Sharpshooter Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Yes, agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 There isn't 100% definite evidence that the world as you know it actually exists and that you're not just a brain in a vat of chemicals being stimulated by alien scientists. Why should you believe that the world exists? There's not 100% evidence of anything, yet that doesn't mean you can just throw out mountains of evidence leading to a conclusion just because you feel like it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 I'm not throwing around any evidence. My point has been that nothing is 100%. Sounds like we're in agreement here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 There isn't any evidence that you are able to dress yourself in the morning either, so of course I naturally don't believe that you dress yourself in the morning. That's the point. I want 100% conclusive, irrefutable, notarized, corroborated proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Is anything 100% irrefutable then? And if nothing is, then neither is your God, therefore we don't need to believe in him either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 I'm not the one saying that something is 100%, I'm saying that nothing is 100%. There is no irrefutable proof for anything, so how can I have proof for something when my argument is that there is no proof? Usually it's the one that is trying to prove something that exists that needs to provide proof, not the other way around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unknown33429 Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Exactly, but according to your illogical threshold of 100% certitude, nothing can be proved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super19 Posted August 28, 2012 Author Share Posted August 28, 2012 So, why don't you believe in evolution then when it's shown to be a fact as supported by evidence and put forth by expert scientists in that field? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Exactly, but according to your illogical threshold of 100% certitude, nothing can be proved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 I take many pieces of evolution and put it in my puzzle piece of life. The parts I don't take are trumped by beliefs I think are better, and the parts I do take are compatible with my belief. End result I can tell you is much of evolution is respected by me. ---- ""A person who has no rigorous background in Islamic studies, cuts and pastes evidence without any explanation. When he is informed that his usage is incorrect by the learned, he responds, "Prove it!" Any humble person should realize that hisown ignorance is sufficient of a proof that his contentions are wrong. But, as we know, these are the days of projection and very little introspection."" -Sh. Suhaib Webb Quote is a reminder to myself first, and can also be applied in other fields. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Yes, my point is that nothing is 100%. I wasn't saying that God is 100%, which is what you seem to think I'm saying. Even the scientists in the articles posted said that a common ancestor isn't 100%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dral Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 I don't know whats wrong with me. This thread is like watching a horrible accident. I know I should look away but I can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 I don't know whats wrong with me. This thread is like watching a horrible accident. I know I should look away but I can't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Armada Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 So you agree then, according to your logic nothing is real because nothing can be proved with 100% certainty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Master Mind Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 So you agree then, according to your logic nothing is real because nothing can be proved with 100% certainty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super19 Posted August 28, 2012 Author Share Posted August 28, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Wow.. Way to take something completely out of context. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 Jager, you still seem to be avoiding the real issue. Of course it seems reasonable to say that we can't know something with 100% certainty, but my problem with your comments has more to do with you applying a completely different standard for burden of proof on evolution than on other scientific principles that you take for granted. Will you honestly say that we can't be 100% certain about gravity, or the Earth being round? So I guess that I can see how you believe your stance is logical, but I do really believe you're taking it a degree too far. Can we just agree that evolution is extremely well documented and verified through observation and scientific testing, to the point that we can very reasonably assume that it's the working principle on which all life changes and adapts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted August 28, 2012 Share Posted August 28, 2012 I'm only calling those that ignore the evidence, ignorant. So the Bible doesn't say God created human beings? If so, then why do you keep suggesting one did? If not, then there's your religion's creation account....literally. I have no problem with conceding that allegories can contain 'moral truths'. Allegories certainly have been and are part of our social evolution. Obviously, the problem lies in when mythological allegories are claimed to be factual accounting of the natural world in opposition to the supported evidence and understanding of the natural world through the scientific process. There isn't any evidence that you are able to dress yourself in the morning either, so of course I naturally don't believe that you dress yourself in the morning. That's the point. I want 100% conclusive, irrefutable, notarized, corroborated proof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.