Evolution & Creationism: Why can't people believe both?

http://www.amazon.com/Language-God-Scientist-Presents-Evidence/dp/0743286391

Collins, a pioneering medical geneticist who once headed the Human Genome Project, adapts his title from President Clinton's remarks announcing completion of the first phase of the project in 2000: "Today we are learning the language in which God created life." Collins explains that as a Christian believer, "the experience of sequencing the human genome, and uncovering this most remarkable of all texts, was both a stunning scientific achievement and an occasion of worship." This marvelous book combines a personal account of Collins's faith and experiences as a genetics researcher with discussions of more general topics of science and spirituality, especially centering around evolution. Following the lead of C.S. Lewis, whose Mere Christianity was influential in Collins's conversion from atheism, the book argues that belief in a transcendent, personal God—and even the possibility of an occasional miracle—can and should coexist with a scientific picture of the world that includes evolution. Addressing in turn fellow scientists and fellow believers, Collins insists that "science is not threatened by God; it is enhanced" and "God is most certainly not threatened by science; He made it all possible." Collins's credibility as a scientist and his sincerity as a believer make for an engaging combination, especially for those who, like him, resist being forced to choose between science and God.
Click to expand...
Treacherous fucker. Just when you think someone's on your side. :rolleyes:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article673663.ece
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20060815_sam_harris_language_ignorance/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theistic_evolution
 
I love the way he asserts as fact

"God is most certainly not threatened by science; He made it all possible."

Moron.
 
You are, then, to say the least, dismissive of any suggestion that 'twas He who set Earth's evolutionary processes in motion?

On what basis, doctor? :cool:

I have to say I was disappointed to read in the Sam Harris link (2nd bottom) that Collins 'found' God one dewy morning in a waterfall that he thought was, um... really pretty. I was hoping for something a little more substantial than that, I must admit.

But, still, he's clearly a very clever bloke - and thus is bound to be a lot righter about this than you or me.
 
Last edited:
redarmy11 said:
You are, then, to say the least, dismissive of any suggestion that 'twas He who set Earth's evolutionary processes in motion?

On what basis, doctor? :cool:
Click to expand...
The basis that the good doctor has no more evidence for it than I have for leperchauns. He has a mental dichotomy that some of us managed to avoid. The poor bastard.
 
redarmy11 said:
You are, then, to say the least, dismissive of any suggestion that 'twas He who set Earth's evolutionary processes in motion?

On what basis, doctor? :cool:

I have to say I was disappointed to read in the Sam Harris link (2nd bottom) that Collins 'found' God one dewy morning in a waterfall that he thought was, um... really pretty. I was hoping for something a little more substantial than that, I must admit.

But, still, he's clearly a very clever bloke - and thus is bound to be a lot righter about this than you or me.
Click to expand...


Why do you think this is so ? How about all the clever people who do not believe in God ? You are making a mistake which is known to psychologists as the halo effect. Because a person is clever in one field we tend to assume that what he says about subjects outside his area of expertise must be true.
 
superluminal said:
Read a history book.
Click to expand...

The same history books that were written by the historians that you hold in such high regard?

"Whatever. History? You believe all that crap spouted by all those overeducated pseudointellectuals? Are you gullible or what?"

REF: Post 201
 
Last edited:
Saquist said:
I'm not going to tell you you're wrong. It can be a very bad form of evidence.
But I don't think it should always be ignored. We actually depend on it greatly in every culture.

The testimony of witness on the scene to exonerate a criminal.
A notorized document of endorsement.
Job referals, etc.

So obviously testimony needs some sort of support. A resume is often researched at major facilities....credit checks, drug testing, a paper trail if you will or even test of some sort.
Click to expand...

You are overlooking something significant. Witness statements can be very wrong. Check out the experiments by psychologists which show that a number of people witnessing an event will often give divergent accounts of what they saw, at a later time. It should be easy for you to find details to support what I am saying.

A witness in court, whose testimony can exonerate someone, is subjected to rigorous examination/ cross-examination. He will have to provide solid evidence to support what he says. There is no escaping the need for evidence.

As you say, testimony needs some sort of support but you never provide any. Your examples of testimony, unlike that of the bible can be checked out. A job application may result in a phone call to a previous employer and academic qualifications can be checked.The same goes for credit checks and so on . A positive test for drugs will be supported by evidence in the form of blood and urine tests.

You are also overlooking another important point. Evidence may not be what it seems.Documents may be forged, for example. Look at the extent of credit card fraud. Forgers succeed because their documents are not subjected to rigorous test at the time they are used. Credit card fraud normally comes to light when the issuer detects a sudden difference in the pattern of expenfiture or when the card is reported lost or stolen.

So, I'm afraid you cannot escape the nedd for evidence to support a claim. You have yet to offer any.
 
Last edited:
davewhite04 said:
The same history books that were written by the historians that you hold in such high regard?

"Whatever. History? You believe all that crap spouted by all those overeducated pseudointellectuals? Are you gullible or what?"

REF: Post 201
Click to expand...

You clearly do not fall into the overeducated category, whatever it means to be overeducated.

A pseudo-intellectual is undereducated, so your "overeducated pseudointellectuals" is an oxymoron.

History is not all crap. There are inaccurcies which will generally be rooted out by comparing different sources. History, unlike the bible, has continuity to the present day. God stopped publishing about 2,000 years ago .

If you doubt history, you can have no confidence in the bible.
 
davewhite04 said:
It wasn't me doubting history, another baseless accusation.
Click to expand...

I think you are going to have to express yourself more clerarly if you wish to be undertood, In the first place we are not looking at a baseless accusation or any accusation at all; merely a response to your statement that "history is all crap.........."

What exactly are you trying to say?
 
Myles said:
I think you are going to have to express yourself more clerarly if you wish to be undertood, In the first place we are not looking at a baseless accusation or any accusation at all; merely a response to your statement that "history is all crap.........."

What exactly are you trying to say?
Click to expand...

I did not make that statement... Read back and you will find out who did, I provided a ref to the post number, to make it easier.
 
davewhite04 said:
I did not make that statement... Read back and you will find out who did, I provided a ref to the post number, to make it easier.
Click to expand...

You are right. I misunderstood your ref to Super. In any event I hold the view, alreadty stated, about history. And an oxymoron is an oxmoron whoever says it.
 
Me said:
But, still, he's clearly a very clever bloke - and thus is bound to be a lot righter about this than you or me.
Click to expand...
Myles said:
Why do you think this is so ? How about all the clever people who do not believe in God ? You are making a mistake which is known to psychologists as the halo effect. Because a person is clever in one field we tend to assume that what he says about subjects outside his area of expertise must be true.
Click to expand...

I'm fully aware of the 'halo effect' so don't patronise me, arsewipe.

But listen: this bloke headed the human genome project. He's a fucking clever bloke!!! So if he says there's a God then believe me, there fucking well is one!!!
 
redarmy11 said:
I'm fully aware of the 'halo effect' so don't patronise me, arsewipe.

But listen: this bloke headed the human genome project. He's a fucking clever bloke!!! So if he says there's a God then believe me, there fucking well is one!!!
Click to expand...

Hey are you back :)

P.S. be nice to Myles.. :mad:

;)
 
redarmy11 said:
I'm fully aware of the 'halo effect' so don't patronise me, arsewipe.

But listen: this bloke headed the human genome project. He's a fucking clever bloke!!! So if he says there's a God then believe me, there fucking well is one!!!
Click to expand...

Glad yopu are aware of the halo effect and that you know how to be abusive. But that's the extrent of your knowledge, I'm afraid.

What you are doing is appealing to authority and that is a no. no. But I'm sure you know that also. But to remind you, you are arguing that. as someone is clever, he is more likly to be right than I am. So all you have to explain is why this clever person should be believed as opposed to lots of other clever people who do not share his views.

It comes down to asking what evidence he has to support his belief. He has no objective evidence. His belief is based on his feelings. So think again, unless you are looking for a father-figure to comfort you.

You are long on arsewipes but sadly short on logic.
 
davewhite04 said:
The same history books that were written by the historians that you hold in such high regard?

"Whatever. History? You believe all that crap spouted by all those overeducated pseudointellectuals? Are you gullible or what?"

REF: Post 201
Click to expand...
Sarcasm alert. I stated that in response to your previous statements regarding how little respect you have for the statements of educated scientists.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top