seanie

GeoTheo

You're not making any sense at all.

Try edging back towards some semblance of rationality.

Starboy

Perhaps you confuse atheism with anti-theism.

Starboy

Mageth

It is a known fact that an observer changes phenomena.

Huh? Do you think this observation from Quantum Physics is a universal maxim?

seanie

Perhaps we have different dictionaries.

'anti-theism' doesn't appear in mine.

scigirl

That is a rather silly sentence. It should read, "What is the biggest proof of evolution to anyone?
Answer: evidence such as fossil record, DNA, etc.

What does religion have to do with scientific evidence?

Incidentally, you can be an atheist and not accept evolution. Yes I do know someone that does this! He never took biology in college either.

Ok let's just say this is true.

I still fail to see you your answer (goddidit) is both non-problematic, and intellectually satisfying. You have no proof god make the earth like the Bible said he did, and you have no explanation or mechanism of how he could have done so. If abiogenesis is a proble for atheists, then every single scientific discovery, that finds a natural explanation for something, is a problem for theists.

I believe neither to be true.

Oh and one more thing: I did not choose to be an atheist. Just like you do not choose to disbelieve in Santa Claus (or do you)?
But what would we be then? Buddhists? Hindus? Christians? Alien believers?

You see, disproving evolution/abiogenesis does not automatically make your particular brand of religion true.

You would still need proof that the earth is 6000 years old, adam and eve existed, etc etc (there has been no such proof uncovered).

scigirl

MrDarwin

Overlooked this one:

I think I speak for many atheists, agnostics, and even theists when I say that the best evidence of evolution is not life itself, but rather a combination of factors, of which one of the strongest is the fossil record. The fossil record was certainly critical to Darwin.

In fact, if life existed with no record whatsoever of past life (i.e., no fossil record, and no way to test, chemically or otherwise, for the past existence of life), I have my doubts as to whether the theory of evolution would have ever been developed.

Starboy

You are right! I spelled it wrong. It should be antitheist.

<a href="http://onlinedictionary.datasegment.com/word/Antitheist/" target="_blank">Definition of antitheist</a>

Starboy

GeoTheo

Why would this be outside the realm of quantam physics?
also, I'm really not trying to annoy anyone here. But it is obvious to me, that the question of origins is not open to any of the people now participating in this thread besides me.
I can believe in a supernatural creator as the origin of the Universe or I could reject that and adopt a totally naturalistic origin. But once I reject one of the options I am no longer objective. That is why I can see it and the people who have chosen the second option can't.
For example in the duck-rabbit scenario. It is impossible to see both at the same time. You can switch back and forth. But not if you are say, unfamiliar with what ducks look like. In that case your perspective would be limited to only one choice. Thus is the case with Atheists.
The supernatural choice with respect to origins has already been rejected after that point no amount of looking at the data( i.e. fossils, DNA etc. will create that perspective.
It is not there.

MrDarwin

What GeoTheo is overlooking is that many of us once did, in fact, not only consider, but fully believe in, a creator/designer, and a supernatural origin for the universe at the very least. And we have abandoned such a belief in the complete absence of evidence for such a belief. And in the case of YEC, in light of abundant evidence against such a belief. As Scigirl points out, our beliefs are not a matter of choice; our beliefs are based on our knowledge of the evidence.

What GeoTheo is not doing is providing us with any reason why we should change our minds, or any evidence that our beliefs are wrong.

seanie

Starboy

Your source gives the following definitions.

Atheist \A"the*ist\, n. [Gr. &?; without god; 'a priv. + &?; god: cf. F. athéiste.] 1. One who disbelieves or denies the existence of a God, or supreme intelligent Being.

Antitheist \An`ti*the"ist\, n. A disbeliever in the existence of God.
-- web1913

Not a very clear cut distinction to me.

Either way this may not be the best place for a discussion on the definitions for these terms.

I'm off to the pub anyway.

Keep fighting the good fight.