The Hypocrisy surrounding Christianity and Atheism

a reply to: Noinden

You clearly have never taken a Philosophy of science paper, or hell read about it. Science is based upon verifiable data. Something does not earn the title of "theory" in science because someone "thinks it so". Nope it gets it frok repeatable and peer reviewed information. My PhD thesis was not just a book I published in a very short print run. It got put past a pannel of academics in my area of interest. So no,m Science is not based upon faith. Perhaps some Descartes might help you?

No I have not taken a Philosophy course and no I do not need academic help of any sort. I am far too old to have interest in philosophy. I congratulate you on your academic accomplishments and wish you the best in the future. I do not agree with your philosophical comments but that is another topic is it not?

Some of us could blow our own horns but that would only incite more anger of which you clearly show in your post. Evolution is not a science and you very well know exactly my intent of my past posts on this matter. Evolution is marked by credible science fields as theoretical at best. I know you are well aware of my intent. I also apologize to the OP for derailing his thread.

a reply to: Seede

"Theoretical at best"? To use a hackneyed phrase "so is gravity, but you still believe in it". WE have had plenty of evidence for evolution, we've observed it, yet people such as yourself seem to wish to deny all of this.

I wish you well in your denial

a reply to: Noinden

"Theoretical at best"? To use a hackneyed phrase "so is gravity, but you still believe in it". WE have had plenty of evidence for evolution, we've observed it, yet people such as yourself seem to wish to deny all of this.

Finally you have gotten the entire point of discussion. Yes there is evidence that changes occur but evidence is not necessarily facts. It is simply that you believe your observations are facts in the way you want them to show. Now you must demonstrate that they are as you believe they are. I may agree to your evidence but apply it to my theology. That my friend is belief just the same as evolution is your belief of the same evidence. I can observe the same thing you observe and have the faith (belief) that I am right and you are mistaken. But that still does not prove my belief or your belief. In the scientific world that is theoretical science.

Most everyone believes that gravity exists on and in this world and even though its origin is not proven it is demonstrable. Some scientists believe one avenue of evidence of origin while others may believe another avenue with the same evidence. Common sense will tell you that either one or both could be wrong or each partially right. Regardless of the evidence they must follow their own guide lines in demonstration their beliefs.

No one denies that change occurs. Poke your head out the window and you can see and feel change from day to day but that is not the avenue that is meant and taught in academia. Now once you can present proof that a million years existed then you can spout your time claims but till that proof is presented you are left with the belief that a million years did exist and have faith that you are right. That is still theoretical science.

a reply to: Seede

You are using some words with out necessarily understanding their meanings neighbor. Evidence builds theories in science. Facts are generally subjective and the preview of region. Science is never 100% sure of something (or 100% against something either). Its honest and open. You will notice I am talking about the disipline and philosophy of science, not the flawed human beings that on a rare occasion pervert it.

I don't judge all peoples who hold religious views by the nuts out there either. All Christians are not the Westbro Baptist Church, all Islamicists are not ISIS, all pagans (such as I) are most certainly not the volkish racists out there.