to believe that beyond all reasonable doubt

[OurBetty]

there is no god?

Oh dear. I think I've got my T of A argument mixed up with something else. But yes, I know the watch argument.

Firstly many people believe in a creator and evolution, may it be on a micro scale or not.

Secondly no-one fully understands evoloution as of yet due to lack of observations,gaps in fossil records, new discoveries and arguments amongst the science communities and so on. It is still a theory with gaps to fill. This does not mean evolution is wroung or to be dismissed, but to believe you understand it fully is wrong and presenting it is absoloute fact could also be argued as wrong.

Er, no. The beetle thing doesn't mean that you can't explain everything with evolution. At best it means that we may not have fully understood evolution yet. Science doesn't need trust and belief. It has logic and the scientific process to cover any issues. Methodological naturalism doesn't need to be given pseudo-religious attributes.

You're not explaining intelligent design, because thats not what they say. ID in a nutshell is "look, you haven't fully explained every minute detail by evolution therefore evolution is a myth and god created everything.". It's just creationism. And there is nothing new about it, they just renamed thousand year old arguments to make them sound less old school to try and get them past the secularism teaching laws in the US.

Er yes. "At best it means that we may not have fully understood evolution yet." That's what I said. "However, I am sure that when shown these forms of life you would say (as would other atheists and scientists) that it is simply something empirical that we have not understood so far, but will come to understand scientifically in the fullness of time, and when we do understand it, evolution will indeed offer a complete explanation."

If you're going to try to be patronising you ought to read the posts you're trying to be patronising about.

If you don't understand, and science cannot explain, but you trust that it will explain at some point, then yes, you are depending on trust and belief. Obviously. Because science doesn't yet have the logic and the process to cover this issue. You just believe that some day it will. Why is this so hard for you to understand? I don't think it's that hard to understand. An atheist won't lose points for saying; yes, science can't explain it but I believe it will some day. I base this belief on x y z.

I suppose I'm not explaining intelligent design, if that's what you say it is. But I don't think the rest of your post is an example of very clear thinking to be honest.

Also I think a lot of Christians do conflate evolution with a creator. Genesis doesn't make sense anyway. In the beginning there was no such thing as a day, so seven days doesn't make any sense. A Christian could just think of it as seven stages I suppose. Or a metaphor?

Claiming 'metaphor'
Is the easy way out of
Saying it's not true.

Wow. That's just so full
Of insight that I must now
Stop going to Church.

Haiku lends itself
To insightful messages.
A good decision.

Empiricists think
That they must always be right.
Thank God they are wrong.

I shall think I'm right
Until I'm proved otherwise.
You've some proof of God?

Oh I see. You did
Not read my posts. Why am I
Not surprised at all.

Apparent flaws in
Evolution do not prove
A god's existence.

Did someone say that
They did? Can you point that out?
Or read again dear.

its four in the morning, clear thinking is not too apparent on either side.

I'm wondering why you're attacking my thinking when you're not sure what theory you may or may not be explaining.

Does science know everything? No. Do I think that gaps will be filled in as an when new knowledge is formed? Yes. This is because experience and logic tells me this will happen.
I don't need "belief" in a religious sense, or faith. Just science and logic.

And FYI, the bombardier beetle theory against evolution has already been dismissed.

Oh you googled! how sweet

Why is it not too apparent on my side? I'm very clear.

I'm attacking your thinking because you are denying something which you agree with in the next sentence.

I'm very open about the fact that it's not a theory I'm up on. I don't pretend otherwise: I don't look for proof myself, but some people do, and I understood their theory to be along those lines. It's interesting that the beetle theory has been dismissed, I didn't know that. You learn something every day!

And also, maybe it's just me but I would distinguish between science and logic roughly along the lines of science - empiricism: logic - maths.

So empirical proofs of God would always be trumped by mathematical disproofs unfortunately or fortunately, and that's where faith steps in and says "TA DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!"

Must stop with the exclamation marks. Anyway -- yes, I'm very clear about proof, disproof and logic. Don't you go worrying on my account.

I'm an artist. I create something from nothing. Therefore, I'm God. Ta Da!

Anyhow, was presented with the WaySeer Manifesto tonight, and although the pop culture imagery gets a wee bit annoying, well, to me, the message is good. I'm partial to The Secret. The notion of God is us. We create the world we live in. We created God(s) to navigate our inability and unwillingness to accept that we are the power.

Can I just say that I am impressed with all the Haiku. I hated trying to write that in school.

I'm not unwilling to accept that we're the power, I just don't believe it's true. And I'm not afraid of nothingness after death either, but again, I don't believe that's the case.

I'm coming to this late so apologies if this has been covered in the thread already. I am atheist, I wasn't as a child though. I went to a church school and believed what we were taught. But as I grew up, and probably helped along by physics A level, I lost my religious beliefs. I think my experience of the world will be the same after death as it was before I was born. I believe the physicists' view of the universe... that the universe was created by an explosion and the coalescing of the exploded matter. Also that life is a brief period of order in the expansion. There is some convincing evidence behind those theories.
But the thing that really bothers me is, why? Why did it all happen? What was there before the big bang? Nothing? I think the view of life as the universe becoming conscious and speculating itself is quite poetic, but still, why though?

There is some scientific research which indicates to me that there is something more. Whether that something more is 'God' who knows. However the scientific research on NDEs, the work of Rupert Sheldrake on telepathy , Professor Bem's work on precognition, and other research on how consciousness affects matter as are some examples which could potentially alter the whole materialist paradigm.

There is dogma in science as well as in religion IMHO.

As a Wiccan, I beleive in multiple Goddesses and Gods, but also that these are part of a greater unknowable Divine force that created and permeates the universe(s). We are also part of that Divine force.

I like to look at it this way: if you were a computer programmer and created an amazingly detailed virtual world, what would be the best way for you to experience that world?

I also believe that it's i before e except after c! Sorry for the typo ;-)