I have noticed that sometimes people with a scientific mind, people who have studied a lot and know a lot of information about different sciences, do not notice simple things that do not escape the attention of ordinary people, even if they have studied less or almost nothing.
For example, the fact that the animals that evolutionists call "lower" in the evolutionary scale still live alongside humans, and that others supposedly fitter, because they are located in a higher position in the evolutionary line of man, no longer exist.
Evolutionary theory holds that as animals progressed up the evolutionary scale, they became more capable of surviving. Why, then, is the “inferior” ape family still in existence, but not a single one of the presumed intermediate forms, which were supposed to be more advanced in evolution? Today we see chimpanzees, gorillas and orangutans, but no “ape-men.” Does it seem likely that every one of the more recent and supposedly more advanced “links” between apelike creatures and modern man should have become extinct, but not the lower apes? https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/1101985017
To what extent do you think the "wisdom" of this system of things can cloud a person's mind?
Scientific thinking and common sense
Moderator: Moderators
-
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1082
- Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2022 7:37 pm
- Has thanked: 53 times
- Been thanked: 91 times
Re: Scientific thinking and common sense
Post #301When God shows you, you will remember my words.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Tue Oct 04, 2022 11:06 pmIt's a shame the only thing God has to fight against the darkness is a dim bulb.
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2572 times
Re: Scientific thinking and common sense
Post #302The liar lies, and the preacher preaches.kjw47 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 9:18 pmWhen God shows you, you will remember my words.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Tue Oct 04, 2022 11:06 pmIt's a shame the only thing God has to fight against the darkness is a dim bulb.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
- Clownboat
- Savant
- Posts: 9385
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2008 3:42 pm
- Has thanked: 911 times
- Been thanked: 1261 times
Re: Scientific thinking and common sense
Post #303You don't offer evidence that your claims are true. Therefore they are in fact empty claims.
Holy Books don't count as evidence here.
I believe I understand as to why man has created religions. I understand there are humans that have a need to have answers to questions that religions provide (why and how are we here, what happens when we die etc...). My mother is one such person. She needs to think she knows about such unknowns as it provides comfort to her and I get that, even though I don't share the need.You see this is a debate sight-the darkness stands on one side, and i stand for God and his truth.
Feel free to believe in whatever god concept makes you happy, but why can't you do it without making enemies (the darkness stands on the one side) out of everyone that doesn't share in your religious beliefs? You have providing a wonderful example of the division that religions cause. Ironic no, coming from a religion of love?
Again, I understand your need to have a religion, what I don't understand is the seeming desire to make enemies of those who do not subscribe to a believe you choose to believe in. The division caused by religions is unjustified IMO, but you keep right on displaying it for us all if you can't help yourself.
Only when mothers and fathers stop telling their children that there is a god that loves them so much, as to send them to a heaven, yet hates another so much, as to send them to an eternal hell will we ever stop the violence and bloodshed caused by religious beliefs. And yet, you believe that I'm on the side of darkness. Something about a plank in ones own eye comes to mind.
Be well.
You can give a man a fish and he will be fed for a day, or you can teach a man to pray for fish and he will starve to death.
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
I blame man for codifying those rules into a book which allowed superstitious people to perpetuate a barbaric practice. Rules that must be followed or face an invisible beings wrath. - KenRU
It is sad that in an age of freedom some people are enslaved by the nomads of old. - Marco
If you are unable to demonstrate that what you believe is true and you absolve yourself of the burden of proof, then what is the purpose of your arguments? - brunumb
- Inquirer
- Banned
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 6:03 pm
- Has thanked: 23 times
- Been thanked: 30 times
Re: Scientific thinking and common sense
Post #304It's rather odd that you say this because you and others regularly offer it as evidence of erroneous history, distorted morality and superstition, that's not equitable - you can cite it as evidence for your claims but others can't cite it as evidence for theirs...
- Diagoras
- Guru
- Posts: 1392
- Joined: Fri Jun 21, 2019 12:47 am
- Has thanked: 170 times
- Been thanked: 579 times
Re: Scientific thinking and common sense
Post #305Compare this with:Inquirer wrote: ↑Thu Oct 06, 2022 12:57 pmIt's rather odd that you say this because you and others regularly offer it as evidence of erroneous history, distorted morality and superstition, that's not equitable - you can cite it as evidence for your claims but others can't cite it as evidence for theirs...
<bolding mine>The guidelines for this forum wrote:While posters may certainly take positions based on religious doctrine, the Bible or other religious writings are not to be considered evidence for scientific claims.
The ‘for’ is the crucial point here. You haven’t shown any evidence of a non-theist ignoring this guideline. The three types of evidence you reference are of errors in the Bible itself, not of any scientific fact or theory.
-
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1082
- Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2022 7:37 pm
- Has thanked: 53 times
- Been thanked: 91 times
Re: Scientific thinking and common sense
Post #306JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 10:03 pmThe liar lies, and the preacher preaches.kjw47 wrote: ↑Wed Oct 05, 2022 9:18 pmWhen God shows you, you will remember my words.JoeyKnothead wrote: ↑Tue Oct 04, 2022 11:06 pmIt's a shame the only thing God has to fight against the darkness is a dim bulb.
I am the preacher
-
- Under Probation
- Posts: 1082
- Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2022 7:37 pm
- Has thanked: 53 times
- Been thanked: 91 times
Re: Scientific thinking and common sense
Post #307You cannot disprove a word i say, so then you are in the same boat. Except i am correct.Clownboat wrote: ↑Thu Oct 06, 2022 12:48 pmYou don't offer evidence that your claims are true. Therefore they are in fact empty claims.
Holy Books don't count as evidence here.
I believe I understand as to why man has created religions. I understand there are humans that have a need to have answers to questions that religions provide (why and how are we here, what happens when we die etc...). My mother is one such person. She needs to think she knows about such unknowns as it provides comfort to her and I get that, even though I don't share the need.You see this is a debate sight-the darkness stands on one side, and i stand for God and his truth.
Feel free to believe in whatever god concept makes you happy, but why can't you do it without making enemies (the darkness stands on the one side) out of everyone that doesn't share in your religious beliefs? You have providing a wonderful example of the division that religions cause. Ironic no, coming from a religion of love?
Again, I understand your need to have a religion, what I don't understand is the seeming desire to make enemies of those who do not subscribe to a believe you choose to believe in. The division caused by religions is unjustified IMO, but you keep right on displaying it for us all if you can't help yourself.
Only when mothers and fathers stop telling their children that there is a god that loves them so much, as to send them to a heaven, yet hates another so much, as to send them to an eternal hell will we ever stop the violence and bloodshed caused by religious beliefs. And yet, you believe that I'm on the side of darkness. Something about a plank in ones own eye comes to mind.
Be well.
- JoeyKnothead
- Banned
- Posts: 20879
- Joined: Fri Jun 06, 2008 10:59 am
- Location: Here
- Has thanked: 4093 times
- Been thanked: 2572 times
Re: Scientific thinking and common sense
Post #308I find it interesting you felt the need to tell which one.
I might be Teddy Roosevelt, but I ain't.
-Punkinhead Martin
-Punkinhead Martin
- Inquirer
- Banned
- Posts: 1012
- Joined: Tue May 31, 2022 6:03 pm
- Has thanked: 23 times
- Been thanked: 30 times
Re: Scientific thinking and common sense
Post #309Let's be very very clear, are you affirming that no atheist has used the Bible to support a scientific argument or claim in the science area of the forum? Is that the proposition you believe you can defend?Diagoras wrote: ↑Thu Oct 06, 2022 4:07 pmCompare this with:Inquirer wrote: ↑Thu Oct 06, 2022 12:57 pmIt's rather odd that you say this because you and others regularly offer it as evidence of erroneous history, distorted morality and superstition, that's not equitable - you can cite it as evidence for your claims but others can't cite it as evidence for theirs...
<bolding mine>The guidelines for this forum wrote:While posters may certainly take positions based on religious doctrine, the Bible or other religious writings are not to be considered evidence for scientific claims.
The ‘for’ is the crucial point here. You haven’t shown any evidence of a non-theist ignoring this guideline. The three types of evidence you reference are of errors in the Bible itself, not of any scientific fact or theory.
- DrNoGods
- Prodigy
- Posts: 2716
- Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2017 2:18 pm
- Location: Nevada
- Has thanked: 593 times
- Been thanked: 1642 times
Re: Scientific thinking and common sense
Post #310[Replying to Inquirer in post #309]
Can you provide an example of this? I don't recall ever seeing any such thing, but there are plenty of debates where science has been used to debunk biblical claims (eg. Noah's flood). Never seen an atheist use the bible to support a scientific argument or claim though ... I'm not sure how that would even work.... are you affirming that no atheist has used the Bible to support a scientific argument or claim in the science area of the forum?
In human affairs the sources of success are ever to be found in the fountains of quick resolve and swift stroke; and it seems to be a law, inflexible and inexorable, that he who will not risk cannot win.
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain
John Paul Jones, 1779
The man who does not read has no advantage over the man who cannot read.
Mark Twain