Ah, I love modus tollens.
Thanks BobC. It's hard to keep up on which ones are in prison, gay, taking drugs, committing adultery, raping children, moving to Enumclaw - ya know, all the stuff other people go to hell for.
Ah yes, Ken Ham... the idiot who screams that he isn't related to a monkey, while looking exactly like an unfrozen caveman.
Rev. BigDumbChimp - I've been worrying about you, the Mrs. and your bacon supply. Have you got somewhere safe to hide from all that nasty wind and water headed your way?
It's all your fault ya know. Gawds mad because you aren't praying, giving him money or burning witches.
Oh yeah. He's mad about the bacon too, you heathen.
Every time I see Ken Ham, I think: homo erectus in a suit. I know, I know, homo erectus doesn't deserve that, but I can't help myself.
Anyway - looks like this poll is over a year old.
Another poll:
"John McCain's speech was effective"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26552748/
I never thought I'd say this, but I agree with almost half of what Ham says in the "What's wrong with believing in Evolution?" interview. He gives the drivel about atheism = EVIL!!1, but then goes on to say that if evolution is true, there is no need for a god. Hmmm...right on, Ken! And if you're curious, empirical evidence never came up.
YEC 24%
OEC 32%
Reality 44%
Yes!!!!
We're closing the gap at 45%
For multiple votes in Firefox.
1) Open poll link
2) VOTE!!
3) In firefox. Tools > Options > Privacy > Show cookies
4) Close options window but keep open cookies window.
5) Delete "beliefnet" cookie folder.
6) No reload needed.. just hit vote again
7) rinse and repeat steps 5 and 6
Side note on the 2nd vote the beliefnet folder will be at the very bottom.
Are there any net savvy folks that could change option two to Tracie Harris' (Atheist Experience) "Argument from Wile E. Coyote"? (I'm kidding, of course, I only said it to showcase Tracie's most excellent comparison).
21/29/50
50% now!! Keep it coming!
I voted (figuring that deleting cookies was a good idea before anyone mentioned it) until Reality went from 50% to 51%. Looks like I had plenty of help, though.
20/27/53
w00t w00t
Quiet Desperation - If you're here, come over to the Open thread. Bride, Truth Machine & I are defending your honor against a really nasty troll. He doesn't even taste good!
19, 26, 55
What do his looks have to do with anything? Paste your own mugs online and lets have a beauty contest.
I certainly don't like the looks of his message though.
YEC18%
OEC25%
Reality56%
Woot! We're up to 57% now. Suck it, Ken!
19 - 26 - 56 now
We should collaborate and do billboards as well.
No fair. Jparenti hit the button before I did. :(
Ken's and his website sheep are having a math-illusion.
Sum the %ages in the last few posts :)
Time for this star trooper to buzz off to bed. I made the troll up a sugar tit.
Good night sweethearts!
I don't see an option for me to pick.
The first step is always the hardest.
Personally saw that poll go from 59->60% in 5 minutes.
Ahhhh, the poll seems to have turned around nicely. Now if we could just put as much effort into keeping the lunatic republican fundies out of the White House I would sleep better.
:^/
FIXED!
3 - 60%
2- 23%
1 - 17%
"Answer 2 is winning, with answer 3 dead last. Can you all fix that, please?"
And behold, answer 3 smote answer 2 and Dr Myers saw that it was good...
YEC 15%
OEC 20%
Reality 65%
And the machines arise...
And the glee sets in.
Up to 66% now.
I braved his ugly visage and discovered this:
"Ham received a Bachelor's degree in Applied Science from the Queensland Institute of Technology in Australia."
Pity he has never applied any himself.
Note to self: Write letter to QIT demanding they lift their game. Letting Ken Ham graduate WTF were they thinking. But then that's Queensland for you the, too much sun rotting the brain.
Yep, 66% correct. (I'm up early to catch a plane.)
14% / 19% / 67%. You'd think they'd learn not to put these polls up. The poll-crashing power of P.Z. is MIGHTY!
1 - 14%
2 - 19%
3 - 67%
69%. Gotta love internet polls.
13/18/70
right now it needs about 1.300 clicks to make 1per cent.
...and a few more to cut it down to 13/17/70
Can't help thinking that voting multiple times rather undermines the result...
Pleased to see the good guys are up to 70%!
Still at 13/17/70.
Well that didn't take long.
Done. We're leading with 70% of the votes.
Still at 70%
I was just thinking that if polls like this keep going up and ending with results against them, maybe they'll get the idea and stop doing it. I'm hoping not though; there may well be people looking at the results going on to investigate religious themes critically for themselves.
In the words of our dear leader (like my Jong-il reference?), MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!! Looking at those poll results on a theist website could only be more satisfying if it was true reflection of the Christians accepting and trusting science, and embracing it as Sagan taught.
Creationist and crazy right-to-lifer Jill Stanek has banned me because I know too much about abortion!
She is afraid to let me comment on her site.
Go there and leave a comment.
http://www.jillstanek.com
If the term "batshit crazy" ever makes it into the Oxford Dictionary, I an convinced that the entry will include a photo of Ken Ham.
If the term "batshit crazy" ever makes it into the Oxford Dictionary, I an convinced that the entry will include a photo of Ken Ham.
Their sales would plummet.
Off topic, but it should make you laugh:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?xml=/earth/2008/09/05/scilh…
Oh the unbelievable scientific ignorance of people!
That poll has been well and truly Pharyngulated. (Answer #3 is at 71%)
By your command!
Answer #3: still at 71% when I voted.
My five browsers rose to the occasion. (I don't have Chrome yet.)
I was able to vote twice, after running Ccleaner (a nice, free utility that removes cookies, etc,) and noting that I had accidentally not closed the site after voting the first time. Have fun!
Bob
Firefox users can use the stealther add-on, which stops cookies and all that other gunk allowing multiple votes, It works like the incognito mode in Chrome.
YEC 12%
OEC 17%
Reality 71%
Hmmm, I thought it would be higher.
[turns knob, moves lever, adjusts gear, flips switch]...
The power of united critical thinkers... Answer 3 now at 71%.. I love poll busting!!!
@120 Greg:
That sounds morally questionable. Should we really resort to such underhanded tactics to essentially violate someone else's polls like that, even when they are retarded?
Right now we are just made aware of the existence of a poll, and each of us selects the option that we agree with most. We should be able to crush the creobots without resorting to cheating.
Reality now leads at 74% as of 9 am EDT.
Well, as close to reality as you're ever going to see on anything related to their site.
12, 17, 71, respectively.
Uh oh! Reality down to 71%!
Evo with Sky Father = 17%
BatShit Crazy's = 12%
It's time to vote again.
ps: Paul Lundgren - Is your father Ted, in FL?
@123 Vidar.
I take your point, and perhaps if this was more than just a bit of fun crashing a ridiculous poll I would agree. Due to the nature of the site hosting the poll, however, it could also be argued that there is merit in depriving any fundies of any potential ammo in presenting their case, eg "well in a recent poll 85% of respondents replied that evolution is a bunch of muck".
It was running at 12, 16, 71 when I was there. I put in several votes thanks to Firefox's "remove cookie" fuctionality.
I don't see any harm in that. Depending on client-side features to enforce fairness is a really christian way of doing it. If I was bothered enough, I'd write a bit of bash script to submit thousands of votes at a time ..... but it's only a stupid little poll and not worth risking facing a hacking / terrorism / child porn charge over.
#3 is now 72%
I got it up to 74%
VICTORY IS MINE!!!!
:)
Wow, we may get it up over 75% at this rate!
I just when thru their "Godless Who's who" and I'm sad to report that Professor Myers didn't make the cut...
Is what I see going on here an example of atheist ethics?
Aside from the fact that the poll is poorly worded, particularly in the given options, it is worth pointing out that there is nothing about that poll which warrants "fixing" it, unless your goal is to skewer the results so that the poll is deceptive and misleading.
It's an opinion poll; simply asking readers to select the option which most accurately describes their own position on the issue. It's not asking people which option they think is closest to the truth. Take note of the fact that it says "I believe" with a colon immediately folowing. Additionally, it's not like anyone needs to vote multiple times to express their own opinions.
To that end, even though my own position aligns closest with option 3, I'm not going to vote.
9/13/78 as of 11:45 EST :)
Well, reality is leading with 78% as of now.
And, yeah, Ken Ham is a creepy individual.
It was up to 78% when I posted.
The Clown:
It's nothing compared to our baby-harvesting black helicopters.
It won't let me either vote or see the results. Did all you guys who got there before me crash it, or is it the firewall here at work?
Margaret,
I think the wrong page sometimes shows up. I voted once (early a.m.), then went back to see if I could vote again, and I got a different page. The third try got me back to the poll; but would not allow second vote. Just now I got through to the poll page.
You should try again.
Another poll successfully Pharyngulized.
I invoke magic for everything: from 30% to 9%
I invoke magic to direct reality: from 41% to 12%
I completely accept reality: from 29% to 79%
Unfortunately only 14%, not 79%, of Americans accept reality. The United States is in a race with the Muslim countries to have the most insane and most uneducated population in the world.
Congratulations, PZ! You've won another poll.
80% for the good guys when I voted (for the second time ...).
Joe,
I can get to the page with the poll and choose the right option, but neither the "submit" nor the "view results" buttons do anything.
At least Ken Ham is consistent. There are no hidden doctrines when he talks, it is all out in front.
I still cannot accept Kangaroos, and ALL of the Cretaceous and Jurassic Fauna on the ARK some 6000 years ago.
A Universal Flood too, I mean, he comes from Australia, and I ask, what place on Earth consistently contradicts the Great Flood than this Wide Brown (more Red) Land.
Yes voting in a poll is immoral.
80 %.
Remember: there are only 900 cdesign proponentsists on teh whole wide intarwebz.
We are asked our opinion, and we give it. Where's the problem? Who prevents you from going over to Free Republic and tell them all to vote for ignorance?
Where's the difference? What do you mean?
Hahaha, I love it.
David Marjanović, where did you find those gems? It's incredible to think that people hold a 'position on an issue' whilst at the same time knowing that an alternative position is closer to the truth. Sheesh.
Mission accomplished. Answer #1 has been demolished.
The universe was created in six days as described in Genesis.
8%
Evolution is true, but God began and/or directs it.
12%
Evolution is true, and religion has nothing to do with it.
80%
You should all be proud of yourselves and your leader- what you've done has made such a big difference in our society!
Is what I see going on here an example of atheist ethics?
Yes voting in a poll is immoral.
I was referring to the fact that several people here have admitted to voting more than once, thereby misrepresenting the true number of people voting, rendering the poll meaningless. I tend to think these polls are a waste of time anyway, and couldn't be bothered to vote. My interest is more in the ethics, or lack thereof, of a number of people here. Remember, your comments can be seen by anyone in the world. If you wish to portray any group as unethical (i.e., the creationists), you'd better make sure that your public record impeccable.
True, responding to such polls does little towards initiating the progressive change we would like to see in american attitudes towards religious supernaturalism or athiesm.
But if it serves to piss some fundie trolls off, then its all good just the same.
Online polls by their very nature are meaningless.
Let's hope the poll site does not have a cost-per-impression advertising deal - I'd hate to think we're funding creationism.
I think that concerns over multiple voting is a waste of moral energy. The whole concept of an uncontrolled poll like this is fatally flawed - what conclusions could ever be drawn? At least we know the poll set-up is more or less legitimate, at least in the short term. Other than that, it's about as "scientific" as creationism.
Anyway, perhaps we can regard a poll with multiple votes as a weighted measure of the enthusiasm with which punters hold a view?
I just voted for the 4th time and I have no ethical problem with it. By its very nature a web poll is un-scientific and meaningless. I find that it is ethical to demonstrate the bad science that these polls represent BECAUSE of the uncontrolled nature of them. It could be argued that we are crashing a party we aren't invited to, but then maybe the folks at this party need to see a strong opinion counter to theirs and without a bunch of uncivilized name calling.
So I happily crash polls at the command of my lord and master PZM.
Looks like the poll's been freeped. Question three is now at 80 percent.
While I don't have an ethical problem with it, either, fly44d, I'd be interested to see how we did without some of us voting multiple times.
I voted for the second one, not that this poll matters, as I am a theistic evolutionist.
Voted. Still at 80%... it's pzned. But I see everyone saying Ken Ham is ugly, creepy, etc. I had never seen him before and when I pulled up the page I wondered what a picture of Brett Favre was doing there. Then I realized it was actually Ken Ham. Didn't anybody else think they look like twins?
Voted. Still at 80%... it's pzned. But I see everyone saying Ken Ham is ugly, creepy, etc. I had never seen him before and when I pulled up the page I wondered what a picture of Brett Favre was doing there. Then I realized it was actually Ken Ham. Didn't anybody else think they look like twins?
Dang, I swore I wouldn't be one of people that double posted but teh intertubes wuz messin wit me.
BMcP
You pronounce yourself a 'theistic evolutionist' like it's something to be proud of. Sad...
Give my best to the Flying Spaghetti Monster.
83% for PZ
That will drive them nuts.
7/9/84
It´ll need at least 7.000 votes to be 85%. So this might be the end.
Yowsa!
84% correct now!
#161 @PM
Not a measure of pride, just fact and why I didn't pick #3, as it would have been dishonest of me.
David @ #146
The difference is that asking a person what they believe and asking them whether they think their beliefs are true, are two completely different questions.
BigDumbChimp @ #153
If online polls are meaningless, then why are you bothering to vote? This poll may be unscientific and poorly worded, but you aren't doing anyone any favours, especially the site owners, by distorting it to unrealistic proportions.
In fact, if that poll was to be in any way representative of the truth, option #2 would have a clear lead and options #1 & #3 would be battling it out for a distant second. Because people such as those that frequent PZ's blog, atheist evolutionists, are a minority not only in the US, but worldwide as well.
To demonstrate the meaninglessness of the poll and for entertainment.
If someone puts a poll online and people online vote one it...
ooooops?
one = on
Clown
Using polls to decide anything is utterly stupid. AOL polls are all right wing biased and just serve to reflect and reinforce people's stupidity.
Using superior intelligence, as used here, to fix the poll is good for mankind.
Living by example never works. Stupidity has to be "corrected"
BMcP wrote "I voted for the second one, not that this poll matters, as I am a theistic evolutionist."
That's interesting. Do you invoke the Magic Fairy to begin evolution, direct it, or both? What magic words did it use? Abracadabra? Hocus pocus?
Do you also invoke magic to explain gravity?
I have just voted and started laughing uncontrollably when I saw the results.
They threaten to kill us and we skew their poll results. Yeah!
While visiting BeliefNet I found this:
"Warning: Belief-O-Matic assumes no legal liability for the ultimate fate of your soul."
These clowns actually think the dead can bring on civil action against the living.
Keep them out of public office, pleeease!
84% (vs 7% & 9%)
I had no problem voting my conscience (twice)- but I might have had difficulty if option 2 had read "...God and/or FSM..."
Wow guys, don't get to excited about trumping an internet poll, you might overexert yourselves and not have enough energy for the circle jerk.
Both #2 and #3 are unscientific, they are philosophical claims...The presence or absence of an immaterial being, whteher Eisnteinian, or traditiaonlly theistic, cannot be answered scientifically, because science by definition only deals with natural phenomena...
I think we're overspicing the "Ham" here...
Sounds like you speak from experience.
Just kicked it over to 85%. (+7% + 9% = 101%, the joys of rounding error.) Next milestone: YEC down to 6%!
Chris P @ #170
Wonderful comments Chris. You have provided a classic example of the authoritarianism that perfectly reinforces the creationist accusation: that of big science imposing a dogma of anti-religious intellectual elitism on the masses. You claim that you are trying to defeat the creationists, but every time you suggest that religious beliefs should be eradicated you end up legitimizing the creationist position.
#151 @Bob wrote:
That's interesting. Do you invoke the Magic Fairy to begin evolution, direct it, or both? What magic words did it use? Abracadabra? Hocus pocus?
Do you also invoke magic to explain gravity?
Ahh.. this is just some insult rather but a sincere question, but I'll answer back anyway even though it has already entered into the realm of schoolyard debate.
I answered two over three because it was the best fit in the poll that had very limited answers. The third answer was geared towards those who believe in no god, so I felt it was dishonest to pick that one for myself. In light of that I elected number two. what do I think drives evolution? Natural Selection. When evolution in life began is a tricky question, I suppose with the most primitive proto-cells, and at that point I suppose it was evolution through imperfect RNA copying.
In light of this, I suppose choosing #2 was also poor, but there was no answers between the second and third answer that could have better reflected my views. Yet again it is an Internet Poll so who really cares.
As for gravity, I hear it is a hypothetical elementary particle called gravitons.
Sorry that should have been #166 @Bob wrote:...
BMcP, You don't invoke your magic fairy to invent or guide evolution, but you call yourself a theistic evolutionist. That makes no sense. The question wasn't do you believe in Mr. God. It was asking do you invoke the Magic Man to begin and/or direct evolution. You don't do that, so you should have chosen "Evolution is true, and religion has nothing to do with it."
To help you understand my point, imagine a religious garbage man calling himself a theistic garbage collector. That would be nutty because the Sky Fairy has nothing to do with garbage. Your calling yourself a theistic evolutionist is equally nutty, because God's magic had nothing to do with evolution.
Evolutionary biology is my favorite branch of science, and you insult it when you attach the disgusting adjective 'theistic' to it.
One more question for you: if you don't invoke your imaginary supernatural monster to explain the diversity of life, why do you waste your life believing in it? What's the point in believing in a magical fairy that has never done anything?
@BobC
I see your point, I do not understand the insulting tone, but this is the Internet.
I suppose most of the time when people talk about "theistic evolution" they tend to include abiogenesis and a supernatural start. I concede this is bad definition since evolution isn't the origin of life itself. I suppose a better term would be "theist who accepts natural evolution" to describe who I am.
I believe what I do for personal and philosophical reasons, not for scientific ones. To say one's God did not run evolution doesn't mean one believes their God has done or does nothing.
OK, thanks for your reply. Perhaps you would like to explain what your God has done or is doing. I don't believe in it because it's unnecessary. God was a useful idea in the Dark Ages, but now we got something called the scientific method which can be used to answer questions about life, our planet, and our universe. God is an obsolete idea.
Some people believe in the god-of-the-gaps, even though they always deny this is the real reason they continue to believe in supernatural magic. Into what gap do you hide Mr. God, and do you worry that scientists will find it hiding there and chase it away?
Certainly you are not some brain-dead fundie scum who lives in a childish fantasy world, but I just don't get why you would still cling to an idea (Mr. God) that most definitely is just a man-made invention.
Holding at:
YEC 6%
OEC9%
Reality85%
@BoBC
I fully understand the scientific method and I understand skepticism, I certainly see why folks (like yourself) have it.
I suppose I see God as the one who started to universe. We have the Big Bang as the method, but we have no cause, as in what started it all at time zero. You may feel there is a purely naturalistic reason for this, and that's fine. I also believe that perhaps life itself was started (abiogenesis) with God, then allowed to evolve. Of course I cannot prove any of this.
On a personal level I suppose my faith gives me peace and comfort.
I am not sure if it will change much for me personally if science makes new discoveries in fields where there are still many questions, such as finding a Higgs-Boson or a solid abiogenesis theory. Personally finding a Higgs-Boson and discovering the answer to why particles have mass would be fascinating.
My faith is personal, I don't push it upon others, I understand if you find my beliefs quaint or unnecessary, but if I do well by them for my life, does it matter?
I think the poll is now locked! Same standings as 24 hours ago: 6-9-85!