Conservapedia - User contributions [en]

Essay:Crackpot

2007-05-29T00:22:59Z

Kww:

The word '''crackpot''' refers to an eccentric person with an enthusiasm for promoting an unorthodox idea. In an early use of the term, a 1913 observer described a rally in support of the impeached Governor of New York as "a collection of the rarest political crackpots I have ever seen."<ref>"Loyal Few Hear Sulzer Farewell," ''The New York Times,'' October 19, 1913, p. 1.'' Attributed to one Patrick E. McCabe, Clerk to the Court of Impeachment. A letter entitled "Political Crackpots" appeared the next day (p. 6) credited McCabe with "adding the expressive word 'crackpot' to our recently somewhat worn political vocabulary.'" An August 6, 1924 letter (p. 12) said that the term "had made its way into respectable literature." It quotes from p. 301 of Frank Swinnerton's 1923 novel ''Young Felix'' :"'Why you old idiot!' stormed Felix. 'You don't know what an artist is. You old crackpot!'"</ref>

The term '''crackpot''' is used perjoratively against a person, who writes or speaks in an authoritative fashion about a particular subject, often in [[science]] or [[mathematics]], but is alleged to have false or even ludicrous beliefs. Such a person may also be termed a [[crank]]. This use seems to date from the 1940s and 1950s. The ''New York Times'' contains a 1946 example of use the context of scientific theory: a review of a book by [[T. D. Lysenko]] says that unless it is read in the context of State control of science "it will strike the informed reader as merely another effusion by a crackpot."<ref>Kaempffert, Waldemar (1946), "Man and His Milieu," The New York Times, March 3, 1946, p. BR4</ref> [[Martin Gardner]] made frequent use of the word ''crackpot'' in his influential 1957 book ''In the Name of Science,'' and list what he said were typical characteristics of the scientific crackpot.<ref>Reprint title: ''Fads and Fallacies in the Name of Science.'' Dover Publications, ISBN 978-0486203942</ref>

Ideas held by such people are called ''crank ideas'' or ''crackpot theories''.

True Crackpots usually have some formal training in science but are often unattached to any university, college, or research institute, and have usually reached a point where their papers and commentaries are refused by standard scientific journals as being of little interest. They form a "fringe" in any field, and it is often difficult to distinguish crackpots from bona fide scientists who hold minority views because the distinction is usually based primarily on behavior rather than on scientific contributions. The consequence is that a bona fide scientist with a minority view is unfortunately sometimes called a crackpot merely due to peculiar or disruptive behavior. Often crackpots are experts in one field but choose to make authorative assertions outside their area of expertise. Such as physicist [[Linus Pauling]]'s endorsement of large doses of Vitamin C against cancer, or doctors espousing on legal matters.

Some distinguishing characteristics of crackpots are:

1. The crackpot has usually lost interest in new experiments and will defend to his theory or viewpoint, even though it may have been rejected by the scientific community as invalid or useless. Any objective view of reality becomes less important than his own personal view.

2. As a consequence of continuing peer rejection, the crackpot becomes more and more strident with advancing age, until eventually one finds him doing vigorous vocal battle in fringe arenas, open forums, anti-science mailing lists, and magazines devoted to fringe ideas and readers who thrive emotionally on fringe ideas.

3. In any serious discussion of a scientific issue, the crackpot will usually offer polemics rather than reason, invective rather than fact, and a harangue that he's a "revolutionary" against an "establishment". Sometimes he makes accusations of a [[conspiracy theory|conspiracy]] against him. At other times, the accusation is of "social control" of the minds of scientists. He appoints himself as the avant-garde of a [[paradigm shift]]. However, this often represents a basic philosophical failure in the crackpot to understand that "paradigms" and "paradigm shifts" are usually recognized ''de post facto'' by historians and almost never while the shift is occuring, and that significant paradigm shifts are almost always the work of younger scientists who come up with innovative and significant ideas early in their career, and not of older scientists whose ideas have already been examined and rejected.

== See Also ==

* [[Pseudoscience]]
* [http://www.crank.net/ Crank.Net]
* [[William Dembski]]
==Notes and references==
<references/>

Kangaroo

2007-05-27T15:13:37Z

Kww: references added

[[Image:Kangaroo-bree.png|right|Eastern Grey Kangaroo (''Macropus giganteus'')]]

'''Kangaroos''' are the largest [[Marsupials]] alive today. They are now native to the continent of [[Australia]]. There are at least sixty-nine [[species]] of kangaroo <ref name="kangbio">[http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/trade-use/wild-harvest/kangaroo/biology.html "Kangaroo Biology"], Australian Government</ref>, which include wallabies and tree-kangaroos.

==Description==

Kangaroos have large ears on top of their small heads, a long snout, and short arms with clawed fingers. Their legs are strong, powerful, and are made for leaping. Their feet have four toes at the end of elongated metatarsi that they rest on when standing. They also have a powerful, thick tail that is used as support when standing, a third-leg when walking slowly, and for counterbalance while leaping. Like all Marsupials, female kangaroos have a pouch on their stomachs in which they carry their young.

===Diet===

Kangaroos are [[herbivore]]s, eating grass, roots, and shrubs. They have a chambered stomach similar to [[sheep]] and [[cattle]]. They are able to regurgitate their food, chew it again as [[cud]], and then swallow it for digestion.

===Social Order===

Kangaroos travel in [[mob | mobs]] of about ten or more males and females. The leader of the mob, called a "boomer", is a male determined by age and size. The boomer has access to females in his mob for mating and will wander around the mob intimidating any other males who try to mate with his harem.

===Reproduction===

Female kangaroos usually only have one baby kangaroo (called a "joey") at a time. The newborn joey weighs as little as .03 ounces when first born, after which it crawls into its mothers pouch where it will nurse, grow, and develop. Red Kangaroo joeys will stay in their mothers pouch for about eight months and Grey Kangaroo joeys stay in there for about one year.

===Development of the Young in the Pouch===

Kangaroos have adapted to the varied conditions across Australia in many ways. One of the most unusual, is the way females of some species can delay the progress of pregnancy. In this way the female is ready to give birth to a replacement for the young in her pouch if it dies early, or within a week of when it permanently leaves the pouch. This ability to delay births means that there can be up to 12 months between a mating and the birth of the young one resulting from that mating (when the normal gestation period is less than 35 days). It also means that the species can best respond to periods of drought and plenty.

Species which have this unusual ability normally mate again soon after the female gives birth. The tiny newly born kangaroo (less than 25 mm long) moves unaided into its mother's pouch and attaches itself to one of four teats. During the early stages of pouch life the young is permanently attached to the teat, but as it matures and begins to grow hair it also develops the ability to release and reattach itself to the teat.

In the late stages of pouch life, once it has a thin covering of fur, the young one begins to explore the outside world for increasing lengths of time until eventually it is old enough to be excluded permanently from the pouch. Complete weaning may take a number of months more after the young has permanently left the pouch. If the mother gives birth during this time, the newborn young will attach itself to a different teat to that being used by the older young. It is remarkable that when this happens the mother produces two different kinds of milk for the two different-aged young<ref name="kangbio"/>.

==Origins==
Kangaroos (Macropodoidea) are divided into eight families. Five (Paleopotoroinae, Bulungamayinae, Balbarinae, Macropodinae, and Sthenurinae) are extinct, and three (Hypsiprymnodontinae, Potoroinae, and Macropodinae) are still surviving. DNA analysis of the three surviving groups has been done on three mitochondrial genes (12S rRNA, tRNA valine, 16S rRNA) and one nuclear gene(protamine P1). This analysis indicates that the most recent common ancestor of all the groups lived between 38 and 44 million years ago, and that the Hypsiprymnodon diverged from the remaining kangaroos between 34 and 38 million years ago. <ref>[http://www.springerlink.com/content/v2h426714759483j/ "Intergeneric Relationships Among Macropodoidea (Metatheria: Diprotodontia) and The Chronicle of Kangaroo Evolution"]</ref>
). A separate study based on microcomplement fixation of albumin <ref>[http://links.jstor.org/sici?sici=0039-7989(198903)38%3A1%3C38%3AAIROTM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-V "Albumin Immunologic Relationships of the Macropodidae (Marsupialia)"]</ref> supports this sequence for the split. This timing explains the kangaroo's isolation on Australia, as the accepted timing for Australia's separation from all other continents is 45 million years ago, 7 million years before the appearance of the first recognizable kangaroo. This 45 million year date is supported by geological evidence <ref>[http://www.earthmuseum.segs.uwa.edu.au/__data/page/48912/Li_and_Powell_2002.pdf, "An Outline of the Paleographic Evolution of the Australasian Region Since the Beginning of the Neoproterozoic"]</ref>, and by genetic analysis <ref>[The Complete Mitochondrial Genome of Rhea americana and Early Avian Divergences,Anna Härlid1, Axel Janke1, Ulfur Arnason1, Journal of Molecular Evolution, Volume 46, Number 6]</ref> of two birds, the South American Rhea and the Australian Cassowary, which were also separated by this event.

Other views on kangaroo origins include the belief of some [[Australian Aborigines]] that kangaroos were sung into existence by their ancestors during the "[[Dreamtime]]" <ref>[http://www.painsley.org.uk/RE/signposts/y8/1-1creationandenvironment/c-abor.htm "An Aborigine Creation Story"]</ref> and the creationist view that the fossil record as a whole does not support the evolutionary position<ref>[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/fossils.asp "Fossils Questions and Answers"], Answers In Genesis</ref><ref>[http://members.iinet.net.au/~sejones/fsslrcrd.html Creation/Evolution Quotes: Fossil Record]</ref>. Creationists state that there is a lack of transitional fossils showing an evolutionary origin of kangaroos:

<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
The Macropod family is alleged to have evolved from either the Phalangeridae (possums) or Burramyidae (pygmy-possums)...</blockquote>

<blockquote style="background: #F9F9F9; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA; padding: .3em;">
However, there are no fossils of animals which appear to be intermediate between possums and kangaroos. Wabularoo naughtoni, supposed ancestor of all the macropods, was clearly a kangaroo (it greatly resembles the potoroos which dwell in Victoria’s forests). If modern kangaroos really did come from it, all this shows is the same as we see happening today, namely that kangaroos come from kangaroos, "after their kind." <ref>[http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/755/ Kangaroos: God's amazing craftsmanship], by Rebecca Driver, ''Creation'' vol. 20 No.3.</ref> </blockquote>

According to the [[origins theory]] model used by [[creation science | creation scientists]], modern kangaroos are the descendants of the two founding members of the modern kangaroo baramin that were taken aboard [[Noah's Ark]] prior to the [[Great Flood]]. It has not yet been determined by [[baraminology | baraminologists]] whether kangaroos form a [[holobaramin]] with the [[wallaby]], [[tree-kangaroo]], [[wallaroo]], [[pademelon]] and [[quokka]], or if all these species are in fact [[Baraminology|apobaramin]]ic or [[Baraminology|polybaramin]]ic. There is, however, no evidence of a genetic bottleneck in the kangaroo species which would be expected if all kangaroos were descended from two individuals.

After the Flood, these kangaroos bred from the Ark passengers migrated to Australia. There is debate whether this migration happened over land<ref name="cab17">[http://www.creationontheweb.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter17.pdf "How did animals get from the Ark to places such as Australia"], Chapter 17 of ''The Creation Answers Book'', by Don Batten (Ed.)</ref> with lower sea levels during the post-flood [[ice age]], or before the supercontinent of [[Pangea]] broke apart<ref>[http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2808 "Pangea and the Flood"], Apologetics Press</ref>, or if they [[rafting (ecology) | rafted]] on mats of vegetation torn up by the receding flood waters.<ref name="cab17"/>
The idea that God simply generated kangaroos into existence there is considered by most creation researchers to be contra-Biblical.

== External Links ==
*[http://www.exzooberance.com/virtual%20zoo/they%20walk/kangaroo/kangaroo.htm Kangaroo facts]
*[http://www.christiananswers.net/kids/kangaroos.html Answers About Kangaroos]
*[http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/migration.asp How did animals get from the Ark to places such as Australia?]

== References ==
<references/>

[[Category:Marsupials]]
[[Category:Australia]]

Apollo 11

2007-05-15T03:34:22Z

Kww: typo

On July 20, 1969 the '''Apollo 11''' spacecraft landed on the moon, and soon after, [[Neil Armstrong]] became the first man to set foot on the moon, when he stepped off the Lunar Module Eagle onto the moon's surface, saying: "''That's one small step for [a] man, one giant leap for mankind.''"<ref>
He intended to say "one step for ''a'' man." Whether he actually said the word "a" is disputed. See [http://www.snopes.com/quotes/onesmall.asp One Small Misstep], Snopes urban legend site. A video clip and sound recording are available at [http://www.hq.nasa.gov/office/pao/History/alsj/a11/a11v_1092338.mpg NASA]. At the time, many listeners perceived his words as "That's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind." Major newspapers and wire services reported it without the "a;" the ''New York Times'' did so as their July 21, 1969 "Quotation of the Day" (p. 35, also in the seventh sentence of their front-page story). Various small noises, short pauses, or transmission artifacts have sometimes been interpreted as the missing word, obscured by technical problems. In September 2006 an audio analyst claimed to have found the missing "a" but this, too is disputed.</ref>

The crew of Apollo 11 consisted of 3 astronauts: Commander [[Neil Armstrong]], [[Edwin "Buzz" Aldrin Jr.]], and [[Michael Collins]]. Buzz Aldrin was second on the moon, while Astronaut Collins orbited the moon in the Apollo Command Module. The two astronauts initiated a live videotaping to be seen on earth and placed a [[United States]] flag on the surface, and a commemorative plaque which read: ''"Here men from the planet earth first set foot on the moon July 1969, A.D. We came in peace for all mankind."'' They then spent time gathering samples of rocks and soil to bring back to Earth.

The spacecraft was launched on July 16, 1969, by [[NASA]], the [[National Aeronautics and Space Administration]], the [[United States Federal Government]] agency responsible for aviation and space flight. The liftoff was from [[Kennedy Space Center]], and lunar orbit was entered on July 19, 1969.

President [[John F. Kennedy]] had said that he was determined to send a man to the Moon before the end of the decade. However, this was not accomplished during his term in office; by the time the lunar landing was made, [[Richard Nixon]] was in office.

The mission of Apollo 11 was completed when the astronauts returned safely to Earth on July 24, 1969.

----

'''References'''

http://www.nasa.gov/

http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/apollo11/

http://www.buzzaldrin.com/

<references/>

See also: [[Project Apollo]], [[Apollo 13]]

[[Category:Space Exploration]]

The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection

2007-05-13T01:45:43Z

Kww: Darwindude may have vandalised some pages, but this wasn't one of them.

''On The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection'' is a book by [[Charles Darwin]] published in 1859. It introduced the world to [[evolution]] through a process of [[natural selection]]. The main thesis was that different animal species were not independently created, and that similar species can result from natural variation followed by different survivability rates. Animals that are more adapted to their environments are more likely to survive. Alfred Russel Wallace wrote a similar theory independently, and had sent a manuscript to Darwin. Darwin also used Herbert Spencer's phrase "survival of the fittest", but then fitness has to be defined as that which survives.

Human evolution is conspicuously absent from Origin - knowing of the opposition such a suggestion would face, Darwin confined his initial speculation to nonhuman animals. He covered the topic of human evolution in a later work, [[The Descent of Man]].

==Summary==

===CHAPTER 1. VARIATION UNDER DOMESTICATION===

In this chapter, Darwin motivates the case for variation and selection by illustrating the variety among the natural and domesticated plant and animal worlds. Without knowing the details of [[inheritance]] (which would be demonstrated later by [[Gregor Mendel]], [[James Watson]], and [[Francis Crick]] among others) he shows its implications: like breeds like. Inheritance is what breeders use to direct the variation of species to some useful means. This is done by selection; the breeders' are keenly aware of the minor differences in the offspring populations of animals and exploit them to create new varieties. The variation of species is not simply due to crossings of existing varieties. He argues this by showing examples where it is unlikely or impossible, pigeons, dogs, and talks about recent domestication. Pigeon varieties completely different in appearance from the the wild rock pigeon show traits of the wild rock pigeon when crossed. He shows, through the works of breeders, that in fact even animals within the same breed show variation of which expert breeders are aware (consciously or subconsciously) and exploit to direct the traits of the offspring. This he shows convincingly, as breeders cannot control traits directly, but can exploit variation to make new breeds because they know the traits are inherited. During Darwin's time, species was not a well-defined category: animals may be regarded as species or varieties even among prominent naturalists of the time.

===CHAPTER 2. VARIATION UNDER NATURE===

===CHAPTER 3. STRUGGLE FOR EXISTENCE===

===CHAPTER 4. NATURAL SELECTION===

===CHAPTER 5. LAWS OF VARIATION===

===CHAPTER 6. DIFFICULTIES ON THEORY===

===CHAPTER 7. INSTINCT===

===CHAPTER 8. HYBRIDISM===

===CHAPTER 9. ON THE IMPERFECTION OF THE GEOLOGICAL RECORD===

===CHAPTER 10. ON THE GEOLOGICAL SUCCESSION OF ORGANIC BEINGS===

===CHAPTER 11. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION===

===CHAPTER 12. GEOGRAPHICAL DISTRIBUTION--continued===

===CHAPTER 13. MUTUAL AFFINITIES OF ORGANIC BEINGS: MORPHOLOGY: EMBRYOLOGY: RUDIMENTARY ORGANS===

===CHAPTER 14. RECAPITULATION AND CONCLUSION===

==External Links==

*[http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/1228 Origin of Species, 1st Edition]
*[http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/2009 Origin of Species, 6th Edition]

{{DEFAULTSORT:Origin of Species, The}}

[[Category:Book]]
[[Category:Origins debate]]
[[Category:Biology]]

Louis Pasteur

2007-05-11T22:22:18Z

Kww: "Discovered" makes it sound like pasteurization was hanging around, waiting for someone to find it. He *invented* pasteurization.

[[Image:Louis Pasteur.jpg|thumb|200px|Louis Pasteure]]

'''Louis Pasteur''' (Dec. 27, 1822-Sept. 28, 1895), French chemist and microbiologist. He is most famous for inventing the process that keeps milk from going sour, which is now known, in his honor, as [[pasteurization]]. He also performed experiments that confirmed the [[germ theory of disease]], created the first [[rabies]] vaccine, was a founder of bacteriology and made numerous discoveries in chemistry.

Pasteur was a devout [[Christian]], and did not see any conflict between science and Christianity, remarking that "science brings men nearer to God." Pasteur experienced many hardships throughout his life, including the death of three of his five children to childhood diseases including [[polio]], but these hardships only served to strengthen his faith and his determination to find cures. Through it all Pasteur gave God the glory, stating that ''"the more I study nature, the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator."''

{{DEFAULTSORT:Pasteur, Louis}}
[[Category:Chemists]]
[[Category:Inventors]]

Spontaneous generation

2007-05-11T22:20:07Z

Kww: Pastuer=>Pasteur

Spontaneous generation refers to the concept that animal forms are created by the decay of organic matter
<ref>http://biology.clc.uc.edu/courses/bio114/spontgen.htm</ref>
<ref>http://www.accessexcellence.org/RC/AB/BC/Spontaneous_Generation.html</ref>. Common theories included:

* Moldy grain produces mice
* Rotten meat produces maggots
* Rotting garbage produces rats

Experiments in the 1600s through the 1800s discredited this idea. These experiments took the form of allowing meat to rot in sealed and semi-sealed containers ([[Francesco Redi]], 1668), which demonstrated that maggots only formed in meat that flies laid eggs in; and by storing sterilized soup in bottles that prevented dust and bacteria from entering ([[Louis Pasteur]], 1860).

Today, the term is frequently misused in creationist literature <ref>Wile, Dr. Jay L. ''Exploring Creation With Biology''. Apologia
Educational Ministries, Inc. 1998</ref>, and is used to obscure the concept of [[abiogenesis]]. Abiogenesis refers to a theorized event where a self-replicating chemical became self-replicating life.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Biology]]

Spontaneous generation

2007-05-11T21:11:20Z

Kww: clarified distinction between "spontaneous generation" and "abiogenesis"

Spontaneous generation refers to the concept that animal forms are created by the decay of organic matter
<ref>http://biology.clc.uc.edu/courses/bio114/spontgen.htm</ref>
<ref>http://www.accessexcellence.org/RC/AB/BC/Spontaneous_Generation.html</ref>. Common theories included:

* Moldy grain produces mice
* Rotten meat produces maggots
* Rotting garbage produces rats

Experiments in the 1600s through the 1800s discredited this idea. These experiments took the form of allowing meat to rot in sealed and semi-sealed containers ([[Francesco Redi]], 1668), which demonstrated that maggots only formed in meat that flies laid eggs in; and by storing sterilized soup in bottles that prevented dust and bacteria from entering ([[Louis Pastuer]], 1860).

Today, the term is frequently misused in creationist literature <ref>Wile, Dr. Jay L. ''Exploring Creation With Biology''. Apologia
Educational Ministries, Inc. 1998</ref>, and is used to obscure the concept of [[abiogenesis]]. Abiogenesis refers to a theorized event where a self-replicating chemical became self-replicating life.

==References==

<references/>

[[Category:Biology]]

Evolutionism

2007-04-07T16:08:55Z

Kww:

[[Evolution]] is the theory that the various kinds of life on Earth came into being gradually over millions of years. Creationists, in attempt to portray this theory as a kind of religious faith, refer to it as "evolutionism" and it supporters as "evolutionists."
In the United States, 99.8% of U.S. biologists support evolution as the most credible theory explaining the diversity of life on earth. <ref>"evolutionism." The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company, 2004. 20 Mar. 2007. <Dictionary.com http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/evolutionism>.</ref>

The terms ''evolutionist'' and ''evolutionism'' carry a connotation of unthinking [[faith]] or [[pseudoscience]] because the suffix ''-ism'' is commonly used to designate varieties of philosophical opinion.
Accordingly, many people who use scientific grounds to support evolution
bristle at the application of these terms to themselves.
Likewise, the term ''anti-evolutionism'' carries an ideological connotation.

This is all part of the controversy over evolution itself. Evolutionists and anti-evolutionists typically accuse one another of ideological, unscientific reasoning or motives (see [[Origins debate]]).

Broken down into two categories, "Evolutionism" and "Evolutionists" usually involve Atheistic/Agnostic Evolutionists (evolution without God) and Theistic Evolutionists (evolution with God). Those categories can be further broken down, but they are the main two.

The word is used differently in different circles of thought. Generally [[Young Earth Creationism|Young Earth Creationists]] use it as a reference to what they believe is the [[worldview]] or [[presupposition]] aspect of the scientific theory of evolution. The term is not necessarily used as a worldview unto itself, but is more based off of and is possibly an extension of a variety of other worldviews including [[Materialism]], [[Naturalism]]<ref>[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA601.html CA601: Evolution and Naturalism] - TalkOrigins Archive</ref>, and [[Humanism]] in its broadest sense. Many that hold to the theory of evolution have been known to be [[Atheism|atheists]] as well, but this does not represent the entirety or whole.

:''"Evolutionism is a '''world-view''', which seeks to explain every aspect of this world in which we live. It encompasses a wide variety of topics, from astronomy to chemistry to biology. At its core, it teaches that there were different stages in the evolution of our universe..."''<ref>[http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/evolutionism.htm Evolutionism - AllAboutPhilosophy] - Accessed on March 22, 2007.</ref>

==Theistic Evolution==
[[Theistic Evolution|Theistic Evolutionists]] believe that God created the universe and did not intervene directly in the evolutionary process. In general, theistic evolutionists accept the

==Foundational question/starting point==
All the viewpoints take a ''step of faith'' as some might refer to it. In other words, there is a common starting point or foundational question (it's a God-related question) that each one asks, and then forms their conclusions around.

===According to biblical Creationists (Young Earth)===
:<code>'''God exists (worldview) > Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact" > Thus science is altered based on the "God exists" idea ''Creationism'' comes before the ''Scientific Theory of Creation''. The theory is based on the worldview.'''</code>

===According to biblical Theistic Evolutionists (Old Earth)===
There is disagreement among Theistic Evolutionists, as not all hold that God is not involved presently in His creation.

'''Impersonal Evolutionist God'''
:<code>'''There is no personal/involved God (worldview) > Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact" > Thus science is altered based on the "no personal God" idea ''Theistic Evolutionism'' comes before the ''Scientific Theory of Evolution''. The theory is based on the worldview.'''</code>
'''Personal Evolutionist God'''
:<code>'''There is a personal/involved God (worldview) > Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact" > Thus science is altered based on the "personal God" idea ''Theistic Evolutionism'' comes before the ''Scientific Theory of Evolution''. The theory is based on the worldview.'''</code>

===According to Atheistic Evolutionists===
Some proponents of the scientific theory of evolution reject the idea of a philosophy or worldview that guides their conclusions in scientific experimentation.
:<code>'''There is no God (worldview) > Therefore we need to explain everything based on that "fact" > Thus science is altered based on the "no God" idea ''Evolutionism'' comes before the ''Scientific Theory of Evolution''. The theory is based on the worldview.'''</code>

===Comparison===
The various viewpoints can be compared in general ways as they all have some sort of starting point. The general Creationist starting point is God, which then all the universe is based on including that of science. Some ''Theistic Evolutionists'' hold to a similar God idea, yet emphasize a somewhat secondary origin<ref>Some Theistic Evolutionists believe that God created the universe and yet He is no longer involved in it. Therefore "secondary origin" is referring to the idea that God is the origin of the universe, but not necessarily ''You and Me''.</ref> in the evolutionary process. Atheistic evolutionists say that we must prove God by science, therefore their intellectual starting point is science itself.

==Controversy==
===Offensive Terminology===
''Evolutionism'' is simply a false Creationist perception, or pejorative assertion that science represents merely another religion. Scientists disagree that the theory of evolution is based on a [[philosophy]] or [[worldview]]. They say that the perception finds no grounding in reality, other than as a rhetorical dramatization. However, according to creationists, this disagreement arises from a misunderstanding of terms. Biblical [[Young Earth Creationism|Young Earth Creationists]] hold both terms in philosophically equal light, up to a certain point. They would say that the term "Evolutionism" has the same or very similar meaning to "Creationism" as it relates to a supposed philosophical/foundational starting point or question (does God exist?). They say the term "Evolutionism" refers to a subset of a combination of worldviews, while the scientific theory of evolution is the result of the ''Evolutionist'' presupposition. In other words, they say that Evolutionism is the collective worldview behind the scientific theory of evolution. However, that's where the similarities end with biblical Young Earth Creationism.

===Religion and Evolutionism===
Some Creationists point out that they see various religious aspects, not in the theory of evolution itself (although they don't exclude that necessarily), but in the Evolutionists themselves. Some will say how Evolutionists have a ''religious fervor'' over what Creationists believe is false science. Some Evolutionists have historically misunderstood this for Creationists labeling science itself as a religion. M. Green, a Creationist, put it this way in his ''Faith of Darwinism'' (emphasis added).

:''"Today the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with '''religious fervor''', and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith." <ref name="mgreen" />''

Evolution has been a recent source of controversy in the [[United States]]{{fact}}. Some prominent Americans seriously question evolution{{fact}}, based on a feeling that it conflicts with religious beliefs. However, according to Evolutionists, at least one aspect of religion and evolution is not mutually exclusive. Some deeply religious evolutionists believe that God set evolution into effect, which is no detraction to His majesty. This is referring to the theory of [[Theistic Evolution]].

===Biblical Young Earth Creationist's problem with a Biblical Old Earth===

==Quotes==
'''''Evolutionism requires faith'' quotes'''<ref>[http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionism.html Evolutionism - Is Evolution a Religion?] - Northwest Creation Network</ref>:
*''"The fact of evolution is the backbone of biology, and biology is thus in the peculiar position of being a science founded on an unproved theory - is it then a science or faith?" <ref>L.N. Matthews, "Introduction" to Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species, pp. x, xi (1971 edition)</ref>''
*''"The hypothesis that life has developed from inorganic matter is, at present, still an article of faith." <ref>J.W.N. Sullivan, Limitations of Science (1933), p95.</ref>''
*''"Evolution requires plenty of faith; a faith in L-proteins that defy chance formation; a faith in the formation of DNA codes which, if generated spontaneously, would spell only pandemonium; a faith in a primitive environment that, in reality, would fiendishly devour any chemical precursors to life; a faith in experiments that prove nothing but the need for intelligence in the beginning; a faith in a primitive ocean that would not thicken, but would only haplessly dilute chemicals; a faith in natural laws of thermodynamics and biogenesis that actually deny the possibility for the spontaneous generation of life; a faith in future scientific revelations that, when realized, always seem to present more dilemmas to the evolutionists; faith in improbabilities that treasonously tell two stories—one denying evolution, the other confirming the Creator; faith in transformations that remain fixed; faith in mutations and natural selection that add to a double negative for evolution; faith in fossils that embarrassingly show fixity through time, regular absence of transitional forms and striking testimony to a worldwide water deluge; a faith in time which proves to only promote degradation in the absence of mind; and faith in reductionism that ends up reducing the materialist's arguments to zero and forcing the need to invoke a supernatural Creator." <ref>R.L. Wysong, The Creation-Evolution Controversy (1981), p. 455.</ref>''
*''"By calling evolution fact, the process of evolution is removed from dispute; it is no longer merely a scientific construct, but now stands apart from humankind and its perceptual frailties. Sagan apparently wishes to accomplish what Peter Berger calls `objectification,' the attribution of objective reality to a humanly produced concept . . With evolution no longer regarded as a mere human construct, but now as a part of the natural order of the cosmos, evolution becomes a sacred archetype against which human actions can be weighed. Evolution is a sacred object or process in that it becomes endowed with mysterious and awesome power." <ref>T. Lessl, Science and the Sacred Cosmos: The Ideological Rhetoric of Carl Sagan," Quarterly Journal of Speech, 71:178 (1985).</ref>''
*''"Today the tables are turned. The modified, but still characteristically Darwinian theory has itself become an orthodoxy, preached by its adherents with religious fervor, and doubted, they feel, only by a few muddlers imperfect in scientific faith." <ref name="mgreen">M. Grene, Faith of Darwinism," Encounter, November (1959), p49.</ref>''
'''''Evolutionism does not involve faith'' quotes''':
*''The concept of faith does not exist in other major religions''<ref>A. Schlafly [http://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Faith&oldid=12708]</ref>

==See also==
*[[Creationism]]
*[[Faith]]
*[[Humanism]]
*[[Naturalistic religions]]
*[[Religion]]
*[[Theism]]

==References==
<references/>

==External links==
'''Notes'''
:'''''Affirmative''' websites that are pro-theory of evolution.''
:'''''Critical''' websites that hold the position that the scientific theory of evolution requires faith and belief just like any other religious system.''

{| class="wikitable" width="100%"
! Affirmative !! Critical
|-
| valign="top" width="50%"|
'''TalkOrigins'''
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA612.html CA612: Evolution requiring faith]
**[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_requires_as_much_faith_as_creationism CreationWiki response]
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA610.html CA610: Evolution religious]
**[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_a_religion CreationWiki response]
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA001.html CA001: Evolution is the foundation of an immoral worldview]
**[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_the_foundation_of_an_immoral_worldview CreationWiki response]
*[http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolphil/metaphysics.html Evolution and Philosophy: Metaphysics]
'''EvoWiki'''
*[http://wiki.cotch.net/index.php/Evolution_is_the_foundation_of_an_immoral_worldview Evolution is the foundation of an immoral worldview]
| valign="top" width="50%"|
'''DrDino'''
* [http://www.drdino.com/articles.php?spec=25 Evolution Is Based On Modern Myths]
'''Creationists.org'''
* [http://www.creationists.org/evolutionisreligion.html Evolution is a Religion]
'''Northwest Creation Network'''
* [http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionism.html Evolutionism - Is Evolution a religion?]
'''Answers in Genesis'''
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v4/i4/religion.asp Evolution as religion]
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2002/0930religion.asp The Religion of Evolution]
* [http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/the-lie/chapter2.asp Evolution is Religion]
'''CreationWiki'''
*[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_requires_as_much_faith_as_creationism Evolution requires as much faith as creationism] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
*[http://creationwiki.org/%28Talk.Origins%29_Evolution_is_a_religion Evolution is a religion] - Rebuttal of TalkOrigins Archive
'''Institute for Creation Research'''
* [http://www.icr.org/article/201/ Evolution is Religion, not Science (1)], [http://www.icr.org/article/455/ (2)]
|}
===Other===
'''Uses of the term ''Evolutionism'' on the Internet'''
*[http://www.nwcreation.net/evolutionism.html Northwest Creation Network]
*[http://creationwiki.org/index.php?title=Evolutionism&oldid=74633 CreationWiki]
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Evolutionism&oldid=115346043 Wikipedia]

[[Category:Religion]]
[[Category:Materialism]]
[[Category:Naturalism]]
[[Category:Humanism]]