Zero Probability of Evolution. Atheism wrong?

[Subduction Zone]

It's not incorrect. Who determines correct and incorrect? A majority belief? Almost endless evidence has put innocent people in prison. Killed "witches". Made harmful prescription drugs.

If the planet is as old as science says it is, why didn't man over populate the planet eons ago? Instead of just the past 6,000 years? He doubled population in just the last 100 years. If man has been here over a million years, was he impotent until the last few millennia? Evolution has more holes in it that you're willing to acknowledge.

Sorry, but the evidence still says that you are wrong. And yes, people have been put in prison by bad evidence, but that is the exception and not the rule. With evolution there is no serious evidence against it and mountains of evidence for it. The opposite is the case with creationism.

Let's hear one of these supposed "holes". This is a claim that creationists make but can never support. At best they only show a misunderstanding of the sciences.

 

[Sapiens]

If the planet is as old as science says it is, why didn't man over populate the planet eons ago? Instead of just the past 6,000 years? He doubled population in just the last 100 years. If man has been here over a million years, was he impotent until the last few millennia? Evolution has more holes in it that you're willing to acknowledge.

Rarely have I seen a more abysmal representation of biological ignorance. Here is a write up, in layman's terms, that will show you the error of your argument.

Math in Daily Life -- Population Growth

 

[Skipper]

The likelihood that God did not participate in the creation of the universe is negligible (and likely zero). Why be an Atheist?

God did participate in creation and God guided evolution.

Well, think for yourself, no matter how many garbage there is in the landfill, the rhinoceros will not be born there. From lifeless only lifeless comes - scientifically proved by Dr. Pasteur.

Pasteur was a great man, but while his words were true at his time and as far as he knew. But Pasteur died in 1895 and many advances have been made that he would have thought impossible with the knowledge of his time.[/quote

He is now wrong. Life has been created from non-living in laboratories.

Dr Craig Venter, a multi-millionaire pioneer in genetics, and his team have managed to make a completely new "synthetic" life form from a mix of chemicals.

They manufactured a new chromosome from artificial DNA in a test tube, then transferred it into an empty cell and watched it multiply – the very definition of being alive.

The man-made single cell "creature", which is a modified version of one of the simplest bacteria on earth, proves that the technology works.

Scientist Craig Venter creates life for first time in laboratory sparking debate about 'playing god'

For as long as life on Earth has existed, all of it has been made up of only four letters. DNA has been written in just those four letters – G, T, C and A – which together create the code that underlies every living thing ever known.

That's until now. Scientists have announced that they have created living organisms using an expanded genetic code. That could in turn lead to the creation of entirely new lifeforms, using combinations of DNA that couldn't possible have existed before.

Two researchers created a bacterium that not only uses the four natural bases, but also uses a pair of synthetic ones known as X and Y. In doing so, the researchers say that they have been able to "lay the foundation for achieving the central goal of synthetic biology: the creation of new life forms and functions".

Scientists create new life form from scratch

 

[Phantasman]

Sorry, but the evidence still says that you are wrong. And yes, people have been put in prison by bad evidence, but that is the exception and not the rule. With evolution there is no serious evidence against it and mountains of evidence for it. The opposite is the case with creationism.

Let's hear one of these supposed "holes". This is a claim that creationists make but can never support. At best they only show a misunderstanding of the sciences.

Ok, the evidence says I am wrong.

On to more important things.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

I see that the point: evolution being false wouldn't debunk atheism, has gone largely ignored.

It wouldn't prove creation true either. In fact, the OP has wrongly tried to connect evolution with something science considers a different field altogether- how the universe came to be. That is not something biologists deal in.

The universe might as well have arisen in a magic cloud- as likely as creation if evolution WERE false.

I suggest that before you attempt to debunk atheism- you have some experience with philosophical arguments and rhetoric under your belt. Trying to use science in argument about a matter it doesn't address won't get anywhere- namely the existence of the non-physical.

 

[Phantasman]

Rarely have I seen a more abysmal representation of biological ignorance. Here is a write up, in layman's terms, that will show you the error of your argument.

Math in Daily Life -- Population Growth

Annenberg is a think tank. Lots of those exist. Take your pick. They each call the other "ignorant" when they cannot find common ground.

I do not argue, but I see many here choose to. When phrases like "you are wrong" or "you are ignorant" are brought into play, I know I am dealing with dogmatism rather than experienced debaters. Debaters know how to ask questions, dogmatism closes the mind.

Moving on.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Evolution has more holes in it that you're willing to acknowledge.

So how do you recommend that the scientific community proceed? Should the scientists toss out Darwin's theory because of all of the problems you see with it and replace it with one of the religious creation accounts?

 

[Phantasman]

So how do you recommend that the scientific community proceed? Should the scientists toss out Darwin's theory because of all of the problems you see with it and replace it with one of the religious creation accounts?

Not at all. Hey, an alien race could make itself known, much more advanced and say that they created what's on Earth. Then you have a third option of belief.

I am happy with what I believe. My life is complete. I don't argue my belief, I merely maintain it,

 

[Phantasman]

BTW, I don't even agree with the OP that Atheism is wrong. If it's a non belief of spirituality, it's a choice. Just because I don't think that way doesn't mean it's wrong. I just don't share the view. And I have my reasons from my own experiences. Faith and hope are accumulative to the one who experiences their results. It is the basis of every person living. A person commits suicide when he/she has lost their ability to "cope".

The mind is much more amazing than people usually see, and take it for granted. Just like breathing air. Only when the need runs out do people realize how important something is.

 

[Truly Enlightened]

BTW, I don't even agree with the OP that Atheism is wrong. If it's a non belief of spirituality, it's a choice. Just because I don't think that way doesn't mean it's wrong. I just don't share the view. And I have my reasons from my own experiences. Faith and hope are accumulative to the one who experiences their results. It is the basis of every person living. A person commits suicide when he/she has lost their ability to "cope".

The mind is much more amazing than people usually see, and take it for granted. Just like breathing air. Only when the need runs out do people realize how important something is.

Exactly the opposite, most people have convinced themselves that suicide is their ONLY means of coping. It is the only solution to their problem. Have you any idea how the body tries to protect itself from being destroyed, by this "amazing mind"? And, how our survival instinct must be fooled, numbed, or tricked to allow its host to commit suicide? "I am happy with what I believe. My life is complete. I don't argue my belief, I merely maintain it" Your words are dogmatic, irrelevant, and subjective, and should never be used to support your position. If I could mind melt with you, I might have a different interpretation of your experiences. They, like the other millions and billions of beliefs, experiences, and revelations, should stay where they belong, in your head. They offer zero probability of objective truth.

It is the nature of being human that we take what we understand or possess, over time, for granted. This is an evolutionary necessity, that enables the mind the ability to learn and acquire new knowledge. Tell me, how can you NOT take the brain (or any other organ) for granted. So, no prize for stating the obvious.

So spare us your testimonials, and your condescending, passive-aggressive view of Atheist. If this is the sum total of your intellectual contribution, it might be best that you not venture outside the choir. Don

 

[Valjean]

Whatever. I could care less how things came to be but more on where they are going. It's a useless waste of time since either side cannot prove or disprove each other.

So any subject that doesn't involve proofs is a waste of time? That pretty much covers mankind's entire field of knowledge -- save mathematics.
For a waste-of-time thread, I must say you're a pretty active poster.

Non physical is just a concept that matter is reactive and created by a power higher than we can "see or know", yet conceived. Just this paradigm makes it a possibility.

Huh? What's that mean? Reactive? Like chlorine? -- and where does a higher power come in?

It's not incorrect. Who determines correct and incorrect? A majority belief? Almost endless evidence has put innocent people in prison. Killed "witches". Made harmful prescription drugs.

Correct and incorrect is determined by evidence -- properly evaluated; by reason, logic and statistics. Convenience, familiarity, and emotional comfort have nothing to do with correctness.

If the planet is as old as science says it is, why didn't man over populate the planet eons ago? Instead of just the past 6,000 years?

Serously? You can't figure this out yourself?

Evolution has more holes in it that you're willing to acknowledge.

Name one. I challenge you.

 

[Valjean]

I do not argue, but I see many here choose to. When phrases like "you are wrong" or "you are ignorant" are brought into play, I know I am dealing with dogmatism rather than experienced debaters. Debaters know how to ask questions, dogmatism closes the mind.

No.
When someone says "you are wrong/ignorant" it's probably because they have found an error in your premises or reasoning, you've made a factual or a logical error.

Not at all. Hey, an alien race could make itself known, much more advanced and say that they created what's on Earth. Then you have a third option of belief.

Exactly! Now you're catching on. Falsifying the ToE doesn't in any way support creationism.

I am happy with what I believe. My life is complete. I don't argue my belief, I merely maintain it,

So you acknowledge that you're unconcerned with truth and prefer to believe what is comfortable or familiar. You've taken Marx' statement that "Religion is the opium of the people" to heart. Religion makes you happy and helps you escape reality, and that's what matters to you.
So why do you argue your views so assiduously with those interested in actual reality?

BTW, I don't even agree with the OP that Atheism is wrong. If it's a non belief of spirituality, it's a choice. Just because I don't think that way doesn't mean it's wrong. I just don't share the view.

But it's not a non-belief in spirituality. Many atheists are intensely spiritual. Atheism is a non-belief in Gods -- and it's not a choice, it's the logical, epistemic default position.

 

[Subduction Zone]

BTW, I don't even agree with the OP that Atheism is wrong. If it's a non belief of spirituality, it's a choice. Just because I don't think that way doesn't mean it's wrong. I just don't share the view. And I have my reasons from my own experiences. Faith and hope are accumulative to the one who experiences their results. It is the basis of every person living. A person commits suicide when he/she has lost their ability to "cope".

The mind is much more amazing than people usually see, and take it for granted. Just like breathing air. Only when the need runs out do people realize how important something is.

Nope, atheism is not a choice. It is a result of thinking rationally.

 

[questfortruth]

.......
He is now wrong. Life has been created from non-living in laboratories.
.......

Just add: "life comes only from life, if no intelligence is used."

 

[Phantasman]

Exactly the opposite, most people have convinced themselves that suicide is their ONLY means of coping. It is the only solution to their problem. Have you any idea how the body tries to protect itself from being destroyed, by this "amazing mind"? And, how our survival instinct must be fooled, numbed, or tricked to allow its host to commit suicide? "I am happy with what I believe. My life is complete. I don't argue my belief, I merely maintain it" Your words are dogmatic, irrelevant, and subjective, and should never be used to support your position. If I could mind melt with you, I might have a different interpretation of your experiences. They, like the other millions and billions of beliefs, experiences, and revelations, should stay where they belong, in your head. They offer zero probability of objective truth.

It is the nature of being human that we take what we understand or possess, over time, for granted. This is an evolutionary necessity, that enables the mind the ability to learn and acquire new knowledge. Tell me, how can you NOT take the brain (or any other organ) for granted. So, no prize for stating the obvious.

So spare us your testimonials, and your condescending, passive-aggressive view of Atheist. If this is the sum total of your intellectual contribution, it might be best that you not venture outside the choir. Don

Wow. You sure make the world a better place. How many years of psychology do you have under your belt?

Again, I just disagree. But what I posted was something my aunts boyfriend told me a decade ago, and also heard repeated by good ol' Dr Oz. Lack of identified purpose in life also causes suicidal thoughts. Like the lack of purpose of your last statement.

 

[Phantasman]

Nope, atheism is not a choice. It is a result of thinking rationally.

What do atheists have faith in?

 

[Phantasman]

So any subject that doesn't involve proofs is a waste of time?
.

Pretty much.

John:
Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

Some people see it, some don't. I just happen to see it.(what I need to see).

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Non physical is just a concept that matter is reactive and created by a power higher than we can "see or know", yet conceived. Just this paradigm makes it a possibility.

How? Just because we can conceive of something doesn't mean it's necessarily possible in the hard sense.

(For purpose of clarity, I have two sub-definitions of possible: soft possibility and hard possibility. Soft possibility refers to something being within the realms of what is not currently known, and therefore possibly true within the context of what we do not yet know. Hard possibility refers to whether or not something is actually possible in the Universe, regardless of whether or not we know about it. For instance, an infinite being is possible in the soft sense - we don't know enough to necessarily rule out the existence of one entirely - but we do not yet know if an infinite being is possible in the hard sense - whether or not a being is actually possible to exist.)

 

[ImmortalFlame]

What do atheists have faith in?

Atheists can have faith in lots of different things. This is like asking "What kind of meat substitute do vegetarians prefer?". Then, of course, there are vegetarians who don't eat any meat substitutes - just as there are atheists who do not consider themselves to have "faith" in anything.

 

[Phantasman]

No.
When someone says "you are wrong/ignorant" it's probably because they have found an error in your premises or reasoning, you've made a factual or a logical error.
Exactly! Now you're catching on. Falsifying the ToE doesn't in any way support creationism.
So you acknowledge that you're unconcerned with truth and prefer to believe what is comfortable or familiar. You've taken Marx' statement that "Religion is the opium of the people" to heart. Religion makes you happy and helps you escape reality, and that's what matters to you.
So why do you argue your views so assiduously with those interested in actual reality?

But it's not a non-belief in spirituality. Many atheists are intensely spiritual. Atheism is a non-belief in Gods -- and it's not a choice, it's the logical, epistemic default position.

I am unconcerned with "your" truth. I don't waste time on questions that cannot be answered. Flat earth, round earth. Evolution, creation. Conservative liberal. Spiritual deity, atheist.

All those "arguments" serve no purpose. I have a great life without adding the stress of ignorance to it. I do not care what anyone thinks of me. It's not about me. I'm nothing.

My happiness factor is quite high. I don't start threads, because I have nothing to ask, or exclaim. I am just another soul waiting to embrace death, and biding my time until it arrives.