- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
03 May 14
Originally posted by RJHindsAtheism existed LONG before evolution was discovered, and neither needs nor
The problem you guys have with me is that I challenge the lies of evolution that you guys need to support your atheism.
relies on evolutionary theory for support.
If you were to completely disprove evolution [effectively impossible] that would
have no effect on my lack of belief in gods.
So you are not only pig ignorant about evolution, you are also [after all this time]
still pig ignorant about atheists as well.
Originally posted by googlefudgeAnd not only atheism existed LONG before evolution was discovered and thus RJHinds is wrong with equating one with the other there, but many evolutionists are theists and that includes Christians and see no contradiction between their theism and evolution because they believe God guides evolution. Although I would obviously personally reject the idea of a god guiding anything including evolution, the point is the very existence of theists that believe the scientific fact of evolution proves that believing evolution doesn't equate with disbelieving that there is a god, i.e. atheism, like RJHinds seems to make out. So his proves he is wrong on at least two accounts.
Atheism existed LONG before evolution was discovered, and neither needs nor
relies on evolutionary theory for support.
If you were to completely disprove evolution [effectively impossible] that would
have no effect on my lack of belief in gods.
So you are not only pig ignorant about evolution, you are also [after all this time]
still pig ignorant about atheists as well.
He seems to believe evolution always means atheism and atheism always means evolution when clearly neither is true -such is his delusions.
03 May 14
Originally posted by googlefudgeHowever, atheists needed a substitute for a god and a religion and evolution was devised to fill the gap.
Atheism existed LONG before evolution was discovered, and neither needs nor
relies on evolutionary theory for support.
If you were to completely disprove evolution [effectively impossible] that would
have no effect on my lack of belief in gods.
So you are not only pig ignorant about evolution, you are also [after all this time]
still pig ignorant about atheists as well.
03 May 14
Originally posted by humyAn atheist before Darwin could have said, following Hume: "I have no explanation for complex biological design. All I know is that God isn't a good explanation, so we must wait and hope that somebody comes up with a better one." I can't help feeling that such a position, though logically sound, would have left one feeling pretty unsatisfied, and that although atheism might have been logically tenable before Darwin, Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist.
And not only atheism existed LONG before evolution was discovered and thus RJHinds is wrong with equating one with the other there, but many evolutionists are theists and that includes Christians and see no contradiction between their theism and evolution because they believe God guides evolution. Although I would obviously personally reject the idea of ...[text shortened]... atheism and atheism always means evolution when clearly neither is true -such is his delusions.
-- Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (1986), page 6
Over in the atheist wing of the evolution camp, Eugenie Scott strategized and commiserated with, and sometimes chided, her fellow secular humanists this past weekend on a Minnesota radio program called Atheists Talk. Scott is Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education, and a fine person. Atheists are sometimes hostile when faced with evolution criticism, but not Scott. I have opposed her occasionally in debates and discussions and she is always professional and respectful.
Scott's strong diplomacy skills are needed not only in defending evolution (not an easy task). She also needs those skills in dealing with her fellow evolutionists who sometimes want to make war with those of us who don't worship Darwin's god.
The NCSE's strategy, therefore, is to remove religious obstacles to evolution. The evolution camp is chocked full of theists, many of whom are more than happy to spread the good word of why theology, properly understood, mandates evolution and not divine creation or intelligent design. And the NCSE understands that religion is too big a force to oppose. So why oppose a giant that can instead be your ally? There are, however, three problems with the NCSE's strategy.
First, the NCSE underestimates religious differences.
Second, the NCSE underestimates the scientific obstacles to evolution. Those who worship Darwin's god don't mind, but others do.
Finally, the NCSE underestimates the transparency of its motives. Evolutionists are driven by their theology and metaphysics to claim that we must accept a silly theory as fact. And all of this is obvious.
When they ignore fundamental scientific problems and declare evolution to be a fact, it is not because they know something we don't. It is because they have no choice. Atheism is compatible with evolution, period. Evolution made atheism respectable, and atheists cannot let it go.
-- Cornelius Hunter, Tuesday, May 5, 2009
http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2009/05/atheists-strategize-on-minnesota-radio.html
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
04 May 14
Originally posted by RJHindsAtheism is not a choice but a state of mind. Accepting evolution is not a
When they ignore fundamental scientific problems and declare evolution to be a fact, it is not because they know something we don't. It is because they have no choice. Atheism is compatible with evolution, period. Evolution made atheism respectable, and atheists cannot let it go.
choice but a state of mind. You either believe a given proposition, or you
don't, and you never hold on to an idea because you wish it to be
true, but because you're convinced that it's true. All that's needed to
convince an intellectually honest person is sufficient evidence.
So the question with the obvious answer becomes, why are creationists
desperately holding on to their ridiculous beliefs in spite of the
overwhelming evidence for evolution?
It's because they have no choice. They believe that evolution (even
science) will eventually turn everyone away from religious dogma, and most
likely they're right. So their only option is to stand on the front-line of the
untenable, with blinders over their eyes, shouting in ever more fervent
conviction their insipid mantras and half-baked attempts at ridicule, while
the rest of the world slowly turns to the physical reality of things; to better
this one shot we know we have at a meaningful life, through scientific,
moral and social progression.
04 May 14
1 edit
In this modern day of science and reason, except for the extremely ignorant and totally uneducated, theism is a choice for those that choice their beliefs and thus are delusional while atheism is for those that don't choose their beliefs and thus are not delusional.
Originally posted by C HessThe atheisf's whole purpose in promoting the theory of evolution is to eliminate faith in God and to foster the false doctrine that the creation created itself, so there doesn't need to be a God. This doctrine of delusion is now referred to as the "great principle" of biology.
Atheism is not a choice but a state of mind. Accepting evolution is not a
choice but a state of mind. You either believe a given proposition, or you
don't, and you never hold on to an idea because you wish it to be
true, but because you're convinced that it's true. All that's needed to
convince an intellectually honest person is sufficie ...[text shortened]... e shot we know we have at a meaningful life, through scientific,
moral and social progression.
To overcome problems with evolution, the atheists simply state the problems do not exist and change definitions that eliminate the problems. For example the "missing links" were called transitional fossils by Darwin to make them seem less missing. And today all plant and animal species are merely transitional forms that are links in a chain of life that are gradually evolving into more advanced stages. It is simple atheist dogmatism to assert that what you want to believe did in fact happen.
- Joined
- 31 Aug 06
- Moves
- 40565
04 May 14
Originally posted by RJHinds😵🙄😵
The atheisf's whole purpose in promoting the theory of evolution is to eliminate faith in God and to foster the false doctrine that the creation created itself, so there doesn't need to be a God. This doctrine of delusion is now referred to as the "great principle" of biology.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
04 May 14
Originally posted by RJHindsWrong. And not science, or science related.
However, atheists needed a substitute for a god and a religion and evolution was devised to fill the gap.
Science vs religion and atheism are SPIRITUALITY forum topics.
Not science forum topics.
So To the Mods.
Boot this creationist the hell out of science.
Permentently
05 May 14
Originally posted by googlefudgeWhy are you so bothered? You don't have to read my comments.
Wrong. And not science, or science related.
Science vs religion and atheism are SPIRITUALITY forum topics.
Not science forum topics.
So To the Mods.
Boot this creationist the hell out of science.
Permentently
