whycantibelinus said:
robert632 said:
he says there is no evidence on almost everything that has evidense to back it up, and he says that because an old, probably somewhat mistranslated book is evidense of everything.
Interesting huh? People don't even stop to realize that the bible has no proof. The only "proof" it has of being "true" is really old COPIES of it's writings, and even then not the whole thing just bits and pieces. It's also interesting how Christians absolutely want proof that evolution is true before they will believe it, but when they are trying to convert people they say that you need to take what the bible says on faith and not rely on the lack of proof.
Completely true.
However, Atheists do the same thing. How many people on here have witnessed evolution? Or seen the "evidence" produced by scientists to prove it?
I am not saying evolution is wrong (I believe in it for starters) but most people who follow scientific beliefs do so with just as much faith as religious people do. They have never seen the scientific evidence, they are really just going on what the scientists (in religious terms: prophets) are telling them.
Let's take global warming for an example. Some believe it's natural, some man-made, some both. There are scientists on all sides; which ones are right? People will choose whatever side they want to believe regardless of evidence (after all, if everyone went on evidence, then we'd all agree right?).
I am not saying people should discount scientists claims, merely that they should use just as much of their own judgement and logic with science as they claim people do with philosophy.
