Incredulity complex and Evolution

Incredulity
[noun]
Being unwilling or unable to believe something.
Skeptical of an assertion.

Claims made by creationists (and proponents of intelligent design) as proof of god often focus on the seemingly unlikely fundamental constants that govern the laws of physics: the so-called fine-tuned universe. The basic claim is that god created the universe in such a way as to ensure an environment suitable for life. In other words, these same creationists accept that there are constants in the universe that are measurable by mankind.

By the same token, many of the same creationists have no difficulty accepting other scientific principles and observations which have led to the technological breakthroughs we see and use on a daily basis.

However, when it comes to evolution, there seems to be a ‘head-in-the-sand’ denial that the laws and principles of nature could possibly apply in this case. Unfortunately many creationist websites exacerbate this with a systematic (and immoral) misrepresentation of what Modern Evolutionary Synthesis actually says. Heck - if my understanding of evolution came from creationist literature I wouldn’t accept it either!

So, my question is: Are your doubts about evolution…
A) based on your unwillingness to believe the evidence?
B) based on an inability to believe it (perhaps because of misrepresentations/lack of understanding)?

The reason I ask is because there seems to be a simply solution, as adopted by all major religions (even the lumbering giant that is the catholic church), namely theistic evolution - that evolution was set in motion by, and directed by, god, using natural laws (as created by god) to achieve this end.

The funny part is religion tries to explain the "why" and evolution tries to explain the "how". The two are not even comparable, so I fail to see why people seem to think there is any form of debate here. We are talking about intelligent design vs random events in creation with evolution just a path in how either way could evolve.

I don't doubt there being a possibility of an entity setting it in motion, but to say in a seemingly infinite universe that us being here means there has to be a god is just ridiculous. In an infinite scenario if the variable potential is there the 'perfect' mixture for life is inevitable. I also dont undertsand why we minimize what the potential for life is based on our relative understanding.

So are you saying the problem always was evolutionist?
And that they are just realizing that evolution "dose not" discredit God at all.
And that God created evolution himself when he created the world.
It even says in the bible

And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. Genesis 1:24

Just like God gave humans the ability to "reproduce" "multiply" so did he the earth

Evolution is just a manifestation of Gods glory
Same with the "higgs boson"
Thats how I see it

Seems to me.
The ones that think they understand evolution,
And deny God. Cant accept that God and evolution goes together

a reply to: TheLead

Just because you use a bunch of big words all put together that you think people wont understand dose mot mean it actually makes any since....

How do you know its "inevitable"?

a reply to: DustybudzZ

I wasn't trying to be misunderstood. Our life is due the right variables all coming together, we understand the universe as being infinite. If the variables are there for our life form we will always exist.

If you don't understand what a post I make means and want to, all you gotta do is ask.

a reply to: TheLead

One What dose that have to do with the OP?

But Anyway how is that saying God dose not exist?
And why is it a reasonable response as proof he dose not?

a reply to: TheLead

And dose not mean we will always be on this planet, realm or dimension

a reply to: DustybudzZ

It has to do with the op because it's my agreeing with him while explaining my position.

I didn't say he doesn't exist, I said I don't see how people can exclaim us being here is positive proof the he does.

There is no more fact or evidence that God dose exist or that he dose not exist

This is where Faith comes in

Your either for him or against him
"Pick a side" "choose wisely"

a reply to: DustybudzZ

I don't feel I need to, because I agree with the concept of god and the devil. I think our whole universe can be broken down to positive and negative integer energy exchange. If you want to personify the positive as god and the negative with the devil it really doesn't matter to me. It's the same thing in the end I'm just taking it back to its simplest form. My only problem with religion is the people that use it for bad, whether the individual missuse or the orchestrated missuse.

a reply to: TheLead

I dont believe in religion either. nor dose God
He is the ONE and Only true God and only wants people to believe in him and worship him

And if you have a close personal relationship with him I dont think I would reduce God to just "positive integer energy exchange" just saying

originally posted by: DustybudzZ
a reply to: TheLead

Just because you use a bunch of big words all put together that you think people wont understand dose mot mean it actually makes any since....

How do you know its "inevitable"?

Mathematics. If you have a very improbable event but there are enough tries eventually the improbable will happen.

There could have been trillions of bubbles over billions of years before cellular life came into existence by a random sequence of events.

a reply to: Xtrozero

Love your avatar. That scene in the movie was over the top funny!

originally posted by: DustybudzZ
a reply to: TheLead

I dont believe in religion either. nor dose God
He is the ONE and Only true God and only wants people to believe in him and worship him

And if you have a close personal relationship with him I dont think I would reduce God to just "positive integer energy exchange" just saying

Why? If he is a merciful and all knowing, all understanding being you wouldn't have to proclaim good deeds in his name for them to be recognized. God shouldn't have an ego, but if he does and we're created in his image it makes sense why it's so prevalent in us. Why would God even instill a negative energy compartment in us that could be so easily exploited by the devil?

a reply to: MarsIsRed

Humans live finite lives.
We cannot realistically imagine a infinite universe.

The question goes both ways. Sure, a 'god' could have set evolution in motion, but then it asks the whole new question; how did the deity come into existence?

But evolution goes beyond biology on planet earth, it's been observed and tested on a cosmic level, we understand our universe more than people think, to the point where quantum physics are almost completely within our understanding.
People who refuse to accept evolution at a biological level will never, ever even come close to understanding it at the cosmic level.

The simple answer is, physics started sometime at the beginning, and everything else followed governed by those physics, how they started, who knows, either way it started somewhere, somehow, and it wasn't a god.

originally posted by: MarsIsRed
Incredulity
[noun]
Being unwilling or unable to believe something.
Skeptical of an assertion.

Claims made by creationists (and proponents of intelligent design) as proof of god often focus on the seemingly unlikely fundamental constants that govern the laws of physics: the so-called fine-tuned universe. The basic claim is that god created the universe in such a way as to ensure an environment suitable for life. In other words, these same creationists accept that there are constants in the universe that are measurable by mankind.

By the same token, many of the same creationists have no difficulty accepting other scientific principles and observations which have led to the technological breakthroughs we see and use on a daily basis.

However, when it comes to evolution, there seems to be a ‘head-in-the-sand’ denial that the laws and principles of nature could possibly apply in this case. Unfortunately many creationist websites exacerbate this with a systematic (and immoral) misrepresentation of what Modern Evolutionary Synthesis actually says. Heck - if my understanding of evolution came from creationist literature I wouldn’t accept it either!

So, my question is: Are your doubts about evolution…
A) based on your unwillingness to believe the evidence?
B) based on an inability to believe it (perhaps because of misrepresentations/lack of understanding)?

The reason I ask is because there seems to be a simply solution, as adopted by all major religions (even the lumbering giant that is the catholic church), namely theistic evolution - that evolution was set in motion by, and directed by, god, using natural laws (as created by god) to achieve this end.

So there was nothing then a big explosion and then science says there was everything?
So can you apply your logic to my scepticism re your belief in your WOO

I cant fathom the ignorance of atheist fundamentalists and their utter incompetence to apply any logic and pass it off as science

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: MarsIsRed
Incredulity
[noun]
Being unwilling or unable to believe something.
Skeptical of an assertion.

Claims made by creationists (and proponents of intelligent design) as proof of god often focus on the seemingly unlikely fundamental constants that govern the laws of physics: the so-called fine-tuned universe. The basic claim is that god created the universe in such a way as to ensure an environment suitable for life. In other words, these same creationists accept that there are constants in the universe that are measurable by mankind.

By the same token, many of the same creationists have no difficulty accepting other scientific principles and observations which have led to the technological breakthroughs we see and use on a daily basis.

However, when it comes to evolution, there seems to be a ‘head-in-the-sand’ denial that the laws and principles of nature could possibly apply in this case. Unfortunately many creationist websites exacerbate this with a systematic (and immoral) misrepresentation of what Modern Evolutionary Synthesis actually says. Heck - if my understanding of evolution came from creationist literature I wouldn’t accept it either!

So, my question is: Are your doubts about evolution…
A) based on your unwillingness to believe the evidence?
B) based on an inability to believe it (perhaps because of misrepresentations/lack of understanding)?

The reason I ask is because there seems to be a simply solution, as adopted by all major religions (even the lumbering giant that is the catholic church), namely theistic evolution - that evolution was set in motion by, and directed by, god, using natural laws (as created by god) to achieve this end.

So there was nothing then a big explosion and then science says there was everything?
So can you apply your logic to my scepticism re your belief in your WOO

I cant fathom the ignorance of atheist fundamentalists and their utter incompetence to apply any logic and pass it off as science

That's a simple explanation of how the universe began, not how EVERYTHING began. You are missing the point of what the big bang represents. It's a singularity, meaning at some point in time everything became one, back to it's original state whether it was a small dot, or a massive hurricane of atoms. It's a simple explanation of everything in the universe working in harmony, and a simple explanation to an extremely complex question.

a reply to: DustybudzZ

Well there is a problem with evolutionist ... its not a word. It is one Creationists use to feel special. It has no sensible meaning. IF you agree sciene is a thing, and say Gravity is real. Then Evolution is too, Kinetics are too, the SN1 and SN2 mechananisms etc You can not pick and choose.

You can say all science is wrong (then bring up evidence) or you can challenge a theory, again with evidence. But to disagree with evolution with out evidence and just blind faith? Yeah nah.

Also why one god? Why not many?

a reply to: MarsIsRed

I agree, the idea that evolution is contrary to Creation and the Bible is plain stupid.

Yet those that oppose Christian ethics, morality and belief continually argue against a case that was moot a century ago.

Evolution describes a process of biological change. It does not explain how that biology came to be in the first place.

Creationism describes a process of the initiation of biology. It does not describe any process of biological change.

Not are they mutually exclusive: God could have created completely formed species and they could have evolved from there or God could have directed abiogenic forces and there could have been biological change from there. All these ideas are compliant with the Bible and with science.