RE: So you believe in evolution..
December 23, 2011 at 5:39 am
(This post was last modified: December 23, 2011 at 5:48 am by power.)
(December 23, 2011 at 5:15 am)aleialoura Wrote: http://atheistforums.org/thread-10032.html
I am not basing my disbelief on evolution. If evolution were proven to be untrue, there would have to be some sort of plausible alternative. Slapping goddidit on something is unthinking the thinkable, and has never been an answer for anything ever, ever.. ever ever.
Probably because there are no such things as gods, but hey, what the fuck do I know?
Here ya go:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dinosaur/blood.html
Please do take your time, and browse around that first link. We made it just for you. It's almost like... we're your gods.
Wow.
Trippy.
(December 23, 2011 at 5:15 am)aleialoura Wrote: I am not basing my disbelief on evolution. If evolution were proven to be untrue, there would have to be some sort of plausible alternative. Slapping goddidit on something is unthinking the thinkable, and has never been an answer for anything ever, ever.. ever ever.
You're admitting here that you just assume apriori that life happened on its own and don't consider any alternatives. It reminds me of this quote:
we take the side of evolutionary science because we have a prior commitment to materialism. it is not that the methods..of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation..on the contrary..we cannot allow a divine foot in the door.
richard lewontin
harvard professor of zoology and biology
You seem convinced that God creating the Universe and life itself is impossible, so I'll just ask you the obvious question: why?
As far as your links go, I've studied the other side of the debate comprehensively. If you would like to engage in a discussion, you could start by using your own words and arguments, if you have any.
As far as your trex link goes, there is nothing there that explains it away. You didn't reference the correct link (it was discovered in 2005). What you've linked is just an attack on creationists who feel this is a big deal. Which it is. What your link doesn't do is dispute the evidence, which is that we shouldn't find soft tissue in 65 million year old fossils if they're really that old.
Bottom line, doesn't it even pique your curiousity that soft tissue has been found in bones at least 65 million years old? If I were a true believer in your theory, I think that would raise a lot of questions which don't have easy answers.
Of all choices, atheism requires the greatest faith, as it demands that ones limited store of human knowledge is sufficient to exclude the possibility of God.
Francis Collins
Human Genome Project
Francis Collins
Human Genome Project