Comment My goodness, where to begin... (Score 1) 477
At the beginning, I suppose:
Many evolutionists operate under the faith that evolution occured and it occurred purely through natural processes.
It is not "faith" if it is supported by MOUNTAINS of evidence, as evolution theory is.
No divine or other intervention has been involved.
This is not what most people who actually understand the science say. What they do say is something along the lines of, "There is no evidence of a higher power."
Any attempt to suggest teaching people otherwise is met with stiff and dogmatic resistance.
Again, there is no evidence of the divine, that's why it shouldn't be taught in science class.
It has not been absolutely proved that only natural processes have brought about our current situation, ergo faith is involved.
Science doesn't absolutely prove anything. Your saying it should belies a basic misunderstanding of what science is.
They may believe that all the evidence points to their conclution, but it is still faith.
Just because you (and others of your ilk) continue to say it over and over doesn't make it so. If, at a murder trial, the murder weapon is found at the suspect's home with the suspect's fingerprints on it, the victim's blood is found in the suspect's car, the suspect was seen entering the victim's home just before the time of death and seen leaving just after, and the suspect was the victim's ex-boyfriend, and the victim's friends said she had just broken up with him, is it "faith" to hand down a guilty verdict? If so, you have a very different definition of "faith" than I do (or any dictionary you care to mention).
Why do you set your alarm clock in the morning? Because you have faith that it will work, that the sun will rise, that your job will still exist, etc. You have no absolute proof of this, but you have pretty good evidence that these things will be so.
This is absolute bollocks and leaves me wondering why I even debate with someone like you. Not only would my alarm clock and my company suddenly have to cease to function overnight, the very solar system would have to cease to function. If you call that "faith", then it is a completely different kind of faith from religious faith, and the two shouldn't be compared as you are attempting to do.
But that is not to say that evidence for a creator is moot.
Please offer us some empirical evidence of a deity.
Some are so entrenched that they cannot see anything but what they want to see...
Now there's something we agree upon.
Many evolutionists operate under the faith that evolution occured and it occurred purely through natural processes.
It is not "faith" if it is supported by MOUNTAINS of evidence, as evolution theory is.
No divine or other intervention has been involved.
This is not what most people who actually understand the science say. What they do say is something along the lines of, "There is no evidence of a higher power."
Any attempt to suggest teaching people otherwise is met with stiff and dogmatic resistance.
Again, there is no evidence of the divine, that's why it shouldn't be taught in science class.
It has not been absolutely proved that only natural processes have brought about our current situation, ergo faith is involved.
Science doesn't absolutely prove anything. Your saying it should belies a basic misunderstanding of what science is.
They may believe that all the evidence points to their conclution, but it is still faith.
Just because you (and others of your ilk) continue to say it over and over doesn't make it so. If, at a murder trial, the murder weapon is found at the suspect's home with the suspect's fingerprints on it, the victim's blood is found in the suspect's car, the suspect was seen entering the victim's home just before the time of death and seen leaving just after, and the suspect was the victim's ex-boyfriend, and the victim's friends said she had just broken up with him, is it "faith" to hand down a guilty verdict? If so, you have a very different definition of "faith" than I do (or any dictionary you care to mention).
Why do you set your alarm clock in the morning? Because you have faith that it will work, that the sun will rise, that your job will still exist, etc. You have no absolute proof of this, but you have pretty good evidence that these things will be so.
This is absolute bollocks and leaves me wondering why I even debate with someone like you. Not only would my alarm clock and my company suddenly have to cease to function overnight, the very solar system would have to cease to function. If you call that "faith", then it is a completely different kind of faith from religious faith, and the two shouldn't be compared as you are attempting to do.
But that is not to say that evidence for a creator is moot.
Please offer us some empirical evidence of a deity.
Some are so entrenched that they cannot see anything but what they want to see...
Now there's something we agree upon.
"Intelligent Design" doesn't move anything forward, it is a political movement consisting of nothing but empty speculation based on religion.
