I'm not sure I follow you caliber. Do you mean atheists take refuge in evolution hoping there is no god so they won't be held accountable for their morals? or, Do you mean the problem of theodicy is a factor in moving many to reject god and investigate evolution?
Non-evidence reasons why people embrace Evolution.
by hooberus 282 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
whereami
Love how you made up this hypothesis itself without reference to any study or research - I.e. No evidence. How ironic. Nevertheless, in the interest of engaging:
Would you also agree then that the non-evidence reasons why people embrace religion are, mirroring your points-
1/ Social and Sexual Ineptitude
A strong desire to police other people's sexual habits to make sure they aren't having more exciting sex than their safe Sunday Afternoon (4pm) missionary position. Included in this is homophobia because not only is it fun to discriminate it's even worse to allow someone to experiment with consensual sex in ways they would never dare. A strong jealousy against gay, single, promiscuous people who don't have to shoulder the responsibility of kids.
2/ A history of Physical and Emotional Abuse
A desire to continue as a victim by choosing to worship a being who is the perfect absent father but when he does eventually return will whup you if you've been naughty. In the meantime surrogate fathers will be sought to emotionally abuse and remind you of your own worthlessness, weakness and need to contribute more time and money to the 'household budget'.
3/ A philosophical a priori condition that requires a God.
An inability to engage in any viewpoint that does not include magic leads to a necessary prime condition of the first magician who literally pulled fully formed rabbits out of his hat. Since everything that follows utterly requires the first wizard the entire worldview rests upon this and so it is the one part of the philosophy that cannot be reinterpreted or twisted as the magicians code is broken.
4/ Desire to be accepted by anyone.
Most emotionally needy believers aren't too picky about which cult that pick as long as they love bomb. An additional status is those who join the cult of their family which entails continued attendance and profession of belief to maintain family ties.
Brilliant!!!!
-
-
cofty
In my experience the latter one is valid, the former is not.
People who want to do what they want to do don't waste years investigating the facts and wrestling with the issues, they just get on with it and bury their doubts.
-
Lion Cask
But we still have all the same bacteria as we did 100 years ago.
Um, no, actually. Ever hear of the nylon-eating bacteria, MD? Found in Japan. It has experienced what is called a frame shift mutation that allows it to consume and metabolize nylon (which didn't exist 100 years ago). Yes, yes, it is still a bacteria. What do you expect? Legs and arms?
Let's be real, there couldn't be evolution without abiogenisis. One flows into the other. If the thought that we evolved from rocks or air is too painful or silly to bear, perhaps it is time to reconsider your reality.
And a singularity became the big bang and the big bang became energy and matter and energy and matter differentiated into elements and elements into compounds and compounds into replicating compounds and replicating compounds into life. One flows into the other. Abiogenenis is a prerequisite of evolution, it is no more the same as evolution as evolution is the same as the big bang.
As for the video above, it is interesting that you have to go to a kid that is not well informed and talking off the top of his head to make your point instead of going to someone that actually understands what creationists teach.
Yeah, it was easy picking for sure, MD. But watch the other 29 videos.
The fact you say this suggests either you have not studied the fossil record in great detail or you are choosing to ignore a heck of a lot of it.
For example?
A counter-argument implies that an initial argument was made. That didn't happen here. Hooberus simply made a valid observation on the frailty of the human condition.
I read the OP differently, TD. You may be right.
-
caliber
bury their doubts. I have often heard people say on this site "Better to have questions you can't answer than answers you can't question "
Do these persons not have "doubts" about not knowing and continue searching as well, with some supposed measure of inner satisfaction ?
-
cofty
I think TD has it right. In the same way people leave the borg for all kinds of reasons, some think their way out, others are hurt and some no longer wish to go along with the rules but take comfort in the knowledge that others can explain why it is all a lie.
-
Mad Dawg
Sabastious said:
Change is unlimited, all things keep going through change, forever.
First, the word used is change, not evolution. Second, Sabastious said all things change . Crofty, you would do well to follow your own advice and understand what was said before you comment.
While a lump of lead will indeed always change - weight of sample, shape, impurities - it does not correspond that the scope of changes are unlimited. While humans may display infinite variety in their appearance, that does not necessarily mean that they have the capacity to evolve into something different. Keep in mind that the variety shown by humans exists within the current population.
Bohm said:
MD: "to be convinced of". But its off-topic and irrelevant.
If you could say it in four words, why did you argue over it for seven pages?
im saying that according to the definitions of information i work with daily evolution DO increase information. When i read an article that says the opposite i wonder what the hell is going on -- and i will note that the author conveniently leave out the definition of the word such that there is no possible way to test his claim.
I was merely pointing out your propensity for using semantics to obfuscate the issues.
If the author is convincing to you, you must have some idea what he is talking about. if not, we agree.
Frankly, I have not read the article. I have not in any way responded to the article. I don't know what I said that caused you think that I had an opinion on the article. My comment was about you.
Regarding the definition of "information" I am going to take a guess that he meant:
knowledge communicated or received concerning a particular fact or circumstance;
For all your harping about definitions, most of the time, one only need to use the common dictionary to find the meaning.
-
jaguarbass
This whole issue involves semantics.
I can tell everyone is not on the same page.
Myself I believe in a young biblical earth under 10,000 years old probably 5 to 6,000 years if you do the math back to Adam.
I also believe in evolution.
Evolution is change. Things change, the the word adaptation in some circles is used instead of evolve.
God made bacteria and life to adapt for lots of reasons, bacteria and scavengers adapt to clean up and maintain
the earth. And all life adapts/ evolves to survive on this earth.
I believe in evloution but I believe God made Adam and EVe to look like 30 year olds, he made dogs, lions, tigers, birds etc
and they all adapt to their enviroment. The popular way of expressing this adaption is evolution. I belive God made
the universe less than 10,000 years ago and he made it to look like its old, God spoke it into being and it has an apparent
age just like adam and eve. If god made the univers big 7,000 years ago it would look big because of the math.
Thats how I answer the question of what came first the chicken or the egg. The chicken came first.
I'm ok with the self professed intellectuals rolling their eyes and disparaging my views.
Thats what makes a horse race everybodys got a different oppinion.
I know there are books written by scientist that explain the fossil record from a young earth flood perspective.
THere are many scientific writings to support a young biblical earth. But that is not the popular view.
THe world lies in the power of the wicked one, and many people when they get a little education
or money dont need God. THats the way it is. Its called pride. THat's what the Devil was full of.
Its a matter of what one wants to believe, and what one wants to believe would place the person in one of the catagories
of why people embrace evolution or believe in the bible.
If you choose to believe the bible for whatever reason the bible speaks of a young earth and says adam and eve and the animals
were made to look like animals they didnt evolve from tadpoles. Also the bible says you cant be queer and you cant live
in sin out of wedlock so when someone mocks someone who believes in the bible those are a couple of factors you can check out.
THe bible also says not to be Greedy or love money. Amerika is a very greedy, materialistic society its no wonder that many
have no use for God or the bible.
If you choose not to believe in the bible then you can believe anything you want to make up.
-
Tuesday
Then there's the entire fossil record.
No half measures there Tuesday!
The fact you say this suggests either you have not studied the fossil record in great detail or you are choosing to ignore a heck of a lot of it.
I didn't stutter Scotsman and I don't cherry-pick the evidence. Evolutionary dead ends are dead ends for a reason, the species did not have the tools to survive. Just because everything did not evolve into a further developed life form does not mean that it hadn't evolved from less developed species.
Since I'm using half-measures would you mind listing some species here that I can go over with you what they evolved from and either why they died out or what animal they are ancestors to today.