TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- God and Evolution..
Pages (12): « 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 »

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Huh? Your answers didn't say anything, that's why I "attacked" them. I don't know where the guys from the political forum went, but it's too frustrating for me to continue to debunk the same straw-man arguments and circular reasoning in every post. How can people be so bloody persistent in their fallacies? It's gotten stale, anyone else want to give it a shot or have you given up?

How many times do I have to say im not debating you? im not used to people asking questions for the sole purpose of finding everything wrong with them. You keep couching your questions as a "Why do you believe?" and then I answer, and you say "straw man".

All this shit you read on the internet, still doesnt prove anything DN, not a damn thing. If there has been ANYTHING conclusive itd be on the news "Christianity Debunked!". You arent the first one to think of anything youve said.

If I say here is why "I" believe, its because i dont feel like writing a fucking book on everything attached to it. You keep asking for falsifiable things. The whole point, is that everything swirls back to GOD as a nexus, which isnt falsifiable. In science classes im sure youve heard the teacher say "We arent going to use God as an answer because we cant prove it / disprove it". Science is a different realm. Sure Religion and Science overlap and mix in a lot of places. But there are some polar opposites on both sides that are non-falsifiable at this point. Science isnt the only thing out there with something to prove.

So why dont you quit the agressive bullshit, get off your high horse of "Where are my political forum chums ho ho?" and get with the program. If you go through life talking to people like you respond to things on this forum, youre gonna have a rough life. People find that constantly probing, searching, attacking mindset pretty fucking annoying. And other people have already mentioned you seem to think you are the only one with answers worth responding to.

Personally, I would find it fascinating to learn about the gaps in evolution. But too many times i find the "if its far enough back in time and small enough in size, anything can happen" theory. Im a cynic by nature, but i like learning why PEOPLE believe in stuff. Not why a person quotes a website. I very much doubt that the websites being posted were the original reason why you came to believe. They were in the first 3 responses by GOOGLE.

Anyways. I doubt very much that anyone would ever be able to present a full life choice case over the internet, because that would require writing at least 1 book. There are so many things that come into play, and many are hard to verbalize. If a question is answered in one way, there is another way to attack it. This ever-revolving sphere of attacks is annoying.

so all in all, im gonna say if you have personal reasons to believe in stuff, thats worthy of discussion. Anything else is a stale vomit that has been staining the rug of humanity for a lot longer than we've been alive.

edit** any of us except neo

quote:

Originally posted by sherman Another thing, it was commented how Christianity didn't start until hudreds of years after Christ's life. This is not true at all. Christianity started spreading quite quickly after Christ's death, and the first churches were started only a few years later, so the points made about Jesus being "forgotten" for a few hundred years and then his followers "playing a bit of broken telephone" has no real basis.

The problem with this argument is that the reference for this 'timeline' is the same reference that I was discrediting as a historical source (the bible). I do not believe that historical records actually confirm this, however I could be wrong so I won't try to say that I'm 100% certain on it. It's too hard to google that info because there's too many pro-Christian sites out there to sift through, so I'll just retract that argument unless somebody else wants to back it up.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax How many times do I have to say im not debating you? im not used to people asking questions for the sole purpose of finding everything wrong with them. You keep couching your questions as a "Why do you believe?" and then I answer, and you say "straw man". All this shit you read on the internet, still doesnt prove anything DN, not a damn thing. If there has been ANYTHING conclusive itd be on the news "Christianity Debunked!". You arent the first one to think of anything youve said. If I say here is why "I" believe, its because i dont feel like writing a fucking book on everything attached to it. You keep asking for falsifiable things. The whole point, is that everything swirls back to GOD as a nexus, which isnt falsifiable. In science classes im sure youve heard the teacher say "We arent going to use God as an answer because we cant prove it / disprove it". Science is a different realm. Sure Religion and Science overlap and mix in a lot of places. But there are some polar opposites on both sides that are non-falsifiable at this point. Science isnt the only thing out there with something to prove. So why dont you quit the agressive bullshit, get off your high horse of "Where are my political forum chums ho ho?" and get with the program. If you go through life talking to people like you respond to things on this forum, youre gonna have a rough life. People find that constantly probing, searching, attacking mindset pretty fucking annoying. And other people have already mentioned you seem to think you are the only one with answers worth responding to. Personally, I would find it fascinating to learn about the gaps in evolution. But too many times i find the "if its far enough back in time and small enough in size, anything can happen" theory. Im a cynic by nature, but i like learning why PEOPLE believe in stuff. Not why a person quotes a website. I very much doubt that the websites being posted were the original reason why you came to believe. They were in the first 3 responses by GOOGLE. Anyways. I doubt very much that anyone would ever be able to present a full life choice case over the internet, because that would require writing at least 1 book. There are so many things that come into play, and many are hard to verbalize. If a question is answered in one way, there is another way to attack it. This ever-revolving sphere of attacks is annoying. so all in all, im gonna say if you have personal reasons to believe in stuff, thats worthy of discussion.

This is bloody ridiculous. We're attacking your logic because every single one of your posts is preachy and completely illogical.

I'm not even gonna waste time on that nexus bullshit. For anything to constitute a proof, it needs to be falsifiable to the contrary, and you just said that's impossible (thus, it is a catchall argument), so why can't you just admit that you can't prove it and say you believe? Nobody said you had to prove it. Just don't PREACH!

Science does not have anything to "prove", which is why many of us are pissed off with religious dogma. It always seems to come around to saying that science is there to prove God DOESN'T exist, well science is about discovery, it doesn't have any inner motivation!

Do you even know what a straw-man argument is?

Oh, and my favourite quote:

quote:

Anything else is a stale vomit that has been staining the rug of humanity for a lot longer than we've been alive.

Basically explains all of my objections to your arguments. Frankly, I think Christian Evangelism is a stale vomit that has been staining the rug of humanity for a lot longer than we've been alive.

Orbax you make some good points..

You never get anywhere with topics of science vs religion vs god. Its like discussing whether Palestine or Isreal is right, it doesnt get anywhere and people start getting mad and attacking people's opinions.

quote:

Originally posted by Dmatrox Orbax you make some good points.. You never get anywhere with topics of science vs religion vs god. Its like discussing whether Palestine or Isreal is right, it doesnt get anywhere and people start getting mad and attacking people's opinions.

We never get anywhere because certain people don't acknowledge our arguments...

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut We never get anywhere because certain people don't acknowledge our arguments...

Why should they, if everyone did, everyone would think alike, no use for that.

quote:

Originally posted by Dmatrox Why should they, if everyone did, everyone would think alike, no use for that.

No, there's a difference between agreeing with arguments and acknowledging them.

Disagreement is fine, lack of acknowledgment only goes to prove one's own stubbornness and ignorance.

Rather than attacking any specific person, I'm simply going to post this for those who don't know:

quote:

A Straw Man Argument is a statement a person makes if they want to more easily attack an opposing position. Let's take the following position: "Evolution has been the main engine of speciation throughout natural history." A person using a Straw Man against that position will intentionally make a ridiculous caricature of evolution, one that only the most ignorant might believe. These are the steps they might use to try to "disprove evolution". Steps used in creating and using a straw man argument: Step 1: Build the Straw Man: "Evolution is false! How could a mouse evolve into an elephant!?" Step 2: Knock down the Straw Man by any means necessary: "How could a mouse evolve into an elephant? There would have to be billions of changes for that to occur, and nobody has ever seen speciation anyway!" Step 3: Connect the original position to the Straw Man:"So it's silly...who has ever seen a mouse evolve into an elephant? Nobody!!" Step 4: Claim to negate the opposing position by the connection in 3. "Therefore, evolution must be false!"

http://www-personal.umich.edu/~lilyth/strawman.html

And yes, I got it from google, sorry for taking the "easy way out" but at least I'm linking to an easily-viewable site, not telling people to go read a book.

quote:

Originally posted by Dmatrox Orbax you make some good points.. You never get anywhere with topics of science vs religion vs god. Its like discussing whether Palestine or Isreal is right, it doesnt get anywhere and people start getting mad and attacking people's opinions.

I'm curious as to what this "Science versus Religion" thing is all about. All "science" is is a set of methods by which we deduce things by observation. It's not some hairy monster looking to prove or debunk anything. It has no personality, and yet people constantly try to anthropomorphize it.

Science isn't fighting with anything, but when people try to suppress our powers of reasoning in favor of spoonfed precepts... well, what's an intelligent man to say? At what point does it become advisable to give up one's ability to reason?

quote:

Originally posted by Flyboy217 I'm curious as to what this "Science versus Religion" thing is all about. All "science" is is a set of methods by which we deduce things by observation. It's not some hairy monster looking to prove or debunk anything. It has no personality, and yet people constantly try to anthropomorphize it. Science isn't fighting with anything, but when people try to suppress our powers of reasoning in favor of spoonfed precepts... well, what's an intelligent man to say? At what point does it become advisable to give up one's ability to reason?

Science and religion is quite a debatable topic and it never gets anywhere. Scientists use fossil dating (and various other methods) to hypothesize the diversion of different phylogeny. Humans are the most intelligent and interesting chordates. No other organism from any phyla has even come close to us. It really amazes me why there havent been any mutations, population selections or evolutions that cause another organism to be as smart or even smarter than we are.

On the other hand is religion. I used to go to a christian school and i was/am a non-christian. The way religious people use their bible quoting everything against you is the same as quoting the word of a politician against you. Its fruitless and has no basis.

Anyways, its easy to beleive what science has offered because of facts and its easy for some people to beleive the word of "God" because they have faith in what they beleive.

And finally, reading these topics is a waste of time. Its interesting, but like i said before it really get no where; people have their own beleifs anyways.

Finally my position: I beleive that there are still flaws in the theory of evolution and diversion of phyla and species. DONT SAY THERE ISNT BECAUSE THERE IS!! It is a relatively beleivable theory but is under development. It is one of the areas of biology that change in the textbooks and continuely get revised. If you are a complete beleiver in evolution, then you must have such strong faith in something that isnt 100.00% correct in details.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut lack of acknowledgment only goes to prove one's own stubbornness and ignorance.

at least we agree on one thing

anyways, you still are thinking that everyone should drop down on their knees saying :OHHHHHHH DIGINUT POSTED A LINK!! BOW DOWN TO HIS WISDOM, ACKNOWLEDGE HIM:

you have a rapist fucking mentality my friend.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax you have a rapist fucking mentality my friend.

This leads me to the other thing I'm curious about.

See, there are lots of common misconceptions, urban myths or old wive's tails if you will, that most people are more than willing to give up when they see contrary evidence. For example:
- Sugar and sweets give you acne
- Being out in the cold will make you catch a cold
- Toads give you warts

And so on.

So can anyone tell me why religion is so different, why people become so obsessed and stubborn in their beliefs to the point of attacking ad hominem anyone who opposes them?

I mean, there's no denying that such a statement was completely unwarranted... how does religion (particularly the dogmatic organized religion, because I haven't experienced this with Buddhism or other "spiritual" religions) have such a profound effect on people? Why do so-called "devout" people see science and logic and anyone who studies or uses them as a threat?

I think it warrants a scientific study.


Incidentally, Orbax, as fine a job you've done of attacking my character, you haven't addressed a single one of my arguments in recent posts, so I will refrain from further comment on the topic at hand.

quote:

Originally posted by Dmatrox Science and religion is quite a debatable topic and it never gets anywhere. Scientists use fossil dating (and various other methods) to hypothesize the diversion of different phylogeny. Humans are the most intelligent and interesting chordates. No other organism from any phyla has even come close to us. It really amazes me why there havent been any mutations, population selections or evolutions that cause another organism to be as smart or even smarter than we are.

Dolphins. And I believe that the common rat is characterized as being quite smart, is it not?

I won't quote the rest of your post but it does make sense. The only thing I really need to add is that again, attacking the theory of evolution would not be sufficient to positively prove the "theory of god", even if one was successful in completely debunking it. But you're right, the theory of evolution isn't perfect, which is mainly because the fossil record isn't perfect (how could it be after so many billions of years?).

If you want to believe, that's OK, like I said, I am myself an agnostic, I don't make it my business to prove god *doesn't* exist. I just don't see enough evidence out there (I don't need 100%... try 50%) that there is such a thing. That doesn't mean there isn't - it just means I'm not willing to accept it on faith alone.

quote:

Originally posted by DigiNut Dolphins. And I believe that the common rat is characterized as being quite smart, is it not? I won't quote the rest of your post but it does make sense. The only thing I really need to add is that again, attacking the theory of evolution would not be sufficient to positively prove the "theory of god", even if one was successful in completely debunking it. But you're right, the theory of evolution isn't perfect, which is mainly because the fossil record isn't perfect (how could it be after so many billions of years?). If you want to believe, that's OK, like I said, I am myself an agnostic, I don't make it my business to prove god *doesn't* exist. I just don't see enough evidence out there (I don't need 100%... try 50%) that there is such a thing. That doesn't mean there isn't - it just means I'm not willing to accept it on faith alone.

Yeah dolphins are smart. What i was trying to say is that, there isnt another really smart organism that is smart enough to cause interspecific competition.

Anyways, i believe evolution to a certain extent, certainly more than stories that men make up and call it god's werd.

quote:

Originally posted by kewlness Just another topic to put in mind for discussion: Let's say, you see a six year old girl getting raped by some 30 year old bastard. Now, you know that is JUST WRONG. But what causes that feeling inside of you that just tells you that it's wrong? Your concsience? Your psyche? As a Christian, I believe it is our conscience that tells us what is right and wrong. I don't believe it is our mind telling us what what is right or wrong, because if you compare humans to animals, we actually believe in what is morally right and what is morally wrong, whereas animals just do what it is best for them or what is best in order to pass down their genes for future generations.

I consider morality and religion to be two seperate entities. Where is it written that an athiest cannot help the poor, treat others how they'd wish to be treated, or recognize that rape is unjust? On the contrary, since when does the fact that someone claims to be a Christian (or Jew, Muslim, etc for that matter) make them a moral person? Need I remind you that some of the worst atrocities in human history have been committed in the name of "god?"

Some examples:

-The crusades in Europe (which forced some of my ancestors out of Spain because they were Jewish)

-The persecution and rape of native peoples in what are now the Continental US, Canada, Hawaii, Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, Central and South America by European colonialists largely on the basis of ethnicity and cultural/religious beliefs.

-Sept 11th and the ensuing "war on terror" (the highjackers felt they were doing the work of "god." Pres. Bush feels he is doing the work of "god." At least that's probably what he tells himself so he can sleep at night knowing how many US soldiers and Iraqi civilians have died in the Iraqi campaign.)

-3 wars between India and Pakistan, countries created along religious lines, within their short ~56 year existence in which countless thousands of people have died.

-Palestinian suicide bombings, and IDF killings of young children throwing rocks. Much of their fight is over supposed religious entitlements to a common piece of land...



Since you brought up the issue of rape, I'll give you another example of one country in which most of the population considers itself to be Christian (Catholic); Mexico.

In Mexico the crime of rape is hardly considered a crime at all. If a woman is raped in Mexico she must struggle against a legal system and a culture that is against her in most every respect to seek justice. Rape cases often get thrown out of court by judges and if there is a conviction (rare), the rapist often only gets a slap on the wrist. In many of the smaller towns and villages, it's considered ok for a woman to be "stolen" by a man as long as the "theif" agrees to marry her after getting her pregnant (usually against her will). Would you consider this to be moral? I don't, but living in the US I was conditioned to view rape as one of the most serious of crimes...

quote:

Physically, I think humans are just a more highly sophisticated, intelligent, and advanced living being. But you must admit that there is something distinctive about humans, not that we are smarter and more capable, but we seem to have a moral sense of what is right and wrong.

Humans are very weak physically compared to many other animals of comparable size and stature (yes humans are animals too). Ask Roy Horn the magician if you don't believe me. As for intelligence, I believe that to be a double edged sword. I think it must have helped us evolutionarily in our past, and thus those genes containing the seeds of the present human consciousness were passed on to future generations. Those of our ancestors who were more intelligent survived the rigors of natural selection.
Dr. Penny Patterson's studies with Koko the gorilla (in my mind) prove that species other than humans are able to be conditioned to adopt a sense of "right" and "wrong." These are the basic building blocks of morality, if perhaps less sophisticated than what humans practice. Actually the fact that Koko can grasp "right" and "wrong" places her above some humans lol.


Here's a question for you:

If humans are so sophistocated and intelligent, why do they poison themselves and consider themselves not a part of nature? Why do they do their best to upset the natural balance the existence of which is the very reason for their existence? Is it moral for large US corporations (supported largely by the right-wing) to move across the border of the US into Mexico in order to avoid spending extra money on pollution controls and minimum wage (or more) salaries in the USA? Is it moral to pay someone 50 US cents an hour as a worker in your factory while you poison their drinking water supply and air? Is it moral to appoint industry lobbyists to the Environmental Protection Agency (and the Texas state equivalent TNRCC)? Dubya's sense of morality and my sense of morality must differ then. What a wonderful Christian man.

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=134343

quote:

For you atheists, what would you think accounts for this sense of what is good and bad? Your brain? Or is it something else??

I'm not an atheist, and I believe that the existence of a creator cannot be proven or disproved at this time. I believe how ones brain is "wired" so to speak, and also ones conditioning and upbringing in ones respective culture account for ones sense of morality. One can "learn" a sense of morality by means of religion, or by other means. The fact that religion is often the vehicle used to teach morality doesn't mean that the two are one and the same.


I have been studying the teachings of the Buddha lately because as much as I respect Jesus' wisdom and teachings (many are very similar to the Buddha), it's hard for me to study what he said without the taint or pollution of the structured Christianity that I've experienced growing up living in the USA. I'm aware of much of the history about how greedy, immoral men have twisted the words of Jesus to suit their own bigotry. This still occurs to this day:


http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...529#post1897529

Thus it's harder for me to view the teachings of Jesus through something other than an opaque window.

-I hope that all made some sense.

Great thread btw/

DaveSaenz


I wasn't saying that Christians are moral but rather I was asking a question of what causes ALL humans to have a sense of what is right and what is wrong.

I am not saying that Christian people are superior to non-Christians. I mean, we do very stupid things due to our own ignorance and arrogance and stubborness. Like all humans, we have many flaws (for ex. Crusades, persecution of scientists). But I feel what separates us from atheists is that we believe that there is a God who we can look up to and ask for guidance whereas atheists tend to want to try to search themselves the answer.

Also, the example I gave was just an example and wasn't meant to represent everyone in the world. Everyone has a different standard of morality, but the question I ask is where and how do we get that gut feeling when we know something we did was good or bad. To one man, raping a six year old might be fine, but to many others, it is just dead wrong. And similarly, murdering someone might be fine to one person but wrong to others. My question addresses the fact that, no matter what level of morality you have, you still have a sense of what is right and wrong.

hope that clears up on some things i mentioned before

dig: lets just break this down real simple like. 1 thing at a time. What specifically were you looking at me responding to? just 1...

dave: are you trying to say you believe in the matrix? "humans are parasites you see?"

quote:

Originally posted by kewlness DaveSaenz I wasn't saying that Christians are moral but rather I was asking a question of what causes ALL humans to have a sense of what is right and what is wrong. I am not saying that Christian people are superior to non-Christians. I mean, we do very stupid things due to our own ignorance and arrogance and stubborness. Like all humans, we have many flaws (for ex. Crusades, persecution of scientists). But I feel what separates us from atheists is that we believe that there is a God who we can look up to and ask for guidance whereas atheists tend to want to try to search themselves the answer. Also, the example I gave was just an example and wasn't meant to represent everyone in the world. Everyone has a different standard of morality, but the question I ask is where and how do we get that gut feeling when we know something we did was good or bad. To one man, raping a six year old might be fine, but to many others, it is just dead wrong. And similarly, murdering someone might be fine to one person but wrong to others. My question addresses the fact that, no matter what level of morality you have, you still have a sense of what is right and wrong. hope that clears up on some things i mentioned before

What creeps me out about christians is the "speak in tongues" thing. I think its wierd and doesnt exist. Also "speaking to god" doesnt make any sense to me neither. Do christian people mistake "speaking to god" as "speaking to their conscience"?

Just wondering

kewlness, are u saying u believe in moral relativism with no moral absolutes?

you guys are gonna flip out when you see the ideas of the Wachowski Brothers and how they relate so much to this thread in matrix 3. just watch

btw, Dave, sorry about being such a dick in that weed thread. i guess i passed judgement too fast, as i see you have some excellent ideas and thought process.

quote:

Originally posted by Dmatrox What creeps me out about christians is the "speak in tongues" thing. I think its wierd and doesnt exist. Also "speaking to god" doesnt make any sense to me neither. Do christian people mistake "speaking to god" as "speaking to their conscience"? Just wondering

I've always said: when you speak to God it's faith... when God speaks back, you're appraoching schizophrenia

quote:

Originally posted by astroboy I've always said: when you speak to God it's faith... when God speaks back, you're appraoching schizophrenia

haha, that's great!

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax you have a rapist fucking mentality my friend.

Looks to me your not interested in debating anything. Your stating your position (poorly) then refuse to answer any criticism. I doubt you'll make it as a lawyer, which requires the ablity to put together a coherent argument and defend it.

You've been bating Dignut and now your resorting to making personal attacks against him because your unable to defend you position. Very distasteful.

quote:

Originally posted by Orbax kewlness, are u saying u believe in moral relativism with no moral absolutes?

I'm saying, different people have different opinions and views on what is good and evil. However, I believe that there is an ultimate standard of what is good and evil is set by God. Where good would be whatever follows God and His will and where evil would be anything that goes against God and His will.

Basically, everyone has their own standard of what is right or wrong but the ultimate standard is set by God and "wisdom" is how close and accurate your standard is compared to God. Hope that clears up my opinion.

quote:

Originally posted by igottaknow Looks to me your not interested in debating anything. Your stating your position (poorly) then refuse to answer any criticism. I doubt you'll make it as a lawyer, which requires the ablity to put together a coherent argument and defend it. You've been bating Dignut and now your resorting to making personal attacks against him because your unable to defend you position. Very distasteful.

shut up bitch, when did you enter this conversation? Oh right, just now. Fuck off, k thanks. Haha, you dumb bastard, I rag on you once, and you get all "sided" dont think I dont know how your little brain works.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.