This is why I don't like debating religion

[timmah]

dsgrue3 said:

timmah said:
I also can't understand why some people act like my view of the origin of life and God is somehow a threat to Science, the Scientific method, or technological progress. It great to know the age of bones, how stars form, discuss theories on how we might have gotten here, but that doesn't stop any of the benefits science has to offer to humanity. Whether a scientist thinks life sprung out of the ocean or was created by God doesn't in any way impede things like cancer research, infectious disease research and cures, technological advancements, or any other scientific field that actually has a positive effect on humanity in general. I talk about issues I have with specific theories in one field of Science and some of you have a meltdown and think I'm attacking Science as a whole. Nothing could be further from the truth.

No one said that. We're saying substantiate your claim instead of attacking ours which is based upon evidence. Do you have evidence to support your claim that isn't anecdotal?

Otherwise you're just using a burden of proof fallacy.

I'm not saying that my position is true because there are holes in some of your theories as would be necessary for that to be a 'burden of proof' fallacy. I had other posts where I presented arguments for my views, just because you don't accept them doesn't mean I didn't present them. I have also said multiple times that a supernatural being cannot be definitively proven or disproven by natural means, so your attempt to bring belief in God into an area where there is clearly no way to definitively prove or disprove His existence could be considered a 'burden of proof' fallacy. I've never set out to prove God's existence to you in concrete and provable way, as I've said multiple times this can't be done. I've been trying to point out that...

1) claims that one has to be stupid, illogical, ignore facts, etc. to have faith are over the top

2) the straw man presented in the OP is not an accurate representation of religion, especially not of those who really folow Jesus' teachings

3) even Science does not have a difinitive, provable explaination as to where we came from, even though it does have theories you find compelling

4) We can still have respect for another's viewpoint, even if it differs from ours (referring to the hostility and derogatory debtate style used at times, mainly of the OP, who admitted to having 'hatred' for religion)