A Former Atheist

[Thumpalumpacus]

What do you mean, they believed it for about 2 thousand years? How old do you think humanity is?!

About 6,000 years old. 

That whooshing sound is what's left of your credibility going straight down the shitter.

[Theoretical Skeptic]

Thanks for your reply to my questions.

Me? You are most welcome. Thanks for such good conversation. 

[robvalue]

Yeah No problem.

[Alex K]

About 6,000 years old. 

That whooshing sound is what's left of your credibility going straight down the shitter.

See, you just have to ask the right questions, and suddenly - clarity.

[robvalue]

The question then would be:

Why do you put more weight in one book than in all the scientific knowledge accumulated by the brightest minds in the last 2000 years? 

[abaris]

About 6,000 years old. 

Excuse me if I don't take anything you say seriously after that.

[Theoretical Skeptic]

The question then would be:

Why do you put more weight in one book than in all the scientific knowledge accumulated by the brightest minds in the last 2000 years? 

Let me see. How to answer that. First of all, the origins of science and education didn't get their start in the secular world, but rather in the religious. Secondly, I can name respected scientists in many fields who not only not believe in evolution, but also teach the Bible in their spare time. So there may be some disagreement with current science and the Bible regarding the flood and evolution but there isn't as much disagreement as you might suspect. Remember, science can't test the supernatural so they have no authority to state a position on it, really. 

Growing up in public schools in the 1970's and 1980's as an unbeliever my science teachers were atheist and most of what they told me, now obsolete science peppered with what I now know was Biblical ignorance was touted as unchangeable fact. Knowledge grows, evolves, changes. Facts don't. Tomorrow's science will no doubt negate the science of today. 

Hundreds of years ago the current science thought that night and day were caused by vapors, from the sky in the day and from the ground at night while the Bible had said thousands of years ago that night and day were due to the luminaries. The hydrologic cycle from the Bible and hygienic laws from the Bible predated science, the latter during Moses' time were only realized in the last 150 years. Until then a physician would go from the morgue to the birthing table without so much as washing their hands. The spherical shape of the earth was explained by the Bible hundreds of years before science concluded it. 

My family and friends are mostly atheists, and like myself at the time, they don't believe everything science dictates to them. None of them that I know believe in evolution. We thought of it as bullshit, like the American public school's teaching of myth and legends, propaganda and outright lies in the guise of historical fact.

[abaris]

Secondly, I can name respected scientists in many fields who not only don't believe in evolution, but also teach the Bible in their spare time.

So, let's get down to business. Name a few, so that we can admire their credentials. Scientists in many fields, you say. So there have to be many names behind this claim.

---

My family and friends are mostly atheists atheist, and like myself at the time, they don't believe everything science dictates to them. None of them that I know believe in evolution. We thought of it as bullshit, like the American public school's teaching of myth and legends, propaganda and outright lies. 

See, that has that particular bouquet of bullshit. Atheists and not believing in evolution? So what's the alternative, if god as well as science is off the table?

[rexbeccarox]

Actually, I think the OP has spent more time telling us what atheists believe than discussing what or why he does.  In fact, OP, you have an awful lot of words to describe something of which the definition is "a lack of belief in deities".  Maybe you could enlighten us as to what it is you actually believe instead of what atheists do.  

The subject of the thread, upon request, was my own personal history as a former atheist. The focus of the response has been a general doubt of my claim to have even been atheist. I think I've been pretty clear what I believe and I don't see my having harped on what atheist believe or lack thereof but their rejection of my own claim as such. 

So when you said this:

The point is, you most likely instilled in your young son some materialistic fantasy based upon mythology, customs and tradition that you knew wasn't true but presented as truth to your impressionable child in order to mislead, and control him and yet you have a big problem with anyone else incorporating these alleged tenets. Atheism is hypocritical, nonsensical, uninformed antiquated polemic pontification. Social and political frustration primarily expressed poorly by failed Christians with a Utopian quasi scientific ideology equally uninformed and hinged upon the failed metaphysical experiment of evolution. And you, I suspect, think that is original and clever. It isn't, so why not be more tolerant of other people's paradigm? 

You were projecting?

[Theoretical Skeptic]

So, let's get down to business. Name a few, so that we can admire their credentials. Scientists in many fields, you say. So there have to be many names behind this claim.

Right . . . credentials meaning whether or not they agree with you, eh? This list isn't my own but for the life of me I can't remember the site where I got it. Teachers of the Bible as well as critical of evolution:  

Wolf-Ekkehard Lonnig, has done scientific work dealing with genetic mutation in plants for the past 30 years, for 21 of those years with the Max Planck Institute for Plant Breeding Research in Cologne, Germany. Also an elder in the Christian congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses. 

Byron Leon Meadows works at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration in the field of laser physics. He is currently involved in the development of technology to improve the ability to monitor global climate, weather and other planetary phenomena. Also an elder in the congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses. 

Kenneth Lloyd Tanaka is a geologist employed by the U.S. Geological Survey of Flagstaff, Arizona. For 30 years doing work in scientific research in various fields of geology including planetary geology. He has had dozens of research articles and geologic maps of Mars published in accredited scientific journals, and is also a JW. 

Paula Kincheloe has several years of experience as a researcher in the fields of cell and molecular biology and microbiology. In addition to studies in DNA, RNA, proteins, and metabolic pathways she is also a volunteer Bible instructor for Russian speaking communities as a JW. 

Enrique Hernandez-Lemus is a full time minister with the JW's and also a theoretical physicist working at the National University of Mexico. His secular work involves finding a thermodynamically feasible explanation for the phenomenon known as gravothermal catastrophe, a mechanism of star growth. He has also worked with the complexity in DNA sequences.

Scientists critical of evolution. 

Eric Bapteste (evolutionary scientist), Joachim Barrande (paleontologist), John Barrow (professor), Dr. Carol Cleland (NASA Astrobiology Institute), Michael Denton (molecular biologist), Henry Gee (zoologist), Malcolm S. Gordon (biologist), Stuart Newman (biologist), Radu Popa (microbiologist), David M. Raup (paleontologist), Michael Rose (biologist), Robert Shapiro (professor of chemistry)

See, that has that particular bouquet of bullshit. Atheists and not believing in evolution? So what's the alternative, if god as well as science is off the table?

The unknown. Really, can the theist or the atheist state for absolute certainty their own positions? They may think they can, but can they?