It is impossible to believe in Evolution and not be a racist

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

05-01-2015, 01:44
chalsdk

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elldallan

And no, it's not the same as saying that Jesus and Hitler are both the same person.
Christianity admits it's roots in Judaism and even uses the Torah scrolls for part of the Bible(the old part), so it's the same god... And Islam recognizes Jesus and all the Jewish prophets as prophets, just not the final most important one. So again, same god. Even the religions themselves admit it(well at least Christianity and Islam does), Islam even have specific decrees that Christians & Jews should be treated better than other non-believers because they do share a faith in Allah or God Almighty, they're just havrn't been enlightened yet.
So it seems that they mostly squabble over who is more right on points of detail. All three share the ten commandments for example. So the God seems to be very much the same one, the difference lies in the interpretation of his wishes and whatnot.

So you mean that it's arrogant to say that people normally get declared mentally ill when they hear voices talk in their heads? Because you know what... they do.

And no, I wouldn't say I'm an Atheist, I lean more towards Agnosticism because while I don not believe in the existence of a higher being nor think it's particularly likely for one to exist if it was ever proven I would have to accept that proof.
Atheism is the flat out rejection of the possibility that there is a god, I just think that the likelihood of the existence of some sort of supreme being is infinitely small, but not non-existent.

If people choose to be religious then that's their choice and I will respect that, but I do think that that's a choice for an adult to make and therefore I think religion has no space in education outside religion classes.
But I'm sorry if it offends you but I if somebody thinks that they're having conversations with any sort of voices in their head then I do think that is uncomfortably close to mental unhealth whether that voice be God's(any variety of God or Gods), Donald Duck or George W. Bush they hear in their heads.

Your need to open a book- and use reason. And yes your in essens saying hitler and jesus is the same person. I will not replay to your post in this post - or any later posted.
05-01-2015, 02:07
Palem

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elldallan

And no, I wouldn't say I'm an Atheist, I lean more towards Agnosticism because while I don not believe in the existence of a higher being nor think it's particularly likely for one to exist if it was ever proven I would have to accept that proof.
Atheism is the flat out rejection of the possibility that there is a god, I just think that the likelihood of the existence of some sort of supreme being is infinitely small, but not non-existent.

Atheism is the belief that god does not exist. You don't believe that god exists, so you're an atheist. You make it sound like atheist would reject a valid proof of god's existence, which really isn't the case for most atheists (you'll have hardheaded, stubborn people in any belief system). There's no shame in believing one way or another ;)

Agnosticism is the "I honestly have no idea what my opinion is so I'm staying out of it" stance. It's not any sort of stance and I refuse to recognize it as a belief system. You either believe god exists or you don't. Not having thought about it enough doesn't indicate a lack of belief.
05-01-2015, 02:20
Craigus

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

Atheism is the belief that god does not exist. You don't believe that god exists, so you're an atheist. You make it sound like atheist would reject a valid proof of god's existence, which really isn't the case for most atheists (you'll have hardheaded, stubborn people in any belief system). There's no shame in believing one way or another ;)

Agnosticism is the "I honestly have no idea what my opinion is so I'm staying out of it" stance. It's not any sort of stance and I refuse to recognize it as a belief system. You either believe god exists or you don't. Not having thought about it enough doesn't indicate a lack of belief.

You beat me to it. Richard Dawkins describes 7 stances one can take with regards to the belief of god. It goes something like:

1. Strong Theist - Absolutely sure there is a god
2. Theist - More than likely is a god but could be convinced otherwise with strong evidence
3. Agnostic Theist - Not really sure but probably is a god
4. Agnostic - No opinion
5. Agnostic Atheist - Not really sure but probably isnt a god
6. Atheist - More than likely is no god but could be convinced otherwise with strong evidence
7. Strong Atheist - Absolutely sure there is no god.

Even some of the most outspoken atheists like Richard Dawkins considers themselves number 6. A true atheist will accept the most likely answer from the available evidence, if the stars alligned one night or a lightning bolt hit a rock with the words " I am Real " you would start leaning towards the possibility of a god.
05-01-2015, 02:29
khronosschoty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

Atheism is the belief that god does not exist. You don't believe that god exists, so you're an atheist. You make it sound like atheist would reject a valid proof of god's existence, which really isn't the case for most atheists (you'll have hardheaded, stubborn people in any belief system). There's no shame in believing one way or another ;)

Agnosticism is the "I honestly have no idea what my opinion is so I'm staying out of it" stance. It's not any sort of stance and I refuse to recognize it as a belief system. You either believe god exists or you don't. Not having thought about it enough doesn't indicate a lack of belief.

Not true, Atheism is the belief God does not exist, Agnostic is admitting you do not know, or the belief you cannot know.
05-01-2015, 02:36
Palem

knowledge and belief are two different things
05-01-2015, 12:01
chalsdk

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

knowledge and belief are two different things

Ill argue that you can know got is there - as if you see the effect of it. Bringing back the dead, exosime, personal profesy and so on. Thats also where I go from Religion and to relationship with God. Job has a nice angle to it : I have heard the Rumers about you, but know I have seen you first hand
05-01-2015, 13:15
TommyB

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elldallan

There we have three major world religions who have wildly differing views on pretty much everything and yet shares the same God, the Christian god, the Muslim god and the Jewish god are all the same "God", so this supposed "god" comes of as more than a little schizophrenic, and why if this god exists would there be so wildly separate opinions on what the **** he wants out of mankind.

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsdk

What you say is here that you think that jesus and Hitler are the same person, just depens on how you look at it. I have read all of it, but your arguments our soo arogant I am not even gona bother trying to reason mr "Ateism Is my religion"

Wow, how did you manage to inject Hitler into a discussion about god? That's quite a leap even tho it ties back to the OP being about racism..

@Elldallan: How is it surprising that people from different cultural backgrounds can look at the same thing and come to different conclusions? Are you really confused about that?!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

Agnosticism is the "I honestly have no idea what my opinion is so I'm staying out of it" stance. It's not any sort of stance and I refuse to recognize it as a belief system. You either believe god exists or you don't. Not having thought about it enough doesn't indicate a lack of belief.

How do you know that an Agnostic never thinks about the question of god? Coming to the conclusion that there isn't enough evidence to proof or disproof the existence of god seems valid enough. I don't know if it qualifies as a "belief system" but it doesn't have to. It's a valid answer to the question, no one can force you to make a choice one way or the other.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma
05-01-2015, 14:18
chalsdk

Quote:

Originally Posted by TommyB

Wow, how did you manage to inject Hitler into a discussion about god? That's quite a leap even tho it ties back to the OP being about racism..

@Elldallan: How is it surprising that people from different cultural backgrounds can look at the same thing and come to different conclusions? Are you really confused about that?!

How do you know that an Agnostic never thinks about the question of god? Coming to the conclusion that there isn't enough evidence to proof or disproof the existence of god seems valid enough. I don't know if it qualifies as a "belief system" but it doesn't have to. It's a valid answer to the question, no one can force you to make a choice one way or the other.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

Well - Look it up. Hitler is LOVED soo much with muslims in the middel east, they total Dig his job with the jews, and they want to finish the job. As a dane I get intro truble for the muhammed drawings, but if I tell I am realy a German(the danish occiped part) they love me, and tell me outright hitler did a great job so I am welcome.
Note - if anything its the other way around, Germany occiped Danish lands.
2 Note I got a ****lord of msg on FB from mulims telling me how right hitler was, youtube is full off em, Holocost only started when the Grand mufty (Arafats teacher) did talk to hitler.

Muhammed said himself that killing jews is right, and when the time is right, even the stones and trees will cry out, There is a jew behind me, come and slay him! For its probber to slay em.

THAT you dont find in the bible, jesus said, The one that is sinless shoud cast the first stone, but muhammed turned it the other way arround. God & Allah has nothing to do with ether what so ever and to claim so is total and abselute ignorance. There is a reason why Main Kamp is the 2 most sold book in every muslim contry, even thougt its banned in most.

Tiny note - Muslim = Quran & Muhammed followers - Plenty of culture muslims that is just awesome peaple and want to live in peace.

@Craigus Im still thinking
05-01-2015, 14:47
Elldallan

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsdk

Your need to open a book- and use reason. And yes your in essens saying hitler and jesus is the same person. I will not replay to your post in this post - or any later posted.

I have opened a lot of books, even some of the ones you're referring to. The main difference between Judaism and Christianity lies in the belief of whether Jesus was the Messiah prophesied in the Jewish faith.
The Jews say no, because there wasn't peace on earth and the land of Israel wasn't free.
The Christians says yes, Jesus was the son of god and the prophesised Messiah. So basically they're arguing about whether Jesus was the son of God or not, not who God was.
Islam recognizes that Jesus, Moses, Noah etc were all prophets of God(but in the case of Jesus not that he was the son of God), he just wasn't the "final" one because that would be Muhammed. Again, same God, different interpretations of who his messengers were or their importance in the grand scheme of things.

This is why scholars refers to these religions as Abrahamitic(as in descended from Abraham) They all recognize Abraham in various aspects and his God as the God. Therefore they share the same God, they just can't agree on the details of his messages/messengers. But Yhwh(or Jehovah), Allah etc. are all the name of the same being, the God of Abraham.

So no, I'm not comparing Jesus to Hitler the claim that I am is absolutely ludicrous.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

Atheism is the belief that god does not exist. You don't believe that god exists, so you're an atheist. You make it sound like atheist would reject a valid proof of god's existence, which really isn't the case for most atheists (you'll have hardheaded, stubborn people in any belief system).

In math terms I would say that my belief that there exists is a supreme being of some sort approaches 0, but does not tangent it. Hence I think that it is technically separate from atheism by an infinitely small number but still separate. :P

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

There's no shame in believing one way or another ;)

You are absolutely correct :)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

Agnosticism is the "I honestly have no idea what my opinion is so I'm staying out of it" stance. It's not any sort of stance and I refuse to recognize it as a belief system. You either believe god exists or you don't. Not having thought about it enough doesn't indicate a lack of belief.

As Craigus said it can be illustrated as a scale, i guess my definition of an atheist is what's called a strong atheist on that scale :)
But if you go by that scale as written then yes then I am without doubt an atheist.

I however doesn't agree that agnosticism isn't a stance, not choosing is also a choice. And it would be rude to Agnostics to claim they havn't thought about it enough, because they may very well have and came to the conclusion that there is no way to know.
05-01-2015, 14:58
chalsdk

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elldallan

There we have three major world religions who have wildly differing views on pretty much everything and yet shares the same God, the Christian god, the Muslim god and the Jewish god are all the same "God",...

Jesus = God
Muhammed did the same thing as hitler did - with he aproval of Allah -As it gives salvation points - or in other ways, its NEEDED to be SURE of your salvation, else its just odds-> just newer dude on the world sceine.

End of debate - Stop lying - Ignorance is not an excuse when you claim to know so much about this topic
05-01-2015, 15:24
TommyB

Trick-question for chalsdk:

How do Arab Christians call their god?
05-01-2015, 15:55
chalsdk

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craigus

Can you please explain? I am not sure what this is referring to?
+
and these big holes..

Love to - Like Evolution is a fact, and that anyone who says otherwise is a fool. Ironic it acts as a religion in its own right. There is plenty of Big Gigantic holes in evolution. To take the FACT of evolution in good faith I have problems with - Just the same with religion, or another things.

Things that come to mind that is clearly problematic, "Why Female" - its simply not effective - and even more, how did one Gender pop up one day, and made kids? If it was so why is it not normal to have both sexes, or if you do, its only one part that is working.

so you got tiny bacteria that do not have genders.. and one day a female pub ups?? why? and even more, how does it mate?? The odds of finding a male is so small its none exist.

If Female happened later, its the same thing.

And since there is a Big bang/creation day in sceince - as a final date - I have read that there is a lack of time to randomly create life.. I can find link - dont have it right here. There is simply a lack of time to creative life by Random. -> Will find link.

I have been at university to be trained as a teacher in nature - and there I had a man who claimed that evolution is a fact, while our books had no such claims and it cant be made - that is what the book said, and I asked our teacher/prof to confirm to accept the brand new books we had! and so he did - in time. And my entire class was impressed. These wild wild lies are quite commen outside uni and other places becourse they are supported by the TV and others who dont care what they say, as long as its borderline true - why most TV today is crap - its not like the discovery channel is "Good & well backed knowede".

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craigus

My world view is shaped by the evidence, the evidence is not shaped by my world view.

Thats awesome. As long as you keep an open eye out and an open mind.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craigus

Look up the trials of Dover. They were attempting to teach Intelligent design in schools. During the trials they found many times that they forgot to replace the word "creation" with "intelligent design". Intelligent design is just a creationists attempt to sound scientific.

Here is a doco if you are interested: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x2xyrel-2vI

Some sum it up - Creation and int. design is not the same thing.
Good Created stuf VS God helped/Guide evolution.
Dont accept darvinian evolution VS Accept it to some degree.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craigus

If me, a layman, can provide these points which contradict your story, then I suggest you look into the evidence for evolution with an open mind.

You have not - you still going on with mixing up int. design and Creation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craigus

Science cannot explain everything but science can obtain the most likely answers to our questions. The problem with creation is that it assumes the answer gained from the bible or Quran, then picks and chooses the evidence which supports their story while ignoring the contradictions. How does asking "how long is one day for god?" benefit anyone? you have to establish a god or gods exists before you can ask that question.

Well - The bible dont claim alot about sceince.. unlike The Quran - and I am not gona defend that as it can not be - like drinking of wells with dead animals is perfectly Good.
However what the bible do claim, no one have jet to disprove. And peaple work HARD on it.
There is no Contradictions in the bible.

And no you dont have to firstly accept that God is there or not. If you allready have stated he is, its not importent. And the very core of this that I am not trying to make a age of the earth - the integent design does. How long was adam and eve in the garden ? dunno.. HE named alot of things, then got a wife.. Migth have been a trillion years, or 1 secound. How long is a day if your outside time?? Does time exist in the garden? how big is it? There is ton a things we dont know, we can argue all day, but its gona be useless, we simply dont know what the bible says.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craigus

50% of Americans could not answer how long it takes for the Earth to orbit the sun. Should we take their word for it too? America has some great scientists, having great scientists doesn't automatically make the general population smarter. Many scientists identify themselves as Jewish while also being atheist. Lawrence Krauss is one of them. Well over 90% of scientists accept evolution, that figure is closer to 100 than it is 90.

Most americans are not at universites or doing reseach, and that was the ones I was talking about - ill even take that most theologians dont know, even most at university, its NICE to know, but hardly usefull. --> My point was about the peaple who did reasech, not generic murican.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Craigus

I prayed when I was a kid, never got an answer. Wind has evidence which we can feel, explain and predict, none of the gods have evidence. With the thousands of gods in human history what makes you think that you were lucky enough to just so happen to be brought up with the teachings of the one true god. If you believe in a particular god, how did you dismiss all the other gods? God should be irrelevant in this conversation because we should only be looking at the evidence to find our answers. You can believe in or not believe in whatever god you like, all I ask is you look at what you can see in reality to determine the most probable answers.

What I noted when I did become a christian was that God did give me a lot or replays, but I did just not notise them becourse I did not wish to do so. And what makes me think I got the right **** - well I experince God, not just the Idea of God, but direkt.

And if we assume that there is no God, or alike - Why is something wrong? Why is suffering wrong?
05-01-2015, 15:57
chalsdk

Quote:

Originally Posted by TommyB

Trick-question for chalsdk:

How do Arab Christians call their god?

God in their native thounge - A few do Allah, but Allah is the NAME of the islamic God. And yes i know that is the same as "lord" - Funny that they dont use our name when in england then.. funny how there is nearly no christians in the middel east anymore..
05-01-2015, 16:11
TommyB

Quote:

Originally Posted by chalsdk

God in their native thounge - A few do Allah, but Allah is the NAME of the islamic God. And yes i know that is the same as "lord"

This is incorrect, Allah is the arabic word for god and is used by Christians, Jews and Muslims alike. The word is older than the Islam too so claiming that God and Allah have nothing to do with each other when it is simply the same word in another language is very ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah
05-01-2015, 17:30
Palem

Quote:

Originally Posted by TommyB

How do you know that an Agnostic never thinks about the question of god? Coming to the conclusion that there isn't enough evidence to proof or disproof the existence of god seems valid enough. I don't know if it qualifies as a "belief system" but it doesn't have to. It's a valid answer to the question, no one can force you to make a choice one way or the other.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elldallan

I however doesn't agree that agnosticism isn't a stance, not choosing is also a choice. And it would be rude to Agnostics to claim they havn't thought about it enough, because they may very well have and came to the conclusion that there is no way to know.

You misunderstand. I didn't mean that Agnostics are agnostic because they haven't given it any thought. That's just the most popular excuse I've heard from people who choose to say.

The reason I don't accept it as a stance is because it's a politically correct cop out. They don't want to ruffle any feathers with their opinion, so they pretend to not have an opinion. You'll notice I say pretend. Even if it's just a naive inclination, I find it impossible that a person doesn't have some .1% sway on whether or not there's an infinitely powerful being above watching over everything you do.
05-01-2015, 17:36
khronosschoty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

You misunderstand. I didn't mean that Agnostics are agnostic because they haven't given it any thought. That's just the most popular excuse I've heard from people who choose to say.

The reason I don't accept it as a stance is because it's a politically correct cop out. They don't want to ruffle any feathers with their opinion, so they pretend to not have an opinion. You'll notice I say pretend. Even if it's just a naive inclination, I find it impossible that a person doesn't have some .1% sway on whether or not there's an infinitely powerful being above watching over everything you do.

Some people 100% **intend** to forgo the use of opinion and stick to 100% facts, atheists do not do this, it could be said a true agnostic does this.
05-01-2015, 17:39
khronosschoty

Quote:

Originally Posted by TommyB

This is incorrect, Allah is the arabic word for god and is used by Christians, Jews and Muslims alike. The word is older than the Islam too so claiming that God and Allah have nothing to do with each other when it is simply the same word in another language is very ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah

Slightly off topic but the word "Allah" is actually the translation of the Hebrew Elohim, well one of the many versions of that word, with a stress on the singleness of God and not like the more commonly used, in Hebrew Elohim, that is plural form of God. That said, it is a prof against Islam that claims that "Allah" is the highest name of God, since clearly if you accept the Old Testament as valid, it is not.
05-01-2015, 17:41
Zantetsuken

Another endless and fruitless argument of religion on the internet? And for the record, it's entirely possible to believe in God and accept evolution. Christianity and Darwinian evolution don't contradict each other.
05-01-2015, 17:45
khronosschoty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

Another endless and fruitless argument of religion on the internet? And for the record, it's entirely possible to believe in God and accept evolution. Christianity and Darwinian evolution don't contradict each other.

Yes, they do, Darwin's theory is flawed.
05-01-2015, 17:50
Palem

You don't need facts to have beliefs. Some beliefs are based solely on the lack of facts.

You also seem to think you can have some control over the things you believe, which is false. You can certainly deny your beliefs, even to yourself, but they're still there and you still believe them. It's like being a Cleveland Browns fan. You can tell people you're not a big football fan and you can even make yourself not watch the games, but when you hear they won, you're happy.
05-01-2015, 17:55
chalsdk

To return to OP post - Why is something wrong or right? Why is suffering wrong? or is it right and why?
05-01-2015, 17:58
khronosschoty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

You don't need facts to have beliefs. Some beliefs are based solely on the lack of facts.

You also seem to think you can have some control over the things you believe, which is false. You can certainly deny your beliefs, even to yourself, but they're still there and you still believe them. It's like being a Cleveland Browns fan. You can tell people you're not a big football fan and you can even make yourself not watch the games, but when you hear they won, you're happy.

Unless you actually have power over your self to decided for 100% truth you do not like them anymore and football etc -- yes, people can have genuine control over their beliefs.

Beliefs based on facts > beliefs based on fantasy.
05-01-2015, 18:13
Palem

Quote:

Originally Posted by khronosschoty

Unless you actually have power over your self to decided for 100% truth you do not like them anymore and football etc -- yes, people can have genuine control over their beliefs.

No. Beliefs change over external thing. At one point you prolly believed in Santa Claus and then some stuff happened and you were like "nah, don't believe that stuff anymore". I'd be interested if you can find a counterexample :)

Quote:

Beliefs based on facts > beliefs based on fantasy.

Depends on what you mean by greater than. The passion and dedication people show as a result of their religious faiths is really remarkable. Such dedication to "facts" is pretty rare. Even hardcore men of science need to pick up the occasional piece of fiction to keep themselves entertained.

I've seen people get into actual over star wars. You won't find such passion surrounding carbon isotopes.
05-01-2015, 18:13
TommyB

Quote:

Originally Posted by khronosschoty

Slightly off topic but the word "Allah" is actually the translation of the Hebrew Elohim

Either that or they are simply derived from the same origin. According to the wiki article the oldest evidence of the word dates back to ancient babylonian stone tablets ca. 1700 BC.
05-01-2015, 18:17
TommyB

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

No. Beliefs change over external thing. At one point you prolly believed in Santa Claus and then some stuff happened and you were like "nah, don't believe that stuff anymore". I'd be interested if you can find a counterexample :)

Many people would describe that example as you, consciously or unconsciously, making a decision to not believe it anymore instead of having been forced upon you by external forces and against your will.
05-01-2015, 18:18
khronosschoty

Quote:

Originally Posted by TommyB

Either that or they are simply derived from the same origin. According to the wiki article the oldest evidence of the word dates back to ancient babylonian stone tablets ca. 1700 BC.

They are from the same origin, that was my point; and for that reason, it is a proof against Islam, according to written tradition -- Islam's understanding of the word, is not in agreement, with the historical records.
05-01-2015, 18:22
khronosschoty

Quote:

Originally Posted by TommyB

Many people would describe that example as you, consciously or unconsciously, making a decision to not believe it anymore instead of having been forced upon you by external forces and against your will.

You can, if you are of strong enough will power, refuse to accept or not accept anything. I allow facts to move me, but some do not. The power of what you will is always present, even if you do not consciously accept that.
05-01-2015, 18:38
TommyB

Quote:

Originally Posted by khronosschoty

They are from the same origin, that was my point; and for that reason, it is a proof against Islam, according to written tradition -- Islam's understanding of the word, is not in agreement, with the historical records.

Whatever you are trying to proof, I don't get it. But I am not competent to further discuss the topic either so let's just leave it here. If I had to discuss it I would probably not wonder if one interpretation or the other is correct but rather why someone would want to disproof an entire religion based on their usage of the name of god. It would appear that there are much stronger arguments to make against any known religion if one was of a mind to do so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by khronosschoty

You can, if you are of strong enough will power, refuse to accept or not accept anything. I allow facts to move me, but some do not. The power of what you will is always present, even if you do not consciously accept that.

True.
05-01-2015, 18:40
Zantetsuken

Quote:

Originally Posted by TommyB

claiming [stuff] is very ignorant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allah

Accuses people of being ignorant, cites wikipedia. Lol.
05-01-2015, 18:44
TommyB

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

Accuses people of being ignorant, cites wikipedia. Lol.

I call it as I see it. Do you have anything to contribute?
05-01-2015, 18:45
khronosschoty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

Accuses people of being ignorant, cites wikipedia. Lol.

Only, I looked for where it uses the word "ignorant" and found non were you linked.
05-01-2015, 19:01
TommyB

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

The reason I don't accept it as a stance is because it's a politically correct cop out. They don't want to ruffle any feathers with their opinion, so they pretend to not have an opinion.

Just want to add: in this singular instance I do not mind "political correctness" as people who know 100% that god exists or does not exist are much more likely to go to war and kill each other about it than those who admit to themselves that they do not know.
05-01-2015, 19:09
Zantetsuken

Quote:

Originally Posted by TommyB

I call it as I see it. Do you have anything to contribute?

I already gave my contribution. Internet arguments over religion are among the most futile of exercises. It's just everyone calling everyone else wrong and citing non-empirical sources as "evidence".
05-01-2015, 19:20
khronosschoty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

I already gave my contribution. Internet arguments over religion are among the most futile of exercises. It's just everyone calling everyone else wrong and citing non-empirical sources as "evidence".

I think one can contribute more then that, but I wont fault you if you decided to think otherwise.
05-01-2015, 19:41
Zantetsuken

Quote:

Originally Posted by freemehul

You know I agree with that, but this is exactly why it sometimes doesn't strike me as mere stupidity and foolishness. Like maybe they really are nuts.

Take for instance the following:
-ID is utterly shameless. They know its wrong yet do not care that it is wrong.
-its magical thinking, in that they believe there is a higher power, namely god
-its arrogance, because they debase scientific evolution theories
-its promotion of religion due to envy over science
-they think they're entitled to be right, when in fact they're clearly not. Entitlement should come from prove and good arguments, yet they have neither to back up their case and yet despite of that lack they still think they're entitled to promote it. So much so that it must be tought in school, even when it obviously is nonsense.
-they don't put boundaries on their theory of intelligent design
-the ID'ers exploit politics to get what they want and feel like they need to be treated better than science.

Add these seven parts up and what you get is called "narcissism".

Add these seven parts up and you have the opinion of one person. There is an argument in philosophy of cause and effect that supports ID. It's called the First Cause Argument:

- Every effect has a cause
- This chain cannot go on infinitely, so there must have been a First Cause, or an Unmoved Mover, or Unmade Maker.
- This First Cause is itself uncaused, and set everything into motion

And before you say Big Bang, it was caused, so it cannot be the First Cause. Some light empirical reading on the subject...

http://tinyurl.com/opqj4r9
05-01-2015, 19:59
Palem

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zantetsuken

Accuses people of being ignorant, cites wikipedia. Lol.

What's wrong with wikipedia? It's just as reliable as Encyclopaedia Britannica. Is that not a reliable source of information?
05-01-2015, 20:28
khronosschoty

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

What's wrong with wikipedia? It's just as reliable as Encyclopaedia Britannica. Is that not a reliable source of information?

For the sake of Encyclopaedia Britannica, I do hope you are wrong, because, I know Wikipedia is very flawed, often times.
05-01-2015, 20:31
Zantetsuken

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

What's wrong with wikipedia? It's just as reliable as Encyclopaedia Britannica. Is that not a reliable source of information?

Apples and oranges. When I was in high school, I would use the library computers to edit wikipedia articles to say ridiculous things. Today, I'm a professional researcher. I would never accept a piece of academic literature into my research library that cites wikipedia.
05-01-2015, 20:32
chalsdk

Quote:

Originally Posted by Palem

What's wrong with wikipedia? It's just as reliable as Encyclopaedia Britannica. Is that not a reliable source of information?

Ahhhhhhh..
05-01-2015, 20:37
Palem

Quote:

Originally Posted by khronosschoty

For the sake of Encyclopaedia Britannica, I do hope you are wrong, because, I know Wikipedia is very flawed, often times.

Nature did a study. As far as scholarly fields are concerned, Wiki is exactly as accurate as EB. Wiki only starts to take a hit on pages that people would actually get a kick out of making incorrect. Pop culture type of stuff.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page