I believed some pretty silly things back when I was a theist, but they were mostly the sorts of things I tried my best not to think about. If you're good at being gullible and even better at trying to rationalize your irrational beliefs, you can become fairly convinced of even the silliest propositions.
Or so I thought. Even at my worst, I had at least some semblance of skepticism keeping me from believing in things I could actively disprove. I didn't have a fully functioning Baloney Detector at the time, but I had one that was at least rudimentary, and it kept me more grounded that at least some of the theists out there.
Which brings me to a statement made in response to a recent question on here: "Most scientists don't even consider [evolution] a legitimate field of study anymore." Slightly paraphrase, but that's the gist of it. Names are witheld to protect the ignorant.
My question is this: How can anyone seriously believe that? It's one thing to reject others work...
2007-07-10
07:54:22
·
21 answers
·
asked by
Minh
6
in
Society & Culture
➔ Religion & Spirituality
...But when you can *easily* see for yourself that a statement is false, and when discovering this requires no expertise in any difficult scientific subjects, how can you hold onto such a mistaken idea?
I know this is not a new thing. Some religionists still followed Peter Popoff after James Randi took him to the cleaners on national television, and that also scares me.
Seriously, how do you manage to believe something when even the tiniest bit of inquiry shows that you're wrong? Believing that scientists reject evolution is roughly akin to if I believed I was really living on Mars, yet I refused to open my eyes to prove otherwise.
2007-07-10
07:57:43 ·
update #1
Theists have too much of their ego at stake -- they've made up their minds that they're the pinnacle of creation and the only reason the universe even exists. Add to that the fact that, since they've aligned themselves with a (supposedly) perfect and infallible being, they are now (by proxy) also infallible.
Once you've convinced yourself of all that, who would want to give it up?
2007-07-10 07:58:57
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
8⤊
3⤋
How can people believe that? Well no offense but these probably aren't "reliable" and "credible" people anyways. They apparently don't actually pay any attention to the scientific community. It's about like someone telling you about the stock market only to find out later that they don't know anything about the stock market, stocks, and economics. They like to say what they themselves have either heard someone else tell them that they agreed with (and thus didn't bother to look into any further than that....because we humans always never bother to actually try to fact-check or research anything that we actually already agree with...unless challenged to do so) and so their repeating. Chances are the person who told them was either A) simply spreading a rumor and also did not do their own research B) said it because they somehow gave themself the authority to make such a statement or C) were actually joking with the person and the person completely missed the sacarsm of the joke.
2007-07-10 08:18:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by gabriel_zachary 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
via fact circumstances are different. Society is leaning in the direction of technological understanding to describe each and every little thing via fact technological understanding is typically credible for its motives, and whilst technological understanding can no longer clarify each and every little thing it remains in many circumstances assumed technological understanding will finally accomplish that. the priority for my section is as quickly as we are able to explaining some thing we immediately withdraw are "awe" from the subject being defined. as an occasion, there have been documented circumstances the place a "clinically" ineffective person has come again to existence on there own, particular it incredibly is uncommon in spite of the incontrovertible fact that it has occurred. whilst it incredibly is first approached it incredibly is like, wow, a miracle, can't be genuine, yet then whilst the scientific argument includes play that achievable the physique became in some variety of stasis or hibernation then the "miracle" itself turns into attainable. So why does not the achievable Miracle of a resurrection be achievable? If it incredibly is defined now why could we nevertheless brush aside the declare interior the previous? i'd are transforming into off subject count along with your question yet back on your unique question. human beings have self belief interior the paranormal issues interior the bible for many motives, some faith based and a few via fact they experience diverse the flaws are attainable, and a few via fact they do no longer view it actually yet extra symbollically. the genuine international says it incredibly isn't any longer achievable via fact we live in a materialism based society the place no count if it incredibly isn't any longer testifiable with the help of ability of scientific approach or if it may't be replicated by using experiements then it incredibly isn't any longer a real threat.
2016-09-29 11:14:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by pihl 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I think the reason that comment is made is it is being misquoted. There are some scientists that do not follow the theory of evolution but mainly to promote their own theories. I do believe that religion and science can coexist and that a belief system does not make you less intelligent than those who do not believe. I know many educated and intellectual theists just as I know quite a few intelligent atheists. Belief in something does not make you less intelligent it just means you have faith.
2007-07-10 07:59:46
·
answer #4
·
answered by Jason J 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
This is an interesting question for the creationists because if there is nobody studying evolution, why would they think the "creation museum" is science? They seem to spend quite a bit of time thinking about that stuff, but if there are no scientists thinking about it, it must all be made up?
I guess he doesn't think that the poster boy creationist "scientist", Micheal Behe, is actually a scientist either, since he "studies" the question.
That's okay with me. It's about time we pushed those quacks off the roster of people calling themselves "scientists". I never thought I'd agree with a creationist about anything, but at last, common ground.
2007-07-10 14:59:03
·
answer #5
·
answered by IGotsFacts! 4
·
0⤊
2⤋
"Most scientists don't even consider [evolution] a legitimate field of study anymore."
Reading that sentence made my brain twitch almost as much as that time I heard someone say "God put fossils here to test our faith" and "Man once walked with the dinosaur." I literally hurt at hearing such ridiculous stuff. To make statements of that nature one must not only lack logic but further have something like anti-logic going on in their brain, actually entering negative numbers on the logic scale.
It boggles the mind.
2007-07-10 08:03:12
·
answer #6
·
answered by deusexmichael 3
·
3⤊
0⤋
Answerer #1 has the right idea, but the problem stems deeper. Governments embrace fundamentalist thinking. Polarized religious followers, mean polarized voters. If they can create a majority, the minority, who feels unrepresented becomes demoralized and most likely will decide to not vote at all. We must always remember that religion is a tool of the government and that keeping the masses uneducated and living in delusion is truly in their benefit.
2007-07-10 08:49:22
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Yeah, that's a pretty ridiculous statement! Of course it's a legitimate field of study! I don't think it's actually taking place based on the evidence I've seen but many scientists disagree. To say it's not a legitimate field of study would be irresponsible even if someone doesn't consider the theory to be correct.
I think you're ignoring a serious body of evidence, however, when you so easily dismiss the "theist" side of the argument. I'd encourage you to buy some good books by reputable scientist on both sides (yes, of course they exist!) and you may not change your mind but I think you'll at least perhaps see the other perspective.
2007-07-10 07:58:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
4⤋
"Those who propagate the ideas of exclusive truth in the name of spirituality do so out of a desperate need to be right, because in the absence of the actual experience of spiritual union, being ideologically correct is their only tenable alternative.
When you understand the fear and desperation behind such positions, you can see why it is so important for them to try to convince others."
In other words: they're not just stupid, they're evil, egotistical and poison mean as well!
Please stop torturing yourself with the idiotic, brutal and senseless things deists do and say. There is no end to that deluge. Concentrate instead on what brings joy and peace to you!
2007-07-10 09:03:52
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
That must be the same group of scientists that have come to a 'consensus' about climate change.
As if consensus meant diddly-squat to science.
2007-07-10 10:06:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by Chris J 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
The human mind SHOULD be inquisitive. The scientific mind, gets a double dose. Almighty God and Jesus Christ are not the least bit worried over, dismiss, or forbid the "questing/seeking" mind. They encourage it. "Seek and you SHALL find..."
The questing, seeking mind did not stop with discoveries by Galileo, Franklin, Newton, Bell, & Einstein..what they and their scientific-minded predecessors theorized and concluded and discovered only whetted/energized future earnest scientific minds.
And I believe through the ages, Almighty God has patiently watched His creation's inquisitive minds, cheered their earnest searching to seek Him out to prove or disprove His Holy Bible & His existence, literally and/or or through scientific study.
Almighty God does not change. Almighty God does not lie.
Almighty God is the GREAT I AM. Almighty God promises those who earnestly seek Him WILL find Him.
It is like watching your child tackle their first simple puzzle. The older your child becomes, the more detailed and larger in scope the puzzle becomes, but at a puzzle's foundational base, is it's irrefutable, unchangeable, law that says each piece has its correct placement in the puzzle & the complete picture of the puzzle can not be completed without it.
That child can TRY to force a piece to fit (how many of us have watched our children TRY to force a piece into the puzzle), before they back track and research the remaining pieces to find the correct order of the pieces so that it fits EASILY & PERFECTLY without conflict to complete the picture puzzle.
Almighty God, as our loving parent, patiently watches us move the pieces around, try to fit pieces in incorrect order, and out of place, until we find the correct placement of each piece of the puzzle to complete the picture.
2007-07-10 08:57:18
·
answer #11
·
answered by faith 5
·
0⤊
2⤋