Freethought & Rationalism Archive

MrDarwin · 06-13-2002, 07:57 AM

I'm starting a new discussion for our latest member, FeistyCreationChick. To get things started, here's what she posted in the "ulterior motives" discussion:

Quote:

Originally posted by FeistyCreationChick:
<strong>

First of all, how is evolutionism more credible than creationism? How is it more believable that our entire universe with it's complex make-up formed out of gases? And just exactly where did these gases come from? Didn't something or someone have to create them? If so, WHAT created these gases if God didn't? And just what or who is this "what"? If a ball rolls down the stairs, you have to come to the conclusion that something or someone set it into motion. What if there was no one except you, home? What conclusion would you come to?

The funny thing is, Creationism is A LOT easier to believe than Evolutionism. Creationism supports science in more ways just because it ADMITS that nothing can be formed from nothing. Nothing can come from nothing. Something that is created must first have a creator, an architect, even if it just happens to be a bunch of gases.

Tell me where these gases came from.

Here's another thought...you are looking at "GOD" as "religion". God is not religion. God is not a denomination. I am not religious, and do not affiliate myself with any religion. My belief is in a relationship with my creator, who I am in awe of. So you see, creationism has nothing to do with religion, for religion is created by humans.

I can understand why people are turned off by creationism only by one observation: They have connected it with man's formation of religion. Open your mind, take away the "man-made religion", and focus a little harder on what this all means. When you do that, you will see God as he truly is. Not a police officer who gives you a moral "ticket" everytime you do wrong. Not a Santa Claus who is a celestial, grandfatherly type who smiles at everything we do then pats us on the head while giving us whatever we want. Not a tyrannical ruler who demands us to bow before him in fear. Not a "Big Man" John Wayne-type figure. Not "The Force" which would be characterized by all of nature and everything in it being God. You have to look at God as he really is: Our awesome creator who loves us and wants us to return to him for guidance. He's our Father.

Your parents created your body through human biology. Now, I can't speak for everyone, I'm sure, but when I was a child, I was in awe (relatively speaking) of my parents. I feared them in a healthy way (please keep in mind that I had great parents) and listened when they told me the basics of how to live a good life. "Don't run with that scissor! You'll poke your eye out!", or "Eat all of your vegetables so you'll be healthy and strong". I look at God as my father, my creator. He is my guide to life on this earth. He is my "spiritual parent" who shows me the right path.

Once you begin to look at God in THAT way, the way that man-made religion blacks out at times, you will see creationism in a new light. Maybe you will believe it, maybe you won't. But you need to open your mind to that possibility of "God the Father" before you can dismiss any of it.

Okay, I'm off on a tangent. Sorry.

Oh, one more thing...you guys need to not only read evolution literature, you need to read creation literature. I have read many books on evolutionism so that I could understand what it was that I needed to debate against. I suggest you do the same. You will find that there are MANY, MANY more holes in evolution than creation. Remember, Carbon Dating has now proven to be totally inconclusive. I'll comment on that later, since this is getting way, way too long.

Ciao for now,

Feisty</strong>

We've already all piled on in the other discussion, so for the moment let's give her the benefit of the doubt and address her points seriously. Perhaps she will come back to support her main arguments.

hezekiah jones · 06-13-2002, 08:07 AM

I don't see many points there, but, I think there was the 'ol quark-gluon plasma before there was gas. Then you got yer liquids and yer solids.

Oh, and "Eat all your vegetables." That's a good point.

Late_Cretaceous · 06-13-2002, 08:26 AM

I hope she expresses those sentiments to her dad on father's day.

Ultimate Atheist · 06-13-2002, 08:30 AM

Your argument that there had to be a creator is flawed. If the fact that we and everthing else in the universe are here requires a creator, that leaves some interesting questions. Who created the creator? And who created the creator's creator? And what is that git's name? And why don't we bow down to him?

At lease evolution makes sense. At least the theory of evolution doesn't hinge on the existence of an invisible guy in the sky who is the beginning and the end of everything.

You can quote Christian propaganda all you want but it still requires faith in something that you can't prove.
<img src="graemlins/boohoo.gif" border="0" alt="[Boo Hoo]" />

Hastur · 06-13-2002, 08:41 AM

I hope she does come back on the Carbon Dating assertion. "totally inconclusive" regarding what, exactly?

And yes, dear; belief in a supernatural Deity (whatever you characterize It as being) is indeed religion. Your religion happens to have a single adherent. Yourself.

Furthermore, you haven't been comprehending these 'books on evolution' you've been reading if you still insist that comsology=evolution.

Do please get it straight, there's cosmology (How the Universe began and what processes it went through to get to here) and there's evolution (Which explains the diversity of life we see here on this one planet, Earth.)

Whichever one you choose to debate, I'm sure you'll find a good number of knowledgeable participants here. Just remember to actually read their responses and reply with your own.

MrDarwin · 06-13-2002, 08:50 AM

Quote:

First of all, how is evolutionism more credible than creationism? How is it more believable that our entire universe with it's complex make-up formed out of gases? And just exactly where did these gases come from? Didn't something or someone have to create them? If so, WHAT created these gases if God didn't?

I'd like to expand on my comments in the other discussion. FCC is buying into two big creationist fallacies: first, that evolution deals with the origin of the universe (they are entirely separate questions); and that evolution and the existence of god(s) are mutually exclusive. Here are just a few of the numerous possibilities I can think of:

1. There is/are no god(s). The universe and life had entirely natural origins, and evolution has proceeded entirely naturally, all without supernatural influence.

2. A god or gods created the universe, then sat back to watch what would happen (or ceased to exist). Planets formed, life arose, evolution occurred, all without supernatural influence.

3. A god or gods created the universe and the first life, then sat back to watch what would happen (or ceased to exist); from that point, evolution proceeded entirely naturally, without supernatural influence of any kind.

4. A god or gods created the universe and life, and then stepped in occasionally to "tweak" the development of this life (e.g., by inducing mutations, by meddling with natural selection, by diverting asteroids or comets towards the earth, etc.) in such a way that this "tweaking" appears to be entirely natural.

Now, FCC, can you suggest any ways we might differentiate between these various scenarios?

[ June 13, 2002: Message edited by: MrDarwin ]</p>

ishalon · 06-13-2002, 03:07 PM

Quote:

4. A god or gods created the universe and life, and then stepped in occasionally to "tweak" the development of this life (e.g., by inducing mutations, by meddling with natural selection, by diverting asteroids or comets towards the earth, etc.) in such a way that this "tweaking" appears to be entirely natural.

Why would (t)he(y) bother making it appear natural? If (t)he(y)'re a god they should make their presence known, and definitely wouldn't try to hide it. So... that leaves 3.

ishalon · 06-13-2002, 03:13 PM

Quote:

The funny thing is, Creationism is A LOT easier to believe than Evolutionism.

- its "evolution".

- Spontaneous generation is alot easier to believe than creation.

- If you aren't religious, why do you sound so strangely like a Christian?

Autonemesis · 06-13-2002, 03:19 PM

"God the Father?"

How about God the Sperm Donor. I like that better.

SanDiegoAtheist · 06-13-2002, 03:44 PM

Quote:

The funny thing is, Creationism is A LOT easier to believe than Evolutionism.

This is one of my pet peeves.

Whether something is "easier to believe" than something else has very little to do with whether that something is actually TRUE or not.

It is EASIER TO BELIEVE that the world is flat than that there is a person only a few thousand miles away (as the mole digs) who thinks that "UP" is in the direction of my feet, and "DOWN" is in the direction of my head.

It is EASIER TO BELIEVE that lightning is caused by a God (take your pick of which one) being angry, than that lightning is actually caused by massive electrostatic potential differences between two clouds or a cloud and the earth.

It is EASIER TO BELIEVE that "light" is simply the opposite of "dark", and not an actual particle that also simultaneously behaves like a wave which interacts with photosensitive chemicals in a way that allows us to perceive our external world.

It is EASIER TO BELIEVE that the sun moves around the Earth rather than vice versa. That is after all what our eyes tell us.

The history of science - and of all mankind for that matter - is one of discarding ideas that are "EASIER TO BELIEVE" in favor of ideas that actually have evidence and support for them in the REAL WORLD, no matter HOW TOUGH THEY ARE TO BELIEVE.

Cheers,

The San Diego Atheist

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-13-2002, 08:07 AM	#2
hezekiah jones Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: WI Posts: 4,357	I don't see many points there, but, I think there was the 'ol quark-gluon plasma before there was gas. Then you got yer liquids and yer solids. Oh, and "Eat all your vegetables." That's a good point.

06-13-2002, 08:26 AM	#3
Late_Cretaceous Veteran Member Join Date: Oct 2001 Location: Alberta Posts: 1,049	I hope she expresses those sentiments to her dad on father's day.

06-13-2002, 08:30 AM	#4
Ultimate Atheist Senior Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Here Posts: 980	Your argument that there had to be a creator is flawed. If the fact that we and everthing else in the universe are here requires a creator, that leaves some interesting questions. Who created the creator? And who created the creator's creator? And what is that git's name? And why don't we bow down to him? At lease evolution makes sense. At least the theory of evolution doesn't hinge on the existence of an invisible guy in the sky who is the beginning and the end of everything. You can quote Christian propaganda all you want but it still requires faith in something that you can't prove. <img src="graemlins/boohoo.gif" border="0" alt="[Boo Hoo]" />

06-13-2002, 08:41 AM	#5
Hastur Regular Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Carcosa Posts: 238	I hope she does come back on the Carbon Dating assertion. "totally inconclusive" regarding what, exactly? And yes, dear; belief in a supernatural Deity (whatever you characterize It as being) is indeed religion. Your religion happens to have a single adherent. Yourself. Furthermore, you haven't been comprehending these 'books on evolution' you've been reading if you still insist that comsology=evolution. Do please get it straight, there's cosmology (How the Universe began and what processes it went through to get to here) and there's evolution (Which explains the diversity of life we see here on this one planet, Earth.) Whichever one you choose to debate, I'm sure you'll find a good number of knowledgeable participants here. Just remember to actually read their responses and reply with your own.

06-13-2002, 03:19 PM	#9
Autonemesis Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: I've left FRDB for good, due to new WI&P policy Posts: 12,048	"God the Father?" How about God the Sperm Donor. I like that better.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.