Scientists and Christianity...

[themadhair]

Themadhair is intolerant of creationism in the slightest bit.

Translation: I’ll play the religious persecution card now so I will not have actually defend my mistaken beliefs regarding literalistic Genesis.

Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly

The theory of evolution is being attacked by religious fundamentalists who call for creationist theories to be taught in European schools alongside or even in place of it. From a scientific view point there is absolutely no doubt that evolution is a central theory for our understanding of the Universe and of life on Earth.
Creationism in any of its forms, such as “intelligent design”, is not based on facts, does not use any scientific reasoning and its contents are pathetically inadequate for science classes.
The Assembly calls on education authorities in member States to promote scientific knowledge and the teaching of evolution and to oppose firmly any attempts at teaching creationism as a scientific discipline.

 

[Storm]

That was my rebuttal. I am saying you are mistaken.

"You're wrong" is not a rebuttal.

 

[Enoch07]

You going to answer the question or not? Are you infallible as well?

 

[Enoch07]

Translation: I’ll play the religious persecution card now so I will not have actually defend my mistaken beliefs regarding literalistic Genesis.

Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly

Good for them. Attack all you want. It just proves my point even more.

 

[Storm]

*sighs* OK, I'll sppon-feed you. No, I'm not infallible. Nor did I ever claim to be, which makes your question a petulant strawman.

What I am is unbiased in this instance, and annoyed at your tactic of pretending to be persecuted.

 

[Enoch07]

*sighs* OK, I'll sppon-feed you. No, I'm not infallible. Nor did I ever claim to be, which makes your question a petulant strawman.

What I am is unbiased in this instance, and annoyed at your tactic of pretending to be persecuted.

Nope just trying to get you to realize how self-righteous you are being.

 

[Storm]

Logic is not self-righteous. Playing the victim is.

 

[Enoch07]

Logic is not self-righteous. Playing the victim is.

If you say so.

 

[themadhair]

Good for them. Attack all you want. It just proves my point even more.

What point? That you are playing the martyr? That your literalistic beliefs have not stood up to the merest scientific scrutiny? That you are a hypocrite for enjoying the technology forged from scientific understanding while rejecting that scientific understanding? That you are incapable of defending your literalistic beliefs?

 

[Enoch07]

What point? That you are playing the martyr? That your literalistic beliefs have not stood up to the merest scientific scrutiny? That you are a hypocrite for enjoying the technology forged from scientific understanding while rejecting that scientific understanding? That you are incapable of defending your literalistic beliefs?

Yeup science is my cheap ho. I use and abuse it all day long. That's the good thing about science. Don't have to worry about lightning bolts and such. Or do I whoooooo!

 

[themadhair]

Yeup science is my cheap ho. I use and abuse it all day long. That's the good thing about science. Don't have to worry about lightning bolts and such. Or do I whoooooo!

So this was your point? I actually expected a little bit better. Not much better, but a little bit.

 

[Autodidact]

Point out all you want to. If you want to believe the fantasy that science is infallible go ahead.

Please cite the post where anyone said that Science is infallible. It isn't. But it is what it is, it says what it says, and among other things it says that the earth is 4.56 billion years old.

Enoch: Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Everyone is not entitled to their own facts. Pointing out facts is not an insult to you. It is a fact that science finds the earth to be 4.56 billion years old. It is a fact that if you believe it's less than 10,000 years old, you deny science. If that hurts your feelings, there's nothing I can do about it.

You can accept science, or you can accept magic. You deny science in favor of magic. O.K.; that's your prerogative. No one's trying to take that away from you. What you can't do is believe in magic and call it science. That's just lying.

I too find lots of room for both religion and science. To find them compatible, you have to accept that they occupy different spheres. Science tells us about the natural world. Religion is about God and the supernatural. The problem is that some religion pokes its nose in and asserts facts about the natural world. Then you have to choose.

 

[Autodidact]

I don't deny we are cousins of some sort. I don't deny evolution entirely either. I just don't believe my great great great great etc grandma was a monkey. Like I said I believe in a mix of creationism/evolution. I just require harder evidence then most people are willing to accept. Surely you can appreciate my skepticism?

So you're familiar with the evidence in favor of the Theory of Evolution (ToE)? I don't think skepticism is your problem; quite the contrary. There is nothing more skeptical than science. It's not that you require harder evidence, it's that your worldview is not based on evidence, at least that part that denies science.

 

[Autodidact]

Well I won't bother trying to explain my theory then. Because you will only believe what you want to believe.

It has nothing to do with what I want. I don't believe things based on what I want; I believe based on the evidence. That's skepticism. If your view is based on the strongest evidence, I will believe it. Is it?

Not being apologetic. Just trying to be civil.

Apologetics is a technical term. It is theological defense of Christian doctrine.

What is unreasonable is you have to have it your way or no way. That is called bigotry.

First, no, that's not bigotry. Second, it has nothing to do with my way. A thing is either true or false. If you want to argue, explain how what I'm saying is not true.

 

[Autodidact]

You misunderstand what I am saying then. I am allowed to have my own theories. Or is free thought not allowed here?

For at least the third time, you're allowed to believe whatever you want; that doesn't make it true.

A bigot is a person who is intolerant of or takes offense to the opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own, and bigotry is the corresponding attitude or mindset. From wikipedia

No one is taking offense to your opinions, lifestyle or identity. We're just pointing out the fact that it is not scientific.

Yes it is bigotry. Themadhair is intolerant of creationism in the slightest bit.

Hey, be a creationist if you want. That's your option. That doesn't make it true. I'm not intolerant of it; I just know it's false. (That is, YEC, literal Genesis creationism.)

 

[Autodidact]

Are you infallible as well?

So Storm isn't entitled to her opinion? Inconsistent much? Oh yeah, that's the problem.

 

[Autodidact]

That was my rebuttal. I am saying you are mistaken.

So you're saying that your beliefs ARE consistent with science?

 

[Autodidact]

Good for them. Attack all you want. It just proves my point even more.

What point?

 

[Enoch07]

Please cite the post where anyone said that Science is infallible. It isn't. But it is what it is, it says what it says, and among other things it says that the earth is 4.56 billion years old.

Enoch: Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Everyone is not entitled to their own facts. Pointing out facts is not an insult to you. It is a fact that science finds the earth to be 4.56 billion years old. It is a fact that if you believe it's less than 10,000 years old, you deny science. If that hurts your feelings, there's nothing I can do about it.

That is where you are wrong. I do not believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old. 4.56 billion years old sounds just fine to me. I never got the chance to explain anything. You have me pegged as a biblical literalist when I am not. In fact the Bible does not say how old the earth is either literally or allegorically. Though I admit some things in it are literal, but not all of it is meant to be. There are several other threads where I say this. Not just this one. I am a unique kind of Christian you have never met before. How about you learn about me before judging me? And stop insulting me in the mean time with your narrow minded view of Christians.

 

[Autodidact]

That is where you are wrong. I do not believe the earth is less than 10,000 years old. 4.56 billion years old sounds just fine to me. I never got the chance to explain anything. You have me pegged as a biblical literalist when I am not. In fact the Bible does not say how old the earth is either literally or allegorically. Though I admit some things in it are literal, but not all of it is meant to be. There are several other threads where I say this. Not just this one. I am a unique kind of Christian you have never met before. How about you learn about me before judging me? And stop insulting me in the mean time with your narrow minded view of Christians.

O.K., great, I got the wrong impression there. What about the global flood? Where are you on that?