The Interface Between Science and God

originally posted by: slowisfast

originally posted by: Phantom423


I did, in fact, Google it. There's nothing concerning 100M+ killed by Darwin's theory. Please provide links.

I didn't know that PolPot, Mao and Hitler were an avid evolutionists.

Again, please provide legitimate links which substantiate your statements.

It's not that he's arguing that 100M+ were killed in the name of Darwin's theory (I could be wrong maybe he is)
It's that the worldview that Darwin proposes, that the Universe, as well as human persons, is a by-product of time+chance acting upon matter leads to an entirely subjective view of existence.

This view of the world, where there is no objective moral values and duties, no innate value given to human persons, can lead to situations(has led to situations) where 'might makes right' and governments and tyrants have executed that worldview to it's logical end. Mass genocide of valueless talking animals. In that worldview Governments take the place of the transcendent and are the arbiters of 'right' and 'wrong' which, as history has shown, can be quite detrimental to human beings on the short end of that stick.

Unless there is some sort of objective code to differentiate between right and wrong, we have no business looking back on history and claiming what they did was evil or good or whatever. It just was.

No, that's exactly what Raggedyman is arguing based on his insistence that anyone who supports Modern Evolutionary Synthesis is an Atheist and his confusing the late 19tg century philosophy of Social Darwinism with the Scientific Theory of Evolution. In his mind, all of the communist regimes of the 20th century along with Hitlers genocidal ambitions of the 30's and 40's, derive their policies directly from all of the biological science behind MES. Add in the posters belief that one must be an Atheist to accept the reality of evolution and you have a recipe for willful ignorance by refusing to look st the facts while regurgitating non science from sources who are proponents of YEC.

a reply to: peter vlar

Well, my apologies.

If that's his stance I'm in disagreement.
Hitler certainly wasn't an atheist and I'm in agreement that belief in evolutionary theory and atheism aren't synonymous.

originally posted by: slowisfast

originally posted by: TzarChasm

because all of that will totally matter when we become fossil fuel for the next 'latest and greatest' in the evolution game. take a look through the hubble telescope and tell us again about how our morals and uniqueness impact the rest of the cosmos.

I means this respectfully, but you just said a whole bunch of nothing.
It was a presupposition followed by a straw man argument.

none. of. this. matters.

not you, not me, not this whole damn country or the little chunk of space debris that we ride helplessly.

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: slowisfast

originally posted by: TzarChasm

because all of that will totally matter when we become fossil fuel for the next 'latest and greatest' in the evolution game. take a look through the hubble telescope and tell us again about how our morals and uniqueness impact the rest of the cosmos.

I means this respectfully, but you just said a whole bunch of nothing.
It was a presupposition followed by a straw man argument.

none. of. this. matters.

not you, not me, not this whole damn country or the little chunk of space debris that we ride helplessly.

Well, I pity you.

I disagree and feel nothing but pity.

originally posted by: slowisfast

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: slowisfast

originally posted by: TzarChasm

because all of that will totally matter when we become fossil fuel for the next 'latest and greatest' in the evolution game. take a look through the hubble telescope and tell us again about how our morals and uniqueness impact the rest of the cosmos.

I means this respectfully, but you just said a whole bunch of nothing.
It was a presupposition followed by a straw man argument.

none. of. this. matters.

not you, not me, not this whole damn country or the little chunk of space debris that we ride helplessly.

Well, I pity you.

I disagree and feel nothing but pity.

save your pity for those who can use it.

I thought that someone had discovered a god API.



Looks like I only get to check out videos.

a reply to: TzarChasm
With your world view, we all could use it.
I'll pity you for the rest of the day, then I'll leave you alone.

a reply to: Raggedyman

Go away, troll. None of that is based on Darwin's teachings about common ancestry.

originally posted by: slowisfast
I'm in agreement that belief in evolutionary theory and atheism are synonymous.

Agreement with whom? They are not even remotely close to the same thing, let alone "synonymous". That's a common theist lie. Even most rational religious folk accept evolution now.

originally posted by: slowisfast
a reply to: peter vlar

Well, my apologies.

If that's his stance I'm in disagreement.
Hitler certainly wasn't an atheist and I'm in agreement that belief in evolutionary theory and atheism are synonymous.

How exactly are Atheism and MES synonymous when some of the biggest proponents are religious people? The head of the Human Genome Project prior to it going public (he's the current head of the National Institute of Health) is a Christian and a geneticist, he doesn't seem to have a problem with evolution coexisting with his religious convictions.

a reply to: Barcs

a reply to: peter vlar

I just re-read my post. I meant 'aren't'

Calm down.

originally posted by: slowisfast
a reply to: TzarChasm
With your world view, we all could use it.

I'll pity you for the rest of the day, then I'll leave you alone.

pity is just a passive form of condescension, so no thanks.

a reply to: TzarChasm

It can be. Or it might be genuine.

23:39...

a reply to: peter vlar

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: slowisfast
I'm in agreement that belief in evolutionary theory and atheism are synonymous.

Agreement with whom? They are not even remotely close to the same thing, let alone "synonymous". That's a common theist lie. Even most rational religious folk accept evolution now.

proponents of theism only agree with evolution because thats the easiest way to make intelligent design look plausible without sacrificing credibility. to be fair, they are actually borrowing credibility by association at that point.

originally posted by: slowisfast
a reply to: Barcs

a reply to: peter vlar

I just re-read my post. I meant 'aren't'

Calm down.

I'm perfectly calm. I didn't realize it was a typo and was addressing what I thought was a misconception. You know, deny ignorance and such.

Just an FYI if you are actively seeking a surefire way to annoy somebody, tell them to calm down when they haven't expressed any anger or emotion whatsoever.

originally posted by: slowisfast
a reply to: TzarChasm

It can be. Or it might be genuine.

23:39...

passively genuine condescension. its implied your perspective is superior to mine and so you feel bad for me. dont.

a reply to: Barcs

My apologies.
I thought I put aren't.
And within context 'are' didn't even make sense.

I saw two in a row addressing it. My bad.

Now calm down

originally posted by: Barcs

originally posted by: slowisfast
a reply to: Barcs

a reply to: peter vlar

I just re-read my post. I meant 'aren't'

Calm down.

I'm perfectly calm. I didn't realize it was a typo and was addressing what I thought was a misconception. You know, deny ignorance and such.

Just an FYI if you are actively seeking a surefire way to annoy somebody, tell them to calm down when they haven't expressed any anger or emotion whatsoever.

Isnt it ironic? "Calm down sir" "FINE I WILL GET MAD"

originally posted by: TzarChasm

originally posted by: slowisfast
a reply to: TzarChasm

It can be. Or it might be genuine.

23:39...

passively genuine condescension. its implied your perspective is superior to mine and so you feel bad for me. dont.

Newsflash-
Everyone thinks their worldview is the correct one and 'superior' to differing worldviews, else they wouldn't have the one they do.

Anyways... none.of.this.matters.
Including your opinions on my feelings of your worldview.

E = mc^2: Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared.

This is the exchange rate between that which is seen and unseen - matter and energy. The fact that the speed of light is encoded into this exchange deepens the metaphysical significance of light.

Another thing too - if mass is simply densified energy, why do we base our theories on the workings of matter when it is secondary to energy? Just some thoughts.