Taken,
Bambi, I find that science doesn't really disprove God, but rather proves how wonderouse His creation is and that nothing so complex and amazingly acurate could possibly have just "appeared" but must have been the handiwork of something far greater and more powerfull than I can understand.
I find that religion doesn't really promote God, but rather demonstrates "how wonderouse" he is and that "nothing so complex and amazingly" powerful (not to mention intelligent) could possibly have "just 'appeared'".
I find the idea that the universe just is rather more palatable than the idea that a mythological "god" just is and the universe is the consequence. At least the former idea doesn't involve any imaginary entities (not to mention that the latter idea merely complicates the issues without explaining anything.)
Note that in order for something to exist it doesn't have to be manufactured by an intelligence. While most human artifacts would not exist if it weren't for intelligent creators, the same cannot be said of all other entities including life on Earth. If you want to claim that life (or the universe, or everything) was designed and/or created by an intelligence, then your only way of supporting such a claim is to demonstrate why life (the universe, or everything) could not exist without having been designed and/or created.
Tony,
*Originally posted by Taken
Bambi,...*
hasn't been checking up for a while.
You know why? After I've spent an entire evening making a total ass of myself by reciprocating your behavior, I finally realized something. My life is too short to spend any more of it bickering with you. I'd rather spend my time on something a little more productive. (you'll be amused to learn that I'm now spending my extra time working through an engineering textbook on signal analysis.)
But you're obviously not interested in a real discussion. You have actually made some astonishing claims that indicate to me you are a lost cause as far as discussion can go. For example, you've claimed that striving for the betterment of mankind is stupid (the justification: because it is not true Christianity.) And then you go and assault atheism on moral grounds... But in your last post of this specific discussion, you've actually managed to state that:
1) If life evolved, than there is no such thing as intelligent life.
2) Given that evolution is nothing, the context is, therefore, nothing.
3) me: *Just because it's in the Bible doesn't mean it's automatically a religious thing.*
you: Aaah, so it isn't "truly" in the Bible?
4) but you don't actually have any answers. You have a lot of questions for which you receive something which engenders more questions, ad infinitum.
[the "something", it is to be concluded, is not answers]
5) For the sake of argument, simply assume that the theory of evolution is completely proven in principle. ... What is the benefit to mankind, or more specifically, you?
[pursuit of truth, apparently, is irrelevant, as is truth itself.]
6) Not one atheist I have met has ever questioned their own most cherished beliefs.
[I'm hurt.]
7) Since you reject a claim which stipulates its own proof, you also reject the proof, hence, you are deluded.
[my personal favorite; anyone who rejects circular reasoning is deluded]
I think you've completely destroyed whatever was left of your point, and I'll leave it at that.
To conclude, the only one who can change a mind like yours is you. Until you start thinking, there's nothing more I've got to tell you.
Meanwhile, the sordid irony of the religion-toting USA fighting against religious extremism and pushing totalitarian policies in spite of its past decrial of totalitarianism -- it's entirely too much. I just hope you don't end up in arguments such as this with any fundamentalist Muslim; unlike with atheists, you won't survive to reply.