Rapid burial with exquisite preservation as found in this and so many other fossils speaks of catastrophic conditions. Since the evolutionists can only offer made-up stories and mysteries, let their explanations be ruled out in favor of explanations that can account for the observations. Remember that “geological time” is a moyboy* phrase that locks away evolutionary mysteries out of sight, out of mind.
Rapid burial with exquisite preservation as found in this and so many other fossils speaks of catastrophic conditions. Since the evolutionists can only offer made-up stories and mysteries, let their explanations be ruled out in favor of explanations that can account for the observations. Remember that “geological time” is a moyboy* phrase that locks away evolutionary mysteries out of sight, out of mind.
*A moyboy is someone who thinks that “millions of years, billions of years” solves every problem in evolutionary theory.
A psychologist has determined that belief in hell reduces the crime rate.
A psychologist has determined that belief in hell reduces the crime rate.
A finding like this might belong in the “Well, duh” category, but more interesting is the interpretation: what does the correlation mean? Science Daily explained how a research team led by Azim F. Shariff decided to check the intuitive idea that worry about afterlife consequences tends to make people behave better. They studied crime data covering 26 years from 67 different countries, and found that hope for reward in a blessed heaven is not enough; that hope by itself is actually a predictor of higher crime rates. The fear of hell is what changes behavior:
“Supernatural punishment across nations seems to predict lower crime rates,” Shariff said. “At this stage, we can only speculate about mechanisms, but it’s possible that people who don’t believe in the possibility of punishment in the afterlife feel like they can get away with unethical behavior. There is less of a divine deterrent.”
“Supernatural punishment across nations seems to predict lower crime rates,” Shariff said. “At this stage, we can only speculate about mechanisms, but it’s possible that people who don’t believe in the possibility of punishment in the afterlife feel like they can get away with unethical behavior. There is less of a divine deterrent.”
For instance, last year “Shariff reported that undergraduate students were more likely to cheat when they believe in a forgiving God than a punishing God.” He published this in the International Journal for the Psychology of Religion. (There is not, apparently, an International Journal for the Religion of Psychology.)
For instance, last year “Shariff reported that undergraduate students were more likely to cheat when they believe in a forgiving God than a punishing God.” He published this in the International Journal for the Psychology of Religion. (There is not, apparently, an International Journal for the Religion of Psychology.)
The article recognized that “these are correlational data, and so caution should be taken with the conclusions.” Correlation is not the same as causation. As for what the findings might mean, the article did not explore whether heaven or hell have any basis. Instead, it and the researchers appear to have assumed that beliefs about heaven and hell evolved by a kind of cultural selection. “The new findings, he added, fit into a growing body of evidence that supernatural punishment had emerged as a very effective cultural innovation to get people to act more ethically with each other.”
The article recognized that “these are correlational data, and so caution should be taken with the conclusions.” Correlation is not the same as causation. As for what the findings might mean, the article did not explore whether heaven or hell have any basis. Instead, it and the researchers appear to have assumed that beliefs about heaven and hell evolved by a kind of cultural selection. “The new findings, he added, fit into a growing body of evidence that supernatural punishment had emerged as a very effective cultural innovation to get people to act more ethically with each other.”
That statement does not elaborate on what, or who, caused supernatural punishment to “emerge,” or why hell would prove more effective than heaven, when PhysOrg just announced a contrary finding, that “Carrots, not sticks, motivate workers.” Furthermore, assuming the psychologists are evolutionists (a safe assumption), they did not explain why evolution would select for ethical behavior in the first place. After all, another PhysOrg article had just stated that “Evolution by definition is cold and merciless” (see 6/08/2012 entry). Ethical behavior or cooperation should, it would seem, be regarded as contrary evidence to “evolution by definition.”
That statement does not elaborate on what, or who, caused supernatural punishment to “emerge,” or why hell would prove more effective than heaven, when PhysOrg just announced a contrary finding, that “Carrots, not sticks, motivate workers.” Furthermore, assuming the psychologists are evolutionists (a safe assumption), they did not explain why evolution would select for ethical behavior in the first place. After all, another PhysOrg article had just stated that “Evolution by definition is cold and merciless” (see 6/08/2012 entry). Ethical behavior or cooperation should, it would seem, be regarded as contrary evidence to “evolution by definition.”
