And here’s one of them. Sure, maybe not in the same league as Dawkins, but that’s being picky. The observations and arguments are great. I wish I could be so eloquent - and this atheist is so young! Sigh…
You know what really blows my mind about Creationists/IDers?
They sneer at science one minute, try their damnedest to ‘refute’ scientific theories, and in the next minute bastardize science in an attempt to create ’scientific proofs’ for their deity. So which is it? Does science have the power to explain the world or doesn’t it? I suspect you believe that science only applies when you want it to apply, and you dismiss it when it doesn’t prove what you’d like it to.
They lie, misquote and misrepresent scientific facts simply to further their own silly agendas. They willfully ignore scientific evidence all while stating that we should accept their evidence because it came from ‘god’ or the ‘bible’. So, I’m to accept evidence for how the world was created that was written over 2000 years ago? Read the whole article here.
I couldn’t do any better than quote from Richard Dawkin’s book - The God Delusion.
“Let’s remind ourselves of the terminology. A theist believes in a supernatural intelligence who, in addition to his main work of creating the universe in the first place, is still around to oversee and influence the subsequent fate of his initial creation.
In many theistic belief systems, the deity is intimately involved in human affairs. He answers prayers; forgives or punishes sins; intervenes in the world by performing miracles; frets about good and bad deeds, and knows when we do them (or even think of doing them). A deist, too, believes in a supernatural intelligence, but one whose activities were confined to setting up the laws that govern the universe in the first place. The deist God never intervenes thereafter, and certainly has no specific interest in human affairs. Pantheists don’t believe in a supernatural God at all, but use the word God as a nonsupernatural synonym for Nature, or for the Universe, or for the lawfulness that governs its workings.
Deists differ from theists in that their God does not answer prayers, is not interested in sins or confessions, does not read our thoughts and does not intervene with capricious miracles. Deists differ from pantheists in that the deist God is some kind of cosmic intelligence, rather than the pantheist’s metaphoric or poetic synonym for the laws of the universe. Pantheism is sexed-up atheism. Deism is watered-down theism.”
As far as defining atheism goes - here’s Wikipedia’s stab at it is this - “Atheism, as a philosophical view, is the position that either affirms the nonexistence of gods or rejects theism.
When defined more broadly, atheism is the absence of belief in deities, alternatively called nontheism.”
As promised, I found the YouTube posting with an excerpt from the excellent Richard Dawkin’s documentary ‘The God Delusion’. This is all that’s really needed to expose the ‘intelligent design theory’ as a complete fraud.
It is also the most concise summary I have yet seen of an atheistic world view. Enjoy - share the link with friends and visit Richard Dawkin’s website (and buy the book!).
Just found this on Richard Dawkin’s site : The Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science is proud to announce that it is now offering all 5 hours of Richard Dawkins’ 1991 Royal Institution Lectures for Children titled “Growing Up in the Universe” for free online! Click here to watch: http://richarddawkins.net/growingupintheuniverse
The internet has become a fantastic repository of video. A broadband connection is required for the best experience of course. If your connection is what I call ‘pretend broadband’ ie: under 512K download speed, then I suggest that after clicking the play button on the video you then press pause and wait for a minute or so until more of the video downloads in the background. That way your viewing will be less stressful!
For a start, here’s Richard Dawkins’ excellent BBC documentary, The Blind Watchmaker (47 mins)
The description from the BBC’s education catalogue follows: “…The evidence proposed is well-organized and current. The video first presents creationist ideas, articulated by Texans who support the theory of special creationism, and then provides vivid contradictory data through observation, computer simulations, robotics, experiments and close examination of designs in nature. Its central argument is that the diversity and variety we see in such complex adaptations as the eye and insect mimicry can best be explained by cumulative natural selection over long periods of time. With its vivid blend of argument and scientific detail, The Blind Watchmaker will enrich even the most advanced student’s view of evolution.”
