Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
I understand the plane flies on science. But from Bieber's perspective - it's faith.
|
No ... from Bieber's perspective, it's ignorance. Because he doesn't know how or why a plane flies (or rejects the explanation even when it's handed to him), he has to
resort to faith.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
Faith in the science that others performed.
|
How is that any better than believing in holy books that others wrote or worshiping a god others invented? At least with science, I'm not expected to set aside everyday reasoning just for the sake of believing in something that makes utterly no sense whatsoever. None.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
Faith in the manufacturers who built the plane. The plane could fail - not based on the science, but on faulty materials. He normally doesn't think about all of that... he just gets on a plane believing that he will get to point B.
|
That's because the Justin Bieber in your example is a moron. I'm fairly certain that MOST people think about the possibility of a crash whenever they fly. The bottom line here is exceedingly simple: There is over 100 years of data received from literally millions of flights that gives any traveler a tangible reason to believe they will get to point B without an issue. Sure, sometimes planes crash, but it is rare enough to be worth the risk. Now ... what kind of tangible evidence is there to cause one to have faith in God? Oh right, there isn't any. Ooops. Returning to the airplane analogy, your idea is like asking me to believe that flying will get me to point B when no one has ever flown before. No, no, before you even think it, billions of other people having faith doesn't mean squat - because none of them have ever flown before, either. Sorry, but unless I have a reason to chuck science in the trash and believe in primitive superstition, I'm not getting on that plane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
There is something else that comes into play - that's the track record of flight today. The success rate is extremely high for a plane to get to its destination without incident. And it's been that way for his whole life. That's what he expects to happen.
|
LOL! Yes, and you were heading down the path of making my argument for me, which is why you abruptly stopped comparing faith to flying in an airplane.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
Back to evolution... nothing is evolving.
|
So even though you know full well that macro-evolution takes place over tens or even hundreds of millions of years, you're going to seriously argue that, because we can't see something evolve from a tadpole to a T-Rex right before our eyes, evolution must be wrong? Really?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
There is nothing in mid-evolution.
|
Uhm ... can I borrow your time machine someday? I can only assume you have one because that's the only way you could know whether or not something is in mid-evolution. Well, unless you've convinced yourself that "mid-evolution" means all kinds of funky and biologically untenable forms. I'm guessing this forum is about to have its next Golden Crocoduck Award really soon. At any rate, humanity could be in "mid-evolution" for all we know, and who is to say if a cat will still be a cat in another 100 million years?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
Nobody on the earth has witnessed anything evolve over a period of time. Unlike the success rate of modern aircraft, the track record for witnessing something evolve is poor.
|
The track record for someone witnessing a supernatural god creating humans from a pile of dirt and a rib is even worse.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
So now I have to go on the science of others. But for me, there is other input and that's from the Bible. And it states...
|
Hey, if you want to line up behind the biology of 4,000 years ago, hey, go for it. However, if you're so certain that these Bronze Age desert goatherders had it all figured out, why don't you see a doctor who practices 4,000 year-old medicine?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
Animals were created and reproduced after their kind. Obviously this disagrees with the science of others. So what do I do? Even though I generally tend towards the Bible, it still needs to make sense in reality. And my observation (which is part of the scientific method) tells me nothing is evolving - which tends to support what the Bible says about animals after their own kind.
|
Every now and again, someone here says something so incontrovertibly ridiculous that I'm left stunned and speechless sitting here in my chair.
First of all, you just admitted your confirmation bias by saying "I generally tend towards the Bible." Science generally tends towards the truth, and if the truth meant announcing to the world that "god did it," then that's what science would say. However, because you're already partial to the Bible, even the briefest and most rudimentary "observation" satisfies the scientific method in your eyes ("I don't see it right now thus it must not exist/must not be true"). The result is something akin to me sticking my head out my front door for a couple of seconds and declaring, "I don't see Tokyo anywhere, so it must not exist."
Secondly, you admitted yourself that "it still needs to make sense in reality," and that statement all by itself rules out the Bible. Except, due to your cognitive dissonance, it doesn't. In your mind, the Bible makes sense in reality ... no, even more than that. The Bible is your default position, a truism that doesn't have to be proven scientifically. It just IS. Science has to do all of the proving, and if science can't give you all the answers right this second, you fall back to magic, superstition, and ancient stories.
Since when does an all-powerful God using magic to poof humans into existence fully formed from a pile of dirt and a rib make ANY sense in reality? Thus you're not holding science and religion to the same standard. For religion, it just has to say so in an ancient book. For science, on the other hand, it not only has to be documented in thousands of books and papers written by top notch scientists, YOU personally must be able to replicate all of their experiments and observations (without any of their scientific equipment or their scientific education) or it simply isn't true (ergo, by using the 'false dilemma' fallacy, magic and superstition must by default be true).
Why isn't it necessary for you to go outside and see a god making humans in order for you to believe the Bible is true? You talk about how no one has actually witnessed macro-evolution ... but I beseech thee, nay! I humbly
beg on my knees for you to explain to me just WHO witnessed God create the first humans? Wow, don't you see just a wee bit of a problem there? A little itsy bitsy one, perhaps?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DRob4JC
So for me to believe in evolution - I have to override what the Bible says, and I have to override my own observation and believe in the science and testimony of others. I am not willing to do that at this point.
|
Yes, you have to override what the Bible says, and if you did that, you would realize with an epic self-slap to the forehead that you needn't have taken every word of the Bible as literal truth in order to believe in God. Tell me, does it say anywhere in the Bible that you will burn in hell if you don't believe in a literal account of Genesis? Is that one of the conditions one must meet before passing through the Pearly Gates? To turn up your nose at science, eschewing the use of that brain God supposedly gave you ... and then to convince yourself that God must be trying to trick you by making it look like evolution is true because watching people inadvertantly send themselves to Hell is a big summer pastime for omniscient gods?
Remember that you worship God, not the Bible. The Bible is just a book written by fallible, faulty, human beings. Oh, I know ... science is also written by fallible, faulty humans. Yep, you're absolutely right. But science accepts that it isn't always right nor does it claim to know all the secrets of life and death. One thing science CAN claim, however, is the fact that it HAS been right many many times. How often has religion been right? I'll give you a hint: It's a number between -1 and 1.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
