How can Biologists believe in the ToE?

When Nator asks in her O.P. title:

quote:

---

How can Biologists believe in the ToE

---

she's referring to the biological ToE, not to any other ToEs that you might be preoccupied with.She's assuming that we understand that, and that it's not necessary to use the word "biological" in her title.So, you ask to be corrected, and I am correcting you. The biological ToE is a theory exclusively concerning life forms. It is not a "process", but a theory that explains a process.Look up the word "biology" if you don't agree, and ask Nator if she didn't assume that everyone would understand that the ToE in her title meant biological ToE.Everyone except you does seem to understand that.

I think you accidentally replied to the wrong post, AiG, unless RAZD has recently converted to Biblical creationism of some kind, which I somehow doubt.No problem, and an easy mistake to make, but I'm just pointing it out as others reading the thread might be confused.As for your post, very well put is all I can say.

That would be a perfect answer to questions like:

quote:

---

How can Christians believe the Bible is the word of God?

​

How can Muslims believe that the Koran is the word of God?

​

How can Hindus believe that they get reincarnated?

​

How can so many Americans believe that Jewish mythology is literally true?

---

Hi, bernerbits, and welcome to EvCIn the post from RAZD just above (No. 252) there's a link to a thread about speech.It'll be interesting to have someone who's studied linguistics around, as it's one of the many disciplines that young earth creationism cuts directly across.Not your fault for being off topic. IamJoseph had dragged the thread onto his favourite subject. He wants to believe that speech was gifted to us by God around the time that written language first appeared.

Could you give us an estimate on what percentage of evolutionary biologists you think have done that? (for example, mine would be <0.001%, and probably none).I should guess that the percentage of Christian priests/ministers who've fucked a choirboy is probably higher, but that doesn't mean it's typical behaviour.

Very logical. But you seem to be criticizing biology, not the 2,000 brainwashing sects.Scientists are expected to present evidence for what they teach to children as (always tentative) "truths".The overwhelming majority of the world's children are being indoctrinated with one religion or another from a very early age (before they know what the word "biology" means) and history shows that only a minority of each generation will manage to de-program themselves.That's brainwashing.

I was commenting on Lucy's brainwashing comment. I don't think Lucy is really too interested in complaining about the media's (often misleading) treatment of science, or even things being picked up by the media before peer review, or bad textbooks, or about systematic brainwashing (creationism wouldn't exist without it). All things well worth complaining about.You've been around creation/evolution debates for a long time, I gather, so what do your instincts suggest to you when you read Lucy's comments on this site so far?Lucy (an australopithicus) is, remember, quite sure that she's an ape in the generally used sense of the word, not a transitional upright walker, and shows an interest in "Nebraska man" that you may just have seen somewhere before.