| jesus kung fu magic said: I really dont understand why people believe there isnt some deity out there that created all this......there ar far too many coincidences not only on earth but in the universe for all of them to even be considered coincidences. Atheism is just a way for people to not have any fear in life.....to be ignorant of what is in front of you just for the sake of you not wanting it there. |
My atheist eyes are open and my atheist ears are ready to listen. When I see a fish I call it a fish. When I see evidence one way and not another, I can come to a logical conclusion as to what the situation is. Yet after 23 years on this speck of dust floating along with other specks of dust in this vast place we call the Universe, no one has ever posed a good argument to me for believing in a creator, let alone a personal God.
It's not that I don't want to see what's in front of me, it's that I can see what's in front of me and it's not a God.
I wont fight hard evidence for a creator if it was there, but there isn't. If a creator came to the Earth and said "Hi people of Earth, I'm you creator, but you can call me Bill" and we could verify that it was telling the truth, that would be near to the level of evidence we have to God as we have for alternative "Godless" theories such as the Theory of Evolution and the Big bang theory.
But we don't. There is no evidence for the creation of all animals in existence in their current form, yet there is literally tonnes of evidence that directly conflicts with it.
Can you provide a piece of strong evidence that supports the creation of all life in its current form?
And your coincidences argument is not proof. We can't give a concrete explanation to this, we can only give hypotheses right now. But because that is the situation doesn't mean you're right by any means, where is your evidence that coincidences have a divine source?
It's like me offering evidence to show that 2 plus 2 may not equal 4, but then going on to say that because it may not equal 4 then it must equal 3 purely because it's another potential answer (but at the same time having offered no evidence showing that it is 3). Bit of an odd example, but it's true.
...
Secondly, as for atheists not seeing what's in front of them. I find it to be much the other way round. I find that the majority of religious people (I make note of a few exceptions) refuse to accept evidence if it conflicts with their answer .
For example, when did the catholic church finally accept that we do not live in a geocentric universe?
It was in 1992, despite the idea of a geocentric Universe being debunked nearly 400 years earlier, with all the abundant and strong evidence being readily available.
I find that a lot of religious people often ignore the vast amount of (well sourced) evidence given to them for one idea, but can't leave one piece of often incorrect and always poorly sourced evidence alone. This is because their beliefs are not versatile, they are not willing to adapt to evidence. So they will purposely ignore evidence disproving their answer, but will lap up every precious shred of "evidence" that they believe prove them right.
The gross (and purposeful) misunderstanding of the second law of thermodynamics is one such case. That law doesn't falsify evolution in any way, and for the creationist interpretation to work you would have to disprove the existence of the sun. Yet creationists cling to it and refuse to let go, and will willingly believe the lie they have told themselves, justified by false evidence.
For further explanation see my post earlier in this thread about people who believe the moon landing was a hoax.
