Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Creationism vs. Evolution, Live Tonight @ 7PM


605 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

I agree with a decent amount of what you guys say, and I think in the end it's hard for us to have this conversation because of comprehension issues of where i'm coming from due to differences in personal perspectives. It's all good though, these conversations are fun. My views on things are based around what makes sense to me due to my personal experiences/understandings, and is what I see at the moment as being the most likely scenario...but that doesn't mean I 100%, or even 90%, believe it to actually be so. In the end I feel like no one knows sh*t, and all we're doing is making our best guesses from angles that may not even be relevant to the big picture. If this stuff was simple we would've figured it out by now at this point in history. But when you start contemplating concepts like "space going on forever, and what exactly is forever...and if it doesn't go on forever, what's after it...or is there just nothing...and what really is the concept of nothing," then you realize that there are some things out there that perhaps we're never meant to learn, and perhaps don't have the capacity to learn in the first place. At that point, for all we know this is a giant computer simulation called "Life on Earth" that can never be answered as long as we're in the middle of it.

 

I wouldn't say we don't know sh*t.

 

To paraphrase Drake on his equation, "We know enough to categorize our ignorance."

 

 

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I wouldn't say we don't know sh*t.

To paraphrase Drake on his equation, "We know enough to categorize our ignorance."


Well done. I believe arrogance is the fatal flaw of mankind.

We should always strive to learn more and never be content with what we know.
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It's really simple.

You want to credit a god for something, prove it exists. Then prove it has the required qualities/attributes. Then prove that that god actually did whatever it is that you're claiming. Until you do all of that, nobody should believe you and I will laugh at you for being ridiculous.

Sent from my SCH-S738C using CarolinaHuddle mobile app

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It's really that easy. You know what you know and you don't what you don't. Belief is not part of that simple idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I have had a couple folks agree with Ham and say he has a better argument.

Geographic assumptions are usually correct in these opinions.

 

 

 

*sits in his big boy chair of believing God and Evolution do not have to be mutually exclusive*

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

evidence pertains to science which pertains to concepts of empiricism stemming from the enlightenment, all of which naturally imply observation, and it's pretty obvious God is not observable, so your question can be rejected in its entiretey

 

 

That  depends on your interpretation of what you are viewing.  Not all is completely understood. Why do things happen as they do? Some see chance, random events, causes of and effects layering on top of each other.   Others see that same portrait of life and see a grand design.

 

I'm a big fan of The Watchmaker argument and I understand it's refutations.

 

This does not preclude me from looking deeper and in looking deeper I don't neglect the possibility of there being a "grand Designer".

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

There's a possibility my cat is God, I cannot prove or disprove this idea.

It has exactly the same weight as any other non provable argument. But the odds of it being correct are quite small so I don't spend much time thinking about it and concentrate on what I know instead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

There's a possibility my cat is God, I cannot prove or disprove this idea.

It has exactly the same weight as any other non provable argument. But the odds of it being correct are quite small so I don't spend much time thinking about it and concentrate on what I know instead.

 

 

and to me, that is perfectly fine.

 

 

 

I tend to search internally for answers, in quiet moments and prayer or short meditation. I've had dark moments in my faith. I've had moments where I feel I was being moved by a guiding hand.   I fail in the definition most Christians in the fact I am not pushy towards Atheists and those who follow other paths in their spirituality (I'm also a cursing horn dog but I digress). I think the argument/conversation becomes inflamed when the game of one-upmanship takes hold and ends any relevant dialog.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

That  depends on your interpretation of what you are viewing.  Not all is completely understood. Why do things happen as they do? Some see chance, random events, causes of and effects layering on top of each other.   Others see that same portrait of life and see a grand design.

 

I'm a big fan of The Watchmaker argument and I understand it's refutations.

 

This does not preclude me from looking deeper and in looking deeper I don't neglect the possibility of there being a "grand Designer".

 

paley's watchmaker argument has long been debunked

 

and i'm not saying god cannot be supported, i'm saying tangible evidence cannot be considered evidence for god, because god is not tangible. philosophical arguments tend to be the most cogent IMO... but the nature of god and the nature of empirical evidence is such that the one can never possibly "prove" the other because they're operating on fundamentally different planes of existence.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It seems a lot of people like to debate these topics purely for the opportunity of making someone else look stupid. I guess that's the tinderbox in general for you though.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

It seems a lot of people like to debate these topics purely for the opportunity of making someone else look stupid. I guess that's the tinderbox in general for you though.


Seems to be a recurring coincidence, huh?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites