inafoxhole (inafoxhole) wrote,

50 reasons (NOT) to believe in god

#38 Evolution describes the way life possibly started, yet doesn't explain what made life start & why. Scientific questions fail to do that. Even if evolution were proved, it would still not disprove God.

There is so much wrong here. (I'm starting to sense a common thread in these 'proofs'.)

First, even if evolution were disproved, it would not prove there was a god. God and evolution are technically independent. There are plenty of people who believe in both.

Second, let's clarify what evolution deals with: it deals with how life changes. It has nothing whatsoever to do with how life began. Once begun, it evolves. But origins are not a part of the theory of evolution, and science has no definitive explainations for abiogenesis just yet. Some good ideas, but no clear picture. So, our theist is correct: it doesn't explain what (not who) made life start, but neither does it describe the way life started.

And as I've pointed out previously, there doesn't really need to be a why. Lots of things happen for no reason.
Tags: arguments for god, evolution

  • Descartes

    In my philosophy class this week, we were discussing Descartes' proof of the existence of god in Meditation III. I think I objected to every single…

  • anthropology class

    I'm taking a physical anthropology class this summer. I suppose it's fortunate it's all online. While there are anthropology majors and evolution…

  • So funny!!!

  • Post a new comment


    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded