A key reason why some atheists challenge religious beliefs

by defender of truth 193 Replies latest members adult

  • MadGiant
    MadGiant

    You've been told that "evolution is just a theory", a guess, a hunch, and not a fact, not proven. You've been misled. Keep reading, and in less than two minutes from now you'll know that you've been misinformed. We're not going to try and change your mind about evolution. We just want to point out that "it's just a theory" is not a valid argument.

    The Theory of Evolution is a theory, but guess what? When scientists use the word theory, it has a different meaning to normal everyday use.1 That's right, it all comes down to the multiple meanings of the word theory. If you said to a scientist that you didn't believe in evolution because it was "just a theory", they'd probably be a bit puzzled.

    In everyday use, theory means a guess or a hunch, something that maybe needs proof. In science, a theory is not a guess, not a hunch. It's a well-substantiated, well-supported, well-documented explanation for our observations.2 It ties together all the facts about something, providing an explanation that fits all the observations and can be used to make predictions. In science, theory is the ultimate goal, the explanation. It's as close to proven as anything in science can be.

    Some people think that in science, you have a theory, and once it's proven, it becomes a law. That's not how it works. In science, we collect facts, or observations, we use laws to describe them, and a theory to explain them. You don't promote a theory to a law by proving it. A theory never becomes a law.

    This bears repeating. A theory never becomes a law. In fact, if there was a hierarchy of science, theories would be higher than laws. There is nothing higher, or better, than a theory. Laws describe things, theories explain them. An example will help you to understand this. There's a law of gravity, which is the description of gravity. It basically says that if you let go of something it'll fall. It doesn't say why. Then there's the theory of gravity, which is an attempt to explain why. Actually, Newton's Theory of Gravity did a pretty good job, but Einstein's Theory of Relativity does a better job of explaining it. These explanations are called theories, and will always be theories. They can't be changed into laws, because laws are different things. Laws describe, and theories explain.

    Just because it's called a theory of gravity, doesn't mean that it's just a guess. It's been tested. All our observations are supported by it, as well as its predictions that we've tested. Also, gravity is real! You can observe it for yourself. Just because it's real doesn't mean that the explanation is a law. The explanation, in scientific terms, is called a theory.

    Evolution is the same. There's the fact of evolution. Evolution (genetic change over generations)3 happens, just like gravity does. Don't take my word for it.4 Ask your science teacher, or google it. But that's not the issue we are addressing here. The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is our best explanation for the fact of evolution. It has been tested and scrutinised for over 150 years, and is supported by all the relevant observations.

    Next time someone tries to tell you that evolution is just a theory, as a way of dismissing it, as if it's just something someone guessed at, remember that they're using the non-scientific meaning of the word. If that person is a teacher, or minister, or some other figure of authority, they should know better. In fact, they probably do, and are trying to mislead you.5

    Evolution is not just a theory, it's triumphantly a theory!

    1 Theory: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena. American Heritage Dictionary
    2 Scientific theories are explanations of natural phenomena built up logically from testable observations and hypotheses. Teaching About Evolution and the Nature of Science - National Academy Press
    3 A standard, scientific definition of evolution is: In fact, evolution can be precisely defined as any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next. Biology - Helena Curtis and N. Sue Barnes, W H Freeman
    4 Evolutionists have been clear about this distinction between fact and theory from the very beginning, if only because we have always acknowledged how far we are from completely understanding the mechanisms (theory) by which evolution (fact) occurred. Darwin continually emphasized the difference between his two great and separate accomplishments: establishing the fact of evolution, and proposing a theory - natural selection - to explain the mechanism of evolution. Evolution as Fact and Theory - Stephen Jay Gould
    5 The Cobb County School Board required a sticker with the following text to be placed on all biology textbooks: This textbook contains material on evolution. Evolution is a theory, not a fact, regarding the origin of living things. This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered. Decision of the Court Striking Down the Cobb County Evolution Disclaimer

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_fact_and_theory
    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
    http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/02/08/only-a-theory/

    personal incredulity

    Because you found something difficult to understand, or are unaware of how it works, you made out like it's probably not true.

    Complex subjects like biological evolution through natural selection require some amount of understanding before one is able to make an informed judgement about the subject at hand; this fallacy is usually used in place of that understanding.

    Ismael

  • MadGiant
    MadGiant

    "Ismael, how much more misleading and deliberately clueless could your post about "the 7 things" be? -

    Myth: Unitarian Universalists can believe whatever they want.

    Not true. Yes, we are a creedless faith just as our spiritual ancestors the Puritans did not have a creedal test for membership. But just as our Puritan ancestors did, we have covenanted together to uphold certain standards. Today we call those standards our seven principles. And while our individual theologies may differ from one another, these theologies are to support our striving to live out these seven principles. If our beliefs counter these principles, then we are challenged to examine our beliefs and explore how to bring them into alignment with these principles.

    Rev. Fred L Hammond

  • MadGiant
    MadGiant

    As I have mentioned before, I realize what it means to test my beliefs against the dictates of reality, and to correct them when nature tells me I’m wrong. I bear no personal stake in any of the beliefs I hold, but simply in the rational assurance that whatever beliefs I do hold are indeed correspondent with reality. I therefore measure my beliefs through a clear set of epistemic rules, and I make no exceptions under any context.

    I gain absolutely nothing discrediting the UU or any church or movement.

    Respectfully,

    Ismael

  • yadda yadda 2
    yadda yadda 2

    It's more liberating and fun to just dump belief in God and angels for belief in UFO's and aliens.

    It's a pretty grandiose leap from humans to the God of the entire Universe. Come on..the omnipotent creator of the whole universe gives a shit about my little shitty life for 80-90 years here on this planet?

    But believing in something in-between, like inter-galatic travelling aliens, seems a bit more reasonable. You gotta walk before you can run.

    One day the aliens may land and intervene. I mean, there are loads of UFO 'sightings' and aliens 'abductions', which is far more evidence than what were getting from any God.

    Oh I forgot..aliens don't offer eternal life after death. How could I forget? F*ck aliens then...give me God.

  • defender of truth
    defender of truth

    Religious belief, even whilst going to a moderate church, can still leave people vulnerable to cult recruitment. This is a BBC article about a highly dangerous chinese cult.
    "Outside a government-sanctioned church in Beijing's university district, there are large black signboards warning congregations to be wary of cult recruiters.
    Christianity provides a sense of shared values and community at a time when the Communist Party seems to many Chinese to have stopped trying.
    But the cult promises an even closer-knit community and even more direct route to salvation. Its recruiters are skilled at targeting people at times of vulnerability: a major illness in the family, a marriage break up, a job loss.
    Already the government-backed church suffers from a steady flow of Christians to the underground churches.
    But the cults recruit much more aggressively and Pastor Wu Weiqing said it's hard to hold onto his flock.
    He said: "I very seriously believe in the next 10 years the most serious challenge to the growth of the church would be from heresies and cults."
    "The cults and the heresies will always have the opportunities to get those people, get their heart and drag them away from us."
    http://m.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-28641008

    ...

    "A cult recruiter's role is essentially to make a newcomer feel welcome and appreciated, and to encourage them to feel an affinity for the idealistic belief system of the group. If this can be achieved, the belief system itself will largely do the rest. It is the belief system itself which is the primary active agent in cult mind-control."
    http://www.ex-cult.org/fwbo/CofC.htm

  • FlyingHighNow
    FlyingHighNow

    Mad Giant, you're preaching to the choir and you're trying to create problems where there aren't any. Were you on the debating team in high school?

  • FlyingHighNow
    FlyingHighNow

    Religious belief, even whilst going to a moderate church, can still leave people vulnerable to cult recruitment.

    The fact is, most people will never join a cult.

  • FlyingHighNow
    FlyingHighNow

    Come on..the omnipotent creator of the whole universe gives a shit about my little shitty life for 80-90 years here on this planet?

    How do you know there is omnipotence involved?

  • MadGiant
    MadGiant

    "Ismael, how much more misleading and deliberately clueless could your post about "the 7 things" be? - FHN, Post - 20941

    "Mad Giant, you're preaching to the choir and you're trying to create problems where there aren't any. Were you on the debating team in high school?" - FHN

    I could be wrong, wouldn't be the first time, but you should get in contact with this guy:

    Rev. Fred L Hammond
    Full-time minister
    Universalist Congregation of Tuscaloosa
    6400 New Watermelon Road
    Tuscaloosa, Alabama 35406
    (205) 758-8729
    http://www.uutuscaloosa.org/
    http://www.uutuscaloosa.org/aboutrev.htm
    http://serenityhome.wordpress.com/

    I never said the UU church was a cult. I am not trying to create any problems, I didn't thought of it until now. I have no personal stake in this, but my beliefs correspond with reality. I evaluate all information through a clear set of rules, and I make no exceptions under any context. I came up with this little piece of information within minutes of my the research.

    As I read it, it gave the impression that some kind of thought control could/should/might be required at some point. Don't kill the messenger, the information is there. Write the guy a note or give him a call. Regardless, the "thought control tactic" is/was mentioned.

    strawman
    You misrepresented someone's argument to make it easier to attack.

    ad hominem
    You attacked your opponent's character or personal traits in an attempt to undermine their argument.

    tu quoque
    You avoided having to engage with criticism by turning it back on the accuser - you answered criticism with criticism.

    I will appreciate if you let me know and share your findings.
    Respectfully,

    Ismael

  • cofty
    cofty

    FHN - You worship a god that 99% of christians would not recognise. Nobody is arguing against your cuddly deity who doesn't care what you believe, does not require worship, never wrote a book and has never destryod anybody in her life.

    Please stop speaking on behalf of the other 99% who worship the repugnant god of the bible - "the god and father of Jesus christ."

    He is a moral monster, and his supporters need to be helped to look more carefully at what it is they adore.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit