What limits a species life?

[woodyguy]

Looks like Swedes have a commanding lead of 88% whilst Danes have a very respectable 83%. Surprising that the French match us.

[Bren.]

In U.S., 42% Believe Creationist View of Human Origins

[se7enthdevil]

interesting report.

 

i still find it quite astounding that america puts something like creationism in the same subject as education myself...

[skyhuck]

"I fear that if we want to look for the next global hotspot of religious fundamentalism, then America is where we should be looking."

 

Put your fears to rest. There've been no beheadings here, just noise. In most countries they lack the freedom to have these loud conversations, and the curriculum is handed down from above. On what level are these decisions made in the UK?

For certain, England seems like a global hotspot for anti-religious Darwinism.

 

The concept of 'tree lifespan' is riddled with assumptions and conditions, nature AND nurture. It depends.

 

Oh dear

[treeseer]

OP asked, "what causes the tree to die?"

 

Answer: "It was preordained". Umm I means "It depends; many variables in a trees' nature, and how it is nurtured."

 

After viewing that Gallup poll I'm not feeling too patriotic!

[Bren.]

OP asked, "what causes the tree to die?"

 

Answer: "It was preordained". Umm I means "It depends; many variables in a trees' nature, and how it is nurtured."

 

After viewing that Gallup poll I'm not feeling too patriotic!

 

Sorry about that mate, be proud of your country, it's achieved many amazing things in its short history.

For me the really worrying thing in that report is not just the figures relating to the 42% who believe in the creationism argument, but the additional 31% who believe that man evolved, but with god guiding the process (or "Intelligent Design). When taken together this represents a massive 73% Americans who do not accept the Darwinian Theory of Evolution.

In the 21st century, that really is an amazing statistic.

[Mountain man]

Doesn't that mean they just believe in God (the 31%) what's so odd about that?

[Bren.]

It's odd because it precludes the acceptance of established scientific theory.

[Mountain man]

Sure, I understand, I'm not sure it precludes all established scientific theory, just says that what's known now is not all there is to know.

It was established scientific theory that the sun rotated round the earth, that it was flat, and more recently the atom could never be split.

How will we regard our EST in 100 years?

Edited December 28, 2014 by Mountain man

[Bren.]

But that's just the point. The parts that are accepted and not accepted are based on their conflict with religious doctrine. Relativity is fine, Evolution is not. Both are explored using the same scientific methodology.