Penn & Teller - The Bible Myth

Sandok

Personally, in the US and Canada, I find it totally the opposite... Hell, it's the only country in existence stupid enough to ban evolution and legalize creationism... I find that scarier than many things going on today! If an entire popultion of over 300 MILLION people can't see anything wrong with that (when 5.7 billion don't...)

Nasty

jp306

Please explain what you mean by "Ban", because evolution in the USA is not banned. It's very controversial, because 75% of the USA is christian and it is not taught in some schools, but there is no law against it. I was taught evolution in the Charleston/Summerville S.C. USA public schools in the 1980's.

Sandok

Texas is getting petitions signed left and right to ban darwin's theory, which I last heard, is gaining some serious steam...

And so what if america is 75% christian? The "capital" of your religion is based in Europe and we don't even dare teach creationism in our schools...

And what about seperation of church and state? I mean, private schools should teach what they want but a goverment run establishement is not allowed to be forced by religious entities just for the sake of it. I mean, if creationism is taught in school, why not evolution in church? Tis just past the bounderies but hell, I don't mind... Just a second bad reputation for America... First your geography, now your biology

Maddogg6

yeah - evo isnt banned - what happened AFAIK - was, *some* place in Texas as I recall citizens compelled a local school system to teach creationalism along side with evo - and the school system accepted it.

The main argument being the compared 'level' or amount of evidence that supports both theories.

Necrosis

I don't see how known facts has any thing do with what I'm saying.

My point is I demand as much proof for the non-existence of a god as you do for there being one. To the best of my knowledge there aren’t any current projects working on disproving the existence of god. The fact is you're wrong, if it were proven god does not exist people would change their beliefs. I'll let you imagine the ways this could be proven. Well hold it, if I leave it up you Newton's laws of motion proves a god doesn't exist. It would be just as bad for me to try to use science to prove god's existence as it for you to say he's not. That isn't the point of science. You can take an idea, and say hey it's possible another way. That is fine but just because something is plausible doesn't make it true. Where are the alien life forms that SHOULD exist? I don't just mean intelligent, even microbial life. So far there is nothing. Even if it were to be found out this planet is the only one with life, that still wouldn't prove a god exists now would it?

Currently science is extremely limited it when it can explain, and especially do. You can figure out how a car works but that doesn't tell you who built it. However, you should be able to tell in that process that some intelligent thought/purpose was put in to its design. There should be markers there that to a point you can say with no doubt if something was planned or just happened by a natural process. Science is not at the level it needs to be to prove this without any doubts to everyone. Maybe that reason why so many still believe in something the latter is rather cold & sterile. Love is a just a chemical reaction in the brain, and philosophy is a waste of time.

Ah, the a typical elitist atheist european american hating drivel.

I'll leave this alone.

Maddogg6

The burden proof is on the one making the assertions (and atheists didnt originate the notion of 'god' did they??)

So the counter-argument of; 'prove god doesn't exist' is simply a 'cop out' argument response because believers can't offer up any proof of his existance.

Necrosis

No but they did originate the notion one does not exist.

Maddogg6

edited:
And.... all they ask for is 'proof' that he does. But believers response is - 'prove he doesn't'.

added:
'prove he exists' is a response NOT the assertion...

Necrosis

It's called using the same logic you're using to prove a god doesn't exist.

Maddogg6

Atheists simply respond to the assertion of 'there IS a god' .. with - 'prove it - you cant? - then there is no god then' - which IS a response and NOT an assertion.

jp306

What I was pointing out is that alot of christians don't like or agree with evolution and that's why it is controversial in the USA, but not banned. Second I never stated that I was part of any religion or belief, so don't go assigning me to one. If anything I would have to say that I'm Agnostic and not part of a religion or movement of any kind, but I do agree with the Video the I posted.

Agnostic
A person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.

Maddogg6

Additionally - has anyone here have an atheist knock on their door like the born again Christians and Jehovah witnesses do?
I havent... but I thought Id ask...

Necrosis

Do you have any one that you loved that has died? Now prove to me you loved them. If you can't prove to me you loved that person it doesn't mean you didn't. So with your logic if I say I have a million dollars, but I don't have any way of proving to you at that very moment I do. I don't have a million dollars? It's not that simple as you know, and that is my point. Honestly the reasons for not believing or believing is mainly based on personal opinions, and pressure from that said person's own environment.

No where in the context of these threads have I said a god does exist.

Necrosis

Right here is the personal aspect coming in.

SFOSOK

Yep, exactly what I was thinking.

When arguements continue long enough you can start to see the bias each side starts forming and more specifically events that caused them to have that bias.

Maddogg6

See, that was exactly my point - YOU *try* to lead me into making an assertion - then YOU expect that I prove my answer to you. What kind of logic is that? Isnt that considered rude too btw?

But if you DID have $1M you could eventually prove it right? Otherwise - its a lie, right? - one YOU originated btw - as I never asked. Besides, God is a 2000+ year old idea.
Ok, so to play along... seeing as I did not ask if you had $1M, whats the purpose for your assertion is the real question?? Are you trying to con me?, or maybe just bragging to boost your ego??
Same with asserting there is a god, whats the motive behind the assertion?

lol - you guys think the religious types knocking on my door has some bearing or an affect on my beliefs - its an observation that makes a point - but obviously doesn't warrant an answer - Thanks for the courtesy tho.

Necrosis

A response or assertion does not matter. Why should I have to prove my answer to you? I have not stated what I believe have I while you have. So I ask the reasons why you believe what you do, lets call it a request. You have yet to give a decent list or collection of responses as to why. Just twisting words isn't adequate.

Word play again. Yes I could prove it if I wanted to. However, there is many ways you would already would know without me counting the money in front of you. The point being is if at that moment I couldn't prove to you I had the money still doesn't mean I did not have the money. I state once again I have not said a god does exist. Let me finish this with a question do you believe there is life on other planets?

What point does it make? That you find them annoying? I fail to see the point you're trying to make by this? There is a lot more troublesome events in life. If you don't like some thing stop it from happening. A no soliciting sign works wonders, ever heard of cause, and effect?

Maddogg6

Remember we *were* talking about burden of proof - so YES assertion or response IS relevant.
How is asking for motivation behind an assertion 'word play'?????

Ya know what - I had quite the long post in response to your last post... but I clipped it down once this hit me - in fear it would just invite more of the same... (which is what spurred on this discussion btw)...

.. a completely ridiculous response on your part - how can an anyone state 'theres no god' - without someone saying there is one first?

So between between that and your attempted shifts in discussion above - you don't need to state your beliefs - is quite clear to me what they are. And its not in 'logic' - at least not any I can relate to anyway.nvm.

SFOSOK

yea...there really wasn't a point to the statement that you wrote earlier. If there was I'm sure you would have found it by now or at least made something up.

Edit: Also just noticed you said religious types...

Hell may as well group every person who has faith in something (everyone in the world) into one giant group to help you with your broad generalizations so you can point out the mistakes one person may have done and blame the collective group for it.

BWX

No matter what, in a debate about whether God exists or not, the atheists are always the most rabid in their assumption that they are correct in their position..

They are always so adamant, so rigid, so incredibly arrogant about their superiority and intellectual enlightenment, that they even deny that being an atheist is in itself a "belief" that they must have faith in to accept. A very interesting phenomenon.
What all that proves to me is that in general there seems to be a pattern. It seems to be the most self-important, the most conceited, the most self-absorbed and egomaniacal among us who thing they, and not God are the most intelligent beings in the universe.

Yes, it all make sense now.