EARTH: A COCAKAMAMIE STORY

[Mighty AC]

Trying to write as creationist/apologist really illustrates the freedom they have to just make shyte up. I do find it odd that they can knowingly invent biblical defences and reasons to ignore scientific facts on the fly, yet still seemingly believe what they are saying.

The near absolute power of brainwashing is incredible. The people that choose to defend religion in discussions like these know that evidence and logic are stacked against them, yet they simply must believe that it is somehow wrong. I guess they have been trained since birth to believe that it is eternally dangerous to think otherwise.

[Wilber]

Exactly!! However, if we simply replace aliens with God it all works out. We already have an account of how God created life the universe and everything and since he exists outside of space time we don't need to explain his creation. God has always been and always will be.

Yet, the scientific community refuses to explore all the possibilities and simply dismisses supernatural explanations out of hand. I suspect that like the so called climate experts they need to keep this charade alive to protect their jobs.

What account? A book with an unknown author, written we know not when? Science is not gospel nor is it not about the supernatural, quite the opposite and science regularly changes its position when there is evidence to support that change.

[Mighty AC]

I agree. Creationists believe the scientific consensus will change on evolution though. They already believe the existence of an omnipotent, creator god to be true hence, they feel anything they or we don't understand qualifies as evidence for creation. They find the scientific refusal to entertain supernatural possibilities, despite there being no evidence of super-nature, to be baffling since there obviously is one true god. Hence, in their view scientists are just biased and closed minded about religious ideas.

If you try to suggest alternative, evidence free, hypotheses like the Flying Spaghetti Monster, or we're all in the matrix and they will take offense. It sounds extreme to some but Dawkins' statement about indoctrination being child abuse is bang on. The majority of society would agree if that statement was made about indoctrinated racism or sexual orientationism, yet far too many defend the brainwashing in of ignorance when the ideas are religious.

[cybercoma]

Now there is the anger you new atheist types are famous for.

Treating absurd beliefs as absurd is not anger; it's derision.

[Mighty AC]

And appropriate.

[Moonlight Graham]

Science says we don't know how life began, because that evidence has been destroyed and/or is otherwise simply unknowable with current technology. Science looks at the (sparse) evidence to come to the most likely theories, but again we still don't know. Intelligent design certainly can't be 100% thrown away as a possibility, however there is no evidence whatsoever to suggest it as likely either. To firmly believe in intelligent design is illogical and pretty much insane.

Edited July 3, 2014 by Moonlight Graham

[The_Squid]

Since we have never had any evidence for anything supernatural, science will likely (yet again) find a natural explanation for another of humanity's great unknowns.

So we can pretty much throw out the whole supernatural explanations since these seem to never be testable or the results repeatable. By definition, science is the search for natural explanations to how our world works.

Edited July 3, 2014 by The_Squid

[Mighty AC]

Exactly. First, find evidence of super nature and the scientific process can be applied to it.