People still believe this

>people still believe this

Why?

Other urls found in this thread:

creation.com/its-not-science
lycaeum.org/~sputnik/McKenna/Evolution/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Why do you offer?

Evolution has many flaws

its just pre computer simulation theory
not really that crazy

I'm curious. How do people still stick to their religion when so much scientific evidence points otherwise? It's not healthy skepticism anymore - it's just confirmation bias.

Such as?

Because all the evidence to the contrary is not entirely dissuasive

Nothing's dissuasive when you've already made up your mind (confirmation bias).

>matter cannot be created, only transformed
>well except the big bang
thanks science

human stupidity is infinite

>i believe everything a 2000 year old book of fiction tells me
>men lived to be a thousand years old
>a bearded old man is watching everything i do
stay cucked christcucks

Same reason people are rightwing and voted for trump. Many people are just ignorant retards.

this, when you ask proof to a religionfag for god he shows his book

can't dig deep enough to hide the cringe everytime

>>a bearded old man is watching everything i do
this is what atheists unironically think of God as

Keep believing in your biogenesis fairy tail, faggot.

It is the only logical answer... The universe is far too complex to be random... I just don't believe in random chance that much... 1 in 10^80th power is just too small for me to put all my faith in... Much more logical to believe that this shit was made... I have no fucking idea what made it... I believe in God and Jesus Christ but I could be wrong I am open minded... Atheism just seems like a disingenuous idea but I understand why people believe in it

No, that's unironically what christcucks think of god as

and btw I'm not an atheist, I believe in my own version of God and despise religion and religious people

So what is the Big Bang? Just a random occurrence that defied the laws of physics? I'm not even a religious fag. The whole theory makes no sense at all unless you subscribe to the religion of main stream (((science))).

>around 4,300 religions in the world
>somehow if I don't assume any of them are unquestionably facts I'm a neckbeard

Fuck religion fags above and beyond

Niggers.

You're not very observant of your surroundings are you?

>>No, that's unironically what christcucks think of god as
this is what cucks unironically believe about what we believe

Herd mentality.

Because the American education system has failed.

your small mind just can't comprehend the big bang, that's all.

Because it would be Islamophobic not to.

What does that even mean? Some cloudy ''god works in mysterious ways'' that leaves place to all the ridiculous claims a christfag could come up with in order to not look dumb in an argument?

Being a cuck has nothing to do with religious beliefs faggot.

Yours can because you've had a big bang in your ass, faggot.

are you implying all life began in my ass? because that's awesome

creationism vs evolution is not about which side has more evidence, rather, its about how that evidence is interpreted.

Take for example, horology that exists across all life forms (FACT), such as DNA. To an evolutionist, this happened because all organisms have common ancestry (THEORY). To a creationist, this is the product of intelligent design - an intelligent designer would reuse parts for efficiency instead of reinventing the wheel.

The creationist has better logic here - we see car manufacturers using the same buttons, designs, ect. in different types of vehicles because its more efficient. Cars, aircraft, and skateboards all have wheels, but that doesn't prove they evolved from a common ancestor.

In a nutshell, evolution is assumed (rather than scientifically proven) to have happened, and than physical evidence is always explained within an evolutionary paradigm.

Here's a good article that explains this further : creation.com/its-not-science

Because there aren't very persuasive alternatives to a lot of people.

>uses human knowledge to try and explain the universe

Why do this at all? Maybe the universe isn't for us to understand. Why try to explain it with a god?

Actially we just a bacteria colony in giant pile of excrements some transcedental creature made.

Sorry I don't understand your accent, please speak English

>The universe is far too complex to be random

I don't. But you should be willing to fight to the death to defend their right to believe it and get off your high horse user. The mudslimes are coming user, and the Christians will be the ones who start the 10th crusade. They are our allies.

because it feels good.

Uhh it's based on the idea that species evolve through random genetic mutations that have the possibility of being beneficial.

Does anyone have that webm of the guy talking about how the banana was made perfectly for humans and it couldn't be just random.

i mean the science and physics all check out
go check it yourself simpletons

Catholics are historically just as bad as the goat fucking pedoslimes lad

>the Universe is easy to explain using modern concepts and ideas and will be concrete throughout the future no matter what we discover and learn about

Flat earther-tier disinfo to provide idiotic comparison for morons against people who don't believe evolution is a fully understood theory.

It's clear the evolution does exist on many different scales, but there's unfinished parts of the theory that they don't want to actually think about and delve into.

The current interpretation of the data we have is that evolution occurs from small, nearly microscopic mutations in species giving individuals of that species an edge in survival which allows them to live and breed, creating more like them. These mutations build up over millions of generations.

The Earth as far as we know is only 4.5 billion years old though. While that sounds like a very long time, comparatively is it long enough for such microscopic mutations to build up enough for the entire species to be represented by the current sum of them? Is it enough time for process of elimination to sort out the non-leaf shaped insects from the leaf shaped insects?
Yes, easily it is.

But, is it also enough time for a cell to become a being as complicated as a human through rigorous trial-and-error survival of the fittest? Is 4.5 billion years long enough for that?

or the bananans that humans picked up got spread around, dropped, squished into the ground and progenerated by the very act itself duh

fuck sake morans

Why is there order rather than chaos?

The Big Bang didn't create matter
Fucking burger education

wow, what a fantastic argument, im convinced!

What is this post even arguing? We still have a lot we don't know, but more discoveries will change that.

>once upon time matter exploded into everything we know today. Where it came from no one knows.

Yeah and creationists are the idiots huh.

>is 4.5 billions enough for that?
Yes, and we are evidence of it. Are we not here? You're suggesting that the amount of time needed to make a cell of a human, which is hardly any more different than a cell of any other ape, ignoring the number of chromosomes, may not have been reached. It has, obviously.

Because brain structure controls belief in bullshit and brain structures variations aren't going away anytime soon.

The order you see is a misconception created by your brain due to its tendency to create patterns. Unless you're referring to why chemical reactions happen the same way every time, well, why wouldn't they? Why shouldn't they?

Please don't breed

>empirical evidence vs no evidence and claims that have been contradicted

There are a finite amount of proteins, no shit we see them repeat. Nothing appears out of what we should see based on what we knowm

>this entire post
Jesus Christ, how dumb are Americans

> bananas perfect for human
> not humans perfectly designed to spread the banana
The real (((them))) is the perky bendies, I knew it!

How do you account for the existence of brains that have pattern-creating tendencies without reference to some kind of order? A brain isn't just chaos, it's a thing. For there to be anything, there need to be real differences. For there to be real differences, there needs to be some kind of organization. Why would there be the sorts of things, like chemicals, that have predictable tendencies as opposed there being sheer chaos?

Science doesn't claim to know what happened before the big bang. The big bang is supported by empirical evidence

>see shit happen
>see shit happen that keeps on happening
>record what is happening
It doesn't take much to understand the universe. How do human intelligence limitations prohibit us from understanding the universe?

>he's never heard of the concept of something being serendipitous

Your brain, will create patterns, even if it does not exist. Ask literally any psychologist or anybody that knows fuck all about your brain and they will tell you the same thing. There is no order in the universe, only in the sense that matter has mass, and gravity will hold their masses together. Gravity will influence other matter around it. We observed the universe react this way, and you're implying that hydrogen in its plasma state should not turn into helium when colliding with another hydrogen atom. So what? Why does that happen? There is no answer to that. Why is it that blue light has a lower frequency as violet light? This type of thinking gets you literally no where.

>STONED APE THEORY
lycaeum.org/~sputnik/McKenna/Evolution/

An expansion of matter that was once compressed into a singularity, moving at the speed of light. There is a limit to the frequency a wavelength can be, so there is a limit matter could be compressed, this is the singularity. Matter cannot be created, so it has always existed. The universe is currently expanding at the speed of light in all directions, which is observable through the red and blue shifts. There exists background microwave radiation of the big bang, there has to be; all of that thermal energy needs to have left behind traces of this, and it has.

>Your brain, will create patterns, even if it does not exist.
I don't deny that but it doesn't entail that there are no real patterns. There would be nothing, let alone brains for psychologists to study, if there weren't real patterns. You acknowledge that there are patterns among some things (matter and gravity's relation, chemical interactions) so I'm not sure why you're harping on the contradictory point that patterns are illusions generated by the brain (which somehow exists despite there being no real patterns according to your view). Which is it, are there patterns or no patterns?

If there are no patterns, there could be no things. If there are no things, there could be no brains. If there are no brains, it makes no sense to refer to brains as the things that generate all patterns. Saying there are no patterns is a self-refuting position.

If there are patterns, do you think that the existence of patterns is necessary or could chaos be a real alternative?

Mutation is random
Selection is not

>10E80 is too small
Because ours minds did not evolve with the capabity to picture such a number.

>it was made by someone else
Who made the person that made the universe? If that person has always existed, why can't it be that the universe has always existed. Even if the universe was created by a deity, you're still met with the dilema of picking the correct religion, and some religions don't even have an afterlife. Some religions say you WILL go to hell (Johova's Witness). Some say you need to die in battle (Nordic religions), and if you're unfit to join the military you're shit out of luck.

As if creationism doesn't? The only flaw in evoltion I can think of is that you can't go out and buy a "My little evolution playset" to watch it happen before your eyes in under a minute.

To summarize: McKenna theorizes that as the North African jungles receded toward the end of the most recent ice age, giving way to grasslands, a branch of our tree-dwelling primate ancestors left the branches and took up a life out in the open -- following around herds of ungulates, nibbling what they could along the way.

Among the new items in their diet were psilocybin-containing mushrooms growing in the dung of these ungulate herds. The changes caused by the introduction of this drug to the primate diet were many -- McKenna theorizes, for instance, that synesthesia (the blurring of boundaries between the senses) caused by psilocybin led to the development of spoken language: the ability to form pictures in another person's mind through the use of vocal sounds.

Compared to the size of the universe our scope is extremely small.

because evolution (and science in general) undermines their moral system. mainly because their worldview is incorrect. science and traditional values are perfectly compatible. in fact, science re-affirms conservative values.

>people still believe this
because science' explanation is equally ridiculous?

Creationism and Christianity are not inclusive, you can very well practice Cristianity and not be a Creationist. Creationism is straight up invalid, debunked. The idea that all life came into existence at one point in time goes against just about every piece of evidence we know about the origins of life. We would fine human fossils with trilobites, we would see every known species clustered together; we don't. We have amino acid sequencing verifying how distant relatives are cross verifying with how old their common ancestors are. Homologies also confirm this.

So what? We can still see and observe all of it, just not in our lifetimes. What does that have to do with man's ability to comprehend? Are you implying we're in Plato's cave? I'm not saying you're wrong.

Creationism in that a higher power set set the big bang in motion and created all the physical laws that governed the creation of the stars and planets, evolution and diversification of life, etc. is fine. Not a belief I ascribe to personally, just because we may not have all the answers currently to how the universe works doesn't mean I'm going to use a god to fill in the blanks. But it's at least not completely inconsistent with our current understanding of the universe.

Young-earth creationism is just asinine, though. I think a lot of people who refuse to believe in evolution don't understand that belief in a god and science need not be mutually exclusive.

>implying creationism has any evidence

The universe is far too complex to definitely argue truth. The mere arrogance in doing so is laughable and (((anyone))) who claims that it is, is a liar.

Huh, yet science shows the universe is most likely a simulation

Not going to respond?

What the fuck does it matter in the end?

Fear.

...

"Magical sky man did it" is far more reasonable, huh?

You're more likely to form a 747 by having a hurricane hit a junk yard than have a human being form from mud in the few million years that earth had water on it.

Besides evolution is self defeating logically. Look up plantinga.

You wouldn't htough because you are some youtube weed fagggot pretending to be smart like a fucking reddit faggot. You don't actually read academic papers.

because its almost completely irrelevant to the practical concerns of everyday life?

Matter can't be CREATED or destroyed
So your sky daddy is out of the equation

>empirical
>evidence
Literally no. There is NO evidence. The "Theory" of the big bang relies on one component to even make sense. Universal expansion and contraction, which has never been observed because it is impossible to observe. Try again.

>the Universe is too complex to argue...
As evidenced by? Scientists not knowing everything there is about the universe is due to not knowing everything, not their ostensible incapability to understand it.

[citation needed]
Doesn't invalidate my point either

>the Universe is too complex to argue...
I never said that. I asked you whether or not patterns are necessary or if chaos is a real possibility.

That probability only exists based off the notion that if evolution were to rewind back to the first cells and that eventually we would see humans again.

looks like a draw to me faggot, your point is?

>he doesn't know about background microwave radiation
>he doesn't know that the universe is expanding in all directions
Try again.

We do need to use someone degree of logic when observing evidence, you know? You can't gather evidence and explain it without logic to any degree

Is this another flat Earth thread?

>are patterns necessary
Only for the universe we reside in to exist.

>chaos is a real possibility
Having some level of order does not imply one can describe it as order. You need to define what you meant by order.

>he doesn't know that the universe is expanding in all directions
like i said, unobservable. you talk about theoretical particles moving at the speed of light so far away you cannot prove they are even there. try again mr hypothesis.

Creationism says that all life came into existence at one point in time. Any archaeologist and antropologist would disagree.

>this happened by accident

People still believe this.

I believe in space colonists from many different civilizations across the galaxy and even universe. There is an intelligent force throughout, but everything happens slowly and gradually. No "poof" creation.

So I guess that the objects we observe in space are mere projections? You got me there, oh how will I ever recover?