Poland's atheist loonies have had their 5 minutes

If you know whats good for you...

..which I cleary don't!

xD

So with reference to the title, is it being implied that all atheists are loonies, or that these loonies are atheists?

What people being beheaded or people throwing stones at others, no it really does have to happen, would be a bit weird if it never happened.


Thats a good one everything makes sense down here but the minute you look up into the sky it goes straight out the window. Its a humbling experience, to gaze and wonder.

No..its being implied by some bible basher that anyone who does not share his views must be mentally impaired...

Going to a church to indulge in lavish ceremonies to worship an invisble person of course shows you are well balanced and normal...

Well, I'm happy to be weird then, living in my weird country where none of this happens.

;)

Yes, the op has a special way about him.

All this talk about logic, proof and the church being anti religious is just silly.
Science doesnt work that way, good old Popper and later the Hungarian Lakatos is the view most have of science, where each piece of knowledge is placed on top of the previous bit of knowledge to form a thing called a paradigm. That is good for teaching purposes but what happens when a scientific explanation cannot be refuted.

Evolution cannot be falsified, in fact it is not a scientific theory as understood in the classical sense. What evolution does is produce better results than religion but it is essentially a belief and it is justified by going to probability. ie science using an art to provide foundations for universal laws.

In short its just as illogical to say there is no God as it is to say there is a God.

You are missing one huge point that is evidence.
It is this evidence that led Darwin to this theory and since millions of more pieces to back it up.


Given that 'logic' it is equally logical to say there are leprechauns, unicorns and honest politicians as it is to say there are not.

Ohh crap BM's here.

Yeah baby!
I was happily just reading through but then someone mentioned supernatural mumbo-jumbo on a par with evolution and well, you know the rest :p

The evidence only fits if you believe the idea and evidence is not proof. In fact it's much more powerful to be able to disprove something then there can be no doubt, using probability always leaves room for doubt.


Yes thats right. You just need to find one. Evolution hangs by a similar thread.

I am afraid the scientific method works almost the opposite of religion in this way.
Science, unlike religion, tries to find fault with it's ideas, understandings and so with our advancement in knowledge and understanding the books change that is why it is called the 'theory of evolution' not because it is a belief but because of the millions of separate pieces of evidence found that support the theory and the lack of evidence against it.


I agree to an extent but to believe you are a big purple dinosaur typing on this forum just because I can not prove you aren't, no evidence necessary, is nonsense.


You have more chance of finding leprechauns ridding around on unicorns than an honest politician :)


Hence the important word, 'Theory' when we talk about evolution.
Do you talk about the theory of God?
Science is not arrogant enough to talk in absolute terms, I am but good science isn't :)

All the evidence for evolution can be used to formulate another set of ideas the only way to evaluate the two would be to disprove one or both. The nature of evolution leaves it unable to be disproved so we have to rely upon results produced ie predictions. Evolution doesn’t provide predictions it just explains what has happened.

Creating an idea from observations cannot be scientific because you cannot separate the idea from the observations ie the observable universe will fit your idea not the other way round. You dont start looking at things with a blank mind.

Evolution has provided a great platform for the sciences but it really in not a testable theory as you quite rightly described science as being.

Nobody ever said it had to.


Of course it could be disproved but it hasn't been so far, there is a big difference.
GOD could just reveal himself and WHAM! :)
In fact the theory has itself evolved to such a state today that Darwin would perhaps not recognise it.
The fact that it hasn't been disproved is not a platform, that it is not a good theory, it could just be bringing us closer to the truth.


This makes no sense, it sounds like you have something specific in mind, do you?
Or maybe I am just not getting what you are saying?


Well that's ''standing on the shoulders of giants'' out the window.
We can build on some sort of foundation, even rip it apart and improve it.
Our computers would not exist if everything was looked at with a blank mind but then again it took someone to look at something observable to come up with one theory for the next generation of thought to come up with an extension of that theory or to completely wipe the old one out.

And as for people looking at evolution with a blank mind, I think we all do.


I agree, hence the word 'theory'.
And once a scientist has come up with a theory, they or most other scientists try their damnedest to disprove it.
But measurable, physical evidence in a court of law is a powerful persuasive tool, I would say much more persuasive than some old scrolls written by unknown authors and translated and edited so much that I doubt if anyone would recognise the original, talking about supernatural mumbo jumbo with no proof, relying on blind faith is nowhere near the same.


This is why I think you have something in particular in mind but lets continue anyway, lets take for example your Human vestigiality.
Your tailbone is the remnant of your lost tail.

One thing of interest is that we have, in some ways, conquered evolution but that is another day's argument :)

Only that I dislike absolutism. Not only is it good practice its natural to question things. Belief in God is only illogical if you look at it with an absolutist mind. I think the same about certain aspects of science, evolution being the most obvious.

No one looks at the world without pre conceived ideas that is why ideas need testing. Newtonian Physics makes all sorts of predictions from knowing where a cannon ball will land to the sun coming up in the morning, they can be falsified. Evolution cannot be disproved because it doesnt make predictions that means its a belief. An idea that has enabled the production of many, many measurable results.

The theory of evolution.
Do you really call it the theory of God?

It's a great theory, does it make me a better person? do I wage war over it? does it make me money? does it explain everything? no

Could it be a step in the right direction for understanding our universe? yes it could.

I find this in stark contrast to religion, with it's dogma, power struggle and absolutism.
Religion does not seek to question itself. it can't by it's own nature, whereas science must.


Now I think I know where you are coming from but still I disagree.
Our understanding of evolution is not perfected maybe we can't ever fully understand it but it is growing.
There are perhaps too many variables for it to be predictable but I am sure something similar was imagined when we tried anything new, like harnessing fire.


Cart before the horse, Darwin didn't just have a notion and try to find things to back it up, neither has any serious investigator since.

The evidence led to the idea, think of it as a murder trial, a dead body is found and we uncover what happened, we didn't invent an idea of a dead body and then come up with some evidence to back it up.

Coincidently Darwin was not the only one who came to the theory because of the evidence, maybe it was just time for man (now that is a belief:)

In your own words:



I know you are read at least somewhat on this matter and you can't say that the theory of evolution was not ridiculed:



And scrutinised although I am very happy that it is scrutinised, perhaps you have been reading too much Dawkins (or perhaps I have:p)?

Yeah, I agree I dislike religion but I'm still not able to say there is no God.

From a theoretical point of view I still cant say Evolution is not a belief. My brother is a Biology professor and he says Its not a theory its reality but then he is a big Catholic:)

I have a great wee book about the philosophy of science I'll gladly send it to you...really:)

Are you able to say there are no honest politicians?
Go on, let's compromise, i will say there might be leprechauns ridding around on unicorns if you say there are no honest politicians :)


My next question was honestly, who is the dogmatic one who talks to you about evolution?
I would have guessed a professor but hey, you are your brother's keeper.


Double dogma :)
The Catholic church recognises evolution, they had their own investigators look in to it.

John Paul the second said:


Catholic Church and evolution
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_evolution#Pope_John_Paul_II

Your brother probably told you that already but I thought because of who the OP is, it was worth a mention.


I think it is like anything in this world, the subject, is most of the time, secondary to the teacher.
Evolution has spirit stirring qualities which might in some ways be what religious men feel when in deep prayer.
Like contemplating your relative size to the universe, there is something godlike in it.
I just find it more gratifying that there is evidence that it really could be how it all works.
But I would be equally fascinated, were someone to disprove it.

As for the book, you could just tell me the name or give it to me next time you're in Krakow over a pint :)

It's because certain religious folk tend to be very narrow minded as well. They don't want to accept any possibility except what's in the Bible. The atheists are at the opposite end of that and resent their closed mindedness. The only logical response is to mirror it.

There's a lot of truth in that. Most people in Europe are somewhere on a continuum between the two poles, but generally closer to the secular end. Religious when wanting a white wedding or buying a lotto ticket, secular when peventing or ending a pregnancy or going shopping on Sunday.

Religion is not the same as believing in God...I believe there could be godlike beings in the universe somewhere, however I don't believe in the God who's in the Bible.

I don't need a religion to tell me when I can go shopping. That's should be up to shop owners and the amount of money I have.

Abortion should be up to the individual and although I wouldn't have one, no one should be prevented to have one if they choose it.

This is true. Some might say "a god" instead of "God", however


complicates things. Many cultures (including European) believe in various entities (spirits, angels, call them whatever) as well as a supreme being. When that supreme being or those entities are described and worshipped, then it becomes religion.

There are so many religions in the world. Some deluded people believe that theirs is the only right one and all others are in error, others believe each is but a way of looking at the truth, and more and more people believe they are all just mythology. I prefer to keep my mind open. Providing they don't start telling me how to live, on the basis of their beliefs.

I'm not sure if I believe what Europeans and other cultures do. There's just not enough evidence to convince me godlike beings are inhabiting earth. It is possible they could exist within the universe since it is so large.

That sounds like the UFO paradox: one the one hand the universe is so vast that anything could be and probably is out there, but on the other hand, the chance is negligible that whatever is out there is at a similar enough stage of evolution to be able to (or want to) communicate with us.

The writers (more accurately storytellers, since it started as an oral thing) of Genesis seemed to believe that something existed, with that intriguing passage about "sons of gods". Muslims believe in 'djinns', a whole parallel set of beings living among us but somehow in a different dimension. Quantum physics may prove them right, and there are Muslim scientists who've risked their academic reputation to discuss this! Though I doubt it'll happen any time soon.

I have my own theory. They are out there building galaxies like hominid earthlings build subdivisions :)
Since the universe is so vast, they could be billions of light years away from here. Still, they exist, but without much impact on us. If they tried to contact us it would take so long for us to get the message there wouldn't be any point.

One day we could be a species not unlike theirs, (I like to call them "The Gods". That is what I have named their species) that is, if we figure some things out first.

Barney wrote:


2 things:

1) Calling evolution a "belief" would be grounds to call essentially anything that is thought to be known in this world to be a "belief" as well.

Is the existence of gravity and the effect it has on objects on earth a belief?

Is fire being hot merely a belief or will a roaring fire give off heat every single time?

2) How does religion produce results?

Does believing in Zeus produce results? Does believing in Poseidon yield results? Does believing in Thor produce results? What about sun worship....any results from that?

Any results from Jesus Christ or Mohammed?

A belief is something that cant be disproved. If there is no possibility to disprove something it is a belief. Genetic investigation can be dismissed (no one has and I doubt if anyone will) the description that is evolution cannot be dismissed.

Most churches have given up trying to counter uncomfortable things from science because the logic is sound. Evolution doesnt have the same solid basis that is why the creationist nuts keep banging away at it.

Evolution works and produces results we can all see. Religion has produced results in the past just measured in a different way:)
I posted before about the church being a form of health insurance in pre health service days even offering a permanent place to retire to. The results the church supplied were of their time.

barney wrote:


now you're making a different claim.

"the church" is an organization of people. regardless of what good doings a church may do, it has nothing to do with belief or faith, it's getting off your butt and actually doing something real, something you can see for yourself. getting someone medical care is not a result of religion or faith, it's either the result of people wanting and willing to help others OR the result of people helping others for ingeniuous reasons such as gaining political clout.

this is nothing unique to "churches".


and now i'm back to my original question.

Or as payment for liberating the world of infidels during the crusades.

I get your point though, the church down the road is real, the Vatican, it exists and the Pope is elected but you can't say the same of belief in God.

If we could elect a God, who would you choose? :)


Why do you think it couldn't be disproved?
Evolution myths: Evolution cannot be disproved
newscientist.com/article/dn13675-evolution-myths-evolution-cannot-be-disproved.html

Billy Connelly... he would sort the world out...