... touchesheic99 said:I assume you mean this post.
Or Genesis is the most that man could understand at the time when said deity revealed the story of life unto them. If God is as powerful as the bible states, then there is an innate possibility that the human consciousness cannot fully grasp the entirety of his powers. Continuing along this line of thinking, the six days of creation that is described in the bible, may have been six days for the supreme being, but for mortal like it could have been 6 million years. As such, evolution can be seen as an attempt to view the process of creation of life on Earth.
Really? I manage just fine.Bob the Average said:you know i thought about being an atheist once but i just couldn't manage to be enough of a smug prick.
I don't think that we've stopped evolving, we just don't live long enough to notice the effects.Kalezian said:*Snip*
A quick perusal of Dawkins Wikipedia entry shows me this list of Dawkins books:PhiMed said:Third, and this is the least-reasonable reason, but probably the most important one in terms of creating evolution deniers. The most publicly prominent evolutionary biologists in the world are militant atheist dickholes. I don't know of a single scientific discovery Richard Dawkins has made, but I know of a ton of books he's written about what a bunch of silly bitches the faithful are. If he's a dedicated scientist, why does he expend so much energy on philosophy?
So, it makes sense that he has done more in the way of attempting to popularize biology than he has to actually advance the field. Carl Sagan may not have been the greatest astronomer of our age, but he was the most publicly visible.n 1995, Dawkins was appointed Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science in the University of Oxford, a position that had been endowed by Charles Simonyi with the express intention that the holder "be expected to make important contributions to the public understanding of some scientific field".
Actually, that's the definition of an atheist. If you believe that there is a possibility that there may be a God, then you are an agnostic.Cakes said:For some bizarre reason, you used "Atheist" and "Creationist" as your two examples. A more appropriate one would have been atheist and theist, since that seems to be the comparison you're trying to make. It still makes no sense though. Only a strong atheists would say "I believe there is no God".sheic99 said:It takes the same amount of faith to believe there is or isn't a god.Cakes said:I'm sorry, what?sheic99 said:Why does an atheist have less faith than a creationist? The truth is, they don't.
Oh, snap! Did Cakes bribe you so that the thread would burn out and he wouldn't have to make good on that bottle of Coke?Zallest said:YouSnack Cake said:You Don't Believe in Evolution, Why?
Probably, not the best choice of words there, but everything is still a belief, as one can never now for certain.Cakes said:For some bizarre reason, you used "Atheist" and "Creationist" as your two examples. A more appropriate one would have been atheist and theist, since that seems to be the comparison you're trying to make. It still makes no sense though. Only a strong atheists would say "I believe there is no God".sheic99 said:It takes the same amount of faith to believe there is or isn't a god.Cakes said:I'm sorry, what?sheic99 said:Why does an atheist have less faith than a creationist? The truth is, they don't.
I have been known to have the occasional spout of logic coming out of me from time to time.dragon_of_red said:... touchesheic99 said:I assume you mean this post.
Or Genesis is the most that man could understand at the time when said deity revealed the story of life unto them. If God is as powerful as the bible states, then there is an innate possibility that the human consciousness cannot fully grasp the entirety of his powers. Continuing along this line of thinking, the six days of creation that is described in the bible, may have been six days for the supreme being, but for mortal like it could have been 6 million years. As such, evolution can be seen as an attempt to view the process of creation of life on Earth.
That was very well done.
Could be true, but i doubt that the first HomoSapiens to walk the earth thought about this enough to make that an actual possibility. Because we the nmust have in some time gone down a couple of notches.
That's just not the case.PhiMed said:Actually, that's the definition of an atheist. If you believe that there is a possibility that there may be a God, then you are an agnostic.
I didn't say he'd never advocated biology, and I didn't say he'd spent his entire life espousing atheism. I said he'd expended a lot of energy advocating atheism. I stand by that statement.Snack Cake said:A quick perusal of Dawkins Wikipedia entry shows me this list of Dawkins books:PhiMed said:Third, and this is the least-reasonable reason, but probably the most important one in terms of creating evolution deniers. The most publicly prominent evolutionary biologists in the world are militant atheist dickholes. I don't know of a single scientific discovery Richard Dawkins has made, but I know of a ton of books he's written about what a bunch of silly bitches the faithful are. If he's a dedicated scientist, why does he expend so much energy on philosophy?
# The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1976. ISBN 0-19-286092-5.
# The Extended Phenotype. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1982. ISBN 0-19-288051-9.
# The Blind Watchmaker. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. 1986. ISBN 0-393-31570-3.
# River Out of Eden. New York: Basic Books. 1995. ISBN 0-465-06990-8.
# Climbing Mount Improbable. New York: W. W. Norton & Company. 1996. ISBN 0-393-31682-3.
# Unweaving the Rainbow. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 1998. ISBN 0-618-05673-4.
# A Devil's Chaplain. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 2003. ISBN 0-618-33540-4.
# The Ancestor's Tale. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 2004. ISBN 0-618-00583-8.
# The God Delusion. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 2006. ISBN 0-618-68000-4.
# The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution. Free Press (United States), Transworld (United Kingdom and Commonwealth). 2009. ISBN 0-593-06173-X.
Of that list, only "The God Delusion" is primarily anti-religious. I haven't read "A Devil's Chaplain", but I assume it is at least partially anti-religious. However, the remainder of those books are primarily pro-biology. So, it would seem to me that the idea that Dawkins has spent his career attacking religion, not supporting biology, is primarily born out of the media (and the public) focusing on that aspect of his work. Also from the Wikipedia entry:
So, it makes sense that he has done more in the way of attempting to popularize biology than he has to actually advance the field. Carl Sagan may not have been the greatest astronomer of our age, but he was the most publicly visible.n 1995, Dawkins was appointed Simonyi Professor for the Public Understanding of Science in the University of Oxford, a position that had been endowed by Charles Simonyi with the express intention that the holder "be expected to make important contributions to the public understanding of some scientific field".
Keeping my fingers crossed for laser-beam eyes!Kalezian said:its possible, after all we were not built in a day [har har.]wouldyoukindly99 said:I don't think that we've stopped evolving, we just don't live long enough to notice the effects.Kalezian said:*Snip*
but if you look at it in the long run, we might be in a rut. and its still a good possibility that the next evolutional step will be, yet like most everything, man made.
I for one cant wait for neural interfaces.
and IM NOT A LINUX USER! >:|
I don't think that's really true.Eicha said:Prohibition of murder is a religious concept.
That's rather the point I guess, if you take it with a grain of salt who's to say you can't ignore any of the other stuff in the texts that may still be relevant? It's no good saying "this is the word of god... except for here, here and here. That was just made up." It makes a farce out of organised religion.Religion and science can co-exist (at least I think they can), and I don't understand why religious groups feel so threatened by things like evolution. The whole "God created the Earth in 7 days thing" was written thousands of years ago by PEOPLE who had absoloutely no concept of science as we know it today. Seriously, you gotta take that bible with a grain of salt now and then.