(March 20, 2012 at 7:41 am)genkaus Wrote:

(March 20, 2012 at 7:16 am)StatCrux Wrote: Not quite correct, the question may arise but it doesn't change in nature, it still remains a philosophical question. What you are saying is that philosophical questions can arise due to scientific discoveries, very true but it doesn't then become a biological/scientific issue.

Quite incorrect. If an issue arises within the field, then it can be judged within the constraints of the field - thereby making it an issue of that field. Take another "philosophical" issue of consciousness. This issue is very much a biological issue when neuro-biologists try to determine the areas of the brain which give rise to it.

So, you would maintain that the question of the existance of God is a biological/scientific issue? The reason for how or why that question arises is quite irrelevant to the nature of the question.

(March 20, 2012 at 8:11 am)Hunter9035 Wrote: There are a lot of fallacies in Catholicism, I don't agree w a lot of things they do. I can't speak for their stance on this. And evolutionists theories will always have missing links and flawed carbon dating etc so I wouldn't call that much of anything let alone evidence.

You want unassailable evidence that your bible is wrong?



This is Galactic cluster JKS041, it is 10.2 billion light years away.

In other words the light we are seeing now has taken 10.2 BILLION years to reach us.

Makes rather a joke of a 6000 year old universe wouldn't you say?

And speaking of Evolution

God created that light in mid flight through space to test our faith, ZB. You just need to open your heart to the lord and he will show you the truth.

(March 20, 2012 at 8:43 am)Faith No More Wrote: God created that light in mid flight through space to test our faith, ZB. You just need to open your heart to the lord and he will show you the truth.

Even my dad who is a Catholic admits that such a God is a God of lies and deceit!

(March 20, 2012 at 8:49 am)FallentoReason Wrote:

(March 20, 2012 at 8:43 am)Faith No More Wrote: God created that light in mid flight through space to test our faith, ZB. You just need to open your heart to the lord and he will show you the truth.

Even my dad who is a Catholic admits that such a God is a God of lies and deceit!

Yeah, even the fucktards at AIG have given up on that one since it shows their god up as a liar.

(March 20, 2012 at 12:44 am)Drich Wrote: Why do Atheist believe evolution cancels out creationism?

Down the hall and to your left is the department your looking for.

The simple answer is that it's not that science believes that evolution cancels out biblical creationism. This is the view of the Christians, which is why they are always so anti-evolution. Science just doesn't have any use for supernatural explanations, so therefore a magical creator god poofing all animals into existence just doesn't fit any valid scientific theory. Science only deals with what can be seen, touched, heard, or measured in some way, so biblical creationism and God don't even factor into science. This is why we don't teach Creationism as fact, because there's no evidence to support it. Whenever Christians can get off their asses and start showing this mountain of evidence they claim they have for their god and Creationism, then science will start taking note. Until then, gods aren't even a subject for discussion in scientific circles.

(March 20, 2012 at 6:32 am)StatCrux Wrote: If I wanted a lesson about God I would speak to a theologian and not an evolutionary biologist. I suspect you don't follow your own advice on this matter...What gives Dawkins any authority to speak about God?

Dawkins is an authority on evolutionary biology. The only authorities on god are comparative mythology professors.

(March 20, 2012 at 8:11 am)Hunter9035 Wrote: There are a lot of fallacies in Catholicism, I don't agree w a lot of things they do. I can't speak for their stance on this. And evolutionists theories will always have missing links and flawed carbon dating etc so I wouldn't call that much of anything let alone evidence.

"Flawed carbon dating"

We hear that claim frequently. The problem is, the claims always turn out to be false.

Care to post a few examples (with sources) so your claim can be properly discussed?