Hi Lynn, and thanks for the chat.



Science is a method by which we learn about the world around us. We make hypotheses based on available evidence, test those hypotheses, replicate those tests, and refine the hypotheses as necessary. It's a way for different people to study the same reality and come to the same conclusions based on that shared reality, though this process usually involves disagreement and debate (as it should) until this can be agreed upon with a reasonable degree of certainty. Is it the ONLY way to knowledge and wisdom? No. Does it eliminate the need for spirituality? No. But it does avoid the problems inherent in people choosing their own versions of reality to believe in. How do you verify those? If someone told me that the earth was flat and aliens were invading us, how would I choose whether or not to believe it unless I had some way of measuring those claims against an objective reality? I'd look at the available evidence and form the hypothesis that it was extremely unlikely.

In the creation and evolution forum, we're looking at evidence for both. So far the creationists have presented very little for their position, despite being sincerely encouraged to do so many times over. On the other hand, there is concrete evidence for evolution and an old earth which comes from the fossil record, the geological column, dating methods, and genetics. I'm not sure how these are "distractions." And no, scientists don't always agree, but that is how science works and how we learn. As new evidence comes to light, ideas are changed or superseded, as was the case when relativity added to Newtonian physics.

If you are discussing autism, mercury poisoning, or a number of other health subjects, you are getting into realms where interpretation of the evidence is much more of a key component. The interpretations are often based on studies which can be inherently flawed because they are based on faulty premises, or because they have been misinterpreted. I'm with you on the possible causes of autism which are generally not accepted by the medical community. I've also had my amalgams removed, have chelated, and make a lot of use of herbs and vitamins. But I do these things because I've seen evidence that they do work. What we are facing is a prevailing paradigm that diagnose-and-prescribe is the right way to health, and doctors are in thrall to the pharmaceutical industry. The evidence is actually there, but most people are simply unaware of it.

The fossil record, and different methods of dating rocks, are rather more straightforward and concrete. Fossils are sorted in the same order in strata all over the world. You find trilobites toward the bottom of the geological record, dinosaurs in layers well above those, and humans in layers well above those. never mixed. This is either a piece of evidence that evolution happens, or an indicator that God had some mysterious reason for making it appear that evolution happens. Why would he do this? Why would he also make the earth appear to be old, and dates from radiometric samples of rocks, tree rings, varves and ice cores to correlate? Is he trying to fool us somehow?

So yes, people have different ways of seeing things, but surely our ways of seeing things need to be based in reality in some way. I personally have a problem with ignoring the evidence above. I also have a problem with a science teacher at school teaching my child to ignore it or misinterpret it in order to push "intelligent design," which is what some people would like to happen. Again, this is why I am uncomfortable with people believing whatever they want to believe -- if they want it taught in schools as legitimate science, then they need to make a case for it being legitimate science. Again, no one in the creation-evolution forum has been able to do that, though I'm still waiting for someone to make a good stab at it.



What would be your definition of the supernatural?
Lots of people are religious, and many are theists. Almost half of scientists throughout the world are theists and believe that God created the universe.
I'm spiritual in my own way too. I just don't belong to a religion.
I wouldn't personally use the word "supernatural." I think that everything is natural.



Please link me to any info you have, I'd be interested.



Me too, most definitely. I also share your admiration for nature. It's just that I can see how evolution explains its diversity without any trouble. The thread I suggested you look at explains how; it was written for people who aren't sure how evolution is scientifically defined, or how it can account for the diversity of life and its adaptations to different environments.



Yes there are many theists in the world. A little over 2 billion are Christian. Last time I looked, the largest percentage of people in the world were Hindus.



Creationism is a largely American phenomenon. American Christians make up less than 10% of the world Christian population, and a little over half fall into the evangelical/fundamentalist category.

What's more, church attendance in the US is four times higher than in the UK, and the percedntage of people who take the Bible literally is five times higher. As I said, creationism is a largely American phenomenon. It has to be said that while my daughter learns about Noah's ark at school, does a nativity play and sings some Bible songs (which I'm fine with -- they learn about different religions there), at least I can rest easy that no one is going to try to teach her that the world is only 6000 years old or that evolution is nonsense.



With respect, I hope not. Variety is the spice of life as they say. I also believe that we can learn a lot from our differences with other people.

Cheers,
Linda.