More proof to evolution

[Laivasse]

That's just one among hundreds of examples of the overwhelming genetic sequence evidence that humans and other primates share common ancestry. It's simply not something which is subject to rational dispute anymore. At least not any more so than the generally spherical shape of the earth is.

eeeeih, I don't mean to sound like a yokel, but could you break that last passage down into english for us wearers-of-dungarees?

In other words: God is deliberately deceiving us by using his supernatural powers to plant misleading evidence?

Somehow I don't see that argument flying once any significant thought is given to it's implications... even by creationists.

I think that's missing the point. The idea is that no matter how far humanity can come to explain its origins scientifically, an omnipotent God could theoretically have created a universe which runs along the lines of what has been explained.

It may beg the question, why would an omnipotent creator create a universe that does not overtly hint at his own existence? Well, in that case there would be no call for faith. God would just be an indisputable fact. People would go about their business with a cheery wave up at the sky. If I was an omnipotent being, I'm not sure if I'd like that.

I'm not necessarily saying this is what I believe, just that these are potential arguments, and that Evolution does not preclude God and vice versa. Don't look to me for religious debate though, my faith in all things is waning.

 

[diluted]

I've met a lot of Christians who accept evolution but also believe in God. I went to a Catholic high school and we were taught evolution. It's just the fanatical far-right that seem to refuse to even consider it, and unfortunately this group wields more power down in the States these days. Apparently some IMAX theatres in the south won't even show movies containing references to evolution, because people there said they were 'blasphemous'... :|

 

[gcomeau]

eeeeih, I don't mean to sound like a yokel, but could you break that last passage down into english for us wearers-of-dungarees?

I did my best! You should see it in technospeak...

I think that's missing the point. The idea is that no matter how far humanity can come to explain its origins scientifically, an omnipotent God could theoretically have created a universe which runs along the lines of what has been explained.

But by the time we reach the point where we're speculating that maybe God created the universe with the amount of evidence that exists for evolution AND YET without evolution actually occuring we've reached levels of absurdity that, while not outside the realm of the hypothetical, are sure as hell outside the realm of the rational.

We might as well be speculating that God just makes it LOOK as if there's a moon orbiting the Earth, complete with very convincing visual AND tactile hallucinations supplied to those few astronauts who think they've walked around on the thing. Oh, and the tides. Is it hypothetically possible that an omnipotent supernatural being could do that? Yes. But that doesn't mean I'm not going to look at anyone who suggests it like they're more than a bit loony.

It may beg the question, why would an omnipotent creator create a universe that does not overtly hint at his own existence? Well, in that case there would be no call for faith.

A question I've always wanted answered: What the heck is the point of requiring faith in his EXISTENCE? What kind of a stupid thing is that to require faith in? And what exactly is it supposed to tell anyone about a person if they have it or not?

God would just be an indisputable fact. People would go about their business with a cheery wave up at the sky. If I was an omnipotent being, I'm not sure if I'd like that.

Because?

I'm not necessarily saying this is what I believe, just that these are potential arguments, and that Evolution does not preclude God and vice versa. Don't look to me for religious debate though, my faith in all things is waning.

Noted, consider those rhetorical questions up there...

 

[Laivasse]

But by the time we reach the point where we're speculating that maybe God created the universe with the amount of evidence that exists for evolution AND YET without evolution actually occuring we've reached levels of absurdity that, while not outside the realm of the hypothetical, are sure as hell outside the realm of the rational.

I still think you're missing the point of the argument slightly. In a scenario where evolution definitely HAS occurred, it wouldn't be beyond the power of an omnipotent being to have created that universe - a universe which runs upon scientific laws.

There would be no need for an omniscient creator to just magic everything into being, and then magic up evidence to cover his tracks. However the universe came into being, and however it works, an omnipotent creator could have made it that way.

A question I've always wanted answered: What the heck is the point of requiring faith in his EXISTENCE? What kind of a stupid thing is that to require faith in? And what exactly is it supposed to tell anyone about a person if they have it or not?

Deeper questions than you or I know! I don't suppose we have to like the situation, if it even applies.

God would just be an indisputable fact. People would go about their business with a cheery wave up at the sky. If I was an omnipotent being, I'm not sure if I'd like that.

Because?

Who among us can second-guess the decisions of an omniscient being?

Besides there's obviously merit in humanity being forced to study the rules of the universe in order to survive, instead of relying on the benificence of an indisputably proven creator. Why would It not allow us to subsist on Its good will? *shrug* I dunno, builds character?

Disclaimer: the views expressed herein blah blah....

 

[gcomeau]

I still think you're missing the point of the argument slightly. In a scenario where evolution definitely HAS occurred, it wouldn't be beyond the power of an omnipotent being to have created that universe - a universe which runs upon scientific laws.

Yes, but then in that case evolution STILL occured. Which is what the evidence indicates. Which is all we're saying.

I was addressing the claims where people believe evolution never happened, and just hand wave away all the evidence that it did with that never-to-be-sufficiently-detested "God working in mysterious ways" crap.

If God works in "mysterious ways" beyond your understanding then nobody has ANY basis WHATSOEVER for speculating about whether or not he did something a certain way EXCEPT to look at the bloody evidence of how it happened!

I just can't possible overstate how incredibly moronic I find that phrase when used as an explanation of why people refuse to accept painfully obvious evidence of something's occurance.

"Ummm... God works in mysterious ways that I can't possibly explain or understand... therefore I can say that I have a pretty good idea that he did this particular thing in a different manner than how it appears it happened, even though I can't say what manner that is.... umm, yeah. Prove me wrong!"

Every time I hear THAT particular reasoning I can't help but think of what an improvement it would be to the gene pool if the person employing it never reproduced.

 

[Maxi]

I think God, if he exists, doesn't want to prove to us that he does because he's sick and tired of watching us pray to him all the freeking time. I mean, sure it'd be cool for the first 2000 years but I mean common! It get's a bit old having someone calling you god after THAT long a time.

 

[Absinthe]

I think God, if he exists, doesn't want to prove to us that he does because he's sick and tired of watching us pray to him all the freeking time. I mean, sure it'd be cool for the first 2000 years but I mean common! It get's a bit old having someone calling you god after THAT long a time.

Heheh...

Q: Why does God like atheists?

A: They don't whine, they don't beg, and when shit happens they blame themselves.

 

[Cole]

God is ****ing mean.
I mean he plays with is like dolls.

God: I think I will send some people lost for 40 years!
God: Ooo ima mass slaughter shitloads of people! *WW2*
God: I gotta take a crap... Tsunami!
God: I think that towers really a telescope trying to find me *9/11*
God: I think my sons a dumbass! Die you ****er!

You see, god is satan. You see back before time began, satan pwned god and then he was now called "God".
Satan hates those who call him "God"
So when people call him "God" enough times he gets pissed off and kills people.
Those last 4 lines can't be proven wrong!

I'm athiest though, but I mean really... gimme facts, and I will believe. Science has facts, and ideas. Ideas that are constantly changing, and improving on what they say to eventually become a fact.

Religion is not constanty changing in what they believe.

Thus by my logical brain, I choose Science because it's what I trust. Even if science one day proves that god exists and he created everything..well ok then I still believe in science... Science is constantly changing and searching for the truth, it dosn't settle on something started thousands of years ago. It settles on the truth.

 

[kirovman]

God is ****ing mean.
I mean he plays with is like dolls.

God: I think I will send some people lost for 40 years!
God: Ooo ima mass slaughter shitloads of people! *WW2*
God: I gotta take a crap... Tsunami!
God: I think that towers really a telescope trying to find me *9/11*
God: I think my sons a dumbass! Die you ****er!

You see, god is satan. You see back before time began, satan pwned god and then he was now called "God".
Satan hates those who call him "God"
So when people call him "God" enough times he gets pissed off and kills people.
Those last 4 lines can't be proven wrong!

I'm athiest though, but I mean really... gimme facts, and I will believe. Science has facts, and ideas. Ideas that are constantly changing, and improving on what they say to eventually become a fact.

Religion is not constanty changing in what they believe.

Thus by my logical brain, I choose Science because it's what I trust. Even if science one day proves that god exists and he created everything..well ok then I still believe in science... Science is constantly changing and searching for the truth, it dosn't settle on something started thousands of years ago. It settles on the truth.

I wouldn't be so quick to believe any science, you need to believe things that have a good set of analysed evidence, but as we see from history even Newton's Laws have been proved wrong.
Things need to be looked at critically, with no previous biased judgement.

Although I believe in evolution: which incidently is just a bunch of random chemical events - the right chemical changes in DNA produce winner species which continue life and the wrong chemical changes in the DNA kill off species. That's why we only see species that are good at living in this world today (apart from species like pandas that are on the verge of dying off anyway). If you don't adapt/evolve to suit your conditions, you die, simple as that.

 

[gcomeau]

I wouldn't be so quick to believe any science, you need to believe things that have a good set of analysed evidence, but as we see from history even Newton's Laws have been proved wrong.

Newton's laws have not been proved wrong. They were demonstrated to be incomplete because they broke down at the atomic level.

You can still use them to quite correctly model the motion of any body that isn't the size of an atom or smaller...

 

[kirovman]

Newton's laws have not been proved wrong. They were demonstrated to be incomplete because they broke down at the atomic level.

You can still use them to quite correctly model the motion of any body that isn't the size of an atom or smaller...

Not only the atomic level. Relativistically too. Actually quantumly speaking it's only Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle that destroys Newton's laws.

But on the relativistic or quantum scale you could say they were wrong.

I agree you can use them for many things, everyday things, NASA scientists still use them today for launching rockets, or orbitting bodies.

I was just saying you can't take current science as truth or fact, as many things in a mathematical science, such as physics, since they will be proved incomplete.

I cited Newton's law as a good and commonly known example of this.

Incomplete, wrong, closely affiliated words, and I'm a physicist, not a linguist.

 

[The Mullinator]

Not only the atomic level. Relativistically too. Actually quantumly speaking it's only Heisenberg's Uncertainty principle that destroys Newton's laws.

But on the relativistic or quantum scale you could say they were wrong.

I agree you can use them for many things, everyday things, NASA scientists still use them today for launching rockets, or orbitting bodies.

I was just saying you can't take current science as truth or fact, as many things in a mathematical science, such as physics, since they will be proved incomplete.

I cited Newton's law as a good and commonly known example of this.

Incomplete, wrong, closely affiliated words, and I'm a physicist, not a linguist.

A big difference though is that in Science people expect new laws to be written. People expect to find new things that result in the old laws being thrown out. In religion however nothing like that is allowed or wanted.

The reason I believe in a scientific universe is that I know that the purpose of science is to seek the truth, whatever it may be. If it just so happens that god is the truth then eventually science will discover that.