Why do some creationists think evolution = atheism?

[It Aint Necessarily So]

.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Notice how when your idols are taken down off their pedestals, it elicits an incredibly defensive response .....yet when evolutionists insultingly relegate the Creator to the realms of myth or fantasy, we are supposed to drop at your feet and grovel. Your pedestal is not my pedestal. OK?

Who's asking you to grovel? That's your religious mindset leaking through. Your worldview is fundamentally one of submission and worship. It's the most basic relationship that there is to you.

My God is better than your god.......that is what this thread has become, yet neither of us can prove "scientifically" (with actual hard evidence) that what we believe is true.

We can prove that what we believe works. That's as good as it gets.

Anyone who sees "no real conflict between religion and science" has sold out to the opposition IMO.....and I believe that they will 'reap what they have sown'.

Here's more of that religious mindset. You've depicted this as a war, of selling out, and of punishment and consequences for thought crimes. I doubt that you're aware of this proclivity of yours, but because it's an alien way of viewing the world to me, it stands out in sharp relief for me whenever I see it. I have no such sense of war. Nobody has my ear about wars or punishment.

The scientific community has no analogous vision of religion. It doesn't see religion as an enemy. It simply doesn't see religion. Why should it? Religion is irrelevant to the pursuit of scientists. They just keep doing more science anyway, including evolutionary science.

Why do you suppose that one, religion, is so interested in contradicting the other, science, but not vice versa? Science educators are more than happy to share with you what the scientists have discerned and why they believe it, but they generally won't ask you if you believe it, just whether you understand it. If you can accurately answer the questions on a final exam in evolutionary science, you'll get a high mark without having to take a loyalty oath or signing an affirmation of belief.

Either the Creator gets full credit or he gets none at all. There is no middle ground.

I'm good with that.

How do you feel about assigning blame? Also all or none? I'm guessing that your answer is also full blame or none. Mine, too.

Either an omniscient, omnipotent god exists, which would also be an omni-responsible god, or it doesn't, in which case we can't blame it for anything.

Do you disagree?

 

[Jenny Collins]

I'm not too sure why you think that none of the thousands of biologists could be unable to distinguish between modern apes and humans and recognise the differences. Are you trying to imply that those hundreds of thousands of modern biologists with all their degrees are all stupid?

Since I never said anything about biologists being about to distinguish between modern apes and humans and recognize the difference, your words baffle me! Of course biologists can tell that an ape is not a human! I pointed out that there is a HUGE difference and that we are not apelike!

But as far as what "thousands" of biologists believe, there is conflict in their ranks and dissenters from the norm, and majority is not always correct! Sometimes dissenters are and the majority scoff and call them "fringe", not "real scientists", say "they got their diplomas at Bible thumping colleges and college mills", etc, even though some got their diplomas at prestigious colleges!

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

although I have all the time in the world (am recovering from foot surgery) there are wiser uses of my time! Since you are all scientists from good schools, I am surprised you spend every waking moment arguing with the fools here! ... only pointing out that there are much nobler uses of ones time when they are the educationally elite! So long and peace to one and all!

Isn't that the call of the educationally elite?

Could one use time any better if they meet their responsibilities, accomplish their goals, and enjoy the things they do?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

He IS mainstream! He grew up as an atheist in a communist country, wasn't influenced by religion in the least, became a MAINSTREAM scientist and then changed his views on evolution!

You must be using a different definition of mainstream than I am. None of what you wrote defines the man as a mainstream evolutionary scientist or having a mainstream opinion among scientists of any kind. He's not even an evolutionary scientist.

I asked you, "What evidence can you offer that you believe that particular person for the reason you gave?"

You declined to answer for yourself, even after my comment that I didn't find yours credible, and suggested an alternative reason for your choice. You not only have done nothing to dissuade me of that, your choice is more consistent with my claim than yours.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

"Humans are apes descended from apes!" So why the common protest that creation believers think evolution means we descended from APES? They laugh at people and say "No, we share a common ancestor with them! Now which is it?

I don't know what you heard or read. Humans are apes that descended from extinct, ancestral apes. We did not descend from extant apes.

 

[Jenny Collins]

A

Isn't that the call of the educationally elite?

I could one use time any better if they meet their responsibilities, accomplish their goals, and enjoy the things they do?

guy on here was quibbling with me and said "I don't suffer fools" My comments were motivated by him! If I am a fool and he argues with me, he "joins a fool in his folly" Sometimes the way I talk is half joke/half using humor to make a point! It is hard to discern on the internet how something is meant

I do not try to verbally abuse people on line or be rude, although sometimes it could come across that way! I do get a little angry back at people who are being that way to me sometimes, when I should just quit responding to them!

I prefer to just talk with people and not get all personal, although sometimes the tone of the discussion shifts away from that

 

[Jenny Collins]

You must be using a different definition of mainstream than I am. None of what you wrote defines the man as a mainstream evolutionary scientist or having a mainstream opinion among scientists of any kind. He's not even an evolutionary scientist.

I asked you, "What evidence can you offer that you believe that particular person for the reason you gave?"

You declined to answer for yourself, even after my comment that I didn't find yours credible, and suggested an alternative reason for your choice. You not only have done nothing to dissuade me of that, your choice is more consistent with my claim than yours.

He is a scientist who came from mainstream thinking and changed some views, so defected from wrong mainstream ideas!

Mainstream means majority, just as one time the now discredited phlogiston theory was mainstream! At one time the theory of evolution was on the fringes and NOT mainstream!

Ad populum is appeal to majority to prove something is correct! What majority believes is not always an indicator of what is true!

My mentioning Vyskocil is because I read an interview about him in my religious magazine, the Awake! Our magazine has articles with many doctors and scientists who have abandoned evolution! They did not start out as disbelieving evolution, they started out believing as you do! JWs do not have creation colleges, if there is a scientist who is a JW, he most likely did not start out as a JW! And likely believed in evolution at one time, so he wasn't molded from day one to believe creation!

Why do I appeal to these scientists and believe them? Because their explanations make sense when I read them! Have I considered the other side? Yes, from web sites like this! I am not impressed!

But my beliefs are not centered around the theory of evolution, I first and foremost believe the Bible! So you may say: "So you disbelieve the evolution because the Bible says so" Yes, and no! I believe the Bible because I have convinced myself that it is solid! Through 50 years of life experience, and research of more than just science, I believe the Bible! Sometimes well rounded knowledge is more important for settling on a world view, than being focused on one subject, like science!

So being rooted in a belief in the Bible, and having weeded out other religions and settling on my belief that JWs interpret it correctly, I move on from there!

I do not believe that evolution is consistent with the Bible, but that still doesn't believe that I don't consider science when studying this issue!

I hear the science arguments from all sides and while there is a lot of talking that is over my head, I do recognize some basic arguments in favor of the views that evolution is false! I am just not as immersed in untangling all of the details, and from what I understand, the evolutionists battle each other over details too! If they don't understand the details, can they fault me?

Instead of putting people like Dawkins on a pedestal, I put his and my creator on a pedestal and believe his words that "the wisdom of the world is foolishness with God"

 

[Polymath257]

Since I never said anything about biologists being about to distinguish between modern apes and humans and recognize the difference, your words baffle me! Of course biologists can tell that an ape is not a human! I pointed out that there is a HUGE difference and that we are not apelike!

But as far as what "thousands" of biologists believe, there is conflict in their ranks and dissenters from the norm, and majority is not always correct! Sometimes dissenters are and the majority scoff and call them "fringe", not "real scientists", say "they got their diplomas at Bible thumping colleges and college mills", etc, even though some got their diplomas at prestigious colleges!

Here's a little thing I wrote:
1) Are you made of complex cells with internal organelles? If so, you are a eucaryote.

2) Do your cells have membranes made of lipids rather than walls made from glucosides and are they surrounded by an extracellular matrix composed of collagen and glycoproteins? Then you are an Animal.

3) During embryo development, does the blastopore (the first opening) become the anus? Then you are a Deuterostome.

4) Do you have a head, backbone, brain, red blood cells, and kidneys? Then you are a Vertebrate.

5) Are you air-breathing, have hair, three ear bones, sweat glands, the ability to regulate internal temperature and specialized teeth? Then you are a Mammal.

6) Do you lack an epi-pubic bone and do females like you have a uterus which produces a placenta during pregnancy? Then you are a placental Mammal.

7) Do you have a collar bone, opposable fingers, a flat nail on fingers and toes, eye sockets made from bone, stereoscopic vision, an enlarged cerebral cortex? Then you are a Primate.

8) Do you have a narrow nose and downward pointed nostrils, broad rib cage, a fused frontal bone, convoluted cerebral hemispheres, a large brain for his size of mammal, color vision, a lack of tail, and a lack of cheek pouches? Then you are an Ape.

So, yes, if you are human, then you *are* an ape.

 

[Jenny Collins]

Isn't that the call of the educationally elite?

I could one use time any better if they meet their responsibilities, accomplish their goals, and enjoy the things they do?

If I have to question Vyskocil's interpretations- who I do know is a highly regarded scientist- then I have to question the people claiming to be scientists on here and what they tell me! I know Vyskocil is a scientist! I don't know that the people here are!

A scientist whom I debated, once questioned whether he truly disbelieved evolution, because she claimed she couldn't find much about him on the internet! She thought that people were using him to claim he rejected it, when he didn't! That is the only time an evolutionist alleged that! It would be pretty risky for invent an interview with a living person and claim he said stuff, he didn't! That would leave us open to lawsuits!

Other religions that normally hate JWs quoted him in their magazines! They of course left off the part about him being a JW!

Anyway, this scientist lady told me that she thought he was really an evolution believer who was being lied about, because she had no way to confirm otherwise! She said she would try to contact him and when she did, he wouldn't respond! To her that was further evidence that what I was saying was nonsense! He probably didn't have time to respond and was bombarded with messages! He is world renowned!

You question why I put faith in what Vyskocil says, but you want me to put faith in what the people in this forum say? They clearly know something about science, use King's English, have some sophistication in the way they speak! And maybe some or all, of them ARE scientists! But maybe they graduated at the bottom of their class, for all I know!

On Yahoo Answers a real obnoxious guy was laughing at me over the issue and put forth some science argument to baffle me! Later I repeated that to others who then laughed at me because what he said was wrong! And they believed evolution too!

Then there were the scientists who got in an online argument with each other and I was the one who started it! Here is what happened: I know that most scientists believe in global warning from greenhouse gases, but there are a minority who believe it is natural cycles!

Well on this site, all of them ganged up on me about the subject of evolution and used their badge of expertise! I did an experiment! I submitted a question about global warming and the scientists who presented a united front against me, started debating each other! And here is the other thing: I had told one of them that the science world have frailties motivated by agenda, and glory seeking! They wanted to get their names in books, get attention and prizes! She told me how science was so careful and the other scientists quashed that from going to far and tainting the scientific method!

Well another scientist proceeded to get in an argument with her over that, and he said I was right about that, how it had a strong presence in their world, and he told me: "Jenny, if you want to disbelieve evolution, you go ahead! But I am going to take issue with her (the other scientist) over what she said about this other issue" He did the arguing for me against what she had tried to insist with me

 

[Jenny Collins]

T

Here's a little thing I wrote:
1) Are you made of complex cells with internal organelles? If so, you are a eucaryote.

2) Do your cells have membranes made of lipids rather than walls made from glucosides and are they surrounded by an extracellular matrix composed of collagen and glycoproteins? Then you are an Animal.

3) During embryo development, does the blastopore (the first opening) become the anus? Then you are a Deuterostome.

4) Do you have a head, backbone, brain, red blood cells, and kidneys? Then you are a Vertebrate.

5) Are you air-breathing, have hair, three ear bones, sweat glands, the ability to regulate internal temperature and specialized teeth? Then you are a Mammal.

6) Do you lack an epi-pubic bone and do females like you have a uterus which produces a placenta during pregnancy? Then you are a placental Mammal.

7) Do you have a collar bone, opposable fingers, a flat nail on fingers and toes, eye sockets made from bone, stereoscopic vision, an enlarged cerebral cortex? Then you are a Primate.

8) Do you have a narrow nose and downward pointed nostrils, broad rib cage, a fused frontal bone, convoluted cerebral hemispheres, a large brain for his size of mammal, color vision, a lack of tail, and a lack of cheek pouches? Then you are an Ape.

So, yes, if you are human, then you *are* an ape.

Tell that to the evolutionists who snicker: "Why do creation believers say we come from apes?" Then insist it is a strawman, and that we share a common ancestor as apes! Some creation believers truly think evolutionists say we are descended from apes, and ask why apes still exist! Others use the term apes loosely and get picked on! I always say evolutionists claim we descended from apelike ancestors! Now you say we descended from apes and are apes! Wouldn't it be nice if people shut up about word arguments, swept away that clutter, and just stick to the point? Or didn't make it personal and tell people they are dumb? Then the opponent spends time defending themselves, and not defending their position?

 

[Polymath257]

T

Tell that to the evolutionists who snicker: "Why do creation believers say we come from apes?" Then insist it is a strawman, and that we share a common ancestor as apes! Some creation believers truly think evolutionists say we are descended from apes, and ask why apes still exist! Others use the term apes loosely and get picked on! I always say evolutionists claim we descended from apelike ancestors! Now you say we descended from apes and are apes! Wouldn't it be nice if people shut up about word arguments, swept away that clutter, and just stick to the point? Or didn't make it personal and tell people they are dumb? Then the opponent spends time defending themselves, and not defending their position?

Yes, precision of language is important here and is way too infrequently used.

Humans *are* great apes. Our immediate ancestors were great apes. But our ancestors were not any of the *current* great apes. So, we did not evolve from chimps or gorillas. We do have common ancestors with the other current great apes. The most recent common ancestors were also great apes.

 

[Jenny Collins]

I think it is time for another experiment like I do! Too bad I closed my Yahoo Answers account, I could go back and ask: "Evolutionists, why do you think we descended from apes?" Then the little arrogant twits would come to it and say: "We never said we came from apes, go play with the children and let the adults discuss this" I have mentioned my atheist friend who tried to distance himself from ones like that, and called them "those other ones" He planned on writing a book and warning atheists about not talking so stupidly and how badly they were hurting their agenda

 

[Jose Fly]

Evolutionists point to populations of bacteria, insects and peppered moths being "selected" by nature as a mechanism for evolution! What they don't tell you is that the genes for resistance to various antibiotics, insecticides, or for the color of the moths were already present in their gene pools and nature simply selected which would survive!

In the case of antibiotic resistance in bacteria, we can (and do) demonstrate that to be false via a simple single-clone lab experiment.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

The gulf between apes and people is incredible! Humans have advanced in collective knowledge and technology! In my shortish life span of 50 years, I have seen tremendous change! As a kid and teen, we didn't have cell phones, few had computers, I didn't have a colored TV until I was an adult! Now they all are colored!

It was only a few centuries ago that we didn't have electricity, phone, cars, planes, etc! At one time, we had no printing presses, need I say more?

However if you take apes and monkeys and compare the ones alive today, they are exactly as the apes and monkeys of 200, 400, 800 years ago! There may be differences due to microevolution, but they haven't developed any communities, technology, etc Two hundred years ago, gorillas ate bananas, and whatever else they eat, pounded their chests, etc and today they do the same

They do have some ability to learn and teach other gorillas, I think some used sticks as tools and then taught other gorillas how to do it or something, but even that shows the huge gulf from man to ape!

As I mentioned earlier in this post, there are gorillas like Koko who learned crude sign language, and called someone "Dirty Toilet Devil" when she was mad at them!

Meanwhile, a human child, if exposed to several languages may pick up all of them and speak them fluently!

Is this an argument against evolution and common descent?

 

[Jenny Collins]

In the case of antibiotic resistance in bacteria, we can (and do) demonstrate that to be false via a simple single-clone lab experiment.

Of course, I never heard of a Clone Lab experiment! So all that I could make of that is that there is an experiment that SOME scientists think lends support to evolution! I don't have enough knowledge to make any judgment for or against evolution based on hearing about this experiment!

That said, if someone like Vyskocil heard you say that, he would likely have an easy answer for you! He might say: "That doesn't prove anything at all" By the way, I hope you are having a great day, you are one of my favorite atheists on here!

 

[Jenny Collins]

I

Yes, precision of language is important here and is way too infrequently used.

Humans *are* great apes. Our immediate ancestors were great apes. But our ancestors were not any of the *current* great apes. So, we did not evolve from chimps or gorillas. We do have common ancestors with the other current great apes. The most recent common ancestors were also great apes.

I had closed my Yahoo Answers account, but reopened it for an experiment! I submitted a question asking if we came from "apes" and a couple said yes, and gave an answer like you did! Others called me a Fundie idiot and said we didn't! I am not even a Fundamentalist, but the guy decides what religion I am, calls me a name and contradicts the other evolutionists who say we are apes! So he was essentially calling the other evolutionists idiots because they answered my question and said we are apes!

A couple others called me a moron too, it was a mixed response!

 

[Polymath257]

I

I had closed my Yahoo Answers account, but reopened it for an experiment! I submitted a question asking if we came from "apes" and a couple said yes, and gave an answer like you did! Others called me a Fundie idiot and said we didn't! I am not even a Fundamentalist, but the guy decides what religion I am, calls me a name and contradicts the other evolutionists who say we are apes! So he was essentially calling the other evolutionists idiots because they answered my question and said we are apes!

A couple others called me a moron too, it was a mixed response!

If you ask a biologist, which is the profession this relates to, instead of the general populace, you might get a more consistent answer.

In biology, we are a type of ape. So, yes, the person who claimed otherwise was talking about something they are ignorant about. That is just as bad for 'evolutionists' as it is for anyone else.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I

I had closed my Yahoo Answers account, but reopened it for an experiment! I submitted a question asking if we came from "apes" and a couple said yes, and gave an answer like you did! Others called me a Fundie idiot and said we didn't! I am not even a Fundamentalist, but the guy decides what religion I am, calls me a name and contradicts the other evolutionists who say we are apes! So he was essentially calling the other evolutionists idiots because they answered my question and said we are apes!

A couple others called me a moron too, it was a mixed response!

If some people said it was wrong to say we came from apes, then they are wrong. Evolution definitively states that humans are descended from apes. However, there are some nuances to this question which may be misleading. For example, depending on how you phrase the question you can easily receive multiple answers, such as asking whether humans are descended from living ape species as a-posed to sharing a common ancestry with them. This can get confusing, because humans ARE descended from apes, but the apes we are descended from are not extant ape species. In other words, we're descended from apes (and ARE still apes), but we are not descended from the apes we see today.

As for people who call you a fundie, just ignore them. They clearly aren't representative of people who accept evolution. I'm sorry you had such a negative experience.

 

[Jose Fly]

Of course, I never heard of a Clone Lab experiment! So all that I could make of that is that there is an experiment that SOME scientists think lends support to evolution!

The experiment is specifically set up to show a population evolving a new trait that wasn't present in the parental population. We know it wasn't present in the parental population because all its members are descended from a single clone that didn't have the trait. So once you see the trait in the evolved population, you know it came about via mutation.

I don't have enough knowledge to make any judgment for or against evolution based on hearing about this experiment!

And that's just fine. Very honest of you to say.

That said, if someone like Vyskocil heard you say that, he would likely have an easy answer for you! He might say: "That doesn't prove anything at all"

Good for him.

By the way, I hope you are having a great day, you are one of my favorite atheists on here!

Thank you. But I'm curious.....what makes you think I'm an atheist?