Sunday, November 21, 2004

Ha! Gullible newts!





I have been told recently by some that my tertiary submission disagreed with their world view and that if I just accept the thinking of the theist, I would understand. Bah! Fie!

Bree: "It's all just theories. There's a lack of proof any way you look at it. I'm reserving judgment until I collect enough data points to tip the scales."

It is not my assertion that there is a god or gods or unicorns, it is against the assertion that I write. There is not only a complete void of facts to support the existence of god(s), but there are remarkable theories that the god(s) as represented are in fact our own creation and further, that the world view that follows a belief in god (in history, politics, sociology, science) is patently false and flawed.

Please remember that the theory is not as the creationist would say, some conjecture or unsubstantiated version of what could happen. A theory is a firm base of thought that explains the evidence around us. If observed data contradicts the theory, the theory has failed. "The distinguishing feature of scientific theories is that they are capable of being tested by experience."

So, with out the "you can't say you don't believe because you don't have a relationship with HIM" or the " I have faith " where is the existence of the proof of god?

I am not blind to evidence. If I were to be faced with observable or demonstrable data that invalidated not only my non belief in the supernatural or magic (thus would further nullify the majority of the intellectual and scientific foundations of culture, life and physics as we know it) I would be willing to concede to the theists that there is a supernatural.

It would remain to be seen what the supernatural was. Mithras maybe, or an omnipotent invisible spirit beaver of unquenchable power . We shall see (I say we shan't)


3 Comments:

Blogger Bree said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

8:44 PM  
Blogger Bree said...

I didn't mean to remove the comment above, just to edit it. Argh.

Darren Barefoot has a post on his blog right now that echoes some of what you say here. He links to an article about a survey that found 45% of Americans believe that God created humans in their present form just 10,000 years ago. His response: "How can they be so blind to science?"

He's also got a brisk discussion going on in his comments, including one gal who says: "The education system should do more to explain what a scientific theory is. I find that Creationists think that the theory of evolution is 'just a theory', as in something Darwin whipped up one night. The lay use of 'theory' causes confusion for many people, who don't understand that a theory is a system of accepted principles and rules of procedure that can analyze, predict and explain a phenomenom." How's that for serendipity? I find myself twice corrected.

Darren's one of my regular reads. You should check him out if you get a chance.

8:49 PM  
Blogger christian said...

yeah, my people are fucktards.

there are scads of people down here that feel creationism and science are compatible. "god caused the big bang" or "god made us evolve"... what they don't seem to realise is that type of reasoning is consistent with a deist god scenario, but not the god most xians believe in.

the fact that hardly anyone knows the true historical origins of their own religions is depressing, nearly as depressing as trying to base modern morality on millenia old norms that are taken out of context... and then you got all this uproar over stuff like "davinci code"...

everyone should be required to take religious studies in school. their own religion and all the other major world religions. in an unbiased, non-dogmatic format. it was far and away my fave (and most interesting) course at uni. no one paid any attention to it because it was tucked away in the humanities dept...

6:28 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home