Questions That Led Me to Atheism #3
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
23-01-2014, 11:25 AM
Questions That Led Me to Atheism #3
3. Why doesn't Science prove my religion is true?

Throughout my youth, Science was a subject that was common in our home. I had access to many Science books, most especially books about animals, dinosaurs, and planets. All of this was free inquiry available to me at any time, without controversy. I do not mean to say that there was no religious bias, for certainly there was. Every beauty of the universe, every medical advancement, every new technological marvel was taken as evidence of god's majesty and power. I did not think this way naturally, rather I had to hear these arguments from my parents many times before I decided to trust their opinion.

As I grew up I often would listen to my father rant about politics, especially around dinner time. My first exposure to debates regarding Evolution Vs. Creationism began with his constant condemnation of modern biology. It was his opinion that their exists a conspiracy of scientists who actively falsify scientific data in order to reach their ultimate aim of removing god from the world. He would often tell us of how they merely desired an excuse to sin without the fear of God's punishment, so they endeavored to disprove his existence in order to feel better about themselves. he believed that if they could be taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ that they would recognize its truth and would denounce their claims about Evolution. He denounced Darwin as a deathbed convert, therefore nullifying any validity of his Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. It was clear to me, even explicit from his mouth, that he considered Christianity, The Family, and Christian values to be directly under attack from all sides. We were conscripted as Christian soldiers to defend our faith against the madness of the world.

Often a newspaper article would appear on the kitchen table with some headline explaining the most recent victory of evolutionary biology over creationism in the classroom. My father would rant about the freedom of religion that was being so coldly infringed, and the dishonest courts that were continually ruling against those who sought to have Intelligent Design taught in public schools. His endless anger about this "conspiracy" designed to destroy his faith, and that of his children, gave me fear that there were those outside my faith, who wanted to rob me of it. I became wary of those who did not believe as my family did. I endeavored to be constantly vigilant, against what, I did not know. I only knew that I was apprehensive a great deal of the time.

A variety of Anti-Evolution books, and quite a few pro Intelligent Design books made their way to my shelf from my father's collection. I was always an avid reader, especially of subjects so controversial as to be extra interesting. Thus I was armed against the forces of the devil that sought to remove God from my school. I read "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael Behe and "Icons of Evolution, Science or Myth" by Jonathan Wells before I turned fourteen. I found both of these works compelling, especially the argument of molecular irreducible complexity taken by Behe. It made sense to me.

I did not notice back then, but it occurred to me later in life that my Father had no books whatsoever written in support of Evolution. Why? Wouldn't it be important to be at least mildly versed in the opinions of Scientists? I do not know why this line of inquiry was not a pursuit of his.

When I enrolled in my first biology class in high school I found myself spending hours trying to refute everything we learned about The Theory of Evolution. I began with the assumption that God was real, and my religion was true, and then went from there to attempting to disprove those principles of biology that I felt conflicted directly with my opinion.

My teacher clearly noticed my uncomfortable attitude in class, and went out of her way to instruct me in a way that I would understand. She did not condescend, or insult me, rather she seemed genuinely willing to listen to me. She never insisted that I take her word for it. Instead she spent extra time and effort giving me sources to look up, as well as books and articles to read that would help me learn. I inhaled everything she gave me.

Immediately I began to notice the sheer lack of controversy among actual scientists. Practically every scientist I studied in the classroom considered Evolutionary Science to be a foregone conclusion. In fact, long before I was even born, scientists had created an entire foundation of science based completely upon Evolution by Natural Selection. There was no competition, no parallel theories, and no serious controversy. In terms of a conflict between my faith and Science, Science has already kicked my religion's ass.

Intelligent Design seemed at first to offer a alternative Scientific view. At least a small number of moderately well known scientists were backing the theory. It took very little reading of their materials to learn that they offered no Scientific Theory at all. They offered a mild amount of philosophical reasoning for their assumption of a "designer". As I researched each individual scientist, it became clear that practically every one of them had private religious convictions that provided the basic assumption of a designer. They were working backwards from an already well established conclusion with no evidence to support it. No wonder actual Biologists payed them no heed whatsoever, and prevented them from teaching Intelligent Design in public schools.

Although I had been intellectually convinced, I was emotionally unable to follow. I took a page out of my parent's book and denounced the entire business as a conspiracy against faith. (I now understood the necessity of that position in my parents, since without it as a last resort, how would they remain faithful?) The scientists were obviously wrong. God has plainly stated so, and he was far easier to understand. This was the only way I could protect my faith from the absolutely devastating blow it had suffered throughout my research into Evolution. A seed was planted in my mind and heart even if I hadn't known it then.

I took it upon myself to make better arguments for Intelligent Design, since my religion was true, and they had failed to explain it in terms of Biology. My passion for logical argument led me to conflict with some of my classmates. Many arguments broke out over the school year about the origins of mankind. I never felt that I made much progress, since none of them were religious like me.

It wasn't until I studied books on the scientific method in later years that I learned the ignorance of my method. I had formed an opinion with no evidence, and then used that as a staging point for my attack on all opposing positions. As soon as I decided to be intellectually honest and examine the evidence before forming a conclusion, my Creationism fell apart. The science was rock solid, and the evidence was overwhelming in quantity and quality. The seed of my biological education sprouted into a passion for Science. I was no longer blind to the obvious.

This particular subject was a master stroke against my faith. If I had evolved from an ancestor, and was not the product of a divine plan, no other principle of the gospel could be true. All of my religious faith and knowledge hinged upon the existence of a divine plan. Learning that the universe could function perfectly well without such a plan, made belief in God meaningless. I knew there were some who still believed in God while simultaneously accepting the Scientific fact of Evolution. I could not understand it. If God performed no function, not even the creation of the world, he might as well not exist. His existence was made meaningless by his lack of intervention. I will never know for certain if there is a God, but I will always know that it makes absolutely no difference in my life, or any other's, either way.

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness.

-Karl Marx
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Dark Phoenix's post
23-01-2014, 11:45 AM
RE: Questions That Led Me to Atheism #3
(23-01-2014 11:25 AM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  3. Why doesn't Science prove my religion is true?

Throughout my youth, Science was a subject that was common in our home. I had access to many Science books, most especially books about animals, dinosaurs, and planets. All of this was free inquiry available to me at any time, without controversy. I do not mean to say that there was no religious bias, for certainly there was. Every beauty of the universe, every medical advancement, every new technological marvel was taken as evidence of god's majesty and power. I did not think this way naturally, rather I had to hear these arguments from my parents many times before I decided to trust their opinion.

As I grew up I often would listen to my father rant about politics, especially around dinner time. My first exposure to debates regarding Evolution Vs. Creationism began with his constant condemnation of modern biology. It was his opinion that their exists a conspiracy of scientists who actively falsify scientific data in order to reach their ultimate aim of removing god from the world. He would often tell us of how they merely desired an excuse to sin without the fear of God's punishment, so they endeavored to disprove his existence in order to feel better about themselves. he believed that if they could be taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ that they would recognize its truth and would denounce their claims about Evolution. He denounced Darwin as a deathbed convert, therefore nullifying any validity of his Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. It was clear to me, even explicit from his mouth, that he considered Christianity, The Family, and Christian values to be directly under attack from all sides. We were conscripted as Christian soldiers to defend our faith against the madness of the world.

Often a newspaper article would appear on the kitchen table with some headline explaining the most recent victory of evolutionary biology over creationism in the classroom. My father would rant about the freedom of religion that was being so coldly infringed, and the dishonest courts that were continually ruling against those who sought to have Intelligent Design taught in public schools. His endless anger about this "conspiracy" designed to destroy his faith, and that of his children, gave me fear that there were those outside my faith, who wanted to rob me of it. I became wary of those who did not believe as my family did. I endeavored to be constantly vigilant, against what, I did not know. I only knew that I was apprehensive a great deal of the time.

A variety of Anti-Evolution books, and quite a few pro Intelligent Design books made their way to my shelf from my father's collection. I was always an avid reader, especially of subjects so controversial as to be extra interesting. Thus I was armed against the forces of the devil that sought to remove God from my school. I read "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael Behe and "Icons of Evolution, Science or Myth" by Jonathan Wells before I turned fourteen. I found both of these works compelling, especially the argument of molecular irreducible complexity taken by Behe. It made sense to me.

I did not notice back then, but it occurred to me later in life that my Father had no books whatsoever written in support of Evolution. Why? Wouldn't it be important to be at least mildly versed in the opinions of Scientists? I do not know why this line of inquiry was not a pursuit of his.

When I enrolled in my first biology class in high school I found myself spending hours trying to refute everything we learned about The Theory of Evolution. I began with the assumption that God was real, and my religion was true, and then went from there to attempting to disprove those principles of biology that I felt conflicted directly with my opinion.

My teacher clearly noticed my uncomfortable attitude in class, and went out of her way to instruct me in a way that I would understand. She did not condescend, or insult me, rather she seemed genuinely willing to listen to me. She never insisted that I take her word for it. Instead she spent extra time and effort giving me sources to look up, as well as books and articles to read that would help me learn. I inhaled everything she gave me.

Immediately I began to notice the sheer lack of controversy among actual scientists. Practically every scientist I studied in the classroom considered Evolutionary Science to be a foregone conclusion. In fact, long before I was even born, scientists had created an entire foundation of science based completely upon Evolution by Natural Selection. There was no competition, no parallel theories, and no serious controversy. In terms of a conflict between my faith and Science, Science has already kicked my religion's ass.

Intelligent Design seemed at first to offer a alternative Scientific view. At least a small number of moderately well known scientists were backing the theory. It took very little reading of their materials to learn that they offered no Scientific Theory at all. They offered a mild amount of philosophical reasoning for their assumption of a "designer". As I researched each individual scientist, it became clear that practically every one of them had private religious convictions that provided the basic assumption of a designer. They were working backwards from an already well established conclusion with no evidence to support it. No wonder actual Biologists payed them no heed whatsoever, and prevented them from teaching Intelligent Design in public schools.

Although I had been intellectually convinced, I was emotionally unable to follow. I took a page out of my parent's book and denounced the entire business as a conspiracy against faith. (I now understood the necessity of that position in my parents, since without it as a last resort, how would they remain faithful?) The scientists were obviously wrong. God has plainly stated so, and he was far easier to understand. This was the only way I could protect my faith from the absolutely devastating blow it had suffered throughout my research into Evolution. A seed was planted in my mind and heart even if I hadn't known it then.

I took it upon myself to make better arguments for Intelligent Design, since my religion was true, and they had failed to explain it in terms of Biology. My passion for logical argument led me to conflict with some of my classmates. Many arguments broke out over the school year about the origins of mankind. I never felt that I made much progress, since none of them were religious like me.

It wasn't until I studied books on the scientific method in later years that I learned the ignorance of my method. I had formed an opinion with no evidence, and then used that as a staging point for my attack on all opposing positions. As soon as I decided to be intellectually honest and examine the evidence before forming a conclusion, my Creationism fell apart. The science was rock solid, and the evidence was overwhelming in quantity and quality. The seed of my biological education sprouted into a passion for Science. I was no longer blind to the obvious.

This particular subject was a master stroke against my faith. If I had evolved from an ancestor, and was not the product of a divine plan, no other principle of the gospel could be true. All of my religious faith and knowledge hinged upon the existence of a divine plan. Learning that the universe could function perfectly well without such a plan, made belief in God meaningless. I knew there were some who still believed in God while simultaneously accepting the Scientific fact of Evolution. I could not understand it. If God performed no function, not even the creation of the world, he might as well not exist. His existence was made meaningless by his lack of intervention. I will never know for certain if there is a God, but I will always know that it makes absolutely no difference in my life, or any other's, either way.

Nothing the scientist have "proven" has disproven the existence of God.

If God came here and answered every one of your questions and performed every miracle you asked, you could still say that he was just a powerful alien using technology you didn't understand.

If science had to "prove" something in order for something to exists, then why do many people and scientist believe life is on other planets when there is zero evidence that says this is true. Perhaps we are the 1st of many.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 12:52 PM
RE: Questions That Led Me to Atheism #3
(23-01-2014 11:45 AM)anidominus Wrote:  Nothing the scientist have "proven" has disproven the existence of God.

He didn't say that the existence of God was disproven, just that it is an unnecessary hypothesis. It explains nothing.

Quote:If God came here and answered every one of your questions and performed every miracle you asked, you could still say that he was just a powerful alien using technology you didn't understand.

If science had to "prove" something in order for something to exists, then why do many people and scientist believe life is on other planets when there is zero evidence that says this is true. Perhaps we are the 1st of many.

And , no science doesn't prove things. Science builds models that explain. A model (theory) is accepted when it explains what we see.

We might be the only life in the universe, but it seems exceedingly unlikely.
This is based on the number of possible places for life, the amount of time available for life to form. We know that chemical compounds useful or necessary to life as we know it are common in the universe, so that increases the odds that life elsewhere exists.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Chas's post
23-01-2014, 01:09 PM
RE: Questions That Led Me to Atheism #3
(23-01-2014 12:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(23-01-2014 11:45 AM)anidominus Wrote:  Nothing the scientist have "proven" has disproven the existence of God.

He didn't say that the existence of God was disproven, just that it is an unnecessary hypothesis. It explains nothing.

Quote:If God came here and answered every one of your questions and performed every miracle you asked, you could still say that he was just a powerful alien using technology you didn't understand.

If science had to "prove" something in order for something to exists, then why do many people and scientist believe life is on other planets when there is zero evidence that says this is true. Perhaps we are the 1st of many.

And , no science doesn't prove things. Science builds models that explain. A model (theory) is accepted when it explains what we see.

We might be the only life in the universe, but it seems exceedingly unlikely.
This is based on the number of possible places for life, the amount of time available for life to form. We know that chemical compounds useful or necessary to life as we know it are common in the universe, so that increases the odds that life elsewhere exists.

Well, I guess I should have said, Science doesn't have to prove anything, in particular, religion, God or anything else in order for those things to be real.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 01:13 PM
RE: Questions That Led Me to Atheism #3
(23-01-2014 01:09 PM)anidominus Wrote:  Well, I guess I should have said, Science doesn't have to prove anything, in particular, religion, God or anything else in order for those things to be real.
That's correct. Sleepy

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 01:19 PM
RE: Questions That Led Me to Atheism #3
(23-01-2014 01:09 PM)anidominus Wrote:  
(23-01-2014 12:52 PM)Chas Wrote:  He didn't say that the existence of God was disproven, just that it is an unnecessary hypothesis. It explains nothing.


And , no science doesn't prove things. Science builds models that explain. A model (theory) is accepted when it explains what we see.

We might be the only life in the universe, but it seems exceedingly unlikely.
This is based on the number of possible places for life, the amount of time available for life to form. We know that chemical compounds useful or necessary to life as we know it are common in the universe, so that increases the odds that life elsewhere exists.

Well, I guess I should have said, Science doesn't have to prove anything, in particular, religion, God or anything else in order for those things to be real.

There are things that we know are real that we do not have scientific explanations for.

There is something holding galaxies and galaxy groups together that is not accounted for by the observable mass. This has been dubbed 'dark matter' although it may not even be matter. We don't know, yet.

There is something that appears to be making the universe expand at an ever-increasing rate. We don't know what that is, but have dubbed it 'dark energy'. It might not be energy.

We can observe embryos develop and we know that it is directed by DNA, but we don't know all of the mechanisms, or even if only the DNA does it. Yet.

Again, science doesn't prove things.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
23-01-2014, 01:21 PM
RE: Questions That Led Me to Atheism #3
(23-01-2014 11:45 AM)anidominus Wrote:  Nothing the scientist have "proven" has disproven the existence of God.

I do not mean to claim that science has dis-proven the existence of a god, rather I mean to say that my former faith was a failure as a means of determining what is true. My method, beginning with a conclusion already in mind, and then depending upon that conclusion as a staging point to assail all other conclusion, was guaranteed to keep me from learning about reality. I did not genuinely wish to learn at that time, rather I wished to prove that my faith was relevant and factually true. The irony is obvious. I accused science of having an anti-faith agenda, while in reality, I was the one with the agenda.

When you stop using faith as a means to determine what is true or accurate, belief in any kind of god becomes optional and irrelevant. Why bother disproving what has no meaning for anyone? Without literal truth and actual intercession, what is there left to worship?


Quote:If God came here and answered every one of your questions and performed every miracle you asked, you could still say that he was just a powerful alien using technology you didn't understand.

Which god are we talking about here?


Quote:If science had to "prove" something in order for something to exists, then why do many people and scientist believe life is on other planets when there is zero evidence that says this is true. Perhaps we are the 1st of many.

I do not know what life may exist in the universe. I suppose I could choose to believe it, if I really cared, but I am content with not knowing. This kind of belief, in something for which we do not have any evidence, is as irrelevant as the existence of god. Although some people may hold both beliefs in private, were they to be exposed to scientific criticism, they would have no firm ground to stand on. In this way, belief in god, or alien life, are on par with mere hope, rather than fact.

Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness.

-Karl Marx
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 01:54 PM
RE: Questions That Led Me to Atheism #3
(23-01-2014 01:09 PM)anidominus Wrote:  Well, I guess I should have said, Science doesn't have to prove anything, in particular, religion, God or anything else in order for those things to be real.

No, but it does beg the question why it's written in one of the gospels that Jesus performed the miracles (and many others not written down) so that others would believe.

One wonders why, supposedly, 2,000 years ago, God was performing verifiable miracles in a small corner of the world to gain followers, but that he then stopped.

It's not so much a matter of whether or not we can disprove God with science; it's more a matter why he isn't readily apparent. The whole notion of faith being super important is an ad hoc justification to explain the fact that people can't actually see this super-important being... despite him going way out of his way to prove his own existence to a few people two thousand years ago.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes RobbyPants's post
23-01-2014, 02:18 PM
RE: Questions That Led Me to Atheism #3
(23-01-2014 01:21 PM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  
(23-01-2014 11:45 AM)anidominus Wrote:  Nothing the scientist have "proven" has disproven the existence of God.

I do not mean to claim that science has dis-proven the existence of a god, rather I mean to say that my former faith was a failure as a means of determining what is true. My method, beginning with a conclusion already in mind, and then depending upon that conclusion as a staging point to assail all other conclusion, was guaranteed to keep me from learning about reality. I did not genuinely wish to learn at that time, rather I wished to prove that my faith was relevant and factually true. The irony is obvious. I accused science of having an anti-faith agenda, while in reality, I was the one with the agenda.

When you stop using faith as a means to determine what is true or accurate, belief in any kind of god becomes optional and irrelevant. Why bother disproving what has no meaning for anyone? Without literal truth and actual intercession, what is there left to worship?


Quote:If God came here and answered every one of your questions and performed every miracle you asked, you could still say that he was just a powerful alien using technology you didn't understand.

Which god are we talking about here?


Quote:If science had to "prove" something in order for something to exists, then why do many people and scientist believe life is on other planets when there is zero evidence that says this is true. Perhaps we are the 1st of many.

I do not know what life may exist in the universe. I suppose I could choose to believe it, if I really cared, but I am content with not knowing. This kind of belief, in something for which we do not have any evidence, is as irrelevant as the existence of god. Although some people may hold both beliefs in private, were they to be exposed to scientific criticism, they would have no firm ground to stand on. In this way, belief in god, or alien life, are on par with mere hope, rather than fact.

Everything your saying leads me to believe that you grew up having no idea what faith was. Faith isn't going to prove anything. I will explain best I can what faith is.

Faith is believing this item you just made will earn you a million dollars and then maintaining the confidence, the behavior, swagger, and work ethic as if this is true without doing something stupid like writing a check for a million dollars without the money being in the bank first.

People use faith all the time, atheist alike. Its how everything huge gets done. Faith got us to the moon.

So, have Faith in God. I don't know how else to explain it.

It doesn't matter "which God".
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
23-01-2014, 02:43 PM
RE: Questions That Led Me to Atheism #3
(23-01-2014 11:45 AM)anidominus Wrote:  
(23-01-2014 11:25 AM)Dark Phoenix Wrote:  3. Why doesn't Science prove my religion is true?

Throughout my youth, Science was a subject that was common in our home. I had access to many Science books, most especially books about animals, dinosaurs, and planets. All of this was free inquiry available to me at any time, without controversy. I do not mean to say that there was no religious bias, for certainly there was. Every beauty of the universe, every medical advancement, every new technological marvel was taken as evidence of god's majesty and power. I did not think this way naturally, rather I had to hear these arguments from my parents many times before I decided to trust their opinion.

As I grew up I often would listen to my father rant about politics, especially around dinner time. My first exposure to debates regarding Evolution Vs. Creationism began with his constant condemnation of modern biology. It was his opinion that their exists a conspiracy of scientists who actively falsify scientific data in order to reach their ultimate aim of removing god from the world. He would often tell us of how they merely desired an excuse to sin without the fear of God's punishment, so they endeavored to disprove his existence in order to feel better about themselves. he believed that if they could be taught the Gospel of Jesus Christ that they would recognize its truth and would denounce their claims about Evolution. He denounced Darwin as a deathbed convert, therefore nullifying any validity of his Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection. It was clear to me, even explicit from his mouth, that he considered Christianity, The Family, and Christian values to be directly under attack from all sides. We were conscripted as Christian soldiers to defend our faith against the madness of the world.

Often a newspaper article would appear on the kitchen table with some headline explaining the most recent victory of evolutionary biology over creationism in the classroom. My father would rant about the freedom of religion that was being so coldly infringed, and the dishonest courts that were continually ruling against those who sought to have Intelligent Design taught in public schools. His endless anger about this "conspiracy" designed to destroy his faith, and that of his children, gave me fear that there were those outside my faith, who wanted to rob me of it. I became wary of those who did not believe as my family did. I endeavored to be constantly vigilant, against what, I did not know. I only knew that I was apprehensive a great deal of the time.

A variety of Anti-Evolution books, and quite a few pro Intelligent Design books made their way to my shelf from my father's collection. I was always an avid reader, especially of subjects so controversial as to be extra interesting. Thus I was armed against the forces of the devil that sought to remove God from my school. I read "Darwin's Black Box" by Michael Behe and "Icons of Evolution, Science or Myth" by Jonathan Wells before I turned fourteen. I found both of these works compelling, especially the argument of molecular irreducible complexity taken by Behe. It made sense to me.

I did not notice back then, but it occurred to me later in life that my Father had no books whatsoever written in support of Evolution. Why? Wouldn't it be important to be at least mildly versed in the opinions of Scientists? I do not know why this line of inquiry was not a pursuit of his.

When I enrolled in my first biology class in high school I found myself spending hours trying to refute everything we learned about The Theory of Evolution. I began with the assumption that God was real, and my religion was true, and then went from there to attempting to disprove those principles of biology that I felt conflicted directly with my opinion.

My teacher clearly noticed my uncomfortable attitude in class, and went out of her way to instruct me in a way that I would understand. She did not condescend, or insult me, rather she seemed genuinely willing to listen to me. She never insisted that I take her word for it. Instead she spent extra time and effort giving me sources to look up, as well as books and articles to read that would help me learn. I inhaled everything she gave me.

Immediately I began to notice the sheer lack of controversy among actual scientists. Practically every scientist I studied in the classroom considered Evolutionary Science to be a foregone conclusion. In fact, long before I was even born, scientists had created an entire foundation of science based completely upon Evolution by Natural Selection. There was no competition, no parallel theories, and no serious controversy. In terms of a conflict between my faith and Science, Science has already kicked my religion's ass.

Intelligent Design seemed at first to offer a alternative Scientific view. At least a small number of moderately well known scientists were backing the theory. It took very little reading of their materials to learn that they offered no Scientific Theory at all. They offered a mild amount of philosophical reasoning for their assumption of a "designer". As I researched each individual scientist, it became clear that practically every one of them had private religious convictions that provided the basic assumption of a designer. They were working backwards from an already well established conclusion with no evidence to support it. No wonder actual Biologists payed them no heed whatsoever, and prevented them from teaching Intelligent Design in public schools.

Although I had been intellectually convinced, I was emotionally unable to follow. I took a page out of my parent's book and denounced the entire business as a conspiracy against faith. (I now understood the necessity of that position in my parents, since without it as a last resort, how would they remain faithful?) The scientists were obviously wrong. God has plainly stated so, and he was far easier to understand. This was the only way I could protect my faith from the absolutely devastating blow it had suffered throughout my research into Evolution. A seed was planted in my mind and heart even if I hadn't known it then.

I took it upon myself to make better arguments for Intelligent Design, since my religion was true, and they had failed to explain it in terms of Biology. My passion for logical argument led me to conflict with some of my classmates. Many arguments broke out over the school year about the origins of mankind. I never felt that I made much progress, since none of them were religious like me.

It wasn't until I studied books on the scientific method in later years that I learned the ignorance of my method. I had formed an opinion with no evidence, and then used that as a staging point for my attack on all opposing positions. As soon as I decided to be intellectually honest and examine the evidence before forming a conclusion, my Creationism fell apart. The science was rock solid, and the evidence was overwhelming in quantity and quality. The seed of my biological education sprouted into a passion for Science. I was no longer blind to the obvious.

This particular subject was a master stroke against my faith. If I had evolved from an ancestor, and was not the product of a divine plan, no other principle of the gospel could be true. All of my religious faith and knowledge hinged upon the existence of a divine plan. Learning that the universe could function perfectly well without such a plan, made belief in God meaningless. I knew there were some who still believed in God while simultaneously accepting the Scientific fact of Evolution. I could not understand it. If God performed no function, not even the creation of the world, he might as well not exist. His existence was made meaningless by his lack of intervention. I will never know for certain if there is a God, but I will always know that it makes absolutely no difference in my life, or any other's, either way.

Nothing the scientist have "proven" has disproven the existence of God.

If God came here and answered every one of your questions and performed every miracle you asked, you could still say that he was just a powerful alien using technology you didn't understand.

If science had to "prove" something in order for something to exists, then why do many people and scientist believe life is on other planets when there is zero evidence that says this is true. Perhaps we are the 1st of many.

We know for a fact that we are on a planet, orbiting a fairly typical star... The fact life has evolved here suggests that under the right conditions, life could evolve on other planets. The sheer number of stars (estimated at about 10 sextillion), the majority of which appear to have planetary systems, means an extremely high chance of Earth-like conditions occurring many, many times over.

Whether or not life will evolve on those planets is less certain, but we know for a fact that its at least possible.

Also, life is known to thrive in surprisingly hostile environments... Suggesting that planets with more extreme conditions may also harbor life.

While this isn't definitive proof of alien life, considering the sheer number of opportunities for it to arise, its quite a reasonable thing to consider its existence likely.

[img]

via GIPHY

[/img]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: