http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jLodot6v0KY
This guy has posters of "Evolution is a lie" as well as making God the premise of all his arguments. Any discussion about evidence is diverted by crap responses about faith in Jesus transcending evidence followed by morality statements such as the only way to be good is to be their follower.
What do you think of this? Also realize that the majority of Christians, about 60% believe in evolution. It's an undeniable fact but these guys say just because they don't see evolution happening right now, it doesn't exist. They then remark how all the fossil records are fake.

 

These guys sound like fanatics, and you can never have a reasoned conversation with them.

Best to stay of of it as much as you can. You can only loose out.

Leave them to their beliefs, and keep you own.

There can never be absolute proof of God's existence, or non-existence, and even if there was, the losing side would probably choose to ignore it.

Evolution has some (I would say very good) evidence behind it, but still the proof is not absolute, which allows these guys to force their view, generally be being forceful rather than reasonable.

Keep your sanity and stay away from these people.

That is my advice

EDIT: And even I have to consider the possibilty that these guys just might have a point. Though it is hard to see past the bullying and manipulation to work out what their point might be.

 

Or get them to read some of this...

Nietzsche: The Death of God

"Have you not heard the madman who lit a lantern in the bright morning hours, ran to the market place and cried incessantly, 'I seek God!, I seek God!' ... Why, did he get lost? Said one. Did he lose his way like a child? Said another. Or is he hiding? Is he afraid of us? Has he gone on a voyage? Or emigrated?... The madman jumped into their midst and pierced them with his glances.
"'Whither is God'? He cried. 'I shall tell you. We have killed him - you and I. All of us are his murderers...'"
"...the madman fell silent and looked again at his listeners; and they to were silent and stared at him in astonishment. At last he threw his lantern on the ground, and it broke and went out. 'I came too early,' he said then; 'my time has not come yet. This tremendous event is still on its way, still wandering -it has not yet reached the ears of man."
In these passages Nietzsche is showing the inevitable unfolding anthropocentrism (lit. putting man at the centre of the world) implicit in philosophy since Kant. If we view our existence through human categories, then our concept of God is itself a human creation.
Nietzsche is not simply asserting his atheism; he is suggesting that once we are aware that the concept of God is our own creation we can no longer base our religious and moral beliefs on any notion of a divine external reality.

 

OK.

can you give me an idea how people evolve??????????Australopithecus

said live about 3.or so..

i dont know.... gimme an idea~

(sorry for large font)

 

This thread is running very close to the borders of the ToS, religion is not a safe subject anytime. All I can say, is there is lots of literature out there, fossils, DNA and much more for those who would ask the questions.

If you have to take something on faith when there is evidence to be viewed then it becomes religeon vs. science, never a comfortable position.

I have a feeling this thread will be closed much sooner than later, if you want to discuss the science then I would suggest starting a new thread.

 

evolution. It's an undeniable fact

Actually it's a theory. Theories cannot be proven as fact, only disproven. I'm not on the side of religion, I'm on the side of correctness. I used to spend some time in an online forum about religion & Atheism (basically an entertaining 24/7 bloodbath flame war & troll feeding ground). I'm an atheist, and the #1 folly I saw with my fellow atheists on that forum was that they would try to argue with believers, using the believers' own terms. Believers would incessantly ask for "scientific proof" that God doesn't exist, and atheists would try to provide it. Some of them made some pretty compelling arguments that I would have liked to support, but they missed the big picture. It isn't the job of science to "Prove" anything; that is the job of religion, and it takes faith (strong belief in something, esp without proof or evidence) - just ask any Christian.

"scientific proof" is a misnomer. It doesn't exist.

 

There are proofs and there are proofs. Right now the Theory of Evolution explains more facts than any other natural process. A favorite tactic is to try to confuse issues with stuff that doesn't apply. Faith is not proof, it is the exact opposite.

I'll be honest, I'm surprised this thread has lasted as long as it has, I do not expect it to last.

I would not be surprised if a fellow mod preempts it altogether.

 

"Theory of evolution" is concerned about the details of evolution, the mechanisms at work that crates variability in organisms, factors that choose one organism over the other, traits shared by different organisms, and so forth. That evolution is real isn't really a theory. Don't be confused just because it's called "evolutinoary theory" and just because some people deny it.

 

What do you think of this?

I think he is entitled to his beliefs. I also don't think you can prove he is wrong. Any system of belief (even science) has a set of starting premises that are assumed to be true. He has carefully chosen his starting premises to allow him to logically hold his belief system, and to prevent you from giving any evidence to disprove him. You can't disprove his logic, - you can only challenge the foundations of his beliefs. But, he will never let go of those foundations any more than you will ever let go of yours.

 

That evolution is real isn't really a theory.

Most people would say the same thing about gravity. Gravity is also a theory.

To say that you know something beyond a doubt, is to set yourself up to look like a fool.

 

Gravity is a theory?????? A fool is one who looks at the proof and continues to deny it.

 

Gravity is a theory?????? A fool is one who looks at the proof and continues to deny it.

I'm just going to play the Devil's advocate here and say that if you think about it, the only "proof" you see is the effect of what we call "gravity". Even after a few hundred years, nobody really knows what gravity IS

 

Gravity is a theory?????? A fool is one who looks at the proof and continues to deny it.

Yes, gravity is a theory.

I'll repeat myself:

Theories cannot be proven as fact, only disproven. I'm not on the side of religion, I'm on the side of correctness...It isn't the job of science to "Prove" anything; that is the job of religion.

"scientific proof" is a misnomer. It doesn't exist.

 

As soon as I learned that gravity is only a theory, I began to float right out of my chair! Fact is, the proof is by examining and measuring the effects. Air isn't a theroy, and we can only examine the effects of it.

 

As soon as I learned that gravity is only a theory, I began to float right out of my chair! Fact is, the proof is by examining and measuring the effects. Air isn't a theroy, and we can only examine the effects of it.

Examining & measuring the effects gives you... the effects. The theory is meant to be a best explanation for the observable & repeatable effects. Obviously, the effects of gravity are observable & repeatable. But the explanation for these effects is a theory (gravitational theory), and could be disproven at any point & replaced with a new, better theory. Same goes for the theory of evolution. there is no proof.

 

Examining and measuring the effects give you the proof. There are accepted scientific proofs, those which have stood the test of time, examination, arguments and so forth. It's no more than a dodge to say there are no facts in science, for those who just don't want to beileve what has been shown and what is known. Gravity, air, fire, light, heat, these are all proven. Maybe some day a unifying theory will replace everything we thought we knew, but as we can observe, measure, feel, quantify, calculate, predict these things, they are proven.

 

those who just don't want to beileve

I'l leave believing to the believers, and you to your misconceptions. I'm not going to convince you, all I can say is take a little refresher on the scientific method.

 

Most people would say the same thing about gravity. Gravity is also a theory.

To say that you know something beyond a doubt, is to set yourself up to look like a fool.

The discussion of scientific facts and scientific theories is an interesting one, and it is helpful to clearly define the meanings of these terms.

My view is that scientific facts are well established observations that are very difficult to deny without resorting to philosophical or religious discussions. Gravity is a good example of a scientific fact. Gravity exists since we have so many observations that show masses attracting to each other, and that is what gravity is. Aside from the very obvious observations, like apples falling from trees, there are subtle observations, such as the precession of the planet Mercury.

Evolution is also a scientific fact. We see so much fossil evidence, DNA evidence and biological evidence that life forms change and seem to have sprung from common ancestors. The fact of evolution is quite a bit harder to see than the fact of gravity, but that doesn't change the nature of what a fact is. Scientist have collected massive amounts of information that collectively amounts to the observed fact that life evolves.

Note that scientific facts are hard to question from a physical point of view. We see, we observe and we decide that it is logical to call a thing a fact. However, one can always question things philosophically or religiously. Perhaps, God deliberately created all of this "fake" evidence to fool us and prevent us from proving that he exists. Or maybe the devil created this "fake" evidence to steer us away from God. The mind is free to question, but a scientist decides to deliberately take a physical point of view, even if he is a religious person. This is the only way that science can be a useful tool.

My view is that scientific theories are our attempts to give detailed descriptions for how those facts manifest themselves. The theory is usually more questionable than the fact. Take gravity for instance. Newton developed the first good theory of gravity, and we still use it. It is not perfect though and Einstein developed General Relativity which is able to describe some observed things about the fact of gravity that Newton's theory fails to describe. We also know there are limitations of Einstein's theory and physicists are currently in search of a quantum theory of gravity that will encompass Newton, Einstein and things beyond. Whether you accept Newton, Einstein, Quantum gravity, or no theory at all, the fact of gravity is undeniable in the physical world.

Similarly, we have various theories of evolution, with Darwin's theory of natural selection pretty much at the center of the modern school of thought. Modern views are far beyond what even Darwin envisioned, but the current view seems to be the best scientific explanation of the observed fact that life is governed by an evolutionary process. Note that a religious person can still reconcile his/her religion while acting as a scientist. The two things need not conflict with each other, if a person is open minded enough to allow for a God that is subtle enough to create a universe that appears self consistent from the inside. The OP is talking about a person that has decided not to take this path. His foundations of belief are too rigid to allow for scientific observations, hence any science is any one of a number of things that render it useless. It is either, misunderstanding, lies, mistakes, hoaxes, misinformation placed by God, or misinformation placed by the devil etc.

 

As soon as I learned that gravity is only a theory, I began to float right out of my chair! Fact is, the proof is by examining and measuring the effects. Air isn't a theroy, and we can only examine the effects of it.

Your own words explain it -" air isn't a theory, and we can only examine the effects of it" We can examine air and find out the components that make it up.

What are the components that make up gravity? Or for that matter magnetism? Since we can't examine the make-up/components of them, they can only be theorized.

 

I'l leave believing to the believers, and you to your misconceptions. I'm not going to convince you, all I can say is take a little refresher on the scientific method.

No need to. I practice science every day of my life.

Your own words explain it -" air isn't a theory, and we can only examine the effects of it" We can examine air and find out the components that make it up.

What are the components that make up gravity? Or for that matter magnetism? Since we can't examine the make-up/components of them, they can only be theorized.

So you're saying it's only a fact if we know the components? Have you seen the components of an air molecule? Have you examined a hydrogen atom? Or have you only heard of the effects we can measure? Do you know the components of light? It not, can you say that light hasn't been proven? Why can I see to write this message?

Steveb gives us a very well thought out and well stated discussion about facts and theories. To have a reasonable discussion, we need to be able to use those facts that have been examined, quantified and measured. Without them, anything can be denied without any reason. That's why we have science in the first place.