Majority of Republicans Doubt Theory of Evolution

[Lyenae]

Originally Posted by Calamity

So so far Mille shot down about 70 of your arguments to your maybe 1. Way to fucking go dude, pat yourself on teh back. You still havent responded to any of her points

I'm not here to respond to any of her points. She tries to box this argument a 2 front science/religion war which it isn't. I don't play the sides game. My arguments have nothing to do with religion.

So far I've educated this thread by

1) Making people aware of naturalism/skepticism. Skepticism is an ally that should be at the side of any person anywhere. When scientists claim a process that can be viewed today occurred millions of years ago and is the one and only explanation for how humans came into being when scientists admit they don't even have a proper grasp of how time works, nor were any of them there, being skeptical is perfectly fucking normal/rational for anyone who can think for themselves.

2) Pointing out that problems with the American education system has nothing to do with evolution. I spent a year being a substitute teacher awhile back, across many school districts, kids in urban school systems are not given basic thinking skills, period. The majority cannot solve problems on their own, even at 12th grade. When you take a look at their lesson plan books, these tactics NEVER evolve beyond modeling. As I walk into Target 3 years later, and it takes 4 red shirts, a manager, and 30 minutes to get a lawn sprinkler exchanged, I see things haven't changed one bit.

3) Making clear that every 'begging the question' is a circular argument. The only minor technical difference is circular argument usually refers to a two step argument (1 premise which is usually the conclusion reworded and 1 conclusion), while begging the question can involve multiple steps. (multiple premises where 1 of them mirrors the conclusion, and a conclusion.) The reason for the fallacy hasn't changed.

I've contributed a ton to this thread. People who are interested in thinking for themselves and are curious how people know anything, should pick up a general world philosophy book and go from there.

It'll rank up there as one of the best time investments you ever do.

[Eomer]

Thanks, Morpheus.

[Tea on tuesday]

Lord, help me. I am bored.

Originally Posted by Lyenae

So far I've educated this thread by

Ah, undeserved arrogance. Sweetest of the message board rhetorics.

Originally Posted by Lyenae

1) Making people aware of naturalism/skepticism. Skepticism is an ally that should be at the side of any person anywhere. When scientists claim a process that can be viewed today occurred millions of years ago and is the one and only explanation for how humans came into being when scientists admit they don't even have a proper grasp of how time works, nor were any of them there, being skeptical is perfectly fucking normal/rational for anyone who can think for themselves.

Thanks for educating us unwashed masses on skepticism. I'm in awe of your rational prowess. You seem to have a poor grasp on how exactly science works. There is no, "this is how it happened and it only happened this way." Direct observation isn't a requirement of science. The only thing science requires is independent verification, which evolutionary theory provides in quantities approaching metric fucktons . Science only selects for the most likely explanation; it never selects for the absolute truth, which science holds to be absolutely untenable.

If you are going to deny evolution (I should use the term "macro evolution" here shouldn't I?) on a basis of skepticism despite all the evidence for it simply because it hasn't been directly deserved then you're about a two shades of gray away from skirting the fringes of sophistry.

I like to use an analogy here. Suppose I were to propose that I had a new theory for the structure of the Earth's crust. Don't tell anyone, but it's the same theory only I have broken it up into two parts. The first part I call micro plate tectonics. Everyone can see that the plates that form the Earth's crust occasionally bump around like school girls in a mosh pit. It's a quite adequate explanation for earthquakes and volcanoes and such, and what's more we can directly observe it. We can see the plates moving ever so slightly thanks to things like seismographs. But then there's this other theory that I call macro plate tectonics, which states that over geologic time that the plates shift the continents around over thousands and thousands of miles. There may be some evidence to suggest that this does indeed occur like magnetic pole wandering, but it's never been directly observed and we have no way of knowing if it really happened like that. So, I maintain a healthy aura of skepticism like any free thinking rational person should.

Time out on the part of the narrator for a spell of cozy mute mirth.

Obscure, self-aggrandizing allusion +1.

Also, you used a red herring. Can't buy a bucket.

Originally Posted by Lyenae

I've contributed a ton to this thread. People who are interested in thinking for themselves and are curious how people know anything, should pick up a general world philosophy book and go from there.

It'll rank up there as one of the best time investments you ever do.

Cringe worthy---abdomen beginning to heave;heaving; narrator convulsed.

Obscure, self-aggrandizing allusion +2.

[Zuuljin]

Thats a damn good, dare I say "perfect", analogy.

[Ceefo]

Religion is a human construct. Often this religion is nothing more than a tool using fear and guilt (Do this or that or you'll go to hell and burn forever) in order to control people. I have no issue with people wanting to believe in a higher power, but I most certainly DO have issue with people using those beliefs for their own personal gain or agenda. Worse still, is when people use this belief in a divine being to excuse themselves from taking responsibility for their own actions or situation.

This rambles a bit I know.. but these are questions I've asked the local zealots when they've come knocking on my door in the past.

1) Why does an all loving god allow his 'children' to burn in hell? How could something call itself all loving and then inflict endless pain upon its people?

2) Why does this supreme being care if people worship it or not? A being of such power, wisdom, and compassion would not be bothered by such trivial matters. It seems rather vain to demand worship, especially considering one of the supposed tenets of your religion speaks directly against vanity.

3) Why is it nearly ALL reglious texts in the world say the same thing? Perhaps not word for word, yet their intents and basic structure of living all point the same lessons. Nearly every religious text speaks of peace towards others, except for that one often quoted section where it's suddenly OK to kill your fellow man if they don't believe in EXACTLY the same book as you do.

Are you ready for MY religion? My commandments? Here you go.. Stand back!!

1) Believe in yourself.
2) Take responsibility for your own life.
3) Mind your own damn business. If it doesn't DIRECTLY affect you, stay out of it.

That's it. If people would follow these rules, life would be so much simpler.

If you don't believe in yourself, why would anyone else? Wants something to change in your life? Change it yourself. Don't ask for someone to give you the strength to do something. Just fucking do it!

No more praying to god to win the lottery cause you can't control your spending at the mall. Just fucking don't buy shit you don't need.

No more getting offended because you just found out that guy who sits next to you is in love with another man, because unless he's in love with YOU, it doesn't affect you. So mind your own damn business and focus on your own shit!

Oh.. and one last thing. I'm a republican. Bite me.

[UnchainedAcolyte]

Originally Posted by Tea on tuesday

I like to use an analogy here. Suppose I were to propose that I had a new theory for the structure of the Earth's crust. Don't tell anyone, but it's the same theory only I have broken it up into two parts. The first part I call micro plate tectonics. Everyone can see that the plates that form the Earth's crust occasionally bump around like school girls in a mosh pit. It's a quite adequate explanation for earthquakes and volcanoes and such, and what's more we can directly observe it. We can see the plates moving ever so slightly thanks to things like seismographs. But then there's this other theory that I call macro plate tectonics, which states that over geologic time that the plates shift the continents around over thousands and thousands of miles. There may be some evidence to suggest that this does indeed occur like magnetic pole wandering, but it's never been directly observed and we have no way of knowing if it really happened like that. So, I maintain a healthy aura of skepticism like any free thinking rational person should.

I have to agree with Zuuljin that it is an excellent analogy, probably the best I have read on these forums in any (ir)rational discussion.



After exchanging posts with Millie I decided to do a little more research for myself on the evolution/logic side of things, along with a review of atheism/agnosticism for the arguments for and against the existence of God in a nutshell. Very enlightening.

I can see in the secular community how evolution is followed practically as fact, or generally accepted due to it's being the most likely, most rational theory. However, there are bumps in the road that leave me, as many others, a skeptic.


As for Ceefo's comments, I think they are a fair evaluation of the real problem with Fundamentalist Christian movements (since I'm most familiar with those):

Having God take responsibility for your life/actions when it should be you;

Accepting on authority certain statements regarding God, scripture, lifestyle, and perception of others without evaluating what you're accepting (aka "blind faith").


For those who do believe God/a god/gods (might) exist, temper your beliefs with reason and make sure what you believe is balanced by a mature community of believers (especially a mentor whom you believe to be mature in the faith), the entirety and detailed study of (your) scriptures, and translate those into practice if you *really* believe them.

If people are serious about their faith then they should learn it thoroughly, live it, and not be afraid to have it placed under scrutiny.

[Slick Willey]

Originally Posted by Ceefo

This rambles a bit I know.. but these are questions I've asked the local zealots when they've come knocking on my door in the past.

1) Why does an all loving god allow his 'children' to burn in hell? How could something call itself all loving and then inflict endless pain upon its people?

This question needs to be asked by every Christian. At some point, you would think common sense would kick in and they would say "You know, that can't be right."

[Millie]

I promised myself I wouldn't get involved in this discussion again, but God help me (ha ha), I can't avoid it.

So where do we begin?

Originally Posted by Lyenae

I'm not here to respond to any of her points.

That's comforting to know. I'd have just as much fun arguing with a brick wall, I suppose: it offers the same degree of intellectual back-and-forth.

She tries to box this argument a 2 front science/religion war which it isn't. I don't play the sides game. My arguments have nothing to do with religion.

I'm not trying to "box" this argument in any way that hasn't already been discussed prior to my entry into the thread. Religion vs. Science was already going at full steam by the time I got here.

So far I've educated this thread by

1) Making people aware of naturalism/skepticism.

And yet, oh Great Skeptic, you refuse to turn that skeptical gaze inward at your own faith. Hypocrisy at its finest. This is yet another of the many points I've made on this thread to which you deign not to respond.

If you're going to wear the mantle of the enlightened skeptic, you need to apply that same skepticism to everything. You have to be willing to accept that evolution may have occurred just as readily as you presently doubt that it did. Skepticism, contrary to your belief, cuts both ways: in the negative ("I'm not convinced X happened") and in the positive ("I'm not convinced X didn't happen, either").

Furthermore, earlier on in this thread you made the assertion that evolution need not be taught in schools because it's -- and I quote you here -- "a waste of time." In fact, you lumped most scientific/theoretical education into the "waste of time" trash bin.

How are we to take seriously your intellectual skepticism if you argue against the teaching of scientific and/or theoretical knowledge?

I spent a year being a substitute teacher awhile back, across many school districts, kids in urban school systems are not given basic thinking skills, period.

So your solution is to cut non-practical skills like science out of the curriculum altogether, and presumably to implement religious education/indoctrination in their place. Yeah. THAT'LL teach them to think critically!

3) Making clear that every 'begging the question' is a circular argument.

What you did was take one thing I wrote out of context and attempt to debunk it in a light in which it was never intended to be cast. I didn't make the statement "Science has discovered things in the past; therefore, it will discover things in the future" to imply that science will figure everything out. Rather, I said that as a means of describing the scientific mode of progression. I was talking about what science does, not making a prediction about what science will do.

My point was that science asks questions, evolves, grows, etc., and that religion works from an opposite point of view: that everything is known now, up front, and that there can be no further improvement because God is perfect and He created everything.

I've contributed a ton to this thread.

The amount of hot air you've spewed into this thread could melt a polar ice cap or two. Certainly.

People who are interested in thinking for themselves and are curious how people know anything, should pick up a general world philosophy book and go from there.

It'll rank up there as one of the best time investments you ever do.

But let's not teach philosophy to our kids. It's a "waste of time!"

[Millie]

Originally Posted by UnchainedAcolyte

...

I owe you a response to your PM, by the way. Sorry for not getting back to you sooner; I've been kind of slammed this week. But thank you for presenting your side of this argument in a rational and well articulated manner.