When Atheists say Stupid Things
On January 19, 2008 in Atheism, Feedback
I’ve been going back-and-forth in the comments of a recent post with an Atheist named Kenny. Initially Kenny seemed like a pretty smart guy. Cool, calm, and collected. But the more he wrote, and the more I responded, it seems almost as though he’s losing his ability to maintain a rational discussion, and has lately began saying some very silly things.
I wanted to take two quotes from one of his recent responses and demonstrate the illogical nature and weak convincing that they reveal.
Intelligent Design does not have the means to prove itself. It does very well when it can present flashy formulas to someone who didn’t pass high school algebra. However, when it does that to an actual mathematician, it fails.
This allegation make a very convincing case that either the person making the claim is willing to lie in order to further his or her belief-system, or the person doesn’t take their belief-system serious enough to be intellectually honest during discussions.
Just a moment of investigation would reveal that one of the major proponents of Intelligent Design, Dr. William Dembski, in fact holds multiple degrees in Mathematics, including a Ph.D., and a Masters from the University of Illinois at Chicago. Additionally, Dr. John Lennox (a name that is becoming even more popular following his debate with Popular Atheist, Richard Dawkins), an Oxford Professor of Mathematics.
The list could go on and on, but it isn’t necessary. Like I said, I cannot trust a person when they make claims like this, because it reveals that they are either lazy, stupid, or don’t even take their own beliefs serious.
It is well known that no matter what evidence is produced, Christians will not accept Evolution.
This statement resembles the last in that it reveals an extreme negligence, stupidity, or the willingness to lie in order to further ones position. It’s a well-known fact that many prominent Evolutionists claim to have been Christians in the past. I could pick one that might shock you, but Charles Darwin would apply. After all, he initially has hopes of being a Preacher. Yet the doctrines of Uniformitarianism and Evolution persuaded him that his life would be spent better pursuing other beliefs.
More recently would be the Editor of Skeptic Magazine, Dr. Michael Shermer who also claims to have been a Christian until learning the beauty of Evolution in explaining the World around him.
If it’s true that Michael Shermer, and Darwin were indeed Christians converted to Atheism via Evolution, then the author of these claims is a liar, lazy, or plain stupid. If Shermer and Darwin were liars, and never really followed the Christian world view, then they are liars, and cannot be trusted.
Making statements like these sets up the speaker for a lose/lose result.
My advice to Atheists out there is this, if you want to be taken seriously, you must first take yourself serious, and always be intellectually honest in your claims and pursuits.
I’d think that the other possibility is that a person is negligent or biased, amongst being lazy, a liar, or plain stupid.
First, one thing I hate about making heavy statements, like “All x is y” is that it takes the extra research and time to ensure it’s truth standing (I really have little time). Therefore, I’ll have to keep making statements like “most likely.” This is all to avoid being *negligent* in my research.
And the other part: biased (or better, personal agenda).
Boy, that’s one property that is seen so freaken often. I admit, it’s hard to take the bias away in discussion, and I think I do it pretty well. But for others, they reveal it in their discussion pretty well.
One more thing. I’ve heard from someone that Darwin rebuked his Evolution belief at his death bed.
Nabeel,
I too have heard about the suppose recant of Darwin, but because there really isn’t any substantial evidence to back that up, I wouldn’t ever use that in a debate. Not to mention, Evolutionists could simply say “Well that doesn’t matter, because his research turned out being more valid than he had latter supposed.”
Fortunately, Darwin went to Bible college and apparently trusted Christ as his Savior early in life. Hopefully he’s with the Lord now. Sure would be nice to meet him someday. I’ll be willing to bet anything that he would have some stories to tell
Jonathan
Ok, so if it’s NOT true that Christians will not accept evolution despite evidence, then one asks the “cut to the crap” question :
“What amount of evidence will it take to convince you?”
There’s no debate or discussion unless one can answer this question, those who are not even open the possibility they can be wrong are not worth any exchange. This goes the same for all people on all sides.
Hmm, I’ve got an idea.
Take some bacteria that lack any mobility device like a flagellum or cilia. Place them on a slanted-plane with food at the top. See how long it takes for them to evolve the ability to move from the base of the plane to the top where the food is. Bacteria “evolve” quickly, so this should be easy enough.
I think Biochemists have been suggesting this for years now…yet there have been no takers…
Good challenge, and I’m willing to believe there have been testers, just none that have found a result (or you’d have heard about it).
To do this experiment, you’d have to assume a few (rather obvious) things : that the bacteria wants the food and otherwise cannot survive, also, in the meantime, reproduction is possible as bacteria die quickly. Survival tests have been made, such as put acidic stress on bacteria and those who survive allow their offspring to survive the same stress (as would cockroaches).
I know you’re going to say “that’s not any new info in DNA” or “that’s not a new device”, so this doesn’t meet your standard. But I hope this is your one and only challenge, not something that once met, you’ll just ask another one after another one.
Add A Comment