Rise in atheistic fundamentalism

[G4Z]

Stating that evolution has no hard evidence behind it is not a statement of opinion and even if it was its flat out wrong. I am not arguing with you, I am discussing it with you in the vain hope that you will see the error in your ways and give evolution the respect it deserves as one of our best tested scientific theories (theory like buoyancy is a theory) we have.

[ajbrun]

I should also point out that your "Dr" Kent Hovind has no actual scientific qualifications. How can he make these claim reliably?

On February 9, 1969, at the age of 16, Hovind became a born again Christian. In 1971, he graduated from East Peoria Community High School. He holds three degrees in Christian education (1974, 1988, 1991) from unaccredited institutions. He is married, and has three adult children and four grandchildren. His son, Eric Hovind, travels doing creationist presentations and debates using many of his father's arguments.[5]

Starting in 1975 Hovind became an assistant pastor and teacher at three private Baptist schools.[6] Then in the 1980s he opened a Baptist school and church at which he taught and pastored.[6] Teachers at public schools must have an accredited degree and a state teaching license,[7] but this is not always required for private schools. Hovind has no teaching credentials or academic degrees from accredited institutions.[8] In 1989, Hovind started his Creation Science Evangelism.[9]

Also note that Mr Hovind has tried to silence his critics by taking down any youtube videos that criticise his claims in anyway due to copyright claims. This is after he has publicly said that all of his content and information is free to use in anyway.

YouTube - CSE SUBMITTING TONS OF FALSE DMCA REQUESTS!

[Kezzer]

Then I admit I was wrong and apologise for any controversy causing any offence.

Just out of curiousity though, and I have no intention of trying to cause any harm here so please play nice - do you guys think everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and that their beliefs should be respected no matter how they differ from your own?

[ajbrun]

do you guys think everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and that their beliefs should be respected no matter how they differ from your own?

Yes, so long as claims aren't made that can't be backed up with some sort of evidence. You can believe you have a blue fairy in your garden if you like, but if you inform me of that belief, I would be interested in seeing a photo of said fairy.

This is especially true, if you try to convince others that you have a blue fairy in your garden (I'm not saying you do this btw).

I'm sure this is the same for anyone. If I make a radical claim that I have invented a perpetual energy/motion machine, you would be quite happy for me to believe that myself, but the moment I tell you about it, I'm certain you would want to see it. Without this proof, I am also certain that you wouldn't want me to tell the local news channels for them to do a report on my new invention.

[kasavien]

I can only speak for myself but as far as i am concerned people can believe what they like about what they like. My parents are Christians and i have no intention of trying to persuade them otherwise, but i will try to correct them if i know that something they have told me is incorrect. I think people take issue with other peoples beliefs when they put content across which is misleading and/or factually incorrect

[Rosaline]

On the earlier comment regarding religious people having better mental health and generally doing better health wise, the placebo effect is stupidly powerful In addition, certain lines of spiritual belief (ie, "love yourself", "every moment is wonderful" rather than "obey the church") are key tenants of good mental health.

Just out of curiousity though, and I have no intention of trying to cause any harm here so please play nice - do you guys think everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and that their beliefs should be respected no matter how they differ from your own?

What matters is not the beliefs, but the harm inherent in the belief. Everyone is entitled to beliefs that harm no-one, not even the believer. I'm not sure were I stand on beliefs that harm the believer, as these are highly subjective matters, however as a rule most of them are probably things that should be worked towards a greater enlightenment of the believer away from self-damaging ideals. I've see those mess up too many people, and they're technically against certain religion's core holy beliefs anyhow (as opposed to papal beliefs).

[iranu]

I'm not going to argue with you as there's nothing to argue about. You have a different opinion to me, I respect that, although it's no reason to get all heated up against me for my beliefs. The fact that you are getting heated up about it means you're heavily influenced by religious propositions - perhaps you've had some experience with creationists in a negative way in the past? I don't know

I hear things from both sides, you could always check our Dr. Kent Hovind's works: YouTube - Age Of The Earth by Dr. Kent Hovind

I'm sorry but quoting or linking to Kent Hovind is like quoting Dr Zeuss in an argument about particle physics.

I did start to watch your link but didn't get past 53 seconds. Why? Well because of this statement and I quote

they believe that 20 billion years ago there was a big bang where nothing exploded and produced everything.

This is known as a strawman argument and is a logical fallacy. Physicists do not say this, have never said this and because of the 1st law of thermodynamics that states that matter/energy cannot be created or destroyed are most likely not to say it in the future.

So there you go. How can you give any weight to someone who uses logical fallacies in their arguments? He is distorting what people say and using that for his own purpose i.e to knock it over - strawman, it's not surprising that he's in prison for fraud. I might continue watching that video but I'm pretty sure I know the type of arguments that are contained within. As Arjbrun says, watch the videos, Kent stars in a couple of them and gets hammered by the science.

KH is a fave topic over at RRS because of a legal feud to do with material that the RRS used but Hovind had removed from utube citing copyright violation. That video posted by kezzer says what at the start? Yep you guessed it, none of the material is copywrited and is free to use. Mmmn.

If you type the words kent hovind into youtube you'll find loads of stuff debunking him. One of my faves is this whereby a geneticist just crucifies him in a radio phone in. YouTube - Kent Hovind vs Molecular Geneticist

[iranu]

do you guys think everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and that their beliefs should be respected no matter how they differ from your own?

Britain fought two world wars for exactly that, freedom of speech, and most people will quote the phrase, "I disagree with what you have to say but will fight to the death to protect your right to say it". So yes I agree. Now lets try a little exercise.

I want you to read the following statement and then comment, whether you agree or disagree with it and WHY.

1+1=3.

That is my belief, I think you ought to respect it no matter how much it differs from your own. What's more I want this taught in schools because people should have all the information.

Ok it might be a bit sneeky using maths (due to axioms) in this argument, but I think you will understand where I'm coming from.

[kasavien]

If this was Dr Hovind he would probably agree with you and say something like that this can be proven by (1+1)/0=(3)/0 which is quite correct but not the point of the exercise. I managed to watch 20 minutes of his pro creation video on youtube before i became too angry at him to watch any more

[G4Z]

Then I admit I was wrong and apologise for any controversy causing any offence.

Just out of curiousity though, and I have no intention of trying to cause any harm here so please play nice - do you guys think everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and that their beliefs should be respected no matter how they differ from your own?

In all honesty, everybody is entitled to an opinion and I truly believe that. However not every opinion or thought is of equal merit, If I was to say to you that I thought the ice caps were not made of ice but in fact were made of icing sugar and that its my opinion and therefore should be taken seriously would that belief be equally valid and as worthy of respect as your belief that they are made of ice? I think the answer is most certainly that it is not worthy of any respect.

So you can say what you like, but if its outright ludicrous don't expect to not be called on it. It really baffles me that religion has this immunity from criticism, that somehow its ideas are more worthy than other ideas to the point that they must not be questioned and certainly must not be disregarded entirely.

[G4Z]

After checking out the 'why we laugh at creationists' vids I came across these pearls.

YouTube - Kent Hovind destroyed by Evolution Grad Studentt1 RETURNS

YouTube - Kent Hovind destroyed by Evolution Grad Studentt2 RETURNED

YouTube - Kent Hovind destroyed by Evolution Grad Studentt3 RETURNED

YouTube - Kent Hovind destroyed by Evolution Grad Studentt4 RETURNS

YouTube - Kent Hovind destroyed by Evolution Grad Studentt5 RETURNED

YouTube - Kent Hovind destroyed by Evolution Grad Studentt6 RETURNED

Kent gets pwnd!

[yamangman]

Of course not. If I said the moon was made from cheese when every other tangible piece of evidence indicates it's made from rock, should that belief carry an equal degree of respect?

Then I admit I was wrong and apologise for any controversy causing any offence.

Just out of curiousity though, and I have no intention of trying to cause any harm here so please play nice - do you guys think everyone is entitled to their own beliefs and that their beliefs should be respected no matter how they differ from your own?

[fuddam]

Of course not. If I said the moon was made from cheese when every other tangible piece of evidence indicates it's made from rock, should that belief carry an equal degree of respect?

that's not appropriate. As the stuck record keeps on saying, there is plenty of evidence for God, but if you don't consider it evidence (which is the principal disagreement between christians and atheists, I would venture) then never the twain shall meet. And no, am not talking about ID at the moment.

for a 'scientific' viewpoint on some issues, have a looksee here Reasons To Believe: Hugh Ross, Fazale Rana, Kenneth Samples, David Rogstad, Jeff Zweerink Check out their About Us section - the 8 myths. I have listened to their podcasts for some time (obvious brainwashing, n'est pas?) but not read many of their articles. Just skimmed their 8 myths, and seems interesting.

also, have a looksee here: Probe Ministries - Faith and Science

your quote is presumptious, since the world of science is NOT united on the 'evidence' (pro or anti evolution) by any means, and as with many atheists on this thread, there is an assumption that any Christian scientists have compromised their approach to science, have flawed reasoning etc.

[Rosaline]

The world of science is united on the conclusion that must be drawn from the evidence for evolution. They are not united however on the exact interpretation of the evidence and many believe more work can be done.

The big example typically dragged out is the peppered moth. Scientists have debated on the exact mechanism at work, and ID and other crowds have leapt upon this. However this debate is only on the mechanism resulting in evolution, not on evolution itself.

I'm sure Iranu or someone else can detail this better, but this is common fallacy used by opponents of any scientific investigation. Science is all about not being complacent, not being happy with what we have or any one single evaluation of the data.

Another thing that must be pointed out is that 'proving' something directly is almost always impossible. Scientists love the most not proving things, but attempting to disprove. Disproving things is easy, very easy indeed. A single example that a hypothesis cannot explain disproves it. A hypothesis for which no test to disprove exists is merely speculation. I'll let someone else roll with this one and explain how evolution is the only viable conclusion based on the ability to disprove.

[LWA]

I'd just like to say that this thread is incredibly interesting and I just hope people can continue to be respectful about other people's beliefs so it may continue.

I'm also an Atheist but am very interested in other peoples beliefs on this subject.

[pollaxe]

I'm not an Atheist, I'm an Agnostic. I wouldn't be surprised if there was something more than the physical existence however nor would I be surprised if there wasn't. However, there was a post on slashdot by someone called Howzer recently whose general thrust pretty much sums up what I think:

'Imagine two baskets.

One contains all the things explained by the phrase "god did it". The other contains all the things explained by "science".

A long time ago, everything was in the god basket, and nothing at all was in the science basket. The weather? God did it. Pregnancy? God did it. Disease? God did it. Where does stuff come from? God did it.

Then, as humanity learned more stuff, things got taken out of the god basket and put into the science basket. The weather. Pregnancy. Disease. Where stuff comes from, right back until a few billionths of a second before the big bang, getting closer all the time.

So what's left in the god basket? Good question -- but that's not where I'm going with this, because actually that's irrelevant.

The point is this: there has never -- never ever ever -- been a single thing that has been taken out of the science basket and put back in the god basket. Not one. Ever.

The traffic is all one way.

So I choose the basket that contains all human knowledge. I choose the basket that keeps getting new and fantastic stuff put in it. I choose the search for truth over the abrogation of understanding.

The god basket? You believers are welcome to that. It's basically empty, getting emptier all the time. But you're welcome to keep hanging on to it. The moment something is taken out of the science basket and put back into the god basket, you let me know, ok?'