Is atheism predicated partially on the belief in evolution and the current prevailing views of science.

If so, then such a belief is subject to drastic changes as discoveries and theories

 have recently arose that shatter the paradigm that is the foundation of such a belief:

Discoveries keep pushing back the inception of civilization, indefinitely back in time

Evidence of coastal civilizations existing during the ice age are arising in now inundated coastal region due to rising seas.

The concept of a missing link is no longer postulated as a bush of hominids lineages walked  the earth. With what was once considered ancestors, actually being contemporary with postulated descendants. A bush of hominids actually existed as recently as 30,0000 B.C.E.

Though theories of evolution abound no working scientific model exists for the emergence of life.

Our very existence is interwoven with the anthropic principle. As such this has required scientist to postulate the multiverse to explain how the anthropic principle is mindlessly satisfied by nature. However this just substitutes one unfalsifiable believe for another.

In truth, Darwin's world has been shattered and the truth has become intractable. Even as we cope with dark matter and energy. Terms that falsely connote that we have defined them, when in fact they are no more apparent than God. As such new scientific theories continue to emerge based on the inadequacy of the standard model. This will continue into infinitum since, as God there is no means to detect these alleged entities with scientific instrumentation.

Views: 4094

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

John gives a more ellaborate explanation below. Sorry that I was too terse.

RE: "This is why there is a big prohibition on drinking blood in the Old and New Testament"

Matthew 26:27 "And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it;

26:28  "For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins."

Yes ,an any other blood, and he is speaking the spiritual sense, would be sacrilegious. 

Please point out the part that says it's intended in only the spiritual sense --

It says it in the synoptic gospels. Try www.biblegateway.com, for good searches.

Believe it or not Michaelmas, I keep that website on an open tab - I use it to debunk the Bible on my website. Exactly where on that site would I find the reference of which you speak?

keep his ass on the fire my friend!! he won't listen, but the dialogue is good!!

Is atheism predicated partially on the belief in evolution and the current prevailing views of science.


If that's a question, we use "?" for that. And, no, it is not predicated on any scientific theories. It is predicated on the fact that there is no reasonable evidence to assume any type of deity or supernatural being exists. Lacking such evidence, many (in my experience most) turn to science to explain the mysteries of the Universe rather than an old book, and if no such answer exists, look for them using the scientific method, which is, to date, the best model for figuring out why things are. Glad to have answered your question. Have a nice day.

The Fallacy is that you are using the same instruments you are using to detect Dark Matter. To date no scientific instrument has detected Dark Matter. If I can postulate an invisible God exists and can create invisible things from the unseen reality that he creates from, Dark Matter would be a candidate for the unseen created by the unseen. Scripture does speak also of the seen being created from that which does not appear as well as the unseen. Using a Carl Sagan metaphor, you are bound in flatland. You do not even have the where with all to begin to intimate about the invisible, unless the invisible has revealed to you. 

Unseen - I think he's playing your song!

"Dark Matter would be a candidate for the unseen created by the unseen. Scripture does speak also of the seen being created from that which does not appear as well as the unseen."

Michael - Why do you misrepresent scientific method?  You know that dark matter is not claimed as truth, you also know that the hypothesis that postulates the existence dark matter is falsifiable. Present the falsifiable hypothesis for your postulation of an invisible God that exists and can create invisible things from the unseen reality that he creates (a link to a published paper in a reputable science journal will do).

The nonbaryonic may not be subject to experimentation. This may include both dark matter and God. As such both unfalsifiable.

RSS

Events

Services we love!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2015   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service