athiests and agnostics know more about religion than churchgoers

#451
#451
I don't understand the rest of your question.


What do you think all of those amazing scientists you found at dissentfromdarwin or whatever do all day?
 
#452
#452
Why does virtually everything we pull from the ground or learn about genetics point towards evolution? Why don't we ever find a rat on the same strata as a trilobite?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#453
#453
VolBurgers said:
That's not oft-stated. I've never heard anyone that has a 10th grade level understanding of science say anything like that.

You're making that up.

You were so quick to respond earlier I thin you may have missed something important.
Click to expand...

So, you agree that the theory of evolution - as a whole, in its entirety - remains in need of rigorous scientific study? Is that correct?

No - I didn't miss it. He stated that the specifics needed further investigation...again, presupposing that the theory itself is true, with only the details requiring further investigation.

Forgive my ignorant and wholly uneducated allegory, but simple-minded folk such as myself need them:

An evolutionist tells me that he wants to examine how an elephant entered the house and cooked General Tso's chicken. I ask what lead him to believe that such was the work of an elephant. While enjoying some delicious stir-fry, he tells me that not having seen who cooked it, and as he saw a circus train pass earlier that day - it must be an elephant. Being so certain of his theory, he immediately suggests that we study the musculature and articulation of the elephant's trunk, thereby enabling us to better exhibit how such is entirely possible. Hearing this, I ask what other possibilities he might be willing to explore or consider. Being far more intelligent than I, he assures me that he has thought of - and effectively refuted - all other possible explanations. When asked what other physical evidence could be produced to support his claim, he assures me that his theory must be predicated on the discovery of elephant tracks leading into the house. In agreement, we go to examine the surrounding yard for them, together. Despite our sincere efforts, going to the railroad tracks and beyond, none are found. I again ask if its possible that other alternatives should now be explored. He asserts that because he is certain that an elephant must have done it, that there must be tracks somewhere - and that their absence isn't indicative of his possibly erroneous hypothesis, but instead, only means that we haven't looked either long or far enough to have found them. Instead, he produces other proof - that a circus train had passed, the full plate of stir-fry, etc. - all undoubtedly true. I say that I still believe the finding of elephant tracks to be a critical element in proving his hypothesis. Being far smarter than I, he chides me for being naive, and begins to ask me for proof of how that stir-fry cooked on its own, without the aide of an elephant's intervention. Failing this standard, he demands that we are only left with the option of believing the elephant hypothesis true. I eat his stir-fry, flip him a bird, and laugh as he soothes himself by calling ME the stupid one for demanding to see that proof which he himself insisted must exist. Later, we go have a beer, admitting that we may never really know to an absolute certainty. And that's probably the most honest thing we can each agree on.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#454
#454
VolBurgers said:
The theory of evolution has to nothing to do with the origin of life.
Click to expand...

Does someone from the other side if this debate want to speak to this statement?

Out of respect for your opinions, though divergent from my own, I'll defer.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#455
#455
I don't know why you think other alternatives aren't explored.

I'll ask again, what do you think those brilliant scientists you found at dissentfromdarwin do all day?

Stare at bananas?
 
#456
#456
Some points that need to be made based on some posts since my last one:

- There are mountains upon mountains of evidence pointing toward a story predicated upon evolutionary progression for life on this planet. Presupposing all such evidence is wrong is intellectually dishonest at best, flat out denial at worst. Let it be noted, the theory in and of itself does not rule out a metaphysical being of some sort. It does, however, rule out any stories of creation explained by all of our current world religions. The single act creation stories (desinger explanations included) are all but fariy tails at this point.

- Of course there will be dissent among scientists as to the specifics of the theory (read randomness and genetic mutations). The overarching theory itself, though, is just about as solid as it gets. Take gravitation for example. This is a relatively new concept and we actually know little about it. We know it exists though. Newton gave us a pretty good first chapter, Einstein followed it up with a great encore. Somebody else will inevitably discover something better. Same with evolution. Darwin did a pretty good job. The discovery of DNA and genetic mutation built on this theory. Inevitably somebody else will discover something even better. Just because it isn't completely known how the theory works right now, doesn't mean we discount the bigger story. Like I said earlier, it would take some pretty significant evidence to say evolution is absolutely wrong.

- Yes, I meant any such designer is the underachiever. If this whole meanignless charade was designed from the beginning, then it was designed to be extremely harsh to life surving for extended periods of time, and the whole planet is destined to be engulfed by the life giveing mechanism supporting before all is said and done. This is some design isn't it? We are one asteroid or supervirus away from being completely annihilated. Greater than 90%...90%!!!...of all life ever on this planet is now gone.

- The universe is absolutely random. Stars explode everyday, there is no rhyme or reason to when and were planets and supernovas happen. It is what it is. There is a wealth of knowledge lurking out there just waiting to be discovered. Saying that because we don't know such things right now at this particular point that we can't say definitively the univers is actually random is wrong. Why is this meaningless state we live in so hard to understand? I would say from lack of trying, for the most part. Everybody living in Tokyo right now is completely unaware I even exist. They go about there day just fine. When I die, this will not change. I am completely meaningless to them. Why is it so hard to extrapolate that out to when I die? Life will go on after I am gone in just the same way it has when somebody living 500 years ago died. There simply doesn't have to be meaning assigned to any of this. Living under the mode of trying to gain hapiness and joy everyday should be good enough. Once this is accepted, it is not only liberating, but it makes this life here and now that much more precious.

- Evolutionary theory and abiogenesis (origin of life) are two completely different areas. One deals with how life began, which nobody has a good explanation for (including the theocrats and ID yahoos)...the other deals with how life pregressed after it started. Evolutionary thoery doesn't even begin to address how life began. It addresses how it progressed since then.

I would just like to say, too, that I feel a charge of "atheists are arrogant" type charge hiding in the near future, ready to pounce on me. Before such charge is leveled, it the discussion needs to be put in perspective. The religious often hail their humility, but, at the drop of hat, will make claims that intrude upon the magistra of scientific discourse. When one claims a designer, or a creator, or a God, or how the universe came into being...they are not just professing a belief....they are making tacit claims about biology, cosmology, etc...and pretending to know things they manifestly do not know. Science...contrary to popular belief...does not do this. All it does is say, according the evidence we have in front of us, this is the best we can come up with now. The claims of the intelligent designers, or people who want to claim evolutionary theory is weakly supported, is practicing arrogance of the first order.
 
Last edited:
#458
#458
Maybe people just overlook the fact that the Creator in His infinite wisdom created life of all kinds that are able to evolve and adapt in order perpetuate an endless chain of living organisms.
 
#459
#459
GVF said:
Maybe people just overlook the fact that the Creator in His infinite wisdom created life of all kinds that are able to evolve and adapt in order perpetuate an endless chain of living organisms.
Click to expand...

Except it isn't endless. And the life process, to get to where we are today, was unfanthomly cruel and capricious.
 
#460
#460
Tenacious D said:
How do you know you're not correct?

What do the origins of our world have to do with your atheism? Here's a hint: if you don't believe in the existence of God, strike "God" from your list of potemtial originations. Which leads back to my original question.

What does your personality have to do with anything?

You're statement continues to be illogical, but I appreciated how you said it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I know I (and anyone else trying to explain the origins of life) have no concrete proof of HOW the organisms on this planet came to be. It is why this whole argument revolves around what one BELIEVES.

There's no lack of logic in what I'm saying... you just appear to have your head up the wrong place.

MY statement on my character was in response to why I don't consider religious people morons. Anyone who thinks a person is a moron simply because of their beliefs is, in my opinion, a smug jerk.
 
#461
#461
rjd970 said:
Science...contrary to popular belief...does not do this. All it does is say, according the evidence we have in front of us, this is the best we can come up with now.
Click to expand...

Are you saying you're grasping at straws?

I believe God has a sense of humor and he's laughing a little at both sides.

That's just me.
 
#466
#466
DinkinFlicka said:
I know I (and anyone else trying to explain the origins of life) have no concrete proof of HOW the organisms on this planet came to be. It is why this whole argument revolves around what one BELIEVES.

There's no lack of logic in what I'm saying... you just appear to have your head up the wrong place.

MY statement on my character was in response to why I don't consider religious people morons. Anyone who thinks a person is a moron simply because of their beliefs is, in my opinion, a smug jerk.
Click to expand...

We view the debate differently but our I agree with this totally.
 
#467
#467
IPorange said:
Why does virtually everything we pull from the ground or learn about genetics point towards evolution? Why don't we ever find a rat on the same strata as a trilobite?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I am sure there's a snappy comeback to this, I just would like to hear it.
 
#468
#468
IPorange said:
I am sure there's a snappy comeback to this, I just would like to hear it.
Click to expand...

It's all part of the creator's intelligent design. Logic and reason don't have to apply.

...sheesh. Some people never learn. :dance:
 
#472
#472
I have a friend who was Christian for the first 40 years of his life. We aren't really friends anymore, and it's because he went atheist, became extremely bitter and hateful in general. I consider myself borderline agnostic, so it's not the fact that he is atheist that we aren't friends. He has spent the last 4 years of his life studying religion intensely. To me, atheism is just another religion. You study it. You identify yourself with other atheists. It requires faith. Etc. How can you say there is no God if you haven't seen that there is no God. It requires some faith to say "there is no God."
 
Last edited:
#473
#473
rjd970 said:
It's all part of the creator's intelligent design. Logic and reason don't have to apply.

...sheesh. Some people never learn. :dance:
Click to expand...

The funny thing is ID and evolution both require faith. Evolution doesn't explain everything and general scientific consensus has been wrong a few times. If evolution explains existence where do bats come from? A flying mammal is an evolutionary oddity. There is no evidence of half bats...at all.
 
#474
#474
nbakerld said:
I have a friend who was Christian for the first 40 years of his life. We aren't really friends anymore, and it's because he went atheist, became extremely bitter and hateful in general. I consider myself borderline agnostic, so it's not the fact that he is atheist that we aren't friends. He has spent the last 4 years of his life studying religion intensely. To me, atheism is just another religion. You study it. It requires faith. How can you say there is no God if you haven't seen that there is no God. It requires some faith to say "there is no God." You identify yourself with other atheists. Etc.
Click to expand...

No. It doesn't take any more faith to only believe in positivisms than it takes for you to believe there isn't a pod of giant space whales swimming around the back side of the moon.

I have five friends that I am very close to, but they are not close to each other. Only one of them is an atheist. Two go to church every Sunday. Your life experiences with atheism are not mine.
 
#475
#475
IPorange said:
No. It doesn't take any more faith to only believe in positivisms than it takes for you to believe there isn't a pod of giant space whales swimming around the back side of the moon.

I have five friends that I am very close to, but they are not close to each other. Only one of them is an atheist. Two go to church every Sunday. Your life experiences with atheism are not mine.
Click to expand...

Yeah, but you don't study hours and hours to confirm that there is no whale on the back side of the moon. Faith inspires action. Atheists study religion because they want to confirm what they believe about it...that it's false.

And I wasn't trying to generalize all atheists. I was just talking about how obsessive this guy became over studying religion. The thread is about religious knowledge, so I thought it tied in.
 
Last edited:
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top