Evolution? How?

Momma Angel wrote:

Quote:

Well, simply stated, you might just say, we have differing viewpoints. Do we ridicule you for your non-belief? Why is it so hard to understand common courtesy?

You are implying that belief and non-belief (in gods) are equal things deserving of equal respect.

When you claim a thing exists and expect me to accept it as true, you open yourself to ridicule if you fail to convince me. The more ridiculous the idea (such as a god claim) the more ridicule you could expect.

Do you accept all the Hindu gods as just as likely as to exist as yours?

I do my best to be polite but our positions naturally lead to a lack of respect and insult is sadly inevitable I fear. (to demonstrate: see Snood's failure to understand that no insult is implied with my suggesting his god to be unlikely to exist)

Eorl,

I may not accept that Hindu gods may exist but I do not show disrespect to someone who believes they do. If something is important to someone, just as their faith, etc., who am I to ridicule them?

Here's why it gets so nasty....

Some of us folks think "Your god is a ridiculous notion...how on earth can you swallow this crap?"

It's not easy to find a nice, pleasant way to say that, and I'm not really sure why anyone should try to soften it.

The frustration comes from not getting any logical answers to the above question.

No, I don't think I misunderstood...and I knew what he meant by "father".

My point is just that my stance is, by it's nature, offensive to your stance ......just as yours is deluded, foolish and dangerous from my perspective...even if we try to be nice about it.

So instead of everybody taking offence at the existence of someone's position and immediately going into defense mode.... why can't you try to understand what they are actually trying to say?

eg. You'd be amazed at the defensive attacks that are launched when I ask....

"What makes you think there are gods?"

..instead of any attempt at a straight answer.

It's obvious why creationists wouldn't like Dr Barash's opinion. Rather than attacking the messenger, some people should try challenging the thesis - if they can.

Eorl wrote:

Here's why it gets so nasty....

Some of us folks think "Your god is a ridiculous notion...how on earth can you swallow this crap?"

It's not easy to find a nice, pleasant way to say that, and I'm not really sure why anyone should try to soften it.

The frustration comes from not getting any logical answers to the above question.

Eorl...

...Christians like the ones posting here want us to respect their "beliefs"...but they have absolutely no problem showing all sorts of disrespect for the things we hold.

I do not use the word "beliefs" for my own opinions or my own "take on things."

But my "opinion" and my "take on things" is that the god of the Bible is one of the most disgusting gods ever to be invented.

Why must I show respect for the Christians and their "beliefs"...

...yet they are allowed to show so much disdain and scorn for my "take on things?"

Why do you suppose they constantly find fault with my "take on things?"

(but just to clarify...I don't think your "father" is a phony piece of crap...I simply don't think he is anything....why would he?....where is he?...what makes you think he is there at all??? apart from a lifetime habit of trusting your feelings ahead of the data and believing stuff that other people told you must be accepted as true.....and that people who don't accept it are evil.....etc...etc?)

mesquite wrote:

real life wrote:

Actually I am fascinated by science and enjoy it immensely.

If you were the head of a scientific research project, and Sir Isaac Newton applied for a position it would be quite an interesting interview, I think.

Would you hire him after he told you he literally believed that God created the world and all that is in it?

Considering the amassed information that was available to Isaac Newton during his time I do not see it as unusual at all that he believed a God created it all.

If however he had knowledge and access to the amassed information of today and then stated that he believed in a literal translation of Genesis, then he would have to have a lot better arguments than I have seen presented here before I hired him for a scientific research project.

Such a belief would to me indicate a lack or reasoning ability which is crucial to scientific work.

It would seem to me that Newton's scientific track record speaks for itself. If you can't recognize the value of what Newton contributed to science , then who has a lack of reasoning ability?

rl, You're still attacking the messenger. How about the thesis?

real life wrote:

mesquite wrote:

real life wrote:

Actually I am fascinated by science and enjoy it immensely.

If you were the head of a scientific research project, and Sir Isaac Newton applied for a position it would be quite an interesting interview, I think.

Would you hire him after he told you he literally believed that God created the world and all that is in it?

Considering the amassed information that was available to Isaac Newton during his time I do not see it as unusual at all that he believed a God created it all.

If however he had knowledge and access to the amassed information of today and then stated that he believed in a literal translation of Genesis, then he would have to have a lot better arguments than I have seen presented here before I hired him for a scientific research project.

Such a belief would to me indicate a lack or reasoning ability which is crucial to scientific work.

It would seem to me that Newton's scientific track record speaks for itself. If you can't recognize the value of what Newton contributed to science , then who has a lack of reasoning ability?

Is your reading comprehension that bad, or is it deliberate that you completely mischaracterize my comment?

rosborne, What rl and their ilk are good at is called "projection." They try to make it a personal analogy by offering negatives that has no relationship to the original question. There's no logic in their arguments.

An example of "projection:"


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Frank; I am sure you are a fine fellow and an excellent neighbor. How does your conscience respond in a situation like this?
Your neighbor gets out of his car and walks toward his house. As he closes the car door you notice that a piece of paper blows out and, without his knowledge, flies into your yard. You think nothing of it until a short time later when you discover it is a $5 bill. What is the faculty that motivates you to return it to your neighbor? You don't even have to think about it do you? I know that must be the kind of person you are. Am I right? You rely on your conscience.

Seems to me like folks with shaky foundations get very upset with folks who tap those foundations to test their strength.

The Christians always seem to be the kids who pack up and go home when the other kids won't play the game by their rules.



*My contribution today brought to you by "Mixed-Metaphors-R-Us"

It is not your take on things that we have disdain for. It is the manner in which you present them.

Intrepid wrote:

It is not your take on things that we have disdain for. It is the manner in which you present them.

And of course, MA immediately came to second this comment.


I think it is utter nonsense.

How would I present my opinion that the god of the Bible is a slug...what I perceive to be a fictional being with almost no redeeming qualities...and an abundance of disgusting ones...in a manner for which you would have no disdain, Intrepid and MA?

How would I say that, in my opinion, the god of the Bible is a vengeful, jealous, petty, vindictive, quick-to-anger slow-to-forgive, comically tyrannical, murderous barbarian...in a manner for which you would have no disdain?