Atheists: WOW proof this Book is from God.

[~Amin~]

No, because they aren't not leaders, they didn't start a religion and people don't follow them like people do Jesus or Muhammad.

They dont have to start a religion, cause even disbelief is a belief, do they
not have there own way of explaining the universe in which we live?
What do you believe Azakel?
is there any particular people you learn from, or are all your beliefs
self taught?

 

[~Amin~]

By THE WAY THIS THREAD IS NOT LIMITED TO ATHEISTS, SO PLEASE JOIN IN.

 

[~Amin~]

. In order for a theory to last it must withstand a lot of skepticism and testing. Only if it continually fits with known facts is a theory accepted as very probably true.

Were did the theory you belive in come from? Who tested it? How do you know
the real meaning of a known fact is?

 

[stone]

Welcome to RF. I hope you find your time here challenging and educational.

There are a great many religious people in the world who have excelled at all walks of life and have a good understanding of what it means to be reasonable. Faith can also be about reason for some.

I would suggest that painting everybody with the same broad brushtroke may not in fact be the height of precision.

hello Rocketman
Sorry about the harse tone to my post, this was not the tone i intended to use :sorry1:

As to the point i was trying to raise, I was not refering to individual people, individuals may or may not be reasonable. My point was that the basic foundation of all religions is based on faith, not reason. The belief in a all knowing god displaying the characteristics i mentioned before is not reasonable, to accept this you must have faith.

Dont they follow Darwin and others?

a) You are confusing Atheism with Evolution.
b) If Darwin was conclusively proved wrong his theories would be discredited, this does not apply to religious prophets, saviours etc. Therefore Darwin is not followed, his work is updated as science progresses.

 

[rocketman]

hello Rocketman
Sorry about the harse tone to my post, this was not the tone i intended to use :sorry1:

No problem.

As to the point i was trying to raise, I was not refering to individual people, individuals may or may not be reasonable. My point was that the basic foundation of all religions is based on faith, not reason. The belief in a all knowing god displaying the characteristics i mentioned before is not reasonable, to accept this you must have faith.

I don't see it as being so black and white myself, but I respect your beliefs

Maybe you could add something to this thread.

 

[fantome profane]

Dont they follow Darwin and others?

Darwin is not an authority for atheists. It is not the same thing as religious authority. What I mean is that if someone were to tell you that they believe in the theory of evolution, you would be right to demand that they provide reason and evidence to support that belief. If someone said that they believe in evolution because Darwin said so, they are a fool. But if someone said that they believe something because the Koran says so, that just makes them a Muslim. Accepting truth based on the authority of a book, or a leader is something that belongs to the realm of religion.

 

[England my lionheart]

My father was a pig farmer and the whole family ate pork regulary even my grandfather lived past ninety,i think that it was because pigs like to root around in mud not because the thought it is bad for you.

A child is born with no state of mind blind to the ways of mankind ,god is smiling on you but he is frowning too because only god knows what you'll go through
Grandmaster flash

 

[~Amin~]

a) You are confusing Atheism with Evolution.

First of all i want to Welcome you to RF, can you tell us the difference between the two ? is there a link between them? is not Atheism a branch of
evolution?

b) If Darwin was conclusively proved wrong his theories would be discredited,

If Darwin was PROVEN right, it'll be called the evolution FACT not THEORY.

this does not apply to religious prophets, saviours etc. Therefore Darwin is not followed, his work is updated as science progresses.

If it was a FACT and not a THEORY it WOULNT need updates, but people
still believe what Darwin said to be true don't they?

 

[Storm]

First of all i want to Welcome you to RF, can you tell us the difference between the two ? is there a link between them? is not Atheism a branch of
evolution?

NO.

If Darwin was PROVEN right, it'll be called the evolution FACT not THEORY.

You never heard of the Theory of Gravity?

If it was a FACT and not a THEORY it WOULNT need updates, but people still believe what Darwin said to be true don't they?

Not really.

 

[camanintx]

If Darwin was PROVEN right, it'll be called the evolution FACT not THEORY.

If I were you, I would be careful the next time you step outdoors that you don't go flying off into outer space, after all the Theory of Gravity is still just a theory.

 

[McBell]

First of all i want to Welcome you to RF, can you tell us the difference between the two ? is there a link between them? is not Atheism a branch of
evolution?
If Darwin was PROVEN right, it'll be called the evolution FACT not THEORY.

If it was a FACT and not a THEORY it WOULNT need updates, but people
still believe what Darwin said to be true don't they?

Here you show a fundamental lack of understanding the scientific process.

 

[Papersock]

First of all i want to Welcome you to RF, can you tell us the difference between the two ? is there a link between them? is not Atheism a branch of
evolution?

Evolution is the scientific theory that living things change and adapt over time and that all life came from a common ancestor.
An atheist is simply someone who does not believe in god.
Evolution has nothing to do with the existence or non existence of a god. People can believe in one or the other, both or neither.

If it was a FACT and not a THEORY it WOULNT need updates, but people still believe what Darwin said to be true don't they?

The whole point of science is to update itself as new evidence become available so that we continually reach a better understanding of the way things really are.

According to Wikipedia:

In scientific usage, a theory does not mean an unsubstantiated guess or hunch, as it can in everyday speech. A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from or is supported by experimental evidence (see scientific method). In this sense, a theory is a systematic and formalized expression of all previous observations, and is predictive, logical, and testable. As such, scientific theories are essentially the equivalent of what everyday speech refers to as facts.

 

[fantome profane]

First of all i want to Welcome you to RF, can you tell us the difference between the two ? is there a link between them? is not Atheism a branch of
evolution?
If Darwin was PROVEN right, it'll be called the evolution FACT not THEORY.

If it was a FACT and not a THEORY it WOULNT need updates, but people
still believe what Darwin said to be true don't they?

I see that people have already answered this, but I still felt the need to respond. ~Amin~, I really hope you have read and tried to understand what people are trying to tell you. It is obvious that you understand neither the theory of evolution nor atheism and if it is your intent to try to discuss these things intelligently it is important that you get this.

Evolution is a scientific theory. Evolution is an extremely well proven theory! When a scientific theory is proven, they do not start calling it a fact; it is still called a theory. Just like the theory of gravity is still called a theory. Other scientific theories include germ theory, atomic theory, quantum theory, the theory of relativity and many more. In scientific terms an idea does not get to be called a “theory” until it has been proven to be true. Did you get that? Here read it again. In scientific terms an idea does not get to be called a “theory” until it has been proven true.

This does not mean that any of these theories have been proven absolutely. That just does not happen in science – ever! In many religions you may find that there are certain ideas that are beyond question. In religion you may find ideas that are considered divine revelation and therefore cannot change. But this never happens in science. The theory of evolution will never reach a point where it is beyond question or where it is not subject to change. Everything in science is open to question and should be questioned.


Atheism is the disbelief in God. That is all it is and nothing more. Atheism is not a scientific theory. Atheism is a metaphysical position.


So is there a link between the two? Well that really depends on what you mean by link. But it is important for you to understand that the theory of evolution is not the theory that God does not exist. And it is important for you to understand that Atheism is not a scientific theory.

Now if you understand that…



It is probably fair to say that most (but not all) atheists believe in the theory of evolution. Richard Dawkins if fond of saying that Darwin made it possible to be an intellectually fulfilled atheist. And there are many people who believe that the theory of evolution supports the metaphysical position of atheism.

On the other hand it would not be fair to say that most of the people who believe in the theory of evolution are atheists. Many people who believe in God also believe in the theory of evolution. There are many Jews, Christians, and even Muslims who firmly believe in the theory of evolution, not to mention Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, and Pagans etc. There are many people who believe that the theory of evolution is not only compatible with their belief in God but even that is supports their belief in God.

Evolution is not the theory that God does not exist, and Atheism is not a branch of evolution.

 

[painted wolf]

Evolution says nothing about the existance or nonexistance of a god.

No part of science is ever free from updating.... science is a process as much as it is a result.
The Theory of Gravity started with the observations of the ancients and was updated by Gallieleo updated by Newton... Einstein updated it... Plank and other quantum physics people updated it more and are still updating it.

wa:do

 

[~Amin~]

If I were you, I would be careful the next time you step outdoors that you don't go flying off into outer space, after all the Theory of Gravity is still just a theory.

Hi there,
1. Firstly do you believe we evolved?
2. If so from what?
3. The Dinosaurs are much older then the " evolution conjecture" but we
have fossils of Dinosaurs why not of half human and half apes?
4. If were from apes were did the tree's, ocean's, mountain's, clouds and so on, come
from definitely not apes, would you agree?
The meaning of the word THEORY in relativity IS NOT the same meaning of the
word theory in evolution.
I ask you did we evolve from ape's, fish or bears, you see theres different
theory, but not so in Relativity.

And to make a similarity between evolution, and relativity is a weak one.

 

[~Amin~]

On the other hand it would not be fair to say that most of the people who believe in the theory of evolution are atheists. Many people who believe in God also believe in the theory of evolution.

Hello, I think its very fair,
coz Ive met MANY people who justify there disbelief, by using a conjecture,
the evolution theory, I'm sure you have also, you see this what i meant by link.

There are many Jews, Christians, and even Muslims who firmly believe in the theory of evolution, not to mention Buddhists, Hindus, Taoists, and Pagans etc. There are many people who believe that the theory of evolution is not only compatible with their belief in God but even that is supports their belief in God.

I don't see how any person who believes in Revelation, can except the theory
of evolution as explained by Darwin its impossible, but the way i believe in evolution is this, my child is evolving developing growing, the changes in a flowers stage from
leaf to flower is evolving, the more i learn i evolve in my intelligence, but Not
the evolution that which is an assumption.

Atheism is not a branch of evolution.

There's ALOT of atheists due to Darwinism, would you agree?

 

[Zeno]

3. The Dinosaurs are much older then the " evolution conjecture" but we
have fossils of Dinosaurs why not of half human and half apes?

Where do you get your information from?

• (A) Pan troglodytes, chimpanzee, modern
• (B) Australopithecus africanus, STS 5, 2.6 My
• (C) Australopithecus africanus, STS 71, 2.5 My
• (D) Homo habilis, KNM-ER 1813, 1.9 My
• (E) Homo habilis, OH24, 1.8 My
• (F) Homo rudolfensis, KNM-ER 1470, 1.8 My
• (G) Homo erectus, Dmanisi cranium D2700, 1.75 My
• (H) Homo ergaster (early H. erectus), KNM-ER 3733, 1.75 My
• (I) Homo heidelbergensis, "Rhodesia man," 300,000 - 125,000 y
• (J) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Ferrassie 1, 70,000 y
• (K) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, La Chappelle-aux-Saints, 60,000 y
• (L) Homo sapiens neanderthalensis, Le Moustier, 45,000 y
• (M) Homo sapiens sapiens, Cro-Magnon I, 30,000 y
• (N) Homo sapiens sapiens, modern

Letter N is the modern human.

4. If were from apes were did the tree's, ocean's, mountain's, clouds and so on, come
from definitely not apes, would you agree?

Evolution says nothing about oceans, mountains, and clouds - all of which can be found on other planets (or moons) as well as earth. Europa (one of Jupiter's moons) is believed to have a frozen ocean. All of these have simple geological, meteorological, or astronomical explanations.

Trees arose through a process of natural selection.
I think before you go on attacking something, you should really understand what it says.

 

[camanintx]

Hi there,
1. Firstly do you believe we evolved?

Of course we evolved. Otherwise we would find million year old human fossils that look exactly like we do now.

2. If so from what?

Most recently, Homo Heidelbergenis.

3. The Dinosaurs are much older then the "evolution conjecture" but we have fossils of Dinosaurs why not of half human and half apes?

What do you think Australopithecus Africanus is?

4. If were from apes were did the tree's, ocean's, mountain's, clouds and so on, come from definitely not apes, would you agree?

You aren't seriously suggesting that oceans, mountains and clouds are living organisms, are you?

The meaning of the word THEORY in relativity IS NOT the same meaning of the word theory in evolution. I ask you did we evolve from ape's, fish or bears, you see theres different theory, but not so in Relativity.

And to make a similarity between evolution, and relativity is a weak one.

Actually, the word theory does mean the same in both relativity and evolution. If you think that Relativity has no alternatives, I suggest you read up on Brans-Dicke theory and the Rosen bimetric theory.

 

[fantome profane]

Hello, I think its very fair,
coz Ive met MANY people who justify there disbelief, by using a conjecture,
the evolution theory, I'm sure you have also, you see this what i meant by link.

Fine, as long as you understand that the theory of evolution is not the same thing as atheism, and that atheism is not the same thing as the theory of evolution.

The theory of evolution is not dependent on the existence or nonexistence of God. The question of the existence of God is irrelevant to the theory of evolution. Please tell me that you get that now.

I don't see how any person who believes in Revelation, can except the theory
of evolution as explained by Darwin its impossible, but the way i believe in evolution is this, my child is evolving developing growing, the changes in a flowers stage from
leaf to flower is evolving, the more i learn i evolve in my intelligence, but Not

the evolution that which is an assumption.

The fact remains. And although you personally don’t understand how someone who believes in Revelation can accept the theory of evolution, many people do. I personally am not in a position to explain this, as I am not someone who believes in “Revelation”.

So this will be the umpteenth time that I will recommend Kenneth Miller’s book “Finding Darwin’s God”. This is a book that not only gives the reader a comprehensive understanding of the theory of evolution, illustrates the scientific futility of creationism and intelligent design, but also, and perhaps more importantly, explains a theological standpoint that is compatible with science. If you wish to understand how someone can believe in Revelation and in the theory of evolution then I recommend you try reading this book. Failing that I am sure that there are many theists on this board who would be happy to explain their position to you.

There's ALOT of atheists due to Darwinism, would you agree?

I don’t know and I don’t care. You have to understand that even if that is true, I don’t see it as a bad thing. If people see the evidence and become an atheist, that is fine with me. If people see the evidence and become a theist that is also fine with me. People should be free to make up their own minds about “God”.

What I do see as a bad thing is when people are told that they must choose between “God” and science. It is a tragedy that some people feel they must reject scientific understanding because of their belief in “God”.

 

[YmirGF]

Amin, sorry to say it, but you are simply making yourself look rather foolish.

1. Firstly do you believe we evolved?

Emphatically YES! In fact, we are still evolving as I type this and we will continue to evolve long after people have given up waiting for Judgment day. The alternative, from your perspective, is the expropriated Jewish/Christian tale of Adam and Eve. Due to there being zero evidence to this "religious theory" it is rather unlikely to be an accurate representation of "evolution".

2. If so from what?

From apes, specifically a species known as Australopithecus Africanus. There is a wonderful book called "Lucy". You need to read it, but here is a web link to a great site.

3. The Dinosaurs are much older then the " evolution conjecture" but we have fossils of Dinosaurs why not of half human and half apes?

You may want to check your facts before minimizing things Amin. You are working from the basis of mistaken assumption. Your question reflects your level of understanding of the issues at hand, ergo -- if you actually understood these matters you would not be asking such a ill-conceived question.

4. If were from apes were did the tree's, ocean's, mountain's, clouds and so on, come from definitely not apes, would you agree?

I fully realize that Muslims have a tendecy to dress their thoughts up in great amounts of smoke and mirrors but how exactly do you equate "tree's, ocean's, mountain's, clouds and so on" with the Theory of Evolution? Tell me Amin, have you studied ANY sciences beyond the high school level -- if that? Have you read ANY books written by Non-Muslim scientists about "evolution"?

The meaning of the word THEORY in relativity IS NOT the same meaning of the word theory in evolution.

Says who?

I ask you did we evolve from ape's, fish or bears, you see theres different theory, but not so in Relativity.

That is true Amin, but there is only one theory of evolution that is taken seriously by mainstream scientists.

And to make a similarity between evolution, and relativity is a weak one.

Actually Amin, making a statement like this simply illustrates the weakness of your understanding.

In summary, Amin, have you read ANY texts about evolution written by non-muslim scientists? Additionally, have you personally ever studied ANY branch of science beyond high school levels? My guess is that the answer is NO on both counts.