Creationism/Evolution
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
03-02-2014, 09:27 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 09:20 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I read it.

Statements such as "monkey man" or (worse) "slime man" demonstrate that you are either misrepresenting or do not understand what "evolution" actually means.

You state that your theory is literally unfalsifiable.
How so? I do not agree.

Quote: Notwithstanding that even allowing the early Genesis narrative to be accurate (an insanely huge allowance) the subsequent history recounted in the Bible is not true. So there's that.
what subsequent history are you speaking and how does it relate to the comment you made in your first post?

Quote:So your, er, "theory" is that "maybe a small part of the bible is true in unfalsifiable ways which necessarily do not contradict the established body of scientific conjecture".
Simply making the claim that my theory is unfalsifiable does not mean it is true. You must first identify how it is unfalisifiable, and it must stand up to scrutiny. I have notice that many of you default to popular atheist terms and word and miss use them terriably. In my first real post there were at least 1/2 a dozen appeals to logical fallacy none of which were even close to their intended use or definations. So forgive me if I do not take your word for any of this.

Now keep in mind we are discussing the core theory and not the scape goats/strawmen I left out their for the rabble to chew on. (Per the recap I just did for you)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 09:29 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 09:27 PM)Drich Wrote:  
(03-02-2014 09:20 PM)cjlr Wrote:  You state that your theory is literally unfalsifiable.
How so? I do not agree.

(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  Because there is literally nothing the atheist can say or do to disprove anything.

So there's that. Consider

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 09:30 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 09:20 PM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  So...you've got a different spin on your myth?

Great, we can all go for sammiches and drinks.

Why is your myth any better than the Hindu's? Or the Polynesians? Or one of the other thousands of myths around the world?
Because it allows for the 2/3's of the Kids the church is loosing to evolution to remain in the faith.

Quote:And why should it need to be bothered coming near science?

Very much cheers to all.
If your not a person of faith then I do not think you would care.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 09:30 PM (This post was last modified: 03-02-2014 09:34 PM by Peebothuhul.)
RE: Creationism/Evolution
Edit: Now you give me a reply. Big Grin

Drich Wrote:Because it allows for the 2/3's of the Kids the church is loosing to evolution to remain in the faith.

And...as has been pointed out. One does not need to lose their faith AND hold both their belief and science. Things only go pear shaped when one tries to be literal about one side of things. Wink

Drich Wrote:If your not a person of faith then I do not think you would care.

Because people of faith really do think I should think the way they think, hence why I tend to care.

Very much cheers to all.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 09:32 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 09:29 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(03-02-2014 09:27 PM)Drich Wrote:  How so? I do not agree.

(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  Because there is literally nothing the atheist can say or do to disprove anything.

So there's that. Consider
I believe that just speaks to the general ignorance of the bible. It does not mean the theory is unfalsifiable. I gave several key points that hang on facts that can be verified. I simply don't think that most if not all of you have the wherewithal to verify or deny the theory.Cool
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 09:34 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 09:21 PM)Vosur Wrote:  
(03-02-2014 09:20 PM)Drich Wrote:  then why does accepting evolution preclude belief in creationism/God??
I don't think I ever said that. One of our admins (KC) is an evolutionary creationist, so it's obviously possible to believe in both.
Many of your peers think this way.. A English professor I debated from oxford thought this way... You must be the only one, or do you represent a new doctrine of atheism?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 09:35 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 09:27 PM)Drich Wrote:  
(03-02-2014 09:20 PM)cjlr Wrote:  I read it.

Statements such as "monkey man" or (worse) "slime man" demonstrate that you are either misrepresenting or do not understand what "evolution" actually means.

You state that your theory is literally unfalsifiable.
How so? I do not agree.

You... literally just said it was:
(03-02-2014 08:37 PM)Drich Wrote:  Because there is literally nothing the atheist can say or do to disprove anything.

(03-02-2014 09:27 PM)Drich Wrote:  what subsequent history are you speaking and how does it relate to the comment you made in your first post?

Basically everything related to the patriarchs and exodus and so on. It's what we might call not true.

So the relevance is that there are necessarily parts of the Biblical narrative that cannot be upheld without a hefty dose of the ol' reality denial.

(03-02-2014 09:27 PM)Drich Wrote:  Simply making the claim that my theory is unfalsifiable does not mean it is true. You must first identify how it is unfalisifiable, and it must stand up to scrutiny.

You said it, not me.

(03-02-2014 09:27 PM)Drich Wrote:  I have notice that many of you default to popular atheist terms and word and miss use them terriably. In my first real post there were at least 1/2 a dozen appeals to logical fallacy none of which were even close to their intended use or definations. So forgive me if I do not take your word for any of this.

Now keep in mind we are discussing the core theory and not the scape goats/strawmen I left out their for the rabble to chew on. (Per the recap I just did for you)

Your theory is that an unspecified interval of time passed between the creation as per the genesis narrative and the expulsion from eden as per the genesis narrative.

There is still no evidence for this other than the bible (which is not a reliable source) and there is much evidence to the contrary.

But regardless, I don't see how it affects anything.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 09:37 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 09:32 PM)Drich Wrote:  I believe that just speaks to the general ignorance of the bible. It does not mean the theory is unfalsifiable. I gave several key points that hang on facts that can be verified. I simply don't think that most if not all of you have the wherewithal to verify or deny the theory.Cool

Yeah, guy, I hate to break it to you, but scripture is not fact.

So there's that.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like cjlr's post
03-02-2014, 09:37 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 09:18 PM)Drich Wrote:  
(03-02-2014 09:15 PM)ThePaleolithicFreethinker Wrote:  Even though I need more evidence for the god claim its good that at least your trying to agree with evolution. Though i'd recommend keeping gods and goddesses out of it

If you want evidence then why not take God up on His offer to provide it for anyone who Asks Seeks and Knocks as out lined in Luke 11?

Not enough. I dont accept the bible and i have asked for god to offer proof its the fact that none appear that i became an atheistDrinking Beverage

[Image: hyena_icon_large_by_griffsnuff-d3juy9l.gif] All request for metazoa info and my larger projects should be sent PM
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
03-02-2014, 09:41 PM
RE: Creationism/Evolution
(03-02-2014 09:34 PM)Drich Wrote:  Many of your peers think this way.. A English professor I debated from oxford thought this way... You must be the only one, or do you represent a new doctrine of atheism?
Not only am I unaware of an old "doctrine of atheism," I also don't know how anything I said so far relates to doctrines. Consider

[Image: IcJnQOT.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Vosur's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: