The Genius of Charles Darwin

Ehhem


[wiki=Issac_Newton]Wiki article[/wiki]


I don't believe that creationism (Intelligent Design) is all that bad for the scientific development of society. After all look at Issac Newton's list of accomplishments!

Newton is a great example. He did some marvelous physics when it came to celestial bodies. Beautiful physics. However, there came a point where he couldn't explain certain motions, he was stymied. So, that's where his quotation kinda comes from, he explained the parts that he couldn't explain with 'angels do it'.

Luckily for us, within ~100 years someone built upon Newton's work (stood on the shoulders of giants, for sure) who then explained all those unknowns that stymied Newton to the point where he said "God does it".

We see that over and over in science. There are a lot of instances where a spiritual explanation seems best and so people use the spiritual explanation. However (I've personally seen it over and over) there actually was a physical explanation for the event, and the people just couldn't see it. Usually because they stopped looking.
 
I don't think we can assert there is no God/higher dimensional being/ whatever based on the absence of evidence. However, I do think we can assert that earthly religious concepts of higher beings and the spiritual realm (plus the Universe in general) are most likely off the mark, because they do make testable claims (like claim of a personal god (some), miracles, etc).
 
I don't think we can assert there is no God/higher dimensional being/ whatever based on the absence of evidence.

There is also an absence of evidence that my bedroom is full of invisible & half-naked czech cheerleaders..

"Just because there isn't any evidence for it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist" is not a very good argument..
 
Depending on what poll you use, two-thirds to three-quarters of Americans don't believe in evolution. Last time I looked, democracy was about the will of the majority. If the majority want their kids taught creationism, why should the will of the majority be ignored?

If the majority of the American population thought that the square root of 10 was a hamburger, should that be taught in schools?
 
I don't think we can assert there is no God/higher dimensional being/ whatever based on the absence of evidence. However, I do think we can assert that earthly religious concepts of higher beings and the spiritual realm (plus the Universe in general) are most likely off the mark, because they do make testable claims (like claim of a personal god (some), miracles, etc).

Ever heard of Russell's teapot?
 
Ah, the good old creationism/evolution argument. Never ends, does it? Just let me say this: athiests are more common than you think. As an example, though 85% of Danes attend the Lutheran church, in a poll only 21% of Danes said "They believe in a personal god"
 
If the majority of the American population thought that the square root of 10 was a hamburger, should that be taught in schools?

I guess it should, maybe. Ideally, you don't need a democratic concensus to teach evolution. You just need a democratic concensus to teach what the experts have learned, and then evolution get taught that way.
 
If the majority of the American population thought that the square root of 10 was a hamburger, should that be taught in schools?

No it should not. Unless the majority of the Experts , Mathematicians ,etc thought so and proved it to be so. Maybe this is more Elitist, than Democratic but when in a Democracy the population is not educated at all some Elitism is the short term answer to it until the Education system changes.
 
I don't think we can assert there is no God/higher dimensional being/ whatever based on the absence of evidence.
There is also an absence of evidence that my bedroom is full of invisible & half-naked czech cheerleaders..

"Just because there isn't any evidence for it doesn't mean that it doesn't exist" is not a very good argument..

I don't think we can assert there is no God/higher dimensional being/ whatever based on the absence of evidence. However, I do think we can assert that earthly religious concepts of higher beings and the spiritual realm (plus the Universe in general) are most likely off the mark, because they do make testable claims (like claim of a personal god (some), miracles, etc).
Ever heard of Russell's teapot?

My sincere and unshakable faith in the existence and divinity of congregations of half-naked cheerleaders in warpus's room, which is situated in a giant invisibly pink teapot-esque structure orbiting the sun in the outer rims of the Oort Cloud; solidifies the foundation of my morality, dictates my daily religious rituals and prohibitions, and informs everything that I do.
 
You'd better join my separatist doctrine, you heretic. MY invisible cheerleaders are FULLY naked!

Infidel. We only require the better half naked. My prophet demand that you cloth the obscenely demonic half, with holy transparent cloth of course.
 
Infidel. We only require the better half naked. My prophet demand that you cloth the obscenely demonic half, with holy transparent cloth of course.

I on the other hand use cloth will holes , instead. That is the only way half naked Cheerleaders of my bedroom should dress !
 
Oh my... my cat cult may have some competition. Still, it's somewhat more developped and unified.
 
Infidel. We only require the better half naked. My prophet demand that you cloth the obscenely demonic half, with holy transparent cloth of course.

I on the other hand use cloth will holes , instead. That is the only way half naked Cheerleaders of my bedroom should dress !

We Fullists scoff at your Halfist theories spouted by your so-called prophets, be you Transparentist Halfists or Holey Halfists.
 
I on the other hand use cloth will holes , instead. That is the only way half naked Cheerleaders of my bedroom should dress !

Oddly, my prophet informed me that your heretic practices are to be tolerated due to our new Edict of Ecumenism, unless you exposed the wrong half. Teapot is Great!

Oh my... my cat cult may have some competition. Still, it's somewhat more developped and unified.

Nonsense. However 'developed' or elaborate your false messiah's occult practices, it cannot compare to the pure joy, intimacy and estacy we derive with our sanctified daily ceremony of 'communion' with our cheerleaders. My 'argument from personal fulfillment and incredulity' nullifies your claims and pronounce that your bestial rituals shall be condemnable by 'Stoning by Oort Cloud Asteroids'.
 
Nonsense. However 'developed' or elaborate your false messiah's occult practices, it cannot compare to the pure joy, intimacy and estacy we derive with our sanctified daily ceremony of 'communion' with our cheerleaders. My 'argument from personal fulfillment and incredulity' nullifies your claims and pronounce that your bestial rituals shall be condemnable by 'Stoning by Oort Cloud Asteroids'.

Ah, but we have more fulfilling explanations! cheerleaders are temporary, this will explain everything:
In the beginning, there was nothing. (except for gypsies, according to my brother) Then dead baby seaturtles came from the future in a time-travelling submarine powerred by a radio active nose. But these were from the future, so they had fur. And in the fur was cotton seeds. As there was nothing there, whatever the dead baby seaturtles thought became true, and they thought of a field. The cotton seeds fell into the field and evolved into a fabric: the fabric of the universe. This combined into a great tapestry. As the Irish make tapesries, Leprechauns appeared. But everything they made floated away, so they made the Earth and hold everything down. Oh, and there isn't an Oort cloud. Space is just a gian plasma screen television.
hah! Counter that!
 
Back
Top Bottom