Rug Vs. Proof of God
Through my normal pursuing of christian content I came across an article on everystudent.com called "IS THERE A GOD?" I then proceeded to read the article. I mean if someone has found evidence of a god I want to know. Sadly, my time was wasted and my face was smashed by my palm so many times my nose will never be the same. However, It did give me something to write about. So, here goes their claims vs logic, science, and reason.
The article starts off by quoting the bible and in a roundabout way saying that if you don't believe in God you are lying. Then concludes its introduction, with more bible quotes, stating that you have to believe in God before you can have proof of God. Which is completely contradictory to the whole point of the article in the first place. Still, I pushed on.
At this point I was just hoping it would have better science than logic. Then I saw the first argument for God.
Well, Marilyn decided to some common arguments as evidence. The first of which is "The Earth...its size is perfect" The dots were already there. That is the exact quote. Yup, the size of Earth. Which she immediately shows her lack of knowledge by conflating size with mass in her next statement. Fine, I'll let that slide. Most people do that. Marilyn writes, "If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury." That's right boys and girls, she thinks it's Mercury's size that prevents it from having an atmosphere. Which if you put that exact question "Does Mercury have an atmosphere" into google you get this "Mercury has almost no atmosphere. The planet's small size means that its gravity is too weak to hold down a normal atmosphere. There is a very thin atmosphere around the planet." Google's voice search would have read that to her if she had bothered to search at all. The main reason Mercury doesn't have much of an atmosphere is due to the solar wind. You can read more about it from here.
The next piece of evidence Marilyn provides for the complexity of our pale blue dot is "The Earth is located the right distance from the sun." This statement in and of itself is completely true. Earth is in the habitable zone of our star. Infact she spends quite a bit of time stating things that are obviously true and if they were not true would make life on this planet impossible, or at least completely different from what we know. The only thing I can say to this is, of course the Earth is suitable for us to live on. Otherwise we would not be living here to know that it's suitable for us to live on.
Marilyn then moves to the human brain, because somehow that relates to the complexity of Earth? Anyway, her main point to this is the human brain is fantastic. Which of course everyone already knows. Her best line is, "There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people." However, once again Marilyn is showing her ignorance. Our closest living relatives the chimpanzees brains perform the same tasks. Infact, every social animal can perform these same task. This makes it a product of evolution, not God.
Marilyn then moves to the human eye. Once again, I'm confused how this relates to the Earth which is the main topic of this section of the article but I'll go with it. After once again bragging about how awesome the human eye is, ignoring the fact that many animals have better eyesight than we do, she makes this ignorant statement. "Yet evolution alone does not fully explain the initial source of the eye or the brain -- the start of living organisms from nonliving matter." Let me take the last part first, and I'm only going to say this once. Evolution has nothing to do with "the start of living organisms from nonliving matter" That is abiogenesis. Evolution is how life changes over time. Now, for the first part of this ignorance filled sentence. She has it completely backward. Evolution alone does fully explain the eye and the brain. Once again, these links took about a second on google to find.
Marilyn's next major section is the following.
In the conclusion of this masterpiece of ignorance, Marilyn writes this nugget, "God does not force us to believe in him, though he could. Instead, he has provided sufficient proof of his existence for us to willingly respond to him." Yet, throughout this article there is not one piece of evidence. Everything she claims is evidence is really just her ignorance. The few places science has not provided an answer she has injected God. What will happen to her God when science does provided an answer? Most likely she will still just continue with her willful ignorance.
I read these types of articles, watch apologist debate atheist, study religious text, and the history of said text because I want to know the truth. However, nothing I have ever seen, read, or studied has held up to examination. That is why I don't believe. Once there is any valid, falsifiable, testable claim that holds up I will gladly be a believer. However, if there is a God and he's anything like what is described in the Bible, Quran, or Torah he would not be worthy of worship. The God described in these books is a homicidal, genocidal, maniacal, sexist, bigoted, asswad, and I want nothing to do with him. I might just be a random guy named Rug with no special knowledge or ability, but that is what I think.
The article starts off by quoting the bible and in a roundabout way saying that if you don't believe in God you are lying. Then concludes its introduction, with more bible quotes, stating that you have to believe in God before you can have proof of God. Which is completely contradictory to the whole point of the article in the first place. Still, I pushed on.
At this point I was just hoping it would have better science than logic. Then I saw the first argument for God.
"1. Does God exist? The complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe, but sustains it today."It would seem that Marilyn Adamson (Author) has not picked up a science book in her life. Infact, she didn't even do a search. Two seconds on google I came across Holocene Extinction on Wikipedia that was sourced from some of the top peer review science publishers on the net. One quote from Stuart Pimm sums up the article rather well, "the current rate of species extinction is about 100 times the natural rate". Since this is the case, how exactly is God sustaining our universe today?
Well, Marilyn decided to some common arguments as evidence. The first of which is "The Earth...its size is perfect" The dots were already there. That is the exact quote. Yup, the size of Earth. Which she immediately shows her lack of knowledge by conflating size with mass in her next statement. Fine, I'll let that slide. Most people do that. Marilyn writes, "If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury." That's right boys and girls, she thinks it's Mercury's size that prevents it from having an atmosphere. Which if you put that exact question "Does Mercury have an atmosphere" into google you get this "Mercury has almost no atmosphere. The planet's small size means that its gravity is too weak to hold down a normal atmosphere. There is a very thin atmosphere around the planet." Google's voice search would have read that to her if she had bothered to search at all. The main reason Mercury doesn't have much of an atmosphere is due to the solar wind. You can read more about it from here.
The next piece of evidence Marilyn provides for the complexity of our pale blue dot is "The Earth is located the right distance from the sun." This statement in and of itself is completely true. Earth is in the habitable zone of our star. Infact she spends quite a bit of time stating things that are obviously true and if they were not true would make life on this planet impossible, or at least completely different from what we know. The only thing I can say to this is, of course the Earth is suitable for us to live on. Otherwise we would not be living here to know that it's suitable for us to live on.
Marilyn then moves to the human brain, because somehow that relates to the complexity of Earth? Anyway, her main point to this is the human brain is fantastic. Which of course everyone already knows. Her best line is, "There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people." However, once again Marilyn is showing her ignorance. Our closest living relatives the chimpanzees brains perform the same tasks. Infact, every social animal can perform these same task. This makes it a product of evolution, not God.
Marilyn then moves to the human eye. Once again, I'm confused how this relates to the Earth which is the main topic of this section of the article but I'll go with it. After once again bragging about how awesome the human eye is, ignoring the fact that many animals have better eyesight than we do, she makes this ignorant statement. "Yet evolution alone does not fully explain the initial source of the eye or the brain -- the start of living organisms from nonliving matter." Let me take the last part first, and I'm only going to say this once. Evolution has nothing to do with "the start of living organisms from nonliving matter" That is abiogenesis. Evolution is how life changes over time. Now, for the first part of this ignorance filled sentence. She has it completely backward. Evolution alone does fully explain the eye and the brain. Once again, these links took about a second on google to find.
Marilyn's next major section is the following.
"2. Does God exist? The universe had a start - what caused it?"After quoting an Astrophysicist and a Nobel laureate in Physics stating that we don't know. Which by the way is the best answer to date. Although, Lawrence Krauss has some theories. She then writes, "The universe has not always existed. It had a start...what caused that?" Once again, we don't know. The wrong answer is to put God as the creator. Since there has never been any good evidence God even exist. Though I keep hoping to find some. Meanwhile, let's take a look at the next section of Marilyn's article.
"3. Does God exist? The universe operates by uniform laws of nature. Why does it?"Once again, the correct answer is, because if it didn't we would not be here to ask such questions. However, I'm always interested to see what the ignorant say. Before quoting some scientist stating that we don't know, Marilyn writes this little nugget, "Much of life may seem uncertain, but look at what we can count on day after day: gravity remains consistent, a hot cup of coffee left on a counter will get cold, the earth rotates in the same 24 hours, and the speed of light doesn't change -- on earth or in galaxies far from us." Yup, this seems to be true. Oh wait, it's not. The Earth's rotation varies by about 16 minutes. Earth's gravity does not remain constant either. It will vary due to a number of circumstances. That cup of coffee would remain hot for a really long time if it was in a vacuum. However, I will admit she does have that one and the speed of light correct. Believe it or not, Marilyn has even more major topics. Let's move on to the next.
"4. Does God exist? The DNA code informs, programs a cell's behavior."After doing a rather competent job of misinforming her readers about how DNA works, Marilyn has this to say about DNA. "Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it." Really? Since when? I'm going to guess she has never looked at a geode, snowflakes, long complex chemical chains that are not DNA, or anything that you would find in a fun science class. Marilyn's misunderstanding of how DNA works and ignorance of chemistry has led her to think God did it. Which, seems to be a recurring theme here.
"5. Does God exist? We know God exists because he pursues us. He is constantly initiating and seeking for us to come to him."Wow, really? I have not seen, heard, or felt this initiating or seeking. Is God seeking in the wrong place? Let's see what Marilyn has to say about this. After stating she was an atheist at one time, she has this to say. "I didn't realize that the reason the topic of God weighed so heavily on my mind, was because God was pressing the issue." That is not God pressing the issue. That is the believers constantly spouting off about it. It's also a conditioned response from childhood indoctrination. Nothing more, nothing less. Childhood indoctrination can be harmful to one's mental health. You can read more about it as a developing study here here and here.
"6. Does God exist? Unlike any other revelation of God, Jesus Christ is the clearest, most specific picture of God revealing himself to us."This section contains a few bible quotes and other gibberish without ever giving any reason why anyone should think the bible is a set of true stories. However, I would like to point out one line here. "None of them ever claimed to be equal to God. Surprisingly, Jesus did." People make this claim all the time. However, these days when people claim to be God we put them in a psych ward.
In the conclusion of this masterpiece of ignorance, Marilyn writes this nugget, "God does not force us to believe in him, though he could. Instead, he has provided sufficient proof of his existence for us to willingly respond to him." Yet, throughout this article there is not one piece of evidence. Everything she claims is evidence is really just her ignorance. The few places science has not provided an answer she has injected God. What will happen to her God when science does provided an answer? Most likely she will still just continue with her willful ignorance.
I read these types of articles, watch apologist debate atheist, study religious text, and the history of said text because I want to know the truth. However, nothing I have ever seen, read, or studied has held up to examination. That is why I don't believe. Once there is any valid, falsifiable, testable claim that holds up I will gladly be a believer. However, if there is a God and he's anything like what is described in the Bible, Quran, or Torah he would not be worthy of worship. The God described in these books is a homicidal, genocidal, maniacal, sexist, bigoted, asswad, and I want nothing to do with him. I might just be a random guy named Rug with no special knowledge or ability, but that is what I think.
Comments
Post a Comment