Is Creationism really mutually exclusive with Darwinism? For Catholics, we believe in both evolution and a creator.

Creationist come in all shapes and sizes o.o

Edited 11/23/2018 22:00:05

Darwinism is inconsistent with Christianity, that should be obvious

^
Darwinisn is not conflicting with a god per se. Though I cant see how anyone can believe in science AND farytales at the same time.

oh, you wacky Europeans with you atheism and stuff

America is the best country because we produced this image: https://i.redd.it/w4iwbllfgwv11.png

pardon me? i can assure you that many americans are also atheists just not as many as you would see in europe
i am one of those americans

Edited 11/24/2018 00:13:57

Oh I know buddy, don't worry. But compare the religious views in Czechia and the majority of the U.S.

Over here, most people are religious in some way and superstition is actively believed by the youngest generation. Many of my friends are atheists (which I don't mind) which is common among youth here, but not to the extent of other countries. You'd be hard-pressed to find another western country with religion playing as heavy a role in life for the YOUNGER generation (notice my emphasis there).

The differences between America and Europe at a glance seem minor, but when you look hard, it is quickly seen that we have some key differences in attitudes and culture.

I don't know what all of it means, but it's fascinating to me. How nations so closely related can be so distant simultaneously! However, I do predict that Americans are shifting toward a more European culture, but we are still pretty distant (and yes that includes that I believe the irreligious in America will increase during the coming decades).

You conflate science with your fairytale worldview of materialism, which is destroyed by its foundational contradictions.

What does that have anything to do with the massive post I just made??

Alright, so we’ve hit eugenics and religion. What other bannable topics can be dredge up?

Europe would be much safer if it had the amount of firearms the US have. They could then easily target and take down any invading Syrian ISIS deep-cover agents who are raping thirteen year olds on the street.

Edited 11/24/2018 05:12:30

USA > The World how manytimes we gotta goover this?? check ww1 and ww2 or maybe our Monroe doctrine


sorry to break it to ya but we rule the world xd xd xd

You'd be hard-pressed to find another western country with religion playing as heavy a role in life for the YOUNGER generation

Clearly never been to a Catholic country, which is most of the West. Also if you count Voodoo and other folk religions, then that's pretty much the rest of the West which is more religious than America. But yes please have America and Britain and Europe as the only countries you have in your mind clearly.

"check ww1 and ww2" The moral the rest of the world got from that is that America is a bunch of lazy arses

western country

I pretty much meant West Europe/USA. Latin America is quite different in its situation and I am not too aware, having only been exposed to the region through conversations with friends who are from there or their family is from their.

Latin america is hyper religious, homophobic, and racist. Most of them are catholics, soooo.

Source: latin american family members

Edited 11/24/2018 18:18:08

I pretty much meant West Europe/USA

Then say so.

if everybody had a gun no mass shootings would happen because if someone tried they'd get shot instantly

My two cents for what its worth:

1st) Currently we aren't capable of using technologies like Crisper to make such dramatic changes in the human genome. We can basically cut out and replace specific strands of DNA, but the number of genes controlling things like height number in the thousands.

2nd) Even if we could we don't have the knowledge of the human gnome to say which combination of genes effect height. And when you start to do the math (think about the number of possible genes, and the number of possible gene combinations and possible interacting effects of different genes), you quickly realize there will be no way we could without significant advancements in the fields of machine learning and statistics. Given the amount of computing necessary, and limitations of our current statistical method we would either need a huge break through in the field of statistics on par with the Central Limit Theorem or Law of Large Numbers, or we would need the computational power of machines to be many, many, many times more powerful than anything that is currently imaginable. Now a lot people like to point to Moore's Law (remember Moore's Law is not actually a law, it is really just a casual observation) and similar patterns in the advancement of human knowledge, but there is no reason to believe that this pattern will continue into the future. Indeed when you examine the exponentially rising cost of technological advancement it would seem like Moore's Law and our current rate of advancement is bound to slow down when all the 'low hanging fruit' is picked.

3rd) Cost Benefit, and the law of unintended consequences. Every trait a human has has a cost and benefit. For example people who are taller also on average die younger due to an increased risk of heart attack.

4th) Why use Eugenics when people already naturally do this? Tall people tend to mate with tall people, short with short. Well educated people tend to mate with well educated people, etc. etc. Bottom line, people mate with other people who are similar to them. Thus naturally leading to a wide spectrum of 'specialized' people (IE tall people, people who favor more education, people who are health nuts, etc.)

If you are interested in learning more about this, check out the podcast 'The Joe Rogan Experiance' episode #1201 with William Von Hippel. I actually don't know a whole lot about this topic, but they talk about it in depth on this episode, and I just finished listening to it. It's really interesting shit.