I like a world where religious nutjobs don't act like religious nutjobs. Where they don't pretend they are presenting facts and then act like *others* are the stupid ones.
I'm totally fine with a dude next to me being religious, as long as he can not ramble on about intelligent design being fact whilst calling evolution silly.
Since you see I know religious people who actually don't act obnoxious like that. I am quite literally sitting 15 feet away from one such person right now.
Believe it or not most Christians actually don't subscribe to the whole "evolution is a fairy tale" line of thought. They also don't try to pull a fast one on people by going on about intelligent design, especially when these people *flat out* do not actually believe in intelligent design and have stated this.
Quite literally Star does not believe in intelligent design, despite his little spiel about how it's totally fact. He believes in God, the biblical God, as he has said numerous times.
Originally posted by Emperordmb
I'd like a world where I can be Catholic and the dude next to me can be Athiest and we can both be fine with that, both of you are part of the reason why that can't be a reality.Ant and Q99 on the other hand seem pretty chill.
Personally, I like studying and learning about beliefs even if I don't follow 'em. There's a lot of interesting stuff in most religions.
Originally posted by Star428
A challenge for atheists:
"Atheism is neither logical nor rational and is certainly not an intelligent choice. It’s a bankrupt belief, and yes, it’s a form of religion too, and devoid of hope or any basis for morality"
The thing a lot of stuff like this doesn't get, is atheism is a category of beliefs rather than a specific belief system.
What an atheist bases their morality on can vary, and one can have an atheistic religion (Scientology being one of these), or a non religion philosophy (secular humanism), or just someone who doesn't worry about religious stuff in general.
Anyone who says atheists believe one thing doesn't get the definition. Yes, that includes anyone who goes on about how rational they are.
Also, I really don't get religious people who *insist* that atheism isn't a religion. Like, don't you think your religion is better than lack-of-religion? Why is your opposition not being a religion a sticking point for you? Is it that hard to believe someone doesn't believe in gods?
Originally posted by Time-Immemorial
YouTube video
😂 😂
Is that Q, Surtur, or Emperor in that video? I'm guessing Q since you posted right after her/him.
The teaching of evolution is linked to racism:
http://deeptruths.com/articles/big_lie_exposed.html
Hitler said in "Mein Kampf" that if you tell a lie for the purpose of propagana, tell a big one! Because the bigger the lie is, the more people are apt to believe it, because they can't possibly believe you would dare to tell such a big lie unless it was the truth!
Originally posted by Star428Star don't wanna talk to a scientist
Sorry, but Intelligent design is the ONLY thing that makes any sense whatsoever. I'm not going to rehash this whole argument over again. I've posted plenty of links to articles recently in other threads that explain why evolution is nothing but utter nonsense. Course, atheists never bother to read them because they have no interest in reading anything that might prove they've been wrong all along. So instead they just hurl insults and mock believers instead of learning the truth. Then, they make a thread like this and when someone says evolution is a lie they shout "prove it!", AGAIN. LOL. FFS, it's been proven several times over but you atheists prefer to stick your fingers in your ears and close your eyes to the evidence that unequivocally proves evolution is the biggest deception ever used on mankind.As for exactly how old the earth is, I don't think anybody can really say for sure. The so-called "fossil record" and the method used to date bones and/or fossils is a joke that relies on circular logic and the [b]assumption
that evolution is real. I'm not quite sure how old the earth is but I"m quite certain that humans as we know them today originated about 6000 years ago with Adam and Eve. The "neanderthal man" is a lie. [/B]
I always find it odd when people try to pass off atheism as a religion. Atheism, by definition, is the lack of theological faith or belief; it's the opposite of religion in the mainstream sense. Of course, various atheist communities can also follow shared principles "religiously", but nothing of the sort is inherent in atheism itself. I'm not sure why so many people want to call it one, either; are they trying to say everyone's in the same boat as them? Because, frankly, we're not.
And DMB's right, it's a weak challenge being issued when the challenger is asking the opposition to put their skin (or cash) in the game without offering their own. No one is going to buy the book for such an inane reason; try putting up some of the arguments from the book yourself if you're that confident in them, seriously.
It's not that I think atheism itself is a religion but believing in Darwinian Evolution is and it's only natural to assume that people who are atheists believe everything about evolutionary "theory". I have no problem with people believing in evolution. Freedom of religion is an American right, afterall. My issue is when people, I don't care who they are frankly, claim that it's "science". It's not.
As for that book, I don't care if atheists buy it or not. I don't make any money off of it's sale so I couldn't care less. Just linked to it any case there might be anybody interested in buying it, whether they're atheists or not. I'll probably check it out myself just for laughs. It's not like it's gonna break my checkbook. It's quite cheap.
Originally posted by Star428
It's not that I think atheism itself is a religion but believing in Darwinian Evolution is and it's only natural to assume that people who are atheists believe everything about evolutionary "theory". I have no problem with people believing in evolution. Freedom of religion is an American right, afterall. My issue is when people, I don't care who they are frankly, claim that it's "science". It's not.
In a sense, I agree with your point that "evolution" and "science" aren't interchangeable words.
That being said, evolution isn't a religion either. It's an explanation of the origins of complex life based on observations and educated inferences.
For most, it doesn't involve the worship of Charles Darwin or anyone else. 😉
Spoiler:
And, as someone who discusses religion on the internet, I'm sure you've already heard this but: theory and hypothesis aren't synonymous, man. The fact that evolution is a scientific "theory" doesn't mean it's not legitimate or certifiable. 😬
Originally posted by NewGuy01
In a sense, I agree with your point that "evolution" and "science" aren't interchangeable words.That being said, evolution isn't a religion either. It's an explanation of the origins of complex life based on observations and educated inferences.
For most, it doesn't involve the worship of Charles Darwin or anyone else. 😉
Spoiler:
And, as someone who discusses religion on the internet, I'm sure you've already heard this but: theory and hypothesis aren't synonymous, man. The fact that evolution is a scientific "theory" doesn't mean it's not legitimate or certifiable. 😬
Yes, I know "theory" and "hypothesis" are not the same thing. I don't care if you call it a theory or not. It's not provable and in fact has many many flaws in just about everything it claims. If you watch the video I posted in link back on page two, iirc, you'll see that. Sorry, but it is a religion. It's based on many absurd assumptions that require a person to believe in them without having any "proof" whatsoever. It requies great faith to believe in evolution because there's virtually no proof of any kind of it other than type six- micro-evolution. If you wanna believe in it, I don't care. Knock yourself out. Just don't expect to convert any of us who know better than to fall for that crap. It is the greatest deception ever used on mankind and Satan is laughing his ass off at those who believe we came from monkeys.
Originally posted by Star428
It's not provable
Well, that just depends on what your standards are. Obviously, we have no way of directly experiencing the past, and the overwhelming odds are that we never will. That kind of hard proof is unobtainable without a Time Machine, and to ask it of either creationists or evolutionists is absurd.
All we can do is infer based on patterns that are observable in the present day, in an attempt to learn more about our past.
and in fact has many many flaws in just about everything it claims.
Sure, evolutionary theory is imperfect. We don't have nearly all of the answers, and no educated evolutionist would claim that we do.
The Bible also has it's fair share of crazy, so pick your poison I suppose.
Sorry, but it is a religion. It requies great faith to believe in evolution because there's virtually no proof of any kind of it other than micro-evolution.
Micro-Evolution and Macro-Evolution are the exact same thing taking place over differing amounts of time.
It is the greatest deception ever used on mankind.
Throwing around lines like this in a discussion is redundant. I could say the same about religion. What's the point?
Satan is laughing his ass off at those who believe we came from monkeys.
Again, only someone excessively illiterate in evolutionary theory would claim that humans are descended from monkeys.
According to mainstream evolutionary theory, monkeys descended from an earlier species that humans also descended from at some point in the past, yes. But that can be said about all life forms, so I'm not sure what makes monkeys any more mentionable than any other creature.
They're very similar to us biologically, which means they're probably more closely related to us than other animals, sure. But they're still our distant cousins at best, not our fathers. 😂
Originally posted by Star428
Yes, I know "theory" and "hypothesis" are not the same thing. I don't care if you call it a theory or not. It's not provable and in fact has many many flaws in just about everything it claims.
Actually, it is testable and is tested with regularity.
It has been tested in labs. It has been observed in nature. It can be checked via the DNA of lineages and how much they diverge and resemble each other, as well as comparing fossils.
I mean, here's the actual-scientist's reaction to the classic "We understand Evolution as well as we do Gravity," thing:
If on a scale of 'how well we understand stuff,' Evolution is an 8 out of 10, Gravity's, like, at 3 of 10. We have equations that at far ends simply stop making sense and contradict equations of other stuff. We know how it works in some conditions, but there's other bits that we just throw up our hands and say, "Nope, no idea how gravity works there. Not even a good guess, really."
If you watch the video I posted in link back on page two, iirc, you'll see that. Sorry, but it is a religion. It's based on many absurd assumptions that require a person to believe in them without having any "proof" whatsoever.
Seriously, this is how you view Christianity too?
You seem to flip-flop on whether religion is good here. You're sounding, ironically enough, like an anti-theistic atheist.
It requies great faith to believe in evolution because there's virtually no proof of any kind of it other than type six- micro-evolution.
Uh, I will note that of the 'six types,' the person names... most of them aren't actually scientific terms to begin with.
Stellar evolution? Stars don't evolve. Some people use that term, but purely in a metaphorical, non-technical term.
Stars do have a development cycle, but it's purely a case of, "Stars are fusion. Fusion produces heavier elements. Stars with different concentrations of heavier elements undergo some physical changes, like in size and temperature." This is just dumb matter going through a development cycle, which it is visibly undergoing in front of our eyes because, hey, we can *see* it fusing.
Sorta like how you might say a sponge that gets wet 'grows' but you don't literally mean it grows like a plant.
Most of those, well, there is obviously change there, quite observable in most cases, but evolution refers to a life process.
And considering we've got dinosaurs with feathers, pre-hatched chickens have dinosaur-esque teeth, we've got the common ancestor of cats and dogs, we've got land animals becoming whales, all with fossil evidence, we've got tons of evidence of all of it.
Heck, just look at amphibians, especially older more primitive ones. They're so obviously descended from fish, and reptiles so obviously came from earlier amphibians.
There's an obvious progression, fish with gills > Fish with gills and lungs in water > fish with gills and lungs that go on land sometimes (lungfish, mudskippers) > amphibians with gills and lungs that spend a lot of time in both land and water > amphibians with just lungs that spend a lot of time in both land and water > reptiles that are a whole lot like those amphibians except their skin retains water better and they lay harder eggs that can work on land > other more diverse reptiles.
Each step is smallish. The result is huge. What, supposedly, is the mechanism that prevents larger changes from simply coming from smaller changes accumulating? Which is, btw, what real evolutionary scientists say is what happens.