Reply to Why don't you believe in God?

Forum Index » Religion

Reply to "Why don't you believe in God?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This DNA straw man is just kicking the can down the road.

Theists said the earth could not be 13.8 billion years old, until it was impossible to say otherwise.  So now God is the uncaused cause behind the Big Bang.

Evolution was a heresy that the theists fought tooth and nail, until we discovered the mechanism, DNA, and it was impossible to deny.  So now evolution is now just another example of the Divine Watchmaker at work.

If we show conclusively that RNA preceded DNA, they'll kick the can down that road.  If we push it back to ribosomes, they'll kick it down there too.  Still they will say that the system shows a quality that only an intelligent mind will create.

Then after another decade, we will prove that each of the steps can occur in real world settings without an intelligent hand guiding it.  We will have not one but five different example pathways.

And they will then forget that they ever made this intelligent design argument and say "you can't prove that any of these is the way".  And the fact that we will have done it five different ways will be used as proof against us, because there was most likely only one way and we won't know which one it really was.

Just more can kicking.  And each generation of science deniers gets the luxury of shedding the previous generation's backwardness.  Their grandparents mocked John Scopes but they are not responsible for that.  However, scientists are responsible for their entire historical legacy.  Scientists are held accountable for any change in theory.  Scientists with differing views are used as proof of the limits of science.  The very thing that gives science its integrity will be exploited as a weakness.

Face it, the theists always win because they [b]do not have to play fair.[/b]  Scientists are hamstrung by documenting their work, admitting its limitations, never being able to erase its mistakes, its requirement to use data and experimentation.  [/quote]

What an interesting post!

I know it was just a rhetorical device, but using the terms "win" and "lose," or "play fair," is so illuminating.  Because science and materialism and empiricism and rationalism are all supposed to be about facts, not value judgments.  There is no fair and unfair in matter and energy.  They just exist.

(I'm channeling the video rationalist now.)

This post shows that science has its set of objectives, and one of those objectives is[i] not [/i]answering "Why?"[/quote]

Shorter OP:  "Bah, atheist!  Now suddenly you're interested in morality?  Well, we've already established that without God, there isn't any.  I'll be as big of a jerk as I want, and there's no divine retribution to serve me justice!"

Oh, slippery theists...[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics