I love olives split or not split!
Evoloution Parody
by Beans 21 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
-
FirstInLine
Pat,
as I said, even if evolution were proven to be entirely wrong, it simply wouldn not prove that there is a God.
My Jesus thing is a way of saying "Then what will?"
-
patio34
FIL,
If you're asking "what will?" then my answer would be one word: proof.
Patio
-
FirstInLine
Patio,
If you're asking "what will?" then my answer would be one word: proof.
What would be proof?
-
Farkel
Trying to figure out how we got here is not nearly as important as trying to figure out what to do now that we are here, IMO.
Farkel
-
Abaddon
Patio, you make a good point.
When I was a dubbie, I could PROVE that we were created, at least to my own satisfaction. I could argue reasonably educated people to a standstill. I never met an evolutionary biologist though...
Now, having a bit of a science education, I can see exactly how dumb my arguments were, and having looked at various experessions of Creationism, I see the same pattern of ignorance and deception.
Some vaugely well-known sort-of-creationist posted a thread way back complaining about the way Creationism was regarded, and how this was so unfair. I and others gave examples of why this is so. He promised to rebutt the arguments, but then disappeared. Most of the major creationistic sites I have seen have a quite pathetic level of knowledge and even on occasions a disconcerting lack of honesty.
So when supporters of Creationistic arguments run them by me, I'm seeing stuff I once believed. I'm not ignorant of the arguments, the arguments are ignorant. And don't even start me on 'Intelligent Design'... a stalking horse for poor science, creationism by the backdoor, religious dogma into the classroom via the Hershey-highway.
I left the Dubbies as I couldn't live like that anymore. I still believed in god. God disappeared in a puff og logic one day in a science class, as I'd gathered together enough threads to realise the confusing simplicity that is evolutionary theory, and already realised that cosmologically at this point one cannot accurately determine the prime cause of existence.
Given that life around us is rather obviously the result of evolution, and that the formation of the Universe after its origin seems to be naturalistic, and that there were unaswerable questions regarding the origin of god if one postulated god as first cause and some rather good theories-in-progress if one postulated a non-god first cause, and that there was absolutely no indication of a single way of truth givenm to humans by god, I'm left with two conclusions to choose from.
- Something some of us might call god exists, but either it has no purpose for us or there's something ineffable going on.
- There is no god
And I think I can answer FirstInLine as to what would be proof; we know that hydrogen exists, even if elemental hydrogen is not a naturally occuring element. Despite this, we can prove it exists. If god exists there should be a similar level of certainty, or the whole things just is guess work and wishful thinking.
-
patio34
Hi Abaddon,
Thanks for that and I agree. I've had the experience of hearing some of the dub arguments given back to me that I used to believe and give too. But as you said, "I never talked (read) an evolutionary scientist." That wouldn't be much of a battle of wits.
FIL, Of course, "proof" could vary from person to person, as Abaddon pointed out. But, for me, it would be as positive as what Abaddon suggested, one of the elements. Or something that would have concrete evidence that could stand up in a court of law (say, something that wouldn't require "faith" because it could be proven).
Of course, you can continue to debate the issue because "proof" can be nebulous. However, just as I can't "prove" (tho it's not my onus) god doesn not exist, you have to admit you can't prove there is such a spectacular being. Sagan: extraordinary claimes require extraordinary proof.
Another instance, before a medicine is approved for use by government there has to be strong evidence, even some codified proof that it works and doesn't harm us.
I think you well know what would be considered proof and are just trying to yank my chain, as it were. If you don't understand proof, then good luck to you if you are ever charged with a crime, or take medicine that hasn't been approved, or fly in a plane which design hasn't been proven.
Pat
-
Beans
I think Farkels statement sums up any argument regarding creation or evoloution!
-
ignored_one
I see the images to the original version are now showing red Xs. Do you think someone tipped them off?
-
Ignored One.
-
FirstInLine
If god exists there should be a similar level of certainty,
Why?