6 Simple arguments to disproving Atheism (once and for all)

[Arikay]

Ok, so you lied about me in the last post to me, yet Obbi is the troll. Hmm, something isn't right here.

 

[mo.mentum]

Ok, so you lied about me in the last post to me, yet Obbi is the troll. Hmm, something isn't right here.

I lied about you? Explain. I might have told you to stop arguing and show me concrete evidence for Evolution or even simply show me a how ONE process works and convince me of it. But you guys do none of the sort. You content youselves by sitting back and picking on my arguments 'cuz i forgot to spell a word right or something. Yet never exposing your arguments cuz u know i would just as easily rip them apart. At least I have the courage to show everyone my ideas and let everyone digest them at their own liking.

You guys just keep moaning and whining about how i "dont understand evolution" yet you've done no effort in clarifying this great wonderful theory of yours.

But whatever..nothing new here! i aint spank ***** yet

 

[Arikay]

Yes,

You said:
"You keep speaking of having proof and it being proven for sure 100%...you're just as guilty as the geocentrists."

I have never spoken about it being proven 100%, matter of fact, in this very thread I spoke about how Nothing can be proven 100% but you can get very close.
It makes me wonder how much you read.

The biggest problem is because you dont appear to understand evolution, you wont find any evidence for it, as many strawman versions of evolution are false, thus no evidence will be found for them.
However, what kind of evidence would you like?
and remember, there is no silver bullet for evolution, its a combination of lots of evidence that make it the most likely thing that happend and is happening.

 

[Smilin]

ya'll still arguing over evolution in the 'other religions' forum..

hahhaha... somebody took a wrong turn at the stop sign

 

[vajradhara]

Namaste all,

well... this seems right on point then.

Stephen J. Gould has put this as well as anyone else:

In the American vernacular, "theory" often means "imperfect fact"--part of a hierarchy of confidence running downhill from fact to theory to hypothesis to guess. Thus the power of the creationist argument: evolution is "only" a theory and intense debate now rages about many aspects of the theory. If evolution is worse than a fact, and scientists can't even make up their minds about the theory, then what confidence can we have in it? Indeed, President Reagan echoed this argument before an evangelical group in Dallas when he said (in what I devoutly hope was campaign rhetoric): "Well, it is a theory. It is a scientific theory only, and it has in recent years been challenged in the world of science--that is, not believed in the scientific community to be as infallible as it once was."


Well evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.

Moreover, "fact" doesn't mean "absolute certainty"; there ain't no such animal in an exciting and complex world. The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us falsely for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional consent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.

Evolutionists have been very clear about this distinction of fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually emphasized the difference between his two great and separate accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a theory--natural selection--to explain the mechanism of evolution.
- Stephen J. Gould, " Evolution as Fact and Theory"; Discover, May 1981


for more information, please feel free to visit this site:
http://www.talkorigins.org/


​

 

[Arikay]

One thing thats interesting is look at the date on that quote, 1981. 22 years ago. Yet, it still comes up, time and time again, that evolution is "only a theory"

also it should be noted, that we base life and death decisions on "only theories" like Germ theory. It is "only a theory" yet people dont seem to be skimping on the antibiotics, because it hasn't been "proven" yet or anything.

 

[kris4h]

arikay,

i thought you were an athiest...werent youarguing against me?

 

[kris4h]

oh! srry nevermind, i thought you made this stream...for stupid reasons.

 

[Arikay]

I am an atheist. But science doesn't equal atheism, and evolution doesn't equal atheism. So, when it comes to science, the theist, the agnostic, and the atheist all agree. Its actually a very nice common ground.

 

[Charles Darwin]

mo, as you yourself said, science is the method and it can lead both ways (i quoted you earlier but am too tired to do so again now) so why do you insist that the way it led you is the right one?

 

[mo.mentum]

Yes,

You said:
"You keep speaking of having proof and it being proven for sure 100%...you're just as guilty as the geocentrists."

I have never spoken about it being proven 100%, matter of fact, in this very thread I spoke about how Nothing can be proven 100% but you can get very close.
It makes me wonder how much you read.

The biggest problem is because you dont appear to understand evolution, you wont find any evidence for it, as many strawman versions of evolution are false, thus no evidence will be found for them.
However, what kind of evidence would you like?
and remember, there is no silver bullet for evolution, its a combination of lots of evidence that make it the most likely thing that happend and is happening.

*sigh*

I just did a recap of the last 4 months of our debate. And I have not seen anything worty of an argument from "your side". I'm still quite convinced you're just good at mouthing off at my arguments without putting anything forth

You keep saying i have a distorted view of evolution. I don't even think you understand the term, anymore

 

[mo.mentum]

mo, as you yourself said, science is the method and it can lead both ways (i quoted you earlier but am too tired to do so again now) so why do you insist that the way it led you is the right one?

Because so far, the "other way" has not shown itself to be valid. All the "other way" has been able to do is dissect semantics without any concrete arguments.

So i see no reason to switch sides. Nor have i seen a reason why poeple on the "other way" stick to their evolutionist ideas, other than it being the coolest thing to do if you dont wanna be labelled a religious fanatic.

 

[Arikay]

Your right though, I didn't provide much evidence to support my side, I spent most of my time trying to correct your misunderstandings. Such as the original misunderstanding that evolution and science = atheism. Remember, you did not start this thread asking questions, you didn't start it asking for evidence for evolution. You started it with the declaration that atheism was false, and proceeded to use bad or missunderstood evidence to prove your point.
Maybe if you had started the thread with questions instead of statements, you would have the evidence you keep saying you want.

Ok, so, if you know so much about evolution, then can you give me a basic explination of the theory of evolution?

Beyond that, maybe you should specify exactly what kind of evidence you are looking for? As I will find evidence to support my side, but I wont waste my time going about finding it, and have it all waved away because you wanted something else, or because you have decided to move the goal posts.

*sigh*

I just did a recap of the last 4 months of our debate. And I have not seen anything worty of an argument from "your side". I'm still quite convinced you're just good at mouthing off at my arguments without putting anything forth

You keep saying i have a distorted view of evolution. I don't even think you understand the term, anymore

 

[mo.mentum]

Beyond that, maybe you should specify exactly what kind of evidence you are looking for? As I will find evidence to support my side, but I wont waste my time going about finding it, and have it all waved away because you wanted something else, or because you have decided to move the goal posts.

I shouldn't be asking for evidence. If you think Evolution is our best answer yet, then you should be showing me the best evidence you've got!

The goal post is still the same. Atheism, like all other -isms, will fall.

 

[Arikay]

Uh hu, yep and we all know what will happen when its given, it will be waved away as "not good enough."

And thus I would like to know what evidence you are looking for, thus if it exists, you can not say that it wasn't what you were looking for.

I say "if it exists" because if you are looking for evidence for a strawman, then it probably wont exist, for example, you wont find evidence of a lizard giving birth to a bird, because thats not how evolution works.

Speaking of how evolution works, since you seem to know so much about it, im amazed you didn't answer my question,
Can you give a basic explination of evolution?

Oh and you do realize theism is an ism, right? Islam would be part of theism.

I shouldn't be asking for evidence. If you think Evolution is our best answer yet, then you should be showing me the best evidence you've got!

The goal post is still the same. Atheism, like all other -isms, will fall.

 

[mo.mentum]

you wont find evidence of a lizard giving birth to a bird, because thats not how evolution works.

Come on. Give me a little credit here. You're belittling me with that comment.

Can you give a basic explination of evolution?

Off top of my head in 5 seconds: a set of biological mechanisms that will enhance or repress certain characteristics of a living being in order to bring about favourable change for the said being, or its demise.

Several mechanisms have been suggested, none have withstood scientifc scrutiny to day.

Alot of the evidence that has been touted consists of "connect the dots" kind of fossil evidence, or genetic similarities in mitochondria and the likes. Still doesn't explain how come we have a closer affinity with swine than apes.

Oh and you do realize theism is an ism, right? Islam would be part of theism.

Islam is in a category on its own because it is totalist. IE: it regards all -isms, including all theisms, as invalid and false but are to be tolerated because humans will never cease to be arrogant and submit to God completely.

Plus, it isnt an -ism


Ok anyway, so give me a list of mechanisms that might be considered as preliminary proof for Evolution.

 

[Arikay]

To add to that.

One big problem is that you need to understand that evolution does not equal atheism. Until you understand that, or understand that evolution does not attack your beliefs, there is a good chance you will dismiss any evidence I give you. Because you may see it as supporting atheism, or being anti islamic, and thus, no matter how good the evidence is, you can not accept it, since you religion is more important than science.

This is unfortunatly the attitude of many creationist groups, they have labeled their interpretation of the bible as the only correct one, and thus they see anything that does not agree with their already formed conclusion as an attack on their religion, and thus they will dismiss it no matter what.

 

[Charles Darwin]

I shouldn't be asking for evidence. If you think Evolution is our best answer yet, then you should be showing me the best evidence you've got!

The goal post is still the same. Atheism, like all other -isms, will fall.

Unlike yourself, evolutionists and those who support it dont care about whether or not you believe in what is says just as long as you dont misrepresent the ideas behind it and mangle the information put forth to support it for your benefit. No we dont need to be laying it all at your feet.

Evolution is not something that people generally care about how popular it is. The main conflict arises when people scoff at it (or on the flip side, creation) for invalid and reasons that have nothing to do with the actual belief/idea itself. So no, we dont need to show you all this in some mad atempt to change an obviously closed mind because changing your opinion is not the goal, its to expand your acceptence at this point.

 

[Charles Darwin]

The goal post is still the same. Atheism, like all other -isms, will fall.

So what about raliens? as far as i can tell their beliefs arent an -ism. Might wanna make sure your a little more specific on your claims, as arikay has also pointed out about what kind of evidence you want. Its like saying that something will never happen. Never is a dangerous word, and just as often being to broad is as well.

 

[Smilin]

Ok anyway, so give me a list of mechanisms that might be considered as preliminary proof for Evolution.

1. Antibiotic resistant strains of bacterium

2. Selective reproduction of horses, dogs, cats,
sheep, etc which produce new breeds constantly.
(Modern cows originiated from one common ancestor
which still existed within the last century...your homework
assignment..identify it)

3. Selective speciation which has been observed.

4. Racial diversity among the human race

5. Neanderthals

6. Most plants you landscape with...(no they weren't
created by a supernatural entity, they were created
by men using the mechanisms of evolution)

7. Compare canines with wolves, coyotes, and foxes
and you'll discover which was the common ancestor.

Want more?