[ 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: 49 KB, 292x364, 20030428.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239285 No.2239285 [Reply] [Original]

Why are atheists (on /sci/ especially) so adamant on being blind to Intelligent Design and just God in general?

You say you want a sign? The entire universe is a sign! You blind fools will lead yourself straight into hell with your arrogant attitudes. A pity -- intelligent young minds straying away from God's path. Let God into your hearts before it's too late. He loves you and wants to be with you. You just need to accept who he is and live by his message.

>> No.2239294
File: 41 KB, 291x339, 20030616.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239294

This is what you actually believe.

>> No.2239301

Anyone who takes a complete side on this issue is buttfuck retarded.

Dawkins is a retard.

Bible beaters are retards.

>> No.2239303
File: 30 KB, 400x400, adam ant.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239303

>so adamant

>> No.2239302
File: 41 KB, 600x491, because science.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239302

>>2239294
>>2239285

>> No.2239307

Whenever I see a religion thread on /sci/ I can't help but laugh. It's funny that many people really believe that religion and science are in any way related.

>> No.2239308
File: 65 KB, 291x356, 20000626.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239308

Evolution is the stupidest religion.

>> No.2239310
File: 86 KB, 600x478, this-is-what-christian-actually-believe.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239310

>> No.2239316
File: 34 KB, 291x324, 20000814.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239316

>> No.2239318

>>2239301
>>2239301

obvious ignorant retard is obviously ignorant.

Dawkins himself says you can't know absolutely either way, but the evidence against intelligent design is overwhelming

>> No.2239322

>>2239307
I think it's funny that many people don't understand that they are conflicting opposites.

>> No.2239323

>>2239307
Both have single-minded idiots forcing their views on others.

>> No.2239331

>>2239318
This, if anything taking a 50/50 chance stance is the most retarded way to go because it shows you lack the ability to do any sort of critical thinking. I'm not saying going 100% god doesn't exist is any better but it sure as hell isn't 50/50.

>> No.2239336

>>2239331
>implying it's a 50/50 chance whether a god exists or not

>> No.2239337

>>2239318
Show me evidence.
And after you do, here is my rebuttal.

Intelligent design doesnt HAVE to follow anything in religion.

>> No.2239338

>>2239323
Yes, I can't count how many times a single-minded idiot has inappropriately applied science to a topic.

But only because I don't know what it means to count to zero.

>> No.2239340

>>2239336
i'm not saying its a 50/50 chance, Do you know how to read?

>> No.2239350

>>2239340
That's exactly what you were saying. Either that or you can't intelligibly express your thoughts in written language.

>> No.2239355
File: 77 KB, 536x220, .jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239355

>> No.2239358

>>2239323
But you can't force science on others. It just exists, that's all. Can you undo gravity? Oh, I forgot that not everyone on /sci/ "believes" in gravity.

>> No.2239365
File: 28 KB, 490x235, believe_web.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239365

>> No.2239367

>>2239350
Are you retarded? Please tell me where exactly you think I am implying its 50/50. "if anything taking a 50/50 chance stance is the most retarded way to go because it shows you lack the ability to do any sort of critical thinking." Where exactly do you see me implying its 50/50 here? "I'm not saying going 100% god doesn't exist is any better but it sure as hell isn't 50/50." I still don't see where I said its 50/50 in fact I explicitly stated that going 50/50 on the issue is absolutely retarded.

>> No.2239375

http://www.cracked.com/article_15759_10-things-christians-atheists-can-and-must-agree-on.html

>> No.2239390
File: 22 KB, 471x355, shitnigga.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239390

>>2239367

>> No.2239391

Evolution is canon with Christianity now anyway.

>> No.2239398
File: 22 KB, 486x227, asteroid_web.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239398

>> No.2239400

>>2239391
A little known fact, however, is that the majority of Christians who "believe in evolution and abiogenesis" don't believe in evolution or abiogenesis.

They think God started it off and constantly fiddled with it. Which is conceptually no better than creationism.

>> No.2239425

>>2239400
>Which is conceptually no better than creationism.
Why not? They're use god to explain why it happened not how.

>> No.2239431

>>2239425
No, they use God to explain how. As in, they don't think it would be possible for it to happen just using normal physics.

>> No.2239439

>>2239431
What about those that believe god is natural phenomena?

>> No.2239443

>>2239439
Those are deists.

>> No.2239447

>>2239439
That's just playing with words.

>> No.2239452
File: 332 KB, 633x468, 1280724825197.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239452

>>2239390

>> No.2239455
File: 6 KB, 500x500, .gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239455

Evolutionists are too dumb to debate their own theory.

>> No.2239458

>>2239443
Seems you can't wrap your head around god being science.

>> No.2239460

>>2239458
Sure I can. I just define
God := science.

It's not very interesting or profound.

>> No.2239467

>>2239301
the world is not flat, im taking that side 100 percent

enjoy being a complete retard

>> No.2239468
File: 170 KB, 1800x954, 1290426920132.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239468

>>2239301
>>hurr
the only one retarded here is you, because answers in genesis, discovery institute and all that KNOW theyre full of shit and WE know theyre full of shit, the only ones who don't seem to are the unwashed uneducated masses.

This entire thread's purpose can literally be shortened to 'real scientists vs christfag lawyers'

>> No.2239473

>>2239455
Compare the research a creationist has to do compared to an evolutionist.

>> No.2239479

>>2239285
>Why are atheists (on /sci/ especially) so adamant on being blind to Intelligent Design and just God in general?

>You say you want a sign? The entire universe is a sign! You blind fools will lead yourself straight into hell with your arrogant attitudes. A pity -- intelligent young minds straying away from God's path. Let God into your hearts before it's too late. He loves you and wants to be with you. You just need to accept who he is and live by his message.

Evidence my friend, evidence. The evidence is clearly against you.

>> No.2239483
File: 244 KB, 509x642, 1290845655457.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239483

ITT:

>> No.2239484

The central problem of Intelligent Design

Proponents of this position hold that it is possible to determine if something was designed by an intelligent agency. The problem is that there are no examples of things that are not designed in this world view. So we are left with the traditional binary, that which was designed by man, and that which was designed by god (or nature).

We have our ways to determine what is designed by man. And when we investigate that which was designed by god, we find no point at which any intelligence needs to intervene, only the dispassionate interaction of natural laws.

There is a place for god as the creator of these laws, but no evidence that it has interacted with the universe since then. And so no way to determine whether or not it exists, and certainly no way to determine what it wants.

>> No.2239485

>>2239431
Well, from that angle:

- The Universe began "just because".
- Beings evolve from simpler lifeforms. At one point we reach the most simple lifeform. Then we encounter the chicken and egg problem. Once again, such a complex proto-cell appeared thanks to chance and probability equal to you and your descendants winning the lotto every day of your lives.

It is possible, yes, but the chances of not ever happening are still pretty small. Some people find this ridiculous, at best, even if they believe that Evolution is real.

>> No.2239486
File: 44 KB, 392x500, tldr.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2239486

>>2239484

>> No.2239492

>>2239301
No, Dawkins is awesome.

>> No.2239495

>>2239484
Let me summarize that post:
>Not falsifiable, and thus specious reasoning.

>> No.2239501

>>2239301

Anyone who takes a side on santa claus's existence is retarded too.

>> No.2239503

>>2239485
No one claims to know how life started on this planet, so any numbers you quote are bullshit.

Also Anthropic Principle.

>> No.2239510

>leave /sci/ a year ago because of myriad of religion vs. science threads
>finally get bored enough to come back
>come on /sci/
>first two threads are religion vs. science, with people actually ignoring non-troll threads to post on these religion vs. science threads.

>consider staying for a moment
>NOPE.avi

>> No.2239547

>>2239285
You're obviously a troll so fuck you

anyway, whenever I look at nature I can see the face of god in its beauty, when I see a pile of dogshit on the street with maggot larvae crawling out of it, i almost well up at its beauty and design. When I see a baby antelope ripped to shreds eaten alive by lions, I marvel at our lords beautiful design. When I see that 99% of the species that have lived on earth have gone extinct, I marvel at how amazing our lord is always creating new species. etc. you atheist are just blind

>> No.2239560

I find it easier to believe that we evolved from apes because of the evidence, rather than believing that a magic man in the clouds made us and decided that we can't do a whole bunch of really fun things. k thnx

>> No.2239587

you know, if god would have just found it in his heart to forgive eve for eating an apple, none of this shit would have happened. Hell, he's all knowing and knew she was going to do that, why did he kill himself for "our sins." If he made the rules he could have just said "fuck it, i don't want to be tortured on a cross for your sins, I'll just forgive you faggots.

>> No.2239588

It has been proven by Stephen Hawking that universe can create itself. God wasnt needed.

>> No.2239598

>>2239588
Hawking, smart as he is, is not all-knowing. He might be proved wrong, just as Einstein himself was.

Nothing new.

>> No.2239623

the answer is real simple

intelligent design = zero evidence (the bible does not count as evidence)

evolution = pain staking years of observations and research (evidence)

If you weren't so lazy/ideologically motivated you could look up all the observations and conclusions yourself and choose to logically refute some areas you feel are illogical, otherwise this whole evolution vs intelligent design debate is a waste of time

Its ok to have questions about problems you have with a theory, but to do so simply because you have accepted another theory that you swallowed with no critical thinking is stupid.

>> No.2240227

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rPLn9nv26NM

/thread

>> No.2240235

OK, time to finish this.

There is no original sin. It was impossible for Eve to understand that eating the Apple was wrong (as it in itself gave full knowledge of good and evil). Any God unable to understand this or that chooses to overlook it is not omniscient, omnipotent or morally sound, and therefore not a God.

/thread

>> No.2240257

>>2239598
>>2239588
What makes you think the universe has a beginning?

>> No.2240260
File: 19 KB, 240x249, troll_thread.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2240260

>> No.2240275

>>2239598

Being proved wrong is only a problem for people who think a person is absolutely correct, whether because they are divinely inspired or whatever reason.

In science, we only claim we are righter than the last iteration. And we almost always are.

>> No.2240302

>>2240257

expansion and motion

>> No.2240308

>>2240302
That's evidence for the big bang. Not evidence that the existence was created at the big bang

>> No.2240310

shut the fuck up all
/thread

>> No.2240313

no really, you WILL die
/thread

>> No.2240316

>>2240313
FUCKER

>> No.2240326

/fucken die die die die die

>> No.2240593

>>2240308
We do have evidence that anything which happened before the big bang can have no effect on what comes after. So to say it is the start of the universe is technically correct, the best kind of correct.

>> No.2240610

These comics are hilariously bad. Please post more.

>> No.2240632

>>2240593
Sure the universe could have been confined to an ineffectual super-singularity before the big bang for eternity. But for me believing that the universe has always existed (even as just a universal seed) makes more sense than some outside force (intelligent or otherwise) creating it at some random point.

Basically because I can see no evidence that the universe was created I believe that it is eternal. Again I want to stress when I say "the universe" I don't mean our universe with galaxies, stars, Earth and whatnot but the energy which makes it up has always existed.

I know I may not be making myself clear and the concept of a universe without a beginning may seem strange but thats my story and I'm sticking to it. Until I hear a better theory.

>> No.2240965

>>2239285
Intelligent design is not science.

This, anyways: >>2240260

>> No.2241490
File: 10 KB, 235x214, .jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
2241490

dont u ppl know how 2 sage?