Religion Debates and Discussions

Gehenna here's a tip for anything to do with logic or science or really just common sense:

If you can't find evidence for something, it's probably not true.

 

I have never sinned before.

 

We've provided you with many examples of demonstrative and direct evidence for evolution, as well as abiogenesis.

 

What if I denied the moon landing because it went against what my grandparents think?

 

why are you even posting in this thread if that is your mindset

 

so why are you continuing to post on this thread...

 

I agree

Can you use other evidence instead of the bible?
...

 

There are lots of "theories" about the moon landing being faked. Images like that could be explained by any sort of disturbment in the moon sand, like a small meteor that bounced or rolled along the surface.
That would be a pretty silly explanation to me, someone who has read a lot of astronomy related stuff that would pretty easily disprove this. But until evidence that contradicts the explanation that goes against the moon landing is provided, the thought can't be dispelled by only pictures.

Okay, see, that's kind of a problem for the people that want the bible to be proven. If you're unwilling to put in the time it effort to find what should be easily accessible evidence, why should we put the time of effort into explaining ourselves? It seems like the discussion is becoming less about actual support for points and more about emotionally charged statements to win the other side over.

 

If you can't be bothered to put in the time to find viable evidence unlike us, therefore, we have the upper hand in this debate.

 

I'm going to give you a few answers that are consistent with your own logic to show you how fking annoying it is.

1. Because dinosaurs don't have to follow the laws of physics and biology.
2. Because Richard Dawkins says so in his book.
3. Evidence is not necessary to prove this point.
4. I could find evidence for this, but I can't be bothered.

Real answer: This is what I could find and I think it explains it well enough.

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Soft_tissue_preservation

Some new questions:

- If you've never taken the time to find evidence for creationism that's not the Bible, how do you know it exists?
- Do you accept that it's a little crazy to believe something and have it be an integral part of who you are when you can't even bring up evidence for it? If everyone had that mindset about things other than religion, there would be no modern technology. Mathematics is based on rigorous proof, physical science is based on experimentation and deduction, and both of those things enable us and so many others in the western world to have the lifestyle that we do. If you want to completely disregard evidence and act like it's not necessary or not important, then that's your choice. But please don't expect others to think you have any semblance of intelligence and please acknowledge how hypocritical it is that you're writing your moronic arguments on the Internet, something that would not exist if there were not scientifically minded intelligent people who used evidence and reason to try and understand how our world works.

"people"
ily too gehenna <3

also I love how logically minded you are when it comes to anything other than religion. You are absolutely right about a lot other things that have been brought up, including this. It just worries me how you switch gears when we mention the bible

 

If the bible said that humans wouldn't ever be able to leave the planet than you would deny the moon landing despite that clear evidence.

 

can you show me an example of rationalwiki's bias? haven't used the website much so idk, I'd be willing to accept it as biased or irrational if you could prove it

"traces of it" can you talk about these traces a bit more?

Oh. Faith. Right. So why don't you have faith in evolution? That's the problem with faith, it's elective, it's subjective, it's moronic. Having faith in something doesn't make it true, and if you need to have faith in it to replace evidence then it's probably not true.

Faith:

There are like a bajillion religions out there that all claim to practice "faith" when it comes to understanding the origin of humans, and they all disagree. Not one of them is clearly better than the others because "I have faith" is not an argument for anything.

Evidence:

Among people who look at the evidence, scientifically rationally minded people, there is a pretty good consensus on how humans came to exist; we evolved from other organisms. Where there is disagreement, rationally minded people are generally able to come to an acceptable conclusion because we examine the evidence and decide what conclusion fits it best, we don't come up with a conclusion then just talk about our faith in said conclusion.

 

I said 'If'