Evolution is False and Impossible

[Autodidact]

Just thought I'd point out that just because someone doesn't accept evolution doesn't mean they are intellectually inferior (mmm, bigotry flavour). The vast majority of creationists of the "Big Three" of the Abrahamic religion do not understand evolution very well.

Well, they may not be any dumber, but they're certainly less informed.

There are a smaller number still who view it with distrust because, forgive me - but because of people like you, who bash their faith and then blab on about evolution disproving God - connecting the two (atheism and evolution) and making it that you must be an atheist to accept evolution; this isn't true. I'm a theist and I accept evolution and all that good stuffs - and the majority of theists, even of Abrahamic religions do.

The problem is not the pro-evolution forces, it's the lying, propagandist, antievolutionists. We're all the time telling them there's no contradiction between God and evolution. It's the anti-evolutionists who call science "athiest" and "secular."

Perhaps you should use the term 'poorly read on the subject'.

Or the most accurate term, "ignorant."

 

[Breathe]

You're right. It doesn't mean that they are intellectually inferior. What it does indicate, is that they are absolutely ignorant of ToE and the process of evolution.

Indeed. As I said, most creationists simply don't understand the ToE - many I've spoken to seem to think it's one change from another.. like, suddenly we just BECOME humans from monkeys over night. A monkey gave birth to a man kind of thing.

Well, they may not be any dumber, but they're certainly less informed.

Agreed.

The problem is not the pro-evolution forces, it's the lying, propagandist, antievolutionists. We're all the time telling them there's no contradiction between God and evolution. It's the anti-evolutionists who call science "athiest" and "secular."

Although, why do they call it atheist and secular? (And what's wrong with secular? )

When you have people who spill their anti-theist crap out at them all the time, there really is no wonder they're treating the ToE with suspicion and going back into their literalism. For some reason, people go deeper into the very thing that they believe they're being ill-treated because of, sadly. Persecution complex?

Then, it becomes a choice between those who say "Hey, we're on your side, and this is how the GOOD BOOK SAYS IT! So this must be a literal historic event of what happened!", and scientists like Dawkins saying "There's no God and evolution proves it! You're wrong, I'm right!", and a few instances on here there have been people who have felt like their faith is under attack and nothing seems to sink in - why? They felt as though they were under attack, so why would they trust what their believed-attacker is saying?

Or the most accurate term, "ignorant."

I don't like the term ignorant on its own. I prefer mine. You gotta treat 'em nicely if you want them to crawl from under the rocks.

 

[Jose Fly]

Odion,

While what you describe may hold true in a few cases, it's been my experience that the vast, vast majority of creationists simply are not open to the possibility that the evolutionary account of life on earth is at all valid....no matter how they're approached.

I've spent years trying all sorts of ways of reaching creationists, and to be quite honest with you, the only time I ever made any progress at all was when I was rather mean to a guy. I mocked him and had an entire group of people laughing at him. He sort of broke down and later came to me and admited the Hovind-esque stuff he was parroting was bunk. I then nicely referred him to some friends of mine who were willing to go over evolutionary biology with him (he and I had far too much history for me to do it). Now, I'm pretty sure he's not a creationist and is kind of on the science side of things, but he refuses to talk about it.

Of course I certainly don't think that's the standard way to go about it. He was an exception rather than the rule. But overall, I would say it really don't matter if the person presenting the science side is Richard Dawkins or Francis Collins; most creationists know one thing and one thing only: evolution sez we's descended from monkeys and the Bible sez we's Gawd's special creation. IOW, it's simply a matter of trying to tell people something they really, really don't want to hear.

Most times, it really doesn't get any deeper than that.

 

[Autodidact]

The people who are saying that evolution = atheism are the anti-evolutionists. I can't count--literally cannot count--the number of times I've explained to creationists that evolution does not equal atheism. In the current evolution = lie thread I've explained it to the same Muslim creationists at least 30 times! In a single thread!

 

[gnostic]

I have large number of cousins, who are atheists, but are not evolutionists. They don't understand evolution. In fact, they don't understand science, because they are more interested in business - making money, so my cousins have no interests at all in science.

That's why I brought up the subject if Charles Darwin was ever an atheist in another thread. I think he followed his friend's philosophical stance (meaning Huxley's) of agnosticism than atheism.

I get damn frustrated with theists (esp. fundamentalist creationists) when they confused evolution with atheism, or even science with atheism.

 

[Godless Ray]

If anyone has read the explanations of people such as Richard Dawkins you get a feel for just how complicated the subject matter is. Its really not surprising that many people don't believe because they can't understand the subject.

 

[Valjean]

Indeed, they're not even taught the basic precepts.
Schoolchildren in the 1920s were much more conversant on the subject than children today.

 

[logician]

Let's not go overboard with this, I would say 99+ percent of educated atheists believe in evolution. The same cannot be said for theists.

 

[Breathe]

Let's not go overboard with this, I would say 99+ percent of educated atheists believe in evolution. The same cannot be said for theists.

Key word there being educated. I've met plenty of atheists ignorant of evolution, and plenty of theists - even of Judaism, Islam and Christianity, who agree with evolution. Many others simply don't understand it, and when people attack their faith and attempt to use evolution to prove there is no God, there's no wonder they shy away from it.

 

[Valjean]

How could evolution be used to prove there's no God? That's as silly as using round earth or Sun centered solar system to prove no god.

 

[Breathe]

How could evolution be used to prove there's no God? That's as silly as using round earth or Sun centered solar system to prove no god.

Indeed.
But, that's what a lot of anti-theists seem to do. "There's no God blah blah evolution blah blah" that kind of thing. It makes those theists who don't know about it even more suspicious of it.

Myself on the other hand, I see them as a complement to each other. Like strawberries and cream.

 

[Autodidact]

How could evolution be used to prove there's no God? That's as silly as using round earth or Sun centered solar system to prove no god.

It's not that ToE or science in general negates God; it doesn't eliminate the possibility of God, but it eliminates the necessity. When asking whether there is a God, theists will say there must be, or else how do you explain--the universe, the world, organisms, or people? If we can explain any of these things without God, it undermines the main (if not the only) argument for the existence of God. Whip out your Occam's razor and whoop! No God.

 

[logician]

Evolution certainly does away with a need for the "magic wand " god, who is constantly fiddling with its creation, and by extension gets rid of the need for a personal god.

 

[nonbeliever_92]

How could evolution be used to prove there's no God? That's as silly as using round earth or Sun centered solar system to prove no god.

Irrelevant, really. Whoever tries to use evolution to disprove god is as big of an idiot as the person who tries to use evolution to prove that god exists.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Funnily enough, I've seen numerous people try to use god to prove there's no evolution, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone try to use evolution to prove there's no god.

 

[nonbeliever_92]

Funnily enough, I've seen numerous people try to use god to prove there's no evolution, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone try to use evolution to prove there's no god.

hahaha! Faulty logic...

 

[Breathe]

Funnily enough, I've seen numerous people try to use god to prove there's no evolution, but I don't think I've ever seen anyone try to use evolution to prove there's no god.

Lucky you, I actually have.

 

[monta]

Lucky you, I actually have.

Did god evolve into something else so there is no god ur whut ?

 

[Breathe]

Did god evolve into something else so there is no god ur whut ?

Not even that sane or well expressed.

 

[Vile Atheist]

I haven't browsed all 26 freaking pages of comments, but I did read the OP...I just laughed lol...It really is a wonder how these people can make it through a single day without injuring themselves with pencils or other semi-sharp objects.