Has science falsified macroevolution?

[Matariel]

You have GOT to be joking. Technology is what has advanced western civilization. Technology produced by SCIENCE. Please explain to me ONE thing a belief in the supernatural and myth has done for science. Science IS agnoistic. Agnostic’s are atheists.

And technology in the West was first utilized by Catholic scientists. The college system, hospitals, universities, were all inventions of the Catholic Church and her people. Practically all the early Western scientists were Catholics, and a lot were priests or monks. The old Roman and Greek cultural writings were preserved by Catholic monks-- without them we’d know a lot less than we do now.

Anyway, you failed to admit I was correct about atheism having no definitive morals. I was correct about that, and so far you’ve just gone off on tangents.

At any rate, we’re derailing the thread, and should resume the first subject: “Has science falsified macro-evolution?”

Science has not falsified macro-evolution.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

And technology in the West was first utilized by Catholic scientists. The college system, hospitals, universities, were all inventions of the Catholic Church and her people. Practically all the early Western scientists were Catholics, and a lot were priests or monks. The old Roman and Greek cultural writings were preserved by Catholic monks-- without them we’d know a lot less than we do now.

Anyway, you failed to admit I was correct about atheism having no definitive morals. I was correct about that, and so far you’ve just gone off on tangents.

At any rate, we’re derailing the thread, and should resume the first subject: “Has science falsified macro-evolution?”

Science has not falsified macro-evolution.

Thats what these discussions do, i wouldn’t worry about it. Firstly your way off with your assertion that these things were inventions of the catholic church thay all predate Christianity by 100’s of years.

That aside it has nothing to do with the fact that is it science not religion that advances technology. That fact a certain sceintist may believe in god is utterly irrelevant. When they discovered they follow the sceintific method, which totally excludes religion.

So in short…

Religion and technology have NO relation.

Science and technology are directly related.

The scientific method by its very nature excludes religion.

As for morals, i have said countless times now there is no such thing as absolute morality. That does not mean atheists are immoral. All studys show atheists are MORE moral than christians, probably due to that fact that (studies show) the higher ones IQ the more likely they are to be an atheist. I would imagine morals and IQ are to an extent related.

The bottom line is morals cannot be boiled down to a set of hard and fast rules.

 

[avflf]

As for morals, i have said countless times now there is no such thing as absolute morality. That does not mean atheists are immoral. All studys show atheists are MORE moral than christians, probably due to that fact that (studies show) the higher ones IQ the more likely they are to be an atheist. I would imagine morals and IQ are to an extent related.

Ohhh, excuse meee… So, religious people have lower IQ’s? Nice one Charles.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

Ohhh, excuse meee… So, religious people have lower IQ’s? Nice one Charles.

I’m afraid to say that in general yes. The higher ones IQ the less likely they are to belief in god. Im sorry if that upsets you, but its a proven fact.

 

[avflf]

I’m afraid to say that in general yes. The higher ones IQ the less likely they are to belief in god. Im sorry if that upsets you, but its a proven fact.

And you have the scientific test results to prove the “proven fact”. How about sharing it with us.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

And you have the scientific test results to prove the “proven fact”. How about sharing it with us.

Scientific American, September 1999

“Whereas 90% of the general population has a distinct belief in a personal god and a life after death, only 40% of scientists on the B.S. level favor this belief in religion and merely 10 % of those who are considered ‘eminent’ scientists believe in a personal god or in an afterlife.”

Nature, 394(6691):313, 23 July 1998

“A recent survey of members of the National Academy of Sciences showed that 72% are outright atheists, 21% are agnostic and only 7% admit to belief in a personal God.”

kspark.kaist.ac.kr/Jesus/Intelligence%20&%20religion.htm

To save quibbling i will retract my statement about IQ in favour of eduction. The more educated one is the less likely they are to believe in god. Im sure if you like i could find a direct link between IQ and education?

 

[josie_L]

Scientific American, September 1999

“Whereas 90% of the general population has a distinct belief in a personal god and a life after death, only 40% of scientists on the B.S. level favor this belief in religion and merely 10 % of those who are considered ‘eminent’ scientists believe in a personal god or in an afterlife.”

Nature, 394(6691):313, 23 July 1998

“A recent survey of members of the National Academy of Sciences showed that 72% are outright atheists, 21% are agnostic and only 7% admit to belief in a personal God.”

kspark.kaist.ac.kr/Jesus/Intelligence%20&%20religion.htm

To save quibbling i will retract my statement about IQ in favour of eduction. The more educated one is the less likely they are to believe in god. Im sure if you like i could find a direct link between IQ and education?

The reason that people with a higher education are less likely to believe in God is because there is a definite bias in our college/universities where God is excluded, in fact, many professors are atheists and so I would surmise that their influence as an effect on students (who start college/university with faith).

 

[josie_L]

Thats what these discussions do, i wouldn’t worry about it. Firstly your way off with your assertion that these things were inventions of the catholic church thay all predate Christianity by 100’s of years.

That aside it has nothing to do with the fact that is it science not religion that advances technology. That fact a certain sceintist may believe in god is utterly irrelevant. When they discovered they follow the sceintific method, which totally excludes religion.

So in short…

Religion and technology have NO relation.

Science and technology are directly related.

The scientific method by its very nature excludes religion.

As for morals, i have said countless times now there is no such thing as absolute morality. That does not mean atheists are immoral. All studys show atheists are MORE moral than christians, probably due to that fact that (studies show) the higher ones IQ the more likely they are to be an atheist. I would imagine morals and IQ are to an extent related.

The bottom line is morals cannot be boiled down to a set of hard and fast rules.

Atheists can be moral but never to the extent where they could be compared to the likes of Mother Theresa, Pope John Paul, Padre Pio, Maximillian Kolbe, Katherine Drexel, Pier Giorgio Frassatti, Gianna Molla . . . .etc. For anyone to achieve what these saints/ blessed did they would need the grace of God working (and growing) within them. And if there was no such thing as absolute morality then how are you able to identify who is or isn’t moral (you’ve just stated that atheists can be moral)?

P.S. I believe it is socio-economic factors more than anything else that affects a person’s morality (especially if they live in the Western world).

 

[Charles_Darwin]

The reason that people with a higher education are less likely to believe in God is because there is a definite bias in our college/universities where God is excluded, in fact, many professors are atheists and so I would surmise that their influence as an effect on students (who start college/university with faith).

If thats what you want to believe .

 

[Charles_Darwin]

Atheists can be moral but never to the extent where they could be compared to the likes of Mother Theresa, Pope John Paul, Padre Pio, Maximillian Kolbe, Katherine Drexel, Pier Giorgio Frassatti, Gianna Molla . . . .etc. For anyone to achieve what these saints/ blessed did they would need the grace of God working (and growing) within them. And if there was no such thing as absolute morality then how are you able to identify who is or isn’t moral (you’ve just stated that atheists can be moral)?

P.S. I believe it is socio-economic factors more than anything else that affects a person’s morality (especially if they live in the Western world).

Mother teresa are you kidding me? lol if you want to name drop here you go. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_atheists_(activists_and_educators

Now back to the discussion.

So you believe morals are absolute and given from god? Do you get your morals from the bible? Do you believe the god described in the bible to be moral?

If morals are given from god does he change them from generation to generation, does he give us fresh morals every generation, or does he give us all the same morals? If he gives us different morals then there is no absolute morality, if he gives us all the same set of morals then why are some people immoral?

 

[josie_L]

If thats what you want to believe .

The Academic world on the whole disregards matters of faith, I don’t it takes much of an imagination to see that our university/college system has little to no respect (as per what it teaches and whose instructing) for God.

 

[ibetrippin07]

sorry for just sorta jumping in here (hate when ppl do it i know)
But to the origional question of the topic, yes it has, the main tool of science is biochemistry. The deeper we go into cells and cellular organisms the more irreducibly complex the things become! it was once thought that the cell was a bunch of little blobs just sorta floating around and now with more powerful microscopes it can clearly be seen that the cell is like a tiny machine in that missing any of its parts would simply cease to exist.
You could prove macro evolution if you could prove that vesicular transport could have evolved in the cell and also if you could prove how a flagellum evolves then you could take major steps to prove macro evolution. problem is evolutionists want to argue on gross anatomy but once you get to cellular anatomy, the room suddenly becomes much quieter… Until then any evolutionists literally is wasting their breath…

 

[ibetrippin07]

If thats what you want to believe .

dont roll your eyes, go to college its not hard to see, im taking a psychology class and one of the first things out my teachers mouth is that all psychology is looked at from an evolutionary and darwinian perspective as well as all the founding fathers of modern psychology being practicing evolutionists.

 

[josie_L]

Mother teresa are you kidding me? lol if you want to name drop here you go. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_atheists_(activists_and_educators

Excuse me, what do you have against Mother Theresa (are you listening to the blatherings of Christopher Hitchens, I bet you are!)?

So you believe morals are absolute and given from god? Do you get your morals from the bible? Do you believe the god described in the bible to be moral?

Yes, I believe morals are absolute otherwise such words/concepts as good and evil, right and wrong would not under the circumstances make any sense. The natural moral law (of which God instituted) is constant (like any other physical law would be) and we perceive this law through conscience, some of us have a less-developed conscience than others because we choose to abuse our free will and go against our better judgement. Through history we have surmised that some societies went against the truths established by God and suffered as a consequence, evil as that practiced by the Canaanites was bound to be expunged from the earth as it would corrupt surrounding peoples. The God of the Bible is/was not a wicked genocidal maniac, He sought to change the ways of men but their hearts were hardened (even the Canaanites were given time to repent of their ways), and so in light of this He did what was necessary as He is a God who is all good and cannot therefore stomach such evil. Throughout salvation history (which is what the Bible actually records) we understand better and better what the natural moral law is, in fact, Jesus is the epitome and the fulfillment of that law, which is why now know so much of what we do with respect to morality. The Church for which Jesus died for recorded these truths for posterity and has henceforth become the mouthpiece of God (she may have herself stumbled in her quest to adhere to these truths but she has always espoused them).

If morals are given from god does he change them from generation to generation, does he give us fresh morals every generation, or does he give us all the same morals? If he gives us different morals then there is no absolute morality, if he gives us all the same set of morals then why are some people immoral?

No God did not give us different morals (the natural moral law has always been) but God had to work within a framework of time that included different people/societies who were growing in their concept/understanding of morality (and God) even if that understanding was paltry at best (this does not mean that there was not at the micro-level, i.e., individuals who were not righteous) The Jews of the O.T. more than any of the ancient peoples were the ones who understood morality better than most albeit they were surrounded by many evils (I mean constantly fighting to survive the wicked people who sought their destruction and way of life) and it for this reason that God was so strict when He gave the mosaic laws as He meant for the Jews to be his Chosen people who were to bring forth the Messiah that would conquer sin and immorality. Furthermore, people will always fight against the truth that God has established because we have free will, pride, and a concupiscent nature which gets in the way of our understanding of what He has set for all peoples. It’s no coincidence that Catholic should mean universal.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

The Academic world on the whole disregards matters of faith, I don’t it takes much of an imagination to see that our university/college system has little to no respect (as per what it teaches and whose instructing) for God.

Of course a lot of people within academia have little respect for religon, but that has nothing to do with bias. Its because they see people trying to attribute acts to god, which they know have completely natural explanations.

God is a non answer, the god explanation does zero for humanity.

You should watch these vids it will shed light on the situation and the real reason for the “bias”, there not long…

youtube.com/watch?v=eV1r4fxaZsE

youtube.com/watch?v=YotBtibsuh0

 

[Charles_Darwin]

dont roll your eyes, go to college its not hard to see, im taking a psychology class and one of the first things out my teachers mouth is that all psychology is looked at from an evolutionary and darwinian perspective as well as all the founding fathers of modern psychology being practicing evolutionists.

I have a degree, and im currently at university doing my honors. LOL what on earth is a “practicing evolutionists”?

 

[Charles_Darwin]

The God of the Bible is/was not a wicked genocidal maniac.

Explain Jephthah.
Explain the book of Job.

(Deuteronomy 22:28-29 NLT)

If a man is caught in the act of raping a young woman who is not engaged, he must pay fifty pieces of silver to her father. Then he must marry the young woman because he violated her, and he will never be allowed to divorce her.

What kind of lunatic would make a rape victim marry her attacker? Answer: God.

(Zechariah 14:1-2 NAB)

Lo, a day shall come for the Lord when the spoils shall be divided in your midst. And I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem for battle: the city shall be taken, houses plundered, women ravished; half of the city shall go into exile, but the rest of the people shall not be removed from the city.

Kill People Who Don’t Listen to Priests

Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12 NLT)

Kill Witches

You should not let a sorceress live. (Exodus 22:17 NAB)

Kill Homosexuals

“If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their
abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13 NAB)

Kill Fortunetellers

A man or a woman who acts as a medium or fortuneteller shall be put to death by stoning; they have no one but themselves to blame for their death. (Leviticus 20:27 NAB)

Death for Hitting Dad

Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death. (Exodus 21:15 NAB)

Death for Cursing Parents

1. If one curses his father or mother, his lamp will go out at the coming of darkness. (Proverbs 20:20 NAB)
2. All who curse their father or mother must be put to death. They are guilty of a capital offense. (Leviticus 20:9 NLT)

Death for Adultery

If a man commits adultery with another man’s wife, both the man and the woman must be put to death. (Leviticus 20:10 NLT)

Death for Fornication

A priest’s daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9 NAB)

Death to Followers of Other Religions

Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed.  (Exodus 22:19 NAB)

Kill Nonbelievers

They entered into a covenant to seek the Lord, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and soul; and everyone who would not seek the Lord, the God of Israel, was to be put to death, whether small or great, whether man or woman.  (2 Chronicles 15:12-13 NAB)

Kill False Prophets
If a man still prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall say to him, "You shall not live, because you have spoken a lie in the name of the Lord." When he prophesies, his parents, father and mother, shall thrust him through. (Zechariah 13:3 NAB)

 

[buffalo]

You have GOT to be joking. Technology is what has advanced western civilization. Technology produced by SCIENCE. Please explain to me ONE thing a belief in the supernatural and myth has done for science. Science IS agnoistic. Agnostic’s are atheists.

THe intelligibility of the universe is exactly what started modern science. Catholics pursued this pagans did not.

 

[Charles_Darwin]

THe intelligibility of the universe is exactly what started modern science. Catholics pursued this pagans did not.

Even if they did it means nothing, the method followed in modern science exlcudes religion.

 

[buffalo]

Even if they did it means nothing, the method followed in modern science exlcudes religion.

Correct. It is limited and by you putting all your eggs in the science basket your conclusions cannot be trusted.

The scientific method is fantastic in the natural world. But you think that is all there is.