Why Intelligent People Believe Stupid Things

Great and short. Andrew, no excuses about knowing all arguments for creation and against evolution, please.
Statements must be answered if there is no faith in a final authority, facts can only be answered have facts added to the disgussion. Right? Preponderence of evidence alone justifies the debator.

Advertisements

10 thoughts on “Why Intelligent People Believe Stupid Things

  1. For the sake of organization, let’s start where we left off. Your last comment was this:

    “O. K. Is is possible for anyone to fully understand this theory and is it impossible for any given person to, in your oppinion?
    Please, I asked for the title of one of the books that you said you read that convinced you to believing evolutionism.
    So then, you never had a conversion to begin with. Wow, 20. Name one of the competing evidences, maybe even the chief one. Doesn’t seem then that you are the type of person who would have had the arguments against evolutionism in the first place. Maybe you could learn something from Dr. Hovind after all.
    You should have been looking for pro-Bible evidence then. That’s what I’ve been doing for years.
    What do you mean by “precisely as we should expect it to in the absence of a god”? Does that mean that scientists have explained how everything arrose due to observed processes? Has no one ever touched on an invisible world around us (scrying, necromancy, levetation, medians, etc.)?
    No. If there is a textbook God, is there a book that I can look at that is his, in your oppinion. What should such a book look like? Something profound? Manythings, not hidden, but of not redily noticible characteristic and extriem complexity? This is given: Divine authorship.
    Sure, the Bible disgusses a god if there is no real God behind it. I’m asking if you think there is a Creator. Please watch this and tell me what you think: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRJ_po3_JQg&feature=player_embedded

    He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him. (Proverbs 18:13)

    Behold, this have I found, saith the preacher, counting one by one, to find out the account: (Ecclesiastes 7:27)

    The sluggard is wiser in his own conceit than seven men that can render a reason. (Proverbs 26:16)

    Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge. (Hebrews 13:4)

    The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God. (Psalm 9:17)”

    “Is is possible for anyone to fully understand this theory and is it impossible for any given person to, in your oppinion?”

    I doubt it. Scientists are typically highly specialized so I would expect that there would be experts in each of the fields that deal with evolution and not one that knows the same as all the others.

    “Doesn’t seem then that you are the type of person who would have had the arguments against evolutionism in the first place.”

    Why would I need to have arguments against evolution in the first place? Even when I was a believer I understood that the Bible can be the inerrant word of God and not be speaking literally 100% of the time. After all, you’re supposed to gouge out your right eye if it causes you to sin, no? Did God mean that figuratively or literally?

    Evolution is an observation of observable phenomena. It is you who chooses to perceive it as an affront to your faith. I mean, c’mon Woody, do you think Genesis is a better explanation of the natural world than 160 years of documented research? Do you actually think Noah loaded two of EVERY species on his boat? Scientists are still discovering new species every day! Especially beetles. If God exists, he really loves beetles.

    “Has no one ever touched on an invisible world around us (scrying, necromancy, levetation, medians, etc.)?”

    In any documented, non-fanatical, meaningful sense? No. Unless you believe those GhostHunters on the Discovery channel.

    “Manythings, not hidden, but of not redily noticible characteristic and extriem complexity? This is given: Divine authorship.”

    I am not sure where you’re going with that. Extreme complexity in life? Addressed. Extreme complexity in the Bible? Where? The Bible is not complex at all. In fact it reads a lot like most Bronze Age literature: simple and to the point.

    1. Here’s what you said:

      I doubt it. Scientists are typically highly specialized so I would expect that there would be experts in each of the fields that deal with evolution and not one that knows the same as all the others.

      Why would I need to have arguments against evolution in the first place? Even when I was a believer I understood that the Bible can be the inerrant word of God and not be speaking literally 100% of the time. After all, you’re supposed to gouge out your right eye if it causes you to sin, no? Did God mean that figuratively or literally?

      Evolution is an observation of observable phenomena. It is you who chooses to perceive it as an affront to your faith. I mean, c’mon Woody, do you think Genesis is a better explanation of the natural world than 160 years of documented research? Do you actually think Noah loaded two of EVERY species on his boat? Scientists are still discovering new species every day! Especially beetles. If God exists, he really loves beetles.

      In any documented, non-fanatical, meaningful sense? No. Unless you believe those GhostHunters on the Discovery channel.

      I am not sure where you’re going with that. Extreme complexity in life? Addressed. Extreme complexity in the Bible? Where? The Bible is not complex at all. In fact it reads a lot like most Bronze Age literature: simple and to the point.

      To which I reply:

      Is evolutionism beyond the understanding of the common person? Sounds like a mystery religion to me, then.

      What is your figuritive interpretation then? Why take Genesis figuritivly when the whole Bible takes it litterally, or would you swim out in the eather? Why did you say you used to use all Kent Hovind’s arguments then? or wasn’t that you?

      Would you just name your evidence then? Please! What FOSSIL? What NEW KIND OF ANIMAL? Give up the monkeying around with genes and come back to biology, geology, and “cosmology”!

      Did you know that the likelyhood of 1 DNA strnad forming by chance is 1×10 to the 19000th power (the width of the universe in inches)? Your hero Richard Dawkins (biology) doesn’t even believe evolutionism any more. As soon as he becomes a Bible believer he’ll be fired (see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=V5EPymcWp-g).

      The Bible is more complex and relyable than you could ever dream of. Had you actually known, you’d have never abandoned the faith of your fathers.

      See real phinomina (Devils, Angels and God):

      The wicked shall be turned into hell, and all the nations that forget God. (Psalm 9:17)

      In hope of eternal life, which God, that cannot lie, promised before the world began; (Titus 1:2)

      Produce your cause, saith the LORD; bring forth your strong reasons, saith the King of Jacob. Let them bring them forth, and shew us what shall happen: let them shew the former things, what they be, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or declare us things for to come. Shew the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together. Behold, ye are of nothing, and your work of nought: an abomination is he that chooseth you. (Isaiah 41:21-24)

      And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. (Matthew 18:3)

    1. Did you listen to the video, guy? No? Why should I then read about something that was discovered long after the “scientific theory” was accepted unanimously? Has there ever been a benificial mutation observed or not.
      They all look very complecated. Really. But, we must both accept these things with faith that they know and are being truthful because we cannot fully understand them. They give us the evidence that supports the dogma. Is now the E.coli your final authority in all matters of faith?
      Listen to the tape, you’ll see why they duck into genetics. You will not WATCH a video, so why should I READ many “scholarly articles” far beyond my mental capacity (not to mention, far later than evolutionism’s general acceptance)?

      The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good. (Psalm 14:1)

      God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. (Romans 3:4)

      1. What do you mean “duck into genetics”?

        I shouldn’t ask that. I already know the answer: you just don’t understand the theory. You admitted as much: “..far beyond my mental capacity…”

        To be honest, I don’t have an hour to spend watching psuedoscience. But, I will play along: Do you have a video that is 5, 10, or 15 minutes long that summarizes your issues with the theory of evolution? That would be a more manageable length of time that would also allow me to respond to individual points.

        “Would you just name your evidence then? Please! What FOSSIL? What NEW KIND OF ANIMAL? Give up the monkeying around with genes and come back to biology, geology, and “cosmology”!”

        Your demanding something that you know I cannot produce. “Evolution” itself is an extremely broad term that has thousands of evidences for each aspect.

        So let’s start with one: common descent. For that, the most intriguing evidence is that of endogenous retroviruses.

  2. He that answereth a matter before he heareth it, it is folly and shame unto him. (Proverbs 8:13)

    I cannot grasp the numbers, I got the theory down. There are no transitional forms in the “fossil record”. So there is no evidence for it, then. All there is is faith and blindness to the word of God.

    Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch. (Matthew 15:14)

      1. The Problem is that evolutionism requires untold billions of transitional forms.

        Pacacetus is proof only if it had children different than itself and no one can show any evidence that it did. I believe the assumptions about it and it’s brother Ambiocetus’ (spelling?) large feet (to flippers), though there were no bones of feet found for them is addressed in CSS 4.
        Evolutionism also requires that all the kin of a benefitially mutatated animal die, or else the new gene is “swamped back in to the gene pool”. That’s a problem, aint it. Have faith in God not in science; believe the evidences; look.

        How long will it be ere ye make an end of words? mark, and afterwards we will speak. (Job 18:10)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s