[BurdenRobert]

How is this causal again? All I see is a strong correlation.

[betraaaus]

Considering the last line, I don't think this is meant to be taken seriously.

There certainly are a lot more factors involved. How religious is the community that the individual was raised in, for starters. Desperate situations (dangerous area to live, financial woes) can cause people to seek faith, as well as people who have done things in their lives that they want absolution from.

[Bromymbollile]

There is no evidence. I've looked for something to cause 'faith'. So far I haven't found it.

[SpecialOFFER]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
You atheists are so comsumed with providing "evidence". It could be viewed as funny. Evidence is everywhere:

You are a thick Texan who believes in god, and I am an atheist with a godlike intellect...


CASE CLOSED!

[Ruiptuptubre]

Wow ok.

So believing that Aliens came to earth and seeded it with life is less stupid then believing in God?

I see how that works.

[Cinzomzm]

Einstein believed in God.

[GypeFeeshyTes]

Originally posted by Japher
Einstein believed in God. Like Spinoza's.

However, a lot of physicists believe in God. It isn't a rare thing within physics, just lower than the general populace (once more, about 40%).

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/08/23/na...gewanted=print

JM

[zueqhbyhp]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi
So believing that Aliens came to earth and seeded it with life is less stupid then believing in God? Not that i believe that that's the way it happened, but to answer your question: yes.

[onelovemp]

Originally posted by Richelieu


Not that i believe that that's the way it happened, but to answer your question: yes. God sent the aliens.

[fluistulkn]

3) Believing that aliens seeded Earth with life is far easier to accept than believing in God, because believing in God requires acceptance of a supernatural entity which it is logically impossible to prove the existence of. So because something is logically impossible to prove that means that things beyond logic cannot exist?

The problem with the Dawkins' explanation is who made the aliens?

[Nopayof]

Sometime I'm curious which is worse, that atheists have no faith, or that I don't care what happens to them.
With my luck, I'll probably go to Hell with them.

[xanaxist]

Didn't say that. Just said that there is no way to prove God's existence. And because of that, there's also no way to assign any degree of probability to his existence. Neglects the point I was making about epistemology. Logic is not the only means by which we derive knowledge. If it is possible for things beyond logic to exist, then it is possible for God to exist even if logic cannot define him.

Given the proper variables, we could figure out how likely it is that aliens seeded the Earth. We lack any observational evidence of aliens whatsoever. A true skeptic would understand that unless of course they were a true believer in aliens, which still doesn't answer the question as to why believing in aliens is less stupid then believing in God.

Bigger debate. Not worth getting into. At best Dawkins explanation doesn't really explain anything, nor does it solve the problem, whereas with God, it does.

[TiepayWrary]

Lynn pointed out that most children do believe in God, but as their intelligence develops they tend to have doubts or reject religion. Similarly, as average IQ in Western societies increased throught the 20th century, so did rates of atheism, he said.
Wow this guy is stupid.

a) Intelligence in children as measured how?

b) All the first statement speaks to is a general and well known trend that as people go through adolescence into young adulthood they tend to become less involved in religion and matters of faith. He doesn't speak to any further trends as maturity sets in whether or not a return to faith occurrs. Are we to assume that the conflation of intelligence and experience is merely happenstance.

c) IQ increased through the 20th century??? Really??? IQ by definition is a normalized function wherein 100 is the average.

Methinks Dr. Lynn (thus showing doctorates have much less value than they did once upon a time) would be best suited writing for The Onion.

[arindiruppyr]

Yes, but we're talking about how reasonable it is to believe something. If you can show me a way outside of logic that can help us determine how likely it is for a particular explanation to be true, please do so. That requires a logical statement and a general framework, as well as a few presuppositions. I would argue that God is the best way to answer some questions that otherwise have no explanation are are left up to chance.

It is perfectly reasonable to think that aliens could exist because we have already observed life existing on a planet. Attempting to define or describe any potential aliens, however, is pretty silly because, yes, we haven't observed any. Intelligent life capable of traversing stars and seeding a planet? We have no such observations. Why is it reasonable to think that there are such aliens out there who would do such a thing?

Of course it explains something; it answers the question, "How did life arise on Earth?" It doesn't answer the question, "How did life arise?" But that's okay. Scientists don't generally attempt to answer all the questions at once. They focus on what they can given the evidence at hand. True, but it really postpones the question, "how did life arise?" which generally is the question that is trying to be answered.

Also, the word "God" does not explain how life came about. Yes, you can have a mythological story about the origin of life based on God, but that's not an explanation. It is an explanation, albeit not a scientific one.

It's not a theory. It can't be proven. It's just accepting that you do not understand how life arose, because you're relying on something that cannot be proven in order to explain it. Science cannot answer the question "what is science"? There are many forms of knowledge beyond that of the scientific method.

Now, accepting that you don't understand how life came about is perfectly fine, because we don't really know yet. But I'm okay with not knowing. I don't need to jump to "God did it!" just because I don't know right now. I would argue the question of "how did life arise" is unanswerable unless God exists, which is an entirely different argument. All the alternative explanations have flaws in them, and cannot be proven through the scientific method.

[strmini]

This "research" amounts to little more than: "nyah, nyah, nyah, nyah, you believe in god so you must be stupid!"

[exettybele]

If I were a poster here that believed in god I'd be very worried. Ben is on your side of the argument.

[jhfkgkfdvjk]

Hi ,

thats called research


i can do science me

plenty of people on poly are religous btw , ... try a poll on it

have a nice day > note not to those researchers

[outfinofulpv]

Originally posted by SlowwHand


"Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."



First thing said in the Bible. You should open one sometime. hey ,

you think they will , .....

[unishisse]

If I want fiction there is better written stuff out there.

[TobaccoNUE]

Hey, I never claimed there weren't good stories in it. Just poorly written. Too many begats.