Darwin Among the Believers (theory of evolution crucial for many fields)

Tech Central Station ^ | 07/22/2005 | Frederick Turner

[highball]

Why do you assume I'm ignorant because I refuse to accept that humans descended from some other life form? Should I assume you're ignorant because you do believe that?

No, I assume you're ignorant because you refuse to acknowledge facts that don't fit your preconceived notions. You ignore knowledge that you don't like because it doesn't support your chosen worldview. That's willful ignorance in the face of potential learning.

Words mean things, don't they? Or are those "in the mind of the beholder" as well? You already admitted that you don't believe in facts, perhaps you don't believe in words either?

[mlc9852]

You apparently choose to believe facts as you interpret them and that's your right. Many, many people don't believe we descended from anything other than humans. Why does that bother you so?

[From many - one.]

mlc9852 appears to be assuming facts not in evidence.

highball does not appear to me to be bothered, simply responding.

[mlc9852]

mlc9852 is not bothered easy, having heard all the same arguments on here for some time now - lol.

[AntiGuv]

I see. Well, here's a newsflash, this is a bedrock tenet of logic:

A > B > C > D > E > F > ad infinitum

A > F > ad infinitum

In other words, effect follows cause. If an omnipotent God did A, then He also did B and C and D and E and F ad infinitum. If the result of such a God's action is evil - however indirectly - then His action was an evil act, to whatever degree it resulted in evil.

A is the creation of man; F is man's evil act.

Moreover, willful inaction is an action. If a God is able to halt evil and declines to do so, then that is also an evil act.

PS. Your best logical answer is that if an omnipotent God exists, then nothing exists that He regards to be evil.

[shuckmaster]

You should write a book.

[wyattearp]

Why is it when evolution is discussed, the subject of God always comes up? It doesn't come up when discussing calculus, geology, astrophysics, or any other scientific discipline. Why?

Because the God Squad doesn't blindly and ignorantly attack calculus, geology, astrophysics, or any other scientific discipline.

[mlc9852]

Wow - you know how God works! I am impressed at your level of understanding.

[b_sharp]

"Okay class. Is this rock in my hand alive?"

Its one thing to recognize the difference between a rock and a bird, two objects that are far enough apart that their difference in appearance and properties are obvious, but the differences blur when the two being compared are extremely close. Would you consider self replicating molecule strings alive? Are prions alive? How about virii? When the organisms are this basic it is very difficult to determine the difference between life and non-life.

[Junior]

I am not trying to disprove the existence of God. Indeed, I know the Almighty exists. What I am asking you is how you know the information you claim is revealed actually is so.

[b_sharp]

"This has been my point all along. Too many evos lack understanding and argue for a religious world view of evolution instead of using logical and scientific reason."

I've always thought that part of the assurance of religious faith was that God put the faith in you.

[mike182d]

In other words, effect follows cause. If an omnipotent God did A, then He also did B and C and D and E and F ad infinitum. If the result of such a God's action is evil - however indirectly - then His action was an evil act, to whatever degree it resulted in evil.

So, you would agree, then, to arresting and executing the parents of a convicted murderer in addition to the murderer himself? Apparently, your logic finds them equally guilty. After all, the parents created him...

Your best logical answer is that if an omnipotent God exits, then nothing exists that He regards to be evil.

What makes evil bad?

[shuckmaster]

You are not descended from some primate and what you believe doesn't change the facts.

Oh, yes you are!

[Dimensio]

Are you still trying to justify your LIE that Antony Flew rejected evolution even though it is very clear that he did no such thing? Or are you still trying to justify your lie that you had never said anything about Antony Flew in the first place even though I just linked to a previous posting where you in fact did say something about him?

Or are you just here to reinforce my position that "creationist" is a synonym for "liar"?

Other creationists here: any of you want to try defending nmh's very clear denial of reality? Not gotten any takers thus far; it's like every creationist out there absolutely refuses to acknowledge dishonesty from their own side (with a very few known exceptions, none of whom called out nmh on his lies).

[mlc9852]

Sorry, but I am not. You perhaps are which would explain a lot.

[Junior]

You refuse to accept it in the face of hard evidence. That is willful ignorance.

[bobdsmith]

What makes pain painful?

[Dimensio]

I would have if you had been my teacher. But I can make up my own mind.

Indeed. You don't need any of that "research" or "education". You just decide what's true without worrying about those bothersome "facts".

[mlc9852]

You don't believe in evil?

[mike182d]

I have told you straight up that the theory of evolution does not care how the first life forms came to be

Yes, I know, and I've said that's a ludicrous proposition. Is evolution a causal force? Did it exist prior to the first lifeform? If not, where did it come from? Who or what brough the causal force of evolution into being?

Evolutionists only don't want to talk about abiogenesis because its the biggest fault of their entire theory and they have no answer for it.