Um, what you're trying to say is that A is B so C is B too.
Proving how macro-evolution works and how Pluto is in orbit with the Sun is a completely different thing. macro-evolution requires observation, and isn't a physics problem while Pluto can indeed be mathematically proven that it is indeed in orbit around the sun.
I'm addressing the way "anti-macro-evolutionists" base their argument on the what we can and cannot see. I'm not talking about Biology vs Physics; I'm talking about how they accept everything science throws at them until it suddenly conflicts with their faith. We haven't seen Pluto complete an orbit, but as you said, we certainly have the math to prove it. Likewise, we haven't SEEN any speciation, but we have things like transitional fossils, bone structure similarities, fossil layers, etc., which provides just as much evidence as the equations for gravitation and orbits. However, the common theist response to evolution I always hear is, "I don't see it happening, so it's
only a theory." And besides, evolution is a natural phenomenon that can be observed. If you're not comfortable with combining macro and micro evolution into one term, then I came up with an analogy: on a color spectrum, if you start at red and keep moving to the right, no matter how slow you progress, the red will eventually turn into other colors (species). You may only be able to observe the transition from red to red-orange, but slowly but surely, it will eventually reach violet.
You drop the prejudice that Christians don't believe in Science, rather- the majority do. Earth was proven spherical, once people invented telescopes and were able to see that almost all major celestial objects were spherical proven through their reflection. Cells were proven once microscopes were invented, which enabled us to see them. So we saw atoms as a theory, but proven as a fact once the electron microscopes were invented. And no matter how Christian, people are people and they believe what they see.
Actually, I believe most people, theists usually, believe what they want to believe. And I never once talked about the actual Christians (I apologize if I did, since that wasn't my intention). I was talking about the Biblical texts, in which the world that they describe is completely incompatible with the world we see today, scientifically speaking. In other words, it's fictional.
Well you know for a fact that you don't know. But you don't know for a fact that mortals can indeed fathom what another dimensional being would be like, let alone the assumption that a God is indeed extradimensional- for it to be a God, a proper usage would be 'omni' dimensional. But based on Christian beliefs, revelation explains what their God is like- so they believe based on 'that'. And most people realized that faith required reason and evidence! WHAT A DISCOVERY. I mean, this is a new word in our dictionary, I cannot fathom such a revolution.
That's an awfully convenient way to dodge any way to provide physical evidence, but fair enough. What evidence do we have that supports the claim that such a God even exists in the first place? You have to understand that for every claim, there will be several other alternatives. Things like whether a man saw a burning bush talking to him, or that he's a schizophrenic who simply sees and hears hallucinations. Therefore, if a claim is to have any weight to the minds of others, it should provide convincing evidence that would significantly raise one idea above the others. Things like "My brother had cancer, but now he is better. Therefore, God exists" is NOT a logical thought process. In fact, I disagree with your idea of faith. Faith has nothing to do with reason, and is actually closer attributed to the wishful thinking of humans. For example, if a person's son were in a car accident, and the doctors suggested that there was only 1% chance of survival, despite the proability (reason), the mother would believe that her son would get better (faith). I'm not saying they are intrinsically at conflict, but rather that they share no relationship at all.
And you can't tell me with a straight face that talking snakes, people turning into pillars of salt, the sun stopping in the sky, virgin births, walking on water, and raising of the dead (and many more!) can be believed by any rationally thinking individual. In fact, it does the complete opposite: it hinders one from thinking logically, and it is, in my opinion, holding back the progression of mankind.
See your bold print? If god were infinite and all powerful (in other words: worthy, in my opinion, of worship) then he wouldn't be bound in any dimension. Now, just because I myself do not exist within the fourth dimension, doesn't mean that I don't know about specific properties of the fourth dimension, and the fifth, and so on. Sure, I don't know everything there is to know about any dimension, but I can still know things that are properties of those dimensions. For example: I would know that a hypercube in four dimensions would have sides that are cubes, with all angles equaling 90 degrees. I would also know that it would take an infinite amount of cubes to create a hypercube, similar as to how it would take an infinite number of squares to create a cube, and an infinite number of lines to create a square, and an infinite number of points to create a line.
Okay, this ALWAYS comes up, and I just want to address this quickly. Deism and theism are not the same. If you prove that some all-powerful deity exists, this does absolutely nothing to the Biblical God (or any God for that matter) in terms of evidence. However, the Biblical God can be disproven, since its existence relies on the Bible.
Post has been edited 6 time(s), last time on Dec 16 2009, 3:18 am by grAffe.
None.