[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 147 KB, 400x533, GodvsScience.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1373298 No.1373298 [Reply] [Original]

Hello /sci/entists, my query for you today is this: why are you so hostile to the idea of a creator?

>> No.1373305

>>1373298
Why are you so hostile to the idea of schizophrenics in positions of power?

same reason

>> No.1373313

>>1373298
Speaking for myself, it's because most religious people unnecessarily extrapolate the simple concept of "creator" to mean a governing, thinking, living being that controls and watches every aspect of their lives. It's silly, and that's all there is to it.

>> No.1373314

>>1373298
cause until today no theory needed a "higher beeing" to work

>> No.1373316

Well now you're being unfair. Who says a creator would be schizophrenic? I'm not trying to step on toes I'm just curious.

>> No.1373317

We are as hostile to a creator as to the idea of bigfoot. We are sceptic by nature and the lack of evidence is the key.

>> No.1373318

There is absolutely no objective evidence that a supreme being is responsible for the creation of this universe we live in. Therefore, the concept is merely a subjective idea at best, thus lacking scientific value.

Sage for non /sci/-related

>> No.1373320

It's not science.

>> No.1373324

Why are you so reported also sage.

lol

>> No.1373325

I wouldnt say most /sci/entists are against the idea of a creator. I think most of them act like they are because they get trolled by a few of the retarded religious people. You know, the ones that are like "evolution is the DEVIL, science is the DEVIL!!! Now let me enjoy my Telovition that the goo lord done pavided fo me"

>> No.1373326

>>1373320
Science is Latin for knowledge. You're gonna have to do better than that.

>> No.1373328

>>1373298
RELIGION SLOWS DOWN THE PROGRESSION OF MANKIND. FTW-IF RELIGION NEVER EXISTED WE WOULD SO MUCH MORE ADVANCED. ALSO DEATH AND MURDER...LOTS AND LOTS OF MURDER

>> No.1373331

Quester #ostentation

>> No.1373334

BECAUSE IT'S NOT ONE HUNDRED PERCENT PROVEN

I NEED EVERYTHING HANDED TO ME

I WANT TO LIVE IN THE BUBBLE OF COMPLETE CERTAINTY

COMPLETE CERTAINTY IS SHELTER

I JUST WANT OUT OF THIS CRUEL WORLD

I JUST WANT... OUT... OF THIS ... CRUEL...

... WORLD.

>> No.1373336

>>1373317
I have yet to be presented with sufficient evidence that the universe can exist without a creator of some sort. Leaves me in a very confused situation. Explain?

>> No.1373343

>>1373328
Murder that was made easier by the progression of science. We have nuclear power because the government wanted it for war. -shrugs- you can do better than that.

>> No.1373345
File: 45 KB, 569x412, 1276125197812.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1373345

>>1373326

>> No.1373348

/sci/ence is entirely phenomenological. That means that it is based off of what we perceive, not what we believe. The concept of physical vs metaphysical is a philosophical one, not a scientific one. I know plenty of creationist scientists, still evolutionary mostly, but believing the idea that we were created by some "god."

>> No.1373350

>>1373336
Occam's razor

>> No.1373352

>>1373334
Pretty sure you're mocking me. Let me just say I"m not trying to convince any of you that there is a creator. I'm pretty sure that you're all too stubborn for that. I'm just trying to get you to explain some things.

>> No.1373354

Because it gets in the way of science. Instead of saying "Let's find out why this is," it says "It's this way because an invisible wizard put it here."

>> No.1373355

>>1373326

Not really, we know the mass of the electron. we know the energy of a photon of a given wavelength. We have no knowledge of any kind of creator. Should a creator ever be discovered teh science of god will quickly take off as we try to gain knowledge of teh creator.

>> No.1373356

>>1373345
Well I flush it. Have fun in the sewer I guess....

>> No.1373357 [DELETED] 
File: 101 KB, 250x761, 1263858878847.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1373357

>> No.1373361

>>1373348
We have yet to perceive evolution. Well, the kind that changes an amoeba into a higher life form.

>> No.1373364
File: 228 KB, 570x610, 1241452507-gtfo_take_fail.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1373364

because the OP of this thread is a flaming homosexual and the idea of a creator is counter to what rational thinking is all about

gtfo nao faggot

>> No.1373366

>>1373336
1. You live in a universe, which seems to exist.
2. You have never seen, heard, touched, smelled, or tasted any kind of creator being. You have heard OF him, and read about him only.

So, it would be fair to assume that the universe exists, and that a creator does not.

>> No.1373368

>hello /sci/dicks, here is my query for you today:
why are you not reporting this thread?

>> No.1373369

>>1373336

Argument from ignorance, I cant think of any other valid way, therefore, god did it.

>> No.1373370
File: 11 KB, 400x400, fuck_off.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1373370

>>1373361

dude, please gtfo nao

>> No.1373371

>>1373326
Science observes the phenomena within our physical realm. God does not fit there.

>>1373336
No one yet really knows where all this shit came from. Want to take the easy way out? Sure, believe in God. But don't hammer your opinion others.

>> No.1373374

>>1373354
Yes and no. For some people it does that but I know that there are naturally inquisitive people who will look for an explanation even if it looks like one doesn't exist. There are people like that that are religious. Adding a creator doesn't mean progression must stop.

>> No.1373375

I believe in a higher order, a higher creator. So did various mathematicians/scientist that were far more intelligent than anyone here who ever glossed /sci/.

For example Godel, Pascal, Newton, and others.

>> No.1373378

I had a fight with christianity after thinking about its logic. The fact that there is a good creator which is infinitely forgiving but has the balls to send people to hell, just doesnt sound right. Still, I believe in the existence of a god, just as a creator that put some order in the chaos, a god in the philosophycal way.

Anyways, most people here are pretentious 15 year olds that think atheism makes them look edgy or smart and still try to discuss about relativity and black holes, while not even understanding the true meaning behind F=ma, for example.

This board has just no place on 4chan

>> No.1373380

>>1373364
No proof. Just ignore this thread please.

>> No.1373381

Long Live The Jesus Freak!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

All else shall Fail Miserably!!!!!!!!!!

AMEN!!

>> No.1373389

>>1373378

your gross over stereotypes warrant this textual reaction:

gtfo nao newfag, you are probably a 15 year old faggot

>> No.1373391

>>1373355
Yes, we know these things but as far as I know (admittedly I don't know much) we don't have an explanation for the origin of the universe, and not a good one for the uniformity of nature.

>> No.1373398

>>1373375
Their opinions are negligible, because they are not aware the current information we have about the universe. Also, argument from authority.

>>1373374
Including a creator or not, it does not belong in the field of science.

>> No.1373399

>>1373378
>He gives up Christianity whist not understanding it and then stereotypes the rest of the board to make himself feel smart

>> No.1373400

>>1373366
Again, I haven't been convinced of things like the big bang, or as they now call it the small bang followed by a bigger bang. Doesn't make sense for the materials to even exist. I know non-existence is tough to understand but you have to realize that something doesn't come from nothing. Not even those randomly appearing particles that I don't remember the name of.

>> No.1373403

>>1373369
Except I don't let that stop me. I still look for an explanation even if a creator did it. I'm a naturally curious person.

>> No.1373405

>>1373400
Just because you don't understand something doesn't disprove it. Go study more.

As far as the current theory goes, the energy and mass have always been there, they did not come from nothing.

>> No.1373412

>>1373405
I'm asking for your explanation not trying to disprove.

>> No.1373416

>>1373412
Explanation on what?

>> No.1373417

>>1373352

I am doing nothing as such. I am mocking militant atheists. Bitter people who shut themselves down to the endless universe of possibilities because it doesn't fit into their binary worldview.

We are a living part of something endless. Infinite yet constituent of separate parts. What's *not* holy about that? How and why would someone confuse science for anything other than a tool for analyzing patterns? Why would you trade your imagination for certainty?

Who are you? Can you truly answer that question? Neither can I, and that's something beautiful. If you think science will you give you an accurate answer to that question, you are wrong. Further, if you want science to give you an answer to that question, I pity you. And finally, if you think science already gave you an answer to that question, you are completely deluded.

>> No.1373421

>>1373405

Learn to thermodynamics before writing bullshit.

>> No.1373427

>>1373421
What so?

>> No.1373430

>>1373416
How matter can exist.

>> No.1373436

>>1373417

There are no answers to your questions unless it is demonstrated that there can be answers to such questions.

>> No.1373437

/sci/ argues about religion but neer comes up with a reasonable answer.

This is an AD HOMINEM shitstorm:

>You believe in God?, oh then you are retarded.
End of discussion, atheists win.


Come on now.

>> No.1373438

Dear theists. Why should I give a flying fuck?

>> No.1373441

>>1373417
Why do you love answers so much? They're always wrong. New questions are always arising that make old answers obsolete. I think that's AWESOME. The idea that we will never know the real answers thrills me. I'd be disappointed to learn that there's some creator somewhere who knows how everything actually works. What a boring universe that would be.

>> No.1373447

>>1373430
Go read a legit science journal or article for that question. Just because I'm an atheist does not mean I know everything there is to modern theories (I'm working on it though).

Your original question was why we are hostile towards the idea of a creator. Not what the origin of mass is.

>> No.1373448

>>1373441

Good news and bad news.

Good: You agree with me.
Bad: You can't read.

>> No.1373460
File: 34 KB, 500x375, 1267637208870.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1373460

>> No.1373462

>>1373447
But you guys answered that question.

Something along the lines of
>God is stupid fuck off retard, you're dumb

>> No.1373464

>>1373412
If you really wanted an explanation you would find one. Not ask some guy on 4Chan.

You also act as if it is the scientist's job to convince you which would be a very hard job indeed judging from the ignorance shown in your posts.

>> No.1373468

I would respect atheists if they actually had the great scientific knowledge they claim to have

>> No.1373473

>>1373400
You don't understand the big bang properly. It's not "There was nothing, and then it exploded".

The entire universe was there, compressed into an infinitely small point. This point, in many ways, existed outside of time. Now what actually caused/created this point is an unanswered question in science.

Perhaps some kind of God did create the universe, but that still begs the question: Who created god? It could have just as easily been some random event that sparked existence. Isn't a random natural occurrence a simpler explanation than an omnipresent, all powerful being popping into existence?

>> No.1373478

>>1373464

So he's supposed to go through entire libraries only to find out science in fact doesn't have an answer to how matter exists? Because I can tell you right away that it doesn't.

Atheists are a like a fucking cult.

>> No.1373480

>>1373468
What atheists claim
>there is no evidence for or reason to believe in a god therefore i dont

What religious people THINK atheists claim
>i know all the answers to the universe and i know there is know god. i can also answer any question about the origin of matter/life/the universe.

>> No.1373481

>>1373462
What else can you expect from a board in 4chan that is continuously spammed with these threads? At least I was trying to answer your question appropriately.

The point still being that no one knows why everything exists in the first place. It's just the way it is. If you want to interpret it as a work of a supreme being, fine. But don't expect others to do the same, because that claim is entirely subjective.

>> No.1373484

>>1373478
holy crap you're stupid...

I am pained.

>> No.1373485

>>1373473

>Isn't a random natural occurrence a simpler explanation than an omnipresent, all powerful being popping into existence?

It's the fucking same. You can assume both and they have the exact same validity. What the fuck is a 'random occurrence'? Doesn't that go against the law of action/reaction? What caused this occurrence?

How the fuck can you use binary 'reason' when dealing with the concept of singularity? Why do you think you're so omnipotent?

>> No.1373489

Good Query! Now Here is my 2 cents...

People find it hard to believe that just one supernatural being with unimaginable powers created this and everything around us because the proof that people use for this argument is "the bible." But, in reality "the bible" was written by a number of people. A rational person would ask questions like: who were the authors? what kind of bias do these authors have? (eg: against women). Intellectuals of my type would go even further and ask questions like: why were all the apostles men?

The more I study and learn the more I'm losing my religion! specially with all these child molestation charges. Makes you kind of wonder what's going on in the Vatican, doesn't it!!!

>> No.1373490

>>1373478
If he really wants to know then yes he should do that.

Asking some guy on an imageboard then claiming victory when they can't answer some of the most complicated questions asked by humans is stupid. Especially when the guy didn't claim to have the answers to everything.

>> No.1373491

because the hypothesis of creator doesn't have any backing, so it's pretty stupid.

>> No.1373495

>>1373473

>The entire universe was there, compressed into an infinitely small point. This point, in many ways, existed outside of time.

I must be retarded but this sounds like the biggest bullshit ever.

>This point, in many ways, existed outside of time.

What the fuck. An expansion of compressed matter giving birth to an entire dimension? What the fuck.

>> No.1373500

To the OP, because there is no evidence for or against a creator, and default belief for an idea is disbelief. I will admit I don't know everything about how the universe exists, the origin of matter, but I keep those questions answered with, "I don't know" rather then some placeholder catchall, "goddidit." Ancient man didn't know what caused lightning or earthquakes, and since had no other plausible explanation, it must be god right? While the questions have changed, our approach to answering them can be different.

>> No.1373501

>>1373489

We're not talking about Christianity. We're not really talking about religion either. We're talking about the spark in the primordial soup and why some people are so hostile about something they can't prove yet. We're talking about the atheistic inquisition. Dickless people who spent their entire lives worming over a book thinking it will give them answers to everything. Exactly like militant Christians.

>> No.1373502

>>1373485
The point that there is no reason to have faith still stands.

>> No.1373505

>>1373495
You don't understand it? Fine, believe in God, because that requires no intelligence.

Want to understand it? Go study.

>> No.1373510

>>1373485

Outside of the universe causality doesn't have to apply. Inside of the universe causality might not apply everywhere.

It seems more likely that the natural cause was more likely because everything else we know has had a natural cause. This is merely an exercise of a rule of thought and not any sort of ontological law. There is an equal likelihood for all possible causes--but there is a literal infinity of possible causes. And so we exercise our rule of thought.

>> No.1373511

>>1373490

That's just bullshit. He wants an answer to 'how does matter exist' -- or rather, does anyone know how matter exists. That's the question. If the answer is 'yes', of course, he's stupid for not opening a book or two. If the answer is 'no', as the case is, he shouldn't deal with things that don't interest him. Not everyone has to be a bookworm just because you are one.

>> No.1373512

>>1373400
This is a line of thought I used to have, but I've since abandoned it for a fairly simple reason.

I agree that it makes little intuitive 'sense' that the 'factory default setting' of existence would be 'Space/time just happens to exist. Whoops!'

But then I realized, it's JUST as bizarre to assume that the 'factory default setting' of existence would be 'A superintelligence /capable/ of creating Space/time just happens to exist. Whoops!'

>> No.1373515

>>1373502

>no reason to have faith

That's just laughable. If anything, all these so-called 'scientists' should read a book or two. Perhaps start with the Bible you hate so much.

>> No.1373518

>>1373505


You didn't either.

Reading stuff off wikipedia is not understanding

>> No.1373520
File: 12 KB, 480x360, 1277874370464.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1373520

>my face when /sci/ is still trolled this easily.
why not just join /b/? cut out the middle man?

>> No.1373523

>>1373515

As scientists we deal with facts and not mystical feelings. Faith only supplies us with a mystical feeling of certainty, that has nothing to do with the facts we study.

>> No.1373527

>>1373500
I agree.

>> No.1373529

>>1373518
No one can really understand the very values and constants which take place in the deepest fundamental level of the universe.

We can however observe its current state, and draw possible conclusions from that.

>> No.1373531
File: 76 KB, 400x400, 1278715211770.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1373531

>> No.1373535

>>1373510

Everything we know is a consequence of causality. You can't talk about the acausal rationally if rationality itself stems from causality. How's that for a rule of thought?

There's zero reason to believe in a creator, and there's zero reason not to. The insecure will choose one of the two, while those curious and full of life will just trust the Universe and themselves as an integral part of it and get out and enjoy life as a game that it is.

Because it really is just a game.

>> No.1373541

>>1373523

>As scientists we reject the gift of life and pretend we're rocks

Fine. Now if you'll excuse me, I'll go have sex.

>> No.1373546

>>1373529
And since so many of these conclusions are beyond humanity's current capabilities of understanding, mankind attempts to explain the unknowable through God. Yes?

>> No.1373549

>>1373546
Yes. That's what I implied in the first place.

>> No.1373556

>>1373549
I agree.

>> No.1373563

>>1373495
It's a perfectly legitimate hypothesis.

It's also entirely possible that "existence" has always "existed", but not in the way we experience it. In the developing quantum field, there are hypotheses that make this possible. For example, our universe could be a 4-dimensional "sphere", and we exist on the "surface" of it, experiencing only 3-spacial dimensions. Ever heard of branes, or more specifically, brane-collisions? These filaments or sheets of long, twisting and turning super-space occasionally (meaning, all the damn time) touch one-another, and spawn universes.

I like to think of it like this... "Everything", meaning existence, is an ocean, and it's always raining somewhere over this ocean due to the laws that govern it. Each time a droplet of rain hits the surface, you get those little orbs that pop back up and out of the water for a short time. Our universe is on the surface of one of these orbs. They're happening everywhere, all the time, forever. The only reason we have an idea of "time" is because the universe we exist in, our bubble, will die someday and return to the source, the super-space that gave it life.

This is VERY watered down, but the math behind these theories is promising.

In an existence that has always been, there wouldn't be a need for a creator, because the laws of this super-space allow for the spontaneous creation of universes. Time may have no value, no meaning outside of our little bubble.

>> No.1373577

The claim that there mas no time before big bang but there was mass, simply violates Navier-Stokes equations for the conservation of max and the flux over a surface.

Atheists 0

Reasonable theist with scientific knowledge 1

>> No.1373581

>>1373577

*was

*mass

Fucking tiny netbook keypads

>> No.1373582

>>1373577
Read >>1373546

also troll

>> No.1373584

Deist here
both of you guys are faggots

>> No.1373588

>>1373563
/thread

now I'm off to watch the world cup (I hope Germany wins)

>> No.1373602

I'm not hostile to the idea of a creator.
I'm hostile to the notion that you think you can walk around claiming there is a creator with no evidence that there is. I feel this way about all unjustified claims, not just theism. Ufos, magic, new age crystal faggotry, reiki, psychics, conspiracy theorists, perpetual motion believers, intelligent design folks, etc.

Surely, if there were a creator, he has been absent in our lives for a long, long time.

Also, I'm hostile to some Christians because they teach their children that logic is bad and that 'Goddidit' whenever they have any reasonable questions. That said, I think Wikipedia is going to prevent this from happening as much in the future.

>> No.1373608

>>1373535

We apply our past experiences and catalogs of knowledge to future experiences and unknown bodies of knowledge. That is the rule of thought. It's only a rule because it has been demonstrably useful. Our past experiences--in themselves--have no import on our future ones. The universe is as it is regardless of our abilities to comprehend it or predict it.

And I really do agree with a good bit of your second point.
>those curious and full of life will just trust the Universe and themselves as an integral part of it and get out and enjoy life as a game that it is.

>Because it really is just a game.

Well said.

>>1373541

We're not to different from rocks, factually. We are made of the same stuff, obey the same "laws" of nature, etc. Scientists only deal with facts.

As humans we scientists are permitted to believe in something more. What that something is, I can't say.

>> No.1373613

>>1373563

That's what's wrong with militant atheists. Religion knew, or at least daydreamed of this a long time ago. Of course, most militant atheists are 15 year olds familiar only with this used and abused version of Christianity, which was basically a 'new age' version of Ancient religions and beliefs as found in 'Paganism', Hinduism, Buddhism, old Judaism and many others.

Read this, you'll like it:

http://home.comcast.net/~readingnews/Hidden_Hand.html

You really don't need math to prove something like this nor will you really have accurate math to prove it. I'm not saying our efforts should stop, I'm just saying that at all times, you need to be aware that you will never bring the entirety of existence into an equation. I think that's what God did -- he didn't like it and that's why he broke it into something more interesting. There's God in each and every one of us -- we are his vessels of understand himself through our imperfection, because perfection was just too boring.

>> No.1373635

I'm not hostile to the idea, I'm just hostile to the creator.
If God existed, it would be necessary to utterly annihilate him.

>> No.1373648

>>1373635

Little do you know, that you are his life.

>> No.1373649

>>1373648
acceptable casualties

>> No.1373655

Im a theist

but I'm still waiting for the equations for the dynamics and conservation of mass that supposedly existed before time did

<div class="math">d/dt</div>? Not anymore lol.

>> No.1373657

>>1373613
stopped reading at apocalyptic prophecies

>> No.1373664

>>1373613

Your post is like a poem. It draws an analogy between an imagined situation and the world and in doing so evokes an emotional response. But it is not a factual display. Your sentences aren't demonstrably true or false and it is misleading to present these kinds of sentences as facts.

>> No.1373666

>>1373378
>>Anyways, most people here are pretentious 15 year olds that think atheism makes them look edgy or smart and still try to discuss about relativity and black holes, while not even understanding the true meaning behind F=ma, for example.

THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS
THIS

>> No.1373667

>>1373535
>There's zero reason to believe in a creator

There's your reason for not believing in a creator.

>> No.1373669

OP: Why are you hostile towards God

/sci/: We are making great headway into the explaining the universe, and so far the need for a creator has not turned up anywhere in equations. Furthermore, a this no evidence for a creator.

OP: I don't understand Big Bang. Where did the matter come from?

/sci/: We don't really know. Currently, it is beyond the grasp of scientific comprehention

OP: God did it, you fucking retards.

>> No.1373674

I am only hostile to the idea that you as a human/group of humans are on the same level as a god and can explain to me who he is and what he wants me to do.

>> No.1373682

>>1373674

And I find the idea that you can know God to be laughable.

>> No.1373690

>>1373682
and also that fact that a god so powerful would create such a wasteful universe and care at all about some biological computers on a spec of dust

>> No.1373693

>>1373298
OP, I'm a Christian and a scientist.

Most people don't understand the relation between God and science. God should not be a discussion in science whatsoever, be it one's belief in his existence or nonexistence.

Science studies the empirical and the natural. Of which ANY idea of a god or gods is neither. Discussing one's belief in a religion in a scientific setting is akin to doing physics in a church, neither field as any place being discussed with the other in my mind.

Religion discusses the metaphysical, and science discusses the physical and natural. The fields are 100% mutually exclusive of one another, it's about time people realized this.

>> No.1373701

>>1373690

Who said that God had any sort of power? Not me. Your response ruins my post.

I MAD

>> No.1373727

>>1373693
But the Bible makes imporantt claims that can be empirically studied. How do you reconcile evolution and creation? If life arose from purely natural causes, then we were not created by God, and therefore Jesus has no authority to forgive us for wrongs we commit against eachother.

>> No.1373728

>>1373693

If god is metaphysical, and science physical, and these fields do not overlap, how is it that god influences in the universe.

A god creating the universe and all life within 6 thousand years ago, or a god the read thoughts, hates gay people, influences sporting events, observes sins, creates life, kills, and orders wars is certainly influencing the physical realm, and is hence, within the realm of science

>> No.1373750

>>1373727
Protip: Most Christians don't believe in creationism.

You really can't base your opinion of an entire religion on its fundamentalists

>> No.1373768

>>1373750
Most Christians don't believe in creationism? Where on earth is your source for that?

I was talking about theistic evolution anyway. He's a scientist, so he clearly believes in evolution. I want to know how he reconciles evolution with special creationism, which is one of the most important aspects of Christianity.

>> No.1373775

>>1373750

And yet the bible says that creationism is true.

How can you dismiss certain biblical claims and accept others?

Perhaps Geneses is metaphorical, you say? Perhaps it didn't happen, but is there to get a point across?

The perhaps God and the whole bible is, also. Perhaps none of it, just like Genesis, or Noah, or Jonah are real.

>> No.1373785

>>1373768
The catholic church has officially stated that it believes evolution is the theory that best explains the diversity of life, and they're the biggest christian denomination.

>> No.1373788

religion keeps getting in the way of science. dear religion, we politely ask you to go molest children and tell retarded americans they'll go to hell if they don't give you money and let us work on scientific progress.

>> No.1373801

Galileo
/threas

>> No.1373816

>>1373785
Indeed, the last pope did say that evolution is more than just a theory. Most Roman Catholic and Anglican bishops do accept evolution as fact. But if you ask laypeople, I think you'll find that most of them don't even follow the Vatican.

>> No.1373901

I read the time debate from that cover
what a horrible debate
francis collins is an idiot
all you faggots who believe in paranormal bullshit
>>>/x/ IS THAT WAY

>> No.1373912

not really, i think that there most be a creator. but in my personal opinion is not a conventional god made of nothing but love who would do anything for you yet has never done anything besides make people go nuts and kill each other to protect their believes. so until he smites me he's a fucken douche who just stands there doing nothing!!

>> No.1373929
File: 57 KB, 580x378, March&#44; 1990 - Belgium.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
1373929

Because my ego is so big, that I don't want dumb people to be right.

Hurf, durf, I'm separate from the universe and humans are the only conscious beings.