It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Enrikez
There is something that has always bothered me about the I.D. vs Science debate.
- People assume evolution or scientific discoveries support their Atheism
There is no logical reason for anyone to make this assumption. By definition God has used the 'laws of the universe' to create existance. The more we learn about how those laws work and function has no bearing on the existance of a creator.
When Science discovered the double-helix structure of DNA we were more enlightened about the workings of God and how life has always been on this planet. We were not suddenly given undeniable evidence that there is no God.
When the theory of evolution was first put forth, there was absolutely no evidence introduced that would remove the need of a creator in existance.
To this day, there has been no evidence presented which can explain the power behind the universe and how something so complex as the universe can exist 'by chance'.
Even the term 'by chance' is a cop-out. Whenever you hear a scientist or researcher say the terms 'luck', 'by chance' or 'for lack of a better', you can guarantee he/she is pulling the wool over your eyes.
There is no room in science for any of these things. Scientists have the Big Bang theory. That holds no water, it may work out mathematically with our current understanding of the universe, but it doesn't attempt to explain how existence came to be. Where did those two infinitely dense particles come from anyways? And why only two?
And an even bigger question, if there where these two infinitely dense particles swimming around, for no apperant reason, in the vastness of space, what are the odds of them even coming close to each other, let alone having a head on collision?! Fantasy.
Science and evolution have the inherent right to revision. Belief does not.
Unfortunately, for the believers, Science has claimed a monopoly on revision.
You have to look at the scientific state of the world 2000 years ago. Of course science, as revised and 'new' (and just as incomplete and bumbling as it ever was),
as it is, looking back at explainations and stories and 'facts' of the past can poke holes in it. There is no surprise that a modern learned person can find fault in a great many things that antiquity leave sus.
My point in this post is not to judge either side or even make a decision myself, it is only to point out the two biggest 'unfair advantages' one side holds over the other.
If the detractors of intelligent design were to structure their arguements without referencing or taking advantage of my two 'unfair advantage' points, I don't think they would even be convincing to each other.
Originally posted by Hexidecimal
Why do you, those that do, believe in God?
You cannot prove he exists. I know there's going to be people that say, "Well, you can't prove he dosn't either". So? I guess then I'll worship Bigfoot, The Easter Bunny, The Loch Ness monster, or any other mythical beast. You can't prove they dont exist either. "Theres no proof it does or doesn't, so it exists." I guess Wizards, Giants, heck, even Lygars exist.
Perhap's we live in a Simulated Universe. It's highly possible. With the way technology is advancing, Perhaps the real year is the year 3000, and technology is so advanced, that we cannot tell it's virtual, and we beleive we are in the year 2007. You can't tell me I'm wrong, and I can't say im right. There's no evidence for either.
As with my discussion on Shelley yates, I'm going to state the same point. Religion Sells. Someone, perhaps not even 100's of years ago, wrote the bible. They sold it to make money, as it was a good story, and people, either intentional or not, took it as a religion. There is no proof it was written when it says it was. The Bible says it was written then, but that dosn't make it right. "Scriptures written back then say it was written then." So someone primitive wrote down some ideas, and someone later in time make a book out of them. Doesn't mean it was.
Prove to me, your god. Why do you believe.
Originally posted by 3_Libras
Originally posted by DaRAGE
Originally posted by 3_Libras
Rightttttttt, but how is existence linked with a man up in the clouds?
My throughts of GOd aren't a Human existing inthe clods, or in heaven, or anything like that. That representation is man-made - aka the bible - "jesus will sit at teh right hand side fo the father, ie god., in the kingdom of heaven". the words" The heavens" has also been used to mean such as the sky.ie. "Look up into the heavens and tell me what you see?"
So heaven they represent god in human form as "god made us in his image", greeting us at teh pearly gates, lol.
But....in the beginning, when the Christinaty "boom" was happening, thats what it was...up in the sky...cos we knew no better. So if God was speaking to whoever wrote that tripe, then surely he gave him the right details? Must have been a bit vague then? Not to mention, the story of creation. Are you gonna sit there and tell me thats the most likely scenario? Puhhhhh-leasseee people.
The Bible is nothing more than a set of morals and laws by which to rule. Simple as that.
[edit on 31-7-2007 by 3_Libras]
Originally posted by lenisey
KNOW INSIDE WHAT IS RIGHT FOR US.....AND IT IS WRITTEN THAT IN THE END HE WILL HAVE YOU JUDGE YOURSELF.....
FOR THERE IS NO WAY TO LIE TO ONES INNER SOUL....
AND ONLY YOU & HIM KNOW.
renee
Originally posted by thesun
why would God expain things that man are not capable of understaing.
why would you read your physics book to your dog when he only understand's seat, fetch and good boy
Originally posted by Impreza
Um, I don't know what rock you've been living under until now, but Ligers do exist! That's a true story, I swear to God.
The liger is a hybrid cross between a male Panthera leo (lion), and a female Panthera tigris (tiger) and is denoted scientifically as Panthera tigris × Panthera leo.[1][2] A liger resembles a lion with diffused stripes. They are the largest cats in the world,[3] although the Siberian Tiger is the largest pure sub-species. Like tigers, but unlike lions, ligers
there was no space....
i know that sounds realyl weird as hell, but, prior to the big bang... there was no space.
yes, because the revisions of science are based on evidence... the revisions of religion are based on whim.
but you can't really find fault with modern science.
science in its present state has no room left for a creator,
ID isn't a theory, it's just superstitious nonsense repackaged in a way to sneak it into the classroom.
Originally posted by lenisey
SORRY- I know, this is really not the topic but,
see, sometimes things that are imaginary...
exist
ligers never were imaginary... maybe at one point they were theoretical... but not imaginary.
Originally posted by Methuselah
you can apply that same logic to God. you may not know for sure if he exists, but have faith that he does and even bring out the science in the bible so you dont automatically discredit it.
Originally posted by lenisey
He is an amazingly powerful, living, energy source that somehow has such intelligence that he created all that we call our world with such exact
prescision , balance, perfection down to every tiny detail that
Originally posted by Methuselah
there was no space....
i know that sounds realyl weird as hell, but, prior to the big bang... there was no space.
yeah thats does, but according to the big bang theory, matter and energy didnt exist either, the theory says that there was 'nothing'.
and 'nothing' cannot produce 'something' its theoretically impossible.
how can something from nothing be the cause of our own existence.
Originally posted by Methuselah
plus you think God doesnt exist... what about the things that science cannot explain? like supernatural healing of any sort (heart starting to beat when it shouldnt, brain activity when brain should be dying, people living when their bodily condition doesnt support it) what about all of these things? how do you explain those?
yes, because the revisions of science are based on evidence... the revisions of religion are based on whim.
Originally posted by Methuselah
no we find the laws and learn how they apply and how they support the theory. there is no conflict. the only big difference between creation and evolutionary theory is that the creation says that out of nothing, God created everything. and the evolutionary theory says that out of nothing (no time, space or matter) over billions of years, everything was created and formed.
but you can't really find fault with modern science.
Originally posted by Methuselah
oh really? what about Ernest Haeckel and his drawings put in textbooks as facts and getting his sued for fraud? or what about Archaeopteryx? that was also a fraud. these were listed as factual evidences.
science in its present state has no room left for a creator,
Originally posted by Methuselah
you know the more i look at his creation the more I believe and the more I realize that there has to be a creator.
no... see, god isn't even theoretical, god is hypothetical.
now, why should i have faith in your god over the countless other ones?
what science in the bible? a disc shaped earth? geocentrism? noah's ark?
i don't discredit the bible entire, it's just like any other book of myth, it contains good and bad, i just don't believe in any of it
Perfect? What universe are you living in? Science has proven that the universe is not perfect, and it is this lumpiness or imperfection which forms the stars and planets you see today. If the universe was perfect we wouldn't be here...
Umm energy did exist, so much energy it's not funny. That's how the bang came in.
You know science is ever growing right? And that nobody 200 years ago would even dream of something called cars. We might find the answers in 50 years time, maybe less. Kind of stupid when you say explain these things when there is so much unanswered by issues surrounding 'god' and so many flaws.
Umm yeh, just like the Earth was round and everything orbited the Earth.
Again, science is not always perfect, but our knowledge continues to grow.