I'll warn you, this one is intellectually insulting and painful. This man is a preacher, an evangelical. The worst kind. I'd say Westboro Baptists are worse but, they are just lawyers who litigate their own contrived free speech lawsuits. They aren't Christians nor Baptists.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=460320387403982
It's a public video, all should be able to see it. In the video, the essence of Father Bullshit's argument is that since we didn't "observe" evolution, it didn't occur. Yes. That's what he said. Since we don't see species make a drastic and improbable leap via one generation or live birth or just *POOF* right in front of our eyes, it simply isn't true.
We all know evolution is a process that has occurred since the first bacteria began to form on the only habitable planet in our solar system. So, when I confronted this person about the claims made, this is the discussion.
By the way, I enjoy this format because I find it redundant to re-type an argument I've already made and I don't want to screen cap and re-size.
I reply first.
Me - " I can't even dignify this absurd unfounded response. I am fucking amazed at the anti evolution movement. This man is a flat out idiot. Evolution is as debatable as "is the sun hot?""
C - " Is the cussing necessary Scott? I'm sorry you feel this way." - Well, that's simply my south side foul mouth. No harm.
Me - " Yes this man is spreading a blatant falsehood. It has been observed for thousands of years. Your child will have evolutionary traits that are passed on and so forth. It is utterly disgusting, unfounded and unscientific.
He attempted to use a semantic maneuver to disprove what is proven in reality. I have an incredibly high IQ and incredibly low tolerance for liars and charlatans"
Me - "This man IS stupid for believing in God but it is because he is in fact, stupid.
I have a Ph.D in my family and he is a Christian. He is a scientist at Abbott. He has much better reasoning than this blathering no-neck, so maybe post something that had substance as opposed to an angry hypocritical liar?"
C - "Evaluation is theory Scott. That is truth. If he's "stupid for believing in God," then so am I. He doesn't sound angry to me. In fact, you sound angry. Again, I am sorry you feel this way. (Forgive the typo, probably on their phone. I do it often.)
I have a few follow up statements in reply to this particular claim, as follows:Me- "A theory that can't become a law because of passenger seat evangelical nonsense is believed to be truth."
"I am indeed angry, this anti science sentiment only exists because it can't Co exist with creationism WHICH WAS ALSO NEVER OBSERVED"
"But enjoy becoming an obscure minority that only people who possess no critical thinking ability can buy.
You're literally taking the word of a YouTube video against over one hundred years of conclusive research. That is sticking your head in the sand."
"What sect of Christianity do you belong to? I'm pretty well studied in them so share and I'll passenger seat your religion like the clueless bloat on this video. You're presenting this opinion as valid, I have a counter." - To this, I'm confident it's evangelical, as they are immovable in their stance no matter what the counter-argument or statement is and their polite damning of anyone disagreeing. At least Catholics have some vitriol.
After stating she'd love to debate over lunch when I am less hostile, there was this. I want to denote, I am a HUGE fan of Ricky Gervais. Without the benefit of hearing my voice's inflection, I can assure you I say it more with sarcastic and comedic tone than anger. Just, without the awesome accent and career. Le sigh.
C - It's only difficult to those that have no education to back up what they believe. And only makes claims based on a feeling. I don't need to prove God is real. He Himself proves that through creation and His word and world events that were written long ago in the bible that are taking place now. The debate is only difficult when people are angry and/or close minded. Instead of questions, they question. And a debate is only difficult if the person(s) debating the subject is only informed on their argument and not the other person(s) "disagreement."
Scott, if you don't believe--I respect your belief and you as a person. However, if you don't believe and have this angry built up...part of me assumes that at one time you did believe and down thing happened and it hurt you and you became mad at God or those who put their faith in Him. If you don't believe, then why are you so angry with Him?
Leanne Gabriel, I'm glad you like my friends "great points." But if your truly curious, I encourage you to not take any of what he or I says as face value and do your own studies so you can have a voice formed by your own educated knowledge.
I love you both. Scott, I promise you--when and if ever you want to talk about this....I am opened and only will invest my time if your willing to sincerely listen and NOT IGNORE FACTUAL statements. I don't argue truths. I defend them until it turns into an irrational discussion--I am not interested."
Me - Here are a few difficulties with your rebuttal.
1 - "He Himself proves that through creation and His word and world events that were written long ago in the bible that are taking place now"
There is no factual evidence to that claim. The sheep and goat herders who wrote the Bible were rationalizing natural occurrences in observable nature and attributing them to acts of God. That's actually still a term used by insurance companies which, as an atheist, I find hilarious.
2 - --"I respect your belief and you as a person. However, if you don't believe and have this angry built up...part of me assumes that at one time you did believe and down thing happened and it hurt you and you became mad at God or those who put their faith in Him. If you don't believe, then why are you so angry with Him?"
I can't be mad at Santa or the Easter Bunny and here Jesus Christ the ever-living MIddle Eastern man of local legend, is absolutely no different than the stories of the aforementioned Holiday representatives. I was never able to rationalize my belief. I felt ashamed that I couldn't believe because I enjoyed Greek Mythology as a young child (I learned to read at 2 years old) so it's suffice to say I couldn't justify that one set of gods were false and one wasn't.
3 - Back to the "word of God". Why has every single prediction for the return of Jesus been false? What the heck is he waiting for exactly? It's been 2,000 years. Now, if you think this it the end-times and you rejoice at the thought of the world ending and your career, life and everything else being exalted into some other unfathomable plain of existence, be my guest. Why are there NO observable miracles in the age of modern technology? They seem to have all CONVENIENTLY occurred when there was nothing but word of mouth and a (this is a fact) less than 5% literacy rate in the civilized world when the books were finally transcribed, over 300 years later after the original "events" took place.
I mean look, if you have a spouse or lover and they cheat and give an elaborate story, and you weren't there to corroborate the events told, you're going to use EMOTION to make the decision about the events that may or may not have occurred?
The "predictions" in the Bible are nothing that isn't within the boundary of natural law. We humans are destroying the planet but not by any means mentioned in the Bible. An all seeing, all knowing God would have predicted technology, CFC's, a lot of other things. His very disposition of omnipotence and omnipresence makes him either A - Unwilling to change the status quo, B - Doesn't care to, or C - being omnipotent and knowing all possible outcomes, disregards it's own supreme intelligence and let's us kill ourselves.
Environmentalists, democrats, independents, Libertarians are more often than not, non-religious. We're worrying about the planet and you guys are worrying about what happens after you leave it. Republicans, tyrannical leaders and Fundamentalists WANT the world to burn and they pass legislation and mine for fossil fuels to insure it does."
C- "And the problem with yours is the fact that you believe in a theory. Big Bang."
Me- "The Big Bang has been proven, did you not catch that news? We found the radiation waves that mathematically lined up correctly to the beginning of time as we know it."
I then provided a link to the video of when Prof. Andre Linde receives the news his theory is confirmed.
So, when do we stop ignoring reality? And why does this particular sect of Evangelicals so vehemently protest science, to the point where a 5 minute diatribe from another Joel Osteen fraud is validation enough to dismiss every piece of scientific data since Charles Darwin began his research? Why all the anti-scientific sentiment? Please, comment below.
