On The Origin of Species

21 posts / 0 new
Last post
Aposteriori unum's picture
On The Origin of Species

Darwin really did it. He opened a huge can of worms with his theory. It simultaneously unleashed a tidal wave of new discoveries in biology and upset millions of religious people. A dangerous idea indeed.

There seems to be an incredible amount of animosity towards the theory of evolution. So many conversations and debates begin with god and bible and somehow end up with evolution. It's as if fundamentalists (and some others) just want it to go away. It's as if the mere word 'evolution' sends chills down their spine. But why? What's the big deal?

The thing is... It has no bearing on whether or not a god exists and/or created everything. Let's say the evidence pointed us in the wrong direction all these years... Oops, we were wrong... That still doesn't change the fact that evidence for a god is approximately zero. Or we say, for the sake of argument, that god exists... That still doesn't change that evolution occured and is still occuring. Why does the being who is all-powerful, who created the universe and everything therein, who set the laws of physics and everything else not have the ability to create the principles by which evolution occurs in his own creations? There is no dichotomy, ie; either evolution is true or god exists.

And yet the debate goes on.

I don't see fundamentalists all upset about the discovery of seeds smaller than mustard seeds or that we actually think with our brains and not our hearts (Albeit those are Petty little details).

Your book is wrong, so what? Now if Star Wars turned out to not be real... That would be a shame.

Any thoughts on anything here?

Subscription Note: 

Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.

Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.

chimp3's picture
Not many religions are based

Not many religions are based on a generic god. The devil is in the details.

Aposteriori unum's picture
Yes, and the Abrahamic

Yes, and the Abrahamic religions are not based on a generic god. Their books are very important to them; they MUST NOT be wrong! I know where that comes from, but just the same, don't they interpret other things in their books ad hoc to fit with reality? Or to change with the standards of morality...? But not the creation story.

Oh well. It might be aggravating, but what can you do? It's less brain-melting than debating flat-earthers I suppose.

Nyarlathotep's picture
Humans are animals. I'd guess

Humans are animals. I'd guess that rather obvious idea is related to the issue that some theists seem to have with the idea of evolution. Maybe add to that the huge amount of misinformation they are taught about it from their religious institutions.

Benjboi's picture
I've never really got it

I've never really got it either. I don't think evolution necessitates the death of god but maybe in a religious context if you're taught that God is loving, proactive and does all these incredible things and yet you cannot ever see any evidence of it, watching a flower opening, seeing the sun rise or the beautiful diversity of life can be pointed to in the absence of science as direct evidence of God. When science starts to deconstruct them you start removing the physical presence of God by explaining these processes it's going to hurt.

Imagine you're a child waking up everyday to your curtains open and your towel warmed. You're told by your mother that daddy had to leave early but before he left he opened the curtains for you and turned your towel heater on because he loves you, and these simple acts validate his love. Years later someone comes to your house to do some electrical work and says to you, 'those automatic curtains and towel rail are really cool' , would you want to believe it? Would you fight back against it? Of course you would, they're engaging in very natural coping mechanisms to protect themselves from emotional harm.

Flamenca's picture
In my country, fortunately,

In my country, fortunately, creationism in schools debate hasn't arrived yet (fingers crossed), but RC Church is free to decide the contents in Religion class, even in public schools, so there's this loophole to creationism. Yet as far as I'm concerned, Evolution remains an unquestionable part of Science class, and it's taught as a fact in both public and private (secular and religious) schools, at least since I was a kid.

Last survery says 53% of young people -who are taught about Evolution as well (apprehension not guaranteed, of course)- keep study Religion until they finish high-school. So most of them seem to accomodate both pretty well. In my opinion, most of the people around me could fall in this category.

Benjboi's picture
I take it you're in the UK.

I take it you're in the UK. If so I had no idea that religious schools had that exemption.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
I gotta fess up...sometimes I

I gotta fess up...sometimes I wonder if you ask these very detailed questions as a means of tripping someone into a "gotcha" situation. Because, really, this sort of detail is absolutely available to you via resources produced by theologians and apologists. You're not really interested in answers, you just wants us to get to a point where we say "I don't know" so that you can jump up and go "Aha!".

Benjboi's picture
I can sympathise with that

I can sympathise with that john but that feeling is actually a consequence of adopting a position that you're obliged to defend. It's hard enough for people to admit they're wrong at the best of times without the burden of 2000 years of religious legacy in their shoulders so if a question is posed that makes you feel uncomfortable you're bound to be suspicious.

But this is an atheist forum with posts by atheists or at the very least skeptics. If you choose to engage as a religious person then you have to be prepared to be challenged and you have to accept that a question is not going to be phrased with your religious paradigm in mind. This is not meant to catch you out, actually since this is an atheist forum the question is not even really meant for you.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
I'm not a theologian, and to

I'm not a theologian, and to my knowledge, no one who is an active poster here is one either. So if you are legitimately interested in information that would answer the OP, your best resource would be a theologian, not a poster on some unrelated forum.

You have to understand that a lot of us have been through questions like this where the person had ulterior motives, to prove something or to steer the conversation in a certain direction.

Flamenca's picture
@Benjboi, @JohnB. has been

@Benjboi, @JohnB. has been around here more than most of us, so I guess he already knows what he's dealing with...

And I have to disagree: The Debate Forum is opened to everyone: atheists, believers, agnostics, gnostics... (@Cyber so kindly provided us the definitions earlier and, please, Cyber, tell if I'm wrong) If you read the information about AtheistRepublic, I think there's this spirit of coexistance and debating among us. Even more, gnostics and believers can freely open their own treads... Every reasonable person should be more than welcome to post about any topic.

Yet, it's very annoying when, for the sake of their own agenda, some unrelated topics are introduced on purpose to mislead the debate, to interrumpt the flow. And I think that is what my fellow atheists usually complain about, not the very opinion.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
@Angiebot

@Angiebot

Haha I'm literally just copy and pasting the comments that people have been giving me this past week. I just replaced small things like biologists with theologian. But these are all quotes from CyberLN, LostLocke, BurnYourBible, Chimp3. They are not my own word.

I just wanted to see how other atheists would respond if I said to them what atheists say to me.

Flamenca's picture
@ComedianBreezy, well, I'm

@ComedianBreezy, well, I'm sure it'll be very fun to read them altogether. Remember that bad critics from well-meaning people sometimes are even a gift, because they allow to see some aspects of you, your dearest wouldn't tell you. If someone wants to share their bad impressions on me, I'd be glad (and a bit scared) to read.

Don't forget to include my long post about you in your thread 'What evolved first' and let's be fair: I think those weren't bad critics at all, except for the "vindictive" adjective... Please, consider it, my early Thanksgiving present! xDD

P.S. The fact that you changed your nickname just proves me right.

Burn Your Bible's picture
I would like to know...

I would like to know...
A) what quotes you stole?
B) what context I used them in.

The reason is if I had made a mistake or used an argument that was invalid then I would like to correct it.

Thank you in advance,
Burn your bible

Benjboi's picture
Fair point @angie

Fair point @angie, hard being a new bod and knowing who people are and their history.

I just think if you don't like being challenged and are instead looking for easy answers then an atheist forum is the wrong place to start.

Flamenca's picture
@Benjboi, I couldn't agree

@Benjboi, I couldn't agree more.

Aposteriori unum's picture
Yeah, my question was: "any

Yeah, my question was: "any thoughts on anything here? " not terribly complicated.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
You ask very detailed

You ask very detailed questions... and when people answer you, you scoff at it as if your an authority on evolution. And let's be clear you don't care what anyone answers unless it fits into your word game

Aposteriori unum's picture
The post wasn't about

The post wasn't about evolution, but the fact that many theists seem to be fixated on it. Try to make it sound ridiculous when the topic at hand is the existence of supernatural things-- not a scientific question. As if evolution has something to say about the former: it doesn't. You may do well to re-read what was written.

Also it wasn't really meant for theists to answer, though they may as well.

ʝօɦռ 6IX ɮʀɛɛʐʏ's picture
Your "instructions" are to

Your "instructions" are to vague. They require too many assumptions.

Burn Your Bible's picture
When I was ten I had this

When I was ten I had this talk with my family... a tree doesn't just pop up so why wouldn't god plant the seed to grow people over time?(evolution) I was grounded for questioning the Bible... my real response when it comes to Christian's is, they can't even agree on what their god wants... why should we care what an individual claims?

Donating = Loving

Heart Icon

Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.

Or make a one-time donation in any amount.