Which of these 'popular' lablels do you associate with?

[Dolerman]

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

Creationism is very much related to religion and goes hand-in-hand with it.

@j8cob

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

1. Yes, they aren't religious viewpoints, so they're irrelevant to the discussion.

@Jotunn Draugr

Well this is awkward....

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

Not everyone who is religious is a creationist, but everyone who is a creationist is religious.

@j8cob

Wrong.

You can belive in intelligent design or even theistic creationism without adhering to any organised religion, do some fact checking before making these claims.

Im not going to keep repeating myself on this but creationism has very little to do with religion, applying biblical literalism to scientific facts is largley seen as a fringe ideology that ties into conspiracy theories about mainstream scientists keeping the public away from god. Almost all christains reject the idea of creationism as it undermines the metaphorical importance of biblical stories.

Now for Ben Carson to think that world is 6000 years old or the world was created in 6 days in the face of astrophysists, paleontologist and biologists, he would have to be agressively ignorant AND very arrogant to think he knows more about the world than a scientist who has trained and studied longer than he has to know about the world. This is why me and you dont claim to know more about brain surgery than Carson because it isnt our field. So he must either think that 99% of the scientists in the world are misinformed or LYING about the facts of the world, which is absolutely insane in any context but especially in the context of someone to run the country.

[Vor]

I'd like to propose a thought experiment.

There are a bunch if people stuck on an island. All of normal intelligence....

@BrokenPromise

Stop right there. Just what the hell is "intelligence", anyway?

Is he smart or stupid?

@BrokenPromise

Again, what is "smart" or "stupid" for that matter?

Ask 10 people out in the street and I'd wager you'd get at least 5 different answers.

Ok, let's take the prevalent theory that intelligence is the capacity to process information, also associated with analytical thinking and problem solving skills. By that criteria, the scientists in your experiment is a smart guy, yeah. But...wait a moment. How the fuck would he be capable of processing that information if he doesn't have it in the first place...?

Now, we come to KNOWLEDGE, which is not the same as intelligence. For survival situations, knowledge is far more useful than a high IQ (which is also not an uniform metric for measuring intelligence). You can be the smartest person in the world, but if you can't light a fire you're gonna freeze to death and that's that. Say, I've got a cousin who's a really good hunter, spends a lot of time travelling through the countryside etc. I would absolutely entrust him with my life in a survival situation, but I wouldn't trust him to represent me in a political debate, because I know more about history and politics than he does. Myself, I'm a programmer and can solve a number of complex mathematical problems. Does that make me "smart"? Maybe, but to fill out a simple tax report, I need to go Google that shit, because I can't do it for the life of me. Does that make me "stupid"? See what I'm getting at?

In your particular example, I'd say that the scientist was a pretty knowledgeable guy and a hero for saving all those other people. However, that doesn't mean I consider his belief in Creationism, a pseudoscience that has 0 empirical evidence to back it up, any less stupid. History is full of really smart people believing really idiotic stuff.

Intelligence isn't binary. You can be very accomplished in one field and a total idiot in another, as @Vilageidiotxmentioned in his post in the last page. Here's an example - a very smart college kid, who has the intellectual capacity to change the world. Unfortunately, he has low emotional intelligence and is socially awkward. Now, I can guarantee you that the chance for this kid to do anything noteworthy with his life are <1%. If you can't express your ideas and if you can't get people to rally behind your cause, you're not going to achieve anything and some well-spoken, less intelligent person is going to walk right over you. 9 times out of 10 this is how the world works. That's why we have so many smart people doing experiments in some forsaken lab, while a bunch of old people that don't know the difference between a monitor and a computer lead the world. So, is the college kid smart or stupid?

My point being, don't be so quick (not you in particular) to label people when you don't even know what the label entails.

[Eklispe]

In case anyone cares that I'm doing this.

[j8cob]

Wrong.

You can belive in intelligent design or even theistic creationism without adhering to any organised religion, do some fact checking before making these claims.

@Dynamo Frokane

You are quite possibly the only person who thinks this. I just did some fact-checking and I couldn't find a single person who identified themselves as a creationist without identifying themselves as some form of Abrahamic religion. I couldn't. Not even the plebians on tumblr or Twitter or anything, let alone any prominent names or famous people throughout history.

To the contrary, I found a good number of Christian websites that very directly state that creationism is an important part of religion with one article outright saying "creation is religion."

Just because the majority of Christians don't believe in creationism doesn't mean it isn't a very religious thing. It is entirely belief based, as religion is. People who believe in creationism had it instilled in them at a young age, as religion usually works too. From that point onward it becomes difficult for anyone who was taught creationism by their parents or parish to ever shake that belief. The way the human psyche works makes people not want to change. People can change, but they inherently don't want to. If they were trained to be super religious as a child, they will remain super religious throughout their adult life outside of rare circumstances. Your assertion that creationism has nothing to do with religion is an ignorant assertion in and of itself, ironically.

[BrokenPromise]

<Snipped quote by BrokenPromise>

Stop right there. Just what the hell is "intelligence", anyway?

<Snipped quote by BrokenPromise>

Again, what is "smart" or "stupid" for that matter?

@Vor

That was... the entire point of the thought experiment.

To take a quote from Albert Einstein:

"Everybody is a Genius. But If You Judge a Fish by Its Ability to Climb a Tree, It Will Live Its Whole Life Believing that It is Stupid"

In case anyone cares that I'm doing this.

@Eklispe

Think I'm gunna pull up a chair beside you if ya don't mind.

[Dion]

@Eklispe I honestly think the highlights have already passed.

It's more a pissing contest between people that wouldn't change their mind regardless of the opinions being thrown around, at this point. Which is not a debate, but an argument between two deaf people.

[Eklispe]

Really? Wrong image then. Here's the one

[ArenaSnow]

If I said that I was visited by an anime unicorn, I would need to prove it. But based on what we understand about reality, we would reliably be able to say that I was lying and that my claim was false.

@Dynamo Frokane

I was visited by a flying turtle when I was sleeping in a tent once. Do you think I'm lying? *eye twitch*

[Dolerman]

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

I was visited by a flying turtle when I was sleeping in a tent once. Do you think I'm lying? *eye twitch*

@ArenaSnow

[Dolerman]

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

You are quite possibly the only person who thinks this. I just did some fact-checking and I couldn't find a single person who identified themselves as a creationist without identifying themselves as some form of Abrahamic religion. I couldn't. Not even the plebians on tumblr or Twitter or anything, let alone any prominent names or famous people throughout history.

To the contrary, I found a good number of Christian websites that very directly state that creationism is an important part of religion with one article outright saying "creation is religion."

Just because the majority of Christians don't believe in creationism doesn't mean it isn't a very religious thing. It is entirely belief based, as religion is. People who believe in creationism had it instilled in them at a young age, as religion usually works too. From that point onward it becomes difficult for anyone who was taught creationism by their parents or parish to ever shake that belief. The way the human psyche works makes people not want to change. People can change, but they inherently don't want to. If they were trained to be super religious as a child, they will remain super religious throughout their adult life outside of rare circumstances. Your assertion that creationism has nothing to do with religion is an ignorant assertion in and of itself, ironically.

@j8cob

Fact checking....you spoke to every single person in the world who indentifies as a creationist and asked them if they adhered to organised religion or was this more of a first page google search?

It gets a little semantical at this point, creationism is commonly seen as the religious branch of creation science which is encompassed by intelligent design which is not nessecarily religious by defination.

Ben Carson Brand which overlaps into This sometimes, its case by case.

I dont nessecarily disagree that it isnt a creationist's fault they were reaised creationist, I'm not saying they should be put in jail, but to believe psuedo science in the face of real science and claim that every real scientist is dumber than Ben Carson or lying is a poor representation of rational/logical thinking and makes him very unfit to run the country. The world is tough, its not the people's fault that your parents never told you santa claus was your uncle in a red suit, and if you are still claiming that its true after being proven its false then you are aggresively ignorant and acting like an idiot.

To summarise, ben carson can believe whatever the hell he wants, but you cant run a country on stupid ideas like pseudoscience.

[j8cob]

<Snipped quote by j8cob>

Fact checking....you spoke to every single person in the world who indentifies as a creationist and asked them if they adhered to organised religion or was this more of a first page google search?

It gets a little semantical at this point, creationism is commonly seen as the religious branch of creation science which is encompassed by intelligent design which is not nessecarily religious by defination.

Ben Carson Brand which overlaps into This sometimes, its case by case.

I dont nessecarily disagree that it isnt a creationist's fault they were reaised creationist, I'm not saying they should be put in jail, but to believe psuedo science in the face of real science and claim that every real scientist is dumber than Ben Carson or lying is a poor representation of rational/logical thinking and makes him very unfit to run the country. The world is tough, its not the people's fault that your parents never told you santa claus was your uncle in a red suit, and if you are still claiming that its true after being proven its false then you are aggresively ignorant and acting like an idiot.

To summarise, ben carson can believe whatever the hell he wants, but you cant run a country on stupid ideas like pseudoscience.

@Dynamo Frokane

Abraham Lincoln was a creationist despite the fact that the Theory of Evolution was a thing two years before he became President. The facts and evidence were out there and he still believed in the Bible's story. Would you say he was an inept President because of his disbelief of modern (at the time) science? Or would you say that, in spite of this, he was able to lead the US effectively and bring it through the darkest hour of its history?

Lincoln isn't the only President to have believed in creation after the Theory of Evolution was realized. Grover Cleveland, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, to name a few. I think that it had very little impact on how "good" of a President it made people. The denial of creationism among our Presidents didn't become common practice until over a hundred years after the Theory of Evolution.

It isn't far-fetched to presume that one's beliefs on the topic of evolution have little or even no effect on their ability to lead. Some of the best leaders throughout world history were absolutely terrible in their understanding of the sciences of their times. There are far more important and relevant qualities to determine a good leader.

[Dolerman]

<Snipped quote by Dynamo Frokane>

Abraham Lincoln was a creationist despite the fact that the Theory of Evolution was a thing two years before he became President. The facts and evidence were out there and he still believed in the Bible's story. Would you say he was an inept President because of his disbelief of modern (at the time) science? Or would you say that, in spite of this, he was able to lead the US effectively and bring it through the darkest hour of its history?

Lincoln isn't the only President to have believed in creation after the Theory of Evolution was realized. Grover Cleveland, Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, to name a few. I think that it had very little impact on how "good" of a President it made people. The denial of creationism among our Presidents didn't become common practice until over a hundred years after the Theory of Evolution.

It isn't far-fetched to presume that one's beliefs on the topic of evolution have little or even no effect on their ability to lead. Some of the best leaders throughout world history were absolutely terrible in their understanding of the sciences of their times. There are far more important and relevant qualities to determine a good leader.

@j8cob

Right I'm back, time to adress this.

Historical Context, 2 years after the theory of evolution it was a new stange and yes blasphemous thing, the shit people got back then for not following a very narrow belief in christianity was social suicide, and sometimes criminal. There is no way Abraham Lincoln could have run as president let alone been a politician. And at the time, this theory was not widely accepted and overall the population were less scientfiically informed and skepticism ESPECIALLY into religous doctrine was not encouraged in public or private schools.

In short Lincoln was a good president FOR HIS TIME but to compare the merits of a man born nearly 210 years ago, and who lead the country during a civil war in times of the most social unrest the country has ever seen to Ben Carson running for president in 2016 is asanine at best.

Whatever way you split it, in MODERN TIMES a leader of the modern world needs to be logical, rational and at least somewhat skeptical. Denying overwhelming scientic evidence in favour of a fringe interpretation of the old testament is not an example of those qualities.

I dont care if hes a fucking brain surgeon, its irrelevant to being a political leader. Its only ONE academic field, you can be a master economist but suck at english literature, try to look at the bigger picture.