Science leads materialist atheist to reject atheism

[Estrid]

All you really have there is another Argument from Incredulity, which I doubt will persuade too many materialist atheists. But since I'm not a materialist atheist myself, I wouldn't know about that for sure.

Just call it " no sensible person"

 

[BobRyan]

All you really have there is another Argument from Incredulity,

That's like saying "I reject your argument that John did not shoot his neighbor in Texas from 20 yards away - since John was in Australia at the time his neighbor was shot in his home and John is blind --- because to accept your argument is to admitting to such a fact would be to accept - argument from incredulity".

 

[BobRyan]

Also, brains came along long after life first came about, so your quips about "rocks did it" don't apply.

Funny thing about "sequences" that is how it works.

A ball of mud rolling down hill does not later become an ice cream sandwich. there is no "sequence" that does that.

 

[Yttrium]

That's like saying "I reject your argument that John did not shoot his neighbor in Texas from 20 yards away - since John was in Australia at the time his neighbor was shot in his home and John is blind --- because to accept your argument is to admitting to such a fact would be to accept - argument from incredulity".

That's... kinda the opposite of an Argument from Incredulity, because you're providing supporting evidence. The Argument from Incredulity is when you can't figure out how it was done, so you assume that it couldn't have happened.

Funny thing about "sequences" that is how it works.

A ball of mud rolling down hill does not later become an ice cream sandwich. there is no "sequence" that does that.

Whether a brain can develop from simpler forms of life and whether life can come from non-life are separate issues.

 

[stevil]

Then, you don't understand how basic organs work. If you're going to rely on random lucky mutations to develop eyes for seeing, for example, randomly flipping values in the gene sequence does not give you all the needed elements to obtain a set of functioning eyes.

Evolution has both a random element (mutations) which creates new information, new capabilities and also a non random element (selective pressures) which means that the more successful structures are more likely to survive and create copies of themselves and propagate throughout the population, where as the less successful structures will die off and not create copies of themselves.

It's a basic concept which is very easy to comprehend.

It is disingenuous to disregard the selective pressures part and to portray evolution as being entirely random.