SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Should God be replaced?
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Brumar89 who wrote (27631)10/13/2009 1:44:56 PM
From: LLCF  Read Replies (1) of 28931
 
I'm trying to understand what the study was all about... you posted VERY LITTLE... :

First you made an assertion with no information attached:

""People who reject evolution generally understand it as well or better than those who accept it.""

Then you made this statement:

"in fact, if you look at the data from psychology and education, what you find is either no correlation between accepting evolution and understanding it or very, very small correlation between those two factors, and I think that's surprising to a lot of people and in particular to educators and scientists.""

with no qualifier... I'm assuming it's YOUR assertion again... with this link below it:

Message 25956226

Which as you can see leads to an article exclaiming: "Evolution and the Thought Police"...which is a long (OFF TOPIC to your assertion) discussion that includes this (finally) near the end:

""it's because they don't understand it very well; they don't really understand what the theory is telling us. But in fact, if you look at the data from psychology and education, what you find is either no correlation between accepting evolution and understanding ""

Then there is finally a link that leads to that article on something called "Darwins God":

darwins-god.blogspot.com

Again... more discussion by clearly an "anti-evolution" slanted website that FINALLY quotes a little from what YOU CLAIM backs your assertion, which of course also supports the overriding concern of the article in hand.

SO NOWHERE IS THERE ANY ORIGINAL MATERIAL OF Lombrozo's DISUCSSION... ONLY QUOTES FIt INTO AN ANTI-EVOLUtION ARTICLE.

So there may be all sorts of truth in the idea... but how would WE KNOW?

I mean are WE supposed to run out and find the origianal research for YOUR assertion or do think folks will simply look at that website and go... 'yea right'?

Not much doubt.

DAK
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News