Any suggestions to refute atheism

[Sideline]

If you have no desire to learn what Catholics believe then why are you here? That is the whole point of this site. I know enough about evolution to see it has fatal flaws and should not be elevated to the level of “thoery” It is hypothesis at best. And the origin of life is pure conjecture, is untestable, so science can make no difinitive statements.

Either you don’t understand it, or you are lying about it. In the spirit of charity, I’d like to assume it is ignorance. Everything you said about it was wrong. That isn’t an adequate understanding.

I do enjoy learning about Catholicism. That is why I was in the seminary for a year, and I taught CCD for 3.

But you weren’t talking about Catholicism, you were spreading falsehoods about what the theory of evolution is. You haven’t stated the Church’s position on the subject. If you had, I wouldn’t have debated with you.

If you had said, “The important thing for Catholics is to understand that God had a truly causal role in the creation of this universe and of life on this planet.” Then I wouldn’t have argued with you, because you would have been saying something true. Catholics must believe that. No argument.

Stick to true statements, and you’ll never have a debate from me.

 

[reggieM]

I am touched, - truly -, that you immediately saw design in these things I mentioned. I, on the other hand did not see design in them as I posted them, nor did I mention design. Still, that you saw design, proves my point, that they are very odd things, indeed.

The appearance of design and purpose is so obvious that even Richard Dawkins can see it. In fact, he says that the appearance of design is “overwhelmingly impressive”.

 

[buffalo]

The appearance of design and purpose is so obvious that even Richard Dawkins can see it. In fact, he says that the appearance of design is “overwhelmingly impressive”.

That would lead him to ask who the designer is? Since he doesn’t believe in God then it would be aliens? Then who designed the aliens so they could design us? He will have to go the way of Antony Flew and A.N. Wilson.

 

[Sideline]

The difference is this; why don’t Coca plants naturally grow in lowland areas instead of mountains. Is there something in the altitude that changes the chemicals in the Coca plant? No. There is just that annoying thing, that a high altitude country has indiginous plants to help people recover from altitude sickness, which is a serious thing, not like forgetting the Rosemary in Mamas’ spaggetti sauce.
(Rosemary, incidentally, helps kill intestinal worms…)

Why doesn’t quinine grow in all the regions that people suffer from malaria? It grows in one region where there is malaria, true, but not the place where it is the deadliest. And let’s face it, if you threw a dart at a map of the world (assuming you didn’t throw it in the ocean) you’d have a fifty/fifty chance of hitting a place that had a problem with malaria. Why doesn’t DEET grow anywhere? DEET is a far, far better repellent than citrus fruit. Why isn’t there a naturally occurring substance that allows people in pollen rich environments deal with hayfever?

If you think about it, these happy accidents are certainly not the norm. But when dealing with very large numbers, you get lucky sometimes.

 

[spectrm]

My religion posits the idea of holiness. The natural-material world does not. The natural world does not provide “oughts” by which the moral life is commanded. Material-nature does not command moral teachings. It permits any and all actions.

A simple yes would’ve sufficed. And, technically, your tenets of Free-Will permits ‘any and all actions’ - but for various reasons, you choose not to commit just any action. This is the same for me

I can understand and appreciate it. The logical conclusions of atheism are frightening and offensive. This is a pretty good help in refuting atheism itself.

Which conclusions? Any in particular? Only with this information can we determine if they are useful in refuting atheism.

I invite you to engage the logical position I already posted. But you’re talking about different things now.

Gladly - the error in your logic of ‘self-interest guiding action’ amongst any population (and to be sure, it does - even Christians and Catholics…) is that it blatantly ignores the self-interest that can be gained through cooperation and community with, what would otherwise be, your competition. For someone who comments on Dawkin’s ideas, you could use a read through The Selfish Gene.

Materalist-atheists, by far the most common kind of atheists, do see only materialism in the world.

in who’s experience? I know many atheists and none of them are strict materialists…might take a bit to get them to admit it, but…alas…pride does appear to be ‘sinful’

If an atheist sees something other than materialism – then that is a major problem for that person’s atheistic theory itself (as well as for atheistic-evolution and most of the other supports that people use for atheism).

This brings up the form of ‘faith’ that atheists and ‘evolutionists’ carry - they have faith in the scientific method to eventually explain the portions that cannot currently be attributed to strict materialism. Any educated atheist I know is aware there are many problems that we may never know the answers to, but they choose to hold a ‘faith’ that also has centuries - nay millennia - of empirical credibility

Where did these “non-material” things come from?

human misunderstanding - like Zeus casting lightning bolts from the sky…oh wait…no…that’s static potential

How do they impose moral obligations on people? How do they comman an “ought” in any human action?

For an individual, there are countless ways to found a morality. For a society (particularly a heterogeneous one), utilitarianism is nearly the only way. There are plenty of theocracies in the world, though. You’re invited to visit them and see how they may be better or worse than modern Western Secularity, but having done this, I think you’ll be rather disappointed with your findings.

Those atheists who posit spiritual, non-material (or even supernatural) values would have many problems in arguing against theism in that case.

Hardly - morality, as stated before by sideline, is not derived from a Godhead in any sense. Plato, Aristotle, Locke, Hume, Einstein, Hawkins…the list goes on and I think involves far more university paper than either of us is capable of attaining. These people, and their ilk, and all of the fiction authors and poets who write about life, tribulations, right vs. wrong, etc. as well as the Bible, Q’uran, and Torah all form the HUMAN Gospel…they’re all writings that contribute to the greater pool of human knowledge and understanding and are capable of teaching great things, including a sense of morality. As an atheist, I would in fact argue that, I have more gospels from which to derive morality than a Catholic could ever hope for.

But if you’re agreeing (by pointing to non-materialist atheists) that the logical proposal I put forward is irrefutable (and therefore we must talk about non-materialist atheism), then that is very good and I would agree with you.

I like I you throw labels around so easily…I’ll attempt to wade through them. Materialism is hardly the only tenet of atheism. If you don’t believe me, that’s your prerogative, but I would encourage more discourse with atheists and more reading about atheist ideas before assuming you understand the concept. In short, I’m disagreeing with you.

 

[Thing]

Why doesn’t quinine grow in all the regions that people suffer from malaria? It grows in one region where there is malaria, true, but not the place where it is the deadliest. And let’s face it, if you threw a dart at a map of the world (assuming you didn’t throw it in the ocean) you’d have a fifty/fifty chance of hitting a place that had a problem with malaria. Why doesn’t DEET grow anywhere? DEET is a far, far better repellent than citrus fruit. Why isn’t there a naturally occurring substance that allows people in pollen rich environments deal with hayfever?

If you think about it, these happy accidents are certainly not the norm. But when dealing with very large numbers, you get lucky sometimes.

I am not talking about man-made chemicals, obviously, because they are conciously made by intelligent beings to counter a problem. I am talking about natural chemicals in living plants that counter human problems in the area where the plants grow. Why would plants evolve like that at all, and most mysteriously why do so where they are needed.

Here is quinine, it is not a plant, but an extract; “Quinine is an effective muscle relaxant, long used by the Quechua Indians of Peru to halt shivering brought on by cold temperatures. Made from the bark of cinchona trees, the Peruvians would mix the ground up bark with sweetened water to offset the bark’s bitter taste, thus producing tonic water.”
Well, thats handy too, Peruvian mountains can be cold, and if your country is mostly made of mountains…

Malaria is not mosquitos. Citrus fruit repels mosquitos, the malaria parasite living in mosquitoes only occurs in some mosquitoes in some areas. Mosquitos by themselves are a real pest and in those areas also grows the solution, citrus fruit…

 

[spectrm]

I am not talking about man-made chemicals, obviously, because they are conciously made by intelligent beings to counter a problem. I am talking about natural chemicals in living plants that counter human problems in the area where the plants grow. Why would plants evolve like that at all, and most mysteriously why do so where they are needed.

that one’s easy - animals (read: humans and creatures alike) find the plant and realize it’s effects. Whilst traveling to areas where they intend to use it, the spores/seeds/etc are deposited leaving a family of the plant to grow in this new environment. It is then cultivated (or at the very least respected by residents) so as to permit it’s proliferation in the area. Meanwhile, the original strain of the plant (growing down in the valley) has fiercer competition with other plant species and is much more likely to die out while it’s brother flourishes…that’s actually ‘natural selection’ by the book. Interesting, too, how a Godhead might have so much foresight as to provide for (presumably heathen…at least in the historical environment) Peruvians comforts while traveling the mountains, but cares little for ensuring portions of Africa and the Middle East have adequate drinking water, foraging, and game for hunting - you know…essentials for human survival.

 

[Sideline]

I am not talking about man-made chemicals, obviously, because they are conciously made by intelligent beings to counter a problem. I am talking about natural chemicals in living plants that counter human problems in the area where the plants grow. Why would plants evolve like that at all, and most mysteriously why do so where they are needed.

I know you aren’t talking about plants. That’s why I’m bringing it up. Think about all of the remedies that could be growing in plants, but aren’t. If you were going to give humans a handful of cures, why would you pick altitude sickness as one of them? Why not something that affects hundreds of millions of people?

Think of all of the ailments that people can succumb to, and think about the handful of natural cures that work. The number that do work is relatively small, and it’s even more rare for it to be somewhere that it is of use. This isn’t a problem with evolution, it’s a problem with people’s understanding of really big numbers.

Think about it, with all of the chemicals reactions that take place in the human body, and all of the chemical compounds found in nature, you would expect at least some of the compounds in nature to be useful to humans. If there were none that worked, then humans wouldn’t have been able to evolve.

Here is quinine, it is not a plant, but an extract; “Quinine is an effective muscle relaxant, long used by the Quechua Indians of Peru to halt shivering brought on by cold temperatures. Made from the bark of cinchona trees, the Peruvians would mix the ground up bark with sweetened water to offset the bark’s bitter taste, thus producing tonic water.”
Well, thats handy too, Peruvian mountains can be cold, and if your country is mostly made of mountains…

Yes, it is handy. It would also have been happy in Africa and Asia, from which it is absent. A compound to help with hayfever would have been helpful too. So would one that would help with cancer.

Malaria is not mosquitos. Citrus fruit repels mosquitos, the malaria parasite living in mosquitoes only occurs in some mosquitoes in some areas. Mosquitos by themselves are a real pest and in those areas also grows the solution, citrus fruit…

I know that malaria isn’t mosquitoes, but if you don’t get bitten by the malaria carrying mosquitoes then you don’t get mosquitoes. So citrus fruit would be the most useful (if it worked well) in places were malaria is the most rampant.

By the way, I’ve lived in areas with lots of mosquitoes and citrus fruit. If you are relying on the citrus fruit to make your life more comfortable, then you must have a higher tolerance for getting bitten than I did.

 

[Thing]

that one’s easy - animals (read: humans and creatures alike) find the plant and realize it’s effects. Whilst traveling to areas where they intend to use it, the spores/seeds/etc are deposited leaving a family of the plant to grow in this new environment. It is then cultivated (or at the very least respected by residents) so as to permit it’s proliferation in the area. Meanwhile, the original strain of the plant (growing down in the valley) has fiercer competition with other plant species and is much more likely to die out while it’s brother flourishes…that’s actually ‘natural selection’ by the book. Interesting, too, how a Godhead might have so much foresight as to provide for (presumably heathen…at least in the historical environment) Peruvians comforts while traveling the mountains, but cares little for ensuring portions of Africa and the Middle East have adequate drinking water, foraging, and game for hunting - you know…essentials for human survival.

Interesting idea, but it does not explain why plants should be beneficial.
If you lived in Bolivia you would find that most of your country, the places you live in, is around 10,000 to 14,000 feet above sea level. Even the indiginous people there have some difficulty with day to day living at the altitude of their country. But no worries, there is an altitude plant. Why? don’t ask me, I have no idea why, its just there.

As for the middle east, don’t they have oasis. Fodder for their animals, date palms for shelter and food. When people get greedy and ambitious resources diminish.

One mans altitude plant is another mans oasis.

 

[Thing]

I know you aren’t talking about plants [man-made chemicals]. That’s why I’m bringing it up. Think about all of the remedies that could be growing in plants, but aren’t. If you were going to give humans a handful of cures, why would you pick altitude sickness as one of them? Why not something that affects hundreds of millions of people?

Think of all of the ailments that people can succumb to, and think about the handful of natural cures that work. The number that do work is relatively small, and it’s even more rare for it to be somewhere that it is of use. This isn’t a problem with evolution, it’s a problem with people’s understanding of really big numbers.

Think about it, with all of the chemicals reactions that take place in the human body, and all of the chemical compounds found in nature, you would expect at least some of the compounds in nature to be useful to humans. If there were none that worked, then humans wouldn’t have been able to evolve.

Yes, it is handy. It would also have been happy in Africa and Asia, from which it is absent. A compound to help with hayfever would have been helpful too. So would one that would help with cancer.

I know that malaria isn’t mosquitoes, but if you don’t get bitten by the malaria carrying mosquitoes then you don’t get mosquitoes. So citrus fruit would be the most useful (if it worked well) in places were malaria is the most rampant.

By the way, I’ve lived in areas with lots of mosquitoes and citrus fruit. If you are relying on the citrus fruit to make your life more comfortable, then you must have a higher tolerance for getting bitten than I did.

I don’t think I’m talking about remedies for ailments and diseases. I mean something simpler, for example, you would not function at all at altitude, it is not a disease or an ailment, the altitude plant allows you to live and function better.

The citrus fruit is not a cure for mosquitoes or malaria, I did not make that claim. It allows the people who live there to live and function there better.

Do you think life should be without disease and illness and pain. That is not the Christian revelation. God said to man ‘Out, out into the thorny land, with you. Your woman will suffer more, and you will live by the sweat of your brow.’ Ok, I’m paraphrasing a bit. But you get the idea. We were not told we had the cure for our ailments, only that we must work and toil to support ourselves. Work and toil and even suffering are made possible over vast countries by natural tonics.
My claim is not that plants owe us something or somehow ought to cure us of everything.
Or that the Christian God should have provided drugs to cure our diseases and ailments on this planet. Only that we must suffer in this life, and whereas we might suffer and suffer to death on a completly alien planet, here on this particular planet we have plants which for some extraordinary reason often allow us to function better or at least tolerably well in the particular areas we live in. I mean, an altitude plant, come on. A plant for cold mountains, hurrah. Citrus and mosquito land, cool.

 

[StAnastasia]

This is why I accept natural selection within a species, but not the kind of changes that would allow a single-celled organism to eventually evolve into us. Small changes over time are acceptible. I can deal with evoution if you use the definition of “changes in allele frequency in a population over time.” This definition does not allow for evolution from amoeba to me.

I don’t know of anyone who thinks amoebas evolve into humans.

 

[spectrm]

Interesting idea, but it does not explain why plants should be beneficial.
If you lived in Bolivia you would find that most of your country, the places you live in, is around 10,000 to 14,000 feet above sea level. Even the indiginous people there have some difficulty with day to day living at the altitude of their country. But no worries, there is an altitude plant. Why? don’t ask me, I have no idea why, its just there.

You have cause and effect backwards, I think. The plant isn’t useful by existing, it’s exists BECAUSE it is useful. If the plant had no use to the animals that consumed it, then they wouldn’t consume it and it wouldn’t spread it’s seed the way plants do.

As for the middle east, don’t they have oasis. Fodder for their animals, date palms for shelter and food.

They sure do…the same way the US has hot geysers…they’re few and far-between geographical anomalies. Nothing upon which to base a civilization. But once upon a time, the land was the richest and most fertile for thousands of miles (the Cradle of Civilization, iirc). As for date palms, trying gaining REAL shelter from a palm…lived in Las Vegas for 2 years, never found solace or shade in a palm tree…too tall and not enough foliage.

When people get greedy and ambitious resources diminish.

Not sure what this illustrates or is suppose to explain, but this is not always the case. I DO live in the US after all. And, as for the decadence of Middle Eastern cultures, much of this is actually attributed to the Caucauses of Turkey and the Near-Aegean conquering the Middle Eastern nations and lacking an understanding of agriculture (why would you understand it if you spent the last 50 generations hunting, conquering and pillaging?).

 

[CWBetts]

I don’t know of anyone who thinks amoebas evolve into humans.

you get the point. According to evolution everything started as single-celled organisms

 

[Sideline]

I don’t think I’m talking about remedies for ailments and diseases. I mean something simpler, for example, you would not function at all at altitude, it is not a disease or an ailment, the altitude plant allows you to live and function better.

The citrus fruit is not a cure for mosquitoes or malaria, I did not make that claim. It allows the people who live there to live and function there better.

Okay, how can I explain this to you? If there is no food or water in an area, there will be no humans living there either. If there is enough food and water, in an area, humans tend to migrate there. Sometimes, not always but sometimes, humans will discover things in that environment that make life more pleasant in that environment. If those things weren’t in the area, they most likely would not be discovered. For example, there could be a chemical in kelp that would help with altitude sickness, but since people who live at high altitudes don’t have a ready supply of kelp, its soothing properties might never be discovered.

Do you think life should be without disease and illness and pain. That is not the Christian revelation. God said to man ‘Out, out into the thorny land, with you. Your woman will suffer more, and you will live by the sweat of your brow.’ Ok, I’m paraphrasing a bit. But you get the idea.

And yet you probably get freezing when having dental work done, right?

Let’s skip ahead…

…on this particular planet we have plants which for some extraordinary reason often allow us to function better or at least tolerably well in the particular areas we live in. I mean, an altitude plant, come on. A plant for cold mountains, hurrah. Citrus and mosquito land, cool.

Yes, some problems have solutions, but most don’t. Places that are intolerable for human life, don’t have humans there. Everywhere there are humans, you have conditions in which it is possible for humans to live.

You have a really strange notion of God if you think that he wants people to suffer, but yet will help with altitude sickness.

 

[Thing]

You have cause and effect backwards, I think. The plant isn’t useful by existing, it’s exists BECAUSE it is useful. If the plant had no use to the animals that consumed it, then they wouldn’t consume it and it wouldn’t spread it’s seed the way plants do.

No so. You are not thinking. Why does that plant exist? Are you saying the plant evolved by coincidence in high mountains to have natural drugs to help people live in mountains? Did the plant evolve those chemicals by accident? What are the odds for an altitude tonic to evolve at altitude? Why have chemicals for altitude at all?
I don’t know of any animals that eat that plant at all or for its altitude properties, and it poisons insects to death.

They sure do…the same way the US has hot geysers…they’re few and far-between geographical anomalies. Nothing upon which to base a civilization. But once upon a time, the land was the richest and most fertile for thousands of miles (the Cradle of Civilization, iirc). As for date palms, trying gaining REAL shelter from a palm…lived in Las Vegas for 2 years, never found solace or shade in a palm tree…too tall and not enough foliage.

I never promised you a rose garden. Did you not hear the one about the Old Testament prophet who was given Some shelter under a scraggy thorn bush.

Not sure what this illustrates or is suppose to explain, but this is not always the case. I DO live in the US after all. And, as for the decadence of Middle Eastern cultures, much of this is actually attributed to the Caucauses of Turkey and the Near-Aegean conquering the Middle Eastern nations and lacking an understanding of agriculture (why would you understand it if you spent the last 50 generations hunting, conquering and pillaging?).

because you said this:

Interesting, too, how a Godhead might have so much foresight as to provide for (presumably heathen…at least in the historical environment) Peruvians comforts while traveling the mountains, but cares little for ensuring portions of Africa and the Middle East have adequate drinking water, foraging, and game for hunting - you know…essentials for human survival.

And I said that the Godhead did provide them with oasis, food, water, and shelter. And that when people get greedy and ambitious i.e. poor/corrupt governing of resources then you will see tragic suffering, but it need not be, it is a human problem and not Gods fault, He gives us what we need, people take what they want regardless of how another may suffer because of that.

 

[Thing]

And yet you probably get freezing when having dental work done, right?

Let’s skip ahead…

Do you think Catholics think painkillers are sinfull?
What do you think cloves are? whiskey? or your other favourite natural painkiller concentrated or otherwise.

Skip ahead… don’ look back…

 

[spectrm]

I don’t know of anyone who thinks amoebas evolve into humans.

Nor do I. Amoebas are pretty advanced, really. While the technology active in amoebas is fairly common to nearly all other species on the planet, they are certainly far from related to homo sapiens.

Amoebas and bacterias are different in their evolution and reproduction from humans in that amoebas and bacterias reproduce asexually via mitosis. This means that their mutations from generation to generation are really based on the cell’s ability to find the right RNA strands to match during cell splitting. Often, a particular resource can’t be found, and so a portion of the RNA chain is scrapped for that of another amoeba consumed and vaccuolized.

We also see similar effects in homo sapiens. Cigarette smokers (and other various carcinogen consumers) can count on portions of their super-gametes (that is, the cells from which sperm is manufactured) being genetically altered. Sperm has no cell nucleus, so the RNA and DNA in it is free floating and subject to abuse by external factors.

 

[Thing]

You have a really strange notion of God if you think that he wants people to suffer, but yet will help with altitude sickness.

We were told to live and work.
We were not told not to suffer.

 

[Sideline]

We were told to live and work.
We were not told not to suffer.

I have had so many conversations with theists that have gone like this.

Theist: Look, God did* X*.* X *helps people. Isn’t God wonderful?
Me: Well, God could have done A,B,C, D or E which would have been a lot more wonderful. So… no, it doesn’t seem all that wonderful.
Theist: God never said life would be without suffering.
Me: Then why do you think that God did X to relieve suffering? It would seem, by your logic, that God doing X to relieve suffering would be out of God’s character.

 

[spectrm]

No so. You are not thinking. Why does that plant exist? Are you saying the plant evolved by coincidence in high mountains to have natural drugs to help people live in mountains? Did the plant evolve those chemicals by accident? What are the odds for an altitude tonic to evolve at altitude? Why have chemicals for altitude at all?

The mere fact that the human body experiences physiological problems in high altitudes is the entire reason why certain chemicals can help. The change in environment causes a change in the organism…this chemical assists in normalizing the organism (eg. reverting it to a more comfortable state) regardless of the environment

I don’t know of any animals that eat that plant at all or for its altitude properties, and it poisons insects to death.

Well…humans eat it and they’re animals. But I would almost certainly guarantee that some “real animals” eat it. And as for insects (and I don’t know what kind of insects live at 10,000 feet), the fact that they don’t eat a fern or actual foliage is a positive factor for it’s progeny.

I never promised you a rose garden. Did you not hear the one about the Old Testament prophet who was given Some shelter under a scraggy thorn bush.

I’ve heard a lot of nonsense from people claiming to be prophets. But like most ‘prophet-talk’ I’ve heard, it just sounds like a parable for common sense. “Sometimes life sucks - deal with it” or “If life deals you lemons, make lemonade” - neither of these statements require a godhead to make them valid…they’re all common sense.

And I said that the Godhead did provide them with oasis, food, water, and shelter. And that when people get greedy and ambitious i.e. poor/corrupt governing of resources then you will see tragic suffering, but it need not be, it is a human problem and not Gods fault, He gives us what we need, people take what they want regardless of how another may suffer because of that.

Okay - it didn’t used to be a series oasis - it was a fertile river-valley with rolling green hills, rows of crops, and plenty of wild game. A monotheistic people (the Caucauses) rode in, conquering the Middle East and eventually left it in tatters.

As for it being a ‘human problem’ and ‘not Gods fault’ - he should’ve thought about that when his omniscient self set the ball rolling (j/k). But it’s really nice to know that these people in the Middle East will suffer for their entire oppressed life, after their thriving civilization was gutted by people with monotheistic agendas (that is, the agenda to spread monotheism indiscriminately), only to be rewarded with Hell, simply because their culture subscribes to the wrong brand of Abrahmism.