To really hate it when atheists take the piss out of those who believe in God?

[sharkirasharkira]

I have several FB friends who are obvious atheists, and often share things about science and/or about the concept of God being stupid -basically saying that anyone who believes in God is an idiot, a child (with an 'imaginary friend') or someone who has no idea about science and the universe.

I get that not everyone has faith in a higher being/religion etc but why the childish name calling and the necessity to take the piss out of those who do? It just really irritates me! Belief in God and an appriciation of science are not mutually exclusive. I find it quite offensive that people who don't know my personal beliefs are essentially saying that if I believe in God I must be an idiot or a child who believes in magical sky fairies, because theres no possible way I can believe in evolution (for example) and be an agnostic.

Aibu to think that people should just let others believe what they want to believe without mocking them for it, even if they don't agree with it?

Namechangerbob

Of course the same theories would be discovered again. That's the operative word, discovered. Humans don't invent scientific principles, we observe them in nature. Unlike religion, which is revealed truth. (i.e someone told me).

There are literally hundreds of different proofs of evolution, in completely different fields of science that all support each other.

I think the problem here isn't that we don't understand religion, it's that you don't seem to have any idea what science is or what is meant in scientific terms by a 'theory'.

Namechangerbob

If you really think that science is people making up 'big equations" then you really don't understand how it work.

Like I said before, I think the problem your having is that science is going over your head, so you think everyone else is the same as you.

the theory is the answer

you seem to have no grasp of basic science and maybe that is why you dont "believe" in it

evolution is here, its been tested, proven and doesnt care if you believe or not- its true

Namechangerbob

You seem confused about what we mean by the word 'belief'.

For example, I believe that there are elephants in Africa. I can't prove it right now and I've never been to Africa and seen Elephants there so I suppose by your rule I am just taking it as faith. But obviously that isn't how it works. Nobody would describe my belief that there are elephants in Africa as an irrational belief, because it is easily provable. If I wanted to I could go to Africa and see them - I could test my belief.

Evolution, gravity all these other ideas you are quick to dismiss are the same. If I wanted to I could find proof or evidence of them and conduct experiments that prove the basic principles are true. So could anyone else, anywhere in the entire world, any time they want to.

Can you say the same about religion?

Can you see why we treat religion and science as separate and ultimately irreconcilable?

A theory in science is an explanation for something in the natural world that includes evidence of various types, including tested hypotheses, observable facts, describable laws. I think ypu are cobfusing a theory with a hypothesis maybe?

namechangerbob, that is.

Some guy may say that gravity is actually a magnetic pull from within Earth which keeps us grounded, come up with a big equation to 'prove it', and why would we question it, he is a scientist after all - but it goes way over the average persons head, yet they claim it as fact.

OK science works like this.

Someone discovers something happens, they create a hypothesis of how it happened. Then other people try to disprove it.

If the hypothesis holds then it becomes a 'scientific theory' which is the way science explains HOW things work, not a random long equation.

This is why children do science experiments i school, the teacher knows what will happen, the book tells the children what will happen and then it does happen.

but it goes way over the average persons head

It doesn't, really it doesn't. Not evolution or gravity, Quantum physics probably does, but not the basics.

If there were no humans there would still be gravity. If there were still dinosaurs and no humans there’d be evidence of evolution, even when nothing has evolved enough to understand the evidence. Science is not infallible and we discover things that contradict or add to the things we already hypothesised. It doesn’t mean stuff like gravity was made up by Newton on a whim or a feeling.

Namechangerbob

Do you know anyone who has had a flu jab? Do you know why you have to have one every year? It is because the flu virus evolves.

This is also how antibiotic strains of disease have come about.

I'm not trying to disprove science. Nor have I said I did not believe in it.

My issue is the disrespectful, dismissive attitude towards religion.

We all understand gravity, evolution etc in the simplistic forms we've been taught but give the average person on the street the research data, I do not believe that they could categorically confirm that as fact therefore a decision was taken whether or not they believe this.

You personally give me un-disputing evidence that what science claims is fact - and not the research or findings done by a 3rd party scientist.

You personally give me un-disputing evidence that what science claims is fact

OK, matter exists in three states, solid liquid and gaseous. Which state a substance is in depends on temperature, volume and pressure

Take some water and freeze it, it will be solid, let it melt it will become liquid, boil it and it will become gaseous.

Try cooking something in a pressure cooker. You are keeping the volume the same and increasing the pressure, this means the gaseous water will increase in temperature above 100 degrees.

Namechangerbob

Ok here's a simple one. In the UK there are two species of fish called Roach and Bream. They are actually descended from the same common ancestor and are 'transitional forms' and not true separate species.

Roach are small and fast and avoid predators by being too fast for them. Bream are very large and slow and avoid predators by being too big to eat. Because they have not fully broken into separate species, they can interbreed, but their offspring rarely live a full life. This is because Roach-Bream hybrids share the negative aspects of their parents. They are too big to be fast enough to escape predators, but not big enough to not be eaten.

Everybody who has ever done any fishing knows all of that, but the point is that it clearly demonstrates how evolution works.

Not all scientific proofs are complicated experiments that take place in laborotories.

I’m very confused. If I choose to believe gravity doesn’t exist it doesn’t stop my boobs heading south does it? Choosing not to believe in God makes no material difference to my life, though it might change how other humans react towards me.

I don’t understand various aspects of quantum physics it does not mean therefore that if something is hard to understand for the average lay person it then doesn’t exist or it then means all things we don’t understand have to be taken on belief.

Good post educatingarti

I’m agnostic but I envy those who have blind faith in God. It must bring the kind of comfort you can’t get elsewhere, I just can’t imagine it. I also think it’s a ridiculous concept but I certainly don’t feel it’s my place to even comment on it

They're both still fish, patriarchy

When I first mentioned science I didn't mean the whole of science...
I only mentioned it because it's always religion v science - and in my opinion neither can be deemed true or fact. Big Bang or creation of God?
I find there is uncertainties in both yet no one ever questions the big bang because it's scientific and therefore must be true, yet if you believe in God it's all make believe and how can you believe in something that isn't proven?
There are a lot of other uncertainties we have in life and beliefs which people have without proof, yet it seems to be viewed differently when it come to religion.
That was my originally point - I wasn't trying to disprove anything.

Scientists are always questioning everything- thats the point of it

it's always religion v science - and in my opinion neither can be deemed true or fact

You cannot be serious, surely?

I only mentioned it because it's always religion v science

It really isn't. It is for a small minority of fundamentalist because science says something that clashes with their beliefs.

Most religious people accept the big bang, evolution, gravity etc.

New species of animals are discovered everyday that I cannot conceive of. I do not believe however that anyone will discover a unicorn or a dragon regardless of the canon of ancient literature that details them. Does that help?

Er..the Big Bang is "scientific" because it has an immense amount of evidence supporting it. Immense. A physicist will happily admit that there are gaps in their knowledge, but that the known universe began following an enormous moment of expansion is beyond rational doubt.

This is in no way analagaous with the "god" hypothesis which has zero evidence in spite of every religious person for the past 2000 years desperately looking for some.

It's this kind of ill-informed crap that makes it impossible to "respect" religious views. "Science doesn't know everything" typed on a computer, linked to the internet, powered by electricity is the height of stupidity. Science doesn't know everything, but it knows a hell of a lot more than any daft, Bronze age mythology.

I prefer to follow the religion of The Wyld Stallions.

Two tenets:
Be excellent to each other
Party on, dude!

(this dates me badly...)

*Er..the Big Bang is "scientific" because it has an immense amount of evidence supporting it. Immense. A physicist will happily admit that there are gaps in their knowledge, but that the known universe began following an enormous moment of expansion is beyond rational doubt.

This is in no way analagaous with the "god" hypothesis which has zero evidence in spite of every religious person for the past 2000 years desperately looking for some.

It's this kind of ill-informed crap that makes it impossible to "respect" religious views. "Science doesn't know everything" typed on a computer, linked to the internet, powered by electricity is the height of stupidity. Science doesn't know everything, but it knows a hell of a lot more than any daft, Bronze age mythology.*

Perfect, you are my example.
While I concede that everything you have mentioned is widely accepted as fact, you sitting at your desktop/phone have also 'accepted' this as fact based on evidence provided by a 'higher power' (scientists/theorists) and therefore you personally are in no position to tell anyone they are wrong for their individual belief. It is simply your opinion that religion is a 'Bronze Age mythology' and it is your attitude towards this debate which is the issue I was trying to discuss in the first place.

Lashalicious

Yes they are both still fish. Therefore Roach/Bream demonstrate microevolution not macroevolution, but the principle is exactly the same, it just takes much longer.

We can actually see evidence of macroevolution in the human genome though. Take our sense of smell. Our common mammal ancestors required a much more pronounced sense of smell than we do, therefore they had more functioning olfactory sensor genes than we do. The point is that humans still have the exact same number of olfactory sensor genes as other mammals, but over half of ours are broken/non functional.

If fundamental religious people had their way they would want you to accept that we have been intelligently designed to be the way we are. Why would God give us the full amount of genes for a particular sense, then render more than half of them non functional?

It's like buying a new computer from PC World and specifying you wanted 8Gb RAM, then finding when you got home that they had put 16Gb of RAM in and then smashed half of it up with a hammer before sealing the box and selling it to you.

If that's 'design' then it's the design of a fucking idiot.

However if we look at it from an evolutionary perspective it makes perfect sense.