I will have to shed my uber-liberal cape for this one.

Here is an article slamming intelligent design:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...AGK2EVDAE1.DTL

This really irks me. Evolution is a theory that arose to explain why we are here. Famous and brilliant minds such as Stephen Hawking and Charles Darwin understood the complexity of evolution, conceding that there must be something else in the mix. Peopl mistakingly attribute Darwin to being the mastermind of popular theory of evolution. Wrong! He instead proved micro-evolution, that is evolution within a species, all the while postulating on macro-evolution (to which there is no absolute proof).

The achilles heal in the theory of macro-evolution is that matter can neither be created nor destroyed. We know this. So if that is the case, then I would argue that there is something above what we know that can indeed create.

And back to this article... this author's depracating approach to anything outside of her own field of vision falls into the same category as blowhards like O'Reilly whom I despise.

Peace

:dons liberal cape and puts on flamesuit for extra measures:

 

Wow...I'm gonna have to say that your connection between conservation of matter and evolution is...well...in a word...inappropriate. Matter cannot be made or destroyed (well technically small bits can be turned into/ made from energy...but that's rare and small) BUT it CAN be changed. All animals are made up of atoms that were created millenia ago in the big bang (or whatever). They just get made up into different forms, dirrected by molecules called DNA. DNA changes over time because of randomly (yes, it can be shown that the mutations are totally random...) inserted mutations. That's evolution...the long term effect of small mutations in the 'blue prints' of living things. Hard to debate that it doesn't happen.


Now if you want to say that a god created the big bang (known as the 'clockmaker' view of god I think, where he created matter then let nature take it's course), then you're right; it could be both. But most modern forms of religion (especially those who believe in intelligent design) don't take that view; they say a god created all of the different kinds of animals, and that I have a problem with.

 

Yes, evolution explains everything. It means every race is different, some superior than others, because we evolved differently, and that homosexuality means our species has a date with extinction.

Scientifically speaking, homosexuality might be a characteristic and scientific sign that humans with such tendencies shouldn't procreate, right?

 

If evolution had given different races different intrinsic traits that corelated with looks, they'd be called species instead of races...ignoramus. You sound like the 18th century scientists who, when looking at the proof for evolution, came up with the 'Bell Curve' idea that those of African decent are less apt to learn than those of European decent...in the 100+ years since then idiots like you have been driven clear of the scientific fields.

I can't comment on the gay thing because noone has proven if it's a genetic or aquired trait, or what the % it is of each of those.

 

Exactly. True Atheism is a mental all too similar to extreme religion.

 

BTW, I have no problem with public schools teaching something about intelligent design...as long as it's in an elective class about religion and philosophy. There is no proof for intelligent design, there is no evidense other than the bible, so it DOES NOT belong in ANY science classroom. It simply isn't science. Would you teach about physics in a class about religion? Because physics can explain things that happen in the bible...but they don't teach that, because physics isn't religion. It really pisses me off that people try to pass what they BELIEVE off as science...I don't care if you believe it, I don't care if you teach it, just stop saying it's a f***ing science and don't shove it down the throat of unsuspecting school kids.

 

Well...I can see that argument against atheism...but here's how I see it.

It's actually not a belief. It is a point of view that says I don't believe in anything that isn't supported by some type of proof. You seem to be saying that that pov is flawed; but actually, it's really common sense.

There's nothing else in my life that people ask me to disprooveexcept religion. What's stupid about even saying that 'if you can't disprove it, you only believe that it doesn't exist' is that it is impossible to prove that anything does NOT exist. Unicorns for example. I've never seen one. I don't know anyone that has. But some people say they have... no way to disprove it, but if someone actually showed me one they would have proven to me that they do exist...but I'm leaning towards them not existing. Do you believe in unicorns?

Same argument for UFOs. I've never seen one. But a s***load of people believe they exist. I know that statistically speaking there IS life on some other planet, but the likelyhood of them finding us or vise versa is nearly 0. So I can't PROVE that there's never been an alien on earth, but I'm pretty damn sure there never has been.

Can you think of an example of something that a fraction of humans believe exist that you CAN prove doesn't exist? I can't.


In other words, the burden of proof is on those who DO believe to prove that something exists, not on those who DON'T believe to prove that it doesn't. Hence I don't BELIEVE that a god doesn't exist; I merely do not believe that one does. Lack of belief is not belief.

 

It's not common sense, it's pigheadedness. Common sense would have you believe what Joan Ryan fails to acknowledge. That being "something above what we know that can indeed create."

 

Obviously I disagree. Why is it more 'sane' to believe in something that is intangible and unproven than to only believe things that ARE tangible and proven?

Why is it pigheaded to understand that a remarkable sequence of physical and chemical events has lead the universe to how it is now?

I'm really not trying to **** anyone off, or claim that atheism is somehow better than religion; I think as long as what you believe makes you a better person and you don't pass judgement on others purely because of what they do or don't believe, then you can believe whatever you want. But don't try to say that atheism is a belief, because it is a lack of belief. And don't pass judgment on that lack of belief, because if you do than your system of beliefs has made you a prejudice person in a way.


And finally, most importantly and pertinant to this thread, don't teach religious ideas and theorys in science class.

 

I agree with MV on this one too. Believing in something tangible and proven is much more "common sense" than believing in some devine power that somehow created us all. What we have to explain athism is the world around us. What we have to prove christianity say, is a book.

Disclaimer: Many of my friends are christian and I have no problem with it. I'm only reasoning MY side to why I am a athiest.

 

It has nothing to do with believing in what is or isn't tangible or understanding biology to the core. It's accepting the fact that regardless of how much proof there is in the creation of the universe, our oceans and the primordial soup, that there will NEVER be any possible way to completely disprove religion and the possibility of a higher power.

Put it this way... If someone where to firmly place a gun to your temple with the full intention to pull the trigger, do you honestly believe that for one second you would not think or hope for a higher power? Even a measly nanosecond of hope for a meaningful afterlife or any form of afterlife? There's no way unless you have the brain capacity of a robot with titanium *********. This is why Atheism is much like Religious fanaticism is the respect that both have pigheaded ideals.

But yeah, as long as you're a good person I could give a damn.

 

I'm still bothered by the reasoning. You seem to be saying, as did dub, that because there is no way to DISprove religion, that it is ignorant to say a god doesn't exist. But like I said before, that statement puts the burden of proof on non-believers; that is flawed. It is pretty much impossible to prove that ANYTHING doesn't exist. A purple elephant...how would you prove that one doesn't (or ever did) exist; but we all know there aren't purple elephants in nature. I mean, the lord of the rings and fairytails have as much proof to them as some parts of the bible, is it ignorant to know for certain that they don't exist? I don't particularly think so.
You can't prove things don't exist just like you can't prove that any one theory is true all of the time. In order to do either, you'd have to have been around for ever and exist for all eternity and see and know everything in the universe. That is one thing that I KNOW is immposible.


I do see your point about the moment of death. In that respect, I suspect I lean towards the existential; I believe at the moment of my death I will find more peace and solice in knowing that I lived my life as a good person and that humans are on roughly the right track than I will find in believing that my spirit will live forever in 'heaven'.

And in that last second, with the gun to the head, won't the terror of wondering what you thought was good enough for heaven actually is? I mean...we justify war, but assuming there is a god, what if he doesn't? Are all soldiers damned? I sure as hell don't believe so, I respect you guys and recognize that military action is neccesary and inevitable (therefore, in my mind, 'thou shalt not murder' is total BS...) . But you see what I mean...while I would suddenly wonder and question the existance of a supreme being while staring down the barrel of a gun, would I also fear for my after life? Would you? Personally I'd rather just know that I'm going in the ground and people will remember me in a positive light.


BTW, if any of this pisses anybody off, at least you can tell yourselves that if your god does exist I'm going to hell for sure...

 

Off topic: are any of you guys getting some words in green and underlined twice? Links to off site commercial sites...is this a new revenue thing for i-club? Or is my computer infected with something? Or is the i-club computer got something?


The word 'millenia' in my first post in this thread for example

 

Now you're repeating yourself. You're not grasping the concept. If you want to throw something as stupid as a modern movie into the mix then fine. Although it's high improbable and irrelevant, there's still no way to disprove fairy tails or if Captain Crunch is God. Saying otherwise solidifies this pigheadedness.

This is irrelevant based on the fact I've already proven Atheism is as pigheaded as religious fanaticism. Besides, turning this into a "what if God..." argument is weak sauce that's doomed to go on forever and ever. But I will say this... you asking these types of questions proves how really open you are in the slight possibility of a higher power existing.

Then you must be willing to say: "So I can't PROVE that there's a God, I'm pretty damn sure there isn't one." You sure you aren't agnostic? Although you claim a near death experience would phase your firm grasp on Atheism, i'm willing to bet it was for the sake of argument based on that quote.

 

I was just noticing that same thing.....

rather strange...