Atheism

[psyah]

Re: Atheism

@kprasad

I have no want to strong arm you, or make you acquiesce to my definitions. You're free to believe whatever you want, just as you're free to call an apple an orange. However, the qualities that make an orange an orange, remain.

Newton's theories weren't replaced, they were modified. There is a hug difference between the two.

Moreover, if you believe that evolution is false, what's your evidence to the counter position? Simply saying it's wrong, doesn't make it so. You have to show evidence for what you believe is correct.

If you quote religious text, which one? There are a magnitude of religious texts and creation myths. Which one is right?

Peace kprasad

Yes it is true I am free to call an apple and orange and it is also true that the qualities that make an orange an orange do remain ... yet you are still strong arming your command of science and contesting my understanding of it ... It is a lie to say that you are not doing this ... but I can believe you don't necessarily want to ... but you are doing it.

Our difference on this matter remains. (At least I have the courage to respect your difference of opinion ... you are simply saying that I am wrong)

Newton's Laws don't apply at the sub-atomic scale ... that is what I meant by replace - i.e. these laws are no longer universal.

I don't believe evolution is false ... I can't .... How can I? No evolutionist has provided a falsification test for it yet ... rather the more they modify the base theory the more they make it less falsifiable ... it is becoming increasingly a dogma ... That does not mean I think it false ... however I say it undermines Creation ... I already have a belief in Creation that need not be substituted for another belief system called evolution. I can't adopt both because they do create problems for each other ... so I have to choose one ...

Scientific discovery has created many problems for evolution that is the reason why the theory needed to be modified so much ... I trust in the idea that more scientific discovery will create even more problems for evolution - but the evolutionists will not let it lie ... they will create further sophistication over it again and again ...

My suspicion of evolution stems from how difficult it is to make a solid connection between two creatures ... in order to even suggest that linking together of two creatures we need to be able to tally up at least 4 parameters ...

Location of find, Date of find, Similarity of finds, DNA if it is in tact

Fossils are records - they provide a snapshot in time they do not provide the information necessary to conclude that "an ancestor becomes its specially different descendant" it merely provides one specimen and another ... We create the process in our heads ... It could just as well be one species that dies and is replaced with another ...

We know that dingos (dogs introduced in Australia that became feral) killed off the dodos ... fossil records will show lots of dodos and then an increasing number of dingos and no more dodos ... We would be dodos to conclude that dodos evolved to become dingos ...

Likewise ... if a similar creature settles in an area say grey squirrel which fought off and competed for the same food source of the red squirrel we see fossil evidence of first red squirrel that was replaced with the grey ... We would be dodos to conclude that the grey squirrel evolved from the red ...

Similar creatures will inevitably seek out similar habitats to feed and breed ... it does not mean necessarily that one becomes the other ... Hey what do I know ... anyway ...

[kprasad]

Re: Atheism

@psyah

Peace kprasad

Yes it is true I am free to call an apple and orange and it is also true that the qualities that make an orange an orange do remain ... yet you are still strong arming your command of science and contesting my understanding of it ... It is a lie to say that you are not doing this ... but I can believe you don't necessarily want to ... but you are doing it.

Our difference on this matter remains. (At least I have the courage to respect your difference of opinion ... you are simply saying that I am wrong)

Newton's Laws don't apply at the sub-atomic scale ... that is what I meant by replace - i.e. these laws are no longer universal.

I don't believe evolution is false ... I can't .... How can I? No evolutionist has provided a falsification test for it yet ... rather the more they modify the base theory the more they make it less falsifiable ... it is becoming increasingly a dogma ... That does not mean I think it false ... however I say it undermines Creation ... I already have a belief in Creation that need not be substituted for another belief system called evolution. I can't adopt both because they do create problems for each other ... so I have to choose one ...

Scientific discovery has created many problems for evolution that is the reason why the theory needed to be modified so much ... I trust in the idea that more scientific discovery will create even more problems for evolution - but the evolutionists will not let it lie ... they will create further sophistication over it again and again ...

My suspicion of evolution stems from how difficult it is to make a solid connection between two creatures ... in order to even suggest that linking together of two creatures we need to be able to tally up at least 4 parameters ...

Location of find, Date of find, Similarity of finds, DNA if it is in tact

Fossils are records - they provide a snapshot in time they do not provide the information necessary to conclude that "an ancestor becomes its specially different descendant" it merely provides one specimen and another ... We create the process in our heads ... It could just as well be one species that dies and is replaced with another ...

We know that dingos (dogs introduced in Australia that became feral) killed off the dodos ... fossil records will show lots of dodos and then an increasing number of dingos and no more dodos ... We would be dodos to conclude that dodos evolved to become dingos ...

Likewise ... if a similar creature settles in an area say grey squirrel which fought off and competed for the same food source of the red squirrel we see fossil evidence of first red squirrel that was replaced with the grey ... We would be dodos to conclude that the grey squirrel evolved from the red ...

Similar creatures will inevitably seek out similar habitats to feed and breed ... it does not mean necessarily that one becomes the other ... Hey what do I know ... anyway ...

Psyah, let me start off by saying that I respect your personal faith. I respect the foundation, I suspect, it provides for your life.

Having said that, I am utterly dismayed by your response. Dismayed at your complete misunderstanding of evolution, misunderstanding of science, misunderstanding of the scientific process, and misunderstanding of what scientists are saying.

It seems you and I are discussing two totally different 'things' here. I have no idea what you are talking about when you say: Scientific discovery has created many problems for evolution. What discovery, in particular, are you speaking about?

All I am trying to say is that your faith, is your faith. Science does not work on faith, it works on evidence and data.

Just as a side note, I'm sure you knew that Newton had predicted that his theories would need to be modified. Science told him so, as did Calculus. Maxwell and Einstein weren't just shooting in the dark! The path forward had been laid for them by Newton!

[psyah]

Re: Atheism

@kprasad

Psyah, let me start off by saying that I respect your personal faith. I respect the foundation, I suspect, it provides for your life.

Having said that, I am utterly dismayed by your response. Dismayed at your complete misunderstanding of evolution, misunderstanding of science, misunderstanding of the scientific process, and misunderstanding of what scientists are saying.

It seems you and I are discussing two totally different ‘things’ here. I have no idea what you are talking about when you say: Scientific discovery has created many problems for evolution. What discovery, in particular, are you speaking about?

All I am trying to say is that your faith, is your faith. Science does not work on faith, it works on evidence and data.

Just as a side note, I’m sure you knew that Newton had predicted that his theories would need to be modified. Science told him so, as did Calculus. Maxwell and Einstein weren’t just shooting in the dark! The path forward had been laid for them by Newton!

kprasad … I’ve just realised that I know nothing about science … All my studies are wasted …my degree in engineering … useless … what is even worse I’ve realised I’m a bad communicator … I really need to go to school again … !!!

[Dr.LuLworth]

Re: Atheism

kprasad ... I've just realised that I know nothing about science ... *All my studies are wasted *...my degree in engineering ... useless ... what is even worse I've realised I'm a bad communicator ... I really need to go to school again ... !!!

It is if you attribute everything to the quran, but have never used it in a scientific study showcasing it to the world of scientists.

I do not see your quran referenced in any scientific theory in any known and credible scientific journal.

you should skip going to school again, and perhaps enlist at an institution.

a mental one, i'd suggest.

as a patient.

:)

[Krypton]

Re: Atheism

^im sorry, but i cant help but giggle at that HAHAHAHAHHAH

[yazdi]

Re: Atheism

@psyah

kprasad … I’ve just realised that I know nothing about science … All my studies are wasted …my degree in engineering … useless … what is even worse I’ve realised I’m a bad communicator … I really need to go to school again … !!!

Although we have discussed this topic extensively in the past an I have no desire to restart this debate all over again..

Just a reminder that I feel really funny sometimes, and really sorry for you on your arrogance because of your engineering degree which you mention frequently to establish your science credentials instead of giving any logical arguments.

Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, Oxford and every reputable educational institution considers Evolutionary Biology as a valid science and teach the subject in their institutions… I feel rather amusing when you portray yourself as an overconfident arrogant scholar bragging his engineering degree, claiming to be more knowledgeable than all these institutions combined..

But again.. I forgot your argument that all these scientist of world/prestigious educational institutions are conspiring against faith to undermine literal religious beliefs..

[psyah]

Re: Atheism

Although we have discussed this topic extensively in the past an I have no desire to restart this debate all over again..

Just a reminder that I feel really funny at sometimes, and really sorry for you on your arrogance because of your engineering degree which you mention frequently to establish your science credentials instead of giving any logical arguments.

Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, Oxford and every reputable educational institution considers Evolutionary Biology as a valid science and teach the subject in their institutions... I feel rather amusing when you portray yourself as an overconfident arrogant scholar bragging his engineering degree, claiming to be more knowledgeable than all these institutions combined..

But again.. I forgot your argument that all these scientist of world/prestigious educational institutions are conspiring against faith to undermine literal religious beliefs..

Evolution is a belief system

It's not about arrogance either - it is about science and how it is undertaken ... if you follow through the argument about the difference between a science and a faith and you will see that evolution is a faith ...

Try arguing from the point of view of absolutes like a scientist and compare the fundamentals of the subject itself - citing x, y and z people about "what they believe evolution is" is only proving my point - you cite them because you are unable to show evolution is not a belief and is a science on its own merit.

In my previous post - I expressed my lack of desire to continue such a conversation if everything I know about science is wrong ... I was not the one being arrogant ...

[diwana]

Re: Atheism

Yes, evolution is just another belief.

Nothing absolute, nothing 'scientific' like something which claims having absolute proof as 1+1=2 or 2+2=4. Nope.

Evolution THEORY is not and will never be like an absolute mathematics. Only imagination and dreams of few idiots.

These idiots believe on it as if it is true. Let them be fooled.

All arguments in favor of this 'theory' are and will always be without any solid proof.

[yazdi]

Re: Atheism

Evolution is a belief system

It's not about arrogance either - it is about science and how it is undertaken ... if you follow through the argument about the difference between a science and a faith and you will see that evolution is a faith ...

Try arguing from the point of view of absolutes like a scientist and compare the fundamentals of the subject itself - citing x, y and z people about "what they believe evolution is" is only proving my point - you cite them because you are unable to show evolution is not a belief and is a science on its own merit.

In my previous post - I expressed my lack of desire to continue such a conversation if everything I know about science is wrong ... I was not the one being arrogant ...

Yeah.. Evolution is a belief system.. and billions of species residing this planet including humans are all aliens who arrived here from somewhere else and killed all the species who populated this planet at that time. Undeniable evidence that the species change in geological time and none of the species present today existed in distant geological time is all crap. Also undeniable evidence that the species which existed in distant geological time do not exist today is also crap.This all happened less than 10,000 years ago after the agriculture revolution. And every major-reputable educational institution in the world are all idiots conspiring against a genius scientist-engineer with a degree who says evolution is a belief system by teaching evolution as a valid science instead of teaching evolution as a belief system/religion.

[psyah]

Re: Atheism

Yeah.. Evolution is a belief system.. and billions of species residing this planet including humans are all aliens who arrived here from somewhere else and killed all the species who populated this planet at that time. Undeniable evidence that the species change in geological time and none of the species present today existed in distant geological time is all crap. Also undeniable evidence that the species which existed in distant geological time do not exist today is also crap.This all happened less than 10,000 years ago after the agriculture revolution. And every major-reputable educational institution in the world are all idiots conspiring against a genius scientist-engineer with a degree who says evolution is a belief system by teaching evolution as a valid science instead of teaching evolution as a belief system/religion.

Peace yazdi

Hey Islam is also a belief system ... :) ...I'm not claiming that my beliefs are scientifically provable either.

But certain things need to be cleared up ...

The way a new species arrives on the Earth is indeterminate ... Evolution cannot answer it scientifically and neither can religion ... The only thing is there are alternative opinions.

I say that it is possible for a creature to be placed in to the Earth in an instant, either as a colony or as a single ancestor that produces its offspring to become a species ... This is a belief statement.

Conversely evolution says one species develops from another ... This is another statement of belief ...

In the case of humans the only person who came from outside were Adam and Eve (pbut), but they were taken from the soil in the first place.

The rest of us are from the Earth anyway as we are born here and we die here.

I don't believe we necessarily killed every creature that lived here.

It is also true that we have found remains of creatures that lived long ago, but no longer live ... It is also true that many creatures that are alive today were not in existence earlier in the history of life on Earth.

For us it can simply be a result of one creature reaching its extinction, by other creatures competing or a natural disaster occurring that leads to one species to die off, other creatures are made and replace them ... How they are made is indeterminate.

Evolution says the new creatures come from the ones that previously resembled them ...that is a belief statement, just like mine is about creatures being made to die off and replaced with other creatures. Evolutionists like to paint a picture of gradual metamorphosis of one creature to another, which is fine as long as acknowledge it is a belief ... Because there are alternate views such as the new arrive old die off theory (belief) ...the fact is the latter of these two is demonstable with the red squirrel being replaced with the grey squrriel as just one example.

It is not my belief that all this happened withi. 10,000 normal years ... This is not something that my belief allows let alone my scientific understanding ... Islam allows for as much time as is evident from scienctific research to still be absolutely true.

Every major reputable institution ??? They are only reputable because of the vast other matters that they pioneer ... There are many researchers and scientists that do not declare their disbelief regarding evolution ... Or they are merely waiting for it to disprove itself in time ... And that is the approach for evolution ...

Modern Science in general, but evolution in particular starts from a premise that There is No God/Creator. Using the well known Reductio-Ad-Absurdum principle i.e. at some point in time Science will arrive at a conclusion that will lead to absurdity of their original premise i.e. there is no God/Creator. This will then leave only one Conclusion i.e. There is God/Creator.

The problem with this is ... By the time they get to that end ...we would already be standing before our Lord ...I'm not waiting for that point to be reached. But moreso, my faith utilises other empirical data, such as spiritual and emotional evidence to compound my beliefs towards certainty.

[yazdi]

Re: Atheism

The way a new species** arrives **on the Earth is indeterminate ...

How do you know that alien species arrive here. Leave evolution... There are billions of species residing this planet.. how did they arrive here??? From where did they arrive???

We know for sure none of the billions of species residing this planet existed in the distant geological past. We know for sure that billions of species which resided this planet in the distant geological past do not exist today. If billions of species inhibiting this planet today are all aliens and arrived from somewhere.. there must be any evidence of this mass arrival. Some debris of the space ships on which this mass arrival of billions of species took place. (After all we are talking about billions of species)...

Either these species arrived here or they evolved here. There is no third possibility.

Every reputable scientist with sane mind.. every reputable educational institution.. say that evolution is a fact and this mass invasion of billions of species is a non-possibility. Only a genius with your engineering credentials who claims to be science scholar.. or literal religionist are dead sure that the alien arrival theory is correct.

[AlexB]

Re: Atheism

Peace rari389

That may well be true, but not for Muslims, we have a very strict 'aqeedah that actually suggests not only evolution, but certain aspects of physics must be rethought.

But you are right to use the words 'believe in evolution'.

Maybe certain aspects of Islam should be rethought instead?

[The_Jinx]

Re: Atheism

Maybe certain aspects of Islam should be rethought instead?

Islam is not Judaism that you can change according to your whims and wishes and by negating the teachings of Moses (Musa PBUH). Islam remains the same as it was given to Muslims by the Last Prophet Muhammad (PBUH)

[yazdi]

Re: Atheism

Maybe certain aspects of Islam should be rethought instead?

There are two schools of thoughts between Islamic Scholars. One school of thought which is followed by people like Mududi and Dr. Israel do not consider Quran as a book of science. They prescribe to an understanding that it is a spiritual book meant for moral guidance only and should not be used to derive scientific discoveries. They do not take prescribe to the literal meaning of certain verses.. Rather they have a spiritual view o. These..

They other School of thought is being preached by likes of Dr. Nail who are he'll bent on finding scientific discoveries from scriptures. They do all kind of mental jugglary to prove their point. Dr. Naik found a science miracle in Quran that it predicted seven layers of heaven by equating it with seven layers of atmosphere but failed to explain why Quran says that all the stars are present in the first layer. Their are several other examples of his mental acrobatics..

[psyah]

Re: Atheism

Maybe certain aspects of Islam should be rethought instead?

the 'aqeedah cannot be changed - it won't remain Islam if someone did that.

[psyah]

Re: Atheism

There are two schools of thoughts between Islamic Scholars. One school of thought which is followed by people like Mududi and Dr. Israel do not consider Quran as a book of science. They prescribe to an understanding that it is a spiritual book meant for moral guidance only and should not be used to derive scientific discoveries. They do not take prescribe to the literal meaning of certain verses.. Rather they have a spiritual view o. These..

They other School of thought is being preached by likes of Dr. Nail who are he'll bent on finding scientific discoveries from scriptures. They do all kind of mental jugglary to prove their point. Dr. Naik found a science miracle in Quran that it predicted seven layers of heaven by equating it with seven layers of atmosphere but failed to explain why Quran says that all the stars are present in the first layer. Their are several other examples of his mental acrobatics..

Peace yazdi

The Qur'an is not science ... The Qur'an contains the truth ... when science stumbles upon truth then people show that such things were in the Qur'an all along ...

[queer]

Re: Atheism

more like deny any of the more recent truths because old scripture doesn't match it. if you deny evolution, you pretty much deny every thing in biology today.

[bitter]

Re: Atheism

i am reminded of two instances from my childhood
1) when a overzealous hindu professor tried to prove me that things like artificial insemination , airplanes , ICBMs were all mentioned in scriptures and the truth was all there for see but we could not comprehend it
2) the Father of the missionary school i attended said that Jesus walking on water was nothing but mag lev

i feel like laughing but sad at the same time - laugh because people go to outrageous lengths to justify their belief system and sad because I see some intellectual thievery here. By claiming credit where it is not due

[psyah]

Re: Atheism

@bitter

i am reminded of two instances from my childhood 1) when a overzealous hindu professor tried to prove me that things like artificial insemination , airplanes , ICBMs were all mentioned in scriptures and the truth was all there for see but we could not comprehend it 2) the Father of the missionary school i attended said that Jesus walking on water was nothing but mag lev

i feel like laughing but sad at the same time - laugh because people go to outrageous lengths to justify their belief system and sad because I see some intellectual thievery here. By claiming credit where it is not due

I don't go to any lengths to justify my belief system ... And I'm not apologetic regarding it. If a scientific discovery complies with the Qur'an, it will be good science, but if it conflicts with the Quran, then for sure there something wrong with the 'science' that was employed in making that discovery/setting the hypothesis.

Regarding miracles such as walking on water ... well I don 't believe it was MagLev, but I do say that a miracle is when such things can happen without any technological intervention, by God's permission. I am not apologetic about my belief in any way whatsoever.

[psyah]

Re: Atheism

more like deny any of the more recent truths because old scripture doesn't match it. if you deny evolution, you pretty much deny every thing in biology today.

Why should evolution be inherent in biology? Which field of biology is compromised by not believing in evolution?