To me that doesn`t make much sense. I cant really bring myself to
believe that[logically]. I do not believe we evolved in the conventional
sense.
I too can find bones, randomly date it to +-a couple hundred thousand
years, and force it to fit some theory. Why would you so readily adhere
and trust such pseudoscience with its questionable methods of testing
and evaluations and conclusions?
You told us you believed in evolution. Guess that was a slight exaggeration on your part? And again, it's funny that you consider radiometric dating a "random" pseudo-science when it comes to evolution, yet you link me to sites that use this same pseudoscience to "prove" Noah's flood.
Quote:
Science and its theories are changing almost all the time in certain
fields. Except for immutable laws and such. If for example, 50 years ago
you told me that the universe was eternal, you would have been correct!,
that was the science at the time. So was steady state theory and all
other theories that came and went.
I don't think I'll ever understand you anti-science people. How can you question the effectiveness of the scientific method when you're sitting at your computer typing this out, driving your car to work, using GPS, etc. etc? Evolution is no more in doubt than the "theory" that the earth revolves around the sun. You literally cannot be a biologist today without believing in evolution. It's like being a doctor without believing in germ theory.
Evolution is a fact. It does not go away when somebody thinks of competing theories. Newton's laws of gravitation did not go away once Einstein discovered general relativity, which gave you different equations than Newton's for gravity. The only reason it's called a theory is because it's about the empirical world, where 100% certainty is impossible, unlike in mathematics.
Again, if you feel so certain about all this, why do you not abandon your entire life and start living like a monk if finite actions here on earth lead to infinite rewards in some eternal paradise that nobody can detect? Is Christianity of infinite importance, or of zero importance? You have to pick one or the other. I would like one decent answer to this.
Quote:
Yep, except the biblical God is the only true God and the rest are but
inventions of the human mind.
When you finally figure out why all the other gods are "inventions of the human mind" you can consider yourself demolished by your own logic.
Christianity has withstood over 5000 years of this.
There's a reason intelligent design is forbidden in the classroom - it's pseudoscience with an agenda. The only answers it provides are "god did it". It's an intellectual cop-out. Going by your logic I could also say that animal worship or Hinduism are older and therefore better than Christianity.
I'm not sure you even know what you mean by "this". Evolution withstood 150 years of the scientific method. Nearly all Christians don't systematically subject their own beliefs to scientific scrutiny, and the people who do universally discover that it's full of holes. No, Christianity has not withstood 5000 years of the microscope.
Yeah, I forgot many dont accept Muslims, Christians and Jews as One religion at the base... besides the whole Which son was killed thing... stupid debate, doesnt even matter.
1.You told us you believed in evolution. Guess that was a slight exaggeration on your part? And again, it's funny that you consider radiometric dating a "random" pseudo-science when it comes to evolution, yet you link me to sites that use this same pseudoscience to "prove" Noah's flood. Quote:
2. I don't think I'll ever understand you anti-science people. How can you question the effectiveness of the scientific method when you're sitting at your computer typing this out, driving your car to work, using GPS, etc. etc? Evolution is no more in doubt than the "theory" that the earth revolves around the sun. You literally cannot be a biologist today without believing in evolution. It's like being a doctor without believing in germ theory.
3.Evolution is a fact. It does not go away when somebody thinks of competing theories. Newton's laws of gravitation did not go away once Einstein discovered general relativity, which gave you different equations than Newton's for gravity. The only reason it's called a theory is because it's about the empirical world, where 100% certainty is impossible, unlike in mathematics.
4.Again, if you feel so certain about all this, why do you not abandon your entire life and start living like a monk if finite actions here on earth lead to infinite rewards in some eternal paradise that nobody can detect? Is Christianity of infinite importance, or of zero importance? You have to pick one or the other. I would like one decent answer to this. Quote:
5. When you finally figure out why all the other gods are "inventions of the human mind" you can consider yourself demolished by your own logic.
1. I said to a degree. Did I not say in relation to `man` I considered it deeply flawed and not something I am willing to believe in.
2. If anything, you are anti-science in some of your beliefs. I absolutely love science, but I dont agree that man evolved as you `believe` it. Too many gaps and flaws and requires `jumping to conclusions`.You mad? "It's not actually possible to prove ancestry" Ian Tattersall (1995), "The Fossil Trail: How we know what we think we know about human evolution", Oxford University Press: New York p:169
3. No it isn`t. Facts aren`t all there for human evolution. Sorry.
4. Infinite importance. Being a monk would be almost a method of avoidance. I know in this matrix of a reality I was created for purposes and interactions within this interconnected scope. The result of decisions and choices define the soul/being. Indeed I can forfeit meaningless goals and selfish desires in this life which would be advantageous.
The finite nature of this universe(which the bible told of long before science discovered) tells us that things are coming to an end, that the initial purposes and intent for this universe is fleeting. You can believe in nothingness hereafter, but I believe that the creator will make everything anew as the bible mentions. The matrix of choice will be over, and its concluding consequence is of finality.
5. Satan, by far the most cunning and deceptive being, has arranged religions to help him accomplish his purposes of beating people down and keeping them from interrupting his plans. Satan has arranged religions to have people seeking meaningless identities rather than the only meaningful identity, to become a member of the family of God, an adopted son or daughter of God Almighty.
Unlike God, Satan would love people to be ignorant of his existence. Remember 3 dimensional beings we are, in both existence and observatory perception.
Basically, Satan has blinders on everyone. Or he doesn`t exist and the bible is 100% fake. Which is what you would believe.
There is no use in arguing!!!!!! Some people believe in science some people believe in extraterrestrial life creating everything in the universe (Yes GOD or various gods) One thing is for certain.. No matter how hard humanity tries we as a species will never full understand fully how our universe works. We can guess, we could label things and put things into a perspective that in our minds we could rationally understand... however we will never know it all.
There is no use in arguing!!!!!! Some people believe in science some people believe in extraterrestrial life creating everything in the universe (Yes GOD or various gods) One thing is for certain.. No matter how hard humanity tries we as a species will never full understand fully how our universe works. We can guess, we could label things and put things into a perspective that in our minds we could rationally understand... however we will never know it all.
Doesn't mean we should throw our hands up in the air and say "I give up. I have no idea how this works. Let's just say god did it."
1. I said to a degree. Did I not say in relation to `man` I considered it deeply flawed and not something I am willing to believe in.
Why not "man"? What makes us so different from all other animals? We are made of flesh & bone, we die, and we have nearly identical DNA base pairs. Some other christians I've talked to also like to claim that there is no heaven/hell for animals. Again, why the heck not? Why are humans so special? This whole "I'm special" nonsense is getting a bit arrogant don't you think?
Quote:
2. If anything, you are anti-science in some of your beliefs. I absolutely love science, but I dont agree that man evolved as you `believe` it. Too many gaps and flaws and requires `jumping to conclusions`.You mad?
The fossil record? The multiple proofs from DNA? Vestigial organs? The complete working theory of how evolution works still has some gaps, but human evolution itself is a fact at this point. Again, that doesn't imply 100% certainty. It's a fact that the planets revolve around the sun, but for all we know we could be living in a computer simulation and everyone is wrong. So what's the point of saying "It's not actually possible to prove ancestry"? Obviously. And yet, the people that deny that the planets revolve around the sun are what we call deluded.
Richard Dawkins sums up this two-faced belief in both science & religion:
“I mean the most extreme case is the geologist Kurt Wise, who has a PhD in Geology from Harvard and said “If all the evidence in the universe pointed towards an old Earth, I would be the first to admit it but I would still be a young Earth creationist because that is what Holy scripture teaches me”. You cannot argue with a mind like that. A mind like that, it seems to me is, well, a disgrace to the Human species.”
He's way too harsh when he says "disgrace to the human species" but it is definitely a prime example of what a closed mind looks like.
If there was a designer, it is safe to say he's a moron.
1) The stupidity of the human lung system. Why mix oxygenated with deoxygenated air, instead of just having a one-way tube like birds?
2) The flaws of human pregnancy. Countless people have died because God failed to take into account what happens if the baby's head is bigger than the pelvic opening.
3) The bible says that God formed us in the womb. If that's the case, who is to blame for congenital defects? God singlehandedly aborts more children than abortionists could ever hope to.
4) Plants are green and not black, even though black plants would absorb more light energy.
5) Worst of all: "Female orgasm is usually produced only by the direct stimulation of the clitoris. The clitoris is not typically stimulated during sexual intercourse."
God fails again. To quote Carlin, "in any decently run universe, he'd be out on his all-powerful ass a long time ago."
4. Infinite importance. Being a monk would be almost a method of avoidance. I know in this matrix of a reality I was created for purposes and interactions within this interconnected scope. The result of decisions and choices define the soul/being. Indeed I can forfeit meaningless goals and selfish desires in this life which would be advantageous.
The finite nature of this universe(which the bible told of long before science discovered) tells us that things are coming to an end, that the initial purposes and intent for this universe is fleeting. You can believe in nothingness hereafter, but I believe that the creator will make everything anew as the bible mentions. The matrix of choice will be over, and its concluding consequence is of finality.
So according to you, being a monk and devoting yourself fully to Christianity is a method of....avoiding Christianity. Great answer. This still doesn't address why you simply don't do these things which would be so advantageous in your infinite afterlife. You are literally wasting countless aeons of future celestial pleasure with each keystroke. I simply don't get the logic in it, but whatever.
Quote:
The finite nature of this universe(which the bible told of long before science discovered)
All things die. Not exactly a huge leap of logic there. This must be one of the brilliant "prophecies" of the bible that I'm supposed to be so impressed by and which I keep hearing so much about. There's also no proof that this universe ever truly "ends," but I could rant about the scientific inadequacies of the bible all day long.
Quote:
5. Satan, by far the most cunning and deceptive being, has arranged religions to help him accomplish his purposes of beating people down and keeping them from interrupting his plans. Satan has arranged religions to have people seeking meaningless identities rather than the only meaningful identity, to become a member of the family of God, an adopted son or daughter of God Almighty.
Unlike God, Satan would love people to be ignorant of his existence. Remember 3 dimensional beings we are, in both existence and observatory perception.
Basically, Satan has blinders on everyone. Or he doesn`t exist and the bible is 100% fake. Which is what you would believe.
Meanwhile, in ancient Scandinavia:
"Odin created the world from the dead body of Ymir, father of the Frost Giants. The first man and woman were sweated out of Ymir's left underarm. All these "fossils" and "carbon dating" are tricks played by Loki and the Dark Elves of Svartalfaheim."
You have to simply marvel at the futility of it all when you realize that somewhere out there on this planet there is a person with as strong of a conviction as yours, yet with a belief diametrically opposite to yours. Try stepping out of your own shoes for a second.
There is no use in arguing!!!!!! Some people believe in science some people believe in extraterrestrial life creating everything in the universe (Yes GOD or various gods) One thing is for certain.. No matter how hard humanity tries we as a species will never full understand fully how our universe works. We can guess, we could label things and put things into a perspective that in our minds we could rationally understand... however we will never know it all.
Who doesn't believe in science? Do you believe that supernatural processes are what cause your computer to work, or for cold medicine to get rid of your congestion, or for pens to come in packs of 200 instead of being handcrafted individually? The problem is that people who deny the scientific understanding of physics, geology and biology will freely and hypocritically accept, without any understanding whatsoever, all the other sciences. Metallurgy? Great! Materials engineering? Sure thing! Aeronautics? Book me a flight! But then you get to biology, geology and physics. Certain details get cherrypicked, and others get wholeheartedly denied. Biology has a working model of the explanation of biodiversity, which happens to be the foundation of all biological study, and it's one of the simplest assertions of any science:
1) Offspring are not identical to their parents.
2) Everything dies.
Now, since evolution theory is the basis of modern biology, you could make an argument that all of biology is flawed if you believe evolution is flawed. HOWEVER, then you get to the whole age-of-the-universe dilemma. You don't get to argue against the foundations of physics with that one. You have to deny a fairly non-fundamental subject in physics, radioactive decay.
And besides ALL of this, simply by accepting the scientific method as it pertains to any science, you accept the scientific method as it pertains to all sciences. If you think science can explain why your glasses allow you to see(optics), you necessarily believe the carbon-dating process. Science is not a body of work, it is a process, and it is the same process for all scientific studies. Have a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, accept the results.
Of course YOU and other like-minded individuals wouldn't understand; just like how many religious individuals don't comprehend quantum mechanics and relativity, let alone Newtonian physics and calculus, or even simple algebra. The combination of your genetics and environmental affects have culminated in an individual (YOU) that cannot comprehend the difference between scientific fact/evidence and make-believe religious stories. You obviously do not understand the evolution theory or the methods and experiments used to test the theory; as such, you are a liar, which is probably a sin in your religion. But you conveniently ignore that, right? Moreover, religious people are quite prideful (another sin?) in believing that they know the truth. As such, you keep ignoring the flaws in religious stories and/or conveniently twist the meanings of religious passages the way a politician plays with words. You have "the forked tongue of a serpent", not that there's anything wrong with snakes or reptiles, unless you believe in that genesis story or a follower of David Ickes. The evolution theory is the most likely explanation for the diversity of life because it has withstood so much methodical scrutiny.
Let's talking about the flaws in the belief of your god. Where are the original ten commandments, supposedly made by that god? Where is the boat that god supposedly told a neolithic human to engineer? Where is the staff that god supposedly magically turned into a snake? Where is the eden garden? Where is the magical burning talking bush? Where is Ezekiel's wheel? Where are Joseph Smith's golden tablets? Do you seriously believe the earth and all life on it were created in 7 days (168 hours)? If you like democracy, why did polytheist pagan Greeks come up with democracy? Why has Buddhism lasted 2600 years (600 years more than christianity)? Why has Vedism lasted 3500 years (1500 years more than christianity)? Why does an omnipotent god need human (that have to be contacted by a bureaucracy of angles and have to pass examinations) to spread religion through conquest and forced conversions? Why doesn't your bible explain why the sun emits light, why gravity exists, or why humans can survive explsure to alpha radiation, but not gamma radiation?
Of course YOU and other like-minded individuals wouldn't understand; just like how many religious individuals don't comprehend quantum mechanics and relativity, let alone Newtonian physics and calculus, or even simple algebra. The combination of your genetics and environmental affects have culminated in an individual (YOU) that cannot comprehend the difference between scientific fact/evidence and make-believe religious stories.
Bad example, there are plenty of people from every group who don't understand these things, including Atheists/Evolutionists/Brights or whatever they might like to be called these days. All that statement shows is that you are an Elitist.
Polls and studies actually do show that non-religious people understand science far better than religious people; in fact, most physicists and other scientists are not religious. Non-religious people also know more about the various religions than religious people. The only elitism is religious people claiming that their view of the universe is the only truth, especially when they lack verifiable evidence to support their claim. The same thing happens with conspiracy hypothesists. When science invalidates their arguments, somehow scientists are part of a conspiracy against religion.
There's a definite correlation between physicists and other scientists and their "nonreligiousness". There's also data to support that genetics and environmental factors influence the growth and development of the brain, which influences individual behaviors and personalities, including thought patterns, perception of their surroundings, and preferences to religion.
Agreed, I hate the idea that we were created by an all mighty being under 7 days 5000 years ago. Its much more elegant and beautifully that we were created under 3 billion+ years by natural selection.
Polls and studies actually do show that non-religious people understand science far better than religious people; in fact, most physicists and other scientists are not religious. Non-religious people also know more about the various religions than religious people. The only elitism is religious people claiming that their view of the universe is the only truth, especially when they lack verifiable evidence to support their claim. The same thing happens with conspiracy hypothesists. When science invalidates their arguments, somehow scientists are part of a conspiracy against religion.
There's a definite correlation between physicists and other scientists and their "nonreligiousness". There's also data to support that genetics and environmental factors influence the growth and development of the brain, which influences individual behaviors and personalities, including thought patterns, perception of their surroundings, and preferences to religion.
The data may indicate that to some extent, but it is ridiculous to lump everyone into one group of stupidity. I've seen some physicists and mathematicians that enjoyed doing the whole Knight Cosplay thing, had drinking problems, and one of them even made alcohol to sell at ridiculous profit. Isn't really fair for me to assume anything about the rest of their ilk from that. One of the most ridiculously bright (and annoyingly happy) guys I knew was a devout Muslim, 4 year physics/CS degree at age 17 or something. Fair to call all Muslims so bright? Of course not.
Point being, please don't assume the entire lot of people with any inkling towards religion are ALWAYS as dumb as rocks. This just isn't true. Enjoy high-fiving with the others though based on someone else's research. Which you fail to link quite often, I might add.
Anyways, unlike the image, I am actually able to sleep when someone is wrong on the internet, mostly up from the evilness of item editing... Sure there will be more fun replies on this tomorrow.
"All the world’s major religions, with their emphasis on love, compassion, patience, tolerance, and forgiveness can and do promote inner values. But the reality of the world today is that grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate. This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether." - Dalai Lama
1. Something on the planet self-replicated and the result wasn't identical to the original being.
2. That thing died.
3. Repeat with the result for 5 billion years.
Conclusion: PEOPLE.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but elegant theories like this possess the same beauty to me as that of math. Things like Euler's identity(e^(i*pi) = -1), the first equation (1 + 1 = 2), and the proof of the Pythagorean Theorem(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pythag_anim.gif) are all elegant expressions of truth, and that is the source of their beauty for me. You may not think there is beauty in evolution theory, but you can't deny its elegance.
My argument against the elegance of creation theory is that by saying "God created people", you are also direly paraphrasing it. "People" is a very complex subject. In evolution theory, all the stuff in people is handled beforehand, in the "5 billion years" step. For creation, you have to include "God created the brain, the heart, the liver, the bones, the DNA, the organelles, the blood, the mitochondria, the lymph nodes, the gallbladder, the eyes, the appendix(whoops!), the skin, the hair, the teeth, the stomach, the kidneys, the spine, the arteries, the lungs, the muscles..." For ALL of those various parts, if you were to ask someone who believed evolution theory "How did people develop (insert body part here)?", the answer is always "A previous generation of life mutated it and its descendents lived on."
On a mildly related note, did no one check out the series I linked in a previous post? :( It talks about this stuff.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
You told us you believed in evolution. Guess that was a slight exaggeration on your part? And again, it's funny that you consider radiometric dating a "random" pseudo-science when it comes to evolution, yet you link me to sites that use this same pseudoscience to "prove" Noah's flood.
I don't think I'll ever understand you anti-science people. How can you question the effectiveness of the scientific method when you're sitting at your computer typing this out, driving your car to work, using GPS, etc. etc? Evolution is no more in doubt than the "theory" that the earth revolves around the sun. You literally cannot be a biologist today without believing in evolution. It's like being a doctor without believing in germ theory.
Evolution is a fact. It does not go away when somebody thinks of competing theories. Newton's laws of gravitation did not go away once Einstein discovered general relativity, which gave you different equations than Newton's for gravity. The only reason it's called a theory is because it's about the empirical world, where 100% certainty is impossible, unlike in mathematics.
Again, if you feel so certain about all this, why do you not abandon your entire life and start living like a monk if finite actions here on earth lead to infinite rewards in some eternal paradise that nobody can detect? Is Christianity of infinite importance, or of zero importance? You have to pick one or the other. I would like one decent answer to this.
When you finally figure out why all the other gods are "inventions of the human mind" you can consider yourself demolished by your own logic.
There's a reason intelligent design is forbidden in the classroom - it's pseudoscience with an agenda. The only answers it provides are "god did it". It's an intellectual cop-out. Going by your logic I could also say that animal worship or Hinduism are older and therefore better than Christianity.
@Taintedwisp: Go
I'm not sure you even know what you mean by "this". Evolution withstood 150 years of the scientific method. Nearly all Christians don't systematically subject their own beliefs to scientific scrutiny, and the people who do universally discover that it's full of holes. No, Christianity has not withstood 5000 years of the microscope.
You don't even know your own religion. Why are you even here?
Maybe Taintedwisp refered to abrahamic religions as a whole? ;)
@Leruster: Go
Yeah, I forgot many dont accept Muslims, Christians and Jews as One religion at the base... besides the whole Which son was killed thing... stupid debate, doesnt even matter.
@Taintedwisp: Go
Still, you used term CHRISTIANITY, not the other way around ;)
1. I said to a degree. Did I not say in relation to `man` I considered it deeply flawed and not something I am willing to believe in.
2. If anything, you are anti-science in some of your beliefs. I absolutely love science, but I dont agree that man evolved as you `believe` it. Too many gaps and flaws and requires `jumping to conclusions`.You mad?
"It's not actually possible to prove ancestry" Ian Tattersall (1995), "The Fossil Trail: How we know what we think we know about human evolution", Oxford University Press: New York p:169
3. No it isn`t. Facts aren`t all there for human evolution. Sorry.
4. Infinite importance. Being a monk would be almost a method of avoidance. I know in this matrix of a reality I was created for purposes and interactions within this interconnected scope. The result of decisions and choices define the soul/being. Indeed I can forfeit meaningless goals and selfish desires in this life which would be advantageous.
The finite nature of this universe(which the bible told of long before science discovered) tells us that things are coming to an end, that the initial purposes and intent for this universe is fleeting. You can believe in nothingness hereafter, but I believe that the creator will make everything anew as the bible mentions. The matrix of choice will be over, and its concluding consequence is of finality.
5. Satan, by far the most cunning and deceptive being, has arranged religions to help him accomplish his purposes of beating people down and keeping them from interrupting his plans. Satan has arranged religions to have people seeking meaningless identities rather than the only meaningful identity, to become a member of the family of God, an adopted son or daughter of God Almighty.
Unlike God, Satan would love people to be ignorant of his existence. Remember 3 dimensional beings we are, in both existence and observatory perception.
Basically, Satan has blinders on everyone. Or he doesn`t exist and the bible is 100% fake. Which is what you would believe.
There is no use in arguing!!!!!! Some people believe in science some people believe in extraterrestrial life creating everything in the universe (Yes GOD or various gods) One thing is for certain.. No matter how hard humanity tries we as a species will never full understand fully how our universe works. We can guess, we could label things and put things into a perspective that in our minds we could rationally understand... however we will never know it all.
Doesn't mean we should throw our hands up in the air and say "I give up. I have no idea how this works. Let's just say god did it."
Why not "man"? What makes us so different from all other animals? We are made of flesh & bone, we die, and we have nearly identical DNA base pairs. Some other christians I've talked to also like to claim that there is no heaven/hell for animals. Again, why the heck not? Why are humans so special? This whole "I'm special" nonsense is getting a bit arrogant don't you think?
The fossil record? The multiple proofs from DNA? Vestigial organs? The complete working theory of how evolution works still has some gaps, but human evolution itself is a fact at this point. Again, that doesn't imply 100% certainty. It's a fact that the planets revolve around the sun, but for all we know we could be living in a computer simulation and everyone is wrong. So what's the point of saying "It's not actually possible to prove ancestry"? Obviously. And yet, the people that deny that the planets revolve around the sun are what we call deluded.
Richard Dawkins sums up this two-faced belief in both science & religion:
“I mean the most extreme case is the geologist Kurt Wise, who has a PhD in Geology from Harvard and said “If all the evidence in the universe pointed towards an old Earth, I would be the first to admit it but I would still be a young Earth creationist because that is what Holy scripture teaches me”. You cannot argue with a mind like that. A mind like that, it seems to me is, well, a disgrace to the Human species.”
He's way too harsh when he says "disgrace to the human species" but it is definitely a prime example of what a closed mind looks like.
If there was a designer, it is safe to say he's a moron.
1) The stupidity of the human lung system. Why mix oxygenated with deoxygenated air, instead of just having a one-way tube like birds?
2) The flaws of human pregnancy. Countless people have died because God failed to take into account what happens if the baby's head is bigger than the pelvic opening.
3) The bible says that God formed us in the womb. If that's the case, who is to blame for congenital defects? God singlehandedly aborts more children than abortionists could ever hope to.
4) Plants are green and not black, even though black plants would absorb more light energy.
5) Worst of all: "Female orgasm is usually produced only by the direct stimulation of the clitoris. The clitoris is not typically stimulated during sexual intercourse."
God fails again. To quote Carlin, "in any decently run universe, he'd be out on his all-powerful ass a long time ago."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_poor_design
So according to you, being a monk and devoting yourself fully to Christianity is a method of....avoiding Christianity. Great answer. This still doesn't address why you simply don't do these things which would be so advantageous in your infinite afterlife. You are literally wasting countless aeons of future celestial pleasure with each keystroke. I simply don't get the logic in it, but whatever.
All things die. Not exactly a huge leap of logic there. This must be one of the brilliant "prophecies" of the bible that I'm supposed to be so impressed by and which I keep hearing so much about. There's also no proof that this universe ever truly "ends," but I could rant about the scientific inadequacies of the bible all day long.
Meanwhile, in ancient Scandinavia:
"Odin created the world from the dead body of Ymir, father of the Frost Giants. The first man and woman were sweated out of Ymir's left underarm. All these "fossils" and "carbon dating" are tricks played by Loki and the Dark Elves of Svartalfaheim."
You have to simply marvel at the futility of it all when you realize that somewhere out there on this planet there is a person with as strong of a conviction as yours, yet with a belief diametrically opposite to yours. Try stepping out of your own shoes for a second.
Who doesn't believe in science? Do you believe that supernatural processes are what cause your computer to work, or for cold medicine to get rid of your congestion, or for pens to come in packs of 200 instead of being handcrafted individually? The problem is that people who deny the scientific understanding of physics, geology and biology will freely and hypocritically accept, without any understanding whatsoever, all the other sciences. Metallurgy? Great! Materials engineering? Sure thing! Aeronautics? Book me a flight! But then you get to biology, geology and physics. Certain details get cherrypicked, and others get wholeheartedly denied. Biology has a working model of the explanation of biodiversity, which happens to be the foundation of all biological study, and it's one of the simplest assertions of any science:
1) Offspring are not identical to their parents.
2) Everything dies.
Now, since evolution theory is the basis of modern biology, you could make an argument that all of biology is flawed if you believe evolution is flawed. HOWEVER, then you get to the whole age-of-the-universe dilemma. You don't get to argue against the foundations of physics with that one. You have to deny a fairly non-fundamental subject in physics, radioactive decay.
And besides ALL of this, simply by accepting the scientific method as it pertains to any science, you accept the scientific method as it pertains to all sciences. If you think science can explain why your glasses allow you to see(optics), you necessarily believe the carbon-dating process. Science is not a body of work, it is a process, and it is the same process for all scientific studies. Have a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, accept the results.
@EternalWraith: Go
Of course YOU and other like-minded individuals wouldn't understand; just like how many religious individuals don't comprehend quantum mechanics and relativity, let alone Newtonian physics and calculus, or even simple algebra. The combination of your genetics and environmental affects have culminated in an individual (YOU) that cannot comprehend the difference between scientific fact/evidence and make-believe religious stories. You obviously do not understand the evolution theory or the methods and experiments used to test the theory; as such, you are a liar, which is probably a sin in your religion. But you conveniently ignore that, right? Moreover, religious people are quite prideful (another sin?) in believing that they know the truth. As such, you keep ignoring the flaws in religious stories and/or conveniently twist the meanings of religious passages the way a politician plays with words. You have "the forked tongue of a serpent", not that there's anything wrong with snakes or reptiles, unless you believe in that genesis story or a follower of David Ickes. The evolution theory is the most likely explanation for the diversity of life because it has withstood so much methodical scrutiny.
Let's talking about the flaws in the belief of your god. Where are the original ten commandments, supposedly made by that god? Where is the boat that god supposedly told a neolithic human to engineer? Where is the staff that god supposedly magically turned into a snake? Where is the eden garden? Where is the magical burning talking bush? Where is Ezekiel's wheel? Where are Joseph Smith's golden tablets? Do you seriously believe the earth and all life on it were created in 7 days (168 hours)? If you like democracy, why did polytheist pagan Greeks come up with democracy? Why has Buddhism lasted 2600 years (600 years more than christianity)? Why has Vedism lasted 3500 years (1500 years more than christianity)? Why does an omnipotent god need human (that have to be contacted by a bureaucracy of angles and have to pass examinations) to spread religion through conquest and forced conversions? Why doesn't your bible explain why the sun emits light, why gravity exists, or why humans can survive explsure to alpha radiation, but not gamma radiation?
Bad example, there are plenty of people from every group who don't understand these things, including Atheists/Evolutionists/Brights or whatever they might like to be called these days. All that statement shows is that you are an Elitist.
@Deadzergling: Go
Polls and studies actually do show that non-religious people understand science far better than religious people; in fact, most physicists and other scientists are not religious. Non-religious people also know more about the various religions than religious people. The only elitism is religious people claiming that their view of the universe is the only truth, especially when they lack verifiable evidence to support their claim. The same thing happens with conspiracy hypothesists. When science invalidates their arguments, somehow scientists are part of a conspiracy against religion.
There's a definite correlation between physicists and other scientists and their "nonreligiousness". There's also data to support that genetics and environmental factors influence the growth and development of the brain, which influences individual behaviors and personalities, including thought patterns, perception of their surroundings, and preferences to religion.
Atheism has withstood over 3 billion years of this.
@Hookah604: Go
Epic.
Technically put it's here (well, it's article on wiki ;) ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictamnus
Agreed, I hate the idea that we were created by an all mighty being under 7 days 5000 years ago. Its much more elegant and beautifully that we were created under 3 billion+ years by natural selection.
The data may indicate that to some extent, but it is ridiculous to lump everyone into one group of stupidity. I've seen some physicists and mathematicians that enjoyed doing the whole Knight Cosplay thing, had drinking problems, and one of them even made alcohol to sell at ridiculous profit. Isn't really fair for me to assume anything about the rest of their ilk from that. One of the most ridiculously bright (and annoyingly happy) guys I knew was a devout Muslim, 4 year physics/CS degree at age 17 or something. Fair to call all Muslims so bright? Of course not.
Point being, please don't assume the entire lot of people with any inkling towards religion are ALWAYS as dumb as rocks. This just isn't true. Enjoy high-fiving with the others though based on someone else's research. Which you fail to link quite often, I might add.
Anyways, unlike the image, I am actually able to sleep when someone is wrong on the internet, mostly up from the evilness of item editing... Sure there will be more fun replies on this tomorrow.
"All the world’s major religions, with their emphasis on love, compassion, patience, tolerance, and forgiveness can and do promote inner values. But the reality of the world today is that grounding ethics in religion is no longer adequate. This is why I am increasingly convinced that the time has come to find a way of thinking about spirituality and ethics beyond religion altogether." - Dalai Lama
@Hookah604: Go
You wanna talk about elegance? ;>_>
1. Something on the planet self-replicated and the result wasn't identical to the original being.
2. That thing died.
3. Repeat with the result for 5 billion years.
Conclusion: PEOPLE.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but elegant theories like this possess the same beauty to me as that of math. Things like Euler's identity(e^(i*pi) = -1), the first equation (1 + 1 = 2), and the proof of the Pythagorean Theorem(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Pythag_anim.gif) are all elegant expressions of truth, and that is the source of their beauty for me. You may not think there is beauty in evolution theory, but you can't deny its elegance.
My argument against the elegance of creation theory is that by saying "God created people", you are also direly paraphrasing it. "People" is a very complex subject. In evolution theory, all the stuff in people is handled beforehand, in the "5 billion years" step. For creation, you have to include "God created the brain, the heart, the liver, the bones, the DNA, the organelles, the blood, the mitochondria, the lymph nodes, the gallbladder, the eyes, the appendix(whoops!), the skin, the hair, the teeth, the stomach, the kidneys, the spine, the arteries, the lungs, the muscles..." For ALL of those various parts, if you were to ask someone who believed evolution theory "How did people develop (insert body part here)?", the answer is always "A previous generation of life mutated it and its descendents lived on."
On a mildly related note, did no one check out the series I linked in a previous post? :( It talks about this stuff.