Author Topic: Its begun, religious people are now primitive on the evolutionary scale  (Read 801 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline muman613

  • Platinum JTF Member
  • **********
  • Posts: 29958
  • All souls praise Hashem, Hallelukah!
    • muman613 Torah Wisdom
I could have predicted this. Now the 'scientists' are claiming that liberals and atheists are higher on the evolutionary scale than those conservative and religious people....

This is total hogwash and another attempt by the scientists to gain power for themselves. Scientists are trying to make themselves the new priests of society. This has been foreseen by many visionaries and it seems they were correct.

Science is only another tool in the hands and minds of humans. It is not the answer to all of lifes problems, it is not something to build life around. Science is a creation of man, just like the computer and the hammer. Science is not perfect and often provides answers which are dangerous to human life. Scientists are human and they have human failings and they often make decisions which don't necessarily correspond to the evidence which is before them. And as we have recently witnessed in the global warming myth, scientists often distort numbers and create data to fit their theories.

Look at what National Geographic says:

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/03/100303-liberals-atheists-smarter-evolution-evolved/

Quote


Maggie Koerth-Baker

for National Geographic News

Published March 3, 2010

Your apelike ancestors probably aren't top of mind when you enter the polling booth. But a new study suggests that human evolution may have a big influence on whether you're liberal or conservative—not to mention how smart you are, whether you believe in G-d, or whether you've got a cheatin' heart.

It's all linked to the evolution of intelligence, says author Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

(Also see "Future Humans: Four Ways We May, or May Not, Evolve.")

Kanazawa's theory is that intelligence—particularly our ability for on-the-spot problem solving and reasoning—arose as an adaptation to deal with the unusual and unexpected, such as a sudden forest fire.

Since disasters like that are rare in daily life, responding to them wouldn't likely be something our ancestors were hard-wired to "know" how to do. Surviving the fire required both the ability to think up a new behavior, and the willingness to try it out.

Passed down via genetics, those two traits are still the calling cards of an intelligent brain—expressed as a tendency toward adopting nontraditional social values and preferences, Kanazawa says in his new study, published in the March 2010 issue of Social Psychology Quarterly.

I do not believe the findings of these so-called scientists. There is no such thing biologically as a Conservative nor a Liberal. You see, I started my political career as a Conservative, and I then spent 20 years as a liberal, and now once again I am finding myself on the Conservative side of the equation. I have been quite open minded about things for much of my life, but I realize that I was mistaken about many things.

But for the scientists to claim that they are evolutionarily on a higher plane than those who are skeptical of what is being called science today... Is this not the ultimate form of chutzpah?

PS: The idea that politics are passed through DNA is preposterous... My father was a lifelong Republican conservative and my mother a lifelong democrat, who has recently recanted her democrat credentials and switched to the right side.... I think my parents parents were all democrats so what does this mean according to the genetics?


You shall make yourself the Festival of Sukkoth for seven days, when you gather in [the produce] from your threshing floor and your vat.And you shall rejoice in your Festival-you, and your son, and your daughter, and your manservant, and your maidservant, and the Levite, and the stranger, and the orphan, and the widow, who are within your cities
Duet 16:13-14

Offline Rubystars

  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *********
  • Posts: 18278
  • Extreme MAGA Republican
This seems like a crackpot type of study, or at least that's how it's portrayed in the article. I think if you did a non-biased test, average intelligence scores would probably be even across the political spectrum. Also all humans are equally evolved, just different groups split off on different branches.

If you know something about how science works it's pretty obvious this article is just sensationalizing stuff.


Offline muman613

  • Platinum JTF Member
  • **********
  • Posts: 29958
  • All souls praise Hashem, Hallelukah!
    • muman613 Torah Wisdom
This seems like a crackpot type of study, or at least that's how it's portrayed in the article. I think if you did a non-biased test, average intelligence scores would probably be even across the political spectrum. Also all humans are equally evolved, just different groups split off on different branches.

If you know something about how science works it's pretty obvious this article is just sensationalizing stuff.




This kind of thing is written in so many other publications also, I first saw this story last week in the New York Times..

http://inventorspot.com/articles/study_equates_higher_iq_liberal_atheist_and_monogamous_values_38259
http://trueslant.com/colinhorgan/2010/03/03/liberals-smarter-than-conservatives/
http://trueslant.com/jimnash/2010/02/24/study-smart-kids-grow-up-liberal-atheists/
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,587229,00.html
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/03/liberals-and-atheists-are-more-intelligent.html
You shall make yourself the Festival of Sukkoth for seven days, when you gather in [the produce] from your threshing floor and your vat.And you shall rejoice in your Festival-you, and your son, and your daughter, and your manservant, and your maidservant, and the Levite, and the stranger, and the orphan, and the widow, who are within your cities
Duet 16:13-14

Offline Rubystars

  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *********
  • Posts: 18278
  • Extreme MAGA Republican
I think you're going to see stuff like this because most universities and even journals are very left wing. What all this is really lacking in is hard evidence.

Offline syyuge

  • Silver Star JTF Member
  • ********
  • Posts: 7684
I support this evolution. At this rate soon we will be finding Saber toothed liberals and Hammerhead atheists. 
;D
There are thunders and sparks in the skies, because Faraday invented the electricity.

Offline Ulli

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 10946
She is wrong.

Religious people have lots of children. Liberals have none or perhaps one.

So according to the concept of evolution we are more successfull, while they become extinct.  ;D
"Cities run by progressives don't know how to police. ... Thirty cities went up last night, I went and looked at every one of them. Every one of them has a progressive Democratic mayor." Rudolph Giuliani

Offline Kahane-Was-Right BT

  • Honorable Winged Member
  • Gold Star JTF Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12581

It's all linked to the evolution of intelligence, says author Satoshi Kanazawa, an evolutionary psychologist at the London School of Economics and Political Science.

Kanazawa's theory is that intelligence—particularly our ability for on-the-spot problem solving and reasoning—arose as an adaptation to deal with the unusual and unexpected, such as a sudden forest fire.

Since disasters like that are rare in daily life, responding to them wouldn't likely be something our ancestors were hard-wired to "know" how to do. Surviving the fire required both the ability to think up a new behavior, and the willingness to try it out.

This guy sounds like a moron.  Let us think about this for a moment.   Would a FOREST FIRE be a sufficient evolutionary pressure to weed out genes through natural selection in any kind of global or grand scale when humans are scattered all over the planet in different habitats, and different types of humans (homo habilis, homo erectus, astralopethicus, etc etc) at that.    There are times when one must differentiate between philosophy and science.   What this author is reported as saying is not science.  It's philosophy.   So he himself may be a scientist, but don't call this "science."    This is more like science fiction.   Creative, interesting, but not science.

I'm sure what was published in the actual study may have interesting ramifications and may have uncovered some evolutionary truths, but it is clear that they are applying an agenda in their interpretation and they are trying to weave a story with the results of their findings.   No one is obligated to accept that their interpretation and created story is correct.   The newspaper publishes the interpretation of the findings which it likes.