Quote:
So I'm to believe that if I take a watch apart and put it into a bag, shake it up, it will eventually put itself to together and become a perfectly working watch again?
Seriously, that's the same "theory" as evolution. All this stuff just simply exists, it formed planets by chance, that formed water by chance, that formed living cells by chance and eventually became human, ALL by chance right?
I don't claim to know what created life or how it came to being. That's the work of abiogenesists and astronomers, but just filling a gap with a god just because it's convenient stumps us from getting any factual based answers.
I will also grab this opportunity to adress this first misconception alot of people seem to be having about evolution. Evolution is not all about "chance" or "randomeness". Evolution is a process where certain random mutations are passed on and selected trough a
non-random system of natural selection that is based on their compability with their environement.
Quote:
Seriously, how do people think everything came into being? People can believe what they want and call it what they want, but not believing in something is a religion too.
How's atheïsm also a religion? Atheïsts do not make assumptions about things they can't know or have proof off, unlike religion, where dogma is key and the whole point of it is to take things as the truth without getting any factional backup.
Which is fine, anyone is free to believe or not to believe what they want. But calling atheism a religion puts the definition of "religion" and "faith" on it's head.
Also, if it's a religion, where's our tax exemption?

Quote:
I personally find it a whole lot easier to believe that something created humans than it just "happened" by coincidence over millions of years.
Something that is easier to believe or accept does not make it fact. For the medieval man it was also easier to believe that the earth was flat and not round because they assumed you would slide off because it's a sphere. Untill science teached us about gravity.
Quote:
Believing in evolution is no different than believing in a creator. They are both faith based assumptions. I personally find it a whole lot easier to believe that something created humans than it just "happened" by coincidence over millions of years.
Again, evolution has nothing to do with faith. It is founded on evidence in the form of transitional species, the observation of mutations, in DNA, in the locations of these fossils in the soil etc... In short: hard tangible data.
Also, if evolution does not take place how come we don't find fossils of dogs or horses in the cretacious area? Or did god trickle life onto earth in this carefully ordered manner that would make it seem life evolved, became more complicated and changed to what it is now in this chronological fashion. All to trick us?
Quote:
As the article states, if evolution where true than wouldn't there be "evidence" that things are in the middle of changing, such as an arm turning into a feather. I mean over millions of years of having animals on the planet wouldn't there be animals in various stages of transformation that would be obvious. Or does a penguin just all of a sudden give birth to a bird/fish/grasshopper mixture. There is NO evidence of anything changing into something else. There is evidence of different breeds of the same thing such as dogs and cats, but nothing about dogs turning into cats.
In fact there
is obvious evidence of transitional species. Here's a nice list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_tr ... al_fossilsIt's a classic creationist strawman argument that is simply rooted in ignoring the facts.
It's also funny how alot of creationists support microevolution, like you do, but not macroevolution. The fact is, that if you aknowledge microevolution you also aknowledge macroevolution. Macroevolution is simply microevolution over a
longer period of time. Quote:
You believe a plane came to be a plane because someone put it together right, well how is that any different than me believing that someone put humans together. You can believe all you want that someone "made" the pyramids of Egypt but you don't have "proof" do you? NO you simply have a theory and a structure. There are no blueprints to the pyramids, there are no factories to make pyramids. I have a theory of how people where made. So why does your theory trump mine?
Again, it is different because we have documented evidence of the process where human beings are making planes. We do not have evidence of the process of some divine entity making the universe or life.
For the pyramids, it has everything to do with archeological and circumstantional evidence that supports the claim they were build by human hand for a certain use. So you're right, no blueprints or factories.
In short, it's all about data. Where is the data that supports the claim that there is an all knowing creator?
Your whole arguement is, that if something exists someone or something should have created it. This, however, means you're merely moving the question. Because who created god then? Or is that one an exeption to the rule somehow?
Quote:
I don't care if you believe in the bible or Jesus or Allah or whoever, but deep deep deep down everyone at one time or another believed or believes in something unexplainable being in control of everything.
Nope, sorry.
But I won't rule out the possibility. Nor won't I for the existence of the flying spaghettimonster, Vishnoe, Ra, Thor or unicorns. But I would refrain from picking any of them up into schoolbooks untill science provides evidence.