Science vs. Faith (PIC)

[yoink*gasp*]

Before I begin I want you to know that I'm not insulting you, I'm simply dissecting your statement.

Firstly, God Exists. What evidense is there to support this? I have seen no physical or even spirtual construction of God. We can say that his existence is possible, but certainly not definate.

Second, Jesus is the son of God. That may very well be true but we still do not have any factual proof that validates the existence of God. Because of that fact we have no choice but to say "If God does indeed exist, the Jesus is his son."

The earth is less than 10,000 years old. How can you know this? Religion has no evidense other than a book to susbstaniate this claim. The Bible cannot be considered an authority simply because it's bias is obviously very one sided.

Until there can be undeniable proof of the age of the earth this fact will also have to remain possible, but certainly not definate.

Third, humans lived with the dinosaurs. Again, what proof does anyone have to substaniate this? Reading the views of a creationist cannot be considered proof simply because of their obvious bias. Though some of their opinions may be factual, the fact remains that their opinions must be twisted to their cause because of their bias.

Fourth, Carbon dating is incredibly inaccurate. This may very well be true. However, there is more effort on the science side of things because at least they're trying to find a way to make it accurate as opposed to relying on a book.

Fifth, The Great Flood did stuff. What constitutes a great flood? The mass melting of the glaciers could certainly be considered a great flood. However, what proof can a creationist provide that validates the claims that "God" created a massive flood.

Lastly, The Theory of Evolution is total crap. Really? How can you prove any of your claims on this one? What makes the probability of evolution impossible?

Back 5,000 years ago do you think someone who was chronically fat or blind survived? Yet today, in our modern age, nearly 10% of the population is severely obese and blind people still live.

You don't think that animals/people havn't evolved to survive in their environments? Explain the fish that exist deep in the ocean that have no eyes because the light doesn't penetrate that far. What about thick haired animals that survive in cold climates?

No... that's not evolution. God put them all there.

Okay, so what about the thousands of different dog breeds that have sprung up in the last few hundred years? No, you're right, God made the Cokapoo.

In either case- please provide evidense to support your claims.

God exsists.

Jesus is the son of God.

The earth is ~10,000 years old.

Humans lived with dinosaurs
I'm not joking, go talk to a creationist (or read online) if you want to know more.

Carbon dateing is incredibly inaccurate
a live penguin was dated to be 8,000 years old and the same rock was dated to be between ~100,000 years old and ~2 billon years old by four different carbon dateing techniques believed to be accurate

The Great Flood did stuff...
There is evidence to support that the Grand Canon was caused by ONE cataclysmic event.

The Theory Evolution is total crap
It doesn't work, things don't become new species. All the theory does is use an incomprehendable amount of time and chance (the actually probabilty of evolution is impossible) amount of time to say things happened.

Go read more online. I just wrote this really quick (I'm at school) - maybe this weekend I will go more indepth and explain some of those things...

 

[Romestar]

In either case- please provide evidense to support your claims.

I just wrote this really quick (I'm at school) - maybe this weekend I will go more indepth and explain some of those things...

yea, it's coming (hopefully by tommorrow)

 

[engaged]

some people are so dumb it hurts

 

[joemeca]

Sad, I will probably get reds for this but...

I might not go to church but I certainly believe in god and don't know how I would live if I didn't have something to believe in.

 

[feros]

i believe in God because science won't send me to hell if i'm wrong

 

[joemeca]

i believe in God because science won't send me to hell if i'm wrong

hahha amen!

 

[emp]

i believe in God because science won't send me to hell if i'm wrong

LOL

I even gave up arguing with them Jesus people. Let them be.

::emp::

 

[NoelKuhl]

I want to be God.

Personally, I still pray and give thanks everytime I eat. I really don't know who I'm praying to but it feels good to be thankful for little things like that.

 

[ltn1dr]

i believe in God because science won't send me to hell if i'm wrong

Funny, but its a valid point.

I'm Catholic, and don't buy the majority of the scientific theories because there is not one that makes enough sense to completely make me believe any of them.

But then again, I might have a little bias, I went to a Baptist elementary school and they pounded our little brains with enough bible to kill a person. They showed us a video of how the flood caused the continents to split up and stuff.

 

[Setec]

RomeStar, somebody's been feeding you a truckload of bullshit. Those are all standard creationist jokes, and each one is easily disproved in hundreds of ways, if not tens of thousands of ways. Thank goodness I don't have to list them all... since creationists have been trotting out the same old nonsense for so long, somebody put together a nice database of explanations why each claim is wrong.

The earth is ~10,000 years old.

Age of the Earth
Age of the Universe

Carbon dateing is incredibly inaccurate
a live penguin was dated to be 8,000 years old and the same rock was dated to be between ~100,000 years old and ~2 billon years old by four different carbon dateing techniques believed to be accurate

Before you consider yourself qualified to contradict the thousands of PhD scientists who use carbon dating, you should really learn how to spell "dating." Learning to spell "billion" would be a plus, too.

However, the basic reason this claim is full of shit is that carbon dating isn't used on things between 100,000 and 2 billion years old. Carbon dating works on most things up to about 50,000 years back, and beyond that a host of different methods are used.

Link: Carbon dating is fine.

The Great Flood did stuff...
There is evidence to support that the Grand Canon was caused by ONE cataclysmic event.

No there isn't.

Link: Great flood / Grand Canyon bullshit

The Theory Evolution is total crap
It doesn't work, things don't become new species. All the theory does is use an incomprehendable amount of time and chance (the actually probabilty of evolution is impossible) amount of time to say things happened.

Denying evolution is literally every bit as insane as denying gravity. Evolution is not just one idea; it's an entire framework underlying almost everything we know about biology, none of which makes any sense without the context evolution provides. It offers logical explanations for millions of otherwise seemingly random features of organisms. It is impossible to convey the magnitude of the evidence supporting evolution in an entire book, let alone one post.

It's hard to know where to begin with somebody who doesn't believe evolution, because that mindset is so far detached from reality. Not one single person looks at the evidence with an open mind and rejects evolution; instead, people are brainwashed against it by their pastors and then look at evolution with a "where can I convince myself this is wrong" mindset. Usually it's pretty easy -- you run up against something you don't understand and say, "aha! I don't understand that, therefore it must be wrong." Something needs to get you out of that mindset, and reason and evidence won't do it. Maybe a whack on the head with a big stick would work.

I really don't know what will work, but try this: read a few actual science books about evolution. Every time something doesn't make sense to you, it's probably something other creationists have used to oppose evolution, which means you could find it in the Index of Creationists Claims. Use that site as a sort of FAQ to give the basics of things you don't understand. Half of the site involves refuting anti-evolution silliness, but you might need to start with these parts:

• We don't expect to directly observe macroevolution. Then again, we don't directly observe atoms, because they're too small to see. Do you doubt that you're made of atoms?
• We have observed the appearance of new species.
• Here's a nice summary of some of the areas of biology which prove life evolved. None of these take the form of pretty little "x and y, therefore z" proofs because most are entire fields within biology.

i believe in God because science won't send me to hell if i'm wrong

No, but you could waste up to 1/7 of your life in church. Since it's the only life you get, that's a lot of time to be tossing in the dumpster.

Besides, punishment has no bearing on what's real or not. If you rationalize you belief on God that way, odds are you realize it's a stupid idea but you're going through the motions so you don't get in trouble. What's the point? Furthermore, what if you've picked the wrong God? Is it really worth believing in one to avoid punishment when it could just as easily be Allah or Zeus or Vishnu waiting to strike you down instead of the Christian God? Or, what if you just believe in a general overall God, but it turns out there's really a sectarian God who sends everyone but Mormons to Hell anyway? You must be scared shitless of all these possibilities unless you're willing to call them all out as bullshit, which is a much better idea.

I'm Catholic, and don't buy the majority of the scientific theories because there is not one that makes enough sense to completely make me believe any of them.

Then you don't understand them. Science is not a set of ideas for the laymen to be tossed out and judged based on how much they aesthetically please you. Most who don't have several years of good college training in science can't even fathom how much evidence and
reasoning underlies a lot of the basic scientific theories that creationists deny. I grew up loving science and was still completely blown away by just how deep the field of physics is when I had majored in it at a top university for a few years. I ended up switching to bio and was again shocked by just how much evidence there is for evolution..

There are a few reasons scientists have a credibility problem in the public eye, none of which are valid reasons to reject science:

1. Scientists are busy doing science, which is a shitload of hard work. They also have the major headache of getting funding, and many of them teach college classes on top of it all. This means most of them don't have much time to market their ideas to the public. Meanwhile, people on the anti-science side do literally nothing but propaganda.
2. The country may spend a lot on scientific research, but it spends pennies on science education. The National Center for Science Education's budget is dwarfed by that of the Christian-funded Discovery Institute, just one of many propaganda outlets on the full-time attack against science. If you scoot through school like most people do in some cushy major that doesn't involve learning the first thing about science, and your Biblical delusions remain intact, there's pretty much nothing out there after school to prompt you to question your fantasy.
3. Most scientists are cautious and reserved when stating their confidence in things, because they're used to a world of papers filled with error bars and caveats, and most of them are unwilling to say they're 100% positive something is true when that frequent question is asked. They say "no" and the sound bite camera shuts down before they can add, "I'm technically just 99.99999999999999% positive." This technical hang-up leads to the perception that scientists aren't as sure of things as they really are.

Then again, God does have a blog.

 

[Romestar]

Setec, public schools have been feeding you a truckload of bullshit. The Theory of Evolution is only taught because it is the only theory about the origin of life that is not based on a religion (however, evolution is still a faith that you are worthless and you came about by chance to reproduce your species).

First, about my spelling in my initial post (since your the second to comment), if you actually comprehended it you would know that I "wrote this really quick" and didn't have time to check my spelling.

I would like to point out that I have studied creationism and evolution. (I went to a Christian school for two years) Setec, I highly doubt you have honestly studied creationism.

I only brought up carbon dating because a lot of people's first response when I tell them the age of the Earth is what about carbon dating? My point is that it is not reliable. There are varies factors that could make it inaccurate; for example carbon dating assumes that the rate of carbon decay has remained the same over the thousands of years the creature has been dead. Just throwing this out there, but don't ice ages occur roughly every 10,000 years supposedly? So if we have a 50,000 year old creature that goes through five ice ages and freezes. This would cause the decay to be much slower. Of course that particular example doesn't support me, but it just shows an example of how carbon dating could be way off.

When I said evolution does work. I wasn't just saying it...

"Evolution is mathematically impossible. The mathematical probability of a SINGLE CELL coming about by chance is 1/10340,000,000, the fraction 1 divided by 1 followed by 340 million zeros! And then this cell must live long enough to reproduce. And then the reproduced cell must live long enough to do the same. And then more "accidents" must happen to cause more complexity. And then more "accidents" must happen to cause more complexity. And long before the first "accident" evolution is nothing but a silly, mystical fairy tale."

Finally, I would like to point out that there is no such thing as a vestigial organ (an organ that is useless - like a leftover byproduct of evolution). It is a common misconception that the appendix is useless, go read this: Cutting out a useless vestigial argument

 

[Andrew]

Actually you are all wrong, its common knowledge that the Earth was created by reptilians.

 

[Grower]

I love you wacko guys, you make life interesting. 200 years ago you would be telling us that the world is flat (100% of scientists would disagree, but what do they know).

The interesting question you should ask yourself is: Why do all smart people in the world disagree with me?

 

[Romestar]

Why do all smart people in the world disagree with me?

there are very smart people on both sides of the creation vs evolution argument

 

[emp]

Setec, I said I wouldn't argue with them Jesus people, but my fingers itch...

I think the thing that riles most religionists is that science is not a faith.

Science is a method. It's a process. It is based on finding faults in one another's works to build on them.

So if you disprove, really disprove evolution tomorrow, science is just gonna truck along another path. As scientists, we're not gonna stand still and defend a lost position.

Funny thing is that creationists want to debunk evolution by the claim that "you can't observe it" - yes you can.

Bacteria (unsure of spelling, but hey, English is not my first langage) and Virii evolve every day right in front of our eyes. In fact, science has to keep up with that evolution to provide all the jesus hugging creationists with antibiotics and up to date medicine.

If you really do not believe in evolution, pray instead of taking those miracles of science next time you are sick. :bowdown:

::emp::

 

[Romestar]

Funny thing is that creationists want to debunk evolution by the claim that "you can't observe it" - yes you can.

no, you can not.

when has something turned into a new species? never.

science itself may not be a faith, but the Theory of Evolution is. You believe that there is no God and that you are absolutely worthless, you came around by chance and that you can do whatever you want in your materialistic lives and when you die you just cease to live (when you actually go to Hell on Judgement Day)

 

[guysmy]

"Evolution is mathematically impossible. The mathematical probability of a SINGLE CELL coming about by chance is 1/10340,000,000, the fraction 1 divided by 1 followed by 340 million zeros! And then this cell must live long enough to reproduce. And then the reproduced cell must live long enough to do the same. And then more "accidents" must happen to cause more complexity. And then more "accidents" must happen to cause more complexity. And long before the first "accident" evolution is nothing but a silly, mystical fairy tale."

What if life is created to adapt to its environment and calibrates itself in order to flourish in good conditions or merely survive in bad conditions? There are limitations, so if the changes required for survival are too drastic within a given frame of time, the species will die off. If the balance is thrown off by the species' absense, it is compensated by all existing species.

If that's the case, the creation of a new species (ie dinosaurs, humankind) would have to serve a greater purpose than to simply maintain the balance of all life. Now, we come to a realm that is beyond human comprehension.

This is my own personal opinion or reality tunnel and I can't prove shit. I like to look at the spritual underpinnings because I think like a mystic. I like reading scientific opinions, however, while scientists are always asking "how?", I'm always asking "why?"

 

[GeorgeA]

Setec, public schools have been feeding you a truckload of bullshit. The Theory of Evolution is only taught because it is the only theory about the origin of life that is not based on a religion (however, evolution is still a faith that you are worthless and you came about by chance to reproduce your species).

Great!now you have a purpose in live,live in sufferance to please a God that may send you in hell ,though he LOVES you. So we must all live/die/waste our lives for him because he needs people to worship him. truly a fine purpose, and a mighty forgiving god (that might just send you to hell , but he's good ).

I would like to point out that I have studied creationism and evolution. (I went to a Christian school for two years) Setec, I highly doubt you have honestly studied creationism.

Creationism is NOT science,please understand that. See the criterion of falsifiability that science generally presents.

I only brought up carbon dating because a lot of people's first response when I tell them the age of the Earth is what about carbon dating? My point is that it is not reliable. There are varies factors that could make it inaccurate; for example carbon dating assumes that the rate of carbon decay has remained the same over the thousands of years the creature has been dead. Just throwing this out there, but don't ice ages occur roughly every 10,000 years supposedly? So if we have a 50,000 year old creature that goes through five ice ages and freezes. This would cause the decay to be much slower. Of course that particular example doesn't support me, but it just shows an example of how carbon dating could be way off.

Oh , I know the explanation for the dinosaurs thing: God put the fossils there to test us !!11!oneone.
Please red about:
Radiocarbon dating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And as you said that you've studied so much , you probably knew that carbon dating is NOT used for dating the age of earth. See: Radiometric dating - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia for further details.

"Evolution is mathematically impossible. The mathematical probability of a SINGLE CELL coming about by chance is 1/10340,000,000, the fraction 1 divided by 1 followed by 340 million zeros! And then this cell must live long enough to reproduce. And then the reproduced cell must live long enough to do the same. And then more "accidents" must happen to cause more complexity. And then more "accidents" must happen to cause more complexity. And long before the first "accident" evolution is nothing but a silly, mystical fairy tale."

If you start like that,you might as well bring the so called "argument" that [SIZE=-1]Sir Fred Hoyle[/SIZE] presented (the one with the tornado and the boeing 747...look it up in the net).
Your understanding of evolution is that a cell must be formed at once "by accident" which is utterly wrong. First , the basic building block of life form (nucleotides), then amino acids,they then form some other structures which names I've forgotten ,which then form self-replicating structures such as DNA or RNA.It's a step by step process , and there is no change that a cell just forms in a second by chance from water , methane , heat and whatever else is needed. The whole point is that each step leads to an increase in complexity,and the sum of all parts can be greater than the parts taken separately.

Finally, I would like to point out that there is no such thing as a vestigial organ (an organ that is useless - like a leftover byproduct of evolution). It is a common misconception that the appendix is useless, go read this: Cutting out a useless vestigial argument

Ever seen the X-ray photos of a whale ? What's with the small leg bones buried deep inside their body,in the back part ? They serve what function ? Oh and what do ostriches and emus do with their wings ? I've never seen one fly.

 

[emp]

no you can not.

when has something turned into a new species? never.

science itself may not be a faith, but the Theory of Evolution is. You believe that there is no God and that you are absolutely worthless, you came around by chance and that you can do whatever you want in your materialistic lives and when you die you just cease to live (when you actually go to Hell on Judgement Day)

So you opt for the prayer instead of modern antibiotics? Great. Just the thing to do with a lung infection.

For me, I know that modern science has saved my life several times already.

Yes, we came around by chance, but no, we and I are not worthless.

Having no faith in God does not imply worthlessness. How Christians make that leap is completely beyond me.

The other leap you are making here is no belief in God = purely materialistic world view = unethical behaviour.

There can be ethics and moral without a God in the picture. For example, I can decide to behave morally because I decide it is the better thing to do.

For example, I won't go around killing people.
Not because I believe in any God or /and his/her/its commandments, but rather because I like people to be alive and well.
Maybe also because "Do unto others as you want to be done unto" is a kinda neat concept...which also works without a God.

You know, I don't need an imaginary friend.

::emp::

 

[Romestar]

Yes, without God you are worthless. Your only here to reproduce your species. You should know that, you seem to like science.

Christians don't just blindly believe in God. Religion is personal. Not to be confused with the liberal perversion meaning keep it yourself, but you have a person relationship with God.

Also, George Washington said this: "Of all the dispositions and habits which lead to political prosperity, religion and morality are indispensable supports."