Evidence

[parllagio]

Further, there is no one that can claim that they absolutely know the origin of life. Whether it be evolutionist of Christians.

Well no "evolutionist" would claim with absolute certainty that they know the origin of life, evolution does not even address this. And I know plenty of christians that would claim with absolute certainty that they know the origin of life, but kudos to you for not claiming this.

But I think your overall theme is that atheist/christians look at the same evidence but come up with two different answers based on there preferences. This I believe is wrong, let's look at the origin of man for example. The bible says god created man by breathing life into dirt, and then created women from one of man's ribs. The bible is the evidence (there may be other evidence that you use, if so, let me know). Science looks at a multitude of evidence from DNA to the fossil record to prove that man evolved from apes. The "evidence" is different, that is why the outcome is different, it has nothing to do with preference.

I am arguing that a true and honest answer would be God. Further, that it is the God of Christianity, because all other religions contridict themselves or just arent logical. So would you all agree, that it really is a matter of preference?

Since when did christianity not contradict itself, and how is it logical?

[Faithless]

Okay, I just have to jump in here about this cancer thing, because I do have a real life story about this that I actually was there for.

My sister is a life-long fundamentalist.  This is because, as some of you know and some of you don't, she was raised by my Christian father while I was raised by my atheist mother.  I love my sister, and although she's a fundie, she's not quite as bad as some.  Over the years she has become convinced that evolution is real, and that the Earth is not 6,000 years old.  She believes god started evolution and that the earth is actually billions of years old.  Unfortunately, this is the only thing in her belief system that has changed.  She still believes in angels, demons, Jesus talks to her personally and puts things into her heart, the whole nine yards.

My sister had colon cancer.  Luckily they caught it early.  A section of her colon was removed, she went through chemo and radiation and whatever else they did to her, and eventually the doctors agreed that they'd managed to remove the whole tumor and she was cured.  During the time of this treatment, however, she had been going to some really wacko revivalist church where they moan and scream and faint in the aisle and so forth.  So this preacher keeps "laying hands" on her during this whole cancer ordeal.  And she will swear to you on a stack of bibles that the last time he did this she could feel god's mighty hand go into her body through the stomach and pull the cancer out of her body through her spine.

So my sister, my family, her whole church and the entire town absolutely and completely believe without a shadow of a doubt that god healed my sister in church that very day.  She has conveniently forgotten all the medical treatment she had, and that the doctors had told her two weeks before her "faith healing" that she was now cancer free.  She loves to tell this story, too, because it affirms for her that Jesus loves her and that god healed her.  The last time I called her on it and said, "What about the surgery, the treatment, and the fact that the doctors told you it was cured before you went to church?"  She said that the doctors couldn't have cured her because there was still a little left in there, and if god hadn't cured her she'd be dead.  Seriously.

So that's how a normal cancer story can get blown out of proportion so that a multitude of credulous sheep can proclaim god did it.

[Wechtlein Uns]

Perspective, do you believe in christianity? It would make sense, if you did, that you are claiming christianity as equally scientific as, well, science.

personally, my brother went to a faith healing when he had cancer, and god didn't do anything for him. I hate the fact that my brother is dead. He was a good guy. A real character. Sometimes I miss him a lot. I just wish he had been at peace when he died, because he wasn't. He cried the night before his death. Dammit!

forget it. I don't even know why I'm saying this.

[wheels5894]

Every scientific discovery can be both explained from a atheist scientific point of view and equally from a Christian scientific point of view. The Problem is not in the evidence, but in how it is interpreted.

I don't even know how to respond... Are you arguing that evolution and creationism are two different perspectives based of the same evidence?

Yes, that is exactly what I am saying. I know none of us here are experts in ALL scientific fields, but I have studied scientific research. What I have seen is that the evidence can go both ways. The problem is not the phenomena, but the cause of it. Further, there is no one that can claim that they absolutely know the origin of life. Whether it be evolutionist of Christians. Fair enough. That's what I mean when I say that we are in the same boat. We both can not claim with absolute certainty (from the evidence) that we are right. I would further argue that if you tried, you would be making claims way beyond the scientist who are masters in their fields. So then the question really becomes, What explains ALL of the phenomena of this life BETTER. I am arguing that a true and honest answer would be God. Further, that it is the God of Christianity, because all other religions contradict themselves or just aren't logical. So would you all agree, that it really is a matter of preference?

I think you have some problems with the science here.

1. Evidence, facts if you like, in science is collected together and a hypothesis made that explains the facts. This hypothesis has to be able to explain all the facts known. It also has to have some power of prediction so that  it can predict what other, new, evidence might come in. If it can do that and cannot be dislodged by the scientific community who are keen to knock it down, it becomes a theory.

2. Every time new facts come in, the theory is examined to see if it still holds - theories are always open to challenge.

3. For most science, probability is the key here, not absolute certainty.  So we cannot be absolutely sure gravity will still be the same tomorrow but it is a fair bet. Evolution is like this. We have fossil evidence, we have DNA evidence, we have we have comparative anatomy all of which point towards our theory being correct but no one is giving up looking for holes. However, because of all the pieces of evidence we have, no one can bring the theory down by arguing with one piece of the evidence or by claiming something is missing.

4. Evolution is to do with the progress of the earliest life through to higher forms. This is what Darwin started. The way life first appeared is called abiogensis and there have been a number of experiments which seem to suggest how it might have happened. Google will give the details for you. We have at least a hypothesis and some evidence for how this may have happened and you have a supernatural being for which there seems not to be direct evidence. I would expect that we might well make progress on this front in the years to come.

Broadly, if you want to negate the results of science, probability is not going to be the answer as you will also have to discuss the probability of your ideas being true as well and given the evidence science has I would expect that the balance would be on the side of science. That said, whilst I see no problem with you believing what you chose to believe, indeed I think it important you have that right, that does not mean I would put god and science on the same platform (assuming you mean by god an omnipotent supernatural being). The totality of science has given us huge insights into our world, universe and ourselves and will continue to do so. This has been to the benefit of people generally (war doesn't count unless you concede genocide in the books of Moses) and, given the choice, were you ill, of a scientifically development medical treatment or prayer and laying on of hands Paul suggests, I bet you would go for the former but I could be wrong.

[perspective]

Perspective, do you believe in christianity? It would make sense, if you did, that you are claiming christianity as equally scientific as, well, science.

personally, my brother went to a faith healing when he had cancer, and god didn't do anything for him. I hate the fact that my brother is dead. He was a good guy. A real character. Sometimes I miss him a lot. I just wish he had been at peace when he died, because he wasn't. He cried the night before his death. Dammit!

forget it. I don't even know why I'm saying this.

Before I reply to anything else, I want to say that I am sorry that this has happened. It is hard when our loved ones go. My grandfather died recently and I spoke at his funeral. It was the hardest thing I have ever done. I wont say anything else about it but death is hard.

[perspective]

It seems that the body of evidence for evolutionary biology is at a minimum overwhelming.

All evidence is interpreted in light of a person’s worldview. It’s hardly surprising that evolutionists think that the evidence supports their position, and creationists think the evidence confirms creation. So, the real question is, “which worldview can make sense of science at all?” We have shown that only creation can.

The evidence agrees with all the observations from the different sects of science.

Evidence doesn’t agree or disagree or make conclusions. You are falsely giving human qualities to things that don’t have them. This is called the fallacy of reification. People interpret facts and observations as evidence. Such inanimate things simply can’t do that.

This is a section of article that I think can help show my point.

[perspective]

I am arguing that a true and honest answer would be God. Further, that it is the God of Christianity, because all other religions contridict themselves or just arent logical. So would you all agree, that it really is a matter of preference?

Since when did christianity not contradict itself, and how is it logical?

I can assure you that the Bible NEVER contridicts itself. And I can assure that it is most logical. I think I might start a new topic to address this issue.

[curiosityandthecat]

I can assure you that the Bible NEVER contridicts itself. And I can assure that it is most logical.

 

...you do realize that you just made what most atheists consider to be quite possibly the single most laughable, dead wrong statement in the history of statements? Also, one which many of us have dozens upon dozens of examples to refute?

[perspective]

I have posted a new topic under religion about contradictions. However, I wont talk about it here so we can stay on topic.

[Sophus]

Evidence, in our case, should be more than just a justification of why something could be, as we see so often used by theist of many different faiths. Rather evidence should be what overwhelms us. Something that would take mental stamina to actually resist. Cognitively speaking, what works as evidence for one will not work for another. Some folks are actually destined to be theists for life.

I don't question that your beliefs could be rational. A rational belief is merely a genuine conclusion arrived upon by ones own thinking. An irrational belief is a belief built upon influence from others. However I find that many theists want to stay with that group of people (whether their beliefs were originally founded for rational or irrational reasons) that they will eventually reject real evidence when freshly presented and substitute justifications for why God can exist in lieu of providing me with a valid reason for why he absolutely must exist.

[perspective]

Sophus

You helped me with my school project, remember. Very good answers you gave. Logical.

all I can say to you is, I like your style, and your reference to RUSH. Rush: Roll the Bones.

[Sophus]

Sophus

You helped me with my school project, remember. Very good answers you gave. Logical.

all I can say to you is, I like your style, and your reference to RUSH. Rush: Roll the Bones.

Ah, I remember now. I suppse I didn't expect you to actually hang around on the forum. Thought you were hit and run for your project.   Well I'm pleasantly surprised... it's good to have you on board. I'm sure our once lone Christian, Titan, will much appreciate your presence too.

Is this a part of your project too?

[perspective]

Ah, I remember now. I suppse I didn't expect you to actually hang around on the forum. Thought you were hit and run for your project.    and scare you with hell fire    ) just kiddin. I rather enjoy talking with people and arguing my beliefs. Anyway...

[McQ]

Okay, I just have to jump in here about this cancer thing, because I do have a real life story about this that I actually was there for.

My sister is a life-long fundamentalist.  This is because, as some of you know and some of you don't, she was raised by my Christian father while I was raised by my atheist mother.  I love my sister, and although she's a fundie, she's not quite as bad as some.  Over the years she has become convinced that evolution is real, and that the Earth is not 6,000 years old.  She believes god started evolution and that the earth is actually billions of years old.  Unfortunately, this is the only thing in her belief system that has changed.  She still believes in angels, demons, Jesus talks to her personally and puts things into her heart, the whole nine yards.

My sister had colon cancer.  Luckily they caught it early.  A section of her colon was removed, she went through chemo and radiation and whatever else they did to her, and eventually the doctors agreed that they'd managed to remove the whole tumor and she was cured.  During the time of this treatment, however, she had been going to some really wacko revivalist church where they moan and scream and faint in the aisle and so forth.  So this preacher keeps "laying hands" on her during this whole cancer ordeal.  And she will swear to you on a stack of bibles that the last time he did this she could feel god's mighty hand go into her body through the stomach and pull the cancer out of her body through her spine.

So my sister, my family, her whole church and the entire town absolutely and completely believe without a shadow of a doubt that god healed my sister in church that very day.  She has conveniently forgotten all the medical treatment she had, and that the doctors had told her two weeks before her "faith healing" that she was now cancer free.  She loves to tell this story, too, because it affirms for her that Jesus loves her and that god healed her.  The last time I called her on it and said, "What about the surgery, the treatment, and the fact that the doctors told you it was cured before you went to church?"  She said that the doctors couldn't have cured her because there was still a little left in there, and if god hadn't cured her she'd be dead.  Seriously.

So that's how a normal cancer story can get blown out of proportion so that a multitude of credulous sheep can proclaim god did it.

Thank you, thank you, thank you a hundred times for sharing this!!!

Seriously, this is a perfect example of how this stuff gets reported as miraculous. Really appreciate you letting us hear about it.
Also, despite her claims that it was from god, I'm happy to hear about the positive outcome for your sister!

[parllagio]

It seems that the body of evidence for evolutionary biology is at a minimum overwhelming.

All evidence is interpreted in light of a person’s worldview. It’s hardly surprising that evolutionists think that the evidence supports their position, and creationists think the evidence confirms creation. So, the real question is, “which worldview can make sense of science at all?” We have shown that only creation can.

The evidence agrees with all the observations from the different sects of science.

Evidence doesn’t agree or disagree or make conclusions. You are falsely giving human qualities to things that don’t have them. This is called the fallacy of reification. People interpret facts and observations as evidence. Such inanimate things simply can’t do that.

This is a section of article that I think can help show my point.

''

I can see how your argument about evidence can make sense. Yes, we all interperet things based on our own world views. I guess a relative example here would be some of the stories people have shared about cancer. Christians may see a miracle from god where atheist see a simple regression, or doctors doing there job well.

I do have to disagree with you on the evolution vs. creationism. Both sides are simply not looking at the same evidence. One side tends to ignore quite a bit of evidence. The only thing I ask you to do is to take a step back and a look at both sides with an open mind. Which side had a conclusion prior to examining any evidence? Which side will change their stance in light of new evidence? Which side is routinely looking for holes in their theory?

Evolutionist did not get together one day, gather up evidence for evolution and say "hey, this fits in our worldview". Evidence was gathered and the best conclusion was drawn from that evidence, predictions were made, and future evidence proved those predictions. From Darwin until now the Theory of Evolution has been fine tuned as more and more evidence has shown that evolution is a fact. We evolved from other species - Fact. This is in complete disagreement with the biblical account of creation.