[NetBehaviour] [stuff-it] FW: Only 33 per cent of Americans believe in evolution
Simon Biggs
s.biggs at eca.ac.uk
Mon Jul 13 12:58:03 CEST 2009
But how many Americans believe in the rest of the world?
Simon Biggs
Research Professor
edinburgh college of art
s.biggs at eca.ac.uk
www.eca.ac.uk
www.eca.ac.uk/circle/
simon at littlepig.org.uk
www.littlepig.org.uk
AIM/Skype: simonbiggsuk
From: patrick simons <patricksimons1 at googlemail.com>
Reply-To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
<netbehaviour at netbehaviour.org>
Date: Mon, 13 Jul 2009 11:29:35 +0100
To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
<netbehaviour at netbehaviour.org>
Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] [stuff-it] FW: Only 33 per cent of Americans
believe in evolution
how about only 33% of the rest of the world believe in Americans?
Patrick
On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 10:59 AM, Geert Dekkers <geert at nznl.com> wrote:
> Actually, what I found most interesting in the article was that while 33% of
> Americans don't "believe" in evolution, 57% consider science important (or
> was it "extremely" important?) And I'd add, even the most fanatical
> creationists rely om the internal combustion engine to get to their meetings,
> showing that being religious and (at least) the use of scientic achievements
> don't rule each other out.
>
> Geert
>
> On Jul 13, 2009, at 11:17 AM, Rob Myers wrote:
>
>> There are healthy debates about some of the details but there are no serious
>> scientific theories that are alternatives to evolution by natural selection.
>> If there were they would replace evolution as experiments and studies
>> confirmed them. That's the beauty of science when it works.
>>
>> Science doesn't require faith, just one less philosophical assumption than
>> religion. The practice of science requires personal drive and curiosity, and
>> is subject to social pressures, but it is the least worst means we have of
>> acquiring knowledge about the world. Art is a complement to it but religion
>> has declared itself a rival.
>>
>> - rob.
>>
>>
>>> On Jul 13, 2009 9:47 AM, "Olga" <olga.panades at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is a very interesting discussion but I was hoping to hear some
>>> alternative scientific theories. For what I know, and I know very
>>> little on the subject, there are alternative scientific theories that
>>> challenge the theory of evolution as we know it. Can anyone give me a
>>> bit more information on those?
>>>
>>> And also, I think science involves big amounts of faith as well...
>>>
>>> --
>>> Olga
>>> http://www.ungravitational.net
>>> http://virtualfirefly.wordpress.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list
>>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour....
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>>
>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
_______________________________________________
NetBehaviour mailing list
NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
Edinburgh College of Art (eca) is a charity registered in Scotland, number SC009201
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20090713/0fd2b572/attachment.htm>
More information about the NetBehaviour
mailing list