Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

[zlatan fulgere]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

For Ego Lost and his lack of Search skills... again.

He lost the thread?

 

[Ego_Lost]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

I didnt lose the thread, just havent posted.
I think Vastar is pretty much on the same page as I am.

There is not a thought in your head or an action you can take that is not determined by an extremely large if not infinite number of other events that took place before it.

Lets pretend for a second that I am right and think of the ramifications.

Every event that ever will, or ever did happen could be traced back to the events that caused them and then to the events that caused those events and so on and so on eventually bottle necking down to the original event. If this is so then you could conceivably know everything that will ever happen based on that first event; in essence everything happened at that one moment. Where does this leave time? Some of us on this page still recognize the existence of time as it is experienced so what exactly are we experiencing?

 

[Ego_Lost]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

Oh yeah...

Sex is a need. Without it those monks would not be around in order to be retarded enough to go without.

 

[Cebrious Arcane]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

I didnt lose the thread, just havent posted.

I'm just giving you shit, hehe.

There is not a thought in your head or an action you can take that is not determined by an extremely large if not infinite number of other events that took place before it.

You know we're going to get into it on Saturday, hehe. What about thoughtless actions? Like instinctual reactions? Your extremely large vast source of all cause is just like God, the all-powerful determinate factor. If everything is determined by something previous to it, then you have no control. If you have no control you have an excuse to be a victim. If you have an excuse to be a victim you are justified in your suffering and thusly can accept your "fate".

Lets pretend for a second that I am right and think of the ramifications.

You pretend that everyday. *wink*

Every event that ever will, or ever did happen could be traced back to the events that caused them and then to the events that caused those events and so on and so on eventually bottle necking down to the original event. If this is so then you could conceivably know everything that will ever happen based on that first event; in essence everything happened at that one moment. Where does this leave time? Some of us on this page still recognize the existence of time as it is experienced so what exactly are we experiencing?

The Big Bang? How does guessing about the origin of reality accurately predict the future? You say "in essence everything happened at that moment" but your whole premise is that one thing happened at that moment and that one thing caused the chain reaction of events that lead to today. To say that everything happened at that moment would imply infinity. Infinity leaves no room for time or change. You recognize time as the following of observed changes in your environment. The concept of change is defined by the person perceiving the event, ala "time flies when you're havin' fun."

The kicker to all of this is that you will never know that original event, ever. So what good is there in placing your faith, and make no mistake it is faith, in the accuracy of that event and thus the predictability of future events? Furthermore, even if you could predict future events based on the past, how would that change anything about life?

Where do creativity, imagination, intuition and motivation come into play?

Example: You can think of a figure that is totally unique to only you, you can picture it in your mind's eye (which scientifically shouldn't exist), you can manipulate it as you see fit, and you can even try to describe it to someone else. Your description then assists that person in forming the picture in his mind's eye, but you can never know if that picture accurately represents the figure you created. Thus is life.

What caused consciousness? Sticking with your assumption, the anxiety ridden, panic attack having, agorophobics have evolved into what they are. Their behavior and actions are determined by previous events, right? So following our friend Darwin, why would they become weaker and less secure rather than stronger and more secure? Their predecessors survived the hardships that contributed to their nature and demeanor, but somehow they became both mentally and physically weaker because of it? Why are so many maladies passed on? Why are there so many hereditary diseases? To say that they will diminish over the next hundred or thousand generations is a faithful statement. Even Polio still shows up and scientists developed a vaccine for that badboy.

Now, we can take it one step further and move past primative Darwin and into science's new belief, the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis. See how they took theory out of there? Clever, eh? But yeah, it's still a theory because the synthesis is a compilation of theories - if the foundation is theorhetical, the conclusion is theorhetical. Anyway, the hinge to this synthesis of theories is the possibility of random mutations through genetic replication. These "mutations" are looked upon by the scientific community as "mistakes" in the DNA replication. Why? Because these "mutations" go against the assumption that the fittest will survive. But here is a contradiction to the theory. So rather than dismissing the theory as false, with evidence as provable if not more provable than Darwin's original assumptions, the faithful scientists attempt to assimilate the new information into their belief system.

Oh yeah, and reproduction is not a need so sex is not a need. It's viral instinct.

See you Saturday, hehe.

 

[Dread Sun]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

In my experience I would say that most Americans who profess to believe in God received the standard brainwash procedure of going to their parents church as a child. They learned their Sunday school lessons but probably have not read the bible more than once.

I have found that many devout Christians don't reject evolution entirely, in fact most of them never really think about it. Yeah there are a very vocal few who argue that they can't be from Apes but most Christians in America are very apathetic about religion.

I personally believe that there is good (GOD?) and evil (DEVIL) but not in the literal sense. Something gave us advanced intelligence, consciousness and the ability to distinguish good action from bad. I also believe that whatever made it so should be seen as something great and worth celebrating. Judaism, Christianity and most religions were started out of a need to improve society and the way men treated their fellow man. Religion makes good communities.

Whatever that special something is, it came about after evolution.

I don't believe there is a grey haired GOD waiting to judge me when I die. But I do believe that I can make life heaven or hell just by how I live my life and treat my family and others.

So yes, most Americans believe in some type of GOD. Most however probably don't believe in the literal translation of the bible. And most are intelligent enough to believe in evolution and that dinosaurs were real. Many just use religion to help raise good kids. And a large percentage of people need something to reassure them at some point in their lives. The elderly faced with the prospect of death in particular need something to put them at ease and religion fills that need.

Don't lump all religious people into the same category. They are not all blind fools who ignore science.

And don't forget that America was founded by Christians and our laws and schools were all based on Christian beliefs. It will be a long time before that fact fades away and no longer influences our society.

 

[Underwater Ape]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

i have many theories. i'll share one. plenty of holes, just something i pulled out of my head and put to paper.

the universe started when you became aware of it. think of the universe as perfectly complete math equation. now imagine there was a variable thrown in that made the equation false. so bam everything stops and collapses at that point. what caused this? simple, you. you are the outside variable. one day you were just aware and everything just was. you're free will. you're the reason the universe just doesn't "complete" itself. if your actions could be predetermined, they would be. there would be no need to be aware. this is why you didn't experience anything before you. it was all able to be predetermined. when you die, your brain will start shutting off. awareness will begin leaving the physical planes of the universe you're currently aware of. very rapidly parts of the "equation" will start becoming finished and a lot of weird things will happen. you'll leave the flesh. be free from time. be free from physical laws. witness the history of the universe if you so please. once you're gone everything can be predetermined since you were free will, and that's now gone from the universe. it can just collapse or do whatever it does insantly.

but what about other people? they're aware. this is true. but remember time is an illusion. there is only now. and now God's awareness is in you. it's like quantum mechanics, God's awareness is here, not here, and everywhere all at the same time. that is the how for all of this. you are and will see it all play out as if the awareness was always just in you, and it was. but from our perspective you just died, and life goes on as normal for me because I'm aware right now.

 

[Cebrious Arcane]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

but what about other people? they're aware. this is true. but remember time is an illusion. there is only now. and now God's awareness is in you. it's like quantum mechanics, God's awareness is here, not here, and everywhere all at the same time. that is the how for all of this. you are and will see it all play out as if the awareness was always just in you, and it was. but from our perspective you just died, and life goes on as normal for me because I'm aware right now.

Hrmm, I didn't think you believed in God, or is that just an example? Interesting perspective though. I'll have to think on it more and maybe raise a question or two, hehe.

 

[Megumi]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

...Fuck.

 

[Dread Sun]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

When I die the universe and time will cease to exist! Sorry!

 

[Underwater Ape]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

Hrmm, I didn't think you believed in God, or is that just an example? Interesting perspective though. I'll have to think on it more and maybe raise a question or two, hehe.

Oh I'm sure you can poke holes in it. This is just abstract thought and ideas that sometimes run through my head. God creates itself. There is always God and there is always no God. An infinty of realization. I am here, I am there, I am nowhere, I am everywhere. But with awareness. Time is an illusion. So the awareness that's in you really is also in everyone else at the same time. My idea of God is ultimate awareness in and of everything. Hence ultimate influence over everything. But right now you're just aware in you. But remember, time is an illusion. Even though you're awareness is here right now, it's also everywhere. The ultimate "God" awareness is true at all times, and awareness is just localized smaller and smaller in different forms at all times as well. But right NOW you're perceiving it only in you. Little thing called the ego is holding awareness in you right now. When you die it will change. Your awareness will realize itself in a different state. Free from this system, part of another one. When you lose the ego awareness shifts..

But then i realize there can be no upper limit to the system either. Or perhaps when ultimate realization is made and awareness is in all things ever possible, perhaps in that moment when there is nothing left, then there is nothing again. Basically it's infinity realized. Nothing, everything, and just a single thing. All at once.

Everything will go through this process forever i imagine. Nothing, here, there, everywhere. Like quantum superpositions. Infinity. That's what this is and always will be. The awareness inside of you will go through it all. I will see it from "my" point of view. Every being from their own. As if it was all them. Complete fufillment from nothing to absolute all. I can't imagine a more perfect and whole system. Isn't that what we see with quantum physics? Here, there, nowhere, everywhere all at once.

So why religion? Why God? Why a need for answers? Because this is Infinity. You will always be searching. Is there an answer? It's a paradox. You're looking for the end of infinity. The awareness will just keep going higher and higher, greater and greater. It is holy. It is everything now and forever. It is the unexplainable, but explainable. We will find answers, but they will just lead to more questions. Forever. Because the answer is YOU. The answer is awareness. We're basically the dog trying to catch its own tail. But we're forever, this is forever. You're the answer trying to solve the question. Welcome to infinity.

/remove insanity cap

 

[zlatan fulgere]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

You know we're going to get into it on Saturday, hehe. What about thoughtless actions? Like instinctual reactions? Your extremely large vast source of all cause is just like God, the all-powerful determinate factor. If everything is determined by something previous to it, then you have no control. If you have no control you have an excuse to be a victim. If you have an excuse to be a victim you are justified in your suffering and thusly can accept your "fate".

Thoughtless actions can be just that, instinctual reactions. Really, what can happen that isn't a reaction in the series of events that is existence? Control is an illusion. I can use that to view myself as a victim, sure. Of course, that view is only the reaction I have based upon my realization.

The Big Bang? How does guessing about the origin of reality accurately predict the future? You say "in essence everything happened at that moment" but your whole premise is that one thing happened at that moment and that one thing caused the chain reaction of events that lead to today. To say that everything happened at that moment would imply infinity. Infinity leaves no room for time or change. You recognize time as the following of observed changes in your environment. The concept of change is defined by the person perceiving the event, ala "time flies when you're havin' fun."

The kicker to all of this is that you will never know that original event, ever. So what good is there in placing your faith, and make no mistake it is faith, in the accuracy of that event and thus the predictability of future events? Furthermore, even if you could predict future events based on the past, how would that change anything about life?

Where do creativity, imagination, intuition and motivation come into play?

I guess I'm not sure we've determined that everything has to have started with a single event. The point is that if you did know how everything effected everything else and were able to grasp it all, you could determine what would follow. I don't believe I can do that. That's not a good reason to dismiss the theory, however. If I had the ability, it wouldn't change my life one bit. If it's true, nothing could. Our levels of "creativity, imagination, intuition and motivation" are similarly determined by something.

Example: You can think of a figure that is totally unique to only you, you can picture it in your mind's eye (which scientifically shouldn't exist), you can manipulate it as you see fit, and you can even try to describe it to someone else. Your description then assists that person in forming the picture in his mind's eye, but you can never know if that picture accurately represents the figure you created. Thus is life.

The person having the image described to them creates an image based upon how he interprets the words used. The way those interpretations are made depend on how the person's been conditioned to interpret them. If some part isn't described, the person's imagination fills in the gaps. That person's imagination is based on the person, which is based on the experiences of his life or his genetic makeup, etc..

What caused consciousness? Sticking with your assumption, the anxiety ridden, panic attack having, agorophobics have evolved into what they are. Their behavior and actions are determined by previous events, right? So following our friend Darwin, why would they become weaker and less secure rather than stronger and more secure? Their predecessors survived the hardships that contributed to their nature and demeanor, but somehow they became both mentally and physically weaker because of it? Why are so many maladies passed on? Why are there so many hereditary diseases? To say that they will diminish over the next hundred or thousand generations is a faithful statement. Even Polio still shows up and scientists developed a vaccine for that badboy.

Now, we can take it one step further and move past primative Darwin and into science's new belief, the Modern Evolutionary Synthesis. See how they took theory out of there? Clever, eh? But yeah, it's still a theory because the synthesis is a compilation of theories - if the foundation is theorhetical, the conclusion is theorhetical. Anyway, the hinge to this synthesis of theories is the possibility of random mutations through genetic replication. These "mutations" are looked upon by the scientific community as "mistakes" in the DNA replication. Why? Because these "mutations" go against the assumption that the fittest will survive. But here is a contradiction to the theory. So rather than dismissing the theory as false, with evidence as provable if not more provable than Darwin's original assumptions, the faithful scientists attempt to assimilate the new information into their belief system.

You're blending our lack of control in with evolution now. That's not the point I was making so I'll leave it alone.

Oh yeah, and reproduction is not a need so sex is not a need. It's viral instinct.

Reproduction is a need for civilization to continue. Getting oxygen into your body is a need if you wish to continue living. Of course, nothing is just a need on it's own.

 

[Underwater Ape]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

YouTube - Life After Birth with Wayne Dyer - Enlightenment

 

[Cebrious Arcane]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

Thoughtless actions can be just that, instinctual reactions. Really, what can happen that isn't a reaction in the series of events that is existence? Control is an illusion. I can use that to view myself as a victim, sure. Of course, that view is only the reaction I have based upon my realization.

I knew you'd come back, hehe. Anything can happen. Cause and effect is dependent upon change over time. If control is an illusion then what are will, intention, and determination?

I guess I'm not sure we've determined that everything has to have started with a single event. The point is that if you did know how everything effected everything else and were able to grasp it all, you could determine what would follow. I don't believe I can do that. That's not a good reason to dismiss the theory, however. If I had the ability, it wouldn't change my life one bit. If it's true, nothing could. Our levels of "creativity, imagination, intuition and motivation" are similarly determined by something.

So once again we return to faith. Determined by something is a vague assumption based on faith that science will determine the original event and thusly can determine all eventual events, including creativity, imagination, intuition and motivation. You can assume they have a cause or you can assume they do not. The choice, once again, is personal because unbiased verifiability is not available.

The person having the image described to them creates an image based upon how he interprets the words used. The way those interpretations are made depend on how the person's been conditioned to interpret them. If some part isn't described, the person's imagination fills in the gaps. That person's imagination is based on the person, which is based on the experiences of his life or his genetic makeup, etc..

The assumption that imagination is a product of life experience and genetic make-up is just that, an assumption. There is no evidence, in science or any other field, that determines when imagination begins in the human mind or where it comes from. Science points the finger at their god, DNA, for the answer because it's ambiguous and mysterious and often a good enough reason for the casual inquirer to accept. The faith that science will discover the answer is not truth. Give me an example of someone being conditioned to imagine. Conditioning itself is vague and loose and psychology has proven that humans have much more control over their reactions than a mouse hitting the lever to get an orgasm so much that he doesn't eat and dies. So to say that conditioning determines a person's reactions is not only an assumption, but one that is based on theories that have been disproven.

You're blending our lack of control in with evolution now. That's not the point I was making so I'll leave it alone.

Your perceived lack of control is dependent on evolution. I'm not blending the ideas, they are already blended because they are from the same system of belief. They're not seperate at all.

Reproduction is a need for civilization to continue. Getting oxygen into your body is a need if you wish to continue living. Of course, nothing is just a need on it's own.

Oxygen is not equal to sex. C'mon now... Civilization doesn't need to continue, thus my labeling reproduction as viral instinct. A virus has the instinctual need to reproduce but humanity is beyond that. We are not viruses. Humanity can behave like a virus, but it can also not. Thus having control. Thus avoiding the perceived need. No one needs to have sex. A person can live his entire life and not get laid and his lifespan won't be any shorter because of it. Surivival as we know it is dependent on food, water, and air. Those are needs, but even those needs have exceptions, which is why I question the gross assumptions of physicality and reality.

 

[terathan33]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

god is for old people!

 

[zlatan fulgere]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

I knew you'd come back, hehe. Anything can happen. Cause and effect is dependent upon change over time. If control is an illusion then what are will, intention, and determination?

I'm glad we found a new direction. (=

Will, intention and determination are attributes that we either gain or lack... or have some level of in between.

So once again we return to faith. Determined by something is a vague assumption based on faith that science will determine the original event and thusly can determine all eventual events, including creativity, imagination, intuition and motivation. You can assume they have a cause or you can assume they do not. The choice, once again, is personal because unbiased verifiability is not available.

I never said science will determine an original event or didn't mean to anyway. I just said that if we knew how something effects other things we could predict those effects. If I knew that adding weight to a balanced scale would tip it, I could predict which side of the scale would drop based on the side I chose to add weight to.

Are you saying creativity, etc have no origin? If one person is more creative than another, there is no reason for it?

I could see there being chance, maybe. I know that the more times I roll dice the greater chance I'll have of getting a six. If you have people that have a high enough level of creativity working on something possible, the odds of success will increase with each attempt. In this instance, if we happen to be omnipotent, we would know that success is possible and X number of people are trying it with the right amount of creativity. We could then predict that it will happen. Sure, there might be things to derail the process but those would just be additional causes.

The assumption that imagination is a product of life experience and genetic make-up is just that, an assumption. There is no evidence, in science or any other field, that determines when imagination begins in the human mind or where it comes from. Science points the finger at their god, DNA, for the answer because it's ambiguous and mysterious and often a good enough reason for the casual inquirer to accept. The faith that science will discover the answer is not truth. Give me an example of someone being conditioned to imagine. Conditioning itself is vague and loose and psychology has proven that humans have much more control over their reactions than a mouse hitting the lever to get an orgasm so much that he doesn't eat and dies. So to say that conditioning determines a person's reactions is not only an assumption, but one that is based on theories that have been disproven.

I mentioned "conditioned" with relation to the interpretation of words. If I hear the word "circular" I'll picture this -> O. The sounds or letters of the word don't indicate anything circular on their own. The image of a circle flashes in my head because that's what I've been taught to associate with the word.

I think I can get at imagination too with my question on the previous quote.

Your perceived lack of control is dependent on evolution. I'm not blending the ideas, they are already blended because they are from the same system of belief. They're not seperate at all.

If we were evolutionarily stagnate, this existence as a series of linear unalterable set of steps I'm trying to describe would not be invalidated.

Oxygen is not equal to sex. C'mon now... Civilization doesn't need to continue, thus my labeling reproduction as viral instinct. A virus has the instinctual need to reproduce but humanity is beyond that. We are not viruses. Humanity can behave like a virus, but it can also not. Thus having control. Thus avoiding the perceived need. No one needs to have sex. A person can live his entire life and not get laid and his lifespan won't be any shorter because of it. Surivival as we know it is dependent on food, water, and air. Those are needs, but even those needs have exceptions, which is why I question the gross assumptions of physicality and reality.

Sex is a need for civilization to continue but not for an individual to survive. I've got no problem with that.

 

[zlatan fulgere]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

YouTube - Life After Birth with Wayne Dyer - Enlightenment

The children's mother did not speak to them with unlimited power but refuse to give out specific validating information... such as "why". It was cute though. (=

 

[Cebrious Arcane]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

Will, intention and determination are attributes that we either gain or lack... or have some level of in between.

Attributes of what?

I never said science will determine an original event or didn't mean to anyway. I just said that if we knew how something effects other things we could predict those effects. If I knew that adding weight to a balanced scale would tip it, I could predict which side of the scale would drop based on the side I chose to add weight to.

Fair enough.

Are you saying creativity, etc have no origin? If one person is more creative than another, there is no reason for it?

Innately, yes, that's what I'm saying. I don't think certain people have more creativity based on genetics or inheritance. I'm sure you can foster or deny creativity and imagination, but it is still there, the fire just isn't being fed.

I could see there being chance, maybe. I know that the more times I roll dice the greater chance I'll have of getting a six. If you have people that have a high enough level of creativity working on something possible, the odds of success will increase with each attempt. In this instance, if we happen to be omnipotent, we would know that success is possible and X number of people are trying it with the right amount of creativity. We could then predict that it will happen. Sure, there might be things to derail the process but those would just be additional causes.

What I mean is that everyone has a sort of well of creativity that just needs to be tapped into. It leads to some of my questions about physical reality because the font of creativity is everflowing, without limit and without boundaries, one just needs to tap into the well to unleash it.

I mentioned "conditioned" with relation to the interpretation of words. If I hear the word "circular" I'll picture this -> O. The sounds or letters of the word don't indicate anything circular on their own. The image of a circle flashes in my head because that's what I've been taught to associate with the word.

Right. But someone could hear "circular" and think "circus tent" or "horse track" and that would drastically alter their version of your picture.

I think I can get at imagination too with my question on the previous quote.

And my same response applies. Imagination is unlimited and endless. You can repress it, but it's there, begging to be unleashed.

If we were evolutionarily stagnate, this existence as a series of linear unalterable set of steps I'm trying to describe would not be invalidated.

Okay, but evolutionarily stagnant is not the same as existing without time. Stagnation still implies time. Without time, there cannot be change and thus there cannot be cause.

Sex is a need for civilization to continue but not for an individual to survive. I've got no problem with that.

Me either.

 

[zlatan fulgere]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

Attributes of what?

Our personality.

Innately, yes, that's what I'm saying. I don't think certain people have more creativity based on genetics or inheritance. I'm sure you can foster or deny creativity and imagination, but it is still there, the fire just isn't being fed.

Alright, so without environment or heredity, you say we begin with creativity that has no origin. I'm having trouble getting past that. If we exist, there must be a reason we exist (we evolved or god closed his eyes, folded his arms and bobbed his head, etc...) and if nothing else, that would be the default origin of creativity. Ignoring that, would you say we begin with a similar level of creativity or is it random?

What I mean is that everyone has a sort of well of creativity that just needs to be tapped into. It leads to some of my questions about physical reality because the font of creativity is everflowing, without limit and without boundaries, one just needs to tap into the well to unleash it.

Maybe I don't get what you're saying. Creativity has boundaries. If we do not exist at some point, our own creativity does nothing. There are less creative people. Would that not suggest a boundary? If I didn't understand as completely how vision worked, I could think my eyesight had far less boundaries. Again, maybe that's not what you were getting at, I dunno.

Right. But someone could hear "circular" and think "circus tent" or "horse track" and that would drastically alter their version of your picture.

That's what I'm talking about. The way someone has been conditioned to interpret language will determine what they'll picture. Being able to predict how things will work out in the future would be incredibly complex. (=

Okay, but evolutionarily stagnant is not the same as existing without time. Stagnation still implies time. Without time, there cannot be change and thus there cannot be cause.

Existing without time? I'm not sure where you're going with that but if there cannot be change, how could there be free will?

 

[JackRandom]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

didn't read hardly any replies, but I wouldn't believe a poll that doesn't state the amount of people polled, nor the demographic.

now for my opinion:
"9 out of 10 words of people is a lie" is a fairly true statement.
And, I have a feeling that in 40 years that poll will be taken again with reverse outcomes. We've hit another age of science, except this time, I don't think we're turning back.

 

[Underwater Ape]

Re: Newsweek poll: Americans believe in God, reject evolution

didn't read hardly any replies, but I wouldn't believe a poll that doesn't state the amount of people polled, nor the demographic.

now for my opinion:
"9 out of 10 words of people is a lie" is a fairly true statement.
And, I have a feeling that in 40 years that poll will be taken again with reverse outcomes. We've hit another age of science, except this time, I don't think we're turning back.

I wish more people truly understood what evolution means. Just becauce we're humans does not mean we're somehow above or beyond evolution. As if to say because we're intelligent and understand things, we're no longer affected. This isn't true, we're just evolving in "different" ways now. When creatures came out of the sea, they didn't need to evolve in a way that would make them more suitable for aquatic life. But wouldn't it of been a stupid remark for a creature to say, "We've evolved past aquatic life. We're done with that, the evolutionary system isn't affecting us anymore."

Religion IS part of evolution. It didn't sprout up from some system that's free from the laws of physics. Religion is a product of 15 billion years of evolution. But like I said evolution doesn't stop. Politics, economics, science, every has and most likely always will be influenced by religion. We've come this far because of them. You can't say the world would be a better place without Christianity or whatever religion people believe in. We're living right now and can only see where our beliefs have taken us, not where we think they might of had we done something differently.