watch the video to see who won?
it's obvious who won man...
Evolution vs God(494 posts)
"Hey guy on the toilette, tell me about kinds! Can't tell me?! See god exists!"
@DSB: I lol'ed.
This is actually a great perspective that is brought to people who don't think that they have already existing faith. Pretty funny
Interesting discussion... but it completely falls apart the moment he starts using the argument that "people believe in evolution because it get rid of moral accountability".
I don't see how it has any relevance. He's using a pseudo-scientific gag popular with religious kooks to make it look like people don't know what they're saying.
"Kinds" has never been a scientific term, it has no genuine application within biology, so it stands to reason that most people who are seriously studying the subject, wouldn't waste their time on some religious fantasy, when there's real science to be done.
Certainty is a pretty rare thing. But there's still a big difference between believing in something that's supported by evidence, and beliving in something that essentially thrives on a lack of evidence.
There is probably no omnipotent God , just like there is probably no parallel universe.
Its probably the most believed hypothetical concept in the world. Maybe because it sounds nice.
@DSB, Pretty much. His entire argument seems to be "There is a hole in your reasoning, therefore it must be wrong."
Evolution is a theory. It's never claimed to be anything else. The point is... its theory with mountains of evidence and observations to back up its concept.
I'm a spiritual person (and not ashamed to admit it), so I sit somewhat awkwardly on both sides of the fence. That doesn't mean I (or anyone else) should ignore facts that are right in front of our faces, if the answers are provable by science.
The thing is science never claims absolute truth, religion does. The evidence is in their holy relics (Bible, Koran, Torah), The science though works hard and conducts various researchs and observations. And I personally think people like Ray Comfort are complete idiots.
I'm an atheist but I do not treat Atheism as a belief system, I never say things with absolute certainty because I do not consider myself a very knowledgeable person. I come by information and knowledge and I spend time processing them and then I decide if they're complete bullocks or there are reasoning behind them.
People like Ray Comfort are trying to use absurd comparisons to create feel good moments for the believer community. But I'm a firm believer that religion is holding humanity back, just look how backwards religious driven societies are, middle-east is the shining example of that.
It's also quite funny how morality suddenly became exclusive to bible. It was there from the beginning of time, in non-religious societies the concept of crime and punishment existed, specially in the far east where philosophical views existed rather than organized religion and they could be perfected or replaced.
Besides centuries before christ the Achaemenid Empire had laws against slavery, something that is pretty legit in the bible and Ray Comfort forgot to bring that up while asking those hard morale question.
What a dumb video. Even if evolution wasn't true, it doesn't mean there's a god by default. If not evolution, then something else aside from god.
As far as putting faith/trust/belief in what scientists say, at the end of the day, I'm free to go and do the experiments myself if I think the scientists aren't trustworthy. Guess what, I'll get the exact same results.
You guys are missing the point. The point is you are saying science is an absolute/answer to everything when in all honesty if put in a position you can't truly prove. The use of "kind" is a correct application of the word. You can't discredit the words meaning because it doesn't fit what you like. Words do not work that way, and even a non religious person can see that.
It also doesn't take a religious person to find it sceptic. Also, you can't just prove evolution that was probably his best point. Trying to apply evolution as reason to your theory doesn't mean it is how it came about. The missing link is still indeed the missing link and to say the small afforded evidence is fact proves you have faith in it because it is not a factual study.
If evolution was indeed true in my eyes. Out of the Billions of people on earth we would see mankind change in some molecular way. The fantasy comic X-men would be a prime example of that. However, that is not the case at best we have humans with genetic deformities growing extra limbs or missing limbs. Evolution is not a truth at the end, selective adaptation is a truth though.
@lexph3re You couldn't be more wrong on everything you said.
"It's also quite funny how morality suddenly became exclusive to bible."
It's also quite ironic when you actually read the stuff that is in the bible. Really the town folks can stone a woman to death if she lost her virginity before the marriage?
If you need the fear of hell/god to be a good human being, chances are you're not a good human being to begin with. If I hurt someone I can tell that it hurts them and that makes me feel bad. Because I have this thing a lot of religious people don't have: Empathy.
I don't need to be told that it's bad by some paperweight.
If that's how you feel, kudos to ya.
It's also ironic how when people are selective and choose and pick things to their liking in the bible to. You know how in the same book it's said he who is without sin cast the first stone. Otherwise known as the whole you aren't better then the sinner to cast judgment others.
But you know.... Let's run with one context of a book. That'll show them
"If you need the fear of hell/god to be a good human being, chances are you're not a good human being to begin with. If I hurt someone I can tell that it hurts them and that makes me feel bad."
You're also missing the point on that one. People don't use treating others right as the guiding stone to get to heaven. That's just one of many things expected of the people of the faith to reach heaven. Very much how the buddist appreciate all formats of life but it is not the foundation of their focus.
Also, where do you think your empathy really comes from? Parents? Where did they get it from? Where did the ones who taught your parents get empathy from? I'm not saying that they got it from a Christian but surely you don't believe it manifested out of thin air right? And that's just a question not an attack or anything.
Well I'm no expert, but empathy seems to be a natural by-product of close contact with those that care for you.
Its also evident in more than just the human animal.
Though the idea that its sprinkled onto humanity by angels in heaven, is a prettier theory.
@zinc Correct it is something that is afford to those that are close to you. But, does that mean that it is automatically given to common man/creatures. It is also common knowledge that all creatures first reaction towards unknown creatures/beings is not open arms. Skepticism is often the first reaction and judgment upon foreign entities for both man and beast a like. Not Empathy
Yes, trust is earned. Empathy comes from experience & love is a chemical reaction.
Science can make it all sound so dry if you can't fully appreciate the complexity of the process involved.
Religious reasoning is simpler, thats its allure.
Well I wouldn't say it's simplier because it still causes for much demand. It's also the complexity of religious/faith base. That's why I found this so appealing because religion is created from Faith and in all reality people have as much faith in the practice and theories of science.
Now I of course state theories instead of facts, because in a true scientific environments constants are always changing. However, people become attached to a theorem just as easily as others to a religious faith. Creating an structuralized organization of believers very much like those of typically assumed to be "ignorant".
A lot of believers in Science are also not practitioners of science either. They indulge in the benefits of it but not really the root of it. People typically using science as a ground for facts are always treading thin ice because tomorrow reveals something yesterday was once unseen.
I personally don't hate Science, I do however detest anyone who think they can use it as a bases for hating other peoples way of conceiving the world around them.
I wouldn't say faith creates religion, I'd say its the opposite.
Humanity are natural story tellers, spinning tall tales & fictions.
Of course some people take their fiction far too seriously & start believing that the myth is fact.
As oppose to science, religion thrives on indoctrination and force-feed tactics to convince people from early ages that they are right and everyone else are wrong.
Scientist publish their researches and base their theories on said researches, they do not pull shit out of their asses and never claim this is absolute.
Religion however is based on centuries old myth and stories of metaphysical phenomenal that no one saw with their own eyes, minus the few whom told tales about them, they are absolute and have never changed, and often unquestionable. That's why if you were a muslim born like myself when you finally reach an age that the whole idea seemed absurd and unlikely at best cannot question the clerics, you cannot drop the damn thing and if you do you're considered an innate apostate and apostasy has only one sentence, murder, you're not allowed a second chance. They just murder you.
There are much better works of fiction that if they claimed they were real it could be far more easier for me to accept them. But the whole notion of some supreme cunt that dictates the fate of man from some invisible plain of existence is just absurd to me. A God that loves you but will burn you in some molten plain for all eternity. It's just horror story for children not grown adults with an acceptable amount of intelligence.
I would disagree with a lot of point you made.
"Also, where do you think your empathy really comes from? Parents? Where did they get it from? Where did the ones who taught your parents get empathy from?"
Yeah, parents and surroundings. They got from grandparents and their surroundings and so on. There is frankly no need for old books or sermons for such things.
A child grasps whatever is taught to him/her, many blindly, some come out of it.
I am probably right is assuming that Gwyn and I come from very same societies - highly religious, where being a atheist makes you stand out. Religion and Gods make zero sense once you think about it from science perspective.
"People typically using science as a ground for facts are always treading thin ice because tomorrow reveals something yesterday was once unseen."
Now this a point I absolutely disagree. I contrast, I strongly believe this is the greatest flaw of religion,god, cults and so on. How am I supposed to not believe what is in front of my eyes and believe some 3000-4000 year old book which was written at a time when man was no better than an animal?
Case in point, ALL major religious authority in the world believed in geocentric model of solar system and for CENTURIES avoided the damning evidence for a heliocentric model given by Galileo, Newton and so on. Hell, on the contrary these people were tried for treason and heresy while Galileo was smart, many other smart people like him perished.
I can never believe in such flimsy associations.
And lastly, I will gladly accept, in fact, any true follower of science/scientist will gladly accept God if someday conclusive evidence about presence of God is available.
But till that, nope. As a saying among science community goes -
"Extraordinary concepts require extraordinary proof"
@lex "You guys are missing the point. The point is you are saying science is an absolute/answer to everything."
I don't moot people are saying that. I think most people are saying that the difference is that science has *observable* answers, but religion doesn't.
And you know what? That's okay. Sometimes it's okay to believe in something beyond our understanding. Just as long as you allow others to believe what it is they want to believe freely as well, without pressure or judgement.
It's a problem when people try to push pseudo-science like the guy in that video. It only serves to make people dumber.
It's the exact same thing as claiming the earth is only 5000 years old or that it's flat, or that it's the only planet in the universe, as some christians have in the past. And in terms of the 5000 year old thing, creatonists still do.
Evolution is only theory because the data is still being examined and collected. It's very well supported, and no one has been able to disprove it.
The evolutionary process itself is fact. We just don't fully understand the rules governing it.
"It's a problem when people try to push pseudo-science like the guy in that video. It only serves to make people dumber.
Isn't that what I said?
"Just as long as you allow others to believe what it is they want to believe freely as well, without pressure or judgement."
^ I'd have to politely disagree about letting people believe what they want.
Certain fictions are entirely too toxic.
You must log in to post.