Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 66 (9049 total)
543 online now:
AZPaul3, kjsimons, PaulK, ringo (4 members, 539 visitors)
Newest Member: Wes johnson
Upcoming Birthdays: Coragyps
Post Volume: Total: 887,676 Year: 5,322/14,102 Month: 243/677 Week: 48/54 Day: 1/4 Hour: 0/0


EvC Forum Side Orders Coffee House Creationist Shortage

Summations Only

Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creationist Shortage
Modulous
Member (Idle past 1131 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 196 of 415 (667493)
07-08-2012 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 189 by marc9000
07-07-2012 9:00 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
As things are now, if I propose a thread about the relationship between evolution and atheism, it gets buried somewhere in the coffee house, or free for all forums, hardly a respected place to address the serious political changes and problems currently happening because of the relationship between evolution and atheism.

Separation of church and state went into Social Issues and Creation/Evolution
abiogenesis went into Origin of Life and was then moved from there to Is It Science?
Theistic Evolution was not promoted.

I think that's all the PNTs you've made.

I ran through all of the PNTs this year to check, and I didn't see this happening there either, but maybe I'm wrong.

yet there is no sub-forum that examines the relationship between evolution and atheism.

As an Admin, if I thought it was worthy of discussion I'd probably consider putting it into Social Issues and Creation/Evolution or Creation/Evolution Miscellany. If it didn't really fit then the Coffee House would suffice I suppose. Sounds like it might generate some interesting discussion, so propose it. If you don't want to but do want to discuss it, let me know and I'll write the OP.

There's no need for a forum about it though, any more than there is a need for a forum that examines the relationship between geocentrism and Middle Eastern theism.

Right now, a current thread title on the main page reads “What variety of creationist is Buzsaw? The new evolution/atheism forum could have a thread titled “What variety of atheist is Panda?”.

What variety of creationist is Buzsaw? (Minnemooseus and Buzsaw only) is in The Great Debate. If you want to start a Great Debate thread with Panda about that subject, you are welcome to do so.

Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by marc9000, posted 07-07-2012 9:00 PM marc9000 has acknowledged this reply

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 1131 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 197 of 415 (667508)
07-08-2012 4:28 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by marc9000
07-07-2012 9:00 PM


threads about atheism and evolution
Some additional information (since you have already read my last post, I figured you wouldn't see an edit). I have since gone and looked for similar threads as the one you're thinking about:

There is Evolution != Atheism (re: the Rejection of Theism in Evolution), which is still open though it went massively offtopic. That was promoted to Creation/Evolution Miscellany

How Darwin caused atheism which is also still open. That was promoted to Social Issues and Creation/Evolution.

I guess my opinion of where to promote that kind of topic is shared by other Admins (AdminNosy and AdminAsgara).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by marc9000, posted 07-07-2012 9:00 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by marc9000, posted 07-08-2012 7:04 PM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1239
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 198 of 415 (667517)
07-08-2012 7:04 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by Modulous
07-08-2012 4:28 PM


Re: threads about atheism and evolution
Thanks for the links. They're both pretty long, as I get time in the coming weeks, I'll read through those and see if I have anything to add, or build on. Chances are I will.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by Modulous, posted 07-08-2012 4:28 PM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

  
Genomicus
Member (Idle past 968 days)
Posts: 852
Joined: 02-15-2012


(4)
Message 199 of 415 (667518)
07-08-2012 7:29 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Buzsaw
05-11-2012 6:47 PM


Re: Where Have Creationists Gone?
One cannot excape the feeling that resident evolutionists do not understand, or allow for creation science talk. Your bully pulpit site owner simply bans it from debate so as for it to stand or fall on it's own merits.

Hmm. I'm no 'Darwinian,' and I am an ID proponent, but I haven't noticed any censorship with regards to stuff I post. I think this site is pretty balanced, in terms of moderation procedures. Are you sure you're not making this stuff up?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Buzsaw, posted 05-11-2012 6:47 PM Buzsaw has not yet responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 4715
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.0


(4)
Message 200 of 415 (667988)
07-15-2012 12:15 AM
Reply to: Message 189 by marc9000
07-07-2012 9:00 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
That list again. This is the ninth time that you've posted it (seventh if you don't count the apparent duplicates):
Message 112 03-Feb-2010 (apparently duplicated in another topic as Message 112)
Message 171 10-Mar-2010 (apparently duplicated in another topic as Message 171)
Message 432 02-Aug-2010
Message 18 01-Nov-2010
Message 84 16-May-2011
Message 56 18-Jan-2012
Message 189 07-Jul-2012

All that time and you still haven't bothered to read any of those books or to learn anything to dispell your ignorance of them. But at least you're being consistent.

I replied to your Message 84 (16-May-2011) with my Message 93 (17-May-2011):

quote:
No, atheist groups and atheist books are not a major cause of the growth and spread of atheism; they serve mainly those who are already becoming atheists. Rather, a major cause of the growth and spread of atheism is creationism. Contrary to the goal of education, which is understanding the material without compelling belief in the material, "creation science" materials try to compel the student to believe in creationism, which is documented to have caused those students who found creationism so ridiculous, and hence any religion that would require believing it, to decide to become atheists (eg, 5th and 6th grade students in Ray Baird's class, Livermore, Calif, 1981). Even worse are the cases of children who were raised on creationism only to grow up and learn how outrageously they had been lied to. I've seen the figures to be about 80% of those children growing up to leave the faith; Kent Hovind would quote from a home-schooling source that the figure of home-schoolers leaving the faith after transfering to public school as being 75%. What role does science play in this? Nothing more than to teach the truth about how the physical universe works, which is more than enough to expose the lies that creationism tells; eg, after having been lied to all their lives about what evolution is and teaches, then they study science and they learn what evolution really is and teaches.

I also directly addressed your ignorance of what's in those books (adding emphasis):
quote:
BTW, I would recommend that you read that last book by Dan Barker (not co-authored by Richard Dawkins, who only wrote the foreword; can't you get any facts straight?). Especially, the first part, which is autobiographical. Dan Barker was born and raised a fundamentalist and became a fundamentalist preacher. In that first part, he chronicles his journey from fundamentalism to atheism.

I will add that evolution had nothing to do with his deconversion, directly contradicting your thesis that evolution causes atheism. Rather, because he was a travelling minister coming in contact with a large number of different evangelical congregations, he also came in contact with almost as many different versions of evangelical Christianity, which blurred his own line of demarcation between "true" and "false" teachings, which in turn got him to start thinking. Once a "true Christian" starts to think, he's on the slippery slope of deconversion and he will eventually mature and grow out of his theology. Must be why you work so hard to avoid thinking.

You also never replied. As I'm sure you will not reply this time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by marc9000, posted 07-07-2012 9:00 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by marc9000, posted 07-16-2012 8:17 PM dwise1 has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8209
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


Message 201 of 415 (668004)
07-15-2012 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by marc9000
07-07-2012 9:00 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
marc9000 writes:

I know that’s the politically correct mantra, but there’s plenty of evidence that shows there is. The word "evidence" isn't the exclusive property of evolutionists.

Well, if that's the case perhaps you'd like to present some of the evidence in another thread and we could discuss it. Personally, I couldn't give a toss what forum it goes into - it,s either interesting or it's not.

For what it's worth, I've never met an atheist that was 'turned' by any of the ideas the ToE contains and I've never met an evolutionist and have no idea what one might be - in your world do gravitationists exist too?


Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by marc9000, posted 07-07-2012 9:00 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by marc9000, posted 07-16-2012 8:26 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1239
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 202 of 415 (668053)
07-16-2012 8:17 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by dwise1
07-15-2012 12:15 AM


Re: What's the purpose here?
That list again. This is the ninth time that you've posted it (seventh if you don't count the apparent duplicates):

Message 112 03-Feb-2010 (apparently duplicated in another topic as Message 112)
Message 171 10-Mar-2010 (apparently duplicated in another topic as Message 171)
Message 432 02-Aug-2010
Message 18 01-Nov-2010
Message 84 16-May-2011
Message 56 18-Jan-2012
Message 189 07-Jul-2012

All that time and you still haven't bothered to read any of those books or to learn anything to dispell your ignorance of them. But at least you're being consistent.

Why do you pretend to know what I’ve read? Are you trying to say that those books have different content than their titles suggest? Their reviews say otherwise, as do the contents of Stenger’s book, which I actually have on my shelf.

There’s a reason I’ve put up that list seven times now, because each time I put it up, it gets a different reaction than most anything any creationist posts. Most of what any creationist posts gets every sentence, every word, criticized/mocked from several different posters and angles. I’ll now briefly describe the reactions that book list has gotten each time I’ve put it up;

2-3-10) One response to that message, with no reference to the book list.

3-10-10) One response to that message, with no reference to the book list.

8-2-10) Three responses to that message, with no reference to the book list.

11-1-10) No response at all to the message.

5-16-11) Seven responses to the message. The first two – no responses to the book list. The third had the question “What does that [book list] have to do with anything? The fourth – no response to the book list. The fifth and seventh ones were yours. The sixth – a taunt of the book list with no substance.

1-18-12) Two responses to the message, the first had one meaningless taunt about the book list, the second made no reference to the book list.

7-7-12) this thread, with no new references to the book list.

All I have to do now, if I live and I have enough time, would be to post that list 993 three more times at EvC. It would almost certainly get no more meaningful responses from evolutionists than it already has, then, when someone repeats the usual, tired mantra of “evolution and atheism don’t have a thing in the world to do with each other”, I can reference that list and say PRATT!! (Point Refuted A Thousand Times) and that word would actually have meaning, something it hasn’t had yet at EvC.

I replied to your Message 84 (16-May-2011) with my Message 93 (17-May-2011):

No, atheist groups and atheist books are not a major cause of the growth and spread of atheism; they serve mainly those who are already becoming atheists.

So if someone who was already a completely converted atheist picked up one of those books, it would be completely impossible for them to get new ideas in how to convert others? Or to find new ideas for legal action against Christian organizations?

So if a person with no intention of becoming an atheist were to pick up one of those books, there is no way those books could inspire new curiosities about atheism?

If those books “serve” those who are already becoming atheists, that would include 5th and 6th grade students, college students, including future teachers, wouldn’t it? By saying it’s not a major cause, are you conceding that it’s a minor cause?

Rather, a major cause of the growth and spread of atheism is creationism.

Unless those who are becoming atheists have something to compare creationism to. Those books give them plenty to compare creationism to. Something that doesn’t have 10 commandments. Something 5th and 6th graders find very appealing.

Contrary to the goal of education, which is understanding the material without compelling belief in the material, "creation science" materials try to compel the student to believe in creationism, which is documented to have caused those students who found creationism so ridiculous, and hence any religion that would require believing it, to decide to become atheists (eg, 5th and 6th grade students in Ray Baird's class, Livermore, Calif, 1981). Even worse are the cases of children who were raised on creationism only to grow up and learn how outrageously they had been lied to. I've seen the figures to be about 80% of those children growing up to leave the faith; Kent Hovind would quote from a home-schooling source that the figure of home-schoolers leaving the faith after transfering to public school as being 75%. What role does science play in this? Nothing more than to teach the truth about how the physical universe works, which is more than enough to expose the lies that creationism tells; eg, after having been lied to all their lives about what evolution is and teaches, then they study science and they learn what evolution really is and teaches.

The "truth" about how the physical universe works, through the atheist prism of one time dimension and three space dimensions.

I understand the talking points of evolutionists/atheists, they do a really beautiful job of showing how closely related evolution/science and atheism really are.

I also directly addressed your ignorance of what's in those books (adding emphasis):

quote:
BTW, I would recommend that you read that last book by Dan Barker (not co-authored by Richard Dawkins, who only wrote the foreword; can't you get any facts straight?). Especially, the first part, which is autobiographical. Dan Barker was born and raised a fundamentalist and became a fundamentalist preacher. In that first part, he chronicles his journey from fundamentalism to atheism.

I will add that evolution had nothing to do with his deconversion, directly contradicting your thesis that evolution causes atheism.

So if you can find ONE example of a person who converted from Christianity to atheism without a big interest in science, it proves that no one can be converted to atheism by science? Your conclusions aren't very logical.

I looked at this link to find a summary of what happened with Barker’s conversion.

A big part of his deconversion seemed to be a problem with money. He didn’t seem to be a very good minister, and found that it was much more financially rewarding for him to climb the corporate ladder at the Freedom From Religion foundation.

quote:
Dan was PR Director of the Freedom From Religion Foundation from 1987 to 2004. He was elected co-president of the Foundation with Annie Laurie Gaylor in 2004, with whom he is co-host of Freethought Radio, a national weekly talkshow on the Air America network. He is a contributing editor of Freethought Today and is involved with the Foundation’s state/church lawsuits. He regularly travels the country and the world giving lectures, performing concerts, and participating in debates with theists, many at college and university campuses.

Atheism of usually defined as a simple, innocent lack of belief, yet for something described as a “lack” of something, it sure can be financially rewarding, can’t it?

Rather, because he was a travelling minister coming in contact with a large number of different evangelical congregations, he also came in contact with almost as many different versions of evangelical Christianity, which blurred his own line of demarcation between "true" and "false" teachings, which in turn got him to start thinking. Once a "true Christian" starts to think, he's on the slippery slope of deconversion and he will eventually mature and grow out of his theology. Must be why you work so hard to avoid thinking.

What he came in contact with was some new forms of theistic evolution – its recent compromises with secular subjects. If we try to fit Christianity into the one time dimension and three space dimensions of atheism, Christianity can’t hold up. But Christianity is actually a lot more than that. Barker and others can reach impressive heights in Christianity without fully realizing that. Satan is very influential.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by dwise1, posted 07-15-2012 12:15 AM dwise1 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by Panda, posted 07-17-2012 5:35 AM marc9000 has responded
 Message 263 by dwise1, posted 07-20-2012 3:50 PM marc9000 has responded

  
marc9000
Member
Posts: 1239
From: Ky U.S.
Joined: 12-25-2009


Message 203 of 415 (668054)
07-16-2012 8:26 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by Tangle
07-15-2012 2:39 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
marc9000 writes:

I know that’s the politically correct mantra, but there’s plenty of evidence that shows there is. The word "evidence" isn't the exclusive property of evolutionists.

Well, if that's the case perhaps you'd like to present some of the evidence in another thread and we could discuss it. Personally, I couldn't give a toss what forum it goes into - it,s either interesting or it's not.

Maybe one of us should start a thread exclusively on that book list. Maybe you and a couple of dozen of your helpers could explain to me how the countless thousands of pages of those books don’t show any relationship between evolution and atheism, yet the few pages of the wedge document (written by one man) are complete proof that ID is religious. But I don't know if that would work for you, as we see above, many here seem to be a little shy about addressing that list.

For what it's worth, I've never met an atheist that was 'turned' by any of the ideas the ToE contains…

It’s not worth much, because reality, and whom you’ve personally met, can be very different things. Here’s a brief description of Richard Dawkins “turning”.;

quote:
Dawkins describes his childhood as "a normal Anglican upbringing".[14] He was confirmed, and embraced Christianity until his mid-teens, at which point he concluded that the theory of evolution was a better explanation for life's complexity, and ceased believing in a god.[10] Dawkins states: "the main residual reason why I was religious was from being so impressed with the complexity of life and feeling that it had to have a designer, and I think it was when I realised that Darwinism was a far superior explanation that pulled the rug out from under the argument of design. And that left me with nothing."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins

and I've never met an evolutionist and have no idea what one might be

It depends, as always, on the definition of “evolution” that the atheist wants to use at any given time. Does it mean “change over time”? Then I’m an evolutionist. Does it mean, common descent-Genesis is wrong-there is no God? – as it almost always does? In that case I’m sure you’ve met many and have a very good idea of who is, and isn’t, an evolutionist.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by Tangle, posted 07-15-2012 2:39 PM Tangle has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by crashfrog, posted 07-16-2012 8:48 PM marc9000 has responded
 Message 206 by PaulK, posted 07-17-2012 1:57 AM marc9000 has responded
 Message 207 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-17-2012 2:37 AM marc9000 has not yet responded
 Message 210 by Percy, posted 07-17-2012 9:24 AM marc9000 has responded
 Message 211 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-17-2012 10:43 AM marc9000 has responded

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 494 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


(5)
Message 204 of 415 (668057)
07-16-2012 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by marc9000
07-16-2012 8:26 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
If I said that the Catholic sex abuse scandal had convinced me there was no god, would that be evidence that the purpose of Catholic sex abuse had been to advance atheism?

Isn't it possible that people can be convinced that there's no god simply by the things that are true about the universe because there's no god, not because the expression of those truths is an agenda to turn people against god?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by marc9000, posted 07-16-2012 8:26 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by marc9000, posted 07-17-2012 8:09 PM crashfrog has responded

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 4715
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 5.0


(7)
Message 205 of 415 (668058)
07-16-2012 8:52 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by marc9000
07-07-2012 9:00 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
“Do evolutionists start out as atheists? Or do they study evolution first and then become atheists?” I can think of a lot of thread titles it could contain. The descriptive line that I suggested above, about what the mindset is of beginning evolutionists/atheists could be applied to the authors of the following books;
quote:
. . .
Godless: How an Evangelical Preacher Became One of America’s Leading Atheists / Barker/Dawkins – 2008

We already know that you had never read Dan Barker's book. Nor have you ever even looked at the cover, because if you had then you would have seen that its sole author is Dan Barker; Richard Dawkins only wrote the foreword.

We also already know from Dan Barker's own testimony in his book that his deconversion had absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with evolution and everything to do with evangelical Christianity and his having committed the unforgivable sin (to evangelicals, at least) of daring to think.

Similarly, my own deconversion was not caused by evolution, which we didn't even study until a couple years later. Rather, what turned me into an atheist was reading the Bible and realizing that I simply could not believe the weird stuff I was reading and reasoning that, if being a Christian required me to believe that stuff that I found I could not believe, then it was time for me to leave. Evolution had nothing to do with my decision, whereas the Bible and, to a lesser extent, Christianity had everything to do with it.

Over the years, I have read and heard many different stories of deconversion and the only role that I have ever heard of evolution playing would be when the person who had been raised on the lies of creationism would then learn what science actually taught and what evolution really is and he would come to realize that his parents and religious leaders and teachers had been lying to him his entire life. Many other deconversion stories involved having been lied to about other things or otherwise betrayed by their religion or their religious leaders.

Some deconversion stories involved having one's eyes opened by learning the truth. One such story involved a Baptist boy who went to college and started dating a Catholic girl, whom he really liked and for whom he felt really sorry because she was damned to Hell for not being a "true Christian". Then one day she suddenly burst out in tears and told him that she really liked him and felt really sorry for him because he was damned to Hell for not being Catholic. Hello! That got him thinking, so he decided to research the matter. He went into the college library and asked for the most complete history of Christianity that they had. The librarian tried to talk him out of it, telling him he didn't want to read it. He insisted and checked out a thick book on the history of Christianity. It took him a month to read the entire book, at the end of which he decided that while he was now no longer certain that God existed, but if He did, then He sure wasn't Christian!

While my own opinion is that it's the lies of creationism that cause believers to lose their faith, I've read that the humanities do much more than learning science does in undermining evangelical/fundamentalist Christian faith. Evangelicals and fundamentalists are locked into a mindset that allows for only one point-of-view, theirs, as being valid, plus that's the only perspective that they ever learn or hear. Far too often in my discussions with creationists, they would refuse to think about what I was describing and adamantly refused to learn about evolution, because they believed that that would require them to believe in those subjects -- to counter, the US Air Force trained us NCOs in Communism, obviously not for the purpose of turning us into Communists, but rather so that we would learn about the enemy. In the humanities, these evangelical/fundamentalist students learn that there are many other perspectives and they learn what those other perspectives are and they learn to discuss the valid and invalid points of those other perspectives. Even the process in literature classes of viewing the events of the story through the perspective of different characters is a major revelation for these students. And as they learn to think, the scales fall from their eyes and they begin to shake off the shackles their religion had clamped about their minds. It's not evolution nor science that you need to fear, but rather English class!

marc, you repeatedly and persistently demonstrate that you have absolutely no idea what atheism is nor how people become atheists. You need to learn, not to continue to stew in and spew your ignorant nonsense. Rather than continue to accept the lies that your church keeps telling you, go out and talk with atheists to see what they actually think and believe and how they had become atheists, for what reasons, and what had caused it. A good place for you to start would be the ex-Christian.net forum's testimonial section at http://www.ex-christian.net/...timonies-of-former-christians. Although it wouldn't come up in a search here on EVC, I'm positive that I have posted links to that forum several times before and I'm sure that some of those times have been in response to your clinging to your ignorance. Go forth and learn something for a change!

The new arrival of puberty, a desire to free themselves from the 10 commandments, a study of evolution, and presto – atheism!

Nonsense! Though I know that that is what your (plural) churches, in their blessed ignorance, teach. It seems that, unable to understand why they cannot convert everybody, they have had to rationalize it somehow, so they projected their own desires onto the unconvertable. And by teaching that nonsense to their children, they create a strongly compelling self-fulfilling prophesy. And then have the audacity to act surprised when children actually do what they had taught them to do, become atheists in order to "free themselves from the 10 commandments"! That's right, you're the ones doing it to your own children. Stop looking for scapegoats and take responsibility for your own actions!

I had a long correspondence with a local creationist activist, Bill Morgan, who had written an error-laden essay (here is a link to a forum where he posted it in 1997: http://www.bio.net/bionet/mm/mol-evol/1997-March/005421.html). I'm quoting here part of that essay in which he repeats your own pipe-dream, though greatly abbreviated to save space here; at that link, the complete text lies a bit more than half-way down:

quote:
I was raised in Buffalo, New York, and was fortunate to have great parents They took my sister and I to church every Sunday, we attended Sunday school and church camps in the summer. I believed in God, and never gave the issue much thought.

In sixth grade, I remember seeing a big colorful book produced by Time-Life. . . . This is called the ascent of man chart that nearly everyone is familiar with.

In sixth grade, I looked at that chart for a while, smirked, thought it was ridiculous, and went outside and played softball.

Eventually I made it to ninth grade. While in a Biology class, the teacher was teaching us about evolution and placed the same chart up on the wall. I still remember it. I sat there and studied that chart for a long time. It was on that very day that I recognized a major conflict existed between what this teacher was saying and what the Bible taught. Should I believe my science teacher, who is teaching man has ascended from ape-like animals, or do I believe mommy, daddy, and that book (the Bible) that says God made man instantly from the dust of the ground?" I reasoned that this teacher is a scientist after all, so this must be valid information.

. . .

In ninth grade I chose to go with the science teacher, and considered myself to be an atheist for about 14 years.

. . .

Question! Why in 6th grade did I think the drawings were ridiculous, but in 9th grade I believed them?

Was it because I was more intellectual? No. Was it because the Biology teacher explained it so convincingly? Not really. The real reason for my becoming an atheist in 9th grade can be summed up in one word...hormones. In 6th grade I did not have much temptation in my life. . . .

But in 9th grade a whole new world opened up to me. The temptation of drinking, drugs and premarital sex presented themselves to me at exactly the same time I was being taught evolution. I knew the Bible said that being drunk and having sex outside of marriage was wrong, but here is my science teacher, telling me the origin of man is completely contradictory to what the Bible taught as the origin of man. I felt excited.....and decided the Theory of Evolution was for me, after all the Bible was scientifically wrong on the very first page!! I considered myself to be an atheist. As an atheist I no longer had to abide by any rules but my own. If I wanted to get drunk, no problem, if I wanted to try to have premarital sex no problem, I now belonged to the evolution "religion" (religion meaning a system of beliefs built on faith) that allowed me to sin without guilt.

It was not the data that made me an atheist, it was the conclusion, a belief that made me the judge of right and wrong. Those cartoon drawings of ape men did look sharp, but I wanted to believe them emotionally, more than I really believed them intellectually.



He let a lot slip there. It wasn't evolution that caused his decision, but rather his desire to use evolution as an excuse, which doesn't disagree much with your own statement. But was it evolution that gave him those ideas? No, not in the least. Well where did he get those ideas from? From his own Christian teachings! He had been taught that the way to get around all those "thou shalt not"'s was to become an atheist and, sure enough, that's exactly what he did! In fact, he let even more slip when I tried to point that out to him: he stated that during all the time he was an "atheist", every night he prayed to God. What real atheist would do that? He wasn't even an atheist, but rather he was just pretending to be an atheist, fooling nobody but himself, the most important person for him to fool!

So your churches' false teachings about morality create the very scenario that you want to blame on evolution. Instead of teaching them the true importance of morality and the very real reasons why it is so very important (which it is, despite your (plural) attempts to trivialize it!), you teach them that it depends on whether God exists and that if God did not exist, then morality is meaningless. Then you don your seedy overcoat and hat and from a dark corner whisper sleazily: "Psst! Hey, kid! Lookin' for a good time? It's easy! Become an atheist and you won't have nobody to answer to. You can then do everything and anything you want to, free of quilt, because there's no god to answer to. You won't be responsible nobody! It's easy! You don't even have to actually become an atheist neither; all you need to do is pretend to be one! Give it a try! It'll be fun!" After feeding all those restrictive and arbitrary rules, you then offer them a great big gaping loophole like that and you don't think they'll grab it as quickly as they can? Especially when you also pound them with your false teachings that accepting evolution will turn them into atheists. Since that's your own big hot claim, that evolution turns people into atheists, that makes you personally responsible for the spread of atheism that you hypocritically decry. If you don't like it, then stop causing it to happen! When the ICR was still in Santee, there was a stone mason just down the street from them, who I would assume gave them very good rates on millstones because of the volume business the ICR offered them; you should contact the ICR to find out who's supplying them now that they're in Texas.

In summary, the true cause of atheism is Christianity, especially false teachings emphasized by evangelical and fundamentalist Christian sects. Those false teachings booby-trap the faith of sect members to self-destruct in highly predictable ways. They also teach non-members that their teachings are false and cannot be taken seriously. Even more, those false teachings, especially "creation science", accomplish what nobody else ever could do: prove that God does not exist. Proof by False Teachings such as "If evolution is true, then God does not exist", and "If even one error is found in the Bible, then throw it in the trash.", and "If the earth is more than 10,000 years old, then Scripture has no meaning." (John Morris, President of the Institute for Creation Research). Nor is that proof lost on outsiders, who accept it at face value and are eternally grateful to have nothing to do with Christianity.

You're creating the situation. Only you could possibly change it, but only by abandoning your false teachings and replacing them with true teachings. Which I am quite certain will never happen, so if there exists a award for promoting and encouraging the spread of atheism, you will win it.

marc, I'm quite certain that you will refuse to learn anything and will continue to cling desparately to your ignorance, so I'll conclude with a quote, reconstructed from memory, by a past Governor of Mississippi (circa 1990, give or take half a decade either way) who was defending his campaign for educational reform:

quote:
We know that ignorance doesn't work, because we've already tried it!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by marc9000, posted 07-07-2012 9:00 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 213 by marc9000, posted 07-17-2012 8:27 PM dwise1 has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17009
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 206 of 415 (668079)
07-17-2012 1:57 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by marc9000
07-16-2012 8:26 PM


Wedge Document versus Book List
quote:

Maybe one of us should start a thread exclusively on that book list. Maybe you and a couple of dozen of your helpers could explain to me how the countless thousands of pages of those books don’t show any relationship between evolution and atheism, yet the few pages of the wedge document (written by one man) are complete proof that ID is religious. But I don't know if that would work for you, as we see above, many here seem to be a little shy about addressing that list.

Of course it is quite easy to explain why the Wedge Document is significant evidence while your list of books is not.

1) Official document versus individuals
The Wedge Document was a product of the Discovery Institute, the leading ID organisation. It was intended for fund raising, thus it can be expected to accurately present the position of the organisation (if it significantly misrepresented it, that would be fraud).

2) Listing books versus direct quotes.
The Wedge Document is frequently quoted to prove the point. You just list the books on the assumption that something that proves your point must be in there. Expecting someone to read even one book to check whether it really does support your point is going too far - and not worth it. Because if they find nothing, what useful discussion can result from it ?

So clearly direct quotes from the Wedge Document are far better than your list of books. Your opinion that there MUST be something somewhere in one of those books is just your opinion. It isn't even evidence.

I will also note that the lack of replies to Message 18 probably has a lot to do with the lack of content of the message. You seem to have missed the obvious point that how you attempt to USE the list is more important than the list itself.

quote:

It’s not worth much, because reality, and whom you’ve personally met, can be very different things. Here’s a brief description of Richard Dawkins “turning”.;

And if you read it, it says the only influence of evolution was to show that there was a viable non-theistic explanation for the diversity and complexity of life. And that was all that was keeping him in the Christian church.

Here's the relevant part of your quote again:


"the main residual reason why I was religious was from being so impressed with the complexity of life and feeling that it had to have a designer, and I think it was when I realised that Darwinism was a far superior explanation that pulled the rug out from under the argument of design. And that left me with nothing."

Evolution undermined the one argument that kept him believing in a God and THAT is the only link he makes between evolution and atheism. If Christianity really had a good case it wouldn't rest solely on the argument for design - not least because it does nothing to prove that Christianity is true, rather than some other religion (or none).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by marc9000, posted 07-16-2012 8:26 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 215 by marc9000, posted 07-17-2012 8:37 PM PaulK has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 78 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 207 of 415 (668082)
07-17-2012 2:37 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by marc9000
07-16-2012 8:26 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
as we see above, many here seem to be a little shy about addressing that list.

You mean to say your off-topic drivel which has been rebutted in other threads only got 8 replies from 6 different people? --- the most replies, and the most respondents, to any post on this entire thread?

Let me tell you about your list. It's a list. It names some books. Curiously enough, the names of the books fail to prove whatever blitheringly stupid point you were trying to make.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by marc9000, posted 07-16-2012 8:26 PM marc9000 has not yet responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8209
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.6


(1)
Message 208 of 415 (668084)
07-17-2012 3:49 AM
Reply to: Message 189 by marc9000
07-07-2012 9:00 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
marc9000 writes:


Evolutionists don’t want to discuss some things about evolution. It’s not politically healthy for them. Admin knows that a sub-forum that welcomed discussion about the atheism in evolution could very well bring in too many creationists for these forums to handle. Combined with an exodus of atheists, it could very well close the forum.

This is cobblers. Evolution is a scientific study like organic chemistry or the physics of sound. It has nothing whatsoever to do with religion. Nothing. You have a peculiarly American, parochial christian fundamentalist view of this. The rest of the world looks on you with vague puzzlement.

In Europe evolution and religion get along fine - even the Catholic church - the religion I was born into and happily practiced until my teens - accepts it. My own atheism is as a direct result of noticing that the emperor had no clothes - that it was a blindingly obvious myth.

I heard about evolution two years later and didn't even make the link to religion until my (Catholic) biology teacher when introducing the subject of eveolution pointed out that whilst it was different to the Genesis story it was an even greater proof of God's design. (A point that went straight over my teenage head.)

As for not wishing to discuss atheism in evolution, you're crazy - we're doing it now, start a thread and we'll all pile in. It might be short lived because it's silly and mistaken, but it will get discussed. Quit whining about forum headings and get on with it.


Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by marc9000, posted 07-07-2012 9:00 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 216 by marc9000, posted 07-17-2012 8:50 PM Tangle has responded

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 2739 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


(2)
Message 209 of 415 (668094)
07-17-2012 5:35 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by marc9000
07-16-2012 8:17 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
marc9000 writes:

Why do you pretend to know what I’ve read? Are you trying to say that those books have different content than their titles suggest? Their reviews say otherwise, as do the contents of Stenger’s book, which I actually have on my shelf.


Which is you confirming that you have only read 1 of the 14 books you listed.
If you can't be bothered to read the books, then why should I?
And even if I did, you could not discuss their contents, because you haven't read them.

marc9000 writes:

7-7-12) this thread, with no new references to the book list.


Which is patently not true.
This becomes obvious when we realise that you are replying to a post discussing your book list!

So...you have a list of books you haven't read. Great!
But I think you'll find that this list refutes your list:

    Wild, By Cheryl Strayed
    Unbroken, By Laura Hillenbrand
    The Amateur, By Edward Klein
    Killing Lincoln, By Bill O'reilly And Martin Dugard
    Gone Girl, By Gillian Flynn
    The Next Best Thing, By Jennifer Weiner
    Wicked Business, By Janet Evanovich
    Criminal, By Karin Slaughter
    Bloodline, By James Rollins
    In The Garden Of Beasts, By Erik Larson
(I haven't read them all, but I am sure they contain stuff that counters your arguments.)

If that doesn't convince you, then maybe this will: www.google.com!
(I haven't read it all, but I am sure it contains mountains of evidence that proves you wrong.)


CRYSTALS!!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by marc9000, posted 07-16-2012 8:17 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 217 by marc9000, posted 07-17-2012 8:55 PM Panda has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20334
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 210 of 415 (668111)
07-17-2012 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by marc9000
07-16-2012 8:26 PM


Re: What's the purpose here?
Hi Marc,

Crash already said it, but it bears saying again. Sure science causes atheism. This is because the more we know the more it conflicts with ideas that are wrong, and science is a great way of identifying ideas that are wrong.

But science doesn't teach there is no God. It simply reveals, for example, that the Earth is billions of years old, not thousands, and that therefore Biblical literalism is wrong. The conclusions one draws from this knowledge are highly individualistic, but that there is no God is certainly one of the many possible.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by marc9000, posted 07-16-2012 8:26 PM marc9000 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 219 by marc9000, posted 07-17-2012 9:00 PM Percy has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021