Posts: 647
Threads: 9
Joined: March 3, 2010
Reputation:
14
RE: Bill O'Reilly punks Richard Dawkins
September 26, 2010 at 10:54 am
(September 26, 2010 at 9:40 am)A Theist Wrote: My question:
Judging by the comments in this thread, most agree with you that science doesn't know everything about evolution. Can anyone be certain that it even happened?
As has been said, there is no certainty in science. But evolution is as near to being certainly true as possible. Not knowing everything about evolution doesn't mean you can't know with reasonable conviction that it exists. I take it that you believe this about God?
Quote:And the mass murderers and serial killers that say that god told them to do it, what do you think of their personal relationship with your god?
Just exactly, what did you rebutt?
He rebutted the idea that having a 'personal relationship' with God proves anything. If these nuts didn't talk to God, what makes you think that you have?
'We must respect the other fellow's religion, but only in the sense and to the extent that we respect his theory that his wife is beautiful and his children smart.' H.L. Mencken
'False religion' is the ultimate tautology.
'It is just like man's vanity and impertinence to call an animal dumb because it is dumb to his dull perceptions.' Mark Twain
'I care not much for a man's religion whose dog and cat are not the better for it.' Abraham Lincoln
Posts: 18503
Threads: 79
Joined: May 29, 2010
Reputation:
125
RE: Bill O'Reilly punks Richard Dawkins
September 26, 2010 at 11:12 am
(This post was last modified: September 26, 2010 at 11:13 am by LastPoet.)
A Theist Wrote:Judging by the comments in this thread, most agree with you that science doesn't know everything about evolution. Can anyone be certain that it even happened?
Yes! Evolution is a fact, its observable on the fossil record, Genetically, amongst other (alot of)evidence. However "The Theory of Evolution by means of natural selection" formulated by Charles Darwin is a scientific theory, and its the one that best explain the way evolution works, based on the evidence. It has been refined over the years due to new mechanisms discovered (Darwin knew not about genetics), but never falsified, yes, falsified because a true scientific theory must be falsifiable, that is, it is possible to exist evidence that can prove it wrong. An example, you never saw the moronic attempt from kirk cameron to disprove evolution saying that "For Evolution to be true a crocoduck should exist!"? He even showed a composed picture. Well, that would not prove evolution, it would disprove it really. Another example: find the fossil of a modern man with more than 100 million years.
I'd wager that you wont even respond properly to this, well, you just don't wanna listen. You are just here to prove to your imaginary sky-daddy you are a good sheep. Go my son, and bask in your ignorance, 'cause ignorance is bliss and you are up there in the clouds, full of it.
Posts: 1965
Threads: 83
Joined: June 15, 2010
Reputation:
37
RE: Bill O'Reilly punks Richard Dawkins
September 26, 2010 at 11:58 am
(This post was last modified: September 26, 2010 at 12:07 pm by Jaysyn.)
(September 25, 2010 at 8:58 pm)A Theist Wrote: Can any of you prove that God does not exist?
1.) You can't prove a negative.
2.) The onus is on the religious to prove their invisible sky-daddy exists. We are not the idiots making extraordinary claims.
(September 26, 2010 at 4:34 am)blood_pardon Wrote: The only reason I can say "I know there is a God" is because of an on going personal relationship with Him. I like what a man said once "There are three choices. Im a mad man, Im lying, or what Im telling you is the truth"
You forgot option 4, sadly deluded. Some schizophrenics have deep, ongoing personal relationships with cartoon characters, that doesn't make them *real*.
God "tells" crazy people to kill other people all the time. How are their claims any less valid than yours?
(September 26, 2010 at 8:38 am)A Theist Wrote: O'Reilly used them effectively to neutralize Dawkins arguments. When Dawkins admited that science couldn't answer how everything came into existence, he was put on the defense throughout the rest of the debate.
That's your opinion & in my opinion (& every other rational, intelligent person on this forum) it's not worth the electrons used to display it.
"How is it that a lame man does not annoy us while a lame mind does? Because a lame man recognizes that we are walking straight, while a lame mind says that it is we who are limping." - Pascal
Posts: 2254
Threads: 85
Joined: January 24, 2010
Reputation:
29
RE: Bill O'Reilly punks Richard Dawkins
September 26, 2010 at 12:16 pm
A Theist, the only thing Bill O'Reilly aka "Mr Douchebag" will ever win is not recognition from us, but a one-way ticket to the happy farm. He's bat-shit-bonkers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2tJjNVVwRCY
(September 25, 2010 at 8:58 pm)A Theist Wrote: Can any of you prove that God does not exist? 1. Which God?
2. Can you prove that your god-concept exists?
...guess not. 
(September 26, 2010 at 4:34 am)blood_pardon Wrote: The only reason I can say "I know there is a God" is because of an on going personal relationship with Him. I like what a man said once "There are three choices. Im a mad man, Im lying, or what Im telling you is the truth" Pity he was being fallacious then, in which only three alternatives were briefly considered, when in actuality there could easily be other valid options, i.e. "I'm misinformed" or "None of the above" for example.
Quote:God is initiating a response from me almost daily, he corrects me for sin in my life, he leads me to hear certain teaching , he puts a deep desire in my heart for me to seek Him, he has brought so much peace and joy into my marriage. And He provides my needs abundantly! An example of this is the other day in wal-mart my wife and I are walking by these lava lamps and she says she wants to get one of those because she remembers having one when she was younger and 3 days later guess what? TWO BRAND NEW lava lamps in the box just sitting by the dumpster! What the...?
You have poor standards of evidence. That's the equivalent of a theist suffering from a bad case of constipation, prays for God, and finally went, considers the whole ordeal some kind of "divine intervention".
Posts: 3522
Threads: 165
Joined: November 17, 2009
Reputation:
27
RE: Bill O'Reilly punks Richard Dawkins
September 26, 2010 at 12:28 pm
(September 26, 2010 at 10:54 am)The Omnissiunt One Wrote: (September 26, 2010 at 9:40 am)A Theist Wrote: My question:
Judging by the comments in this thread, most agree with you that science doesn't know everything about evolution. Can anyone be certain that it even happened?
As has been said, there is no certainty in science. But evolution is as near to being certainly true as possible. Not knowing everything about evolution doesn't mean you can't know with reasonable conviction that it exists. I take it that you believe this about God? Quote: I take it that you believe this about God?
I don't practice the faith anymore...but I'm still a long way from embracing evolution....like you said,..."there is no certainty in science."
"Inside every Liberal there's a Totalitarian screaming to get out"
![[Image: freddy_03.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=s25.postimg.org%2Fuq1y7aapr%2Ffreddy_03.jpg)
Quote: JohnDG...
Quote:It was an awful mistake to characterize based upon religion. I should not judge any theist that way, I must remember what I said in order to change.
Posts: 18503
Threads: 79
Joined: May 29, 2010
Reputation:
125
RE: Bill O'Reilly punks Richard Dawkins
September 26, 2010 at 12:36 pm
Science for you is so uncertain, that you really don't believe the computer you are posting these posts exist. Yeah, science, the reason why people like you escape natural selection.
Posts: 1211
Threads: 38
Joined: July 15, 2010
Reputation:
21
RE: Bill O'Reilly punks Richard Dawkins
September 26, 2010 at 2:11 pm
(September 26, 2010 at 12:28 pm)A Theist Wrote: I don't practice the faith anymore...but I'm still a long way from embracing evolution....like you said,..."there is no certainty in science."
There are no absolutes either but evolution is as certain as science can reasonably get - just like many other scientific concepts that scientists haven't questioned in well over a century since the first pieces of evidence started piling up.
Just like most of the scientific concepts most people never question - like relativity, the atomic theory, and chemistry.
If today you can take a thing like evolution and make it a crime to teach in the public schools, tomorrow you can make it a crime to teach it in the private schools and next year you can make it a crime to teach it to the hustings or in the church. At the next session you may ban books and the newspapers...
Ignorance and fanaticism are ever busy and need feeding. Always feeding and gloating for more. Today it is the public school teachers; tomorrow the private. The next day the preachers and the lecturers, the magazines, the books, the newspapers. After a while, Your Honor, it is the setting of man against man and creed against creed until with flying banners and beating drums we are marching backward to the glorious ages of the sixteenth centry when bigots lighted fagots to burn the men who dared to bring any intelligence and enlightenment and culture to the human mind. ~Clarence Darrow, at the Scopes Monkey Trial, 1925
Politics is supposed to be the second-oldest profession. I have come to realize that it bears a very close resemblance to the first. ~Ronald Reagan
Posts: 3872
Threads: 39
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
43
RE: Bill O'Reilly punks Richard Dawkins
September 26, 2010 at 2:51 pm
(This post was last modified: September 26, 2010 at 2:52 pm by Ace Otana.)
(September 26, 2010 at 12:28 pm)A Theist Wrote: I'm still a long way from embracing evolution....like you said,..."there is no certainty in science."
Ok, so are you saying that you won't accept evolution because we don't know 'everything' about it? You won't accept it because it isn't an absalute certainty? But god isn't a certainty (no where near it) and you seem more than happy to accept that.
Hey guess what? Gravity is only a theory, we don't know everything about it....does this mean you won't accept gravity either?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Posts: 57
Threads: 5
Joined: September 12, 2010
Reputation:
0
RE: Bill O'Reilly punks Richard Dawkins
September 26, 2010 at 4:53 pm
Welsh Cake Wrote:He's bat-shit-bonkers.
Lol, I actually wonder if theres some truth to that after watching that video. He was definetley acting like a nut cake.
Posts: 14932
Threads: 684
Joined: August 25, 2008
Reputation:
142
RE: Bill O'Reilly punks Richard Dawkins
September 26, 2010 at 6:30 pm
(September 26, 2010 at 11:58 am)Jaysyn Wrote: 1.) You can't prove a negative. Did you actually read the article at that link? It actually contains several counter-arguments to the statement "You can't prove a negative", which is false and rightly so.
I'm not sure when the atheist community started reciting it like a mantra, but I do wish they'd stop. You can prove negatives; sometimes it is very hard to do so, sometimes it is very easy.
Hard: Proving there are no pins in a football stadium (or other large area).
Easy: Proving there are no square circles.
The first is hard because you need to look at the entire football stadium to see if there are any pins. The second is easy because a circle cannot have a square shape as an attribute; it is by definition circular, and therefore cannot also be square. One could disprove God by coming up with contradicting attributes (the omniscient / omnipotence paradox is an attempt at this).
|
