I find it hard to believe that in a progressive and educated country like Canada, this would happen (Update: finally, some positive results, at the last count 55% believed in evolution):
4,367 so far have said “no”. It really irritates and bugs me to no end that people in this day and age would say that evolution did not happen. I mean, for gods sake, what is it going to take for these buffoons to understand that the Theory Of Evolution rests on unshakable scientific facts.
I don’t profess to know everything about the Theory Of Evolution but I am implicit and explicitly trust scientists who do understand the theory very well. And before you say “ah ha, this prick is trusting some fucking expert”. Well, yes, I do trust someone who is an authority on the Evolution theory, who knows what the details of the theory are just as I would trust an aircraft engineer who tells me that the theory of flight is based on scientific and well tested facts to enable me to climb into an aircraft without uttering a prayer.
At the same time, when someone says they do not believe in the Theory Of Evolution because it “does not sound true”, I call that kind of a statement absolutely full of crap. Just because you think it “does not sound true” does not make it bogus. E=MC2 never sounded true to anyone when Einstein came up with it, but it has since been tested and utilised very well as the nuclear strikes in Nagasaki and Hiroshima have demonstrated.
I found this very interesting tit-bit on the net and may explain why the question of the validity of evolution never was raised in India.
That’s not to say that the Indian society is not religious. I would say that religion in India is at the same level as it is in the US. However, science and religion have had a comfortable co-existence with some minor flare ups every now and then.
And here is a complete and utter bullshit version of revisionism by the fucking elite of United States Of Amerika.
UPDATED:
Woohoo!! Check this out. Guess I am wrong about Canadians (yes, yes, I know that this is an unscientific poll, but what the hell. Let me enjoy the moment)
Desi In Toronto 
Great post – Yep – it’s amazing & they call it developed world ;)
Well the debate on evolution vs. creationism / evolution vs. intelligent design is not new. The link @ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mp7b9ERMxp0 explains why creationsism still survives and how politics is responsible.
Actually the real debate is religion vs. science… science might have got its freedom after centuries of religious hegemony post renaissance but has coexisted with religion ever since. And there are times when due to factors such as, recession / depression, wars etc. the religion card is invoked by those in power and this debate is brought to life.
I personally feel scientists who truly care about science should not expend precious energy on fuelling this debate because it is like a fashion trend which will come and go. And neither can they wish, for the sake of the very society they live in and the passion they pursue, that religion didnt exist.
Hey Pramit, I agree with you up to the point where you say that scientists should not get involved. The problem is that in today’s political scene, the loudest voice gets heard. Gone are the days of Ghandhism where persistent truth would do the trick. The creationist are loud and they are very active in politics. Unfortunately, they bring up insane issues like the eye/ear/cell genetics as proof that god created life. To counter that, the lay man, us, need scientists to slap their ass around with the truth.
Which is why I am glad that scientists are actively involved in politics and publishing books and going on tours to counter the creationists arguments.
BTW, when are you coming up with your blog? Your tweets are pretty good and I think you must graduate to a blog soon.
Thanks Anurag, Very soon… I think I’ve discovered enough reasons to blog :-)
By arguing with the creationists, scientists give them reasons to launch their next attack, for instance what was the necessity to counter their claim that the human eye is too complicated to evolve and prove them wrong @
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOtP7HEuDYA :-)
“By arguing with the creationists, scientists give them reasons to launch their next attack, for instance what was the necessity to counter their claim that the human eye is too complicated to evolve and prove them wrong”
…….because if the scientists did not reply, these assholes would have claimed to have won the argument and instituted crucial policy changes in education which is why it is essential to counter their claims at every step of the way.