Also, it would be a statistical impossibility for no scientists to also accept Creationism. A certain percentage of the population works in the field of science (in some capacity) Some of them will be religious. Ive looked at those lists and you see people who work in many different fields. Very few would be even slightly more qualified to discuss biological evolution than a person yanked off the street at random.

I personally feel that Draco-deniers are dumb

I yank off at random too But not in the street. Only at home.

Well you know. I have my own bias.

However it seems its a little different then most people's bias.

I do not have bias against new claims made based on any preconception of the idea. (unless I been there and done that, and no new details are being presented)

If a person can intelligently explain something with details then I will typically research with fervor the details then come to a personal conclusion.

My bias comes in when I expect everyone to be like me in the sense that when something is posed to them that their response should be effort that involves intense research that sorts through propaganda and only accepts verifiable facts as relevant, then comes to a logical conclusion.

I tend to think people who do not follow this process are stupid or lazy. Which to me does not matter.

I understand you in this but part of being a complete person ourselves is the part where we accept that others will definitely be different from us and this is a good thing. I too logic things out and I definitely do not believe well almost nothing on someone's word alone. But there are trusting folks who want to believe or they want to believe because it meets one of their own ideals or they want to believe because someone they trust says it is so, etc....

You can state how you believe and feel but you cannot expect all to accept it on your word or your research either.

We have to accept others will be different from us it is part of being a healthy human.

Just a few words of wisdom from the forever skeptic here.

If you let go of the frustration of trying to show others that you are right it makes your life a whole lot easier.

They had shown on television a man who is around 70 years old but can't take care of himself. His father I think around 87 is taking care of him by washing him in the shower, etc. etc.

yet this man has memorized 12,000 books and can tell you the day and event of each day for over 100 years.

It is amazing stuff.

Although he cannot look anyone in the eyes when talking he goes to seminar to tell his extrodinary skills. It reminds me of the movie Rain Man with Dustin Hoffman and Tom Cruise.

Amazing stuff indeed

I agree, the way I tend to handle it is by acknowledging the things I like and disregarding the things I do not like about the person. Experience has taught me that to dwell on these differences that I find irrational only makes life for everyone less friendly. However on the flip side the same must be true for the other person, if they are unwilling to let it go it becomes just as frustrating, especially when emotions get involved.

Projection tends to follow.

It almost always comes down to a difference of skill sets, however that is not always the case, as was illustrated in the article where folks with good analytical skills come on to the scene later and do not realize that the pro's have been there done that.

I think ultimately some ideas are easy to break down and others are far more subtle, I try very hard to never pass judgment on the folks where the issue is subtle and complex.

Some things are so simple to me that its near impossible not to hold some ill feelings even if only pity for the other person who just freakn doesn't get it.

I think part of the challenge for us ourselves is in knowing when our judgment is being effected by society, emotion, and desire for a thing to be true. There is a disconnect in our own minds that makes it nearly impossible for us to always sort this out for ourselves.

I think part of my problem is I give most people far too much credit on the level of their analysis tool kit. Critical thinking skills are not as common as common nonsense.

Always so fascinating to hear of these kinds of individuals!

If I were to fall into either category (stupid or lazy) I would have to say that Lazy fits best.

If I were not so lazy I would do more paintings, learn more about CSS, have my house more organized, etc.

But I tend to evaluate information intuitively rather than intellectually. There is way too much crappy information out there to get nit picky about all the details of the crappy stuff.

So I scan information quickly, discarding stuff that does not pass certain tests. I can spot religious and political agendas and propaganda very quickly, but that does not mean I discard all of the information. I take what seems true, and see if I can verify it.

I don't dismiss information just because it is mixed with agenda and propaganda. I sift through it for the truth. Neither do I dismiss it because someone has done a good job of trashing the credibility of the messenger, or building up the credibility of the authority. I take that into account, but I don't put all the weight in those things.

I don't like to waste time on things I know I don't understand but sometimes I will read things that are way above my head just to see if I can get something out of it.

I don't like to waste time in areas that have flunked my credibility tests, but I might skim the information if it looks like something new.

I look at the large picture first and the details last.

(By the way, that is the same way I execute an oil painting.)

Details last. Important details, I examine closely for flaws, agendas, motives, etc.

If a thing effects me or my life directly, I will focus on the evidence and proof very carefully. I rely on intuition and feeling more than intellect.

I don't consider myself "educated." Intelligence is relative I suppose. I am intelligent compared to some, and not compared to others.

I agree I do not think intelligence is directly related to education, however the intelligent tend to find enjoyment in learning challenging topics.

What is challenging to one person is just boring to another... or what one person thinks is challenging, another person just sees it as interesting.

It requires both my interest and the challenge to be worthy of my time. I have to decide if my time is worth the rewards.

I once thought I wanted to learn to play the guitar... until I realized how much time and effort I would have to spend to get really good at it. And I did not really see a future in music for me. So I passed it up.

Its a trade off. We only have so much time to spend in our life's efforts. We can't do it all.. so we have to make a choice where our interest lies.

Ohh! If that was an online article I would love to get a link so I could read it, sounds interesting!

____


Well but back to the OP, we assume that becuase a person is interested in something and intelligent that they would go through the necessary steps to properly validate their opinions. This isn't always so.

In light of this article I think it becomes clear that it comes down to credulity meets social factors meets why we find the idea interesting in the firsts place.

I think sci fi is interesting, I enjoy reading all kinds of ideas, but do not transpose those ideas upon reality where there is not sufficient evidence to show that this idea can be apart of this reality.

I think the concept of suspended disbelief has not been talked about enough.

When we go to the movies we suspend disbelief sometimes to really enjoy the movie. I am a trained actor, before that I was a feelings actor, but always the suspension of disbelief has been a big part of my life.

Is it possible that sometimes we do the same maybe if only subconsciously in our daily lives to gain more entertainment from our ideas, and those of others we find fascinating?

But Billy, that is because you have decided that this reality is REAL in the material sense.

You believe appearances only in the macro-world. You refuse to deal with the lack of things in the micro world.

There is nothing there.

Nothing can be found or measured except for what we designate as boundaries. No boundaries between something and nothing have ever really been found.

It is all infinity.

It is all light and sound, vibration and reflection. It is a unified field of consciousness and illusion.

If you are so big on proving things, then find the ultimate building block of matter. Find the particle. Measure it.

It can't be done.

They have a child who is 8 years old in Singapore who is fascinated since 6 years old in Chemistry. He is doing High School Chemistry understanding all the formulas and reactions to each mixtures.

What is fascinating is that he explained that the school he is going to is way to easy. In all the subjects.

He mentions how everything for him is going in sssssllllllloooooooowwwww motion and that he needs to have the challenge to advance his educational ambitions.

Of course we can see he is a gifted child, yet it makes one wonder how this is possible at times that occassionally such miracles happen.

Will he be the next Einstein that will offer us a alternative to invent hyper drive so we can travel at warp 8 speeds to other universes?

In the long run it is truly fascinating how someone who has only lived 8 years knows more then 80% of the world on Chemistry for many don't fascinate themselves in the subject.

He sounds like he is tapped into the subconscious collective.

He will probably die of boredom before he reaches adulthood, or go what we will call... insane.

it is funny you say this because the father of this child is worried this will happen. So he is desperately trying to find classes that will accept him to learn at their level to keep up with the interests and at the same time let him be a child around his own age. What a challenge that must be.

I do hope he doesn't go insane and somehow manages to keep a very high IQ to perhaps discover things we don't know yet while being sane.

I also fascinate myself with children who can play the piano and such hard tunes as the symphony from Beethoven or Mozart, Strauss, etc.

At age 5 playing hard tunes that takes months to learn and only if you are good in music by itself.

In anycase gifted children are fascinating. My child isn't gifted but very bright. She is 8 now and already won the first school's spelling bee. The principal has a keen eye on her interested in entering her for the regional spelling bee. Although she picks up words quickly, I still have to study with her. I figure a gifted child doesn't even have to study much. Just hears the word and (Puff) knows it.

Smiles knew where I was going with it.

When I last had it checked...my IQ was WELL into the triple digits.

High School education only.

I think it has more to do with a person's reading ability and desire to read.

While I agree that an intelligent person likes to learn new things whenever possible, and relishes the challenges involved, I also think that intelligence is something that parents can help a child obtain.

If a child grows up with parents who do not feel that education is all that important, chances are that the child will feel the same way and won't strive to be the best that they CAN be.

For me, when I was young, reading was an escape from the everyday things I was subjected to.

Later on, it became a source of knowledge. That turned into a way for me to let all the people who told me that I was stupid and going to be a nobody know that I am much better than they ever thought I would be.

Easy. When I was in my early teens my highly intelligent, college educated sister tried to tell me that homosexual meant the you were normal because of the meaning. She thought that same sex meant the same as everyone else. See what intelligence and education gets you? Pick a topic, there are no guidelines only personal experience.

What I find really interesting about people's tendency to assume that those who hold different beliefs are "dumb" relates to a quote that I absolutely love - in the book "The Dance of Intimacy" by Harriet Lerner: part of her definition for intimacy is "a profound respect for differences." Think about it - how can we be truly intimate with another person unless we can accept - and embrace - the fact that they believe differently than we do?