Atheism : Love it or Leave it?

[Bill]

That sounds like you are going on a bit of... faith?

The fact is, there has never been any real science, that is the gathering of data through observation (which we can do) and then of course experimentation (which they have not be able to do) yet somehow they have arrived at a theory that they claim is fact. The theory of evolution somehow managed to skip the part of science where we experiment before we actually devise a theory. So in turn, evolution is actually a philosophy or a world view. Scientists have been able to observe and experiment with micro-evolution, or horizontal evolution. The best example of that is the fruit fly. Scientists have been experimenting and manipulating the DNA of fruit flies. They have managed to make all sorts of changes to the fruit flies, but they have not been able to create a new species. So again, horizontal but not vertical.

After being around for 150 years, with so much information and books on the subject. You still have people who have so little understanding of it that they should probably refrain from mentioning it.

What Zoken is mentioning is abiogenesis, which is only a theory for how life began, and not a theory for evolution. Evolution merely states that once life began, however that may have been, it evolved.

What people have failed to realize with evolution is that its full of holes. Ideas and 'discoveries' are forced into the model even if research and evidence screams that it doesn't fit.

I will leave you with a quote from a website that I am sure a lot of you will just simply dismiss, but I urge you to go visit it with an open mind. There are many real scientists out there, secular and creationist, who do not subscribe to the dogmatic views of evolutionary philosophy.





Take what you will from that. But, I really urge some people to be a little more skeptical about evolution. I understand that skepticism that is directed towards religion, but it seems that a lot of folks are accepting evolution just as blindly as they claim others are accepting religion. So I guess what I am saying is... practice what you preach!

On a whim, I checked out their SLoT page. It's a good way to establish if the site claiming to refute Evolution has some credibility. Unfortunately, nothing new here. They create a straw man of the Second Law of Thermodynamics and apply the straw man to evolution.

Let me be perfectly frank on this. ANYONE, no matter their credentials, who starts arguing that Evolution violates SLoT has no idea what they're talking about. Read this to clear it up.

What you've got here is a nice looking site that made by someone with an agenda. His agenda is replacing Evolution with creationism, but I notice that he doesn't argue for the scientific validity of what he proposes, which is a typical Creationist tactic.

Every single objection can be found here. Mr. Yahya brings nothing new to the table.

 

[Carcharodon]

Didn't see that SLoT site. Good point; that argument is whack.

 

[Bill]

I have a question for those who are athiests:

Where did we come from?

I, as a Christian, believe in evolution. However, where did the first cell that led to all life on Earth come from?

Science tells us that everything comes from something, correct? Well how did the the first life form materialize out of nothing?

I just want to see your perspectives.

The first building blocks of life didn't form from nothing. Read here for some "perspective."

 

[Bill]

Didn't see that SLoT site. Good point; that argument is whack.

There's quite a bit on there. I didn't see anything that I haven't seen before just perusing through. I know talkorigins has seen it as they have it listed on their list of anti-evolution sites and the sites claims are on their refuted claims list. I suspect there is a Darwinism Refuted Refuted site.

 

[squeekness]

Ultimately, the science vs. religion debate can end in only one way:

Science proving that there indeed is no God/Higher entity and everything
in our universe is as is because of a random coincidence.

Until that day comes, people will continue to believe and religion/faith will continue to live on and be a major part of our world.

I am not so sure anyone can say there would absoultely be one outcome here since this has not happened yet. For all you know, science will eventually prove the existance of God in some form.

Of course it doesn't make sense to you because unfortunately you wrongly assume my view of religion.

Let me make something clear: I don't believe the Christian religion is absolutely right. I don't believe the Muslim religion is absolutely right. I don't believe the Hindu religion is absolutely right. etc. etc.

I do not blindly follow absolutely everything a religion teaches. I believe what I feel is right and make my own decisions. That's why contraditions among the religions are irrelevant to me.

Personally, I find the whole "DO IT MY WAY OR GO TO HELL" message is utter bull****.

Another main reason for my belief is because I feel it will make me a better person.

And despite their differences every religion preaches the eseential rule:

"Do unto others as you would have done unto yourself."

Thus every religion has good, and by seeing the good in all as opposed to isolating myself to one doctrine, there is nothing to lose.

Make sense now?

I find it funny that you deem someone else's belief as nonsensical. The only nonsensical thing is assuming your own beliefs are somehow more right than others. Which is why I never see atheists as being "ignorant" or "stupid". Their belief is just as valuable as mine no matter my views on it.

I can agree with most of this post, it mirrors many of my own thoughts. I myself will not stand up and say any one particular religion is absolutely right since so little can be proven either way.

On the other hand, I also agree with some of Wilhelm's thoughts that while folks have a right to believe what they want, some beliefs cannot be respected, namely those that seriously hamper the civil rights of others, especially those who cannot always defend themselves like women and children. I have zero respect for anyone who goes out of their way to kill large groups of people just to make a point.

 

[xisaacx]

by calling yourself an atheist someone who doesnt believe in god, arent you therefore admitting there is one by saying you dont believe theres one?

 

[squeekness]

by calling yourself an atheist someone who doesnt believe in god, arent you therefore admitting there is one by saying you dont believe theres one?

LOL, I don't think it quite works like that. I don't believe in Santa and we've rpetty much figured out that while he was probably based a real guy, there isn't a Santa now that really goes around bringing presents to all the world's children in one night like the legend says.

 

[Addendum]

by calling yourself an atheist someone who doesnt believe in god, arent you therefore admitting there is one by saying you dont believe theres one?

Atheism is the lack of a god-belief, the absence of theism, to whatever degree and for whatever reason.

 

[Wilhelm-Scream]

by calling yourself an atheist someone who doesnt believe in god, arent you therefore admitting there is one by saying you dont believe theres one?

HO-lee GAWD some of the stuff I read here!


So I guess all the people who don't believe David Icke when he says that George Bush is actually a Reptilian alien shape-shifter from the 4th dimension, masquerading as a human, who eats babies and menstrual blood?..........yeah, they're actually admitting that George Bush IS a Reptilian alien from the 4th dimension that eats babies and menstrual blood...by not...believing...he, is one.

Yeah.




GOD! The HOrror!

 

[The Senator]

by calling yourself an atheist someone who doesnt believe in god, arent you therefore admitting there is one by saying you dont believe theres one?

Nice try.

Atheism has to acknowledge that others believe in a God, yes. But atheism is the rejection of that belief or beliefs. There is no admission among atheists that a God exists... but if you really must know what an atheist believes in, look it up on teh wikipedia.

 

[Bubonic]

So any change of opinion in the last 3 years?
Have any atheist reconsidered their position on cosmology, and have any of the pious lost faith?

Science presumably has moved forward since then, and I know some of the Hypsters were extremely well versed in it so has anything come up to substantiate the adherence to the dismissal of theological cosmology?

Looking over what the thread became the title and opening post are more or less relevant apart from the demand for civility and respect for others.

Stephen Hawking's 2 cents http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/may/15/stephen-hawking-interview-there-is-no-heaven

 

[Thread Manager]

This thread is now closed it has a continuation thread [split]354461[/split]