BeerAndWhiskey
308295
5084
432
I used to believe in young Earth creation because of this guy. (I even met him twice.)
And people like this that pretend to be scientists.
And, although I find them hilarious now.....
....I was really turned off by these.
In fact, I was further entrenched in my beliefs whenever I heard negative, foolish insults from the opposition.
It actually strengthened my resolve because I felt I had the moral high-ground.
But, then I started listening to Professor Ken Miller......
Bill Nye.....
And of course NDT.
I began to open my mind because of Christopher Hitchens and Carl Sagan.
My whole point is this......
Don't just write someone off because you think their perspective is foolish. There are millions of intelligent people out there that believe in a young Earth because, unfortunately, that's what they were taught. We won't win them over with insults and arguments. We'll win them over with kind discussion, open-mindedness, and a proper presentation of facts. I'm living proof that people can change, and not just concerning this topic. Don't give up on them.
........................................................................................................
EDIT: I would be remiss if I did not also mention Professor Richard Dawkins and Penn Jillette. Also huge influences.
monkaypants
"You are the universe experiencing itself." - Carl Sagan
TheBasementNerd
Ken Miller.........guys I think we found Ken M.
MrLumbergh
Goodonya OP; I was once a brainwashed young-earther too. Then I started thinking for myself, and none of that made sense.
IMissedTheBoatOnAGoodUsername
God damn, Sagan was the man...
EvaluateYoLife
"Young Earth " haven't heard that in like over 4 billion years
TheRealDurdan
Is 0.5 billion years considered young?
MisterWho
It's important to note that creationists' main source of reference is their own imagination, not the Bible.
KingoftheIntroverts
As someone who has had lengthy conversations with people who believe in a young earth, I disagree that they can be won over with facts.
KingoftheIntroverts
At least over a period of weeks, which is all I could tolerate without physically beating them before I wrote them off as a lost cause.
DipStickPaddyWhackPeePeeGoogaleeGee
It takes a brave person to challenge their own beliefs, and a braver one to admit they were wrong. Good on you, OP.
drownthesun
what if they go from evolutionist thought to creationist thought? Is that still brave?
DipStickPaddyWhackPeePeeGoogaleeGee
That's difficult. They would have to move from something with evidence to something without, from science to faith.
drownthesun
Is that wrong?
DipStickPaddyWhackPeePeeGoogaleeGee
I think it's harder to justify, logically. But if the decision is reached with appropriate thought and is embraced with conviction, then no.
scrophie
well put
nagchampa
I was a happy clappy christian in my teens but I never bought into it completely. Being gay was a big factor in moving away though.
klar971
But...but...http://www.awesomeoff.com/images/entries2/mainview/jesusridingdino_prehistoric.jpg
Counterfit
That filename is a lie!
nijlonkai
My dad says the bible actually states that its creation stories are a metaphor.
PlutoForPresident2016
Whoa, really? Mormon here; that would be really awesome to look at. Think I could get some verses?
nijlonkai
http://biblehub.com/2_peter/3-8.htm this is it I believe. He is a faithful scientist, so it makes sense it would mean that to him.
iamireland
I usually speak up, as an Atheist, in favor of treating people respectfully to convince them. I'm often treated like an ignorant asshole.
MrRandom314159
I always figured that (if) God made everything (then) he has been smart about it. Making it so they could change and protect themselves.
Idontwanttochooseaname
My mom has a degree in astrophysics and a PhD in archaeology (bronze-age Greece) and is a devout Christian. You can be both.
MekootGorlock
Are you asking people to play nice on the internet? Is that even a thing?
aroastedrutabaga
+1 for the Hitch
ScientistFromSouth
I remember Dinosaur Adventureland! The one in Pensacola got shutdown for tax evasion. That's ironic...
Spedytor
The mean jokes and insults aren't meant to convert anyone. They are for amusing the choir.
FlesHBoX
It's self defeating though, for exactly the reasons mentioned in this post. It makes you look bad, and invalidates your position.
Spedytor
I'm saying it's not self defeating argument because it's not an argument. It's just a joke for amusing those who already agree with it.
FlesHBoX
You're right, it's not an argument, but it is still self defeating since presumably you would like them to see the truth, n'est-ce pas?
yesiamaphysicist
Not totally correct. If an idea is thought of as a joke, people stray away from it simply from societal pressure. The jokes/insults are /1
yesiamaphysicist
there so that silly beliefs will stop being considered normal. /2
CitizenDickbag
Ridicule can be a powerful tool of changing people's beliefs, actually. Once it hits a tipping point, most people flee from ridiculed ideas.
CaptnVonClapp
Tell Dawkins that!
SAWhowhatnow
Mocking and ridicule can be effective at changing minds in *SOME* cases. It's one of many rhetorical tools.
triggrhaapi
You're actually both right. They do both. The trick is to insult the idea and not the person.
brandsilven
That doesn't work, though. It just makes people defensive. Don't attack other ideas, just present your own and let them speak for themselves
skitchmusic
Depending on how fundamental the belief is, argumentation/evidence are usually insufficient to change those beliefs, regardless of delivery.
HorseMeatHeaven
2/ someone could actually legitimately take it seriously, I always think they're joking or being sarcastic.
HorseMeatHeaven
1/ But what if the idea is really really stupid? I usually make fun of creationism because I just can't wrap my mind around the concept that
triggrhaapi
To be honest, when you get to that point, the discussion is long over. You're not going to convince everyone.
UnknownGenius
I find that a lot of inflammatory things aren't even meant to sway someone, just troll for reactions. They confuse the issues.
youhavemail
I am a christian and I loved Neil degrasse Tyson in cosmos, I want every fact before a decision and I still believe in god.
youhavemail
And I have the right to later change my opinion
kuemmel
Hitchens helped you? He was amazing, but I thought he would be the last guy to help someone get over young earth creationism.
BeerAndWhiskey
I was willing to listen, and he made an awful lot of sense.
kingmagnus22
My mom is Mormon and a Chemistry teacher. She has a poster that reads "If science threatens your faith, then you don;t understand either."
ridgeblader
R.I.P. Hitch.
mcdefmarx
They took the wrong Hitchens.
MichaelJordanAsHimselfInSpaceJam
I miss him. The closest substitute now is Sam Harrison maybe? He's good but Hitchens had an inner sass that I'm missing from Harrison.
CitizenDickbag
Harris* And Harris doesn't sass all that much, no.
MichaelJordanAsHimselfInSpaceJam
Oops. Thanks.
Kirol
Hitchens was a mean motherfucker. He got the job done, and did not give a single fuck along the way.
themagicalliopleurodon
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mQorzOS-F6w
MrAgnosticman
I fucking miss this guy. I started listening to his stuff in February of last year then I learned he died long before I heard of him :/
ridgeblader
I missed seeing him speak in Australia shortly before he died. I regret that a lot.
MrAgnosticman
This guy has a way with words like no other, I would go around YouTube to find all of his debates and talks and listen to them all
crosek
I've always regretted not seeing him then, either. He had such an impact on me and the way I think. it was great to see him in this post.
TheWhisperingWindsofShit
People are all talking about religion and I'm just sitting here sad because there are no dinosaurs
ActuallyUnpopularOpinions
Birds are dinosaurs (Eumaniraptora). Scientists are even considering eliminating Aves/Aviale as a group and creating a more appropriate one.
lockwoodx
We celebrate Dinosaurs every Thanksgiving by slaying one and eating it.
ARodianInEwoksClothing
I'm late on this, but me too. Saw the first picture, thought I'd see a Dinosaur land. Very disappointed.
MrAgnosticman
If we still had dinosaurs walking around, I would tame and ride a tyrannosaurus.
R0da
http://imgur.com/qYQFVyS
derpbread
BUT JURASSIC WORLD SOON
gamblingpoet
Go ride an ostrich if you want a dinosaur.
CaptainQuarkk
Just think about it like this: every time you fill your car with gas, you are, in a sense, filling it with liquid exploding dinosaurs!
DavidA1225
Sure there are ... they're just in bird cages these days...
TheGingerBeardedBiologist
I've said this before and people didn't believe me. IT'S TRUE PEOPLE! FLYING DINOSAURS ARE EVERYWHERE!
HomelyArgonianMaid
And cooked for dinner! Kentucky Fried Dino, anyone?
WilhelmvonSchlapphand
They did a study and chickens are the closest living relative of dinosaurs. I could find the study but I'm lazy.
Cheomesh
They can be vicious little fuckers...
R0da
Of the t-rex, I believe the story goes. Though, I'm willing to put money on the cassowary holding that title 'cause http://imgur.com/XYa3dNR
Tomosaurus1
Chickens literally are dinosaurs, they are classified under dinosauria.
BirthdayMassacre
god those fuckers taste great with mashed potatoes.
felofilipino
I don't think we'd be at the top of the food chain if they were still alive
Dsharppe
Are you kidding me? Some culture would probably like to eat only their earlodes and the lobeless carcasses of the rest would litter the land
felofilipino
uh. They were pretty fucking big.
Dsharppe
So are whales. How are they holding out? I wouldn't wanna go one-on-one with a T-Rex but surely we'd have killed most of them by now, lol.
felofilipino
People don't dwell in the same environments as whales, so that's a horrible argument. Many species are much larger and elephants and (1/2)
felofilipino
could possibly be a lot more aggressive than elephants. Elephants are the largest land animal now living. (2/2)
iMightHaveBeenDroppedOnMyHead
You can't adequately argue your point without first knowing your opponents point.
iPretend
It's crazy I like to have discussion. At the end of the discussion I look forward to swapping reading recommendations. They always so no!
WhimsicalCalamari
Something that 90% of the internet apparently needs to learn.
TheFlyingHellfish
Полезно знать что думает противник. It is wise to know the ways of one's adversary. (From "The Hunt for Red October").
luxveniae
My favorite movie as a kid! +1
TheFlyingHellfish
Same here. I'd fake sick to stay home and watch it. Wore out a VHS tape, even.
LivingInYourIntestines
It seems like he's saying they cannot be argued with and he's exceptionally open-minded. I see similar things with anti-vax people. It's sad
fakebecauseidontwantpeopletoknow
Which is why anyone who wants to seriously challenge a creationist should actually study... It doesn't help if you don't have good answers.
skitchmusic
One could say the same thing to a creationist who wants to seriously challenge someone who accepts evolution.
fakebecauseidontwantpeopletoknow
Duh
TitsMcGee30
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBA6qlHW8po
sillysuitcase
it's not really about arguing though. it's more about exchanging ideas and forming an opinion based on those ideas
skitchmusic
Depends on who you are talking to, what their position is, and how they go about engaging in the conversation.
SugarSmack
I'm genuinely surprised to see Christopher Hitchens name mentioned in a post about being respectful to those with whom you disagree.
CitizenDickbag
Hitchens was often very respectful to the people with whom he disagreed, just not their ideas. If they said something immoral, he'd pounce.
MyImaginaryFriendCanBeatUpYours
My daughter cried more at her first haircut than when I cut off her clitoris with a sharp stone :D
kenrlill
I'm an atheist, but still respect other religions. Because I'm a normal Norwegian male.........
Mcknizzle
what the hell is a norwegian? some kind of wagon?
46853
It means that he's from Norway.
Mcknizzle
nobody lives there its all ice.
46853
They're an Ice Giant
MakerOfBadJokes
But were they Created as Ice Giants, or did they Evolve to become them? >..>
MakerOfBadJokes
I like what you said, but got confused by the word "normal" - lost me there... beyond that, good on you for being a good person. :)
Spedytor
"other religions"
46853
I like and respect you!
MyImaginaryFriendCanBeatUpYours
Then don't claim to care about humanity. Watching as someone wastes their life away because you want to be "respectful" isn't a good thing.
Mcknizzle
You just gave a stupid response to a reasonable statement. You're bad and you should feel bad.
HerpestonMcDerping
You should hate every religion, like any self-respecting atheist does.
MyImaginaryFriendCanBeatUpYours
Religion was a useful tool when we were crawling out of caves. It has overstayed it's welcome. We're better than that.. or should be
MakerOfBadJokes
Hate doesn't serve anyone; people serve hate - by their actions, thoughts, and words. Hate doesn't do people justice - people justify hate.
cmdebard
Old earth, creationary evolutionists unite!
Marxthird
Here here!
wardsandcourierplz
and the God of the Gaps retreats yet a little further
cmdebard
I respect your views and beliefs with no hard feelings. Fake Christians have done enough to deserve your bitterness. Much love
wardsandcourierplz
No bitterness, just a simple observation. Take off your judging hat.
OliverClothesoff70
As a Christian, Evolution is not relevant to how we are expected to live our lives. "Did you help any widows or orphans today?" (1/2)
StarrryNight
That's nonsense. It's science, of course it's relevant. The pursuit of knowledge if one of the cornerstones of our human nature.
Orccus
from what i understand, he/she is saying that evolution shouldn't have any impact on personal belief in God (1/2)
Orccus
(2/2) which lots of people seem to think is required: God or Evolution, instead of God AND Evolution.
Jbizaar
Evolution means the Adam and eve story is not true. Which it isn't. But most Christians ignore facts because they cant handle the truth.
OliverClothesoff70
"No, but I argued about Evolution & yelled at some gays!" Yuck. Let's prioritize the important and not argue over the irrelevant. Ok? (2/2)
CitizenDickbag
Evolution is the cornerstone of modern biology and by extension medicine. It's vital it be understood for our well-being.
OliverClothesoff70
You profoundly missed my point. Whether evolution is real or not (I believe it is) arguing about it is not at all useful or important.
CitizenDickbag
When there are people trying to suppress it and bungle teaching of it, then the debate matters immensely.
ascendingCondescension
Every single user on this website can benefit from this. I want this post on the front page for the benefit of imgur, regardless of points.
captainnukeman
I agree with you and have done my part! Onwards!
wantfastcars
As a child of YEC parents and a former YEC myself, yeah. This is INCREDIBLY important. Blatant, intentional ignorance is a leech on 1/2
wantfastcars
progression in society, and while respecting beliefs is important, YEC is toxic and harmful to the education of... well, people. 2/2
quadralol
I agree!
ButterfaceTaintClown
I'm Brian and so is my wife!
TheThingNoNotThatOne
Exactly. I try to tell people on anti-vax posts, but it never seems to sink in, because we just want to feel superior and not actually teach
skitchmusic
Serious question: If someone is anti-vax, what can you actually teach them that'll stop them from being anti-vax all of a sudden?
TheThingNoNotThatOne
No idea. Studies show that both ridicule and scientific information make them less likely to vaccinate. But people are working on it.
skitchmusic
It's extremely difficult if the belief is grounded or centralized in such a way that makes it impervious to change through argument/evidence
wessyfbaby
Wait people make posts about other being anti-vax? Nooooo
StrayAllieCat
I don't think you understand how imgur works sir.
ButterfaceTaintClown
Hehe. The post is wrong. Stupid people believe what they're taught. Intelligent people question everything. Even themselves.
notmicrowavesafe
It's that kind of attitude that stagnates progress man, people can change with the right methods,
ButterfaceTaintClown
Yeah. By questioning what they're taught. If Einstein hasn't questioned Newtonian physics I would be responding to you now by post.
airandfingers
One can be intelligent and still foolishly believe something without questioning it. Smart people sometimes do dumb things, and vice versa.
ButterfaceTaintClown
No. You can't. You can believe something trivial is plausible, but to believe in THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE without any doubt... duh...
ButterfaceTaintClown
Ironically, OP exercised his intelligence and doubted what he was taught.
airandfingers
I disagree. Everyone (or almost everyone) has their analytical blind spots. These don't disqualify them from being considered intelligent.
yourbassist
What bothers me is how evolution has become a blanket statement to describe things that would more appropriately be defined as adaptation.
razetherunner
adaptation is another name for micro-evolution in many cases, so it's just a matter of scale
felofilipino
adaptation is one requirement of the theory of evolution.
Lobsterwaffle
I'm pretty sure you're splitting hairs. Random mutations change an organism over time. Mutations that help in that organism's ability [1]
TheGingerBeardedBiologist
Evolution is a term that predates Darwin. In biology, evolution is generally heritable adaptation.
AbnerDoon
Evolution is just the change in allele frequency of a population over time. That includes adaptation.
iPretend
True, evolution as natural selection and speciation is observable, but links among the higher taxa can only ever be assumed.
CitizenDickbag
Having a pretty complete fossil record showing evolution in higher taxa is more than just "assuming."
Lobsterwaffle
to live and reproduce in its certain environment are passed down to future generations, as more of that organism will thrive. The process[2]
MrAgnosticman
How do you mean? Could you give me an example of such a situation?
yourbassist
Animals that have develop more hair depending on their location. Humans with different skin tones based on lineage.
ILoveBoobSweat
That's evolution..
leafspring
That's called evolution. Mutations that improve survivability become prevalent because specimen with that mutation are more likely to repro.
angus017
No my friend that is called adaptation.
MrAgnosticman
What would you define evolution as then?
yourbassist
That act of doing so is evolution. The change is adaptation.
Lobsterwaffle
as a whole is evolution(NS), while the specific change is adaptation, no? Full disclosure, I'm a physics / engineering guy, not biology. [3]
ILoveBoobSweat
You're absolutely right. Seems like bassist knows one thing about bio abd wanted an opportunity to show everyone how smart he is...
yourbassist
I was just expressing my understanding. I'm not a scientist.
CitizenDickbag
No, you have it backwards. Evolution is the the change. Adaptation is the result of the change.
Lobsterwaffle
Ah, how's it go? Evolution by means of natural selection? well, like I said. I'm not a biologist by trade.
ThisFrickenGuy
There are LOTS of Christians and Christian professors and scientists who believe in God, AND in solid theories like evolution.
soukmania
As a european, I had never even heard of young earth shenanigans until imgur. It's a us only thing I guess. Or anglosphere.
housewifecat
I had a Nigerian camp counselor who thought dinosaurs were a hoax :-/ but she also thought cheese was unnatural, so we didn't listen to her.
soukmania
people are crazy sometimes, but is it widely accepted in the nigerian culture? or was she just a crazy woman?
Bent0916
Relatively speaking, not at all. A scientist is much less likely to believe in a deity than a non-scientist. Harder science = less chance.
colinardo
Absolutely! I went to a Christian college in MI and all the science profs are wholeheartedly Christian and believe in evolution.
seagul999
Calvin College?!
colinardo
Yeah!!! What's up!?
seagul999
I went to Calvin too!! Knights 4 Life :)
Myusernameisfinallyrelevantagain
Religion =/= Opposite of science.
carewyllie
That's because most Christians are not Creationists. Do not confuse the two categories.
ThisFrickenGuy
Well I know that. But is it not apparent that most people widely believe that if you're Christian you're scientifically clueless?
carewyllie
On this site, perhaps, but not among anyone I know so I figure people mostly play along with that online for shits & giggles or something.
ThisFrickenGuy
I guess since I've noticed that too, I just thought I'd throw it out there. Tbh, I thought the post would die in user sub anyway.
Owlcapwn
technically they can't. they contradict each other. that just shows (imo) how BS religion is.
DinosaurJessica
It's called picking and choosing, the cornerstone of modern theology.
brunette7900
Amen to that.
Dominomotion8
I do
sadwastedmexican
Yeah, while scientists are disproportionately agnostic/atheist there are tons of great Christan working in the field
intensivex
Fun fact - Neil Degrasse Tyson, Hitchens, Hawkings and most of the notables OP mentions are Atheists (Sagan and Nye are Agnostic).
SAWhowhatnow
NDT doesn't like to be given labels like that, and adamantly denies self-identifying as atheist. Though I agree he is one.
DoctorSpaceDog
God is everything or he's nothing. The first act of God you give up kills him. God was dead for me years before I ever said it out loud.
kemushi
This post isn't about god, its about creationism. I have no problem with theism, but I DO have a problem with science denying.
dmax12
Then you have a problem with science. See: Problem of inductive reason.
ThisFrickenGuy
You're absolutely right, but the point of the post is that many Christians were raised to believe creationism and we should be gracious.
skitchmusic
I'm only gracious if the person I'm talking to isn't being an ass about either misrepresenting science or atheism.
Xynatox
Red and Yellow are arguing. Then comes Orange. Both Red and Yellow dismiss Orange, because Orange is ridiculous. Same for theistic evolution
SAWhowhatnow
I wouldn't say I dismiss theistic evolution. It's just that it doesn't add anything useful to the model.
Xynatox
I would, but that's just because I think, while not a completely incorrect theory, it's not useful and misleading.
lacrema
It's weirder to me that there are some who don't. How bizarre.
echonite
God and evolution were never contradictory.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
thecolonels
Apply the scientific method to god. See what happens. No evidence=null result= no belief in god. God is like sub-electronic particles.
yesiamaphysicist
Science is not just logic. Science also assumes things like Occam's Razor, which addition of religious beliefs contradicts.
teh0khardic
I'm sure there are dozens of them
TheRealDurdan
A difference that makes no difference is no difference.
DoctorCarrot
I went to Catholic school & we were only taught evolution. Sci. teacher on creationism: "why would we teach you something that isn't true?"
SpyceyBrycey
At my Catholic school, we were taught both; that God created the base organisms and they evolved to what they were now. I have since (1/2)
SpyceyBrycey
Stopped caring at all about how the world was formed, as even if either could be proven, it wouldn't affect me. Nothing would change. (2/2)
Counterfit
The Catholic orders that work in education don't fuck around
MyDogsAreBobbieAndBruno
How can reconcile your religion with scientific fact without discounting your religion?
thecolonels
Agreed. Applying scientific method to religion results in the null hypothesis- the disbelief in god. Especially on specific religions.
dmax12
To reach the NH you need to accept the problem with inductive logic. The only way to disprove a belief in this fashion is to accept another
thecolonels
Who invited Karl Popper?
DoesAnybodyHereRememberVeraLynn
As a Catholic, you may count me among them.
IgnazWrobel
just don't mix them. that's all.
ghsdkgb
There really is no conflict between science and religion, unless you manufacture one.
yesiamaphysicist
Yes, there is a conflict. Science assumes Occam's Razor holds. Religion, by adding unnecessary assumptions, conflicts with Occam's Razor.
skywards
If you take a step back and rationally look at the history of mankind, our planet and the universe, each religion seems quite delusional.
shantideva01
Yes! This whole "I believe in X fairytale but still accept the incompatible Y of science" is just feelgood clickbait
skywards
for some reason religion is planted so deep in most people's brain that they seem to just shut down rational thinking about that subject.
GiantRobotsRule
The problem is Christians needing to take the Bible as Fact. The geneologies in Matthew don't allow human history to exceed 6000 years orso
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
RocketMan2
We aren't assuming you're wrong. We have an issue with you demanding 100% rationality from humans as we are by our nature irrational beings.
Dsharppe
Finally someone sane ..
thecr00cible
But they're not mutually exclusive events?
[deleted]
[deleted]
thecr00cible
Explain your reasoning.
MyImaginaryFriendCanBeatUpYours
Like religion saying a sky wizard created the universe, and if you say his sons name in the mirror you'll get a present? no conflict eh
ghsdkgb
(1/2) The point is that religion isn't meant to work against science, only to work alongside it to answer the questions science can't.
ghsdkgb
(2/2). Questions like: "What is my purpose here?", "How do I lead a good life?", or "Can I make it through this hard time?"
ghsdkgb
(Extra Credit) People using religion to "attack" science are misusing religion. Ergo, manufactured conflict.
ghsdkgb
(and, of course, you can answer all those WITHOUT religion, but that doesn't change the fact that that's religion's primary purpose)
TheLastSassBender
It's tough though because macro evolution doesn't have any solid evidence.
SAWhowhatnow
As already pointed out, macro and micro are the same thing. But what would be solid evidence for you, so I can present it?
TheLastSassBender
Well, microevolution happens inside of DNA. Each slight change happens because there is DNA to support it. 1/2
TheLastSassBender
Macroevolution suggests that drastic change happens outside of the DNA such as mutation. 2/3
TheLastSassBender
Unfortunately, mutation is proven to only take away DNA, not give. So help me out here. 3/3
CitizenDickbag
There is no difference between "macro" and "micro" evolution other than timeframe. And there is abundant evidence for "macro," yes.
ProfessorZeus
Taking a catholic theology course taught by a Priest. He says there is no "believing" in evolution. It is scientifically backed through(1/2)
ProfessorZeus
So many studies, and that the creationist stories were literally stories meant to teach lessons (mostly about trusting strangers (MrSerpent)
TheMostModestMouse
Well at least they are only half wrong.
robsc16
Ken Miller is a Catholic.
skitchmusic
Which some fundamentalists will use to rationalize that he 'really isn't Christian.' Fun times.
Tyggna
I can believe ThisFrickenGuy
AllThingsNinja
LOTS in deff an overstatement. especially when 95% of scientist are athiests
planetfinder
*citation needed*
iseveryusernametakenforreal
I know thats how it is, but i still don't understand how they can defend it.
CharlesLylyeLarue
This, yes. For some reason, most people seem to think that you can have one or the other, not both. Sad.
xanthio
Science is how. Religion is who and why.
keikomoondragon
I'm a Christian and I believe in solid theories like evolution. Folks that express the belief in Creationism make me want to flip tables.
ThisFrickenGuy
Me as well, but we have to be patient and loving. I mean, that belief isn't going to get anyone killed, so let's be gracious with them :)
cotcpeters
thank you SO much for saying this. I am a church raised girl in the bible belt and its hard to feel understood on things like belief.
popculturella
There's room for both.
NiskanensBureaucrats
Personally, I think that believing in ignorance over enlightenment is wasting gods gift of intelligence. We expand our understanding.
GuyInTheBack
In Judaism it states that if science prevails, the Torah must be changed to conform with science beliefs
thedarkestcloud
Christian liberal arts student here---my microbiology prof will pray for us and express his passion for evolution in the same breath
eviscera
...somehow.
JesusVEVO
Christians who try to believe in God and evolution are just fooling themselves unfortunately.
SAWhowhatnow
They aren't mutually incompatible at all.
JesusVEVO
Nothing is mutually incompatible if you're willing to cherry pick.
MundaneFacts
It's really fucking easy of you dismiss most of genesis as the mythology of a culture.
JesusVEVO
Resorting to explaining inconsistencies and impossibilities to mythology of a culture is a weak argument.
AndroidBrotherHood
I can't respect creationists as scientists
scouttrooper
Right here.
eractnod1
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/T7QrEXNQt7g/hqdefault.jpg
dmax12
And some who refute it on the basis of inductive reasoning. All I see here are two groups who think the are better than each other.
HotshotRobot
It is easy to believe that God uses science to further his creation in a way that people can comprehend. If you just try.
maltbrew
I think lots might be stretching it. Some, sure but not lots.
Tzaot
And person with the most experience with megalomania on this planet, I would like to add that God is NOT hurt in his personal feelings.
Tzaot
And that you must NOT feel sorry for being who or what you are, towards anyone other than yourself and the humans around you.
Tzaot
ALSO Animals. I should have said persons. And YES I have met God, prove the opposide!
Trumar616
They don't contradict each other. Intelligent design via evolution makes perfect sense.
Mcarave
That is one reason why I am alive. Had my father not move away from his highly conservative town and parents, my parent would not have met.
ctrlaltdefeated
I was brought up young earth theory like op. But since then I still have my faith and my scientific interests.
ohhkittehh
Me me me!!!!
LearnSomethingNew
My belief is that God made the Big Bang (let there be light = a point where everything came from), and God made Evolution so he didn't (1/2)
GiraffesWearPyjamas
That is called theistic evolution
fakebecauseidontwantpeopletoknow
Consider a tree. It is planted, and may appear to take what shape it desires, but a gardener carefully grooms it each week.
DidItForScience
http://earthsky.org/space/what-if-the-universe-had-no-beginning
grizzlynutz
have to make himself a grilled cheese sandwich. (2/2)
MyImaginaryFriendCanBeatUpYours
Let there be light... and then a couple of days later create the sun... seems like mr I know everything messed up XD
greatgooglymooglytheoneandonly
Same
IgnazWrobel
for me, god begins where scientifique explanations aren't available.
effypom
but those explanations may be available in the future
IgnazWrobel
I hope so. until there will be no god needed to explain things.
effypom
How convenient.
yesiamaphysicist
All of time and space begins at the Big Bang. If you include a God you are saying our current understanding of physics is wrong.
GREATEASYPIES
False. If the universe is currently expanding and has been since it formed, then it started at a definite time, and something started that.
yesiamaphysicist
Nope. Time starts at the Big Bang. "Before the Big Bang" is a meaningless statement just as "outside the universe" is meaningless /1
vielleicht
but which religion represents a belife like that?
LearnSomethingNew
Loose Christianity, sorta. It's almost agnostic.
FedEXguy
Sounds like Deism. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
kayakninjas
Oddly enough, the big bang theory was actually invented by a a Jesuit named Georges Lemaitre 2 years before Hubble.
SaturatedPhat
Most contemporary Mormon leadership. The older ones were certainty more fiercely divided on the issue. Lots of Mormon apologists do as well.
[deleted]
[deleted]
khora
The bible is self contradictory in very many ways, so you have to ignore things.
fancierpants
There are different genres in the bible (letters, historical narrative, poetry, etc.) Theistic evolution would view it as allegorical.
fancierpants
Instead of narrative.It fits stylistically with mesopotamian and Egyptian origin stories which is the major evidence for the interpretation
Stupidium
That is... weird logic "I choose to ignoring the law against jaywalking so I will ignore all laws?" Like, I get what you're saying but still
fakebecauseidontwantpeopletoknow
You don't have to ignore any of it. Every page teaches you about the character of God and His purpose. It doesn't have to be literal. 1/?
fakebecauseidontwantpeopletoknow
Genesis 1 (0.1% of the bible) teaches us about God's power and his intent for the world.
fakebecauseidontwantpeopletoknow
Try explaining the internet to a caveman, and then have him write it down so the other cavemen can understand it.
MagnorCriol
I think a god that engineered a system where one little spark eventually trns itself into a vast myriad of creatures is really, really cool.
TharrickLawson
I think it's a hell of a lot cooler than one who had to micromanage the whole thing every step of the way :P
MagnorCriol
Or who just snapped his fingers and had everything just *poof* happen.
TharrickLawson
Yeah, I'd consider that pretty lazy to be honest
ButterfaceTaintClown
"The God of the gaps". There I said it. Let's see how tolerant you guys are to those five words.
Dominomotion8
I don't understand.
ButterfaceTaintClown
Google it ffs.
Dominomotion8
Asshat.
Lobsterwaffle
This doesn't always apply to such debates, though, since faith in the supernatural almost necessitates that God exists outside of [3]
Lobsterwaffle
the concept of the eternal soul and communion with such a god are usually the larger "point" of Abrahamic religions. [5]
Lobsterwaffle
more phenomena can be naturally explained. So, on the continuum of knowledge, supernatural explanations and God are ever-receding. [2]
Lobsterwaffle
It's a common argument for science vs religion. Bascially, God explains the things that science cannot. As science advances, however, [1]
Lobsterwaffle
physical laws. Plus, a personal god is very often associated with much more than just explanations of the physical world. Things like [4]
ButterfaceTaintClown
I honestly don't know what's worse. Saying "I don't understand" or plus oneing it.
Dominomotion8
Right so I'll just pretend I know it instead of asking?? I figured someone would tell me about it. You're acting like an ass.
Lobsterwaffle
I mean, you're not wrong, but the god of the gaps doesn't exactly address the whole argument. See my reply to domino.
Dominomotion8
I much appreciate you telling me thank you! Much better than googling it. I learn so much from this site. It is amazing!
Lobsterwaffle
Not a problem! It's something I've had to work through the last several years, and unbiased explanations can be hard to come by.
SimiKusoni
Stating something exists outside of natural laws makes it no more likely to be true.
SimiKusoni
In fact, it actually makes it less likely by introducing unnecessary complexity into your hypothesis.
Lobsterwaffle
I was just presenting the argument without my own bias. I'm familiar with Occam's razor.
LearnSomethingNew
-have to do anything. Kinda like a watchmaker making a watch. He's going to make everything run by itself. (2/2)
h0m3r
That is not Christianity, but actually called Deism.
arminillo
If he believes in jesus it still is christianity
h0m3r
He never said anything about Jesus, therefore, it is Deism that he is describing.
fancierpants
So are you deist or do you believe he still works in and through creation?
GrandTheftManual
Same
RamirezGoDoEverything
Same here. I believe that God is the maker and science is us learning how He did it.
poopiekins
I have always thought this. It's weird reading something I've never said out loud but always believed.
cornodacaccia
Yes!
buttcrackula
Thank you!
shesaidgoodbyetotheground
This is what many of the founding fathers believed as well
poopiekins
Really?
shesaidgoodbyetotheground
Yes, Thomas Paine & Ethan Allen were true deists, while Franklin, adams, Monroe, and Washington are believed to have been Christian deists
shesaidgoodbyetotheground
(Deism is the name for the idea that God was like a clock maker who made the clock and wound it, but didn't interfere much afterward)
shinyRK9
^this
DaHolca
They say they believe become of the stigma of not saying they do, but they don't.
HailKingKoopa
Look up Dr. William Lane Craig and http://www.reasonablefaith.org/ for some sound arguments for a creator.
skitchmusic
WLC's arguments aren't terribly sound, and his conduct when responding to others is hardly praiseworthy.
HailKingKoopa
1/ Really, I find him very respectful when I comes to staying on point to the topic and his arguments are
HailKingKoopa
2/at least as well developed as the opponents. I think most are uncomfortable with his faith, not his arguments.
skitchmusic
1/ I am partially uncomfortable that he maintains that even if an argument were to demonstrate his position as wrong, he would still believe
RadiumNation
Im glad to hear people saying this.
copingcabana
Yes. On the other hand, I'm agnostic, have a graduate degree in Atmospheric Physics, but think global warming is total BS. ;)
copingcabana
My point being, people should check their assumptions before judging why or what someone believes. (Also, I don't work for BigOil)
shantideva01
That's fun. Go ask NASA or any National Academy of Science on the planet if they share your musings.
copingcabana
I don't have to. I worked for NASA.
MagnorCriol
Yeah, I've never understood how the two have conflict.
GiantRobotsRule
Biblical literalist need to believe the Bible is historical fact. The creation account in Genesis and geneologies in Matthew, literally dont
MyImaginaryFriendCanBeatUpYours
Science deals with reality, religion deals with fantasy. I'm sorry but someones imaginary friend can't create anything, let alone a univrse
yesiamaphysicist
Occam's Razor is a fundamental assumption in science. Including religious beliefs violates Occam's Razor.
GiantRobotsRule
...allow for millions of years of dynamic species change,,or more than 6000 or so years of human history.
MagnorCriol
As a Christian, biblical literalism always struck me as, well, dumb. Even as a five-year-old.
fakebecauseidontwantpeopletoknow
I'm a Christian, and I believe God is a programmer. Proof? DNA.
effypom
That is not PROOF. You can believe that God is a programmer but in no way is DNA PROOF of that.
fakebecauseidontwantpeopletoknow
I'm not being serious. You are right it is definitely not proof.
skitchmusic
I don't see how one can posit DNA as proof of creation/programming.
fakebecauseidontwantpeopletoknow
To someone who believes in a creator it is... to anyone else, it is evidence that can be interpreted that way.
LocutusOfBored
The Catholic Church endorses evolution and have for a very long time.
757365726e616d65
since they can't burn scientists anymore they started coming around on that science thing
Catumi
I was taught evolution in a catholic school and used it to explain how god works or something like that.
Catumi
I have my own personal views and don't practice any religion now though. My definition of god is the energy that is everything.
TheTypo
THIS, it pisses me off how some pople think the curch is against evolution
satcomjeff
It's been, what, six months?
AvatarTommyBee
Yeah .. but you have to put some effort into conciliation .. and effort is not peoples strong side.
Cheomesh
I was taught about it a little bit in Sunday School as a kid, though we spent most of our time around the Christ period.
guzzball
I grew up going to a Catholic church and school and was taught in both of evolution and that it's accepted. It's true.
TheTypo
same here, they told us that the genesis in the bible shouldn't be read as something literal
GaryFreakinOak
I was taught that measures of time for extradimensional omnipotent beings are different than ours.
breakfasttimeallthetime
That's exactly what my childhood priest told me...well, he didn't use the words extradimensional & omnipotent (I was 7). But same idea
krauraurgg
It makes a lot of sense, really. The bible is just the human-friendly retelling of earlier events. Genesis is hardly a firsthand account.
MichaelJordanAsHimselfInSpaceJam
Since at least the early 90s with Pope John Paul II
VinnieJonesDiary
Since the 1950s under Pope Pius XII
scouttrooper
I did not know that....interesting.
DarthMaulOfAmerica
Yup, I think a lot of it comes from the Enlightenment actually. God was referred to as the "master watchmaker" who "set things in motion"...
DarthMaulOfAmerica
and the idea was that he doesn't take a direct action in people's lives. I assume evolution as Darwin knew it was classified similarly.
trolololono
That's actually heresy according to the church. It's called "Deism"
DarthMaulOfAmerica
Ahh that makes more sense. I'd heard that term but wasn't too familiar with it.
TheTypo
...noooooooooooooope
revenfett
It tends to be very wishy washy though... the last thing I read from this Pope sounded a lot like ID, that a god was "necessary"
leagueofaffability
they have evolution as their doctrine, not sure how that is wishy washy. Also, for the pope to endorse God doesn't seem terribly surprising.
revenfett
The theory of evolution stands completely independent of any god hypothesis, so when the Pope says evolution necessitates god, he misstates
revenfett
the science
Cassiraa
God molded animals and man from the clay of the earth. Evolution is the method through which He did it. THIS IS NOT A CONFLICT PEOPLE!!!
nighthawk663
Oh gosh, explain that to my girlfriend >_<
slimstebow
Umm... In one week?
Cassiraa
Hebrew word yom can have a number of meanings, only one of which is 24 hours. Psalm 90:4 and II Peter 3:8, compare a day to a thousand years
CitizenDickbag
So why did some fish evolve eyes and then lose them? Why do most genetic mutations kill the organism?
Cassiraa
Who doesn't play around with their clay before making something useful?
CitizenDickbag
You think a being w/ 150+ billion galaxies to run is playing with animals here? Childish nonsense.
WanderingBlueWanderlust
As someone who did pottery, I'm guilty of making tiny clay pokemon before *ahem* turning them into useful works of art.
Cassiraa
If you think the platypus is anything but god fooling around and having fun, then I don't even know what to tell you.
CitizenDickbag
Except that we have pretty good ideas how it evolved, and intention design ain't one of them.
delecti
Seriously, I don't believe in god, but the platypus makes me wonder who was screwing around in the gene pool.
Adamismyname
Brb.. going outside to find some people clay
46853
Try the amino acids and sludge mix
Cassiraa
TYL the bible uses metaphor and simile.
MyImaginaryFriendCanBeatUpYours
Something's wrong in the bible? Must be a metaphor cause the bible says it can never be wrong, nice excuse XD
Adamismyname
TIL...you don't have a sense of humor
Dsharppe
See - backpedalling.
VinnieJonesDiary
Even if it was backpedalling, so fucking what? A huge organisation realises they were wrong and changes their opinion, HOW DARE THEY!
IUpVoteDadJokes
See - St Augustine, reading 4th century
Dsharppe
He's one guy, not a church. See - backpedalling.
IUpVoteDadJokes
See- St Augustine (who is a big deal in church history) arguing against reading Genesis literally in the 4th century, along with others.
Dsharppe
100% totally irrelevant unless it is placed in the Catechism. Catholics do not listen to any single individual but instead obey the
Dsharppe
official catechism of the Church (this 900+ page book explaining the Church's position on just about everything in the world). The only way
IUpVoteDadJokes
I'm not Catholic, but even I know Augustine's ideas are foundational to their catechism and the book where he favors non-literal 1/2
iPretend
The problem is more theological than it is scientific. Evolution requires death before sin and that kinda defeats the purpose of the Bible.
ThisFrickenGuy
I don't think so. The Bible says God breathed into man the breath of life. I believe that means life eternal. He gave us a soul at that (1/2
ThisFrickenGuy
time, and morality. The fruit symbolizing that we could die not only a physical death, but eternal death. But I'm no theologian 2/2
brytheguy
The death that is referred to in the bible is a spiritual death. I think at least as far as my limited knowledge goes.
iPretend
If it was only a spiritual death then Christ never needed to die in the flesh. Also all this talk of a coming resurrection of the body makes
drrange
Or it is now once facts proved the original understanding wrong.
iPretend
Little sense. Furthermore, when God created man he said it was "very good" which is hard to believe of people were dying of cancer.
SAWhowhatnow
What are you talking about? The point of the bible is Jesus' death on the cross to forgive the sins of man Death before sin dont change that
iPretend
I'm on mobile so I could find your other comment, but to answer your question, I have fully subscribed to YEC. I used too then I stopped
iPretend
As in single cell organism common ancestor evolution as ultimately irrelevant to empirical science,
iPretend
So never feel like it's to late to spring up a talk should you change your mind.
iPretend
I do not cover this subject to proselytize, but I think we could sharpen both our arguments by at least attempting to discuss.
iPretend
So in conclusion, I take almost every dating method very skeptically, and overall see dating the universe and the theory of evolution
iPretend
So to answer your question I more disagree with old earth than a do agree with a young earth. To me it seems like an old earth is 3/?
iPretend
2/? Caring cuz I kinda walked away from the church for a while. But I recently took a class in epistemology and it really got me going again
iPretend
Is just as important to the religion of naturalism as a young earth is to Christianity. I also think most valuable science is done
iPretend
It's seems you lost interest in the discussion. Which is ok. But I'm very passionate about this subject and you seem civil.
SAWhowhatnow
later and will move this to messages so we don't have to worry about 140 character limits. Or you can message me if you wish, as I [2]
SAWhowhatnow
I apologize, but I wasn't getting notifications of replies for these threads for some reason. I'll reread everything when I get home [1]
SAWhowhatnow
only have access to my phone until tomorrow and it's a pain to read through deep threads. Just let me know what topic you want to discuss :)
iPretend
Let's start with some introductions. Whoever sends theirs first wins!
iPretend
So sorry for all these comments. Also I meant to say haven't subscribed
SAWhowhatnow
So what evidence, if any, would convince you?
iPretend
Is it ok if I don't have the answer to that completely hammered out yet? For now let's say a dating method that requires zero assumptions 1/
iPretend
And is based on no presuppositions.