Already in progress, one person wrote...
Yes, once again, a Theory of something being taught as fact....aka.... The Theory of Evolution. With absolutely no proof to back it up. Gotta love you God haters.
Okay, did you catch that? The theist(yes, theist. How'd you guess?!) bleats, "absolutely no proof to back it up".
No proof, eh? Really? Okay, for starters, how about transitional fossils and the fact that fossils are ordered in the strata, simpler, to more complex? 'Just a ginormous coincidence, is it?
Anyhow, I replied....
Yes, once again, a "theory" in science isn't just a "hunch" or "wild guess". E.g...gravitational theory and atomic theory aren't just wild guesses. I don't see anyone complaining that those theories are taught in the science classroom.
To which the same theist/creationist then asserts...
IF, the Theory of Evolution were true, then why haven't humans "evolved" for numerous centuries now. If anything, the(sic) have devolved.
Notice that theist/creationist doesn't make it clear whether he's talking about humans (not) evolving in the biological sense as a species, or if he's talking about us (not) evolving sociologically. I get the impression that he intended the latter, since he put quotations around "evolved". But either way, we've most certainly evolved(changed) over time, so his question is as ridiculous as it is false. I mean, consider that we no longer burn "witches" at the stake. Consider that we no longer smear bird's blood on people to cure them of disease. Consider that we no longer keep slaves or throw rocks at rebellious teenagers. Consider that you don't see anyone baking bread over a dung fire on the cooking channel.
And BTW, all of the above is biblically supported and was carried out back when we were, um, more "evolved" than today. Yes, nothing like following the archaic "moral" advice of a bunch of uneducated fisherman who thought that a rape victim should marry her rapist.
In any case, rather than try to convince my creationist interlocutor that he is in error(which we all know is a futile endeavor), I was willing to wipe the theory (and fact) of evolution off the table. IOW, I was willing to throw it out for sake of discussion in the hopes that we could examine his scientific evidence for "creation".
Of course, the astute among us know that when a creationist spends all of his or her time bashing evolution, they likely do this in the hopes that we won't notice that their premise is a big, fat non-sequitur. Yes, when creationists spend all of their time bashing evolution, this is smoke 'n mirrors. That is, they try to divert us in the hopes that we won't notice as they erroneously assume that if they can somehow convince people that evolution is not a legit' theory in science, that this somehow makes their bible's "In the Beginning [yadda, yadda,]" the default "truth", thinking that the "theory" of "Genesis" explains the diversity of life we see today, when in fact, "creation" is neither fact nor theory, and "Genesis" explains no such thing.
When it comes to the diversity of life we see on this planet, there is not one speck of evidence that "God did it!!!". None; zero; zilch; nadda.
So, as it went, a few more comments were exchanged, and as you might've guessed, the creationist had nary evidence for his "God did it!!!" worldview. However, in true Christian form, he had some insults and threats, bleating.....
Oh, yes [...], you have "won" the debate, oh you well educated man. Believe what you will. I'm just glad to not be you.
He's no doubt glad to not be me because he's likely under the (mistaken) impression that something really, really bad awaits me for my rejection of his Christian worldview, a view that he likely inherited from his parents, which, of course, is a view that posits that non-believers are going to be tortured unmercifully, 24/7, for all of eternity. Little does he know that I'm about as worried about that happening to me as he worried about getting sent to "Jahannam", which is Islamic "Hell", which, according the "Holy Qu'ran", is what one receives for rejecting "Allah".
IOW, kind sir, I'm not worried in the slightest flippin' bit, since both places exist only in the minds of the duped people who've been handed the family belief-system, whether that be "Islam", or "Christianity".
5 comments:
Every time i here a theist bleat on about the word "Theory" I get a visual image of the Peter Faulk character "Columbo" talking to his suspect about his "hunch" on how the crime was committed ... it's laughable that theists reject/ignore the scientific definition of the word "theory" as if it does not and had never existed.
It's not even a demonstration of ignorance (which in some cases could plausibly be acceptable) but rather a demonstration of outright stupidity and delusional thinking ... which I guess is no great stretch considering the crazy crap in their scriptures which they must accept with ZERO foundational evidence ... no ... rather i think it's intellectual laziness because "science" and evidence is "too hard" to comprehend so they jest reject it as people like us using big words to fool them and make them look stupid - little do they realize they don't need our help to do that :P they do just fine all on their own.
I had a facebook friend recently post that "If facebook would go away, that would end most of the racism in the world today". I didn't have the heart to tell him how absolutely stupid a comment that was ... if it weren't for facebook, most of this racism (and to the point - the silly beliefs that theists hold and the verbal and mental gymnastics they must constantly exercise to maintain these beliefs) would never be exposed or addressed or confronted for what they are.
For course, additionally, debates on evolution and the big bang are red herrings in my opinion because they have very little if anything to do with answering the question(s) "Is there a god?" and "Did things happen the way the bible (or other 'holy' scriptures) say?"
I think that any scientist that maintains any type of theology, rejects the bible as any type of historical tome but rather ONLY accepts the concept of spirit/soul and that "god" was the spark that generated the whole shabang (life/universe etc). and because those areas are generally so far off for science to answer they can intellectually get away with it. This way they can continue their work completely separate from conflict with theology. It's disingenuos but as a practicality it keeps them from raising the ire of the wacko theists.
Happy Holidays to you and your readers :)
"debates on evolution and the big bang are red herrings in my opinion because they have very little if anything to do with answering the question(s) 'Is there a god?'"
And also, who's to say that Theism precludes the Singularity and/or that we evolved from simpler life forms? Millions of bible-believing Xians accept both. How? Because they can always just presuppose that God is the ultimate cause of [insert ANYTHING]. E.g...A Big Bang? God did it!
Thx, and ditto on the Holidays!
Because they can always just presuppose that God is the ultimate cause of [insert ANYTHING]
I am reminded of a similar thought when I was in catechism class at my church when I was about 12 or 13 yrs old ... I remember trying to step through the concept of god with logic and at the end kept wondering, "If god was needed to start the chain of events starting with single cells and balls of rock etc. and other basics needed long before we get to the level of complexity that we have correctly ... then what was needed to produce this god that did all this? and if god needed creating, then who/what created god and would that not be far superior?"
Needless to say, I think it was about then that I developed parallel belief/learning tracks in my mind - one for religion and one for reality ... it took until a few years ago (some 3+ decades later to attempt the exercise of reconciling the two ... and as you know - the religious track was simply obliterated
Typo in the above comment:
the word "correctly" should be "currently"
"then what was needed to produce this god that did all this? and if god needed creating, then who/what created god and would that not be far superior?"
That's where their "Get out of jail free" card is played, Bobby-boy. How convenient to be able to say "Complexity requires a creator!" and then when asked, "Then who or what created God?", answer, "God? He's always existed!"
Here's the rub: No matter what science discovers about origins, they'll always tack on, "Oooh, so that's how God did it!"
Post a Comment