by Abandoned 104 Replies latest jw friends
Nice job, as usual Abaddon, explaining the concepts of theory and evolution to people who from their comments obviously don't understand what they are making strong assertions about.
I find that one of the hardest things in all of this - trying to reason with people about something that they are making all sorts of statements about, statements that sound clever to them, but to someone who actually has an understanding of the subject, the statements are ludicrous.
S4
WOW! This thread has taken on a life of its own. Good. I feel humbled by most of the responses because while I know very well how I think and feel, I've not thought about some of this stuff as deeply as some of you.
So, I'm going to sit back and watch. I'm putting off finishing The God Delusion until I finish Anthony Robbins's Awaken The Giant Within. I'm only in the second chapter of that one and I've already seen huge progress in my attitude and belief in my dreams. This is the year. Last year was the one wher I became a published author (for money) and this is the year I'm going to make my break-out sale.
Anyway, back to talking about God, his existence, or lack thereof, and why it matters one way of the other since he/she/it doesn't quite seem ready to come to the table and talk.....
The Chinese theorist said it was like the scientist hundreds of years ago that ignored the fact the earth of revolving around the Sun. He then said long held ideas are hard to change scientist today can be as stubborn as those during and after Galileo time.
skyking,
not only are you refusing to address the issues brought up, but you seem to have mixed a very important fact up:
it was not scientists who did not want to change in galileo's time. it was the church. magical thinking folk. people who did not want to give up the favoured position of humans in the little cosmos, to a view of humans not being the center of a much larger cosmos.
and i believe the chinese looking guy might have been michio kaku, one of the founders of string theory. i have heard him use this analogy on bbc before. he uses it to remind people that they must follow facts, not politics. and actually, kaku and dawkins are quite similar in their roles: they are both spokesmen for areas of science that they believe have the power to change the world for the better. which is a philosophy in addition to the theories which they represent. a logical philosophical extension. don't confuse them for the theories themselves, as i believe you already have done.
Dawkins only believes what he chooses to believe.
there was a choice in it, yes. it was the choice to follow the facts wherever they led us rationally, regardless of whether it made him or anyone else feel small and insignificant. and that's what he chooses to believe. he might be grumpy about it, but he's been a voice out in the wilderness about all this for a while.
tetra
So we are back to the great divide. Those who believe there is a God and those who don't.
And it still baffles me that God can't do something that would deliver the knock-out punch.
At least evolutionists can say they have tried their best.
If I were omnicient and omnipotent I could convince anyone.
Why doesn't he cure a stadium full of down syndrome kids. That would be a pretty good start. And----hey --- since he's probably omnicreative he ought to be able to think up an infinite sequence of miracles that would convince anyone.
Some will say - well just open your eyes -STUPID. The universe IS a miracle.
It might be - but no one has ever seen him actually do it. No one has seen God take a clump of dust and form a human out of it.
Terry and Tetra - great posts.
RAF - Not sure what you're trying to say. Your post didn't make much sense and was very confusing. But, if you actually believe that there was an Adam and Eve and it took them 900 years to die...well...sorry to burst your bubble, but that's a myth.
As far as the Bible being a masterpiece - well, some parts are pretty terrific, but overall, the Bible is a literary mess of myth, allegory, fantasy, history, re-written history, the rantings of madmen, philosophy and theology. Anyone can take it and get whatever things they want out of it in total contradiction to what other people get out of it - witness the thousands of "Christian" religions that teach completely different things from the very same text!
The Bible is an interesting book certainly, but a masterpiece? Hardly!
S4
Often controversy and misunderstanding occurs when information is framed in a wrong context.
It is like telling a joke and not getting a laugh. The setup makes the payoff (the laugh) possible.
Some people cannot tell a joke. They give too much information.
This is true of Evolution explanations.
The Intelligent Design community creates false contexts (Strawman fallacies) and then pokes holes in "proving" they are right.
Take for example the idea of IRREDUCIBLE COMPLEXITY.
Here is the setup for their "joke".
Why would evolution evolve a "partial" eye that could not see? What would be the advantage in that?
False premises lead to false conclusions.
Have you woke up in the middle of the night and had to go to the bathroom? What if you are in a pitch black room you've never been in before at a friend's house? You stub your toe and bump into furniture and put yourself at risk. However----just the smallest amount of light (nightlight) can make the difference in avoiding accidents! You don't have enough light to discern details. You just ascertain shapes and outlines. BUT, THAT PARTIAL ABILITY makes all the difference between a cracked kneecap and smooth sailing!
There is your benefit in a so-called "partial eye".
It is all in how you frame your premise!
Science bothers to be careful.
tetrapod.sapien You forget to look into the mirror and see your own reflection.
Last night I re-watched the show which I have half of it recorded and that is almost exactly what he said. He also mentioned when a scientist proved viruses were causing people to get sick but the others ignored the facts refusing to change their ideas. He also mentioned The Right Brothers proving they could fly, even after they did it scientist still wrote articles saying it was impossible. It took weeks after the first flight even though the Right Brother showed hundreds of people, then and only then, did the scientific community admitted it was true.
He then said the same thing is happening today in regard the study of dark matter.
So all of you closed minded people are proving human nature stays the same.
Hi everyone,
About the Bible:
Its true like Seeker said many interpret it in different ways. Its like this famous line - The Bible is like a fiddle, you can play many tunes with it. For Christian believers we need to understand that it is NOT the words written in the Bible that are most important to our faith, it is having a personal relationship with the leader we follow, which is Jesus Christ. Even non believers have found much good and truth in the teachings attributed to Jesus. (Ghandi for one) Notice what Jesus said to the Pharisees:
John 5:39-40
39 You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me, 40 yet you refuse to come to me to have life.
Again, it is not what is written that is most important for believers. The Apostle Paul said even he "saw through a hazy mirror". We simply do not fully understand everything written in the Bible so lets not pretend we do. If we do, it puts us (meaning believers) in a bad position, we will always have to defend our faith and when given contrary arguements, our minds will be too closed to see other people views. And given the arguement that we are right simply because the Bible says this or that, makes us look stupid. As far as some differences of opinion in Christian churches, thats o.k. because Paul said our "love" would cover any differences we had.
My view of Dawkins:
No doubt this man has a very brilliant mind and is on the top of his field. The thing that turns me off to him and others I know is the arrogance that he has about his brillance. He acts as if people should worship him as a diety. And his attacking of people of faith is totally uncalled for. I believe you should treat all people with respect whether they are athiests, Jews, Christians, agnostics, whatever. And I feel he does not really respect any who do not agree with his views. Now, this is just my personal opinion. I am not necessarily against the guy because he does not beleive in God or creation. I actually read a lot about Darwin and respect this man for his opinions and his intelligence much more than I respect someone like Dawkins who seem to go out of thier way to personally attacks people's beliefs. Think about the book "God Delusion", here he is claiming that to even consider another view than his, meaning in a God, we must be under a delusion! Not Nice Mr. Dawkins. Lilly
Just to mention some more things that has changed in my life time. Scientists thought that eggs were bad for you, drinking wine caused cancer, man could never go to the moon, teleportation was impossible, Mars never had water on it, Color TVs were impossible, That it was impossible for man to be able to put all the books ever printed into a space smaller than city block. Grow new human parts on animals then surgically put them on the human host. They thought there were no other small rocky planets like the earth out side our solar system. They thought all comets were ice balls. They thought there was only nine planets. Solid Rocks could not have life in it. Thought an aeroplane could not exit out of the earth atmosphere and then re-enter to be used again.
I could go on all day scientist had their theory's to prove everyone of this things were impossible but yet science pressed on. When Dawkins makes comments in his books that is meant to prove only his ideas are correct he is doing the same thing his claims religionist are doing. Only his ideas are correct, he is not living up to what a real scientist does and that is keep an open mind.
He would of been the first to tell Orville and Wilbur Wright science proves heavier than air travel is impossible, because science says it is. He has made science his God.
Skyking,
I think the point they are trying to make is that, once scientists are presented with the evidence, they are willing to change their viewpoint. For example, are there any scientists today who teach that it's impossible for airplanes to fly, or that viruses are a factor in disease? No, and there hasn't been for a century or so. Why not? The preponderance of evidence.
Just because Dawkins or anyone else holds very strongly to an idea, that doesn't make that a good idea - nor a bad idea. It's just that, in Dawkins case, the weight of evidence is completely on his side.
I'm an atheist, but if suddenly there was evidence that god actually existed, and that evidence was compelling, I'd change my ideas. But, as Proplog noted, god remains awfully silent despite a reported ability to prove his or her or its existence beyond any doubt quite easily.
Hope your day is going well.
S4
