Atheist: Do atheist force evolution without proof.?

The evidence for evolution is and has been interpreted from a Philosophical and ideological Bias, The answers given by adherents to Evolution here in R&S is proof of the bias and agenda, Atheism has to have an alternate explanation—other than a Creator—for how the universe and life came into existence.

Darwin once identified himself as a Christian but as a result of some tragedies that took place in his life, he later renounced the Christian faith and the existence of God. Evolution was invented by an atheist.

What is sad is that Christians are falling into this Trap and trying to fit evolution into the Bible (Theistic Evolution) thinking they can make it fit.

Lee Stroble in his video listed below “ The Case for the Creator” stated (5 min. 28 sec into the video) The Case for a Creator

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6881114962...

That “There is no way you can Harmonize Neo Darwinism with Christianity, I could never understand Christians who would say “ Well I believe in God yet I believe in Evolution as well” You see Darwin’s idea about the development of life led to his theory that modern science now generally defines as an undirected process completely devoid of any purpose or plan,”. Now how could God direct an undirected process? How could God have purpose in a plan behind a system that has no plan and no purpose? It just does not make sense.

It didn’t make sense to me in 1966 and it doesn’t make sense to me now.

The Apostle Paul wrote to His Son Timothy stating that “ in 2 Timothy 4:3-4 “For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, [because] they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn [their] ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.”

Those Christians who believe in evolution have no idea how that effects their theology.

What is theistic evolution?

http://www.gotquestions.org/theistic-evolution.htm...

http://carm.org/secular-movements/evolution/theist...

How do beliefs about creation impact the rest of theology?

http://www.gotquestions.org/creation-theology-beli...

Eternity is a Long Time to be wrong about this

Darwin's Deadly Legacy (1 of 7)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4mxXICZ9mXo

Creation In The 21st Century - Planet Earth Is Special 1 of 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uk8xtXRI6OE

Creation in the 21st Century - The Evidence Disputes Darwin 1 of 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FaveDbWrQuQ&feature...

Creation in the 21st Century - The Evidence Disputes Darwin 2 of 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mZFIe2zk1fw&feature...

Some modern scientists who have accepted the biblical account of creation

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/bios/

More than 600 Scientist with PHD’s who have Signed A SCIENTIFIC DISSENT FROM DARWINISM

“We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life.

Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged.”

http://www.discovery.org/scripts/viewDB/filesDB-do...

NO HUMAN witnessed the beginning of life on earth.

- Yet you INSIST that the biblical version of the beginning of the earth is real.

Nor has anyone seen one kind of life evolve into another kind—a reptile into a mammal, for example.

- Define "kind". Scientists have documented one species turning into another species but is that your "kind" and they have proven the transition more dramatically with forensics and fossils.

Therefore, we must rely on the available evidence to draw conclusions about the origin of life.

- Which is what we do but you rely on a proven fairy tale as your evidence.

And we need to let the evidence speak for itself rather than force it to say what we want it to say.

- and that is EXACTLY what science does.

Many atheists, however, view science through the lens of materialism—a philosophy that assumes purely material causes for the origin of life

- No it PROVES a material cause of life. You have yet to prove magic exists so there is no other choice.

“That materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”

- You have to prove a "divine foot" exists before you can attribute processes to it, not the other way around which is what you are trying to do.

1) That is not a "somehow" it has been proven on many levels.

2) It only takes 1800 molecules to make a self replicating RNA molecule. As an arrogant fundie you think it was some hoe statistically impossible for it to create a human, but then you think humans were its ultimate objective. No, life was the ultimate objective and we humans lucked out.

How did the molecules of life form and acquire their amazing abilities without an intelligent designer?

- Read some actual science and discover that. It has been proven on virtually all levels.

Evolutionary research fails to provide adequate explanations or satisfying answers to questions about the origin of life

- Because evolution has NOTHING to do with the origins of life. Evolution is change over time, nothing else. You need to read some read science rather than fundie captions or Ben Stein.

In effect, those who deny the purposeful intervention of a Creator attribute godlike powers to mindless molecules and natural forces.

- No, You paradigm dictates that there is a supernatural intervention so your conclusion mirrors your pre-conclusion. Very fundie of you, but not rational, logical or scientific.

What, though, do the facts indicate? The available evidence shows that instead of molecules developing into complex life-forms, the opposite is true:

- That is where you need to stop reading fundie captions and start reading something intelligent. That has already been proven.

Physical laws dictate that complex things—machines, houses, and even living cells—in time break down.

- And here we are with the fundie version of the 2nd law of thermodynamics. Read the second half of the law where it deals with open systems.

Yet, evolutionists say the opposite can happen.

- In an open system that is EXACTLY what happens.

That energy, however, has to be carefully controlled and precisely directed because uncontrolled energy is more likely to speed up decay, just as the energy from the sun and the weather can hasten the deterioration of a building

- You are reaching into the absurdity here. You think everything was EXACTLY created for you and that is the fundie arrogance. Life exists under conditions you consider impossible or at least impossible for YOU to exist. That is the fundie arrogance that all of this was made for you.

Those who believe in evolution cannot satisfactorily explain how energy is creatively directed.

- Because that is your pre-conclusive paradigm. It is NOT "creatively" directed, it exists, nothing more.

"Nor has anyone seen one kind of life evolve into another kind—a reptile into a mammal, for example."

That would disprove evolution. We have however, witnessed and documented speciation - the arise of a new species. Science has to use naturalistic means to explain everything. It can NOT use the supernatural to explain anything. And evolution IS proven.

1: Proven:

2: Proven.

3: Not quite proven yet, but almost there.

And lastly: Evolution is 'NOT' about the origin of life, but the origin of species, get that into your thick skull. Even if abiogenesis is wrong, evolution will still be true.

Not correct. Entropy only applies to closed systems. Earth is not a closed system.

You ought to do more study on the theory of Evolution before you convincing humans you recognize better. Evolution does no longer say that monkeys are our ancestors, cats and dogs have entirely exclusive DNA, though they share some biologically similar traits, in general visible in mammals (people occur to be mammals, too, which is a aid for evolution). So, you need to be a little extra compelling with your arguments next time.

NO HUMAN witnessed the beginning of life on earth.

That's abiogenesis you idiot

Nor has anyone seen one kind of life evolve into another kind—

"Kind" is not a scientific word, or even one that has a specific definition. It is like pulling teeth to get a Theist to say what they mean by "kind", almost asif they just repeat things Kent Hovind said without thinking about it.

a reptile into a mammal, for example. Therefore, we must rely on the available evidence to draw conclusions about the origin of life.

Abiogenesisand evolution are different things you moron

And we need to let the evidence speak for itself rather than force it to say what we want it to say.

Indeed, none of that Ken Ham "putting on your bible glasses" bullshit. SCIENTIFIC METHOD FTW

Many atheists, however, view science through the lens of materialism—a philosophy that assumes purely material causes for the origin of life. “We have a prior commitment . . . to materialism,” wrote evolutionist Richard C. Lewontin. “That materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.”

Huh?

Once again, people are confusing evolution with abiogenesis. Nobody knows how life originated, and no evolutionist worth their salt will tell you that they know.

Evolution, however, has been observed. Numerous times. One of the best documented cases is the evolution of an E. coli relative that can metabolise citrate ions in an aerobic environment. This was researched and documented by Dr Richard Lenski and his research team.

You can't force evolution to occur, any more than you can force it to stop.

It's independent of what one believes, religiously speaking; it is an easily-demonstrable fact that any good 9th-grade biology student could illustrate.

If you don't know the difference between a "hypothesis" and a "theory," then may I respectfully suggest that you get a good dictionary and USE it?

You are far too late to discredit the principals of biological evolution.

Knowledge regarding evolution has already greatly improved our quality of life. It has produced tens of thousands of discoveries in genetics, epidemiology, archeology, agriculture, embryology, bacteriology… the list goes on. It is the foundation for all the biological sciences.

Denying evolution now would be like denying the possibility of electronics after using a telephone, television and computer.

Biological evolution is observable, repeatable and irrefutable. But the process can't be explained in one sentence so many people will never understand it.

--------------------

(btw - Biological evolution addresses changes in already existing populations of life forms and is not related to the origin of life or to atheism.)

.

"Those who believe in evolution cannot satisfactorily explain how energy is creatively directed."

Natural selection 'directs' energy towards models that result in survival and reproduction

No...no human has witnessed these events, but unlike creationism, there is actual strong evidence to support evolution.