₦airaland Forum

The truth is all of us do not know. It won’t make sense for you come to read this thread and you notice that everyone’s comments is saying they do not know.

But one thing I know is that after death and if you’re buried the following things happen;

1) you begin to decompose
2) micro organisms begin to feed on your remains
3) after many years, maybe the human specie would have advanced science and they may use your fossils to show evidence for evolution

No it’s no safe. In most cases it could be a coincidence.

Introduction to etabs user interface and analysing a simply supported beam on etabs




https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USlP57i0Jeg

Good day guys, I shall be dropping daily tutorials videos on how to effectively use ETABS v16. Just like my previous thread


Staad Pro tutorials

asalimpo:
Dawkins is a professor of biology or so,and one if the most reputedly I intelligent men alive. His opinion matters. He is an evangelical atheist,whose views other atheists respect.

If Dawkins was wrong,then other atheists would've called him out on it. None did.

First of all there are no scientific authorities it’s not like religion where the imam or pastors tell the members how to behave, believe or do whatever.

You r d one calling you arguments word games. I defend my stance with logic. I don't have to play word games with any1 but if u want to debate my stance,i'm willing to give a reason for my stand.
I have explained how atheism is a religion based on science and how science forms the bedrock,yet u say I'm playing word games.


"It answers no such questions"- this is wrong. Philosophy does try to answer such questions. Hard science can't answer such questions about the purpose of life because such answers would b unobjective.

Atheism is not a religion for fucking sake. Is theism or pantheism a religion? It’s just a position of belief.

Theism: believe in gods or gods
Atheism : lack of belief
Simple. It’s like me asking you what is your favorite carbohydrates and you say rice. Then you in turn ask me what mine is and I reply “ I do not eat carbohydrates” and you conclude that “ not eat carbohydrates is your favorite carbohydrate “

asalimpo:
Philosophy is d foundation of all science. They aren't mutually exclusive.
Dawkins answered the question of the purpose of life.
Science,the physical science has an opinion on the origin of life and the universe.
The question that started this was faith which atheists place in science as Christians place in God and the Bible. We look to God,you look to science. Hence science us a religion,nit because you worship a diety but because you consult it on life issues. And hope it will eventually have an answer to pressing questions. As do religious ppl.

stop this fallacy we don’t have faith in science, we acknowledge and accept its evidence given and if it’s not enough we dismiss it

EmperorHarry:
Hmm..gravity was a fact but became a theory.

no! A scientific theory explains the phenomenon. If you still think gravity is a force in 2019 then

So back to the discussion no matter the evidence in this world you give a scientific theory can never become a law.

Paxonel, I think I have noticed the hasty generation by some atheist but I think most religious people commit this fallacy “because Joseph Stalin and mao were atheist and mass murderes, then all atheist are killers”

EmperorHarry:
Oh really? Interesting.. What preceded the big bang?



Dude trust me I totally get the scientific theory thing but I'm pretty sure it is still just a theory which has the potential of becoming a fact. Theory of relativity has not been disproven but is still a theory cos science doesn't want to make errors where assumptions are facts which is then disproven over time.

but gravity is also a scientific theory. Why don’t you say gravity is not a fact ?

EmperorHarry:
I wasn't insinuating that it was included in Darwin's original theory. Don't misinterpret it.


So the big bang theory is only a theory? And not facts and as such the first cause position is still up for grabs and any opinion is still a possible outcome even the theistic God.

do you even understand what a scientific theory really means ??

This is too gruesome.. you can’t just waste their lives anyhow.. you’d have just made them clean the community for a month

EmperorHarry:
Natural selection is a possibility among many other probabilites we are faced with but natural selection can occur regardless of your opinion of the intelligent designer theory

. Well whether you like it or not evolution by natural selection is as real as the heat from the sun. Secondly no evidence for the intelligent designer. I have told you to show me any peer reviewed scientific journal that supports intelligent designer.

Its pretty obvious you have issues with the mainstream version of God and is therefore bias in your analysis of the evolution theory.

This only proves the point I made earlier


I don't think there is any reason to talk any further. It's obvious you're really not concerned about evolution.You're just looking for ways to refute God so I don't think you're a solid evolution or a ride or die evolutionist.

well I do not have any issue with any god. The truth is that the universe is fine the way it is and I would not even want to live in any universe created by god

Emperorharry Yes, not all theist or deist are creationists. I said these are most of the fallacies used by them to defend the existence of any god.

To answer your question why I feel evolution is valid theory ?

Let me give you some evidence of evolution by natural selection
1) DNA’s
2) transitional fossils
Etc.
IF you check out most scientific peer reviewed paper. You don’t see anything about the intelligent design.

Now intelligent designer is just another name for god in which evolution by natural selection has refuted.


As an atheist, I do not need any authority to tell me what to do. If Richard Dawkins , Sam Harris, Seun, capslocked and many other Nairaland atheist decide to become deist or pantheist. This doesn’t invalidate my “lack of belief”

If you noticed I mainly used Big Bang and evolution because these are one of the scientific theories that tells us that we do not need any form of intelligent designer ( god ) for the creation of life and the universe.

10. Personal incredulity fallacy
This is the most common fallacy committed by most religious people to defend their god and the Personal incredulity fallacy is Attacking a proposition based on lack of definite evidence; accusing a theory of being irrational without presenting actual evidence. In summary when you do not understand something and you say it cannot happen because you do not understand. I’ve noticed babyapple commit this type of fallacy, just because you do not understand the big bang theory of evolution does not make it false.

9. Argument from ignorance
It asserts that a proposition is true because it has not yet been proven false or a proposition is false because it has not yet been proven true. For example "I don't see how evolution could increase the complexity of an organism," so it is not true. Using this same logic i can say " since you did not see the world war 1 and 2" then they never happened.

8. They commit the Burden of proof fallacy
Burden of proof is one type of fallacy in which someone makes a claim, but puts the burden of proof onto the other side. If I propose that the particle x exist, then the burden of proof rest on me to give evidence. But religious people ask atheist to give evidence of god’s non-existence. Common if I claimed I am using a stone to surf the internet, won’t you ask me to provide you with evidence rather than me telling you to give me evidence that I am not using stone to browse the internet. As Carl Sagan said “extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”

7. They commit the strawman fallacy.
The Strawman fallacy someone attacks a position the opponent doesn’t really hold. For example, “if human evolved from monkeys how come there are still monkeys?” this is just a sign that many creationists do not understand evolution. And think the best answer to them is to ask “if god created man from dust, how come there are still dust?”.

6. They commit Black or white fallacy
This type of fallacy occurs in arguments that have a certain premise: i.e. one that gives just two alternatives when there can be more alternatives. For example, most religious people say it is either complex life was created by god or it came by a random chance. Now the religious ones forget that these are not the only two options that can create complex life. Natural selection explains how complex life came. This leads to the next logical fallacy.

5. They commit a non sequitur fallacy.
This is means when the conclusion of an argument does not logically follow its premise. For example, many theist and deist would say “the universe is too complex, so there is a god” The proof of an assertion must be a logical step in reasoning with a logical relationship. That the world has beautiful and complex things for us to see is not necessarily related to the existence of a god and is therefore a pointless proof. Likewise, that Muslim extremists carry out acts of terror is not logically connected to whether or not the religion of Islam is a viable religious institution and is an irrelevant proof.

4. Fourthly, they commit an equivocation fallacy
This is a type of fallacy in which the user is alternating between the different meanings a single word can have in different contexts. This is one of the most common fallacy committed by creationist. For example, “You have faith in science, and I have faith in god."
This exploits the fact that “faith” is often used to mean "confidence," that is having a solid reason to be confident of something due to its past performance—this argument is an effort to equate science with, religion when in reality science does not require faith. According to theist faith is just believing without evidence.

3. Thirdly, they commit an appeal to nature fallacy.
Appeal to nature fallacy asserts that something is good or immoral because it occurs naturally or it is bad because it is unnatural. You would be intellectually myopic to think that penicillin is bad because it is unnatural. You hear most Christians and Muslims say “Homosexuality is unnatural”. They say homosexuality is an abominable sin unto their god according to jesusjnr. Even if it is, it does not make it immoral. The fact is Homosexuality is natural. While homosexuals can’t procreate themselves, they facilitate and provide for heterosexuals that can procreate. According to one of Richard Dawkins book the selfish gene, he explained evolution in a gene centered sense. That is organism care about each other as far as their gene is passed on to the next generation. There is enough evidence whether you like it or not that the group of these archaic homo sapiens had a higher population of homosexuals which helped the heterosexual to procreate better. This is the reason why some percentage of animals have Homosexuals amongst them e.g sheep, bat, dogs etc. This is because it is integral to their survival. To think homosexuality is unnatural means you fail to understand our evolution.

2. Secondly both theist and deist love to commits a false cause fallacy
False cause fallacy means attributing a cause and effect to something even though it has not been proven. They say “complexity and order can only be caused by a creator”. This statement has been proven to be completely incorrect. This analogy mistakes correlation with causation. Let me give you a good example, because there is an increase in rain and also an increase in rape cases then you conclude that there might be a relation between rain and rapist, just like complexity and designer, this just not mean one requires the other. Theist and deist now completely ignore evolution by natural selection. Well I am not here to explain evolution by natural selection. We (scientific community) know that evolution is a fact just like the heat from the sun (Richard Dawkins). The reason we accept the fact that the wrist watch was designed was because we know the watch was designed.

This was popularly presented by William paley the watch maker analogy is used to describe the intelligent designer. The watch maker asserts that anything complex will require a designer. The way paley put it was that if you walked down a road and you find a wristwatch, if you look at it you would know it’s too complex and orderly to come by a random process, that it requires a designer. Just like how the universe and life is, it also requires a designer. This is the most common excuse given by theist and deist and these are some of the flaws they commit:
1. First and foremost, this is a false analogy fallacy
False analogy fallacy means that because two things have the same property in one aspect, they have the same property in all other aspect. So paley’s logic go thus;
the watch is complex = it requires a designer
life is complex = life also requires a designer

using this faulty logic to reason I can as well say

the watch is complex = it was created in 2006
life is complex = it was created in 2006
so this means that because 2 objects share the same property in one does not mean they share other properties.

A Christian is someone who believes something even if the evidence is against what he or she believes

cause it is boring

that is too dumb. i see rain falling in one country soon

jesusjnr:
Homosexuals need the Homophobics.

why did your god create other mammals as homosexual but made humans homosexual an abominable sin ?

The invigilator is funny what is even wrong with giving someone something with left hand

BabyApple:
Look at the Whole Old testament and New Testament and show me where God or Jesus himself made mention of Christianity as religion. Then you will understand. All the prophets that came before Christ were not ( Christ-ian ) even Jesus was a Muslim. Islam wasn't started by Muhammad. He is just one of the prophets that God sent as mercy to teach people how he want to be worship.

first of all you claim jesus and the other older prophets were muslims, is there any evidence for this claim ?

secondly, you make it sound asif islam is special; no its not special it's just one of the over 1000 religion created by people who did not know the earth orbited the sun

both religion are outdated so there should not be any need to discuss this further

BabyApple:
I was a member of The Redeemed Christian Church of God RCCG before i embraced Islam in 2007. I enjoyed being a Muslim. Christianity is falsehood.

but what is actually the difference between the two religions?

BabyApple:
can you tell this to your mom and dad?

Can you give evidence for allah ! No !