Weren't Stalin and Pol Pot atheists? Granted they didn't kill in the name of atheism but they didn't need a god to kill a ton of people, assuming that was true.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Most people aren't against religion, they're against the institution of the church. And it's undeniable the church (of all religions) has used their god to justify war, slavery, prejudice, and overall hatred. I will never critise a person for holding a certain religious belief but when they are a part of an institution that does promote or assist in any sort of violence I will speak up.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

However I should note that I am against any religious belief that directly contradicts scientific fact. (Eg. Not believing in evolution) But I won't bring up the points of their churches policies.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Technically Gravity is a theory and so is Atomic Theory which was used to make an atom bomb. Some theories are fact. And evolution is one of them.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

People think that just becayse evolution is a theory, it means it's not true or that it's a hypothesis. In reality, when science speaks of a theory, it's an idea that explains things we already know for sure. Think germ theory or string theory or theory of relativity. Theories are essentially the closest thing to the truth, so you can't say not to teach evolution on the basis that it's "just a theory" because with that logic we should just not teach gravity either. Technically we know microevolution is real because it's observable, the only thing that raises skepticism is macroevolution. To not believe in evolution and natural selection as a concept because it's "just a theory" is not a smart thing to do.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

However the Theory of Relativity is flawed. It doesn't account for the incredibly small. That's what Quantum Theory is for. Which doesn't account for the incredibly large. String Theory is just an attempt to fuse the two to fix the flaws. Eventually the 5 versions String Theory (all flawed) were put together to what is now Super String Theory or M-Theory. Unfortunately this can't be proven with today's technology.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Creationism is not a scientific theory is a religious belief. And it can in fact be proven. I suggest you look in to Darwin's work in the Galapagos and the findings of Chromosome 2.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Also if you accept Creationism (without Evolution) you have to accept that the Earth is about 10,000 years old. Not only are there obvious flaws such Dinosaurs and other prehistoric animals, but that also suggest that Planetary evolution is false. Which can literally be observed. http://ctrlv.in/106128 These are Solar Systems currently forming in Orion. Another thing. If creation (without Evolution) is true than the most distant celestial object we would be able to see would be 10,000 Light Years away. But since we can see Galaxies whose light took 13 billion years to reach us, that is obviously false.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

String theory isn't known for sure.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

She's right. I thought I mentioned that but all I said was that today's technology can't prove it. There are some Scientist who disagree with String theory and instead subscribe to Loop Quantum Gravity. (Which admittedly is easier to test but I prefer my "Everything Theory" in Strings.)

by Anonymous 11 years ago

You might have mentioned it I just skimmed through the convo.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

I technically didn't. It was lightly implied. Love your picture by the way.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Macroevolution isn't known //for sure// but it's the closest thing we have to truth anyway. String theory and theory of relativity are kind of recent so I listed them, but there are countless of theories that are generally accepted as truth, including the theory of gravity, germ theory, heliocentric theory, etc.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

It's conversations like these that remind me of how little I know about science.

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Okay, you just said evolution might not be fact but said obviously evolution exists. There isn't really that much of a difference between micro and macro evolution. A whole bunch of microevolutions builds up to a species change, which means there's no definitive line where micro stops and macro starts. One species can and does change to another, like Darwin's finches. Put that over millions of years and one species turns into another. You don't have to believe it if you don't want to, but I'm tired of creationists saying "oh it's just a theory" which "obviously means it's not proven" and discredits it. Scientific theory is just a term for an idea that encompasses a whole bunch of facts. The theory of evolution will always be called a theory, even if it is "proved".

by Anonymous 11 years ago

Humans didn't come from apes, and science doesn't say they do. Science says humans come from "Australopithecus afferensis", the first humans, and did I mention they were human, not ape?

by Anonymous 11 years ago