[deleted]
[deleted]
Steve.
I can't prove it was Steve, but you know what he's like.
Steve was Adam's homosexual lover. It's not him.
share
MovieChat Forums > General Discussion > [deleted]
The cold dead hand of evolution or so the theory goes.
Two bored monkeys.
shareInteresting question...It isn't god I can say that.
shareFor sure. These people that believe all that nonsense in the bible are so gullible. If you read some of the outrageous stuff in it and believe it you might as well believe in Santa Clause and the Easter Bunny.
shareAgreed.
shareIt's comical how enlightened you people think you are.
share^^^This^^^ I love it when people are too smart for God.
shareYeah and they act like we're arguing that the earth is flat. They don't know, they just don't believe and hide behind "science". We don't know either, we just believe anyway. Which is why it's called "faith". The truth is that they are miserable and want everyone else to be too.
shareYep. I have no problem with people believing whatever they want but don't ridicule my faith when you can't prove your own.
shareMy point exactly. I don't know why they feel the need to do that. It's not going to affect anyone's faith but it's still rude and childish behavior.
shareOk, but I don't just believe whatever I want, I try to figure out what is most likely, based on evidence. Just saying that tells me you don't give a damn whether your views can be backed up with anything rational. You just want to have your "opinion", not justify it within actual reality. That's not what people who care about making sense do.
shareYes, you do believe whatever you want and your "evidence" is by no means even remotely conclusive and in no way does it exclude God, intelligent design or whatever you want to call it.
Your "reality" is no more provable than mine and your views can't be backed up by "anything rational" either.
So you guys think it "just happened?'
Serious question - not being snarky.
I can't make any sense out of it really. It all just seems very strange.
[deleted]
"...a dream within a dream...", a recurring line in this poignant film today:
https://moviechat.org/tt1650060/SGT-Will-Gardner.
the big mystery isn't evolution. that's straightforward and obvious. it is abiogenesis - the beginning of all life, or going back another 15B years, the beginning of the universe itself. if you can see a personality operating within or without this unimaginably vast cosmos of which we are an unimaginably small part, that's cool. but you could never ever demonstrate or prove it to any reasonable person's satisfaction.
all I know is - it happened. making unfounded unprovable assertions about how or why the universe came into being is completely above my (and your and everyone's) pay grade.
And I'm the one accused of needing "a" instead of "an" intellectual throwdown, by a so-called teacher on this board of very impressionable young minds. (eye-roll)
shareBest answer in the thread. Sums up "where we're at" in terms of these questions succinctly
sharethanks CB. Those are the 'big two' gargantuan questions of existence, in my book. The 'why am I here', being quite individualistic, falls way behind. But it's a natural one to ask. Thing is, we can ask any kind of questions we want to, but we have no particular right to an answer to each & every one.
shareI find it interesting that some among the religious folks, and certainly religion polemicists traditionally, have taken it upon themselves to assign the demerit of arrogance upon those who don't follow their particular brand of religion, or at least SOME form of religion - as if any fable is better than no fable at all.
Which is pretty darn arrogant, if you think about it a minute. WE'RE arrogant for not dancing to the tune you pulled out of your ass. That's rich.
I'm religious and don't give a shit about what those whom don't agree with my faith think. i don't mind your dancing or the other guy's. I just don't want to hear your music unless I ask. Scientific musings about faith are as odious as being ambushed by religious freaks.
sharei have no problem with that. i'm just reacting to getting slagged on for expressing my views. if someone thinks there is an author to all of this we see and don't see, there is no argument against that, anyway.
shareI find it interesting that some among the religious folks, and certainly religion polemicists traditionally, have taken it upon themselves to assign the demerit of arrogance upon those who don't follow their particular brand of religion
You do know the blade cuts both ways, right? People on all sides get absolutely hateful and vile to people who don't share their faith and make no mistake, it's ALL faith.
I am a Christian but I NEVER assert that what I believe is absolute, irrefutable fact, just as NO ONE can say what they believe is absolute, irrefutable fact. When people do, I take issue. share
The Pope does. He's infallible.
shareThe pope is worthless, IMHO.
shareI have no argument with anyone of faith. Only with an attempt to base their faith on the structure of the universe as we (seem to be equipped to) know it.
A faith that is anchored in the ineffable is unassailable. Also unsubstantial.
All we can do is express the truth as best we know it. If someone is being unreasonable, I can't go along.
I do recognize that this sort of expression comes across, to some, as arrogant. We should, nevertheless, if we are talking of such things, speak our minds clearly. If there was any discernible reason to hold with a supernatural version of reality, I would be right there with it.
We hold with what we hold with for reasons. We can either explain them, or cannot, or prefer not to. I'm one who feels the impulse to explain mine. Especially when asked. :)
Only with an attempt to base their faith on the structure of the universe as we (seem to be equipped to) know it.
Please explain. share
" all I know is - it happened. making unfounded unprovable assertions about how or why the universe came into being is completely above my (and your and everyone's) pay grade."
I don't believe in god, but I'm also not an atheist for the same reasons you mentioned here. I just don't think humans are capable [yet] of comprehending these heavy questions.
Understood. The reason I move beyond a noncommittal stance on these unknowable questions is that I see no reason to infer from what we see any sort of personality, a God any of us would recognize, that would recognize us.
Spinoza pretty much reduced God to nature. Which seems, imo, reductio ad absurdum. But this is destination for anyone who puts the proper weight on matter (light or dark, now :) ) - that it isn't a dream, or an illusion, but everything of which we consist, can interact, can effect our contingent beingness. Deconstruct our physiology and we are not. Or explain otherwise without resort to fables.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_Spinoza
You can say that but it doesn't make it true.
shareHahahahaha!!! How do you know?
shareLOL that's a great question. Science doesn't have a solid answer yet
There's the primordial soup theory and then there's panspermia
no reason to think anyone or anything created it.
natural selection, genetic drift, random mutations, all that stuff.
how it actually started is a topic for fun speculation and interesting ideas.