Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   I Am Not An Atheist!
Taq
Member
Posts: 9970
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 326 of 382 (670222)
08-10-2012 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 303 by marc9000
08-09-2012 7:40 PM


I think the one thing that has recently brought this out more than anything else is the immediate, widespread rejection throughout the scientific community of the concept of Intelligent Design.
Once scientists uderstood what ID was about, of course they rejected it. ID is not science. ID is an anti-science.
As dwise can attest, the YEC underpinnings were clear from the start. ID supporters continued with the same refuted arguments that they had used as YEC's. They claim that there are no transitionals, that there is no evidence for evolution. Of course scientists rejected ID. It is based on lies.
We could use other theories as examples, such as Germ Theory. If there was a fundamentalist group that was pushing the idea that Germ Theory was all wrong, and that God was involved in producing disease, what do you think the reaction of christian microbiologists would be? What if the Intelligent Infector (II) proponents were pushing known lies, such as E. coli does not really release lipopolysaccharides, or that bacteria are not correlated with disease symptoms? I would think that honest, christian microbiologists would run away from this christian fundamentalist supported anti-science movement, and rightly so. We have the same situation with ID.
There’s always the chance that Intelligent Design could show some type of evidence of the actions of whatever Deity they believe in.
Did it ever occur to you that perhaps people don't need to remove evolution from nature in order to see the actions of their Deity?
Evolution has nothing to do with atheism - that’s been the standard scientific talking point for many decades now, but repeating it over and over doesn’t make it any more true. Just because countless man hours over the past 150 years have shown more and more scientific detail in biological change over time, it doesn’t magically erase the atheism that originated, promoted, and continues to promote the enthusiasm that the subject of evolution inspires. Without the atheism, it wouldn’t get near the attention and public spotlight that it gets. Biological change over time — what could be more boring? If it had nothing to do with atheism, these forums wouldn’t exist, popular books wouldn’t be written about it, court cases concerning it wouldn’t exist, on and on.
"To affirm that the Sun ... is at the centre of the universe and only rotates on its axis without going from east to west, is a very dangerous attitude and one calculated not only to arouse all Scholastic philosophers and theologians but also to injure our holy faith by contradicting the Scriptures" [Cardinal Bellarmino, 17th Century Church Master Collegio Romano, who imprisoned and tortured Galileo for his astronomical works]
It would appear that Heliocentrism is atheism as well.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 303 by marc9000, posted 08-09-2012 7:40 PM marc9000 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 329 by dwise1, posted 08-10-2012 2:34 PM Taq has not replied
 Message 336 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-10-2012 8:29 PM Taq has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024