God Hates Ignorant People

Ask the same people if they believe that in our legal system the accused gets a fair trial.

Helpfully point out that 99% of cases never go to trial because the police threaten to force a wrongful conviction on a worse charge unless the accused admits to a lesser charge -- thereby completely circumventing the Bill of Rights. Helpfully add that the police pay snitches to tell stories, they fabricate evidence, plant evidence, and offer reduced sentences as rewards for perjury.

Ask yourself how the vast majority can be so wrong. Is it just an honest mistake? No. Then it is a dishonest mistake. People know the legal system was broken within decades of its origin and will never be fixed. At the same time they'll claim it's the greatest in the world. They know that they're lying. They're kidding you, kidding themselves, living in a fantasy world -- and well aware of it. They are very good at not tripping over their own lies simply because they've had so much practice at it.

Reconsider evolution with a simple test. The family dog, female, disappears for a few weeks and returns pregnant. It is likely she will give birth so a litter of mutts. But anyone would accept it was possible for the litter to be half-wolf. Even half-fox is conceivable, although half-coyote is more likely. (In Australia, half-dingo.) Everyone accepts that dogs, wolves, foxes, and coyotes are related species, which means they understand that these species share a common ancestor species, which is to say these species are related by common descent. In animal husbandry over the last 10,000 years, people have tried crossing different species thought to be related. People have were trying to crossbreed plant centuries before Mendel, so even 'dumb farmers' at heart believe in evolution. Across the Bible Belt, farmers practice evolutionary thinking seven days a week, but for an hour on Sunday they pretend recreationally.

So for someone to agree that evolution is a fact and then to agree that the sky fairy created the universe, is simply a matter of hypocrisy: sometimes they lie, sometimes they don't.

Look at the way people lie about their own politics.

None of this religious babble should be surprising.

In order to fix a problem you have to understand the problem. If you want to get rid of that problem you have to "strike at the root". If you don't pull a weed up from its root what happens? It grows back. QED

"The restoration of the father and the annointment of the son -- that's a very powerful duo," says Stephen Hess, a political analyst at the Washington-based Brookings Institution and the author of America's Political Dynasties. "You don't call Brookings to find out about what that means.You have to call a Bible institute." -USA TODAY, 08/02/00 http://www.usatoday.com/news/conv/069.htm

The results of most polls that ask questions with opposite targets tend to prove to me that polls are just noise. The more polls done, the more the nonsense decibel level goes up. Polls are low level social static!!

Pushing the polls upwards...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Push_polling

(2004) Karl Rove: Prince of Push Polling
http://www.webdelsol.com/The_Potomac/politics-rove.htm

Q: If someone plays a game in "god mode" and wins is it really winning?

A. There are two ways to win: hocus-pocus or fair and square. Both ways achieve the same goal - a victory. I suppose it all depends on how much integrity you're willing to give up to achieve that victory.

Personally I hate polls and try to mess with them.

Roy - that's precisely why I have the system stacked in my favor. I worked for the state AG's office. Everyone knows who I am and what I did for them. Matter of fact, some of my handiwork is used at every police department in the state.

I also know several people in the judiciary, chief justice among them.

If there's one thing I really gained from my time at the AG's office it was contacts.

... making me wonder how stupid is the average American?

You know how stupid the average American is?
Well, half of them are stupider than that.

I realize the difference between median and mean, but my point is the same.

I would guess that the average US citizen has an IQ of 100, just like every other large group of humans.
So more than half of the people in the world have an IQ less than 101 and the same is most likely true for the US.

So if we equate IQ with intelligence and make the poor assumption that stupid people are unintelligent then more than 50% of the people in the world are stupid.

I'ld also say that intelligent people are more capable of self delusion and rationalisation of conflicting views than unintelligent people.

As for the apparent conflict between the answers;
1) people don't like admitting they don't know
2) people accept, generally, that science isn't untrue
3) people don't wish to be in conflict with their local society/group.

i.e. I suspect some people are being disingenuous with the truth when answering, perhaps not knowingly.

If you ask people if the moon orbits the earth they'll say yes.
If you ask the same person if the moon always shows the same face to the earth they'll say yes.
If you ask them if the moon rotates on its axis they'll say no.

Not stupidity just a lack of learning combined with no requirement or benefit to them in that learning.

We have a world (western(ised) countries) that do not value science education in fact whatever words are spoken in support of it. I suspect that goverments prefer uneducated people, socialists especially.

If you admit to not being able to do basic mathematics it isn't considered bad or even a sign of ignorance, the same goes for basic understanding of science.
Given the salaries paid for various jobs engineers, mathematicians and scientists aren't valued that highly; whilst lawyers and politicians can become millionaires by twisting and misrepresenting the truth.

The vast majority of humans go through life without needing or wanting to know why a computer or car works, they just need it to work.

Especially when one paradigm is a scientific theory based on evidence and repeatable observable experimentation while the other is based on a poorly-written ancient collection of books...

Gee, can't imagine why you'd have trouble finding employment when making idiotic statements like this. Tis a mystery to me.

Especially when one paradigm is a scientific theory based on evidence and repeatable observable experimentation while the other is based on a poorly-written ancient collection of books...

Gee, can't imagine why you'd have trouble finding employment when making idiotic statements like this. Tis a mystery to me. Posted by: Hi There!

Why is it idiot?
I might quibble about the poorly written, that is a matter of taste, but it is an ancient collection of books (I'm guessing that she is refering to the Bible, though it would apply equally to the Koran, Vedas etc..).

You are also making some large assumptions; the most worrying is that being honest about your beliefs is detrimental in obtaining a job even when those beliefs don't affect your work.

Do self-named Christian folk act in the bigotted un-christian way implied by your comment? If they do then they aren't a good advertisment for their professed beliefs.

blah blah blah.

First prove that you aren't just a brain in a vat being fed stimuli to make you think that the world is what it is, then we'll talk.

...First prove that you aren't just a brain in a vat being fed stimuli to make you think that the world is what it is, then we'll talk.
Posted by: ben

Would I want to communicate with you?
Do you have anything intelligent to input?

Perhaps one of the many reasons the statistics are confusing is that the polls present a false dichotomy. There are alternatives to believing in evolution OR creationism -- you can believe both, for instance, which I do.

I defend my Ph.D. dissertation in astrophysics in January, so I am on the side of science. I am also a devoted, practicing Christian, and I use a lot of my free time engaged in outreach activities, which includes delivering lectures to religious groups about the confluence of science and faith. My aim is to convince these people that science is not a threat to their faith. That science is perceived as a threat is not due to the imagination of religious folks -- I get complaints from my students that biology professors proselytize in class, telling them that evolution means religious belief is a crock (can you imagine the consequences if I used my astronomy classes to shill for God?). Pick up a book by the likes of Dawkins or Stenger and you see the same thing.

Here is something important that people such as the author of this post seem to miss: when you tell devoted religious people that they must choose between God and science, they will always choose God; but when you tell them they can have both, they are usually very open to scientific ideas. The fact is, many, many religious people, particularly those of Judeo-Christian faith, have no problem whatsoever with scientific fact as long as it is not used as an ideological weapon against them. Most of them want to trust in science. When I demonstrate to my audiences how the big bang and the subsequent evolution of the universe is in perfect agreement with Genesis, they are delighted. (cf. Gerald Schroeder's The Science of God and The Hidden Face of God.) I have convinced more than one young-earther that a 14 billion-year-old universe is consistent with the Bible, an it's my intent to go on convincing as many as I can.

Though Christians can be stubborn, ignorant fools at times, I place most of the blame for the current, muddled state of things squarely on proselytizing scientists, who, rather than allow people to decide the ideological implications for themselves, elect to use their knowledge in a crusade against faith. If, instead, you have a genuine desire to see all Americans, regardless of belief, embrace current scientific ideas and trust in the scientific method, you have to convince them that you are not trying to undermine their faith. Like it or not, there is a sizable number of Christians in this country, and if you try to use science to coerce them out of their faith, you will only succeed in making America a more ignorant place.

Sorry Chris, my comment wasn't aimed at you, but the post.

Argh! This is how my comment should have proceeded:

Especially when one paradigm is a scientific theory based on evidence and repeatable observable experimentation while the other is based on a poorly-written ancient collection of books filled with allegory and mythology describing as much magic (and much more murder) as the average Harry Potter book?

blah blah blah.You live, you observe, you die. What's the point?

First prove that you aren't just a brain in a vat being fed stimuli to make you think that the world is what it is, then we'll talk.

Kind of like The Matrix, eh, Ben?

It may be a matter of opinion, but I take issue with "poorly-written." Many non-religious scholars consider the Bible as remarkable literature.

..It may be a matter of opinion, but I take issue with "poorly-written." Many non-religious scholars consider the Bible as remarkable literature.
Posted by: Sarah

Which one? I'm not being funny, I have a Catholic (New Jerusalem) bible, Russian & Serbian Orthodox bibles as well as some Abyssian Orthodox books plus a King James at home.

I do think that the quality of the writing varies a lot between the books composing these bibles.

I also came across one with NSV in its title, seemed an odd translation to me and poorly written.

All better to read than the koran, but that is bye the bye.

Ah, trying to figure religion out... please stop. Its got nothing to do with science. And I fail to see how mixed up beliefs on where we came from means this country is in a 'heap of trouble.'

according to the poll results, more than half of all americans believe that the earth has only been around for approximately 6,000 years and that humans popped onto this planet during a moment of eclesiastical hocus-pocus, yet they simultaneously believe that the earth and all its inhabitants (including, presumably, humans) have evolved over millions of years -- this is why i think this country is in a heap of trouble. based on these resxults alone it is obvious that the average american cannot reason effectively and they are incapable of logically analyzing their own basic scientific inconsistencies.

Let's say that in a few years, we do this exact same poll, and let's say that 100% of people believe that evolution took place, and science has its educational victory. I guarantee that if you asked if there was a God, there would still be very high numbers. Why? Because most people wouldn't have changed their belief in God, just their paradigm of what they had previously interpreted. So the question is, why hold on to that belief in God so strongly? And once that's the question, it stops becoming a scientific issue. So, to the scientific community, I say, relax! Just keep getting the objective data, keep giving that data to textbooks, and learn to live with the idea that society just isn't going to start altering their entire belief system and identity because of scientific consensus. Americans are not stupid or ignorant. They'll get it, given enough time. Have a little faith. I mean, rational expectation.

The reason people turn to God, and will continue to do so, even if evolution is fully accepted by everyone, is that science cannot explain the origin of existence. It doesn't provide people with an objective reason to live. It doesn't answer "why?" it only answers "how?" and even that it does incompletely.

Remember Spock in the Star Trek Motion Picture? "Is this all that I am? Is there nothing more?"

"It doesn't answer "why?" it only answers "how?""- ben

I hear this all the time, and it bothers me because peoople seem to be missing the point. There is no why, its all how. How it happens is why it happens. Trying to get an answer to why the world exists is usually one people do when they want the world to exist for some purposful reason, and they want to feel special. People dont like the fact that the world doesnt exist for them like they had been told for years.

...I hear this all the time, and it bothers me because peoople seem to be missing the point. There is no why, its all how. How it happens is why it happens. Trying to get an answer to why the world exists is usually one people do when they want the world to exist for some purposful reason, and they want to feel special. People dont like the fact that the world doesnt exist for them like they had been told for years.
Posted by: Mathew

The why question may be a valid one (irrespective of what materialists may say) and how is not why.

It really doesn't have to have anything to do with people wanting to feel special; the vast majority (I was going to write "all" but there are exceptions to most things) people want to feel special, loved, needed etc irrespective of their beliefs, but just because they desire certain things doesn't argue against the relevance or validity of the question.

Science doesn't address the why or ought questions (some people go further and claim that the questions are stupid but this is their belief set/philosophy not science) scientists examine the natural world/universe and use cause & effect (though cause may not be the best word) to explain how the whole thing fits together. The natural world/universe is taken as a given.

Science (methodological naturalism) isn't set up to address the why & ought questions, that is one reason philosophy exists.

So ... what is the point of the poll? To point out how stupid they are? Guess what - that's always been the case so why is this a big surprise?

Whenever I see the comment "that this country is in a heap of trouble" its the first indication that person has no sense of perspective. This country has been in trouble since the day it was founded. Sometimes its in more trouble than in other times. I am personally think we are back on the upswing of "less trouble".

Now - go back 50 years and ask the same questions. I have a feeling you will see these "poll results" as a remarkable improvement.

For a moment let's accept Evolution is the sole determinant of humanity - we are what we are because that's what evolved. Then the fact so many of us have a religious belief system and cling to it rather fiercely must mean it brings or brought some evolutionary benefit to become such a well established trait. So to speak, religious beliefs are either evolutionary artifacts, or valuable evolutionary traits... How many of us really want to struggle and fight to reproduce believing this all has absolutely no point at but just "happened"? I think the answer to that illustrates the evolution of religious belief and its ongoing value...

So under this scenario, the answer to the question "how stupid is the average American?" is "As stupid as evolution has made 'em, and as illogical as needs must to survive."

Personally I believe 1) humans did and are evolving - relatively rapidly in fact, due to our use of technology, 2) there has been slight but detectable changes in our genome in 10,000 years - so in effect what we are today IS relatively recent, 3) "something" (let's use "God" for lack of a better term) ultimately created this creation that science has so much fun exploring, and 4)that thus it follows this "something" is ultimately responsible for the reality of evolution...
Therefore the only correct answer to both poll question is "true"

there are books out there that argue the evolutionary benefits of irrational beliefs, especially religious beliefs, but i think there is another aspect to religion that is not mentioned: it is an artifact of evolution itself. by that, i mean that religious beliefs are an artifact of how our brains developed and probably are an aspect of developing self-awareness and a knowledge of our own impending deaths, much as whales still retain pelvic bones despite the fact that they no longer use hind legs to move around on land. there are few, if any, evolutionary pressures selecting against whales retaining these rudimentary appendages because they remain hidden beneath their skin, just as there apparently are few evolutionary pressures against humans retaining a belief in the supernatural.

...just as there apparently are few evolutionary pressures against humans retaining a belief in the supernatural.
Posted by: "GrrlScientist"

This reminded me of the film you blogged about; idiocracy I think it was called.

There may in fact be advantages in being religious. Social support being just one of them. The advantages might outweigh any disadvantage.

think of a way to get past the laws of christ then TALK.
p.s. our original title is Man not human.

I opress godless people with passion>

Pray for Jesus "Son of God" and be saved! Or endure everlasting anger of one Almightiy God.I pray black terror while falling forever does not come to any servent of god but only the faithless.Repent!belive!never die!

Science is a solid def. of ignorance in Gods eyes you do the math!

Women is the beholder of wisdom and 90% of women would agree with my last four logs.Please I would Love a comment.