Total Posts:94|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Delusion of Atheist on Evolution

Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 9:52:50 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It's a wonder to me why creationists and religious people never point this out. Ever notice the hypocrisy that atheist use?

When a religious person says that God created man and the atheist ask for proof, they may show them religious scripture stating that God created man. The atheist will say that it's not proof because they are only words with no evidence that the words are true.

Notice, it's not proof because they are just words stating something occured, which is not proof that something actually occured. One has to prove that the words are actually true, according to atheist. This means that there must also be proof that those who record a document are truthful.

Yet when an atheist is asked of what proof they have that evolution is true, they themselves refer to records and documentation claiming that scientists have discovered certain fossils, and other studies, peer-reviewed research, etc, as proof that natural selection is true. In other words, they themselves are relying on someone's words, with no proof that the words are true. Then it goes down hill from there. For if you ask of what proof they have that the scientists are telling the truth, they refer to another document or records claiming that scientists have discovered certain fossils, and other studies, peer-reviewed research, etc, as proof that evolution is true. In other words, more words that something occured, but no roof that they are speaking truthfully.

This is hypocrisy in the highest order. If a religious person cannot use the words of scripture as proof that creation is correct because words are not proof that they are truthful, then atheist cannot use the words of scientists as proof that natural selection is true.

For an atheist to be correct that natural selection is true, they have to, according to their own logic, provide proof that the words that scientists have discovered fossils and other evidence is true. But they can't. They are quick to state that religious scripture are lies and myths, and will even go as far as to proving so by....you guessed it... the words of someone else. In other words, they are relying on the word of others just like religious people, yet when a religious person does it, it becomes false.

Now the kicker, for even the words and works of scientists have demonstrated that scientists themselves lie about natural selection.

1. Piltdown man was a hoax by scientists where false fossils were created and put together as proof that humans evolved from ape-like ancestors.

2. Javaman was a hoax in the same way as piltdown man.

3. Ota Benga, an african boy, was forcefully taken captive by scientists and placed in a museum for the public to live as proof of a live ape-like person as proof of natural selection. He eventually committed suicide.

Here, we have just three examples that scientists do in fact lie about natural selection that even scientists do not deny. And when we consider the fact that no one can present actual video footage of a species evolving into another species, this alone is proof that evolution, or natural selection is a big lie and a hoax.

So the next time an atheist person says that natural selection is true and they present documentation to support it, with claims that scientists have analyzed, studied, researched, used peer-reviewed methods, just simply ask them what proof they have that the people who created the document are telling the truth and watch them squirm. Or they will use circular logic and claim that the proof that something was peer -reviewed is that it was peer-reviewed. Or the proof that a document came from scientists is that...it came from scientists. Then include the fact that scientists lie, as in the case of piltdown man and javaman, and you will see a lot of squirming, backpeddling, snapping because they've been exposed, etc.

The delusion of atheism summed up.
EvanK
Posts: 599
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 10:03:30 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Why couldn't God use evolution to create mankind? I don't often see people arguing that. I don't believe the bible is true as far as creation goes. 7 days? Garden of Eden? Talking snake? Give me a break.

I believe in God, but I believe in evolution as well, and that God used it to create the Earth. We have more proof for evolution than we have for the story of creation. But why couldn't God have used evolution?
The problem with socialism is that, sooner or later, you run out of people's money."_Margaret Thatcher

"The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."_Thomas Jefferson

"The beauty of the Second Amendment is that it will not be needed until they try to take it."_Thomas Jefferson

"It is easier to fool someone than to convince them that they have been fooled."-Mark Twain
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 10:19:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
What evens said. It always annoys me when people assume theism and evolution are mutually exclusive.

But anyways, scientific documentation is not even near comparable to religious. While we should question some scientists word, you would have to assume one huge hoax or conspiracy was going on amongst hundreds or thousands of scientists to question others.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
tvellalott
Posts: 10,864
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 10:34:17 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
For the TL;DR crowd:

Religious scripture should be considered on the same level of evidential credibility as scientific research.

RESPONSE:
No. I will debate you on this any time you like Fatihah.
"Caitlyn Jenner is an incredibly brave and stunningly beautiful woman."

Muh threads
Using mafia tactics in real-life: http://www.debate.org...
6 years of DDO: http://www.debate.org...
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:16:51 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 10:03:30 PM, EvanK wrote:
Why couldn't God use evolution to create mankind? I don't often see people arguing that. I don't believe the bible is true as far as creation goes. 7 days? Garden of Eden? Talking snake? Give me a break.

I believe in God, but I believe in evolution as well, and that God used it to create the Earth. We have more proof for evolution than we have for the story of creation. But why couldn't God have used evolution?

Response: God could have used evolution. However, evolution is used by atheist to prove that there is no God, which is my contention.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:21:10 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 10:19:02 PM, phantom wrote:
What evens said. It always annoys me when people assume theism and evolution are mutually exclusive.

But anyways, scientific documentation is not even near comparable to religious. While we should question some scientists word, you would have to assume one huge hoax or conspiracy was going on amongst hundreds or thousands of scientists to question others.

Response: We would also have to assume one big hoax around religious scripture as well, So the same argument applies. I can understand an atheist denying religion, but not God. If one claims that religious scripture is wrong and that all of it is either lies or mythical nonsense because there is no proof that the authors of scripture are speaking truthfully, then one cannot claim the evidence of evolution is true until you can prove that the scientists making the claim are truthful.
Invalid
Posts: 105
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2012 11:38:45 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I'm sorry, but you've got to be joking. "Atheists refer to documentations that claims scientists have found fossils". The stupidity of this sentence alone is beyond my comprehension. Average citizens don't have the evidence and research just lying around or sitting in their pockets. That's why we"refer to evidence. However, if you would like to see the evidence r research for yourself, go to the nearest museum of evolution or research facility. Our evidence is for viewing, whereas yours is not.
"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence."
- Christopher Hitchens
WriterDave
Posts: 934
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 2:30:37 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
You need not take the scientists' word for it. Go dig through the rocks yourself. If you make even a single genuine find of a mammalian fossil in the Precambrian strata, then our modern understanding of evolution is instantly destroyed. And no, the scientific community would not try to silence you -- they would be excited by your find, just as they were (cautiously) excited when the CERN guys thought they had discovered FTL neutrinos.

How can Genesis 1:1 be tested?
Writer. Liberal atheist. Official "Official of the FREEDO Bureaucracy" of the FREEDO Bureaucracy.

Edit To Civilize, with FAQs: http://bit.ly...
Insult Ownership: http://bit.ly...
Haters: http://bit.ly...

"I said you are a fake, a phony, and a fraud, but that doesn't mean I think you're putting on an act." --Innomen
socialpinko
Posts: 10,458
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 3:06:30 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Only an arse would purposely use evolution as a mechanism to create humanity. Billions of species dying out just so we can be here coupled with the fact that evolution by itself is only contingent on natural phenomenon makes God "guiding" it unlikely. If God exists and is benevolent then I doubt it had any part in our evolutionary development.
: At 9/29/2014 10:55:59 AM, imabench wrote:
: : At 9/29/2014 9:43:46 AM, kbub wrote:
: :
: : DDO should discredit support of sexual violence at any time and in every way.
:
: I disagree.
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 5:41:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The observations, methodologies, and evidences for evolution are completely, 100% reproducible. If you doubt them, then go seek them out yourself.

This can't be said of the Bible. The Bible is a collection of inscrutable anecdotes mixed in with a bit of actual history.
twocupcakes
Posts: 2,750
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 7:10:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
You can go to museums, study biology and perform science yourself. Feel free to check the work of scientists if you doubt them. You cannot go back in time to obsereve supernatural phenomena that happened thousands of years ago.

Why can should your religious scripture be believed over the many other religious scriptures and Gods? You claim that it is hypocritical to trust in one person and not anothers. So, you must be a hypocrit for believing your religious text, while denouncing the many other religious texts, right?
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 7:44:50 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 11:16:51 PM, Fatihah wrote:
At 6/23/2012 10:03:30 PM, EvanK wrote:
Why couldn't God use evolution to create mankind? I don't often see people arguing that. I don't believe the bible is true as far as creation goes. 7 days? Garden of Eden? Talking snake? Give me a break.

I believe in God, but I believe in evolution as well, and that God used it to create the Earth. We have more proof for evolution than we have for the story of creation. But why couldn't God have used evolution?

Response: God could have used evolution. However, evolution is used by atheist to prove that there is no God,

You do know sects of Christianity reconcile this right? Theistic evolution, read up on it. And evolution doesn't exactly disprove God, only Creationism.

which is my contention.

No its not...
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 7:49:28 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Cross-reference the Bible, and then we'll start a discussion.
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
drafterman
Posts: 18,870
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 7:57:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 7:49:28 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Cross-reference the Bible, and then we'll start a discussion.

That's the beauty: it cross references itself!
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:06:13 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/23/2012 11:38:45 PM, Invalid wrote:
I'm sorry, but you've got to be joking. "Atheists refer to documentations that claims scientists have found fossils". The stupidity of this sentence alone is beyond my comprehension. Average citizens don't have the evidence and research just lying around or sitting in their pockets. That's why we"refer to evidence. However, if you would like to see the evidence r research for yourself, go to the nearest museum of evolution or research facility. Our evidence is for viewing, whereas yours is not.

Response: You've done nothing but prove my point. For you can also go to museums and discover religious scriptures and writings of eyewitnesses to miracles of prophets, yet you reject them, thus exposing your hypocrisy. For you say that proof of evolution is the fossils in museums, but you have no proof that the fossils are real, but rely that they are real because scientists have told you so, with no proof that the scientists are actual scientists, or that they are speaking the truth. Thus you have blind faith just like the religious people you critique, which is hypocrisy.
Stephen_Hawkins
Posts: 5,316
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:08:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 7:57:54 AM, drafterman wrote:
At 6/24/2012 7:49:28 AM, Stephen_Hawkins wrote:
Cross-reference the Bible, and then we'll start a discussion.

That's the beauty: it cross references itself!

Who wants some logic pie?
Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach him how to be Gay, he'll positively influence the GDP.

Social Contract Theory debate: http://www.debate.org...
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:12:52 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 7:10:11 AM, twocupcakes wrote:
You can go to museums, study biology and perform science yourself. Feel free to check the work of scientists if you doubt them. You cannot go back in time to obsereve supernatural phenomena that happened thousands of years ago.

Why can should your religious scripture be believed over the many other religious scriptures and Gods? You claim that it is hypocritical to trust in one person and not anothers. So, you must be a hypocrit for believing your religious text, while denouncing the many other religious texts, right?

Response: Not at all. For I personally do not just rely on words because it says so, but can verify that the words are true, unlike atheist who simply rely on the words of scientists but can not prove the actual words and scientists are speaking truthfully, but denounce religion because they say it's just words. That's hypocrisy.

Can you prove that the archaeological fossils in museums are actually fossils of human ancestors of another species without relying on the words of alleged scientists?
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:14:44 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 7:44:50 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

You do know sects of Christianity reconcile this right? Theistic evolution, read up on it. And evolution doesn't exactly disprove God, only Creationism.

which is my contention.

No its not...

Response: Yes, it is.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:26:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 8:12:52 AM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: Not at all. For I personally do not just rely on words because it says so, but can verify that the words are true, unlike atheist who simply rely on the words of scientists but can not prove the actual words and scientists are speaking truthfully, but denounce religion because they say it's just words. That's hypocrisy.

Can you prove that the archaeological fossils in museums are actually fossils of human ancestors of another species without relying on the words of alleged scientists?

So, your claim is basically that there is a massive conspiracy involving tens of thousands of scientists who are all claiming that there is overwhelming evidence for evolution when it is all in fact fabricated. It's not only absurd, it's incredibly insulting. These are people who have devoted large portions of their lives to become respective experts in their fields of study. They have devoted their lives to the pursuit of human knowledge and the origins of the diversity of life. And you, who (and this a certainty) have no education whatsoever in evolutionary biology are calling them liars.

I recommend reading this textbook explaining the fundamentals of evolutionary biology: http://www.amazon.com... . Not only is it a fascinating read, it will endow you with enough information that you won't have to reference evolutionary controversies from well over half a century ago to substantiate your points. Doing so just reveals your vast ignorance of the state of the contemporary understanding of evolution.
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:31:02 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 8:14:44 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 6/24/2012 7:44:50 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

You do know sects of Christianity reconcile this right? Theistic evolution, read up on it. And evolution doesn't exactly disprove God, only Creationism.

which is my contention.

No its not...

Response: Yes, it is.

Atheists don't normally use evolution to disprove God only Creationism.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:44:48 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 8:31:02 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

Atheists don't normally use evolution to disprove God only Creationism.

Response: But if a creationist believes in God then using evolution to disprove creationism against them would also mean that there is no God.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:49:49 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 8:44:48 AM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: But if a creationist believes in God then using evolution to disprove creationism against them would also mean that there is no God.

No, they could also revise their beliefs such that evolution and theism are not incompatible. They could change from creationist to theistic evolutionist.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:54:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 8:26:43 AM, Kinesis wrote:

So, your claim is basically that there is a massive conspiracy involving tens of thousands of scientists who are all claiming that there is overwhelming evidence for evolution when it is all in fact fabricated. It's not only absurd, it's incredibly insulting. These are people who have devoted large portions of their lives to become respective experts in their fields of study. They have devoted their lives to the pursuit of human knowledge and the origins of the diversity of life. And you, who (and this a certainty) have no education whatsoever in evolutionary biology are calling them liars.

I recommend reading this textbook explaining the fundamentals of evolutionary biology: http://www.amazon.com... . Not only is it a fascinating read, it will endow you with enough information that you won't have to reference evolutionary controversies from well over half a century ago to substantiate your points. Doing so just reveals your vast ignorance of the state of the contemporary understanding of evolution.

Response: Likewise, are you claiming that there is a massive conspiracy and scam by tens of thousands of religious people and scholars that there is a God and prophets have come and performed mirales as proof. That's not only absurd, but incredibly insulting as well. For there are many extensive efforts and accounts of eyewitnesses who have went through extensive accounts to preserve the word of God and have fought and died for its preservation, while you have no education (and this is a certainty) on comparative study and critical analysis whatsoever and you call religion a lie.

I recommend you read the Qur'an and the history and collection and preservation of it by the companions of Muhammad in Sahih Bukhari and Muslim, for doing so will reveal your vast ignorance of religion and expose the absurdities of evolution.
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:54:24 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 8:49:49 AM, Kinesis wrote:
At 6/24/2012 8:44:48 AM, Fatihah wrote:
Response: But if a creationist believes in God then using evolution to disprove creationism against them would also mean that there is no God.

No, they could also revise their beliefs such that evolution and theism are not incompatible. They could change from creationist to theistic evolutionist.

This. Theistic Evolution is accepted by many theologians (Catholicism implemented it in order to reconcile science and religion.)
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:56:02 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 8:49:49 AM, Kinesis wrote:


No, they could also revise their beliefs such that evolution and theism are not incompatible. They could change from creationist to theistic evolutionist.

Response: They could also reject evolution as being compatible with their religion.
Kinesis
Posts: 3,667
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:57:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 8:56:02 AM, Fatihah wrote:
No, they could also revise their beliefs such that evolution and theism are not incompatible. They could change from creationist to theistic evolutionist.

Response: They could also reject evolution as being compatible with their religion.

Don't reframe the conversation. Your original claim: "But if a creationist believes in God then using evolution to disprove creationism against them would also mean that there is no God." has been falsified.
THEBOMB
Posts: 2,872
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 8:58:15 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 8:56:02 AM, Fatihah wrote:
At 6/24/2012 8:49:49 AM, Kinesis wrote:


No, they could also revise their beliefs such that evolution and theism are not incompatible. They could change from creationist to theistic evolutionist.

Response: They could also reject evolution as being compatible with their religion.

Then they are being close-minded and not open to reason.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 9:00:59 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 8:58:15 AM, THEBOMB wrote:

Then they are being close-minded and not open to reason.

Response: And so are atheists.
Fatihah
Posts: 7,758
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/24/2012 9:02:34 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 6/24/2012 8:57:54 AM, Kinesis wrote:

Don't reframe the conversation. Your original claim: "But if a creationist believes in God then using evolution to disprove creationism against them would also mean that there is no God." has been falsified.

Response: A hypothetical can't be falsified, so your claim is false.