Expelled!: Or the battle for evolution heats up the teacup again?

Thirith on 7/4/2008 at 10:25

Quote Posted by catbarf

I don't know, and I don't need to. Evolution works just fine without knowing the origins of the universe. I will wait until there is sufficient evidence for any one concept.

That's something I don't get, though. I see how the evidence for evolution leads you (or anyone) to the conclusion that there is no need for divine interference in the creation of intelligence. But just as you'd say religious people are selective in what they consider literal truth and what they consider metaphor in their understanding of sacred texts, it strikes me as selective to say where you need explanations and where you don't. Which is fair enough, by the way, but I don't particularly see you granting religious people the same rights in an argument as you claim for yourself.

Epos Nix on 7/4/2008 at 11:03

Quote:

I don't know, and I don't need to. Evolution works just fine without knowing the origins of the universe.

Evolution works just fine for what it's worth, yes. But if you consider that observable matter accounts for about 4% of the total energy density in the universe with the other 96% being 'dark matter' and 'dark energy', and if you take into account that we have almost no freakin' clue what 'dark matter' and 'dark energy' really are because we can't observe them directly, you start to realize how infinitesimally small a grasp we as humans have on the nature of the universe and the events that take place therein.

This isn't to say anything other than that you shouldn't get too proud or arrogant when speaking of what goes on in every day life as if you know the state of things so well. In actuality, what you know and think and feel accounts for a percentage of everything that scientists would label zero on the universe-scale of things, and yet here you are telling theists just how wrong they have it.

Chimpy Chompy on 7/4/2008 at 11:14

Point taken, but dark matter has a solid enough place in science that it doesn't really need the quote marks. :p

SD on 7/4/2008 at 11:30

Quote Posted by Thirith

But just as you'd say religious people are selective in what they consider literal truth and what they consider metaphor in their understanding of sacred texts, it strikes me as selective to say where you need explanations and where you don't. Which is fair enough, by the way, but I don't particularly see you granting religious people the same rights in an argument as you claim for yourself.

The atheist's answer for How Things Came To Be is that we don't really know what the explanation is yet, and should wait and see what we discover.

The religious person's answer to the same question is that a benevolent sky wizard called Jehovah/Allah/Vishnu/FSM (delete as applicable), who judges whether you are good or kind enough to enter his Magic Kingdom, like Santa Claus with his naughty list, did it all.

Do you see how one of these is on intellectually more stable ground than the other?

Thirith on 7/4/2008 at 11:54

Quote Posted by SD

This will not surprise you, but I don't think it's particularly accurate to describe the beliefs of all religious people like that. There's a lot more difference even within the religious group than you acknowledge. Thanks for your answer, though.

SD on 7/4/2008 at 12:01

Quote Posted by Thirith

This will not surprise you, but I don't think it's particularly accurate to describe the beliefs of all religious people like that.

Christianity, Islam and Hinduism account for two-thirds of the world's population alone. Of course not all religious people have beliefs similar to what I described - just the vast majority of them.

Thirith on 7/4/2008 at 12:15

Even within Christianity (and, I'd imagine, Islam and Hinduism) there is more diversity - although I'm pretty sure that Fred Phelps-type Christians would deny that I am in any way entitled to calling myself a Christian of any kind.

Jason Moyer on 7/4/2008 at 12:34

Quote Posted by Thirith

I wouldn't describe the beliefs of all atheists like he did, either. Some of us, while firmly believing there is no divine being pulling the strings, would choose not to worship him even if his existence were scientifically proven. The "we just don't know" group are a bunch of wishy washy pansies, imho.

jay pettitt on 7/4/2008 at 12:38

Quote Posted by BEAR

I assume you are being facetious but Im not entirely sure.

No, not at all. I can quite scare myself by thinking bad things about God or the Devil in the wee small hours; for no other reason than it has been relentlessly ingrained in my psyche by a superstitious society from day one. I am, and I suspect many of us are to various degrees, psychologically scarred by religion.

Quote Posted by Chimpy

Life maybe, I'm not sure how you think it [The Origin of Species] made us understand the Universe and Everything?

You misunderstimate the impact of Darwin on science. Of course evolution has nothing directly to say about the big bang or extra dimensions - what it did do is demolish in the clearest possible way the notion that there were problems beyond study of the physical universe. Darwin was a starting cannon.

Thirith on 7/4/2008 at 12:50

Quote Posted by jay pettitt

Perhaps I misunderstand you, but if I don't: how do Darwin's theories "demolish in the clearest possible way the notion that there were problems beyond study of the physical universe"? Can study of the physical universe explain why a person may be moved to tears by Mozart's Requiem, for instance?