Co pilot, those little shrines in the cars make me laugh. Devoutly religious or atheist when death comes knocking all those prays count for squat. No body has done a statistical survey on the longevity of atheists and the rest. My money is on there being no difference. Atheists probably have a little more money though.
Here's a good read.

 

In the beginning of man, things were so much simpler. GOD was easy


Man had things figured out


Fire burns but keeps the cave warm
The stick is good for hunting but a rock is better for killing


Thru the millennia's, man learned many things about his universe and how things worked. And GOD became a bit more complicated.


But still, Man had things figured out


Now man thinks he has the big bag thing figured out. And in his arrogance, he no longer needs to be concerned with the complicated creature his Creator has become.


In his arrogance he ignores that the Big Bang Theory is just that, a theory and one that is pretty well debunked. Un Provable and unrepeatable in the lab. And complicated by a multitude of "other" scientific faith paths competing to the final truth. Evolution need not be completely debunked in the process. But it does need to explain those things which do not fall into it's mandate.


How the fire of life started would be a good place to begin.


Like friendship, Morality , and why, when my cat purrs in my lap, the sound lowers my blood pressure.


An anatomic function that serves no purpose in evolution yet crosses the species line for no apparent reason that relates to survival of the fittest.


Gifty little nuggets left from GOD or a messy process of merciless, brutal, serendipity? We don't have proof of either answer.


However;
It would seem likely that GOD, if he truly exists, may be far more complicated than the simple process of evolution. I say proceed, figure it out. Do so with all haste and honest scientific endeavor. The facts are there to be discovered.


Same as fire.


And I suspect if GOD did truly exist, as he has manifested himself to many, he would not discourage it.

 

Man I love this thread. It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion. You know that you shouldn't look because it's going to be bad but you just can't turn away.

 

I'd like to know where Franc copied that post of his from.
Or as he does not attribute it to anyone, I guess he had a helping hand from above...... not.

 

I cannot fathom what is "bad" about a discourse that addresses the question of one's creation. Unless their mind is closed to the truth, or stubbornly in an arrogant or assumption of their belief of the truth. The question is of great importance.


Or perhaps in the, "it is what it is" bliss in of life of a lemming, it is of no importance. I suppose some folks are like that.




One could see, of course, how the process natural selection works well in that environment.


Sadly perhaps
It really is what it is.

 

Well, Dave, I actually know about that read. That is an atheist's look at the world. I don't know a lot of practicing atheists and the few I do know are really quite, well, hateful. That is being nice. People can believe or not believe. Doesn't bother me either way. In a Christian's eyes I'm a sinner and in an atheist's eye, well, I am nothing to them. And that is how I perceive atheist to be....They answer to themselves. Either way, we will all suffer the same demise someday. There isn't any difference there...

 

Don't do that Dave. Speak of what you know or it is false witness.


I spent 60 some years coming to those conclusions and the last two days thinking how to express them here. I copied them from no one.


I suppose I should thank you for the compliment, however I doubt it was your intention.

 

A pretty poem, but not based in any reality outside of his own drug trips:


Imagine there's no heaven
It's easy if you try
No hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Living for today...

He didn't think this thru, did he? People living only for TODAY?

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people
Living life in peace...

Ok, so no countries or religion = peace?
I'm unsure I buy that - all of us the world over living as one COUNTRY under one government? Now THAT sounds like a weird religious idea right there.
How many of the wars we've seen in just the past 200 years were 'civil' wars?

You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope someday you'll join us
And the world will be as one

I do share his thought, that we all live in peace as one. The difference between me and Lennon, is that I grew into an adult and he never did.

Imagine no possessions
I wonder if you can
No need for greed or hunger
A brotherhood of man
Imagine all the people
Sharing all the world...

Where has that ever happened? When has it ever happened?

NEVER.

 

As to the debate, I don't see how either won, but point to Bill for pointing out that Ham's system can't predict anything. (I actually enjoyed that observation, myself.)

Both of them were, IMO, respectful of one another and of the audience. I was encouraged at how civilized it all was, given the emotions behind the reason everyone was there.

Being a devout Christian myself, I enjoy debates about the whole young earth/old earth issue. I am an old-earther myself - which means neither side is happy with me - and I enjoy that!

 

I seem to recall that Lenin and Stalin and Mao all took a shot at that one ....

 

Well time to move on. No debate here. Atheist grew up surrounded by Christian belief, but they will attest that none of that affected them in anyway. We all know you can't grow up in a Muslim country and not believe or you will dead before your time. At least atheists around here can NOT practice what is preached and live. I think the book mentioned as I remember it, has a whole lot of good points about a lot bad things that have happened because of religious conflict with one another. It would drive one to think we are better off without religions. But, there are a whole lot of other teachings that have molded who we are. I am not some crusty old angry pissed off all the time FU mentality until confronted by some jack wagon who wants to attack me personally. Then the fight is on...so, my Christian belief needs work in that area.... I don't turn the other cheek very well. I work for a Christian company now, and remind those that I am around to pray for me...as I certainly need it. Atheist...well, my aunt is one, and her hateful attitude has caught up with her. I won't go into details, but helping her and my uncle is tough to do knowing how they pissed on everyone there whole life and now need our help... If nothing else I can remind them of that when we do help them...You all have a great debate...I will keep working on getting my trinkets together for my next drive...

 

I would agree with your analysis of the debate and your approach to the age old question.


The eyes of primal man were bare and focused thru the reality he could perceive with those few sensory processes available to him. Poor tools for a process so immense and daunting as creation. And consequently, what he concluded and stored in the tribal memory wasn't written but told and retold with interpretations not veridical with the scientific method.


Facts about the universe around early man related not to the oxidation of wood producing heat as much as the usefulness of it as a precious tool to keep his family safe and warm. Life lessons, written in somewhat indiscernible cacography of the time, related to effect, not creation and were cataloged thru that prism.


While these records are a fair view of the level of intelligence of early man, they are hardly valid proof of the beginning of his existence. I would not rely on them as fact either. I use the Bible for lessons of life, not science.


Some do foolishly stand on The Book for science, and lose credibility on the face of their arguments. But that doesn't change the debate much less lose the argument. we will find the answers in Bill Nye's approach but not if we simply accept it as fact.


Darwin was very disappointed that his theory remain unproven and in doubt as he passed from this world. But not because "radical cleric" wouldn't submit. He was disappointed because so much of what he presumed would be found as evidence to substantiate his presumptions, was still missing or proving inclusive.




We need to keep searching for the answers and let not religion, a manmade equivocation, or elitists biased science, a manmade collusion, interfere with an honest search for the truth.


Despite a common belief, in the scientific world there is no such thing as settled science.

 

EXACTLY -

It’s a pretty poem - just like believing in God and reading the pretty words in the Bible/Koran/Book of Mormon/Dianetics....(or any of the other super-human entity or entities)

Religion requires FAITH

FAITH really means there is no proof it’s ever really happed and you have absolutely no proof that it ever will.

Only a belief that some super-human entity will come down to earth and rain hellfire on those who did not believe in what you did - and then reward you with 50 virgins / your own planet / etc…etc… (or whatever fairy tale you've been told)

 

That's telling them.

 

"I cannot fathom what is "bad" about a discourse that addresses the question of one's creation. Unless their mind is closed to the truth, or stubbornly in an arrogant or assumption of their belief of the truth. The question is of great importance.

Or perhaps in the, "it is what it is" bliss in of life of a lemming, it is of no importance. I suppose some folks are like that.

One could see, of course, how the process natural selection works well in that
environment."

Really???? Wow!!!!! Lemming????? I was commenting on a thread that has gone so far off the track that it had resorted to personal insults and attacks. Calling people bullies because they don't agree with a particular point of view and had the audacity to express it. To quoting songs by Elvis, for Christ's sake. Good God, man, lighten up.

 

We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further.
Richard Dawkins

 

Creation and/O evolution. A quick video revue of our history end to end.

 

Chill John.. With all due respect;

My commentary wasn't about you,,,or me. Personal?.....please, don't make it so.

 

Here is probably a better website for this type of dscussion.

James Randi Educational Foundation

I started life and lived it until my 30's as a christian. I started studying the bible and various religions and ultimately came to the painful conclusion that there really isn't evidence to support a deity of any ilk. I'm not saying there isn't a deity, just no evidence to support the contention. I shook off my christianity to the horror of most everyone I know. As an Atheist I let the evidence speak for itself. So far the scientific rationale which is testable, verifiable and is open to new data input where it is rigorously tested once more, make sense to me. To have blind faith in anything is a dangerous trait. As far as most christians...they are what they are due to serendipity and where they were born. If they were born in Yemen to Muslim parents...guess what religion they would be. So, I'm thinking most christians and most other folks of any religion are the way they are through indoctrination. Most are too lazy to be objective and really search for answers. I will be the first to say I was wrong and take my place in the line to hell if any evidence to support a deity or a trifecta of deities comes about. It's all obout testable, objective, repeatable, documented evidence being interpreted by objective reasoning and critical thinking. Bring the proof and change my mind.

 

I tend to agree with your remarks here.


But consider;
We were lucky enough to be born in the USA. A Republic, and a freeman's parades by comparison to so many places in the world.


I would say you are on the mark here Wes. But one must ask,.. how does being born into an established religion invalidate it?
And from the other side, despite differences, so many of the worlds religions contain an all powerful, world creating diety(s) of some sort. I would argue, despite reasonable numbers of consensus, that really doesn't validate God either.