creat-volution

Heh. & what's up with gravity? I fell down once.

 

Right. Sometimes it seems like creationists take the belief in evolutionary theory as some kind of personal affront. As if we purposefully and stubbornly refuse to accept their irrational theories because they are so christian-y. It belies an absolute ignorance of what inspires the acquisition of scientific knowledge - that which is passion. Christians don't own the copyright.

 

I suspect our purpose creates our stubbornness. It seems to me the goddists are lazy.

 

We hold our own copyrights, right?

 

what about Stephen Hawking. he thinks that God is a very real possibility (in terms of being the Creator)

http://www.examiner.com/creationism-in-atlanta/does-stephen-hawking-believe-god

 

/I'm going to hell

 

There's a very real possibility I'll join you there.

 

I've been to France, so I can confirm it's real. Here's the thing though, you've never seen ME so am I real?

 

You couldn't do that if you weren't. ...I've been to Paris both ways, but not in reality.

 

No, but I've seen a boot. Shouldn't Italy be the shape of pizza? Fishy, don't you think?

 

so all of you reject the possibility of a God?

Not looking for an explaination just a declaration, a yes or no.

And yes there is a middle

 

Every religion has a version of the creation story. Most predate the Judeo-Christian tradition. The Chinese, Norse, Greeks, Mesopotamians... everybody had one. Heck, the Egyptians kept rewriting theirs. Pick one and defend it to the death against all evidence.

The people living on the eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea had a bunch of stories, passed down through the generations. These stories were the attempt to explain the world by simple nomads and tribesmen. They were collected and assembled into a book, called Genesis. A culture was built around this book, and, eventually, a religion.

A very vocal portion of our population would have the whole world mindlessly accept the story that some ancient nomadic father made up to quiet his inquisitive child, rather than try to make sense of the evidence at hand. By that logic, we should still be working with stone axes and communicating by beating drums.

The thing about evolution... keep tracking backward, all the way to the Big Bang (theory) and postulate beyond. Everything came from something. I think that is where many scientists find God, or keep looking for him.

 

A true skeptic, or a scientist, would not reject the possibility of a god, no. The probability, based on what we know, is low. The probability of the gods that have been proposed by religions so far, is very, very low. The possibility/probability of most, based on contradictions in the texts of these religions, is exactly zero.

As grumpyolddude aludes to above, we have been looking for a god in the gaps of our knowledge, and as we've looked we have found answers that have no need of the deity. So why propose one at all, until we find evidence of a deity?

 

Reject the possibility? No. Because I can no more prove that there is not a god, then you can prove there is one (without requiring me to take a leap of faith).

 

It's my understanding that Islam accepts the Old Testament, so I would assume that Genesis is their working view on creation. Not a scholar on world religions, though.

 

The existence of a god and the theory of evolution aren't mutually exclusive. There is nothing to prove or disprove whether God or sheer happenstance caused the big bang to occur (if you believe that such a thing happened).

Scientists make guesses on what happened (and happens) based on the available evidence. Religions ask people to have faith that God exists, without any clear evidence to back up that claim.

and I've also been to France, and I guess I flew somewhere near Italy. Nebraska on the other hand? That place is a myth!

 

The last refuge of the religious is to say god is responsible for science.

The other team, of course, tends to think science has made us gods.

 

Don't point that comment at me. I'm an atheist.