Total Posts:38|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why religious people refuse to meet half-way

munkhtulgaod
Posts: 5
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/28/2014 10:42:59 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

If it ain't Jesus, it ain't right.
tkubok
Posts: 5,044
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 9:13:40 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:42:59 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

If it ain't Jesus, it ain't right.

That isnt a why or a how, that is simply a what.
Brendan21
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 9:29:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

The problem is when people accept things as absolute truths, which is exactly what religion tells people to do. It is inherently fallacious to accept anything that can't be physically proven (IE jumping off a 700 foot tall bridge head first and surviving), even if you believe it to be true and the most probable.
PeacefulChaos
Posts: 2,610
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 9:55:33 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/29/2014 9:13:40 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:42:59 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

If it ain't Jesus, it ain't right.

That isnt a why or a how, that is simply a what.

My mom's a teacher, and when she discussed some religious topics with another teacher at the school, that was the direct answer she gave my mom.

I thought it'd be funny to put it here.
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 10:03:17 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/29/2014 9:29:48 AM, Brendan21 wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

The problem is when people accept things as absolute truths, which is exactly what religion tells people to do. It is inherently fallacious to accept anything that can't be physically proven (IE jumping off a 700 foot tall bridge head first and surviving), even if you believe it to be true and the most probable.

Can that statement be physically proven?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
Brendan21
Posts: 294
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 10:10:50 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/29/2014 10:03:17 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 5/29/2014 9:29:48 AM, Brendan21 wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

The problem is when people accept things as absolute truths, which is exactly what religion tells people to do. It is inherently fallacious to accept anything that can't be physically proven (IE jumping off a 700 foot tall bridge head first and surviving), even if you believe it to be true and the most probable.

Can that statement be physically proven?

No, and very little can unless pertaining to the physical realm. Just proves my point though, nothing should just be flat out accepted. The stance that "I know nothing" is far more logical than the stance of one strict belief and its assumed absolute truths.
irreverent_god
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 12:42:27 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/29/2014 9:13:40 AM, tkubok wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:42:59 PM, PeacefulChaos wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

If it ain't Jesus, it ain't right.

That isnt a why or a how, that is simply a what.

Actually, it doesn't even qualify as a "what." It's merely the assertion of a "what," until such time as there is some supporting corroboration added to hold up the asserted "what." None, of course, will ever be forthcoming.
Logic and Reason are the precursor to Justice.
Faith and zealotry are the precursor to Folly.
matt.mcguire88
Posts: 1,137
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 1:12:05 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

Excellent :)

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

So far, so good. Nothing wrong with that I see. I'm a Christian and there is no restriction of being curious and exploring. There are no limits set on our minds, except that which God would consider harmful.
The only "theory" that would pose a problem is that of which God does not exist, of course then you would be rejecting theism... and your suggestion of "meeting in the middle" falls apart. As a believer, some spiritual truths are important to accept, only because they are things that are discerned by spirit. But nothing that you have mentioned here is offensive.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It would be helpful to rewrite the above, it could just be me but I'm finding it difficult to understand.
If you're asking religious people to meet you half way, what is it here^?

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

That's the YEC, no passages in the Bible give an age of the Earth. This needs to be put away with. I'm not agreeing with science, or the YEC, I'm saying the beginning of Genesis gives no such date or age.

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

They don't, and they shouldn't. The Bible does no such things. The Bible is not a science project, it's intent is to relay information about God and our spiritual well being. The scriptures give us a basic idea of creationism in a simple manner, the focus is on God and spiritual truths.
If I wanna learn something about a physical matter I will utilize science. If I wanna learn something about cooking I will utilize a cook book or a chef. If I want to learn about God and spiritual things and gain spiritual knowledge I can utilize scripture. No need to reject one for the other.
annanicole
Posts: 19,791
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 1:18:47 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Part of the answer lies in the fact that there is simply no chronology in the Bible - and it doesn't matter. I have never argued for a "young earth" ... an "old earth" ... or an "in-between earth" because .... it just doesn't matter. The Bible does say, "In the beginning God created .... " It does not say when the "beginning" was. Nor does it say precisely how He did it.

That's the conclusion that creationists ought to have. With that out of the way, I'm certainly willing to meet anyone half way.
Madcornishbiker: "No, I don't need a dictionary, I know how scripture uses words and that is all I need to now."
popculturepooka
Posts: 7,926
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/29/2014 4:12:38 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/29/2014 10:10:50 AM, Brendan21 wrote:
At 5/29/2014 10:03:17 AM, popculturepooka wrote:
At 5/29/2014 9:29:48 AM, Brendan21 wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

The problem is when people accept things as absolute truths, which is exactly what religion tells people to do. It is inherently fallacious to accept anything that can't be physically proven (IE jumping off a 700 foot tall bridge head first and surviving), even if you believe it to be true and the most probable.

Can that statement be physically proven?

No, and very little can unless pertaining to the physical realm. Just proves my point though, nothing should just be flat out accepted. The stance that "I know nothing" is far more logical than the stance of one strict belief and its assumed absolute truths.

So that statement is inherently fallacious...right?
At 10/3/2016 11:49:13 PM, thett3 wrote:
BLACK LIVES MATTER!
neutral
Posts: 4,478
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2014 2:47:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

There are several common atheistic errors here:

#1 - Creationists are religious people, they are certainly not ALL religious people in existence.

#2 - Many religious people are avowed evolutionists (myself included), and readily accept the scientific theory of evolution.

#3 - Many atheists flatly refuse to accept that there is anything in the evidential record that leaves open room for any other view save their own.

#4 - the choice in not atheism or Creationism, it atheism vs. religion - and when you must take on the most extreme religious interpretation and ignore the moderate ones (as adopted by the Catholic Church for example) - perhaps the failure to come half way is a two sided problem.

Additionally, there seems to be some kind of irrational belief that everyone MUST acknowledge evolution. Tell me, Strong theory is generally poorly understood by the general populace, as is quantum mechanics, etc., does this pose a threat of some sort?

What does a man gain by denyng evolution and accepting God? Well, God of course. He also gains what many of us lack these days - certainty. He gains a methodoly of understanding the world and his roll in it and in his community. If he gets sick, he still goes to the hospital and garners the benefits of evolutionary advances through biology and medicine, correct?

He also brings something to a discussion that an evolutionists, with survival of the fittesy mentality, cannot: morality. He brings a moral framework into a situation that is equally valid.

Tell me, if killing innocent people is wrong ... should we have invaded Iraq? Many of those who resisted this effort were deeply religious people.

There is a values question, about what we value as individuals that many atheists are blind about: knoweldge is important, but it is hardly the only important thing in the world.
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2014 2:17:40 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
your evidence is not evidence (even if it is)

And that's where I stopped reading. What the hell are you even talking about?
Installgentoo
Posts: 1,420
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2014 2:17:54 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
your evidence is not evidence (even if it is)

And that's where I stopped reading. What the hell are you even talking about?
klkl47
Posts: 92
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/30/2014 4:18:41 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

I think one deals with physical the with everything that is not. So they are talking about 2 different things. It's like watching a bird debate a squirrel
Illegalcombatant
Posts: 4,008
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/31/2014 7:45:41 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

If some one is coming from the view that the bible is the perfect word of God, then what ever is in the bible is true must be true.

Thus if any claim is made, whether scientific or otherwise that is not compatible with the bible..........THEN IT MUST BE FALSE.
"Seems like another attempt to insert God into areas our knowledge has yet to penetrate. You figure God would be bigger than the gaps of our ignorance." Drafterman 19/5/12
Measure
Posts: 142
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2014 2:33:16 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

Theory of evolution? The theory has not been proven. And you base it on limited knowledge that is constantly changing? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation. Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it? Did you do the research yourself? Or are you trusting someone else to give it to you? And what is half way on your part? What are you willing to give up?
bulproof
Posts: 25,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2014 4:43:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/12/2014 2:33:16 AM, Measure wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

Theory of evolution? The theory has not been proven. And you base it on limited knowledge that is constantly changing? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation. Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it? Did you do the research yourself? Or are you trusting someone else to give it to you? And what is half way on your part? What are you willing to give up?

Did you do the research and find god sitting on a throne just above the solid dome covering the earth? Or are just believing what someone, you don't know, told you?
civilbuthonest
Posts: 110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2014 5:17:30 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/12/2014 2:33:16 AM, Measure wrote:
Theory of evolution? The theory has not been proven. And you base it on limited knowledge that is constantly changing? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation. Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it? Did you do the research yourself? Or are you trusting someone else to give it to you? And what is half way on your part? What are you willing to give up?

I think you have hit the nail right on the head. In common with many creationists and religious folk, you clearly do not want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it.

Unfortunately, truth is not manipulated so easily. We can 'want' or 'not want' any particular theory to be true, but this has no influence on whether the theory actually is true.

The evidence for evolution is overwhelming, and it makes makes not a jot of difference whether you or I would personally prefer it not to be true.

By all means, ask why should we believe in the theory that we (and all life) have evolved, and experts in the field will provide you with extensive evidence demonstrating showing that life on earth has indeed evolved.

However, if (as you did) you instead ask why anyone would want to believe in a theory that we 'just evolved' then you have unwittingly displayed your own prejudice. Personal want has no place in the pursuit of truth.
Measure
Posts: 142
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2014 8:37:05 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/12/2014 5:17:30 AM, civilbuthonest wrote:
At 6/12/2014 2:33:16 AM, Measure wrote:
Theory of evolution? The theory has not been proven. And you base it on limited knowledge that is constantly changing? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation. Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it? Did you do the research yourself? Or are you trusting someone else to give it to you? And what is half way on your part? What are you willing to give up?

I think you have hit the nail right on the head. In common with many creationists and religious folk, you clearly do not want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it.

Unfortunately, truth is not manipulated so easily. We can 'want' or 'not want' any particular theory to be true, but this has no influence on whether the theory actually is true.

The evidence for evolution is overwhelming, and it makes makes not a jot of difference whether you or I would personally prefer it not to be true.

By all means, ask why should we believe in the theory that we (and all life) have evolved, and experts in the field will provide you with extensive evidence demonstrating showing that life on earth has indeed evolved.

However, if (as you did) you instead ask why anyone would want to believe in a theory that we 'just evolved' then you have unwittingly displayed your own prejudice. Personal want has no place in the pursuit of truth.

Experts in the field! Extensive evidence! Waiting for some.
Half way? Is this your half way?
Just switched the question around and gave it the same way you gave it but no response. Slippery!
Measure
Posts: 142
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2014 8:40:44 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/12/2014 4:43:30 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/12/2014 2:33:16 AM, Measure wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

Theory of evolution? The theory has not been proven. And you base it on limited knowledge that is constantly changing? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation. Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it? Did you do the research yourself? Or are you trusting someone else to give it to you? And what is half way on your part? What are you willing to give up?

Did you do the research and find god sitting on a throne just above the solid dome covering the earth? Or are just believing what someone, you don't know, told you?

Did the research and HE is not sitting on the throne just above the earth.
bulproof
Posts: 25,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2014 8:49:55 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/12/2014 8:40:44 AM, Measure wrote:
At 6/12/2014 4:43:30 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/12/2014 2:33:16 AM, Measure wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

Theory of evolution? The theory has not been proven. And you base it on limited knowledge that is constantly changing? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation. Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it? Did you do the research yourself? Or are you trusting someone else to give it to you? And what is half way on your part? What are you willing to give up?

Did you do the research and find god sitting on a throne just above the solid dome covering the earth? Or are just believing what someone, you don't know, told you?

Did the research and HE is not sitting on the throne just above the earth.

Ooh so you don't believe that the bible is the word of god? 'Cause that is what his word says. Or is god a liar?
Measure
Posts: 142
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2014 8:51:23 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/12/2014 8:49:55 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/12/2014 8:40:44 AM, Measure wrote:
At 6/12/2014 4:43:30 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/12/2014 2:33:16 AM, Measure wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

Theory of evolution? The theory has not been proven. And you base it on limited knowledge that is constantly changing? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation. Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it? Did you do the research yourself? Or are you trusting someone else to give it to you? And what is half way on your part? What are you willing to give up?

Did you do the research and find god sitting on a throne just above the solid dome covering the earth? Or are just believing what someone, you don't know, told you?

Did the research and HE is not sitting on the throne just above the earth.

Ooh so you don't believe that the bible is the word of god? 'Cause that is what his word says. Or is god a liar?

Texts?
bulproof
Posts: 25,303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2014 9:06:57 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/12/2014 8:51:23 AM, Measure wrote:
At 6/12/2014 8:49:55 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/12/2014 8:40:44 AM, Measure wrote:
At 6/12/2014 4:43:30 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/12/2014 2:33:16 AM, Measure wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

Theory of evolution? The theory has not been proven. And you base it on limited knowledge that is constantly changing? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation. Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it? Did you do the research yourself? Or are you trusting someone else to give it to you? And what is half way on your part? What are you willing to give up?

Did you do the research and find god sitting on a throne just above the solid dome covering the earth? Or are just believing what someone, you don't know, told you?

Did the research and HE is not sitting on the throne just above the earth.

Ooh so you don't believe that the bible is the word of god? 'Cause that is what his word says. Or is god a liar?

Texts?

Ohh puhhhleeeeeease .
It's your book of magic things.
If you don't know where it's said, then you can't be a good godbotherer.

Your god sits on a throne above the solid dome covering the earth.
Just ask NASA. bwuahahahahahahahaha
civilbuthonest
Posts: 110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/12/2014 9:59:57 PM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/12/2014 8:37:05 AM, Measure wrote:
At 6/12/2014 5:17:30 AM, civilbuthonest wrote:
At 6/12/2014 2:33:16 AM, Measure wrote:
Theory of evolution? The theory has not been proven. And you base it on limited knowledge that is constantly changing? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation. Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it? Did you do the research yourself? Or are you trusting someone else to give it to you? And what is half way on your part? What are you willing to give up?

I think you have hit the nail right on the head. In common with many creationists and religious folk, you clearly do not want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it.

Unfortunately, truth is not manipulated so easily. We can 'want' or 'not want' any particular theory to be true, but this has no influence on whether the theory actually is true.

The evidence for evolution is overwhelming, and it makes makes not a jot of difference whether you or I would personally prefer it not to be true.

By all means, ask why should we believe in the theory that we (and all life) have evolved, and experts in the field will provide you with extensive evidence demonstrating showing that life on earth has indeed evolved.

However, if (as you did) you instead ask why anyone would want to believe in a theory that we 'just evolved' then you have unwittingly displayed your own prejudice. Personal want has no place in the pursuit of truth.

Experts in the field! Extensive evidence! Waiting for some.
Half way? Is this your half way?
Just switched the question around and gave it the same way you gave it but no response. Slippery!

You may or may not agree with the evidence for evolution, that's up to you, but it is a simple fact that there is extensive evidence out there. Try your local library, or surf the net if you prefer.

I'll admit that I did not address the main topic, of 'meeting halfway', because I picked up on and was fascinated by your stance of not wanting to believe in evolution. In my experience, humans frequently and unconsciously form conclusions based on what they want to believe or don't want to believe, rather than on what the evidence in fact shows, and your posting shows that you fit this mold exactly.

You don't want to believe in evolution because it clashes with your religious beliefs and, as you put it so well, Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it?

You could not have expressed you opinion better if you tried.
Measure
Posts: 142
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/14/2014 1:03:48 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/12/2014 9:59:57 PM, civilbuthonest wrote:
At 6/12/2014 8:37:05 AM, Measure wrote:
At 6/12/2014 5:17:30 AM, civilbuthonest wrote:
At 6/12/2014 2:33:16 AM, Measure wrote:
Theory of evolution? The theory has not been proven. And you base it on limited knowledge that is constantly changing? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation. Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it? Did you do the research yourself? Or are you trusting someone else to give it to you? And what is half way on your part? What are you willing to give up?

I think you have hit the nail right on the head. In common with many creationists and religious folk, you clearly do not want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it.

Unfortunately, truth is not manipulated so easily. We can 'want' or 'not want' any particular theory to be true, but this has no influence on whether the theory actually is true.

The evidence for evolution is overwhelming, and it makes makes not a jot of difference whether you or I would personally prefer it not to be true.

By all means, ask why should we believe in the theory that we (and all life) have evolved, and experts in the field will provide you with extensive evidence demonstrating showing that life on earth has indeed evolved.

However, if (as you did) you instead ask why anyone would want to believe in a theory that we 'just evolved' then you have unwittingly displayed your own prejudice. Personal want has no place in the pursuit of truth.

Experts in the field! Extensive evidence! Waiting for some.
Half way? Is this your half way?
Just switched the question around and gave it the same way you gave it but no response. Slippery!

You may or may not agree with the evidence for evolution, that's up to you, but it is a simple fact that there is extensive evidence out there. Try your local library, or surf the net if you prefer.

I'll admit that I did not address the main topic, of 'meeting halfway', because I picked up on and was fascinated by your stance of not wanting to believe in evolution. In my experience, humans frequently and unconsciously form conclusions based on what they want to believe or don't want to believe, rather than on what the evidence in fact shows, and your posting shows that you fit this mold exactly.

You don't want to believe in evolution because it clashes with your religious beliefs and, as you put it so well, Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it?

You could not have expressed you opinion better if you tried.

Zig,zag,need to get out of this conversation? Why evolutionist refuse to answer there own question when asked. Evolution clashes with its self. It doesn't know what it believes from one week to the next, always "evading, oops, evolving" so you never know what half-way is. For the second time, what do you give up on your part of meeting half-way?
Measure
Posts: 142
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/14/2014 1:09:09 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
At 6/12/2014 9:06:57 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/12/2014 8:51:23 AM, Measure wrote:
At 6/12/2014 8:49:55 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/12/2014 8:40:44 AM, Measure wrote:
At 6/12/2014 4:43:30 AM, bulproof wrote:
At 6/12/2014 2:33:16 AM, Measure wrote:
At 5/28/2014 10:30:01 PM, munkhtulgaod wrote:
I keep reading through numerous forums and debates and we all know that this is one of those topics that will never end so I'm not gonna try to disprove religion and anything but let's talk about religious people themselves.

for lack of a better word, Evolutionists (me included) are curious and want to explore nature and know more. Yes we have theories you don't agree with and yes we they do sometimes change when better evidence comes up. We accept new evidence and are willing to change our beliefs based on the best evidence available.

However, creationists seem to just say god exists, your evidence is not evidence (even if it is) then say your science explains this small part of the bible so the whole bible is true or that the parts that your evidence explains can be justified because god is supernatural.

It just seems to me that creationists have one conclusion and they refuse to let anything change that... Even when there is 'observable evidence' (which the creationists seem to favor) that the world is more than 6000 years old!

Tell me why... or rather HOW anyone can just blatantly choose which scientific evidence to believe and which ones to dismiss solely based on what a 2000 year old book (which no one can prove is non-fiction btw) tells them to?

Theory of evolution? The theory has not been proven. And you base it on limited knowledge that is constantly changing? It takes more faith to believe in evolution than creation. Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it? Did you do the research yourself? Or are you trusting someone else to give it to you? And what is half way on your part? What are you willing to give up?

Did you do the research and find god sitting on a throne just above the solid dome covering the earth? Or are just believing what someone, you don't know, told you?

Did the research and HE is not sitting on the throne just above the earth.

Ooh so you don't believe that the bible is the word of god? 'Cause that is what his word says. Or is god a liar?

Texts?

Ohh puhhhleeeeeease .
It's your book of magic things.
If you don't know where it's said, then you can't be a good godbotherer.

Your god sits on a throne above the solid dome covering the earth.
Just ask NASA. bwuahahahahahahahaha

No text? Have a nice day!
civilbuthonest
Posts: 110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/14/2014 1:36:21 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
I'll admit that I did not address the main topic, of 'meeting halfway', because I picked up on and was fascinated by your stance of not wanting to believe in evolution. In my experience, humans frequently and unconsciously form conclusions based on what they want to believe or don't want to believe, rather than on what the evidence in fact shows, and your posting shows that you fit this mold exactly.

You don't want to believe in evolution because it clashes with your religious beliefs and, as you put it so well, Why would anyone want to believe in a theory that we just evolved and that's it?

You could not have expressed you opinion better if you tried.

Zig,zag,need to get out of this conversation? Why evolutionist refuse to answer there own question when asked. Evolution clashes with its self. It doesn't know what it believes from one week to the next, always "evading, oops, evolving" so you never know what half-way is. For the second time, what do you give up on your part of meeting half-way?

I'm not sure what 'meeting half way' exactly means. In any debate, if one person clearly has the better case then they should express that case fully, even if it does 90% (or even 100%) demolish the competing case. That said, both sides should be civil, respectful, and readily acknowledge valid points made by the opposition.

To be honest, I'm not sure you understood the point I was originally making about 'not wanting' a theory to be true, for you have not responded to it. Nonetheless, I'm fairly sure that many others did understand, but with the point made, I won't hammer you any further with it. Peace, my friend. :)
intellectuallyprimitive
Posts: 1,000
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/14/2014 1:37:43 AM
Posted: 2 years ago
Pious individuals that claim god exists fails to satisfy criteria of what can be considered demonstrable evidence for god. Half-way is putting it utterly too generous.