All aboard the atheist bus?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The Devil said:
You don't seriously believe this nonsense, do you?
Click to expand...

yes!!!

this is an interesting book written by an ex athiest .

DAWKINS DELUSION THE PB - ALISTER MCGRATH
Code / ISBN: 0281059276
Publisher: SPCK
ISBN13: 9780281059270
Section: BOOKS : SCIENCE AND CREATION
Description: World-renowned scientist Richard Dawkins writes in The God Delusion: 'If this book works as I intend, religious readers who open it will be atheists when they put it down.' The volume has received wide coverage, fuelled much passionate debate and caused not a little confusion. Alister McGrath is ideally placed to evaluate Dawkins' ideas. Once an atheist himself, he gained a doctorate in molecular biophysics before going on to become a leading Christian theologian. He wonders how two people, who have reflected at length on substantially the same world, could possibly have come to such different conclusions about God. McGrath subjects Dawkins' critique of faith to rigorous scrutiny.
.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nope coz its not my religion bub and I dont buy on the basis of brochure bibles
 
I find your arrogance quite breathtaking. First, you point out that "a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing", and then in the next paragraph, you are talking about a ninja LP12. A turntable about which you know, er, little.

Before you post, think.
 
It is amazing how open-minded people are. [tongue-firmly-in-cheek]
While I accept that everyone has the right to their own opinions, and I would vigorously defend that right (although there are many who would violently deny me the same right), it strikes me that many reject 'religion' or the Bible without having any real experience of it.
Most people are exposed to extensive atheistic teaching in school (evolution etc.) and Religious Education was the only subject which parents could opt their children out of, so most religious people have some knowledge of other ideas which many of them have rejected.
But the general ignorance of the Bible's teachings amazes me. It is disregarded 'out-of-hand' as 'nonsense' etc without any real discussion of why people feel that way. The argument seems to be: 'I don't need to prove a negative', but I would say you need to explain your reasons for rejecting it.
 
i think that every book,"religious or not" have a personal meaning to the individual witch then is taken to heart, never spoil a good story i say, what ever the individual belives it is up to them as to wich, believer or not the argument will go on and on, we all have our views the problem lies i think in contradiction,
"i think,
bless ,nando.
 
What a crap post.
Which bit of the Bible's teachings would you like to discuss? The Old Testament of death to enemies, murdering wives, beating children, psychopathic god or the new with its infantile myths about the impossible.
 
Czechchris said:
It is amazing how open-minded people are. [tongue-firmly-in-cheek]
While I accept that everyone has the right to their own opinions, and I would vigorously defend that right (although there are many who would violently deny me the same right), it strikes me that many reject 'religion' or the Bible without having any real experience of it.
Most people are exposed to extensive atheistic teaching in school (evolution etc.) and Religious Education was the only subject which parents could opt their children out of, so most religious people have some knowledge of other ideas which many of them have rejected.
But the general ignorance of the Bible's teachings amazes me. It is disregarded 'out-of-hand' as 'nonsense' etc without any real discussion of why people feel that way. The argument seems to be: 'I don't need to prove a negative', but I would say you need to explain your reasons for rejecting it.
Click to expand...

I was brought up in the catholic tradition. Mass every Sunday, catechism and RI Saturday, everything you could wish for, except mercifully no interfering priest.

I never truly believed in it, though, even as a small child. It seemed so implausible. I used to feel quite guilty about my doubts, because I could tell that all the grown-ups wanted me to believe.
 
I dont need to know what the "ninja lp12" is (even though you detailed it repeatedly at length) - the point is that it was your religion and for exactly the same reason. You had no evidence just faith based on hype and glossy brochures so don't think you are any smarter than someone that is a Christian.
 
P.S. It is a really crap post:

Czechchris said:
Most people are exposed to extensive atheistic teaching in school (evolution etc.)
Click to expand...

Evolution is a hard fact. It's the way that things are, just as the earth orbits the sun, and the moon the earth. It isn't "atheistic" unless you are a barking-mad creationist. Educators have a duty to tell things the way they actually are.
 
brizonbiovizier said:
I dont need to know what the "ninja lp12" is (even though you detailed it repeatedly at length) - the point is that it was your religion and for exactly the same reason. You had no evidence just faith based on hype and glossy brochures so don't think you are any smarter than someone that is a Christian.
Click to expand...

Get a life.
 
Actually evolution is a theory - which includes facts, laws, inferences and hypotheses. It cannot be a "hard fact". Such absolutist thinking is mistaken and not that far removed from religion.
 
brizonbiovizier said:
Actually evolution is a theory - which includes facts, laws, inferences and hypotheses. It cannot be a "hard fact". Such absolutist thinking is mistaken and not that far removed from religion.
Click to expand...

Dumb & dumber. Read & learn:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_as_theory_and_fact


Evolution is a fact in the sense of it being overwhelmingly validated by the evidence. Frequently evolution is said to be a fact in the same way as the Earth revolving around the Sun is a fact.[15][16] The following quotation from H. J. Muller, "One Hundred Years Without Darwin Are Enough" explains the point.

There is no sharp line between speculation, hypothesis, theory, principle, and fact, but only a difference along a sliding scale, in the degree of probability of the idea. When we say a thing is a fact, then, we only mean that its probability is an extremely high one: so high that we are not bothered by doubt about it and are ready to act accordingly. Now in this use of the term fact, the only proper one, evolution is a fact. [3]

The National Academy of Science (U.S.) makes a similar point:

Scientists most often use the word "fact" to describe an observation. But scientists can also use fact to mean something that has been tested or observed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing or looking for examples. The occurrence of evolution in this sense is fact. Scientists no longer question whether descent with modification occurred because the evidence is so strong.[17]
Click to expand...
 
I did - I suggest you read again. You regurgitate without understanding. That link just corroborates what I just said. I am using "fact" in the scientific and not the popular sense of the word. I suggest you read Popper and Kuhn. Evolution is a theory and therefore cannot be proved only falsified. An increasing amount of evidence and facts increases the probability it is correct but it can never reach a probability of unity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn13620-evolution-24-myths-and-misconceptions.html

Darwin presented compelling evidence for evolution in On the Origin and, since his time, the case has become overwhelming. Countless fossil discoveries allow us to trace the evolution of today's organisms from earlier forms. DNA sequencing has confirmed beyond any doubt that all living creatures share a common origin. Innumerable examples of evolution in action can be seen all around us, from the pollution-matching peppered moth to fast-changing viruses such as HIV and H5N1 bird flu. Evolution is as firmly established a scientific fact as the roundness of the Earth.
Click to expand...

Evolution is an observable fact. Just like gravity. We don't fully understand gravity, but there it is.

It's hard for me to tell whether you are genuinely in difficulties, or just pretending to be.
 
Even popular science articles mix the two meanings of "fact" and I am afraid you seem unable to deal with this. Evolution is a theory - one extremely well supported by facts. If you familiarise yourself with the reference texts on scientific method then you will realise this is the case.
 
Einsteins General Relativity is the Theory of Gravity

Gravity itself is phenomena that is observed. The process of "evolution" is not directly observed - it is a theory inferred from phenomena that are observed. Hence the difference. One cannot observe evolution it is an explanatory theory - but you can observe mutation, natural selection and adaptation. Facts that support the theory of evolution.

For a medical consultant I would expect you to be a bit more on the ball.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top