reply to post by Quadrivium
In no particular order.
Point 2. I do not need to list all of the incorrect statements and inconsistencies in the bible to show it can not be the word of an infallible
deity. I only need to show one. As this post is not "Does god exist, answers on a postcard please" i wont be listing any but my personal "belief
on the matter can be summed up with a simple question. "What type of Christian are you? Anglican? Baptist? Catholic? Methodist? Orthodox?
Pentecostal? Protestant? Quaker?
(rhetorical, please do not supply an answer as that too is off topic, and no assumption is being made to your personal religious belief. The you is
generic and the entire statement made to demonstrate the point that they cant all be right)
Point 4. I'm glad you agree. there are however a very large group of young earth creationists (about 40 percent of Americans and about 20 percent
British. - Gallup 2008) who believe exactly that.
I look forward to your looming thread with regards to both the above points and we can discuss the matters more completely then.
When elligable I might start an "evolution" based topic howevr point 1 does at least, almost bring us back on topic.
Point 1. The evidence for evolution is absolutely over whelming. The weakest evidence. the fossil record, proves species appear and disappear
throughout history. Mitochondrial DNA links every animal on the planet to every other animal genetically. Thomas Hunt Morgan in 1906 proved that fruit
flies were easy to manipulate and force evolutionary changes to the species.
There are many theories as to the driving force behind evolution but the fact that animals change in response to external pressures is fully
understood, has been tested, replicated in the lab, and the results have been independently reproduced by the others in the scientific community. As
more is understood about genetics, the previous experiments (sticking with fruit flies) are revisited and if need be the information is added.
In a nutshell, the last paragraph is the scientific method, which brings me tou your final point.
Point 3. In my original post i did no picking or choosing of "which scientific facts you base your method". You do not base your method on the fact
you are trying to prove / disprove. If that were the case, using nothing but a tape measure, i could prove the age of the earth to be exactly 3 foot
7 inches. Throughout my post i was referring to THE scientific method ( see response to point 3), not A scientific method.
And this brings us nicely back on topic which is "Atheism - A complete disregard of scientific fact"
Each of the examples above are scientific fact, not opinions. ( I take it that by scientific fact the author means facts accepted by the scientific
community as fact, and not fact that anybody can postulate and claim to be true because "i believe it to be so") As an all out card carrying atheist
I take exception to the accusation of denying science based on my atheism when the absolute reverse is true. A point that has been made over and over
on this very thread where people have been quoting their personal belief systems in order to support some statement or other. While a personal belief
system can also be a fact, Belief does not equal fact.
Simply demanding "show me you evidence" does not make you scientific in method. The evidence for all my statements exists, and is real, and is
accepted as fact by the scientific community (Thats what makes it a scientific fact folks!). I am not here to teach and will not be holding anybodies
hand as we stroll through the aforementioned evidence. If you truly are open minded go take a look. If your mind is closed, simply demand that I
personally recreate every experiment and produce all of the material evidence to you personally. And then you can continue to pretend.
Ti late, ciao f now.