Understanding through Discussion

Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 77 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-25-2019 8:33 AM
26 online now:
AZPaul3, Heathen, PaulK, RAZD, Tangle, Theodoric (6 members, 20 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 850,195 Year: 5,232/19,786 Month: 1,354/873 Week: 250/460 Day: 2/64 Hour: 1/0

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Author Topic:   Use of Science to Support Creationism
Member (Idle past 1507 days)
Posts: 162
From: Colonia Lindensium
Joined: 02-29-2004

Message 121 of 122 (155291)
11-02-2004 7:52 PM
Reply to: Message 119 by nator
11-02-2004 7:06 PM

Atheism is based upon a materialist philosophy, which holds that nothing exists but natural phenomena. There are no supernatural
forces or entities, nor can there be any.

I would call this anti-theism. Atheism is just a lack of belief. Non-thiesm. Maybe some would prefer to term it as "weak atheism", I don't really care. Atheism is just a lack of belief in 'god/s' without denying their possibility. It's sitting on the fence by default rather than choice.

The above cited definition is a reason why athiests get a bad rap.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 119 by nator, posted 11-02-2004 7:06 PM nator has not yet responded

Inactive Member

Message 122 of 122 (155309)
11-02-2004 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 109 by Cold Foreign Object
10-30-2004 9:46 PM

Re: Original title: Asking for a clarification from Creationists.
Why is human evolution alleged as proven fact based upon a paucity of physical fossil evidence ?

Millions of years to get erect yet an amount of disputed body of evidence that could fit into a medium sized box at best = so much based on so little = irrational belief not supported by the evidence.

I think I replied to you a few weeks ago on this very subject. Why must you ignore things just because they are rare? While I believe your "medium sized box" analogy is a bit flawed, I am willing to admit that the fossils are few and far between when compared to other types of animals. However, saying that the fossils are rare and just ignoring them does not explain their existance.

Willowtree, how would you explain the existance of these fossils, however uncommon, if they did not arise by evolution? Keep in mind that dozens of skeletons and artifacts have been found from early Homo sapiens, Neanderthals, Homo erectus, and many others, many in quite good condition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by Cold Foreign Object, posted 10-30-2004 9:46 PM Cold Foreign Object has not yet responded

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:

Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019