Posts: 3837
Threads: 197
Joined: August 28, 2013
Reputation:
38
RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
December 19, 2013 at 11:14 pm
(This post was last modified: December 19, 2013 at 11:17 pm by Lemonvariable72.)
statlerwaldorf Wrote:That’s the only find that seems to ever get used as supposed evidence. I personally do not have to discredit anything; the scientific literature on the subject has already done that. According to Lingham-Soliar’s article “The evolution of the feather: Sinosauropteryx, a colourful tail” published in 2011, the presence of the eumelanosomes and pheomelanosomes organelles that produce such pigments were actually an optical illusion created by low image reproduction of the scanning electron micrograph. I realize you guys really want dinosaurs to have had feathers but the evidence to support such a notion is rather dubious at best. If you bothered to read the damn link I posted, you'd realize that, that is not the only find all. Ffs even look at archaeopteryx
![[Image: archie2.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.ucmp.berkeley.edu%2Fdiapsids%2Fbirds%2Farchie2.jpg)
Or how how about Sciurumimus albersdoerferi
![[Image: ku-xlarge.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=img.gawkerassets.com%2Fimg%2F17roz5w5aomtmjpg%2Fku-xlarge.jpg)
And here is Anchiornis huxleyi
![[Image: dinosaur_feathers_fossil.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.wired.com%2Fimages_blogs%2Fwiredscience%2F2010%2F02%2Fdinosaur_feathers_fossil.jpg)
Or Sinornithosaurus millenii
![[Image: File:Sinornithosaurus_Dave_NGMC91.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=en.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FFile%3ASinornithosaurus_Dave_NGMC91.jpg)
or Sinocalliopteryx gigas
![[Image: journal.pone.0044012.g001.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=cdn.physorg.com%2Fnewman%2Fgfx%2Fnews%2F2012%2Fjournal.pone.0044012.g001.jpg)
It just happens to be that Sinosauropteryx is in the spotlight right now do to that debate.
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Posts: 419
Threads: 3
Joined: December 10, 2013
Reputation:
3
RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
December 20, 2013 at 12:08 am
What is an atheists standard for evidence/proof?
If it could be proven beyond doubt that God exists...
and that He is the one spoken of in the Bible...
would you repent of your sins and place your faith in Jesus Christ?
Posts: 11260
Threads: 61
Joined: January 5, 2013
Reputation:
123
RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
December 20, 2013 at 12:10 am
(December 20, 2013 at 12:08 am)orangebox21 Wrote: What is an atheists standard for evidence/proof?
Things that are demonstrable, repeatable, falsifiable, and in proportion to the claim being proved.
Personally. I can't speak for everyone else, mind.
Posts: 3022
Threads: 34
Joined: May 11, 2013
Reputation:
30
RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
December 20, 2013 at 9:38 am
Wow, stat really got called out on the feather thing
'The more I learn about people the more I like my dog'- Mark Twain
'You can have all the faith you want in spirits, and the afterlife, and heaven and hell, but when it comes to this world, don't be an idiot. Cause you can tell me you put your faith in God to put you through the day, but when it comes time to cross the road, I know you look both ways.' - Dr House
“Young earth creationism is essentially the position that all of modern science, 90% of living scientists and 98% of living biologists, all major university biology departments, every major science journal, the American Academy of Sciences, and every major science organization in the world, are all wrong regarding the origins and development of life….but one particular tribe of uneducated, bronze aged, goat herders got it exactly right.” - Chuck Easttom
"If my good friend Doctor Gasparri speaks badly of my mother, he can expect to get punched.....You cannot provoke. You cannot insult the faith of others. You cannot make fun of the faith of others. There is a limit." - Pope Francis on freedom of speech
Posts: 2921
Threads: 26
Joined: June 25, 2013
Reputation:
41
RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
December 20, 2013 at 1:52 pm
(December 20, 2013 at 9:38 am)Bad Wolf Wrote: Wow, stat really got called out on the feather thing
That's not the only thing he gets called out on. You should hear him carry on about Noah's Ark.
Posts: 2921
Threads: 26
Joined: June 25, 2013
Reputation:
41
RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
December 20, 2013 at 6:36 pm
(This post was last modified: December 20, 2013 at 6:47 pm by Bad Writer.)
Posts: 3837
Threads: 197
Joined: August 28, 2013
Reputation:
38
RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
December 20, 2013 at 11:53 pm
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Posts: 419
Threads: 3
Joined: December 10, 2013
Reputation:
3
RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
December 23, 2013 at 12:27 am
(December 20, 2013 at 12:10 am)Esquilax Wrote: (December 20, 2013 at 12:08 am)orangebox21 Wrote: What is an atheists standard for evidence/proof?
Things that are demonstrable, repeatable, falsifiable, and in proportion to the claim being proved.
Personally. I can't speak for everyone else, mind.
If you say you can only speak for yourself you imply that standards are relative, that they are not absolute. Do I have that correct? And if the standards for evidence/proof are relative how could a person prove anything to you? If you accept "relative" standards then you would have to accept anyone's proof/evidence so long as they fit within their own set of standards for evidence.
If it could be proven beyond doubt that God exists...
and that He is the one spoken of in the Bible...
would you repent of your sins and place your faith in Jesus Christ?
Posts: 11260
Threads: 61
Joined: January 5, 2013
Reputation:
123
RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
December 23, 2013 at 12:38 am
(This post was last modified: December 23, 2013 at 12:41 am by Esquilax.)
(December 23, 2013 at 12:27 am)orangebox21 Wrote: If you say you can only speak for yourself you imply that standards are relative, that they are not absolute. Do I have that correct? And if the standards for evidence/proof are relative how could a person prove anything to you? If you accept "relative" standards then you would have to accept anyone's proof/evidence so long as they fit within their own set of standards for evidence.
I'd suggest that the standards I'd given, things that are demonstrable and repeatable and so on, are absolute in that they're objectively verifiable, and objectively real: things that exist exist, and if you can show them to exist you've proved that they exist. Good job.
But the question you asked was, what is the atheist standard for proof or evidence, and that's ill-formed in some ways, because atheists are only unified in their acceptance of a single position: disbelief in god claims. Other than that, their standards can vary, but that's not an exclusively atheist thing, everyone does that; even among the religious, you have people accepting their religion on faith, and those who go looking for evidence first. Hell, there are christians who believe in alien abductions, and also those who don't because their standard for evidence is different enough to exclude those accounts from the category of believability. And that's ignoring the obvious differences between biblical literalists and those who take the less believable stories to just be metaphor. To say that atheists therefore have relative standards is to ignore the fact that everyone has an internalized standard of what's believable to them.
I'd say that the standards I gave are the minimum threshold for evidence: if something exists and you can demonstrate it, what's the problem? Where do the further questions come in? If something exists and is demonstrable, it would be crazier not to believe it's there, no?
Also, I take issue with your claim that accepting the idea that people bring their own standards of evidence to the table requires me to accept everyone's evidence as sufficient so long as it's sufficient to them: that doesn't follow at all. Why would you think that?
Edited to add: Oh, and when I say I only speak for myself, that's me being polite. I don't want to put words into anyone else's mouth. You didn't need to spin my polite invitation for anyone else to chime in with more into this whole thing about relative standards, that's just silly.
Posts: 667
Threads: 25
Joined: December 18, 2013
Reputation:
13
RE: The Bible is the claim, not the evidence
December 23, 2013 at 6:00 am
The Bible is evidence of God in the same way that the Lord of the Rings is evidence of Sauron
|
![[Image: 10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg]](https://scontent-a-dfw.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/t1.0-9/10314461_875206779161622_3907189760171701548_n.jpg)
