Most atheists do not know what science says about our origins

Status
Not open for further replies.
JoeEllison said:
That's sort of the point, isn't it? To make stupid and ignorant believers feel smart and well-informed?
Click to expand...

What about all the atheists and agnostics who did not know what eukaryotes are -- are they stupid and ignorant too.
 
DOC said:
What about all the atheists and agnostics who did not know what eukaryotes are -- are they stupid and ignorant too.
Click to expand...

"Ignorant"? Sure, in the sense that they would be "ignorant of eukaryotes". You still don't have any point whatsoever.
 
Doc, I know you are keen on appeals to popularity.

When it comes to religion and the start of life which set is bigger?

Atheists who believe God did it or
Believers who accept evolution.

Supplementary question.

Shouldn’t you be trying to persuade those on your side rather than struggling so badly here.
 
articulett said:
Or are you like a first grader asking trying to tell the big kids the truth about calculus?
Click to expand...

By the way Isaac Newton invented calculus.

He also wrote 300,000 words on the Book of Revelation (from the Bible)
 
DOC said:
By the way Isaac Newton invented calculus.

He also wrote 300,000 words on the Book of Revelation (from the Bible)
Click to expand...

SO WHAT?!?!

You say that as though it means anything, which just makes you look stupid.
 
DOC said:
What about all the atheists and agnostics who did not know what eukaryotes are -- are they stupid and ignorant too.
Click to expand...

At least most of those atheists and agnostics would know how to use a questionmark. ;)
 
DOC said:
By the way Isaac Newton invented calculus.

He also wrote 300,000 words on the Book of Revelation (from the Bible)
Click to expand...

DOC, we really don't give two tugs of a dead dog's coTAIL who believe what. Belief doesn't make something true.
 
DOC said:
What about all the atheists and agnostics who did not know what eukaryotes are -- are they stupid and ignorant too.
Click to expand...

Ignorant, yes. However, ignorance is a curable disease. All one has to do is grab the nearest encyclopedia.

Now, let's compare that to... let's say... a person who, despite all evidence to the contrary, believes that all life on earth was magically "poofed" into existance by the verbal command of a psychotic, yet invisible, male who lives in the sky.

Now THAT is what I call "stupid."
 
DOC said:
By the way Isaac Newton invented calculus.

He also wrote 300,000 words on the Book of Revelation (from the Bible)
Click to expand...

By the way, do you know what a non sequitur is? (Besides the title of a great comic strip by Wiley Miller.)
 
Here's some information that will blow DOC's mind:

There were atheists around long long before Darwin, or even the scientific method.

I'm just putting info out there. What you do with it is your own business.
 
DOC said:
Once again we get into the attack the messenger mode. But that's par for the course.
Click to expand...
Allow me to present a parable to explain why many of us are annoyed.

http://www.livevideo.com/video/Mike28/D5492E7801474CDD990F1E6CE7DABA5C/kith-citizen-kane.aspx

DOC said:
I'll be happy if people read all the posts in here that are relevant to the topic. Especially this one where science says all plants and animals originally came from bacteria.

http://faculty.clintoncc.suny.edu/f...aboratory/History of Life/History of Life.htm
Click to expand...
I'm not certain why you are happy about this. This thread has demonstrated quite clearly your willingness to ignore facts and truth.
Par for the course = DOC has no problem lieing or is unable to tell truth from lies.


DOC said:
And as I often said, I'm just putting info (scientific, religious and historical) out there. What you do with it is your business. I have to believe if someone was really interested in the truth, they would thank me for putting out info they didn't know about before instead of getting irritated and cynical about it.
Click to expand...
You're going back to the game of no agenda? Why do you lie?

DOC said:
Yea I know now its time for everyone to come in and trash the hundreds of informational posts I've put out there. But what I'm glad about is that you are reading them.
Click to expand...
You are bizarre.
 
DOC said:
By the way Isaac Newton invented calculus.

He also wrote 300,000 words on the Book of Revelation (from the Bible)
Click to expand...

He was also interested in alchemy, as were several other early scientists. Do you believe in alchemy, Doc?
 
DOC said:
By the way Isaac Newton invented calculus.
Click to expand...
No, he didn't. He codified a lot of what was already known, in a very poor manner, added a bit, in a complex and almost unusable way, and he certainly didn't come up with the version we use today. That was Leibniz.

http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi1375.htm
http://www.jimloy.com/calc/newtleib.htm
http://www-history.mcs.st-and.ac.uk/HistTopics/The_rise_of_calculus.html

Newton was just a better self-publicist.

He also wrote 300,000 words on the Book of Revelation (from the Bible)
Click to expand...
I could write 300,000 words on the Book of Revelation. So what?
 
DOC said:
By the way Isaac Newton invented calculus.

He also wrote 300,000 words on the Book of Revelation (from the Bible)
Click to expand...

And he was majorly into alchemy. People didn't have access to the amazing amount of knowledge and evidence we've amassed since them. What's your excuse?
 
DOC said:
I would estimate that no more than 10 percent of all atheists know that modern science believes that all the millions of "plant and animal" species that have ever existed came from the "same" organism (and that first organism that we all came from was a one celled bacteria).
Click to expand...


DOC said:
Yes it does. This scientist calls it the "Ancestral Organism".

http://faculty.clintoncc.suny.edu/f...aboratory/History of Life/History of Life.htm
Click to expand...

If science truly hypothesized that all forms of plants and animals came from a solitary single celled organism, wouldn't you think you could find numerous references to this hypothesis in the scientific literature? And yet, you have only been able to find one semantically ambiguous graphic, not even a full sentence to that effect.

As to the lack of an "s" at the end of "organism", has it ever occurred to you that, (1) that may have just been a typo and (2) the rest of that page is talking, not about abiogensis, but about the division of species?

Can you provide a source that definitively asserts the hypothesis you are suggesting that science asserts?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom