51. Revealed: rise of creationism in UK schools

Comment #10288 by Aaron on November 27, 2006 at 5:44 pm

TimeLord,

You are one of the first seemingly firm believers in a god I have seen on this forum. Would you like to lay out your beliefs and I'll lay out ours so that we can debate the issue more honestly? I'd be happy to explain the darwinian evolutionist/atheist's side. It would be much more useful than for each side to assume the beliefs of the other. If you would like to continue the debate on this forum, however, stick to the argument at hand. The issue is whether or not intelligent design is a scientific alternative to Darwinian evolution, which it is not. I can point you towards material on the subject. I would assume you've read a bit counter argumentative to your own beliefs to maintain a well rounded opinion but after reading your first two posts I highly doubt it. Asking questions like "If you can get a poodle from a wild dog, why not a walrus?" shows your ignorance. It might help to read up a bit before responding. Also, if you want to have an intelligent debate, stay away from using the "argument from authority" (i.e. "Andy McIntosh as mentioned above is probably one of the UK's leading academics..."). His intelligence is not the issue either. Finally, it does not prove a point to ask question to which you presuppose an answer (i.e. "Why do animals only breed to type?") Would scientific answers that counter your beliefs actually make you change your them? Let's make this an honest discussion.

52. Public school teacher tells class: 'You belong in hell'

Comment #8733 by Aaron on November 22, 2006 at 5:53 am

Matthew LaClair deserves our applause. It's also important to keep in mind that if the Intelligent Design movement had their way, this teacher's behaviour would be sanctioned into every classroom in America.

53. Atheism, not religion, is the real force behind the mass murders of history

Comment #8730 by Aaron on November 22, 2006 at 5:46 am

"the indisputable fact is that all the religions of the world put together have in 2,000 years not managed to kill as many people as have been killed in the name of atheism in the past few decades."


What an incredibly brash, ill-informed and preposterous statement to make. I like how the author conveniently avoids providing a single example of any crime that was committed in the "name of atheism."

54. A Free-for-All on Science and Religion

Comment #8617 by Aaron on November 21, 2006 at 8:43 pm

'Dr. Dawkins wasn't buying it. "I won't miss her at all," he said. "Not a scrap. Not a smidgen."'

Classic.

All of the "criticism" weighed against Dawkins seemed to fall into the "waahhhh, don't be so mean" category.

55. Dawkins's version of the deity does not exist

Comment #7513 by Aaron on November 18, 2006 at 4:52 pm

The same tired old "God exists outside of time and the universe, because we say so" argument. Leave it to theologians to talk their way out of providing a rational explanation by simply decreeing that God is outside of matter.

56. Richard Dawkins and the "new atheists" come to America

Comment #7260 by Aaron on November 18, 2006 at 12:20 am

"Christianity does not reject any religion as being "completely false." Much of what Islam teaches is true and beneficial. From what I understand, we do not say that we are completely right, either. The only way to have a perfect religion is to have a religion that follows Christ perfectly."

Is that so? So tell me, what parts of Scientology are true? What aspects of the beliefs of the Heaven's Gate death cult are true? Your dismissal of other faiths can be summed up by the following line:

"The only way to have a perfect religion is to have a religion that follows Christ perfectly."

You dismiss every other religion as being false except for the one that you happen to follow- which, by the luckiest series of accidents, happens to be more dominant than the others. Yes, I'm sure there are certain ideas about other faiths that you embrace. But my point still stands- you reject every other religion except for your own. You know what it's like to disbelieve in something, yet you find it hard to understand why atheists disbelieve in your own faith.

"Some people do believe that religion is the cause of the world's evil, including some people on this site. Do a little research and it'll back this up."

I don't doubt this; people believe in alot of weird things. However, no educated person with any grasp of history could possibly stand behind such a brash statement. Religion may very well be a barbaric, ancient, outdated practice that teaches the 'dangerous nonsense that death is not the end' (Dawkins), but it is surely not the cause of ALL the world's evil.

57. Richard Dawkins and the "new atheists" come to America

Comment #7257 by Aaron on November 18, 2006 at 12:03 am

"Atheism, on the other hand, takes no responsibility. There is nothing to strive for and no motivation to do good to others, and there is nothing or no one to hold people accountable for their deeds. If you seek responsibility, it is not found in atheism."

How about the satisfaction that comes from helping others? I do moral things because they are the right thing to do, not because I'm sucking up to the magical security camera in the sky.

58. Morality

Comment #7184 by Aaron on November 17, 2006 at 2:48 pm

I usually respond by pointing out that behavior, to some degree, is controlled by genetic information. We can take a pair of animals and begin breeding them- selecting offspring based on their behavior- and eventually produce two seperate groups of individuals that behave entirely diffently. Scientists in Russia were able to do this with rodents, and they wound up with one line of rats that were so docile they would hop into a person's hand. The other group, selectively bred for their aggressive behaviour, were so violent that they would attack the cages as soon as a human entered the room. This is how we were able to domesticate animals- by selective breeding based on their behavior.


With regard to humans, the genetic information of altruistic, sympathetic individuals was more likely to be passed along than the genetic information of violent or antisocial individuals within our early communities. This may be a form of self-domestication, similar in principle to the artificial domestication of animals such as pets and livestock.

59. Morality

Comment #7147 by Aaron on November 17, 2006 at 10:56 am

I think it's important to point out the superfluous nature of theologians' attempts to discredit the natural source of morals. For example, they often resort to word games by asking things such as "why is murder wrong?" which, they hope, will lead the misguided atheist to admit that morals are nothing more than subjective feelings. It's important to point out that such questions are, in essence, moot points; our universal ability to recognize murder as being wrong is stronger than our ability to articulate why, and the same universal ability is evidence in and of itself of a purely natural, darwinian source of ethical behavior. Ask ten different people why murder is wrong and you may very well get ten different answers, but regardless, they all recognize it as being wrong. These are natural urges, or lusts if you will, that require no critical thinking or rationalization to work for us.

60. Neanderthal DNA secrets unlocked

Comment #7122 by Aaron on November 17, 2006 at 8:59 am

Billy Sands-

Neanderthals did in fact have hyoid bones, if I'm not mistaken. It is unclear, however, if they acquired the ability to maintain cognative speech. They simply had the anatomy to do so.

61. Neanderthal DNA secrets unlocked

Comment #7053 by Aaron on November 16, 2006 at 10:13 pm

I wonder, how will the young-earthers react to this? As far as I know, they believe that neanderthals were the offspring of angels that bred with a race of giants, or something like that.

62. Richard Dawkins and the "new atheists" come to America

Comment #7051 by Aaron on November 16, 2006 at 9:51 pm

I think the answersingenesis author handled the topic quite well, considering the source. It's interesting to try to understand the point of view of those that see the world through the distorted lens of religious faith. I only have a couple issues with it:

"Rejecting of the authority of God—many are humanists to the core and want nothing to do with any God who would hold them accountable."

-As someone else pointed out, nobody is rejecting the authority of something they don't believe in. This is like saying Christians are rejecting the revelation to the prophet Mohammed (one out of the thousands of alternative religions they completely reject as being false).

"Holding a view of history that sees religion as the motivator for most of the world's violence throughout the centuries (as opposed to fallen man's sinful nature)."

-I don't think anyone seriously believes that religion is the motivator for most of the world's violence. Without religion, we would still have bad people doing bad things and good people doing good things. Religion does, however, tend to place an emphasis on a magical afterlife at the expense of the overall value attributed to our real, actual, finite lives- not exactly a recipe for pacifism.

"An absolute reliance on materialism and the scientific method."

-As opposed to what? Astrology and witchcraft? Should we utilize tarot cards, mediums, voodoo rituals and Johnathan Edwards instead of scanning electron microscopes, mass spectrometers and particle accelerators?

63. Humphrys In Search of God

Comment #6432 by Aaron on November 14, 2006 at 8:18 am

The Rabbi said faith is the courage to live in uncertainty (or something to that effect). To me that says faith was necessary for early humans to evolve far enough to rationally search out the answers to uncertainty. Now that we're more certain about the world around us because of emperical science we could shed religion and faith all together. It seems the religious still need their hands held through life and through (and perhaps because of) the last uncertainty of death. I love what Richard says about death: "The unfortunate ones aren't the ones who die. Everybody dies. The unfortunate ones are those who are never born." I quote this to everyone I run into who is either in mourning or shows fear of death.