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: 4016

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Michael

people have been NOT believing in god/gods/dieties for THOUSANDS of years before yours showed up and even MORE thousands of years before mr. darwin had his first thought on earth... not sure why this is needing to be explained to you, whatever you wrote after your first thought is useless to discuss.....

To the contrary, prior to Darwin, even during  the age of enlightenment, the belief in God ruled. But a lot of this was under duress due to the fear of the Inquisition.

I certainly hope there is not a dreamy hankering back to the bad, good old days. '..fear of the Inquisition.'

I am very happy that theists have lost much of their bite. Keeping theists clowns out of politics, for the most part, continues to be a very good idea. Talk about a cultural decay and moral outrage, theists would offer nothing new to the list, but only more of the same. I still believe that we live in a culture where cultural diversity and the market of ideas still thrives. A theist monoculture would be a blight. 

It is good the RCC lost it's temporal powers, too late for Galileo. Unfortunately the prophecies predict dire things in the future with the EU and Russia imposing it's orthodoxy in the future. The Schism of the 13th Century will be healed, just as Rome and Constantinople blow life until the Emperial Roman Beast. "Who is like the Beast and who can make war with it". Her Blasphemies and violence, will usher in days of vengeance spoken about by the prophets. Babylon the mysterious mother of abominations. RC is Mithraism, and the Babylonian Mysteries Cult redressed with the Egyptian standing image planted squarely in the court of  Vatican City.

Are you expecting me or the rest of us, to 'unpack' this?

I am going to have a real 'life' before any of this will fill my days!

Take care!

And there we go with the prophecies again, just like last time - rave on, Michael --

Not to worry, Noah was mocked to scorn also. 

Since there was never an historical Noah (must be one of those biblical fables you've been deriding), you must mean Zuisudra, who, as I mentioned earlier, actually WAS involved in a Euphrates River flood, was never mocked (at least to his face), and doubtless considered himself damned lucky that trading barge was in port, so he could haul his royal ass out of there and let the little people worry about treading water.

Don't you mean there's NO EVIDENCE of an historical Noah?

No.

How do we know that there ever was a given historical person? By the evidence. Ergo, in order for there to BE an historical Noah, that evidence for an historical Noah exists,  goes without saying, so I didn't say it.

As for Zuisudra, he is listed on eight of the ten still intact, stone Mesopotamian Kings Lists, in the native language of the reagion, and on a ninth in Greek. I would consider that to be evidence, but saying that there was an historical Zuisudra, already implies that evidence is available. Some prefer to conserve words when possible, rather than splurge with them, on the assumption that they have a surplus remaining (or that they fear they're nearing the end of their supply and prefer not to retain a remainder), like some I know.

Will we finally know where Jimmy Hoffa is buried or what happened to Judge Crater?

"Judge Crater?" Wow - you DO go back a ways, don't you? I felt badly the other day when I heard a little boy ask, "Who's John Wayne?" but "Judge Crater"?

RSS

Blog Posts

My Dad and the Communist Spies

Posted by Brad Snowder on August 20, 2014 at 2:39pm 0 Comments

Breaking Free

Posted by A. T. Heist on August 20, 2014 at 9:56am 4 Comments

Services we love!

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

In need a of a professional web site? Check out the good folks at Clear Space Media

© 2014   Created by umar.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service