Has science truly eliminated God as an intelligent cause.

[Bart007]

I dedicided it would be prudent to start a new topic since the old one was intended solely to flame scientists who happen to also be creationists.

Grumpy says. "I too do not know of any creation scientists since a scientist cannot study supernatural subjects and there is no evidence to support a supernatural creation."

OK, so atheism is your religion and your dogma includes the assumption that God does not exist. You need evolution in order to justify your adopted materialistic worldview.

However, science is a program by which we seek to understand the world around us. There are two kind of causes in this world. Natural causes and intelligent causes.

We observe Mt. St Helens blow its' top and we see nature in action and realize the blown top is the result of natural cause. We see the faces on Mt. Rushmore, and even though we may not have seen it done or know who did it, we clearly know that an intellgent cause brought this about. What seperates intelligent cause from natural cause is that intelligent places boundary conditions on the laws of physics and chance to produce a predetermined result. Thus we have a means by which to determine an intelligent cause, and if the intelligence is determined not to be that of any living creature, the evidence logically leads us elswhere, and it requires putting one's head in the sand to disqualify God from being the intelligent cause simply because your an atheist.

Grumpy says: "There are many scientist involved in the study of evolutionary sciences, it is not a matter of belief, simply acceptance of reality. There are mountains of evidence supporting evolution as a fact with several valid theories explaining some of the processes involved. Faith in the existance of something is not required if evidence is readily available validating that existence, such is the case with evolution."

OK, per your statment, please provide me a few examples of the conclusive evidence you have that common ancestry solely by natural means is reality, as you so claim.


How does evolution explain the origin of the different classes of proteins? and, in particular, how did hemoglobin originate solely by natural causes?

Grumpy says: "And as a scientist I can tell you from experience you could not be more wrong about scientists not careing, they care very much indeed, more than your average person by a lot. After all nothing in biology makes any sense without evolution."

You have misunderstood, they are caring people, they care about there families, they care about their non-evolution science work, they care about civic matters, many believe in and care about God, but they just don't give a copper dam about evolution.

[juliod]

so atheism is your religion and your dogma includes the assumption that God does not exist.

This is where you make your error. The rest of your post follows from this premise. I don't speak for grumpy, of course, but atheism isn't a religion, blah, blah, blah; and we don's assume god doesn't exist, blah, blah, blah.

DanZ

[bernee51]

OK, so atheism is your religion

to cal atheism a religioon is like calling baldness a hair colour

and your dogma includes the assumption that God does not exist.

your useof th word 'includes' indicates a belief that there are other dogma common to atheists. What would they be?

You need evolution in order to justify your adopted materialistic worldview.

No I don't.

See that was easy

Thus we have a means by which to determine an intelligent cause, and if the intelligence is determined not to be that of any living creature, the evidence logically leads us elswhere, and it requires putting one's head in the sand to disqualify God from being the intelligent cause simply because your an atheist.

And it is a logical fallacy to assume that because something is unexplainable (to date) then the only other possibility is a god. This error is very common amongst theists.

... how did hemoglobin originate solely by natural causes?

Have you noticed the similarity between haemoglobin and chlorophyll?

[Bart007]

so atheism is your religion and your dogma includes the assumption that God does not exist.

This is where you make your error. The rest of your post follows from this premise. I don't speak for grumpy, of course, but atheism isn't a religion, blah, blah, blah; and we don's assume god doesn't exist, blah, blah, blah.

DanZ

Atheism is certainly a religion. It requires faith on the belief that there is no God. a = No, Theism = God! It's creed is humanism, that man is the highest authority in the world. In fact, Humanist sought, and received, recognistion from the Supreme court in the 1960's that it was a religion. Most, if not all, signers of Humanist Manifesto's I & II wer atheist.

If you believe God exist, then you believe in the supernatural. God becomes instantly the best source for the information found in the genetic make-up of each type of Creature.

If you do not know if God exist, you are an agnostic.

[Bart007]

and your dogma includes the assumption that God does not exist.

your useof th word 'includes' indicates a belief that there are other dogma common to atheists. What would they be?

Man is the highest authority in the world. You are the captain of your fate. Your free to create your own personal morality

You need evolution in order to justify your adopted materialistic worldview.

No I don't.

See that was easy

Atheists have long struggled with the question of the origin of life. Being an atheist is so unsatisfying without a credible theory of origins that excludes God as the Creator. Evolution is the cornerstone of a materialistic evolutionary worldview. Otherwise Atheism becomes philosophically ugly. Your not honest with yourself if you claim otherwise.

Thus we have a means by which to determine an intelligent cause, and if the intelligence is determined not to be that of any living creature, the evidence logically leads us elswhere, and it requires putting one's head in the sand to disqualify God from being the intelligent cause simply because your an atheist.

And it is a logical fallacy to assume that because something is unexplainable (to date) then the only other possibility is a god. This error is very common amongst theists.

But it is legitimate to demonstrate something is explainable only as an intelligent cause, and them give further cause as to why it logically follows that the evidence best fits an omnipotent living God.

... how did hemoglobin originate solely by natural causes?

Have you noticed the similarity between haemoglobin and chlorophyll?[/quote]

As I tell my wife, don't give me a little hint, don't give me a large hint, tell me exactly what it is that you are hinting at.

[Ami]

to cal atheism a religioon is like calling baldness a hair colour

Not really, if by this you mean to be an atheist means you are not supposed to be religious. To be an atheist means you do not believe in any God(s), right? But to be religious doesn't necessarily mean that you do believe in any God(s). One can be religious and an atheist at the same time. I think there are some religions that are based mostly on philosphy not on anything supernatural.

[juliod]

Atheism is certainly a religion.

Nope.

It requires faith on the belief that there is no God.

Nope.

It's creed is humanism

Nope.

You may be suprised to learn that atheism goes back to at least 500 BC, millenia before humanism.

Some atheists might be humanists as well. Others, like me, might not even know what humanism is.

DanZ

[Grumpy]

Ami

One can be religious and an atheist at the same time. I think there are some religions that are based mostly on philosphy not on anything supernatural.

Talk about hitting the nail on the head!!! Good post Ami!!!

Personally my morals are based on the teachings of Jesus, though Budda also has an input. Did you know that Budism is technicly Atheism as Budda expressly forbade his followers from worshiping him as a God, he taught that the Godhead or "enlightenment" was in each of us as individuals.

Bart007

Man is the highest authority in the world. You are the captain of your fate. Your free to create your own personal morality

Not as an individual, I must obey the law as well as you do, but man as a society is responsible for the morality of that society. Thou shalt not kill, thou shalt not steal and thou shalt not bear false witness are the only ones of the ten commandments to make it into modern law. And those are also morals for Athiests as well.

The first two statements I have no problem with.

You need evolution in order to justify your adopted materialistic worldview.

No I don't. I need evolution to explain the thousands of tons of fossil evidence found by paleontologists and archeologists in the last 200 years, it explains those facts very well indeed.

and your dogma includes the assumption that God does not exist.

I assume nothing of the kind, do you have scientific evidence of the existance of God??? Because I have never seen any, so I don't assume the existence of something there is no evidence to support. I don't assume that werewolves exist, or vampires or even the tooth fairy, do you have evidence of those too, because, being a scientist, I would have to accept Thor if I saw him demonstrate his hammer to my satisfaction.

Atheists have long struggled with the question of the origin of life. Being an atheist is so unsatisfying without a credible theory of origins that excludes God as the Creator. Evolution is the cornerstone of a materialistic evolutionary worldview. Otherwise Atheism becomes philosophically ugly. Your not honest with yourself if you claim otherwise.

Curious, yes. Morally conflicted, no. And I find the continuos quest for scientific explanations of the natural phenomina around us very satisfying indeed even if we never will know some things(What existed before the Big Bang, What form was the first life, what is dark matter and does the water going down the bathtub drain always go clockwise). And philosophicly ugly my big ol' butt!!! Athieism is the most honest view of the world, unfiltered by centuries of religious dogma and superstitions. To actually face reality without the psycological crutch of a belief in a father figure who is going to save you from your own stupidity if you pray hard enough, and to realize that you have only yourself to come up with solutions to lifes difficulties takes real courage at times.

Thus we have a means by which to determine an intelligent cause, and if the intelligence is determined not to be that of any living creature, the evidence logically leads us elswhere, and it requires putting one's head in the sand to disqualify God from being the intelligent cause simply because your an atheist.

That is all very subjective, science works on objective evidence. Nothing we see in nature is too complex to have come into being from small changes driven by evolutionary forces accumulating over time into very complex systems. DNA never throws out "information", which is why we share 40% of our code with vegetables, even though our last common ancestor died over a billion years ago. God is not excluded from the process, there has just been no scientific evidence of a designer seen to date.

And just because we don't understand everything about evolution don't try to stick God into the gaps because that dooms your God to being smaller and smaller as we find out more and more about those things. Again, if you have valid, positive evidence of his existence your Nobel Prize awaits.

But it is legitimate to demonstrate something is explainable only as an intelligent cause, and them give further cause as to why it logically follows that the evidence best fits an omnipotent living God.

That's a very tall order, so far the attempts have been pathetic and easily shown to be invalid, good luck with that, I won't hold my breath.

Atheism is certainly a religion. It requires faith on the belief that there is no God. a = No, Theism = God!

The absence of religious belief Is religious belief??? That is a pile of what the Bull leaves in the field when he goes back to the barn, a big pile. And Humanism is not Athiesm and vice versa, though some people are both.

If you believe God exist, then you believe in the supernatural. God becomes instantly the best source for the information found in the genetic make-up of each type of Creature.

Just judging from this statement your IQ drop a heafty percentage, too.

OK, so atheism is your religion and your dogma includes the assumption that God does not exist. You need evolution in order to justify your adopted materialistic worldview.

Wow, three compleyely erronious and ignorant statements in one paragraph, are you trying to set some kind of record??? No, it isn't. No, it doesn't. No, I don't.

There are two kind of causes in this world. Natural causes and intelligent causes.

Yep, just two, natural, man made but no supernatural has been seen. That's a statement I can agree with.

OK, per your statment, please provide me a few examples of the conclusive evidence you have that common ancestry solely by natural means is reality, as you so claim.


How does evolution explain the origin of the different classes of proteins? and, in particular, how did hemoglobin originate solely by natural causes?

These evidences are there for you to see if you just look, most of us have gone over and over them in these forums, so do your own homework, I have better things to do with my time. I really don't care whether you recieve a proper education or believe in the Great Spaghetti Monster. I just enjoy pricking the balloon heads of those who think they know better than the thousands of dedicated scientists whose life work is finding the truth about the natural world.

Go ahead and set up a few strawmen, my ball bat needs the excersize. ID is science my azz!!!

Grumpy 8)

[bernee51]

Man is the highest authority in the world.

I don't believe so - though he may claim to be.

You are the captain of your fate. Your free to create your own personal morality

Many, theists and atheists would believe this.

religion involves an organized system of beliefs. Neither theism or atheism constitute an "organized system of beliefs" (and atheism isn't even a single belief, it's the absence of a belief), thus neither atheism nor theism are religions. Both can, however, be part of religions. They don't have to be, though - you can have both theism and atheism without religion.

You need evolution in order to justify your adopted materialistic

Atheists have long struggled with the question of the origin of life.

And what has evolution got to do with the origin of life?

But it is legitimate to demonstrate something is explainable only as an intelligent cause, and them give further cause as to why it logically follows that the evidence best fits an omnipotent living God.

Until you prove an intelligent cause then your argument is illogical

Have you noticed the similarity between haemoglobin and chlorophyll?

They have at their centre the same structure - porphin - the building block of heme and chlorophyll.

Quite a coincidence

[Bart007]

I too agree with Ami's post.

DanZ - the nopes add up to nothing and an appeal to ignorance does not alleviate the implications of your belief in atheism anymore than ignorance of the law alleviates the punishment for violating the law.

A bit more info on atheism and its beliefs:

Religion Without God?
In 1961, the Supreme Court ruled that there are some atheistic religions and cited among them Hinayana Buddhism, Taoism, and secular humanism. Here are some of the beliefs of secular humanism:
1. “Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.”
2. “Humanism believes that man is a part of the universe and that he has emerged as the result of a continuous process.”
3. “We can discover no divine purpose or providence for the human species.… No deity will save us; we must save ourselves.”
4. “We affirm that moral values derive their source from human experience. Ethics are autonomous and situational, needing no theological or ideological sanction.”
5. “Moral education for children and adults is an important way of developing awareness and sexual maturity.”
6. “To enhance freedom and dignity the individual must experience a full range of civil liberties in all societies. This includes … an individual’s right to die with dignity, euthanasia, and the right to suicide.” [All quotes from Humanist Manifestos I and II, ed. by Paul Kurtz (Buffalo: Prometheus Books, 1973).]
Geisler, N. L., & Brooks, R. M. (1990). When skeptics ask (Page 37). Wheaton, Ill.: Victor Books.

Both humanists manifestos declare Evolution as its cornerstone.

Also, King David wrote

Ps 14:1-3
The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God."
They are corrupt, they have committed abominable deeds;
There is no one who does good.
The LORD has looked down from heaven upon the sons of men
To see if there are any who understand,
Who seek after God.
They have all turned aside, together they have become corrupt;
There is no one who does good, not even one.
NASU

So Atheism goes back to at least 970 BC.

Grumpy, you do well to to regard the teachings of Jesus, It would be a real shame if you miss His greatest teaching that He came that whosoever believes in Him and trust in His atoning death on the cross for the washing away of sin, will have eternal life.

In my post to you, Grumpy, I requested some hard scientific evidence that you had indicated existed, and you provided none, which I must see as a legitimate and accurate response to my inquiry. I do not know of any either.

But You did allude to the existence of tons fossil evidence that favors evolution, please feel free to enlighten us on precisely what this evidence consist, that is if you know. We'll forget you dodged my last request for evidence of your evolutionary beliefs.

And finally, I assure, there is nothing subjective about the conclusion that the four faces of US Presidents appearing on Mt. Rushmore, via the imposition of boundary conditions on the laws of physics and chance on the stone of Mt. Rushmore via an intelligent causes, is hard science. Such science is also the basis of SETI.

It's a pleasure to make your acquaintance, Grumpy.