Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
I have stated on a number of occasions that, to me at least, belief is something that is earned. If you have a compelling argument based on sound reasoning for your belief then you will have earned the right to hold that belief.
When I started posting here two years ago one of my first threads was posted in general apologetics for the simple purpose of asking theists why they believe. All I have ever asked for is a rational argument. To this day every thread I start along this vein gets largely ignored.
So after two years I am still at square one. I have yet to hear from one theist that can present me with a compelling argument for why I should believe that man was magically created in his present form instead of by evolutionary processes.
I am a man of reason. I am a reasonable man. I will not abandon beliefs that I hold which are based on reason for those stepped in faith no matter how much you threaten me with postmortem fire and brimstone. The only thing that will ever change my beliefs is a superior argument based on evidence and reason.
So I ask again. If there is a theist that can defend his or her beliefs, I would like for them to present me with an argument as to why I should place stock in their beliefs instead of the TofE. I'm looking for reasoning based on epistemologically sound knowledge and not logical fallacies. I don't want to hear Pascal's Wager rehashed. I want to have a reasonable discussion.
Are there any theists up for this challenge or should we all just accept that Creation vs. Evolution = Faith vs. Reason and admit that this isn't really a valid debate at all.
__________________
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." -- Stephen Roberts
"There once was a time when all people believed in God and the church ruled. This time was called the Dark Ages." -- Richard Lederer
"No, his mind is not for rent
To any God or government."
-- Rush
Last edited by AnEmpiricalAgnostic; 1st June 2007 at 01:07 PM.
Are there any theists up for this challenge or should we all just accept that Creation vs. Evolution = Faith vs. Reason and admit that this isn't really a valid debate at all.
I hope this isn't off topic, but...
Whether or not this is true (and it isn't), this really isn't the sort of thing you should say publically. You're well aware that fundamentalist Christians have a lot of political sway in America. Remember two things: first, over half of voting Americans believe in creationism. Secondly, the proposed marriage amendment is an excellent example of how fundamentalist Christian interests can even result in discussions of constitutional amendments (and I say this as someone who is against gay marriage). The reason a lot of people are against teaching evolution in school is because they believe that it is contrary to Christian faith. What makes it worse is that we scientists tend to be an arrogant bunch, and the science-worshiping non-scientists who follow us around are even more pompous. In our noble quest to discern the great truths of the universe, many of us fail to learn the art of public relations. Maybe that's why so many school districts are voting to teach creationism.
So I'll make a simple and pragmatic suggestion: if you (mis)use evolution to tick off enough voters, we're going to wind up living in a country where creationism and other pseudoscience are written into law. Once the legislature speaks, it doesn't really matter how much evidence there is for evolution. So my suggestion is that those of you who believe evolution to be opposed to faith should keep your personal beliefs to yourself. This goes double for those of you who may be in positions of scientific authority. All it would take is enough angry faithful voters to put the angry atheists in their place. Normally I'd love to see that, but I don't want science to go down the tube with you guys.
__________________ Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only Son of God. (John 3:18)
Then I'd like to hear your reasoning as to why it isn't. I've spent two years trying to give theists every opportunity to show me that this isn't true and have yet to hear one single argument that isn't based on blind faith and faulty logic. Can you? Know anyone that can?
Originally Posted by arunma
, this really isn't the sort of thing you should say publically.
And why not? I'm not one of those people that think that religious beliefs deserve some kind of default respect. Beliefs are beliefs. They range from the well supported to the asinine. If you want me to lend any belief merit then you must give me a reason to.
Originally Posted by arunma
You're well aware that fundamentalist Christians have a lot of political sway in America.
Fundamentalist Christians don't have nearly as much political sway as they would like to believe. The problem is that most non-christian voters are generally apathetic. With proper motivation they will vote fundamentalists right out just like Dover. I only hope enough reasonable people will turn out for the major elections to make sure that reasonable people get put in charge for a change.
Originally Posted by arunma
Remember two things: first, over half of voting Americans believe in creationism.
I'd like to see where you get that number. Either you have to be using the term creationism loosely here or you know something I don't. There just aren't that many fundamentalists.
Originally Posted by arunma
The reason a lot of people are against teaching evolution in school is because they believe that it is contrary to Christian faith.
I like the word corrosive myself. It's not evolution though. Education in general is corrosive to all kinds of "faith". Should we let religious zealots start burning down libraries again?
Originally Posted by arunma
What makes it worse is that we scientists tend to be an arrogant bunch, and the science-worshiping non-scientists who follow us around are even more pompous.
I can't think of anything more arrogant than dismissing the hard work of the scientific community because one is convinced that their faith based beliefs are superior.
Originally Posted by arunma
In our noble quest to discern the great truths of the universe, many of us fail to learn the art of public relations.
Yes, the church is famous for its public relations. All these fundamentalists railing against evolution are public relation artists. What is so offensive about calling out this faith based belief of magically created humans for what it is? These same anti-science fundamentalists try and undermine education whenever they can. It's time people started pointing a spotlight on their beliefs too.
Originally Posted by arunma
Maybe that's why so many school districts are voting to teach creationism.
Maybe it's because the power once held by the church is slipping away and fundamentalists make desperate political maneuvers when their system of control is in its death throws.
Originally Posted by arunma
So I'll make a simple and pragmatic suggestion: if you (mis)use evolution to tick off enough voters, we're going to wind up living in a country where creationism and other pseudoscience are written into law.
Evolution is just a poster child for a much larger problem. Active theists have taken advantage of atheistic apathy and slowly eroded the separation of church and state for too long. Maybe it's time this gets pulled out into the open. There are far more free thinkers than theists would like to believe. It's time they they stood up for their rights too.
Originally Posted by arunma
Once the legislature speaks, it doesn't really matter how much evidence there is for evolution.
Legislature can always be changed. This country will never be a theocracy. Even flirting with the idea shows that we would lose our technological advantage in a heart beat. It would be another dark age only this time there will be other countries like China poised to carry the torch.
Originally Posted by arunma
So my suggestion is that those of you who believe evolution to be opposed to faith should keep your personal beliefs to yourself.
I'm well aware that theists are capable of performing the mental acrobatics necessary to reconcile evolution with their beliefs. I want to hear from those who still think their belief in magical creation of man is superior to the TofE. I would like to hear a reasonable argument to show me why this concept deserves to even be discussed along side evolution much less offered as a viable alternative. Anyone?
Originally Posted by arunma
This goes double for those of you who may be in positions of scientific authority. All it would take is enough angry faithful voters to put the angry atheists in their place. Normally I'd love to see that, but I don't want science to go down the tube with you guys.
I'd like to see them try. Just like Dover, they will be in for a very rude awakening. Please, let them keep pushing this into the lime light. More reasonable people need to become aware that these people even exist so that these faith based initiatives can be squashed one by one.
__________________
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." -- Stephen Roberts
"There once was a time when all people believed in God and the church ruled. This time was called the Dark Ages." -- Richard Lederer
Whether or not this is true (and it isn't), this really isn't the sort of thing you should say publically.
I disagree. This is exactly the kind of thing we should be saying publically, loudly and often. Just because the gorilla in the room is easily offended doesn't mean we have to bow to his ignorance. Yes, we might take some lumps... but in the end the truth always... ALWAYS wins out.
You're well aware that fundamentalist Christians have a lot of political sway in America. Remember two things: first, over half of voting Americans believe in creationism. Secondly, the proposed marriage amendment is an excellent example of how fundamentalist Christian interests can even result in discussions of constitutional amendments (and I say this as someone who is against gay marriage). The reason a lot of people are against teaching evolution in school is because they believe that it is contrary to Christian faith.
And they're wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. I simply refuse to bow to ignorance.
What makes it worse is that we scientists tend to be an arrogant bunch, and the science-worshiping non-scientists who follow us around are even more pompous. In our noble quest to discern the great truths of the universe, many of us fail to learn the art of public relations. Maybe that's why so many school districts are voting to teach creationism.
Or perhaps they're just pandering to the lowest common denominator.
So I'll make a simple and pragmatic suggestion: if you (mis)use evolution to tick off enough voters, we're going to wind up living in a country where creationism and other pseudoscience are written into law. Once the legislature speaks, it doesn't really matter how much evidence there is for evolution. So my suggestion is that those of you who believe evolution to be opposed to faith should keep your personal beliefs to yourself. This goes double for those of you who may be in positions of scientific authority. All it would take is enough angry faithful voters to put the angry atheists in their place. Normally I'd love to see that, but I don't want science to go down the tube with you guys.
Then don't misuse it. Point to it for exactly what it is and don't ever hide behind knowledge. Because as long as religionists insist upon their personal beliefs being public spectacle I see no option but to respond with the truth.
__________________ "The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others, unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. They must learn to make their views known without trying to make their views the only alternatives. ..." - Barry Goldwater
Yeah I don't believe in keeping quiet to be polite (or show "respect") to certain belief's anymore. That's how they got whatever "power" they have now, which they obviously are not prepared to handle. No more Mr Nice Guy/Gal. I see a huge backlash coming against the self righteous and ignorant.
Whether or not this is true (and it isn't), this really isn't the sort of thing you should say publically.
Galileo Galilei surely didn't keep his discovery a secret. It was faith vs reason then and it is faith vs reason now. All levels of Evolution has been proven beyond reasonable doubt, Biological creationism has yet to yield one argument not based on pure assertion and that hasn't been debunked by a well documented observation. Creationists, even 'professional' ones, have effectively demonstrated that they will believe virtually anything that is presented as evidence for creationism. Willfully withholding information giving thousands of half truths and outright lies, publishing papers on features of tiktaallik which have not yet been released(lies), comparing human B-cells adaption to Flavobacterium, stating outright that there will never be evidence they accept against Christianity, publishing baseless probability statistics against evolution, ignoring hundreds of times that Evolution operates on more than one function, the list goes on and on.
Galileo Galilei surely didn't keep his discovery a secret. It was faith vs reason then and it is faith vs reason now.
Quoted for emphasis.
If you don't believe me take my challenge.
And quoted again for emphasis. You can find her challenge here. The only challenger thus far failed spectacularly. If creationists can not come up with 5 pieces of positive scientific evidence to support their case why should we take it seriously? If creationism and ID are completely absent in peer reviewed journals how can it ever make it's way into science classrooms? And again, why should scientists take it seriously if it can not produce original scientific research?
EA's challenge in this thread is even broader than science. Thus far the only answer to the challenge is a complaint that creationism and christianity as a whole should not be criticized. To paraphrase someone whose name escapes me, there are no sacred cows in science. I believe, along with EA, that this applies to all beliefs. If a belief can not stand up to scrutiny then it is not worth believing to begin with.
__________________ "Since YAC [Young-Age Creation] epistemology accepts Biblical claims over physical evidence and human reason, logical or evidential arguments for evolution and/or against YAC are likely to be ineffective in converting most YACists."--Kurt Wise
If a belief can not stand up to scrutiny then it is not worth believing to begin with.
Signature material
__________________
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." -- Stephen Roberts
"There once was a time when all people believed in God and the church ruled. This time was called the Dark Ages." -- Richard Lederer
[/size]
The only challenger thus far failed spectacularly. If creationists can not come up with 5 pieces of positive scientific evidence to support their case why should we take it seriously?
I can try to make a list of what a Creationist would use on that list as positive "proof" of Intelligent Design/Creationism.
1. The Bible supports Creationism
2. The Bible was written by men who had access to the word of God
3. The word of God is the absolute truth
4. X REFUTES 0.01% OF EVOLUTION, THEREFORE EVOLUTION IS WRONG AND CREATIONISM IS RIGHT
Darn, I got lost at 5. Sorry.
Anyway - Back on topic, I don't think you'll ever find a Religious person that can defend his or her Religion without using easily refutable "Science" or just coming up with random facts which roots in a deep ignorance on the topic or being under the assumption the Bible is the ultimate truth and nobody can critise it without being wrong.
I know you're not being serious but I will go ahead and answer.
2. The Bible was written by men who had access to the word of God
3. The word of God is the absolute truth
These points must be direct, clearly defined, based on evidence(you must cite the evidence), be fasifiable, and pertaining specifically to Evolution.
4. X REFUTES 0.01% OF EVOLUTION, THEREFORE EVOLUTION IS WRONG AND CREATIONISM IS RIGHT
I issue a challenge to you to raise five points against Evolution and five points supporting Biological creationism.
These points must be direct, clearly defined, based on evidence(you must cite the evidence), be fasifiable, and pertaining specifically to Evolution.
Darn, I got lost at 5.
You really only had the start of two.
I don't think you'll ever find a Religious person that can defend his or her Religion without using easily refutable "Science" or just coming up with random facts which roots in a deep ignorance on the topic or being under the assumption the Bible is the ultimate truth and nobody can critise it without being wrong.
Based on current evidence, this is true.
However, there are liberal Christians out there that attempt to bring Christianity back into rational grounds, but they fail because disregarding one line of the bible is the same as being an Atheist or of another religion.
Creation vs. Evolution = Faith vs. Reason? 
What is so offensive about calling out this faith based belief of magically created humans for what it is? These same anti-science fundamentalists try and undermine education whenever they can. It's time people started pointing a spotlight on their beliefs too.
Sorry.
Linear Mode
