Does God exist? (3 Viewers)

[inasero]

Yeh he is so compassionate. His creations which are less then ants to him do not say how good and nice he is all the time so he will roast them in hell for all eternity. Sounds like a real secure and well adjusted guy to me.

In 2 Peter 3:9 it says:

The Lord is...not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

And the word also says that Hell wasn't created for humans but for fallen angels, and God loved the world so much that he gave his one and only son to die in our place. That to me speaks of a God of amazing grace and mercy. If we reject God's rescue plan, then how can we possibly criticize Him for receiving the punishment we rightly deserve?

 

[darkliight]

I just don't get the whole thing with organisms turning into completely different organisms. Granted evolutionists say it takes a very long time. Or why some organisms can't seem to make up their mind (pardon me I know there is no thought involved in the process), wether they want to be in the water or on land (like whales) or something similar to that.

Wait. You don't get it, but you still come to the conclusion that it's wrong? Maybe you meant it doesn't sound reasonable to you, but then, what sort of background/education are you basing that on? Your Bachelor of intuition? And how do you come to terms with the many documented cases of speciation? I mean, the only way out of that is to ignore it isn't it?

I think there are a lot of things out there that don't sound reasonable to someone without adequate training. For instance, if you ask the majority of people "which is bigger? the set of all numbers, or the set of just the positive numbers?", chances are they'll say the former. I know I doubted that they're the same 'size' when someone told me. But with just a little bit of education is becomes totally clear.

Thinking that the worlds scientists have nice books, acknowledging the amount of research that has gone into them, but then telling them you think they're all wrong has got to be the height of arrogance.

lol prove me wrong and show me you know what you're arguing, rather than resorting to base rhetoric. so again, i'm asking you to show me you personally understand the evidence behind evolution, if you please.

Are you serious? You want someone to write you a textbook on evolution before you'll decide if you'll debate them? This may come as a bit of a shock, but you're a fucking idiot. I mean, putting aside the fact you're willing to tell the scientific world they're all wrong, you actually expect someone to spend time convincing you they know all about what you don't agree with? "Holy shit".

 

[Graney]

the single biggest flaw with evolution is the incontinuity in the fossil record.

There are many indignant young atheists ITT at present, with an over-inflated opinion of their own intelligence and beliefs.

Don't worry about it, their immaturity is plain for all to see.

I'm aware of problems with the incontinuity of the fossil record, such as the lack of major transitional special between fish and amphibians. I believe the missing records are simply waiting to be found. A 100% complete fossil record is an unrealistic expectation.

Nonetheless, you must admit, the fossil record is pretty awesome and strong evidence as it stands.

 

[bigboyjames]

i find it hard to believe in the evolution theory. just not enough evidence.

 

[laurenmoss]

i hate this argument, no one is ever going to come to a conclusion, it's just a waste of time.. one's opinion will never change if someone tries to challenge it.

 

[darkliight]

i find it hard to believe in the evolution theory. just not enough evidence.

Are you serious? It's constantly being observed, real time!

EDIT: 3 seconds searching on wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_common_descent
Imagine what a few days will get you.

 

[inasero]

Wait. You don't get it, but you still come to the conclusion that it's wrong? Maybe you meant it doesn't sound reasonable to you, but then, what sort of background/education are you basing that on? Your Bachelor of intuition? And how do you come to terms with the many documented cases of speciation? I mean, the only way out of that is to ignore it isn't it?

I think there are a lot of things out there that don't sound reasonable to someone without adequate training. For instance, if you ask the majority of people "which is bigger? the set of all numbers, or the set of just the positive numbers?", chances are they'll say the former. I know I doubted that they're the same 'size' when someone told me. But with just a little bit of education is becomes totally clear.

Thinking that the worlds scientists have nice books, acknowledging the amount of research that has gone into them, but then telling them you think they're all wrong has got to be the height of arrogance.



Are you serious? You want someone to write you a textbook on evolution before you'll decide if you'll debate them? This may come as a bit of a shock, but you're a fucking idiot. I mean, putting aside the fact you're willing to tell the scientific world they're all wrong, you actually expect someone to spend time convincing you they know all about what you don't agree with? "Holy shit".

i never asked for a textbook response, i just want to know if this guy really knows what he's arguing about. and if you read my response, you'll understand that it wasn't my intent to criticize evolution. so i'd appreciate if you kept your personal attacks to yourself.

 

[inasero]

i hate this argument, no one is ever going to come to a conclusion, it's just a waste of time.. one's opinion will never change if someone tries to challenge it.

I agree, but I think it's worthwhile discussing these things so we understand where the other side are coming from. I've certainly learnt alot ITT.

 

[Graney]

i hate this argument, no one is ever going to come to a conclusion, it's just a waste of time.. one's opinion will never change if someone tries to challenge it.

I disagree, I've greatly changed, adapted and strengthened my beliefs after consulting with experts, partly due to this thread.

This thread is meaningfull and informative to a lot of more open minded memebers I'm sure.

 

[darkliight]

i never asked for a textbook response, i just want to know if this guy really knows what he's arguing about. and if you read my response, you'll understand that it wasn't my intent to criticize evolution. so i'd appreciate if you kept your personal attacks to yourself.

Sorry, I guess I totally missed what you meant here, hey?

I know what the scientific facts and theories are. I want to know if you do as well, so I know I'm not wasting my time arguing. Fair enough no?

 

[laurenmoss]

I disagree, I've greatly changed, adapted and strengthened my beliefs after consulting with experts, partly due to this thread.

This thread is meaningfull and informative to a lot of more open minded memebers I'm sure.

that's not what i meant and i am open minded, i just think it's pointless for people to get angry at eachother for holding a certain belief..

 

[KFunk]

the single biggest flaw with evolution is the incontinuity in the fossil record.

The theory of evolution doesn't require that we be able to find a perfectly continuous fossil record. To require such strong evidence is to misunderstand the scientific method - you shouldn't expect a 100% airtight, knockdown proof. Perhaps from some areas of physics you might, or physical chemistry, but certainly not once you enter biology or the social sciences. Strong, but incomplete, evidence is damn well good enough. It certainly outshines what evidence I can see that backs the claims made in Genesis. You shouldn't be asking 'what claims can we produce a conclusive proof for?', but rather 'what beliefs are most warranted/likely given the current state of evidence?'.

If you hold up the theory of evolution to stringent standards requiring incontrovertible proof you end up making a strawman argument.

 

[bigboyjames]

The theory of evolution doesn't require that we be able to find a perfectly continuous fossil record. To require such strong evidence is to misunderstand the scientific method - you shouldn't expect a 100% airtight, knockdown proof. Perhaps from some areas of physics you might, or physical chemistry, but certainly not once you enter biology or the social sciences. Strong, but incomplete, evidence is damn well good enough. It certainly outshines what evidence I can see that backs the claims made in Genesis. You shouldn't be asking 'what claims can we produce a conclusive proof for?', but rather 'what beliefs are most warranted/likely given the current state of evidence?'.

If you hold up the theory of evolution to stringent standards requiring incontrovertible proof you end up making a strawman argument.

lol.

 

[KFunk]

For good measure:

 

[KFunk]

lol.

¿Qué?

 

[Riet]

For those who don't accept evolution, what do you propose as an alternative theory and where is the evidence for it?

 

[The Eagle456840]

Wait. You don't get it, but you still come to the conclusion that it's wrong? Maybe you meant it doesn't sound reasonable to you, but then, what sort of background/education are you basing that on? Your Bachelor of intuition? And how do you come to terms with the many documented cases of speciation? I mean, the only way out of that is to ignore it isn't it?


I think there are a lot of things out there that don't sound reasonable to someone without adequate training. For instance, if you ask the majority of people "which is bigger? the set of all numbers, or the set of just the positive numbers?", chances are they'll say the former. I know I doubted that they're the same 'size' when someone told me. But with just a little bit of education is becomes totally clear.

Thinking that the worlds scientists have nice books, acknowledging the amount of research that has gone into them, but then telling them you think they're all wrong has got to be the height of arrogance.

In terms of speciation by the process of natural selection the organisms aren't vastly different from the original species. They are still the same class. I'm probably going to end up contradicting myself the way this is going. Antibiotic resistant bacteria are still bacteria, even though there has been a change in their genetic structure.

To me the height of arrogance is not doing any research into evolution (or any topic you disagree on for that matter), not knowing what it is and still saying it is wrong. Sorry to anyone who might have done that. I have done my research and still disagree.

 

[squeenie]

Oh dear proverbial God, this thread is really starting to get out of hand. If there's anything I've learnt from this, its that you should never argue with a fundamentalist.

The Eagle456840, what exactly about evolution do you disagree with? Evolution does not seek to radically change a species, but to slowly change it over thousands of years, to ensure its survival. There are some parts of evolution I don't really get either, but that doesn't mean I entirely disagree with it.

 

[squeenie]

that's not what i meant and i am open minded, i just think it's pointless for people to get angry at eachother for holding a certain belief..

I agree, but try telling that to our resident fundies.

"They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned or negotiated with. Some people just want to watch the world burn" is what a wise friend once told me.

 

[sam04u]

For those who don't accept evolution, what do you propose as an alternative theory and where is the evidence for it?

I accept evolution. But for the sake of "proposing alternative theories"...

Rather than small changes always occuring over a long period of time.
Rapid changes occuring only very rarely over a long period of time.