Evolution Facts

[Dawsonite]

Those are two very different versions of 'authority' and 'faith.'

I agree with everything you say in your post except this. Let's take this out of the evolution vs. creation debate and do a hypothetical:

Germany, say 1938. Nazi scientists, sponsored by the government, have published studies showing that "Aryans" possess greater intelligence, strength, endurance, and niceness than any of the inferior races. These findings have been peer reviewed (of course, by other Nazi scientists) and verified. Within Germany and among its friends, this authority has the scientific imprimatur. Many, probably most German citizens will have faith in these findings.

Our situation is the same as this. It's just on a wider scale. It's argument by authority.

---

As far as my vulgarities go if you don't want to read the work fuck you are probably on the wrong forum. If you don't want to be called an asshole you should probably stop acting like one.

So calling someone an asshole for disagreeing with you is not acting like an asshole? Interesting point of view. I think I disagree. Calling someone an asshole advances your argument? Once again, I don't think so. But hey, whatever turns your crank. Vulgarity amuses me, it doesn't offend me. But I rather doubt it convinces anyone. Just my opinion.

---

My fiance- she's another mod here, goes by the name Luckie- used to be a creationist. Taught in religious schools or homeschooled, faith healing, the whole nine yards. And this is her thread.

Of course all generalizations are false. My bad.

I think you would agree though, that your fiancée is an exceptional person in many ways, wouldn't you? After all, she said "yes."

[Tonus]

Our situation is the same as this. It's just on a wider scale. It's argument by authority.

But as I pointed out, it's to an authority that we recognize as fallible. I think that in the 1930s, as now, people tend to trust science and technology based on its track record. Scientists may fail and be wrong a lot, but the general trend is towards more knowledge and understanding. Believing that the scientific method is superior to the 'wisdom' contained in ancient books is not the same as replacing god with scientists. We expect and receive very different things from them.

In our everyday lives, both the theist and atheist place about the same amount of faith in science. We use electric lights to see, pens and pencils to write, we use calculators and computers and automobiles and radios and computer networks and cell phones and so on. We benefit from research into medicines and human health and fitness. We accept the fallibility of scientists, but our faith in their ability to produce working technology is rewarded dozens, possibly hundreds of times every day.

It's when we turn from that authority to the supernatural that the sides diverge. If faith in god paid off in ways as consistent and obvious as faith in science does, then no one would doubt that god existed.

[Dawsonite]

Do you even know what an ad hominem is?

Not only do I know what it is, I can give an example of one:
Calling someone an asshole because he or she disagrees with a position with which you have a religious attachment.

---

Once again, I accept all your facts. We do, in fact, accept fallibility in our authorities whereas Creationists are pretty much stuck with absolute authority (at least in the short run -- in the long run, their philosophy morphs inevitably in response to reality. For example, they eventually stopped drowning witches when they started running out of comely young women).

[coldwx]

Not only do I know what it is, I can give an example of one:
Calling someone an asshole because he or she disagrees with a position with which you have a religious attachment.

Wrong. He must equate you being an asshole with your argument. If he somehow claimed your argument was invalid BECAUSE you are an asshole then it would be ad hominem. Calling someone an asshole is just an insult.

[Dawsonite]

What exactly is an "atheist world-view"...?

Dunno. That's one reason I'm here: to find out. So far, I've learned that for some it includes calling people assholes when you disagree with them.

It's almost if........

I think you mean "It's almost AS if...." And I agree, it's almost as if someone is so invested in his opinion that he or she allows emotion to overcome reason, dunnit?

---

Wrong. He must equate you being an asshole with your argument. If he somehow claimed your argument was invalid BECAUSE you are an asshole then it would be ad hominem. Calling someone an asshole is just an insult.

Good point. And since insult is such an important part of reasoned debate, I MUST be an asshole for being insulted, huh?

[popeyespappy]

As far as my vulgarities go if you don't want to read the work fuck you are probably on the wrong forum. If you don't want to be called an asshole you should probably stop acting like one.

So calling someone an asshole for disagreeing with you is not acting like an asshole? Interesting point of view. I think I disagree. Calling someone an asshole advances your argument? Once again, I don't think so. But hey, whatever turns your crank. Vulgarity amuses me, it doesn't offend me. But I rather doubt it convinces anyone. Just my opinion.

I called you an asshole because you were acting like an an asshole. It didn't have anything to do with your argument. It had to do with calling me out for being off topic when I was directly addressing a point you were trying to make.

[coldwx]

What exactly is an "atheist world-view"...?

Dunno. That's one reason I'm here: to find out. So far, I've learned that for some it includes calling people assholes when you disagree with them.

So you are claiming there IS an atheist world view without knowing what or even if there is such a thing? If you think one exists then you must have some idea of what it is.

[Dawsonite]

I called you an asshole because you were acting like an an asshole. It didn't have anything to do with your argument. It had to do with calling me out for being off topic when I was directly addressing a point you were trying to make.

I disagree but I understand your position. One might say that my entire contribution to this thread is off-topic in that I am not supplying facts about evolution, or even arguing about them.

I apologize for upsetting you. It was not my intention. [snark]I guess this apology is off-topic as well.[/snark]

[popeyespappy]

Apology accepted.

Going to bed now. It's 2:47 in the f'in morning here...