Evolution...?

[ChumpDumper]

... and writing a book or giving a talk qualifies him to do what exactly?

David Icke has written books on aliens and our reptilian overlords. Does that make him an expert on reptilian exobiology?

Avante is a Nazi because Hitler wrote a book and spoke to groups of people.[/Godwin]

[RandomGuy]

I totally disagree as do the billions and billions out there who do believe in some God/Supreme Being.

You do know that only about 8% of humamity are atheists, right?

Also Known as: Ad Populum

Description of Appeal to Popularity

The Appeal to Popularity has the following form:

1. Most people approve of X (have favorable emotions towards X).
2. Therefore X is true.
The basic idea is that a claim is accepted as being true simply because most people are favorably inclined towards the claim. More formally, the fact that most people have favorable emotions associated with the claim is subs uted in place of actual evidence for the claim. A person falls prey to this fallacy if he accepts a claim as being true simply because most other people approve of the claim.

It is clearly fallacious to accept the approval of the majority as evidence for a claim. For example, suppose that a skilled speaker managed to get most people to absolutely love the claim that 1+1=3. It would still not be rational to accept this claim simply because most people approved of it. After all, mere approval is no subs ute for a mathematical proof. At one time people approved of claims such as "the world is flat", "humans cannot survive at speeds greater than 25 miles per hour", "the sun revolves around the earth" but all these claims turned out to be false.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...opularity.html

Do you still think this argument is valid or meaningful?

[RandomGuy]

Why does evolution preclude a creator?

It doesn't. Avante though, seems to have been lied to a lot, and told it does, or simply doesn't understand the nuances well enough to grasp it.

Can't really quite blame someone for having been brainwashed, unless they are too lazy to make the effort to think, when shown exactly how they have been lied to.

[RandomGuy]

You try too hard little guy, ok? I;m not changing my mind, ok?

I care less for what you do or don't believe, than for what you assert as fact. I care a little bit that you are ignorant, and seem content to be so. That puzzles me, as I have stated already.

[RandomGuy]

Avante is a Nazi because Hitler wrote a book and spoke to groups of people.[/Godwin]

Well played sir, well played.

[RandomGuy]

fish to a rat to a monkey

Magic man in the sky is going to resurrect zombie followers... :LOL

or

Magic man in the sky is still moral even when he orders his followers to hack babies to death

or

magic man in the sky is still moral despite thinking that slavery is ok

could go on of course...

[Avante]

Magic man in the sky has how many followers? While we have how few atheists?

[MultiTroll]

no. out of roughly 480,000 scientists in america with respectable academic credentials, only 700 gave credence to creation-science

eeew wow thanks for the solid *study* evidence.
Fawk.

One 1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".^[24]

and then in the very next sentence your Wiki quote blows your cherry picked number up with:


A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.^[25][26]

[MultiTroll]

no. out of roughly 480,000 scientists in america with respectable academic credentials, only 700 gave credence to creation-science

Another place your cherry pick leads to:

While most US scientists think humans are simply smarter apes, at least 4 in 10 believe a creator "guided" evolution so that sapiens are ruled by a soul or consciousness, a new survey shows. Scientists almost unanimously accept Darwinian evolution over millions of years as the source of human origins. But 40% of biologists, mathematicians, physicians, and astronomers include God in the process.

[Avante]

Little people, I realize you live in a world that sees you as weird with your...THERE IS NO GOD!...WE WERE A FISH!!!...so ya come here stiking back at them thru me/those who aren't idiots like you.

I'm not at all impressed with any of you dummies and I can't believe you haven't figured that out, you are wrong and there is nothing you can say or do that will change that. Yes something is responsible for all this and no we were never fish, so if ya STILL need to act re ed, why?

This...

But I had biology in school.

Are you serious?

[Avante]

A master at work, hahaha!!!!!!!

172 pages, what can I say? So all you Avante wannabes take notes.

Pick a topic that will get a lot of disagreement and then have a know it out personna. BOOM!!!!!!!...172 pages.

Yep, the master.

Let's have some music, what would fit, hmmmmm?

Be right back.

Perfect

[spurraider21]

eeew wow thanks for the solid *study* evidence.
Fawk.

One 1987 estimate found that "700 scientists ... (out of a total of 480,000 U.S. earth and life scientists) ... give credence to creation-science".^[24]

and then in the very next sentence your Wiki quote blows your cherry picked number up with:


A 1991 Gallup poll found that about 5% of American scientists (including those with training outside biology) identified themselves as creationists.^[25][26]

yeah genius. the first percentage was from earth/life scientists... the second was from all scientists including those without biology backgrounds. when it comes to study of life, i'll trust a biologist over a physicist, astronomer, etc

and even then... 95% of scientists dont support creation theory

[MultiTroll]

yeah genius. 95% of scientists dont support creation theory

From the Wiki link you provided:
"But 40% of biologists, mathematicians, physicians, and astronomers include God in the process."
fap on.

[Avante]

Why is the fact 100% of science has been 100% wrong NUMEROUS times?

[admiralsnackbar]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VpcEhFlwYi0

[admiralsnackbar]

Why is the fact 100% of science has been 100% wrong NUMEROUS times?

Science is built to adapt itself to evidence, not the other way around. That's what makes it useful.

[spurraider21]

From the Wiki link you provided:
"But 40% of biologists, mathematicians, physicians, and astronomers include God in the process."
fap on.

that quote does not exist on that wiki page

the word "astronomer" isn't on that page at all

you lying sack of

[Avante]

Science is built to adapt itself to evidence, not the other way around. That's what makes it useful.

Not saying it isn't useful, I'm saying it's limited to the data it "presently" has to work with.

[spurraider21]

Not saying it isn't useful, I'm saying it's limited to the data it "presently" has to work with.

and theism is limited to data it doesn't have, never had, and likely never will have

[Blake]

Not saying it isn't useful, I'm saying it's limited to the data it "presently" has to work with.

While your imagination is limitless

[admiralsnackbar]

Not saying it isn't useful, I'm saying it's limited to the data it "presently" has to work with.

Just to add to spursraider, science is constantly generating new data to presently work with.

[Blake]

Why is the fact 100% of science has been 100% wrong NUMEROUS times?

They've done studies, you know. 60% of the time, it works every time.*

[Avante]

and theism is limited to data it doesn't have, never had, and likely never will have

So why do so many simply not care and believe anyway?

[Avante]

Just to add to spursraider, science is constantly generating new data to presently work with.

It's 1902, what could science tell us then about todays world? What can science of 2015 tell us about what we'll be seeing in 2115?

[Avante]

While your imagination is limitless

FINALLY....said something that is true.