Should evolution be taught in high school?

[Chaz]

MUQ wrote:

To: Chaz
If you do not know how to walk, how can you expected to run?
If you do not know A, B, C, how could you be expected to lecture some one in English?
If you do not know, how life began, then how can you understand , how it evolved?

The difference being that the process of the first two is entirely different to the third. To draw comparison, I would be more like saying "how do you in what way a ball rolls down a hill without first understanding how it was made?" That's like you presenting me with all the research you've done into your family tree, and me saying "none of it matters, because you don't know anything about how your family name came to exist."

It's very, very simple: life changes over time. We can study this and understand it on it's own merits, and as a process it is entirely different from the initial formation of life. We do not need to know how life initially formed in order to observe and understand how it changes over time.

Please, don't even pretend to be this stupid.

MUQ wrote:

That is why BTOE, without understanding and explaining origin of life is a bunch of empty words and nothing else.

So says you, but then it's your words against the overwhelming majority of scientists. Forgive me if I don't take you at your word.

MUQ wrote:

If evolution is by Random Mutation and Natural Selection, then let me say, that these two are the most non scientific terms , that any scientist can use. That is why this BTOE is not a scientific theory at all.

Okay. Can you explain WHY you define these as "non-scientific" terms?

Normally, when you make a claim you're supposed to support it with facts.

MUQ wrote:

You may not know the intricacies of your body and function of all its organs, but so long you believe that you have a Creator, who has created you, gave you life, and will test you for your actions in this life…. You are on the right path.
But if you know each and every action of all your organs… and have very deep insight about functioning of every part of your body… but are one of those unfortunate lot…who gave no thought to their creator…or the purpose of their lives, then you have wasted your life. All your knowledge is a sort of waste, if you have not understood the very purpose of your life.

And what does this theological pontificating have to do with evolution?

Frankly, I find people like you who deny reality in favour of childish daydreams about magical sky fairies to be the most pitiable people of all. I don't need centuries old fables dreamed up by goat herders in order to give my life meaning.

Does the idea that a person can have a perfectly good, happy and meaningful life without sharing your beliefs scare you? I invite you to try and think hard as to why that should be.

[Liam R]

Chaz wrote:

...
Please, don't even pretend to be this stupid.
...

What makes you think he's pretending?

[Chimney]

MUQ wrote:

PS:
Is it not amusing to see the people who are so "passionate" to defend their version of a teeth or bone discovered in a forgone cave...and yet show no interest or emotion to know about the "truth" about the greatest tragedy of our times.
Every one in the world has suffered from that tragedy in one way or the other.... but these BTOE followers are living in a different world...the world where Random Mutations and NS reign Supreme!!

Who said there is no interest in this?

However, 9/11 is not even remotely the subject of this thread. BTOE is true regardless of who blew up the Towers. There are other places you can have that discussion.

[Chimney]

MUQ wrote:

To: Chaz
...
If you do not know, how life began, then how can you understand , how it evolved?
That is why BTOE, without understanding and explaining origin of life is a bunch of empty words and nothing else.
If evolution is by Random Mutation and Natural Selection, then let me say, that these two are the most non scientific terms , that any scientist can use. That is why this BTOE is not a scientific theory at all.
...

Yet again betraying your utter lack of understanding of how science works.

We can know how evolution works before we know the origin of life or of the universe. We can have partial explanations before we have complete ones. In fact we MUST, in science, that is how science grows and learns.

Your problem is that you are so brainwashed you can only see the world in the terms dictated by your religion. You thinks that its fake certainty and answers to everything are real.

Then you compare it to science, an HONEST discipline that admits doubt where doubt exists, and you say "if they don't know everything, then they know nothing!".

On the other hand a real scientist looks at the fake certainty you have for your religion and laughs at your learned stupidity:

How you make the absurd claim that the "word" is fully compatible with science by:

1. Denying that science in conflict with the "word" is "real science". By the way we only talk about evolution here but most of quantum mechanics is also incompatible with your "word".

2. If the conflict is undeniable, but the science is too obviously true, you twist it by saying the "word" was meant to be understood poetically / figuratively, and not taken literally.

Two absurdly stupid and simplistic tricks that only your brainwashed mind could fall for.

[Chimney]

Liam R wrote:

<quoted text>
What makes you think he's pretending?

Any mind with a dogmatically enforced CONCLUSION that must be agreed before the evidence and regardless of the evidence will serve the ends of stupidity.

Applicable to all stripes of dogmatism, religious, political, philosophical.

What we see in MUQ is a perfect example.

[Sheila]

MUQ wrote:

Want to enjoy "Multi Choice Questions and Answers"?
Well I have a lots of them stored for you, and soon I would be posting them on this thread for every one to "enjoy"!!

You are so boring. I really feel sorry for your wife, having to pretend that you're interesting and smart. That must be a real mental work-out for her.

[Lil Ticked]

Sheila wrote:

<quoted text> You are so boring. I really feel sorry for your wife, having to pretend that you're interesting and smart. That must be a real mental work-out for her.

Why do you think I stopped posting in this forum? I could barely get through his posts let alone have my brain function after I did get through it. Maybe if I hung ouot in here more often I would be able to get to sleep.(yawn)

[SupaAFC]

MUQ wrote:

There is only one point on which all "Scientists, peers and Blind BTOE followers" agree.... That there never was a plan, design or creator for this Universe!!
What else is called a close mind?
If they had started on the right foot... may be this nature and every thing in it would have guided them to the right path...
But by first rejecting the hand of Creator in everything, they have doomed all their efforts to failure.
They are groping in the dark, running after red herrings one after the another...
That is the propblem with falsehood, it seems to solve one problem but in reality creates ten more!!
The correct approach for these BTOE followers is to come back to right path...start from the very beginning....
See the Power, Wisdom and Mercy of Creator in every thing....from the first Bang to the formation of primitive matter....
The origin of life... the forms it took... looking for evidence and praying to Creator to help them in their search....saying " We do not know anything, except what You had taught us and You indeed are knowers of every thing hidden or open"
"O our Lord! You did not create this (heaven and Earth) in vain (or idle sport)..."
It is only then this BTOE will get eyes and light and follow the correct path.
Right now it is nothing but groping in dark...
And calling names who dare to contradict their assumptions.

And once again MUQ fails to see the hypocrisy in his accusations.

No surprises there.

[SupaAFC]

MUQ wrote:

PS:
Is it not amusing to see the people who are so "passionate" to defend their version of a teeth or bone discovered in a forgone cave...and yet show no interest or emotion to know about the "truth" about the greatest tragedy of our times.
Every one in the world has suffered from that tragedy in one way or the other.... but these BTOE followers are living in a different world...the world where Random Mutations and NS reign Supreme!!

Argument from incredulity. In other words, a meaningless post.

[MUQ]

1486 Wrong. Many people who accept evolution, including scientists, are religious.

What's more, accepting evolution does not alter nor diminish anyone's philosophical beliefs. Frankly, I think your statement that all people who accept evolution share a singular belief is incredibly and obviously stupid To: Chaz

You have posed two questions in your reply:

A. Many of those scientists who accept evolution are scientists and

B. Believing in evolution should not change your philosophical outlook.

Both of these are based on poor understanding of real issues involved and your lack of depth of knowledge about religion or this BTOE, let me clarify both.

A. Many “religious” scientists also accept evolution:

1. In our present society “religion” is just a sort of label. If your are named in a certain way, and perform some rituals, then you are a religious person.

2. However the real purpose of religion is to accept divine guidance that came thru revelation on true prophets of God and live your life accordingly.

3. As per religion, this human life is a test, and we are accountable to our creator for the way we have spent our life on this earth. Our life is not just a coincidence or an idle sport or just in vain.

4. Any one who is “religious” in true sense, will immediately know that where this belief in BTOE is taking him. By believing that humans evolved out of a single cell creature., all by themselves would negate all concept of God, revelation, purpose of life and accountability etc.

5. But so called religious scientist do not ponder on this matter carefully or they think it is of no real importance.

6. Like any diversion from a straight road, the separation between the two is very less in the beginning, but as the two roads progress, the separation gets on increasing.

7. In the days of Darwin, when his TOE was a nascent, the separation between religion and TOE was not that much, but after 150 years, his TOE has been hijacked by Atheists and Materialists and converted into BTOE, the separation between religion and BTOE has become very large.

8. So either these religious scientists do not really know what is religion or what is BTOE or just play innocent.

Now coming to your second question

B. Believing in evolution should not change your philosophical outlook.

1. This is also explained in my above reply. BTOE is no longer a scientific quest to find out how the life proliferated in the billions of years since the first cell was formed.

2. It has “decided” that Creator had no hand on it. Even if He had… they have found no “Evidence” of it.

3. So if you are die=hard supporter of BTOE, you cannot be a true religious person and the vice versa is also true.

4. The only road open for you is to behave like a hypocrite, pay lip service to God and religion and let your heart be with this Atheist philosophy of BTOE.

5. I am sorry to say that most of our correspondents on this thread are example of what I have written. They say Science and religion should be separate. They say, religion is your personal outlook, what it has to do in day to day life and statements like that.

6. Those who oppose them are branded as ignorant, barbaric, fundamentalists, fools and all such names.

[MUQ]

1.“Someone” is trying to educate me about these protein molecules, saying that these are just a long string of Amino acids and nothing else!!

Does he want to say that any combination of Amino Acids becomes a protein? If that was the case, then there was no problem…

but the problem is that not every combination of Amino Acids is a protein….they have to be certain specific combinations of certain specific polarity!! Out of Billions upon Billions of such possible combinations, only a few thousands are only correct and rest have to be discarded.

That was not possible by mere permutation and combination… he tries to override this difficulty by saying over millions of years…as if the millions of years are a helping factor!!

Any thing done idly over millions or billions of years would only add to the confusion and would make the choice difficult

2. As to his comment that opinion is divided between “peers, Scientists and BTOE followers” that if indeed there is a Purpose, Design or Creator behind all this….speaks more than these words can convey.

3. It means that you can go on believing in what you want, so long as you do not contradict us and allow us to lead the way..

4. The success of your life will not be calculated as to how many Nobel Prize you have won….. no one can even say that all these Nobel Prize Winners were really successful and fulfilled the mission of their lives. Their answer book is in the hands of their Creator and He will decide if they deserve any prize or not.

5. Nobel Prize and all such prizes are only recognition by humans that they did some thing remarkable in their lives. The standard by which God judges and by which humans judge are different from ach other.

6. I want to pose one question to such type of people.

Who is successful in this life, A CEO of a Multinational Company or a mere Janitor who sweeps the floor of the same Multinational Company? Please reply with justification.(this is not a Multiple Choice type of question)

[Chaz]

MUQ wrote:

You have posed two questions in your reply:

Actually, I didn't pose any questions. But I digress...

MUQ wrote:

A. Many of those scientists who accept evolution are scientists

Uh, is this a typo?

MUQ wrote:

and
B. Believing in evolution should not change your philosophical outlook.

Firstly, neither of these are "questions".

Secondly, nobody "believes" evolution. You either accept it or deny it. Science does not work based on "belief".

MUQ wrote:

Both of these are based on poor understanding of real issues involved and your lack of depth of knowledge about religion or this BTOE, let me clarify both.
A. Many “religious” scientists also accept evolution:
1. In our present society “religion” is just a sort of label. If your are named in a certain way, and perform some rituals, then you are a religious person.
2. However the real purpose of religion is to accept divine guidance that came thru revelation on true prophets of God and live your life accordingly.
3. As per religion, this human life is a test, and we are accountable to our creator for the way we have spent our life on this earth. Our life is not just a coincidence or an idle sport or just in vain.
4. Any one who is “religious” in true sense, will immediately know that where this belief in BTOE is taking him. By believing that humans evolved out of a single cell creature., all by themselves would negate all concept of God, revelation, purpose of life and accountability etc.
5. But so called religious scientist do not ponder on this matter carefully or they think it is of no real importance.
6. Like any diversion from a straight road, the separation between the two is very less in the beginning, but as the two roads progress, the separation gets on increasing.

Again; firstly, numbering your arguments is just a sneaky, underhanded way of making it look like you have more arguments than you actually do. All six of the above statements can be summed up as a single argument, and a fairly weak one at that.

Secondly, you posit that anyone who accepts evolution CAN'T be "truly" religious. Obviously, this is an entirely self-serving philosophy that clearly falls flat in light of even the slightest glances. It's a typical diversion from the simple fact that religious people DO accept evolution, and that there is no real conflict between the establishing of fact-based science and religion. You've failed to provide so much as a single reason why it should be otherwise.

MUQ wrote:

7. In the days of Darwin, when his TOE was a nascent, the separation between religion and TOE was not that much, but after 150 years, his TOE has been hijacked by Atheists and Materialists and converted into BTOE, the separation between religion and BTOE has become very large.

Except that, in Darwin's day, his theory of natural selection was not nearly was well established as the theory of evolution is today.

Once again, I repeat, religious people (including scientists) accept and even work on evolution theory. This simple fact completely contradicts your claim that evolution has been "hijacked" by atheists, even if we ignore the simple fact that evolution has no real theological consequences whatsoever aside from reducing some ancient creation stories to the status of fable - the same status they previously held for some two thousand years.

[Chaz]

MUQ wrote:

8. So either these religious scientists do not really know what is religion or what is BTOE or just play innocent.

Typical "see no evil" argument. "No religious people accept evolution, except for those that do - but they they're not REALLY religious because I say so."

It's a very childish argument, MUQ. You should grow out of it.

MUQ wrote:

Now coming to your second question
B. Believing in evolution should not change your philosophical outlook.
1. This is also explained in my above reply. BTOE is no longer a scientific quest to find out how the life proliferated in the billions of years since the first cell was formed.

Bull.

MUQ wrote:

2. It has “decided” that Creator had no hand on it. Even if He had… they have found no “Evidence” of it.

A "creator" has nothing to do with it WHATSOEVER. It neither implies NOR denies the existence or hand of a creator.

Honestly, are you so averse to facts coming to light that DON'T involve God? Why don't you go and complain about gravitational theory and why it "declares" that the Creator had no hand in the formation of the planets?

MUQ wrote:

3. So if you are die=hard supporter of BTOE, you cannot be a true religious person and the vice versa is also true.

As said before, just a way for you to avoid confronting the truth: to deny it.

MUQ wrote:

4. The only road open for you is to behave like a hypocrite, pay lip service to God and religion and let your heart be with this Atheist philosophy of BTOE.
5. I am sorry to say that most of our correspondents on this thread are example of what I have written. They say Science and religion should be separate. They say, religion is your personal outlook, what it has to do in day to day life and statements like that.
6. Those who oppose them are branded as ignorant, barbaric, fundamentalists, fools and all such names.

Because they most often are: like you. You clearly have very little understanding of the actual implications and purpose of science, and a complete inability to accept any facts that contradict your religious viewpoints. You are, by any stretch of the imagination, an ignorant, fundamentalist fool.

You're proof that we're right: that the ONLY objections to evolution DON'T come from facts or science, but people who hold their beliefs over facts. Sorry.

[Chimney]

MUQ wrote:

1486 Wrong. Many people who accept evolution, including scientists, are religious.
What's more, accepting evolution does not alter nor diminish anyone's philosophical beliefs. Frankly, I think your statement that all people who accept evolution share a singular belief is incredibly and obviously stupid To: Chaz
You have posed two questions in your reply:
A. Many of those scientists who accept evolution are scientists and
B. Believing in evolution should not change your philosophical outlook.
Both of these are based on poor understanding of real issues involved and your lack of depth of knowledge about religion or this BTOE, let me clarify both.
A. Many “religious” scientists also accept evolution:
1. In our present society “religion” is just a sort of label. If your are named in a certain way, and perform some rituals, then you are a religious person.
2. However the real purpose of religion is to accept divine guidance that came thru revelation on true prophets of God and live your life accordingly.
3. As per religion, this human life is a test, and we are accountable to our creator for the way we have spent our life on this earth. Our life is not just a coincidence or an idle sport or just in vain.
4. Any one who is “religious” in true sense, will immediately know that where this belief in BTOE is taking him. By believing that humans evolved out of a single cell creature., all by themselves would negate all concept of God, revelation, purpose of life and accountability etc.
5. But so called religious scientist do not ponder on this matter carefully or they think it is of no real importance.
6. Like any diversion from a straight road, the separation between the two is very less in the beginning, but as the two roads progress, the separation gets on increasing.
7. In the days of Darwin, when his TOE was a nascent, the separation between religion and TOE was not that much, but after 150 years, his TOE has been hijacked by Atheists and Materialists and converted into BTOE, the separation between religion and BTOE has become very large.
8. So either these religious scientists do not really know what is religion or what is BTOE or just play innocent.
Now coming to your second question
B. Believing in evolution should not change your philosophical outlook.
1. This is also explained in my above reply. BTOE is no longer a scientific quest to find out how the life proliferated in the billions of years since the first cell was formed.
2. It has “decided” that Creator had no hand on it. Even if He had… they have found no “Evidence” of it.
3. So if you are die=hard supporter of BTOE, you cannot be a true religious person and the vice versa is also true.
4. The only road open for you is to behave like a hypocrite, pay lip service to God and religion and let your heart be with this Atheist philosophy of BTOE.
5. I am sorry to say that most of our correspondents on this thread are example of what I have written. They say Science and religion should be separate. They say, religion is your personal outlook, what it has to do in day to day life and statements like that.
6. Those who oppose them are branded as ignorant, barbaric, fundamentalists, fools and all such names.

MUQ.

You start with an unsupported certainty: "BTOE is atheistic" and attempt to support it by claiming that religious people who support BTOE cannot REALLY be religious!

Just like another unsupported certainty of yours: "Everything in Quran agrees with science" and attempt to support it by saying that if a science like BTOE disagrees with it, then BTOE cannot be science.

Why is it so impossible for you to see how upside down and backwards your "logic" is? You do not use facts to reach a conclusion - you start with the conclusion and try to change the facts to support that conclusion.

Again: explaining the lack of Nobel prizes in your Muslim community.

[MUQ]

What caused the destruction of WTC Towers on 9/11 Part-4

4. Arden Bement, the metallurgist and expert on fuels and materials who was nominated as director of NIST by President George W. Bush in October 2001, was former deputy secretary of defense, former director of DARPA’s office of materials science, and former executive at TRW.

Of course, DOD and DARPA are both leaders in the production and use of nano-thermites (Amptiac 2002, DOD 2005). And military and aerospace contractor TRW has had a long collaboration with NASA laboratories in the development of energetic materials that are components of advanced propellants, like nano-gelled explosive materials (NASA 2001). TRW Aeronautics also made fireproof composites and high performance elastomer formulations, and worked with NASA to make energetic aerogels.

Additionally, Bement was a professor at Purdue and MIT. Purdue has a thriving program for nano-thermites (Son 2008). And interestingly, at MIT’s Institute for Soldier Nanotechnology, we find Martin Z. Bazant, son of notable “conspiracy debunker” Zdenek P. Bazant (MIT 2008), who does research on granular flows, and the electrochemical interactions of silicon. Zdenek P. Bazant is interested in nanocomposites as well (Northwestern 2008), and how they relate to naval warfare (ONR 2008). MIT was represented at nano-energetics conferences as early as 1998 (Gordon 1998).

Bement was also a director at both Battelle and the Lord Corporation. Battelle (where the anthrax was made) is an organization of “experts in fundamental technologies from the five National Laboratories we manage or co-manage for the US DOE.” Battelle advertises their specialization in nanocomposite coatings (Battelle 2008). The Lord Corporation also makes high-tech coatings for military applications (Lord 2008).

In 1999, Lord Corp was working with the Army and NASA on “advanced polymer composites, advanced metals, and multifunctional materials”(Army 1999).

[MUQ]

What caused the destruction of WTC Towers on 9/11 Part-4A

5.Hratch Semerjian, long-time director of NIST’s chemical division, was promoted to acting director of NIST in November 2004, and took over the WTC investigation until the completion of the report on the towers. Semerjian is closely linked to former NIST employee Michael Zachariah, perhaps the world’s most prominent expert on nano-thermites (Zachariah 2008). In fact, Semerjian and Zachariah co-authored ten papers that focus on nano-particles made of silica, ceramics and refractory particles. Zachariah was a major player in the Defense University Research Initiative on Nanotechnology (DURINT), a groundbreaking research effort for nano-thermites.

6.NIST has a long-standing partnership with NASA for the development of new nano-thermites and other nano-technological materials. In fact, Michael Zachariah coordinates this partnership (CNMM 2008).

7.In 2003, two years before the NIST WTC report was issued, the University of Maryland College Park (UMCP) and NIST signed a memorandum of understanding to develop nano-technologies like nano-thermites (NIST 2003). Together, NIST and UMCP have done much work on nano-thermites (NM 2008).

8.NIST has their own Center for Nanoscale Science and Technology (CNST 2008). Additionally, NIST’s Reactive Flows Group did research on nanostructured materials and high temperature reactions in the mid-nineties (NRFG 1996).

9.Richard Gann, who did the final editing of the NIST WTC report, managed a project called “Next-Generation Fire Suppression Technology Program”, both before and after 9/11. Andrzej Miziolek, another of the world’s leading experts on nano-thermites (Amptiac 2002), is the author of “Defense Applications of Nanomaterials”, and also worked on Richard Gann’s fire suppression project (Gann 2002). Gann’s project was sponsored by DOD’s Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP), an organization that sponsored a number of LLNL’s nano-thermite projects (Simpson 2002, Gash et al 2003).

10.As part of the Federal Laboratory Consortium for Technology Transfer, NIST partners with the Naval Surface Warfare Center at Indian Head (NSWC-IH) on Chemical Science and Technology (FLCTT 2008). NSWC-IH is probably the most prominent US center for nano-thermite technology (NSWC 2008). In 1999, Jan Puszynski, a scientist working for the DURINT program, helped NSWC-IH design a pilot plant to produce nano-size aluminum powder. It was reported that “At that time, this was [the] only reliable source of aluminum nanopowders in the United States”(SDSMT 2001), however, private companies like Argonide and Technanogy were also known to have such capabilities.

Among an interesting group of contractors that NSWC-IH hired in 1999 were SAIC, Applied Ordnance, Battelle, Booz Allen Hamilton, Mantech, Titan, Pacific Scientific Energetic (see below), and R Stresau Laboratories for “demolition materials”(NSWC 2000).
A tragic coincidence left William Caswell, an employee of NSWC-IH, dead on the plane said to have hit the Pentagon (Flight 77). He had for many years worked on “deep-black” projects at NSWC-IH (Leaf 2007).
(Contd.)

[Lil Ticked]

FUQ wrote:

What caused the destruction of WTC Towers on 9/11 Part-4A

You do realize that no one actually reads these , right?

[Chimney]

MUQ wrote:

1.“Someone” is trying to educate me about these protein molecules, saying that these are just a long string of Amino acids and nothing else!!

Correct.

Does he want to say that any combination of Amino Acids becomes a protein? If that was the case, then there was no problem…
but the problem is that not every combination of Amino Acids is a protein….they have to be certain specific combinations of certain specific polarity!!

Ahh, a different point. Proteins found in living systems are indeed all chirally pure, "left handed".

Now, if you are a dimwitted person, you will say this is sure evidence that "Goddidit!" and that is the only possible explanation.

On the other hand, if you are a rational, problem solving scientist, you will see chiral purity as evidence that a selection factor was at work. For example, chirally pure proteins tend to have more rigid structures than chirally mixed proteins. It is therefore quite possible that early life used mixed versions but pure versions were naturally selected. Another possibility would be that any slight chiral imbalance would lead to a cascade of selection favouring one over the other. These conjectures may lead to testable hypothesis and eventually a theory of chirality in living systems.

In the West (and these days China etc. too), researchers will be working on this issue and will eventually come up with a rational answer while MUQ's "Muslim scientists" blabber on about God.

The real scientists will get the Nobel prize while the "Muslim scientists" will continue their 400 year unbroken record of adding zero to the sum of human knowledge.

2. As to his comment that opinion is divided between “peers, Scientists and BTOE followers” that if indeed there is a Purpose, Design or Creator behind all this….speaks more than these words can convey.

Peers = scientists
BTOE followers = scientists

As we would expect, on the question of BTOE, with its overwhelming evidence in support and zero evidence against, there is a 99.9% agreement among scientists. With its zero evidence, there is a wide range of opinions on religion, again as one would expect.

.. no one can even say that all these Nobel Prize Winners were really successful and fulfilled the mission of their lives.

hahahahahaha

5. Nobel Prize and all such prizes are only recognition by humans that they did some thing remarkable in their lives.

Correct.

[Drew Smith]

Chimney wrote:

MUQ.
You start with an unsupported certainty: "BTOE is atheistic" and attempt to support it by claiming that religious people who support BTOE cannot REALLY be religious!

Yup, MUQ has committed the "No True Scotsman" logical fallacy. In so doing, he has to pretend that over 12,000 U.S.*Christian clergy*(who fit the very idea of "religious people") have not signed a public statement indicating their acceptance of the theory of evolution.

[SupaAFC]

MUQ wrote:

What caused the destruction of WTC Towers on 9/11 Part-4
4. Arden Bement, the metallurgist and expert on fuels and materials who was nominated as director of NIST by President George W. Bush in October 2001, was former deputy secretary of defense, former director of DARPA’s office of materials science, and former executive at TRW.
Of course, DOD and DARPA are both leaders in the production and use of nano-thermites (Amptiac 2002, DOD 2005). And military and aerospace contractor TRW has had a long collaboration with NASA laboratories in the development of energetic materials that are components of advanced propellants, like nano-gelled explosive materials (NASA 2001). TRW Aeronautics also made fireproof composites and high performance elastomer formulations, and worked with NASA to make energetic aerogels.
Additionally, Bement was a professor at Purdue and MIT. Purdue has a thriving program for nano-thermites (Son 2008). And interestingly, at MIT’s Institute for Soldier Nanotechnology, we find Martin Z. Bazant, son of notable “conspiracy debunker” Zdenek P. Bazant (MIT 2008), who does research on granular flows, and the electrochemical interactions of silicon. Zdenek P. Bazant is interested in nanocomposites as well (Northwestern 2008), and how they relate to naval warfare (ONR 2008). MIT was represented at nano-energetics conferences as early as 1998 (Gordon 1998).
Bement was also a director at both Battelle and the Lord Corporation. Battelle (where the anthrax was made) is an organization of “experts in fundamental technologies from the five National Laboratories we manage or co-manage for the US DOE.” Battelle advertises their specialization in nanocomposite coatings (Battelle 2008). The Lord Corporation also makes high-tech coatings for military applications (Lord 2008).
In 1999, Lord Corp was working with the Army and NASA on “advanced polymer composites, advanced metals, and multifunctional materials”(Army 1999).

The amount of sh!t you speak is unreal.

To paraphrase Stan Marsh: "What do you mean who caused 9/11? A bunch of pissed-off Muslims of course."