Evolution vs. Creationism: Why Science Outweighs Faith in the Eyes of this Blogger

It was a real struggle for me to come to a conclusion on how i should approach a comprehensive paper involving the topics of evolution and creationism and their differing ideologies. I have found an overload of information about both of these groups of individuals, but must now find a way to best utilize this information while also taking a stance on the subject. I have concluded that the best way to make a more cohesive paper is to focus in on the arguments discussed between creationist science and biological science. By detailing the intricacies of DNA, the cell, and ultimately macro-evolution, I can better explain evolution and help detract the mind from the psuedoscience that creationist exhibit. This will allow me to use quotes and examples from biologists as well as religious thinkers, and sort of come to a conclusion using "faith" in science and "faith" in religion. I will also talk about how evolutionists and atheists do not try to push their beliefs on others, rather expose information to those who would have been sheltered from knowledge due to many sociological determinants. I also want to harp on the debates raging in classrooms in Britain and Science, and how federal law and scientific backing have discontinued the teach ing of intelligent design within the classroom.

this topic will allow me to both take a pro-evolution stance and allow for the false logic and errors contributed by creationists to be exposed. Richard Dawkins, Biologist and pre-evolution philosopher, relates evolution to a detective showing up at the scene of a crime. They obviously were not present at the time of the incident, but can use information gathered at the location to better explain what happened and why. Just as in any scientific thought that has gained recognition in the history of human discovery, it takes the scientific method and overwhelming support to make a simple "theory" (as defined as an explanation of a phenomena) into a scientific "theory" (as defined as having substantial evidence supporting it, and unanimous agreement across the field). I hope that with this paper, the reader will get a better understanding of the topic of evolution, and also be aware that even though evidence exists to support almost everything that humans believe, there will always be people who take science as a mere study and not concrete fact.

Sociological factors

There are many factors that lead to cult beliefs, like those associated with creationist thinkers. Some of these traits are lack of post graduate education. In a poll prepared by GULLY survey, 70% of creationists lack post-GED degrees. Creationists also make up 35% of the total number of kids home-schooled in America. This is to combat the scientific "blasphemy" that is taught through public education. Basically, these severely ignorant parents do not want their kids to gain knowledge, just like the bible forbid the original humans (Adam and Eve0 to eat from the tree of knowledge. pretty twisted stuff if you ask me. Out of the 8 million creationists now present in America, 60% reside south of Mississippi. this means that southerners tend to have creationist sympathies. 92% of creationist thinkers are 2nd generation believers. just another sign that this is a cult that we must be aware of, they are brainwashing their kids with propaganda in order for their kids to be sheltered from the harsh realities that exist in existence.

American Sociological Association and Creationism

The American Sociological Association is group of researchers who focus on the sociological reasons that people do what they do, feel how they feel, and think how they think. It combines the whole "nature vs. nurture" argument, while also including such factors as age, gender, education, location, and more. The ASA are adamant supporters of including science in high school curriculum, and even stated that evolution should definitely be taught within the scientific field due to the amount of objective empirical data supporting its validity. With regards to religion being mentioned in classrooms, the ASA stated, "The ASA opposes proposals that promote, support, or advocate religious doctrines or ideologies in science education cirricula. Religious doctrines and ideology include, but are not limited to, the non-scientific notion of "creationism", including "intelligent design". They even go on to say that these beliefs are "cult beliefs". The article goes on to mention that evolution is crucial in the understanding of biological processes by young Americans, and to deny these ideas from being taught in class would lower science literacy rates and academic achievements. The ASA did mention that creationism as a social movement and pseudoscientific cognitive process is a legitimate scientific topic for studying social factors that influence social movements or documenting the social and behavioral correlates of cult belief.