Evolution and Big Bang are lies from Hell

[LE19]

More fishing.

Caught a few and then rebait and go again.

Shame, when there's a worthwhile debate going on.

 

[Bhafcman]

"The thing is with life as such, when it evolves, it evolves in the environment it is in. There are some evidence that there are live bacteria in very hot places on our planet, i.e. life can arise in different circumstances than our current one,Basically, we're judging our current condition as the "perfect" one and only possible solution only because we can't compare to another different condition, and because of that ignorance, people tend to draw religious conclusions"

what do you have to say to that?

Evolution does not exist, where did the first life come from?

Still waiting for answer to this Stewart

 

[teaboy]

There is only one Deity, unless you are an ancient Greek or Roman or similar. Most (reasonable) people of faith would accept that the Muslim and Christian God are the same one, but that there are just different routes to it - and it is of course the same God as the Jewish God anyway.

That is a gross over-simplification..... and i bet Stewart will have a problem with it.

I think it's fairer to say that you believe there to be only one deity. I doubt you have any more information on the subject than the Romans, Greeks, Hindus, etc. I don't think there are any gods. I find the idea far too simplistic an argument. I'm comfortable in the fact we (humans) don't know everything. I think we'll find out more, and probably find out that some things the 20th century saw as fact are not quite right (see Newtonian gravity). I like the drip, drip, drip of information, new discoveries and refinement of old ideas. I don't need there to be a reason for all this - it's actually easier without it!

I truely believe that modern science is the best way to explain the world as it is. It's a process of evolution in itself with new suggestions tested and re-tested before being accepted or abandoned. If a better way of doing it is ever proposed and found to be more correct then that will be adopted in place of science. That isn't a bad thing, but quite exciting.

'Morality' is an evolutionary construct that comes from being safe in our environment. It doesn't come from 'outside', otherwise why would what is or isn't 'moral' change over time?

 

[Lord Bracknell]

'Morality' is an evolutionary construct that comes from being safe in our environment. It doesn't come from 'outside'

Are you saying that all those childhood lessons about the importance of being good, or I'll beat the living hell out of you, were a waste of time?

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

More fishing.

Caught a few and then rebait and go again.

Does it really matter if people are enjoying the debate?

But Stewart is either a wind-up merchant or a prat or, quite possibly, both. I think people who gain pleasure out of winding other people up are very, very sad indeed.

 

[teaboy]

'Morality' is an evolutionary construct that comes from being safe in our environment. It doesn't come from 'outside', otherwise why would what is or isn't 'moral' change over time?

Are you saying that all those childhood lessons about the importance of being good, or I'll beat the living hell out of you, were a waste of time?

Did the approach work? Do you have a link to a meta-analysis?

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

I think it's fairer to say that you believe there to be only one deity. I doubt you have any more information on the subject than the Romans, Greeks, Hindus, etc. I don't think there are any gods. I find the idea far too simplistic an argument. I'm comfortable in the fact we (humans) don't know everything. I think we'll find out more, and probably find out that some things the 20th century saw as fact are not quite right (see Newtonian gravity). I like the drip, drip, drip of information, new discoveries and refinement of old ideas. I don't need there to be a reason for all this - it's actually easier without it!

I truely believe that modern science is the best way to explain the world as it is. It's a process of evolution in itself with new suggestions tested and re-tested before being accepted or abandoned. If a better way of doing it is ever proposed and found to be more correct then that will be adopted in place of science. That isn't a bad thing, but quite exciting.

'Morality' is an evolutionary construct that comes from being safe in our environment. It doesn't come from 'outside', otherwise why would what is or isn't 'moral' change over time?

Other than the fact that I do believe in a God, i accept and agree with everything you say.

 

[Lord Bracknell]

Did the approach work? Do you have a link to a meta-analysis?

Dunno. I guess you've turned out good and denied me the opportunity to test the theory.

 

[Silk]

and herein lies the fundemental difference between science and religion. "where did everything come from" for the scientist is a question to start a process of discovery to explore the nature and workings of the universe and see what can be found. for the religious it is a question that just gets pushed aside as unknowable, sky daddy made it so.

Now, I didn't say that, and am not particularly religious, but for a theist, there IS only one God, so the question is utterly pointless.

 

[Silk]

I think Stewart may be a young lad. I think he needs to read a bit about science, theology, and philosophy, and also to live a little, and see what he thinks then.

There is a certain irony about dismissing the big bang as bullshit but believing that amputated limbs grow back.

 

[Curious Orange]

Now, I didn't say that, and am not particularly religious, but for a theist, there IS only one God, so the question is utterly pointless.

Only for monotheists you mean. The Jews, Christians and Muslims do not have a global monopoly on either religion or faith. Other religions are available for those who prefer a pantheon of deities.

 

[Herne Hill Seagull]

If you believe in evolution, then why aren't you killing people then? Were here for no reason, so why not kill loads of people then, it won't matter.

That's the weirdest question I've ever heard, quite genuinely. I can't speak for everybody, but personally I'm not killing people because it'd be wrong. Of course it matters. You don't have to be religious to comprehend right and wrong, to define a moral code and live by it. Are you genuinely suggesting that only your faith is stopping you going round bumping people off? Because that's the other side of your bizarre questions's metaphorical coin.

Some other possible questions of the same pertinence to put to evolutionists, in case you run out: "If you believe in evolution, why aren't you stapling bacon to the lawn?" "If you believe in evolution, why aren't you painting budgies blue?" "If you believe in evolution, why aren't you worshipping Meade's Ball as the exemplum of the paradigm?" Hope they help.

 

[pastafarian]

If you believe in evolution, why aren't you stapling bacon to the lawn?

this could possibly be the greatest question in the history of humanity.

 

[beorhthelm]

Now, I didn't say that, and am not particularly religious, but for a theist, there IS only one God, so the question is utterly pointless.

that wasnt aimed at you, left over multiquote... go a few posts before. abridged, you are very wrong as there is plenty of polytheist religions.

 

[Silk]

Only for monotheists you mean. The Jews, Christians and Muslims do not have a global monopoly on either religion or faith. Other religions are available for those who prefer a pantheon of deities.

Theism is normally taken to mean belief in monotheism. So as I said, from that context the question is meaningless.

 

[teaboy]

Theism is normally taken to mean belief in monotheism. So as I said, from that context the question is meaningless.

Whether or not you're correct in how it is usually taken (I don't think you are), it isn't what it means, hence the need for the 'mono' and 'poly' to differenciate.

 

[beorhthelm]

Theism is normally taken to mean belief in monotheism.

no it isnt. this is dictionary time, look up the word.

 

[Silk]

FFS. Whether I am right or wrong about what theism means - and try looking at Wikipedia - the question is still bollocks. For the adherents of the main three western monotheistic faiths, it is a meaningless question. For adherents of a polytheistic faith, the Gods you believe in are the ones you are mandated to believe in by that faith. I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, so please try and make it a little more coherently.

 

[beorhthelm]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, so please try and make it a little more coherently.

the question from Mr Orange was "how do you decide which deity you choose to follow? And do you ever worry that the ones that you decide not to worship might get a bit annoyed?". the point is, there are a number of claimed gods, how do you know you've picked the right one? if you haven't you're a bit screwed (possibly more so than the atheist who could plead that at least they didn't pray to another). theres a further point, after arguing for existance of god x with the athiest, how do you then say that god y doesnt exist?

you've half given away the answer "...the Gods you believe in are the ones you are mandated to believe in by that faith". you are indoctrinated into a faith and accept its god(s).

 

[DavidinSouthampton]

no it isnt. this is dictionary time, look up the word.

According to the Shorter Oxford Dictionary, which i happen to have on the shelf behind my head, it can mean both - meaning 1 is belief in a deity or deities, and no 2 meaning equates it to monotheism as opposed to Pantheism or Polytheism.