Ben Stein vs. Sputtering Atheists

[moot]

Various eggheads answer "Does science make belief in God obsolete?" :
http://www.templeton.org/belief/

Snippet from Shermer's much longer answer:

Science traffics in the natural, not the supernatural. The only God that science could discover would be a natural being, an entity that exists in space and time and is constrained by the laws of nature. A supernatural God would be so wholly Other that no science could know Him.

Does science make belief in God obsolete? Belief, no. God, yes.

[AKIron]

Iron, the problem is that time and space as empirical facts, could be subordinate to some bigger empirical framework.. God as a rational cause of what we can detect and tinker with till we understand is forever receding, in any such setting - where some something supernatural is given as explanation to something natural.

Forever is a long time. For you and I the answer to whether there is a supernatural will come much sooner. We need only die to have our answer. I'm patient.

[midnight Target]

You first.

[Mini D]

That the genetic characteristics of a population change over time is a fact. It can be demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is overwhelming. The only persons who deny this are either so poorly informed as to not understand the evidence or so biased by religious dogma as to deny the evidence.

You're wrong here, myelo. You're wrong on so many levels it's quite funny. You seem to think I'm arguing for religion and creation as defined in the bible when I'm simply arguing that evolution takes the same leap of faith. I am not a victim of dogma.

And now... history seems to be science? Is history imperical? And just what historical evidence is there to explain the origin of a species? The links have not been found and proven (by science) to be links.

Regarding the former, since you apparently can comprehend written English and have internet access, there’s really no reason you can’t learn the basics enough to at least understand the topic if you really wanted to.  A good start would be:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html

Regarding the latter, it’s true evolution contradicts a literal interpretation of Genesis, but so does the fact that the earth is not flat. But evolution doesn’t contradict the existence of God in general, because common descent could describe the process used by God. Many people believe both in the existence of God and in evolution, including a lot of biologists and the Pope.

What does the earth being flat have to do with genisis again? That's a few times I've seen it in this thread. I would guess you believe that only the christians thought the world was flat. It definately seems as if you believe the bible says it.

I have no problem with aspects of evolution, but on a micro scale. I've said it before that evolution is subtractive and not additive and have no problem with it in that context. I have no problem looking at various breeds of dogs and understanding how they came to be. I have no problem looking at various species of birds and realizing how they came to be. What I have a serious problem with is the very notion that this all evolved from a single cell that magically appeared in a pond that magically appeared on a planet that magically appeared in a universe that magically popped into existance. Those things are being tought as fact these days.

As for you moot... that's pretty damn funny. Make a senseless statement and declare victory  (yep... thoughts are the only pure thing in the universe alrighty). Maybe I should ask you for proof?

[SirLoin]

You're wrong here, myelo. You're wrong on so many levels it's quite funny... You seem to think I'm arguing for religion and creation as defined in the bible when I'm simply arguing that evolution takes the same leap of faith. I am not a victim of dogma.

Evolution requires zero leap of faith...That has to be the stupidist thing said in this entire thread.

[potsNpans]

My last post on this, as arguing religion is fruitless as argument is based on logic and religion is based on faith.

By definition, logic is faithless and faith is illogical. It is illogical to come up with something that requires a leap of faith, and a leap of faith defies logic.

You ask, “Is it illogical to believe the universe was created if everything we see within it is the result of cause and effect?” Quantum says that things sometimes just happen, so modern physics says that sometimes things are created from nothing.

You ask if it is illogical:  It is not illogical to believe the universe was created, as it exists.  But that is as far as you can logically go.  We cannot logically say something created it if we have no evidence that the whatever is was that did the creating exists.    Quantum says it could be that the creation just happened.

If you say God created it, then you must answer the question of who or what created God as in order for Him to exist, He must have been created, just as it is for the Universe.

I'll take advantage here of having the final last word over you !80}  It's logical for the farmer to plant a field and yet have faith it will yield.
 Quantum says getting something from nothing only works if your on welfare.
If I said God created I'll add the definition of God that he is self existent infinite and eternal according to the evidence provided.
 

Can one of the religious guys please answer my question?  What was created first, the sea slug or the bombardier beetle?

Hey Skyrock, the Torah gives them both to be created on the fifth literal day of creation.
Let the slough march on.

[moot]

Forever is a long time. For you and I the answer to whether there is a supernatural will come much sooner. We need only die to have our answer. I'm patient.

If I were irresponsible enough to evaluate things based on faith rather than reason and empirical evidence, then I'd say that yes, there's definitely a way for us to divine everything, from the future to what's supposed to be "impenetrable" ways.  If that supernatural judgement day comes up, I'll at least have the clear conscience of having done things reasonably rather than on some random leap of faith.

[Donzo]

Evolution requires zero leap of faith...That has to be the stupidist thing said in this entire thread.

Is that because evolution is backed up by so many facts?

[storch]

Evolution requires zero leap of faith...That has to be the stupidist thing said in this entire thread.

do you get issued a robe and pointy hat in your religion when you first join up?  how about pointy curly up tipped loafers?

[AKIron]

If I were irresponsible enough to evaluate things based on faith rather than reason and empirical evidence, then I'd say that yes, there's definitely a way for us to divine everything, from the future to what's supposed to be "impenetrable" ways.  If that supernatural judgement day comes up, I'll at least have the clear conscience of having done things reasonably rather than on some random leap of faith.

I promise you that your day will come and it may be here much sooner than you expect. If you believe there is no supernatural and you're right how will your reason profit you then? I agree that doing things reasonably is better than taking some random leap of faith. I don't think you'll find anyone here that believes their faith to be a random leap though. To the contrary, it's probably safe to say that all believe their faith reasonable based on their experience.

[Mini D]

Evolution requires zero leap of faith...That has to be the stupidist thing said in this entire thread.

LOL! Yeppers, you got me there. It's all been proven and is based on science. Something came from nothing just like science says it would.

[moot]

As for you moot... that's pretty damn funny. Make a senseless statement and declare victory  (yep... thoughts are the only pure thing in the universe alrighty). Maybe I should ask you for proof?

Declare victory where? Yes, by all means ask for proof for whatever.

I promise you that your day will come and it may be here much sooner than you expect. I agree that doing things reasonably is better than taking some random leap of faith.

Sure, and I've got 7 virgins waiting for me if I go enlist in the nearest jihad office and gobble up all the superstitious crap they've got for me..
As for dying, I've come close three times already by my own doing, and probably more times in situations where I had no control.  Whatever that's worth.

If you believe there is no supernatural and you're right how will your reason profit you then?

That's the thing you don't seem to get. I don't feed any sort of belief on supposed supernatural.  
Second, where did I say I was looking to profit?

I don't think you'll find anyone here that believes their faith to be a random leap though. To the contrary, it's probably safe to say that all believe their faith reasonable based on their experience.

Bolded the key word.  All the jihadists also "believe" their faith is reasonable based on their experience. An example that might tickle some people the wrong way, but that's beside the point.

LOL! Yeppers, you got me there. It's all been proven and is based on science. Something came from nothing just like science says it would.

Science doesn't say the universe came from nothing, anymore than it says there's nothing beyond black holes' singularity.  Science is a process.

[AKIron]

What's the point of reason if not profit?

[moot]

I think we covered this already.  My only agenda is knowing more. Put me in front of those supposed pearly gates and I'll be thinking "interesting..."

Second goal is to get off this piece of rock.  If I get to go see other stars and nebulas etc, even better.

[kamilyun]

What's the point of reason if not profit?

That's a bit cynical. 

Some people are just interested in learning how stuff works.  I'll never make a dime off of an oil slick rainbow, but understanding why it's there is kind of cool.