Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

Knowing what science says about evolution and the history of the earth isn't "smarmy condescension" any more than looking out your window and proclaiming that the sky is blue on a sunny day would be. Science can't assess whether or not gods exist, but it can quite easily show that the Earth is not 6000 years old and that life was not created in it's current form.

Laelia Komi Anomalocaris

Knowledge isn't the problem, it's what some choose to do with it, and I think you realize that and are side-stepping the point.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

Not sure what you mean. If you're referring to correcting people who make false scientific claims, I still don't see where the condescension is.

Laelia Komi Anomalocaris

More referring to the "oh, you silly plebes, how can you believe in your imaginary boogey-man when there's science" types. Don't pretend you don't know what I'm talking about because we get that here a good bit (especially the "imaginary boogey-man" part).

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

You were talking about science. Atheism is not science, and science can't prove or disprove the existence of deities. I think it's quite reasonable to ridicule belief in imaginary men who live in the sky, but that's not because of science, it's because the idea is ridiculous.

Laelia Komi Anomalocaris

I'm going to start ridiculing vegans then.

I'll jump on that band-wagon.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

you don't already?

I can accept that some believe in a creator of the designer or architect type, the catholic god, allah, or zeus. I know that having a philosophical interpretation of what we know of the universe is important to most people, and I even have my own which is not unique. (if you're curious: I think that not knowing everything and realizing that there's a lot of mysterious shit going on makes life more interesting and exciting than subscribing to a belief system that apparently has an answer to everything, obviously that's not compatible with everyone and you don't see me pushing that)

Where we have a problem is when you have widespread evangelism promoting willful ignorance to the point of pressuring to change a school's science curriculum to include creationism, or even to give it equal time. Promoting that your faith is better than anyone else's and belittling (remember what Bush Sr said of atheists? He held the most important office in the world) any other by convincing their followers that everyone else is going to suffer eternally "you better believe it or else!", and luring with the attracting concept of eternal life. Promoting that there's a god watching your every move, controlling your fate that's pre-determined when you're born.

Where we really have a problem is when such people gain positions of power over other humans.

If you look into it, it comes down to a simple thing: knowledge violently destroys this kind of faith. Evangelists promote the rejection of knowledge. They're fakes, profiteers, charlatans and some are even straight up scammers. I don't see why those shouldn't be called out for what they are.

What's the difference with science, you ask? Science has no authority, it is a collaborative enterprise with a method that does a good job at eliminating bias and the fallibility of humans with systems like peer review, falsifiability, repeatable experiments and observations, etc. Each generation brings something new to the past generation's discoveries, it's hundreds and thousands of years of work, research and observation of our world. This is going to sound funny: science is about being wrong again and again, and on occasion you appear to be right and win a cookie.



edit: extreme example of a profiteering scammer:

Not really.


Though they deserve it.

This. As Dawkins said in the OP's video, it's a primitive superstition. A quick historical recap to put it into perspective for some of the people in this thread:

- The first nomadic civilizations were animistic polytheists who saw religion as a convenience for hunting and gathering.
- The first sedentary agricultural societies were polytheists (sans most of the animism of their nomadic predecessors) who looked to religion in order to predict upcoming harvests. A good example of this would require one to look no further than the theocratic Sumerians. The Sumerian way of life was based around putting off their bleak afterlife. Their concept of the afterlife, of course, was based on the irregular and often chaotic flooding of the Tigris/Euphrates rivers.
- As time went on, the polytheism of the ancient civilizations gradually gave way to monotheism (e.g. Judaism and Zoroastrianism) while most classical civilizations retained their polytheistic beliefs until the middle of the first millennium CE with the rise of Christianity and Islam in the west and east, respectively.
- With the rapid spread and conquest of Christianity and Islam after Constantine's conversion and Muhammad's conquest of the Arabian Peninsula, monotheistic beliefs dominated the religious sector for the next millennium in the majority of the civilized world while the Maya, Aztecs, and Inca flourished in the western hemisphere without any contact having been established with the "old world."

To say that one god (such as your Christian god) is superior to any of the thousands of gods from religions past and present is to deny basic logical reasoning. Judging by the fervor with which many religious followers defend their individual faiths, everyone thinks they're right. But how can everyone be right if they believe in different gods with teachings that often contradict each other? We can't all be right.

But judging by the progression of religion over the last ten thousand-plus years, the Christian god concept will most likely be thrown into the "mythology" pile along with Allah, Yahweh, Ahura Mazda, Zeus, Jupiter, Utu, and every other deity past or present. Logical reasoning (along with a modern scientific perspective backed up with evidence of the universe's previously unexplored facets) goes against the principles of religion as a general concept and defies your anti-science logic.

Speaking of science, what has/have religious dogma (along with religious officials) ever proven that science hasn't aside from the fact that people can be easily motivated to commit horrible atrocities against humanity in the name of a divine purpose? Our planet is round, there was never a massive flood where two of each animal were brought onto a huge boat, condoms save lives, and human sacrifice doesn't do a hell of a lot to help one's people.

Your Pal,
Jubber

AKA "The Gun"
AKA "ROFeraL"

World Renowned Mexican Forklift Artiste

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

We might as well laugh at each other:

Obviously you're convinced your opinion is absolute truth, that's just proving my point. Go try telling your opinion to someone who says that God healed them from cancer (or insert: any disease/ailment of choice) and try explaining to them how it's not possible that doctor's told them they had cancer several times and don't know how they as a patient no longer have it anymore. They won't believe your all-knowing powers because they know God healed them from cancer. But you can't believe that there must be some logical explanation right if only religious/spiritual folk could just see that fossils answer every question and fill every missing link.

If you're still missing my point, it is that whether it is a christian/ muslim/ atheist/ w/e- expressing your belief as ultimate truth to one another in a condescending manner is not helping anything.

edit: Fossils are awesome, dinosaurs are awesome, animals are awesome, people are sometimes awesome, religions are rarely awesome, pretending you know everything about all of this and where everything came from is not awesome. Tho Carlin is hilarious in nearly every clip.