Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
You believe that everything evolved from lower forms of life without solid evidence. You have a fossil record that is a record of extinction. Others have put it in categories and said it shows creation ascending from simpler forms. You believe them. They have found the equivalent to 10 pieces of a 1000 piece puzzle and filled in the rest calling them missing links. You believe them. They have identified the origin of life as beginning as some chemical soup that doesn't exist naturally today and couldn't outside of the lab. This soup does not explain the formation of a genetic code. You believe them.
|
Being an anti-theist does not require me to believe any of your condescending generalizations, but if all of these critiques were fair then you would still have all your work ahead of you to prove any of your beliefs are true.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
You believe that everything evolved from lower forms of life without solid evidence.
|
I understand the theory and believe the evidence is sufficient to assume this is the most likely explanation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
You have a fossil record that is a record of extinction.
|
How do you harmonize this with an omnipotent creator?
Is he malevolent, capricious, or inept?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
Others have put it in categories and said it shows creation ascending from simpler forms. You believe them.
|
I understand their conclusion, a conclusion has made many predictions that new evidence overwhelmingly supports, and intend to continue to consider it the most likely explanation until a better theory is presented to me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
They have found the equivalent to 10 pieces of a 1000 piece puzzle and filled in the rest calling them missing links. You believe them.
|
Please support your ratio of evidence-based conclusion to guesses.
(Spoiler alert! He can't because that claim is garbage, like most of this post).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
They have identified the origin of life as beginning as some chemical soup that doesn't exist naturally today and couldn't outside of the lab. This soup does not explain the formation of a genetic code. You believe them.
|
I understand their claims, and find that conclusion to be the most likely explanation.
The same circumstances do not exist today; the atmosphere didn't include flora and fauna exhausting gasses before they existed - if the exact same circumstances were present today then the theory would be contradicted.
You aren't the first person to think of these problems.
Nor are you the first to dismiss supporting evidence that disputes your chosen book of reverence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
You believe that nature left alone becomes more complexed. You believe this despite what we can be observed. The difference between you and me is I recognize faith as faith. You call yours science and belittle mine.
|
We can observe this complexity when we look at the same strain virus that our bodies must re-learn how to fight every year. We can observe this complexity when 99% of all species that have ever lived on this planet are now extinct. The evidence is all around you if you'd open your eyes.
What "we can be observed" do you consider to refute the theory that "nature left alone becomes more complexed" ?
It is very silly to assert that your willful ignorance of a rudimentary scientific concept is somehow noble because your feelings get hurt defending it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Calgaryborn
It would be interesting to expand that UBC survey and go beyond just the Christian community. I wonder what Hindus or Muslims think about Atheists. Would they hold you in such low regard?
|
The Qur'an claims that the holy text takes precedence over observable evidence - you're welcome to take their zealots under your umbrella if willful ignorance is your criteria - we don't want them.