Question Archive

This is an archive of questions and requests for new threads. If you have an idea for a new thread, or a question or topic you would like to discuss, please post it here!

113 Responses to Question Archive

  1. Anonymous says:

    On the askanatheist website, the article on morality says, “atheists have no motivation to be moral other than their own innate sense of morality.” My question is, where dooes this sense of morality come from? You’re claiming you have it, but how is it that you have it?

  2. The Atheist says:

    I’ll move this to https://askanatheist.wordpress.com under a new thread called: “Where does the sense of morality come from?” and respond there. Thanks for the new thread! :)

  3. Rumrum31 says:

    AA Atheist
    I am needing some feedback from any members of AA that are atheist. I am secure in my beliefs and appreciate AA. For me, the two are reconcilable. However, I would like some recovery feedback regarding this issue…and please NO HATE mail.

  4. The Atheist says:

    Rumrum,

    Thanks for your post. I’ll create a new thread called “AA Atheist” on the Home page.

  5. steve says:

    hi im 14 and im an atheist, i have been wanting to read the god delusion for some time now. i am a pretty good reader i was just wondering if the book was TOO advanced for me. and if it is can you recommend any other good books for me to read.

  6. The Atheist says:

    Stave,

    Thanks for your question. Look for you new thread on the Home page called “Atheist Books for Teens?”

  7. theist says:

    Where do atheists derive their morality from? Can you really just say it is “innate” without either implying that God created us with a sense of morality built in. Also, if you argue that we are socialized to have a moral sense, does that not originally derive from religion?

  8. Thanks, theist. I’ll post your new thread under the title: “Where do atheists derive their morality from?”

  9. milehigh says:

    It’s my understanding atheistsr don’t “believe” in god because there’s no “scientific evidence” of god’s existence. Do atheists not believe in love since there no way to quantify scientifically it’s existence?

  10. JB Monteverde says:

    I have no issue with someone who does not believe in G_d. I do not think that one should be forced, pressured, coerced, or even convinced to believe one way or another.

    But I would like to know what atheists DO believe in. What do you have FAITH in.

    I hear a constant prevailing theme and tone in these blogs and from other sites for atheists and atheists I have spoken with, personally, that does, however, ridicule other peoples’ beliefs and faiths. And THAT attack-mode stance and mentality does much to diminish the validity of atheists’ position in my eyes. I have belief and faith and know what I know, yet I never feel the need to bolster my position by negating somebody else’s belief.

    Personally I think it is ridiculous to waste one’s time looking for “evidence”. I have never associated the concept of “evidence” with any aspect of my spirituality. To me, a truly spiritual person just “GETS” the concept of faith.

    I feel that if one can reach a point of true spirituality and faith and all the enrichment that those qualities bring to a life, without a belief in anything beyond mortal man and earthly material-world evidence, then that is just as valid as anyone elses belief or mindset.

    I do not want to know why you don’t believe in G_d. What I would like to know, is what IS your belief system. What consoles you, teaches you, counsels you, sustains you in troubled times. Is there anything more important than you? Is there anything beyond you? I am asking this quite sincerely. By the way, I do know that who ever answers this is just probably speaking for themself, since i don’t think the atheist non-church has elected their pope yet….LOL

    Thanks for your time. —-JB

  11. JB Monteverde says:

    WHAT IS YOUR BELIEF AND FAITH?

    I have no issue with someone who does not believe in G_d. I do not think that one should be forced, pressured, coerced, or even convinced to believe one way or another.

    But I would like to know what atheists DO believe in. What do you have FAITH in.

    I hear a constant prevailing theme and tone in these blogs and from other sites for atheists and atheists I have spoken with, personally, that does, however, ridicule other peoples’ beliefs and faiths. And THAT attack-mode stance and mentality does much to diminish the validity of atheists’ position in my eyes. I have belief and faith and know what I know, yet I never feel the need to bolster my position by negating somebody else’s belief.

    Personally I think it is ridiculous to waste one’s time looking for “evidence”. I have never associated the concept of “evidence” with any aspect of my spirituality. To me, a truly spiritual person just “GETS” the concept of faith.

    I feel that if one can reach a point of true spirituality and faith and all the enrichment that those qualities bring to a life, without a belief in anything beyond mortal man and earthly material-world evidence, then that is just as valid as anyone elses belief or mindset.

    I do not want to know why you don’t believe in G_d. What I would like to know, is what IS your belief system. What consoles you, teaches you, counsels you, sustains you in troubled times. Is there anything more important than you? Is there anything beyond you? I am asking this quite sincerely.

    By the way, I do know that who ever answers this is just probably speaking for their own self, philosohy-wise, since i don’t think the atheist non-church has elected their pope yet….LOL

    Thanks for your time. —-JB

  12. The Atheist says:

    JB. I posted your comments under a new thread called: “What DO Atheists Believe.” I will respond there.

    Thanks for posting!

  13. Darla says:

    I need help from an atheist who did follow spirituality practices and stopped, I am trying my best to quit but keep being pulled back into it. Threats and the like. Thanks

  14. The Atheist says:

    Darla,

    Is this something you would like to discuss on the blog? If so, let me know and I will be glad to post it. The reason I’m asking is that it sounds like something you might prefer to discuss in private. If this is the case, please email me at webmaster@askanatheist.org and I will be glad to help however I can.

  15. chris in Houston says:

    I find it curious that “athiests” seem to read the bible in more detail than alot of Christians. Seems like they’re still trying to convince themselves…..that’s good! Search and you will find, knock – and the door will be opened for you.

    I will make it simple: Jesus rose from the dead, performed many miracles (including raising Lazurus from the dead), and preached his truth in front of thousands of witnesses. Jesus said he was God.

    I believe him. You’re not sure (if you were, you wouldn’t waste your time reading the Bible or even discussing Christianity). I know it doesn’t make sense in our day and in our 3 dimensional world. But that’s just our little world…not God’s. You’ve got to put aside your paradigm of what can and can’t be, and then examine Jesus’ teachings. Then, hopefully, the truth will become apparent despite all the inconsistencies with our world.

    And that is FAITH. Please, keep at it and hopefully the truth will become acceptable to you. And then, through embracing the truth, you will become acceptable to God. Make no mistake, he already loves you. But you’ve got to reciprocate!

    Incidentally, it didn’t make sense to me either, even though I was raised a Christian. Too many wierd things to believe. Didn’t match up with my world view as a university trained scientist… But then I read the Bible through and voila! I believe! Does it always make total sense to me? No. Do I sometimes doubt it? Yes. That’s just our human nature. I no longer question Jesus’ truth, just my ability to accept it and live according to God’s will.

    As a truth loving person, please get a copy of “A Case for a Creator” – book or DVD. You will see proofs of God’s hand in creation that no scientist or Darwinist can explain away.

  16. The Atheist says:

    Thanks, Chris. I’ll post this under a new thread called “Atheists Read the Bible in More Detail Than Christian,” then I’ll respond to your comments there.

    Thanks for posting!

  17. My new friends :)

    Im new here…

    Tanya Hoodia is my name

    Just wanted to say hi. This place seems really warm

    All the best

    Tanya

  18. The Atheist says:

    Hi, Tanya. Thanks for stopping by.

  19. Alright dog, i have a few questions for you that will help me on a project for my Sociology of Minorities Class. We are working on social issues regarding minorities and we would like to get the opinion of Atheist.

    First of all do you feel that Atheist are a minority in this county? If not how do Atheist view themselves in the United States?

    Secondly in a social respect, how do you feel Atheist are viewed differently.

    And lastly, what can Atheist do to attain a level of minority status that will allow them to receive benefits that are given to other minority groups?

    Thank you for taking time to answer our questions and we look forward to reading your responses and learning about Atheism.

    Curious College Students

  20. […] of Minorities Class Curious College Students Says: Alright dog, i have a few questions for you that will help me on a project for my Sociology of […]

  21. doug says:

    dear the atheist,
    “i am so like totally lost” ;D in regards to all of this.
    i am confused about how to go about all of these things.
    i hope this works.
    before i forget mr/s the atheist you sound like a very nice person.

    okay here blows.

    why is it that at&theist insist upon arguing science vs. philosophy?
    definition of at&theist: “reach out and touch someone” an old at&t campaign ad ;D
    at&theist force science against God in order to reinforce their own refusal to believe that YES GOD IS !
    a good scientific argument would be :
    intelligent design
    or
    global warming
    a good philosophical argument would be:
    reincarnation

    at&theists continue to argue matter vs. faith to put it another way.

    when you call someone you Believe someones out there.
    when you pray you Believe God is out there.

    i have read many entries on different lines or blogs and/or whatever. almost everyone out there to a [wo]man ;) sounds very intelligent some with their own sites, books pending,etc. mind you i’m not a mental midget, but once more almost to a [wo]man on both sides people seem to enjoy hearing themselves talk. you want 15 minutes of fame go shoot your post[wo]man :D personally i am a minimalist. there is too much over thinking on here. too many references to books [yawn].
    as for myself i believe in kiss [not the band ;) keep it short &simple stupid. to do anything but that is once more enjoying the sound of your fingers on the keys.

    so once more:

    why do at&theists continue to argue science vs. philosophy?

    best wishes & God bless you,
    doug

    why

  22. J.D. says:

    “In the Beginning”

    I would like to hear other Atheists views on the beginning of life. Please spare the the self-contradicting story of the bible, if that is what you believe. We know it, we know “Christians” like to pick and choose what parts of the bible they believe and how to go about believing it. BUT if you have info on “the beginning” from non-Christian religions feel free to post, I would like to learn something new if I can.

    I do have one theory of my own, that so far I have not heard form anyone else. It is one, I would like to think is general capable of being backed by what science has taught us.

    Everything has always been and always will be, unless catastrophically destroyed by some cosmic event. This could cause newbies to be formed as well.(that is the begging part, here is my reason)

    My observation is this, the older things are, we find them deeper in the earths crust, Theoretically, once it got deep enough it could possibly “get melted.” Which brings me to my next inclining, we might not be the first go-round of peak evolution.

    If you look at the overall structure of the earths crust there is evidence of what could be several all life ending events. that could cause life to reverberate back to “pond scum.”

    As for the “expanding” universe, with the life span of the universe being so long it is nearly infinite, couldn’t we just be in the midst of an outward wave of a pulsating universe. This could indeed cause cosmic events such as “when worlds collide”(see the beginning).

    This is just a theory, and more sound than a biblical creationist theory I would think. Because I base this theory on observations I have made on other, more scientific studies.

    Give me your thoughts, if you can prove it utterly wrong, go for it. It will make my brain quit buzzing wondering how logical my theory is.

    First and foremost, I want what other people believe posted. I seek information I have not yet cataloged in my mental database.

  23. The Atheist says:

    The most compelling theory to me is the one advanced by superstring theory. The model describes 10 space dimensions and 1 time dimension (so 11 space-time dimensions). The model suggests that the 3 “large” space dimensions that we are familiar with are no different than the 7 minuscule (on the order of Plank’s constant) space dimensions. One model shows that 3 dimensions at a time expand as the other 7 contract to the size of Plank’s constant. Once the 7 reach this limit, 3 of the 7 dimensions begin to expand as the large 3 begin to contract. The Big Bang according to this model is the initial expansion of the the large dimensions that we are familiar with. The model agrees with the rough estimates of the earliest history described by the Big Bang, but it more accurately formulates the estimates.

  24. J.D. says:

    I have to admit, I have no idea about that theory, can you shoot me some links where i can read up on it.

  25. The Atheist says:

    I haven’t really found a good online resource – here’s the book that I read that explains the theory:

    http://www.amazon.com/Elegant-Universe-Superstrings-Dimensions-Ultimate/dp/0375708111

    The book is great – an easy read that covers a lot of ground, I highly recommend it!

  26. J.D. says:

    Christians claim that the Bible has hundreds of fulfilled prophecies, and is proof of its divine inspiration. In actuality, these so called fulfilled prophecies failed, were false or weren’t prophecies at all. Many of these prophecies are so vague, they can be attributed to different events. It’s also a fact that the Bible was written 100’s, even 1000’s of years after these presumed prophecies and their “fulfillment” took place. It’s also fair to mention that nowhere in the Bible will you find countries such as the United States, Russia, China, Korea, Great Britain prophesied. Oh Christians will tell you that they are, if you know how to interpret the Bible.

    Genesis 26:4 And I will make thy seed to multiply as the stars of heaven, and will give unto thy seed all these countries; and in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed.

    Here God tells Isaac that his descendents (Hebrews) will be as numerous as the stars. Considering the number of stars there are in the universe, that would have to be on the order of 10 to the power of 20 Jewish people.
    ——————————————————————————

    Isaiah 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.

    Christians say that this verse is a prophecy of Jesus’ birth to a virgin. There are a couple problems with this prophecy…First, virgin in this verse is a mistranslation of the Hebrew word “almah”, which actually means “young woman”. A young woman is not necessarily a virgin. “Bethulah” would have been the correct word to use if the author meant virgin. Second, nowhere in the New Testament is Jesus referred to as Immanuel.
    ———————————————————————————-

    Isaiah 17:1 The burden of Damascus. Behold, Damascus is taken away from being a city, and it shall be a ruinous heap.

    Damascus is still inhabited today with over a million people, and hardly a ruinous heap.
    ———————————————————————————-

    Isaiah 19:4-5 And the Egyptians will I give over into the hand of a cruel lord; and a fierce king shall rule over them, saith the Lord, the LORD of hosts. And the waters shall fail from the sea, and the river shall be wasted and dried up.

    The river mentioned here is the Nile. The Nile is still one of Egypt’s greatest natural resource.
    ———————————————————————————–

    Isaiah 19:18 In that day shall five cities in the land of Egypt speak the language of Canaan, and swear to the LORD of hosts; one shall be called, The city of destruction.

    The Canaanite language has never been spoken in Egypt, and is now an extinct.
    ————————————————————————————

    Isaiah 52:1 Awake, awake; put on thy strength, O Zion; put on thy beautiful garments, O Jerusalem, the holy city: for henceforth there shall no more come into thee the uncircumcised and the unclean.

    There are uncircumcised people living in Jerusalem even today.
    —————————————————————————————

    Ezekiel 29:10-11 Behold, therefore I am against thee, and against thy rivers, and I will make the land of Egypt utterly waste and desolate, from the tower of Syene even unto the border of Ethiopia. No foot of man shall pass through it, nor foot of beast shall pass through it, neither shall it be inhabited forty years.

    Never in its long history has Egypt ever been uninhabited for forty years.
    ———————————————————————————-

    Amos 9:15 And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy God.

    Many times, Jews have been pulled up out of their land. The ownership of their land is still being fought for.
    ————————————————————————————

    Jonah 3:4 And Jonah began to enter into the city a day’s journey, and he cried, and said, Yet forty days, and Nineveh shall be overthrown.

    Nineveh was never overthrown. Why? Because God changed his mind in verse 3:10, despite what Malachi 3:6, Numbers 23:19 and Ezekiel 24:14 says about God never changing his mind.

    Jonah 3:10 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

    (another note on this one:so god did evil huh? sinned? not so perfect?)
    ———————————————————————————-

    Zechariah 11:12 And I said unto them, If ye think good, give me my price; and if not, forbear. So they weighed for my price thirty pieces of silver.

    Christians say that this prophecy is was fulfilled when Judas received 30 pieces of silver for betraying Jesus. Matthew 27:9 recites this verse, but incorrectly credits Jeremiah with the prophecy.
    ———————————————————————————

    Matthew 1:22-23 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.

    Again, Jesus is never referred to as Emmanuel (Immanuel).
    ——————————————————————————–

    Matthew 2:23 And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene.

    Nowhere in the Old Testament is such a prophecy found, so how could such a one be fulfilled?
    ———————————————————————————–

    Matthew 12:5 Or have ye not read in the law, how that on the sabbath days the priests in the temple profane the sabbath, and are blameless?

    There is no passage in the Old Testament that can be attributed to what Jesus is saying here.
    ————————————————————————————

    Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

    Jesus states that all the signs marking the end of the world in Matthew 24 would be fulfilled before his generation ended. That generation ended 2000 years ago, and the world has not come to an end, neither has all those signs been fulfilled.
    ————————————————————————————

    Matthew 27:9 Then was fulfilled that which was spoken by Jeremy the prophet, saying, And they took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him that was valued, whom they of the children of Israel did value.

    This prophecy was never spoken by Jeremiah.
    ————————————————————————————-

    Matthew 26:64 Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

    Jesus tells the high priest that he would see his second coming. The high priest is long dead, and Jesus hasn’t returned yet.
    ————————————————————————————

    Throughout the New Testament, the end of the world is prophesied as being very near, at hand, to be witnessed by those living at the time. Paul often told the people he preached to that they would be witnesses to Jesus’ second coming. They are all long gone.

  27. The Reverend says:

    A Rough History of Disbelief

    On May 25th Wisconsin Public Television will be broadcasting Jonathan Miller’s ‘A Rough History of Disbelief.’

    From Wikipedia: “…a 2005 documentary series conducted by Jonathan Miller for the BBC tracing the history of atheism. It was first shown on BBC Four and was repeated on BBC Two.

    The series includes extracts from interviews with various academic luminaries including Arthur Miller, Richard Dawkins, Steve Weinberg, Colin McGinn, Denys Turner, Pascal Boyer and Daniel Dennett. The series also includes many quotations from the works of atheists, agnostics and deists, all read by Bernard Hill.”

    The schedule for airing has changed a couple of times, so you may want to monitor their calendar: http://wpt.org/schedule/index.cfm

    The series is also available for viewing at: http://www.veoh.com/channels/briefhistoryofdisbelief&

    Enjoy!

    The Reverend

  28. doug says:

    Atheists With Doubts.
    All of us have doubts.
    All of us have questions.
    Christians have doubts about Gods existence, Christians wonder why ‘good things happen to bad people’.
    Just as Christians have doubts and questions about the fact that, ‘YES GOD IS’.
    No doubt atheists sometimes have doubts that God does not exist.
    This thread is specifically for you. This being an atheist web site I do not expect many if any hits, for who would want their name broadcast that perhaps, just maybe they have doubts that God does not exist. 99.9% of aethiests would refuse to express their doubts.

    Belief in God is not a playground it is a battleground!

    Best wishes & God bless you,
    Doug

  29. The Atheist says:

    doug,

    That is a most excellent question! Thanks for posting it. See your new thread at: https://askanatheist.wordpress.com/2008/05/25/atheists-with-doubts/

  30. Testttyq says:

    Hello

    Bye

  31. Edwin says:

    I would like to mention something about one of the verses you used in a posting about homosexuality.

    “Lev 20:13 – If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. ”

    That does not condemn homosexual relations. Women in biblical times were considered as property, while a man was above her. This verse merely says that if you are disrespectful of a man you have sex with, you are committing an abomination, while it is A-OK to treat a woman like crap.

  32. Damian says:

    Hehe, maybe that verse is merely discussion positions?

  33. Damian says:

    Damn! I hate it when I have to go back and correct a throwaway one-liner: “discussion positions” should be “discussing positions”.

  34. The Atheist says:

    Edwin,

    Thanks for the new thread! See it at: https://askanatheist.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/lev-2013-and-homosexuality/ under the Title: “Lev 20:13 and Homosexuality”

    Damian,

    D’oh!! :)

  35. James says:

    “Is Christianity Unintelligible?”

    In it, I would like to discuss an article I found in Christian Reformed Theology and Apologetic found at http://www.reformed.org/webfiles/antithesis/index.html?mainframe=/webfiles/antithesis/v1n3/ant_v1n3_unintel.html.

    This form of apologetics is part of the religious tradition from which I have emerged. And I find that this apologetic is, of all apologetics, the most persuasive. Specifically, I would like to discuss the following claim:

    “For the Christian, the Absolute standard is the personal triune God revealed in Scripture. There is no higher court of appeal by which the Christian evaluates what is rational, ethical, or real. A Biblical outlook simply does not countenance any human standard of rationality to which God must answer. If God is truly Absolute, as he is presented in Scripture, then He stands as the ultimate judge over all issues in logic, ethics, reality, and knowledge. The Christian God is not in the dock being forced to answer to our finite standards. ”
    Atheists must howl at this sort of stance, since it appears to beg-the-question against any atheistic claim. Yet the atheist’s howling is naive. If there were some higher standard of “reason” or “conceivability” by which both the atheist and Christian could adjudicate their dispute, then the Christian God would not be Absolute; He would be limited by something outside and above His nature. Yet the Christian does not worship some being subordinate to Platonic Forms or some alleged higher standard of reason or goodness. The Christian God is truly the final court of appeal.

    “The atheist also has a final court of appeal. The atheist also bows before an Absolute standard. And just like the Christian, the atheist does not permit anything to correct or evaluate this ultimate standard, for if he did then the standard would obviously not be the final court of appeal.

    “The ultimate standard for the non-Christian, in general, and Smith, in particular, is finite human rationality — or the autonomous human mind. Though this Absolute standard is often portrayed as “Reason,” it is, from a Christian standpoint, a distortion of reason. Nevertheless, this non-Christian Absolute functions in much the same manner as the Christian Absolute. Non-Christians even use religious terminology when they refer to this Absolute — ‘bowing before the bar of reason’ or ‘reason is the only guide’ or ‘we cannot dispute reason’ or ‘an offense against reason.'”

  36. The Atheist says:

    James, Thanks for the very thoughtful question and the invitation for discussion! I have created a new post called Is Christianity Unintelligible. I will post my response on that thread.

    Welcome to the blog!

  37. Chas says:

    I am trying to learn about others beliefs because I am going to school to be a teacher. I do not want to promote any type of beliefs to students. However, I also do not want to discriminate against students and want to learn more. I would like to know an atheist’s view on women’s rights and if you support them, saying the pledge of allegiance, interracial dating, and wether you support gay and lesbian support groups. This information will be appreciated to help me learn about others. Thanks

  38. The Atheist says:

    Chas, Thanks for great the question! I created your new thread and called it Sensitive Teaching. I’ll respond there and I hope others will too.

  39. yaya says:

    anyone out there from the Charlotte area in an AA group that is an athiest?

  40. The Atheist says:

    Hi, yaya. Welcome to the blog and thanks for the question. You can see your new post on https://askanatheist.wordpress.com/2008/10/12/atheists-in-aa-in-charlotte/. I hope someone out there is able to help!

  41. Bobby, says:

    How about a thread devoted to: the criteria to convince an atheist of divine existence.

    No matter what the topic of discussion may be, it always ends up going in that direction! So why not establish a criteria and see if people can adhere to it?

    Later

    your brother

  42. SJ says:

    A thread about the existence of evil.

    As one that believes in God, I’m interested to know your view on evil. I think that we can both agree that evil and suffering effects everyone and no one from any religion or belief system is exempt from it. I have hope that one day God will redeem the world from sin and sorrow, so I curious to understand your perspective on the struggle for good and evil and how you account for the presence of evil in the world.

  43. The Atheist says:

    Hi, Sj. Thanks for your very thoughtful question and welcome to the blog! You’ll find your new thread at https://askanatheist.wordpress.com/2008/12/03/the-existence-of-evil/

  44. Sabregod says:

    Why Does Atheist Doesn’t Believe in Bible And Religion. Bible And Science Doesn’t Contradict if You Gave Some Examples of Contradictions, I Will come up some counter-arguments against those contradictions.

  45. The Atheist says:

    Hello, Sabregod and welcome to the blog! Thanks for the question – you can see the new thread at https://askanatheist.wordpress.com/2008/12/06/bible-contradictions/

  46. enelogemi says:

    Hello folks, I just went akross this awesome forum through google and I like the especialy this form. I really like the design and the team does its job verry good.
    I´m Andrew and I´m pleased to be here :)

    Greetings

  47. The Atheist says:

    Welcome to the blog, Andrew!

  48. expickreetred says:

    Nothing seems to be easier than seeing someone whom you can help but not helping.
    I suggest we start giving it a try. Give love to the ones that need it.
    God will appreciate it.

  49. forexguy says:

    Hello All,

    I am new here and just wanted to introduc myself.

    I have a few questions but I will first search for the answers before asking them just in case they have been asnwered.

    THanks!

  50. The Atheist says:

    Hi, forexguy.

    Thanks for stopping by. Don’t be afraid to just “ask away” – we’ll be happy to either answer again, or point you to an earlier discussion.

  51. Andy says:

    What is the evolutionary explanation for having two sexes (man and woman)?

  52. The Atheist says:

    Hi Andy, welcome to the blog! Thanks for your question – I have posted it here for discussion. See you there!

  53. Xela777 says:

    I’m a high schooler, so I haven’t really met the hierarchy of evolutionists, but every atheist (not that their necessarily the same) I’ve met, including my dad, hasn’t been able to even make an explanation of how the “first reproductive cells” started asexual reproduction and then evolved into sexual reproduction. It would require two voluntary cells, one to somehow know how to play the female role, the other the male, and get that complex reaction to work.
    So, anyone?

  54. Damian says:

    Hi Xela777,
    As many Christians (or theists) will tell you…

    [ see full comment here ]

  55. Johnny B says:

    I’m a Darwin Evolutionist…

    [ see full comment here ]

  56. Damian says:

    For the record…

    [ see full comment here ]

  57. The Atheist says:

    Xela777

    Thanks for the new thread and welcome again to the blog!

    I’ve posted the thread here:

    https://askanatheist.wordpress.com/2009/03/12/jesus-subservient-to-the-father/#comment-11639

    Damian & Johnny B

    Great discussion, guys! If there are no objections, I am moving your comments to the thread’s new location (https://askanatheist.wordpress.com/2009/03/12/jesus-subservient-to-the-father/#comment-11639). Let’s continue the discussion there??

    (sorry for this confusion – it took me a while to get to this because I’ve been absolutely swamped this week!)

  58. ApepAcumS says:

    Excellent site askanatheist.wordpress.com and I am really pleased to see you have what I am actually looking for here and this this post is exactly what I am interested in. It’s taken me literally 3 hours and 58 minutes of searching the web to find you (just kidding!) so I shall be pleased to become a regular visitor :)

  59. Bible Prophecy says:

    EVOLUTION: FACT OR FICTION?

    Charles Darwin hereby speaks for himself:

    “I may here also confess that as a little boy
    I was much given to inventing deliberate falsehoods,
    and this was always done for the sake of causing excitement.”

    Reference(s): The Autobiography of Charles Darwin 1809-1882. With original omissions restored. Edited by Nora Barlow. Page 23.

    See,
    http://darwin-online.org.uk/content/frameset?viewtype=text&itemID=F1497&pageseq=1

    “I love fools’ experiments.
    I am always making them .”

    Reference(s): John Bartlett (1820–1905).
    Familiar Quotations, 10th ed. 1919.

    See, http://www.bartleby.com/100/450.5.html

  60. Bible Prophecy says:

    THE CASE FOR CHRIST

  61. Bible Prophecy says:

    ATHEIST DAY: April 1st. (April Fool’s Day)

    THOSE WHOM GOD CALLS FOOLS

    The fool says in his heart,
    “There is no God.” (Psalm 14:1).

    For the message of the cross is foolishness
    to those who are perishing,….(1 Cor. 1:18).

    You fools, when will you become wise?
    (Psalm 94:8).

  62. Bible Prophecy says:

    “I can see how it might be possible for a man to look down upon the earth and be an atheist, but I cannot conceive how he could look up into the heavens
    and say there is no God.”

    –Abraham Lincoln

  63. The Atheist says:

    Bible Prophecy

    Welcome to the blog. Was there a topic you would like to discuss?

  64. Xela777 says:

    Amino Acids: Attacking Atheism (again)

    So, you guys had your experiment, (http://bcs.whfreeman.com/thelifewire/content/chp03/0302001.html) where “you” used methane, ammonia, hydrogen, and water to mimic the early earth’s atmosphere, and viola you guys made amino acids! No one disputes that. Although, I am curios as to how these amino acids eventually linked up to make a functional cell, or how they linked at all. These amino acids needed to be in a very specific order, and although T’s will link to C’s, is it? I don’t see how the groups of T-C and A-U (in the case of RNA, which is thought to be before DNA) will join together to make any intelligible (as in, will work) organism.
    I will also point out that after the 1950’s, the prehistoric meteorologists rethought their hypothesis of early atmosphere, and changed it to nitrogen, I think oxygen, iron too? The point is, they changed it because the supposed hydrogen would’ve escaped off, and the experiment never showed the amino results in the “new” atmosphere.
    But how did aminos link?

  65. xela777 says:

    Terrible Translation?

    What translations do atheists use? How did you go about getting your Bible? Do you read the poetic books? What about the shorter NT books?

  66. psychosavant says:

    I’ve heard it before, I’ve read it on this blog. Contrary to what many would say, even atheists, we can and some of us do, hate God. Anyone who says it is impossible for an atheist to hate God because they don’t believe he exists is not looking at things from the right perspective.

    I’m an atheist, and I hate God. How is this possible you ask? Am I thus acknowledging the existence of God? The answer to this latter question is a resounding “No!”.

    I hate God in much the same way I hate the Teletubbies, the Mighty Morphing Power Rangers, and DragonBallZ. I do not have to believe something is real to hate it. God to me, is as fictional a character as the rest of these, but I hate him the most.

    However, this is not to say all atheists hate God. To each his (or her for the ladies) own. But it is not particularly impossible for anyone to have an emotional response, or to love or hate something, simply because they do not believe in it.

  67. xela777 says:

    So you hate the idea of God?

  68. The Atheist says:

    Hi, xela777

    Thanks for the question! You’ll find your new thread here

  69. The Atheist says:

    Hi, psychosavant and welcome to the blog!

    Good comment! You’re new thread is here

  70. JMartyr says:

    Hi, I have a question.

    What would an atheist’s reply be 2 the Christian who argues that most of atheism’s arguments for Jesus’ non-existence rely on fallacious arguments from silence? I know they say that we would’ve found something by now, but didn’t it indeed take centuries, even millenia, for most if not all historians/archaeologists to make many of their discoveries?

    Thanks,
    JMartyr

  71. The Atheist says:

    Hi, JMartyr and welcome to the blog. Here is your new thread. Thanks for the question!

  72. monokeeloX says:

    Say saying hi to you guys!

  73. Kefrawledodef says:

    I’m the only one in this world. Can please someone join me in this life? Or maybe death…

  74. Xela777 says:

    Que es el problema Kefrawledodef?
    Dang, I haven’t been here in two weeks and I’m still on the “recent posts”. Did the atheist rapture occur or something?

  75. enlightened says:

    Help! I’m all alone in my enlightened bubble!

    I was raised knowing that I am Jewish, but had a very sparse religious education. That changed when I moved to Israel (long story) and met my future husband who came from a very traditional family. Somehow, despite my very rational and logical approach to just about everything, I became a full believer. Mind you, I NEVER practiced or admired orthodoxy, but I did believe in a supreme deity- or at least convinced myself that I did. Then, after a tragic wake-up call, I evolved! I was enlightened! In some ways it has been invigorating and–well, enlightening! Although most often it is a very sad and bitter realization. I feel angry that I wasted so much time, that I allowed myself to be oppressed-THAT I WAS PART OF MY OWN OPPRESSION! But the worst part is that I fed this stupid god/Santa Claus BS to my children. My husband still fears god (he’d do better to fear me a little!) and we even keep Kosher. I have no room in my life and absolutely no patience for religion- especially Judaism. (Somehow, I only pity the followers of other religions-but I have a growing animosity towards Judaism.) Most of my friends are believers as well. They just smile and change the subject when I start to rant (I am a good person and a good friend so they stick around). Those of my friends who are not believers just can’t understand what I am so worked up about. They sing holiday songs, enjoy holiday feasts and could care less about god, and all the ugly facets of religion that lie heavy on my heart.
    So here I am on one hand relieved and excited. (I want to wake everyone up! “Hello! Guess what?! There is no god you idiots! There never was! Ok, let’s get to work! It is time to move on! There is a MUCH higher level of morality than religion. Let’s get busy and fix this world!)
    On the other hand, I am depressed. I have god and religion all around me, all of the time. I married my heart’s choice 20 years ago and I feel that I can’t just change the rules on him. I began raising my children Jewish and feel that they are too young to turn around and say “oops, I didn’t really mean that.” The innocent part of celebrating Holidays is gone for me, and I just can’t bring myself to celebrate anything but birthdays. I am a real pain during the holidays!!
    I admit that I have been prone to ranting and raving lately, but I just wish I could wake up tomorrow and find that the world has caught up to me. People think that I just hate god, because of the losses I have suffered. What they don’t understand is that I hate what the belief in god has done to humanity, what it has done to me, my parents, and my sweet peace-loving sister who was blown up beyond recognition while sleeping on the beach. I don’t hate god. THERE IS NO GOD! I hate bigotry, oppression, discrimination and ignorance- A.k.a. Religion!
    So- besides anti-depressants, therapy, tolerance, patience and time, does anyone have some suggestions for the ‘woman in the bubble’?

  76. The Atheist says:

    enlightened,

    Thanks so much for sharing this very difficult story with me and others who read this blog. It moved me to tears – I can’t even begin to imagine what you have been through. I’ve posted your story here.

  77. louis says:

    Hey atheist! Why do so many of your commenters and thread-starters have no blogs of their own?

  78. The Atheist says:

    Hi, louis and welcome to the blog. here is your new thread.

  79. Xela777 says:

    The Raptird

    Can someone give me an article (or a series of articles) on how Raptors went from that to bird? My problems aren’t bone structure, (this doesn’t prove anything, it’s just a similarity. It’s a suggestion rather.) I want to see an article on how the biology of scales become something as different as feathers, how cold-blooded becomes warm blooded, how teeth are not advantageous and gave way to beaks, and how something survives with a half wing half arm, which as I see it can provide neither task.

    If any of you gives me an article that is huge and I waste me time completely reading just to find it’s about BONE STRUCTURE, I will strongly dislike you until you give me a good article. Sorry if I sound mean.

    Anyway…

    Begin.

    • Durzal says:

      First i’ll deal with your not understanding how something can survive with half wing half arm.

      This explaination from wikipedia explains it quite well(link below)

      The modern version of the “from the ground up” hypothesis argues that bird’s ancestors were small, feathered, ground-running predatory dinosaurs (rather like roadrunners in their hunting style[84]) that used their forelimbs for balance while pursuing prey, and that the forelimbs and feathers later evolved in ways that provided gliding and then powered flight. The most widely-suggested original functions of feathers include thermal insulation and competitive displays, as in modern birds.[85][86]
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_birds

      There are plenty of flightless birds who have some sort of half wing/arm that seem to be doing just fine
      Check the link
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flightless_bird

      This is all rather simply if you think about it for more than 3secs with an objective eye.

      (btw I’ll deal with the rest of your list on another reply)

    • Durzal says:

      Okay next ill deal with scales into feathers.

      Again asking someone to explain how scales changed into feathers suggests to me you dont really understand the basic concepts of evolution as this is a hell of an evolutionary jump.

      First i need to point that scales and feathers are made of the same protein
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keratin
      (Wikipedia Quote)
      β-keratins found in nails and in the scales and claws of reptiles, their shells (chelonians, such as tortoise, turtle, terrapin), and in the feathers, beaks, claws of birds and quills of porcupines.[1]
      So they didnt really change into something different.. just a different shape.

      Scales did not changed into feathers due to some extreme mutation overnight, the scales may have through mutation or natural selection become slightly more pronounced as you have agreed can happen(ie small changes in species) then maybe 50.000 years later they became even more pronounced..and so on… this could have happened for a number of reasons from camouflage to a more impressive mating display.
      Given millions of years the scales could change into all sorts of keratin structures(as long as they where advantageous) like porcupine quills that offer protection and insulation, the plumes/barbs on feathers are just further evolution that were advantageous.(ie SMALL changes over a Great! Great! Great! deal of time)

      I’ll deal with the warm/cold blooded thing here as well as its sort of related.

      Its a common belief that the dinosaurs were all coldblooded as they were just seen as big lizards.. this is incorrect as dinosaurs were fast moving(a characteristic of warm blooded animals) so its not really a question that need answering, I would add that whether certain dinosaurs were cold/warm blooded is still hotly contested and its unlikely to be proven anytime soon as its not something that can be seen in fossil records.

      • Durzal says:

        I’d also add that modern bird are unlikely to have evolved directly from dinosaurs such as raptors as there were feathered birds amongst the dinosaurs such as this happy chappy
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx
        This dino bird has more in common with small theropod dinosaurs than it does with modern birds and is probably a offshoot of a much earlier dinosaur than a raptor.

      • Xela777 says:

        I suppose a fabulous answer of the feathers (why does everything have keratin?), and I was thinking the same of the blood. It just hit me after I posted it… >.> Why can’t they change the theory then?

        Wait, shouldn’t we know from those T.Rex blood samples we found? Or do we need other stuff to tell?

        No, the feathers aren’t a problem, it’s that I have a half arm, which can’t be used for arm functioning ( a half cane can’t serve as a cane), and can’t be used as a wing because it’s only half wing. I’m a slow lizard that can’t hit back or run on all fours because my arm sucks, and I can’t fly yet, that’s in 10,000 more years.

        My dad was telling me that supposably medical science will increase so fast at this point that we will be able to live forever. (sounds familiar) If we could live a vast amount of time, it would be great to wait a million years and see if something evolves. Or God come back, whichever’s first.

      • Durzal says:

        The good thing about scientific theories is they are constantly being changed and proved wrong when new evidence comes to light, It moves so fast that hardly anyone is up to date with the current undertsnading on every topic.

        Regarding the T rex blood sample.
        Well its not something you would be able to tell from a sample as what makes a creature warm or cold blooded has little to do with blood tempreture.
        Its how the creature keeps a certain body tempreture lizards(coldblooded) sun themsleves to maintain heat while a warmblooded animals will keep active to maintain body heat. (theres also differences in how many valves the heart has but its not something we can discover through fossil records)

        Im unsure if you read my first post but it explains in detail why a half wing/arm could (and is in many modern animals) be useful.
        i.e the half cane you talked about may not be suitable as a support as it stands but it may be useful as a weapon. (then as it evolves it could be used for both support and to hit people.)

        Your old man knows his stuff there is research going on trying to understand how cancer cell continue to replicate themselves forever and thus cause the problems they do, if every cell in your body continued to replicate itsself in this manner we wouldn’t grow old. Fasinating stuff.

      • Durzal says:

        I’d also add that you dont need to wait a million years to see evolution happen, its happening all the time like the bird and swine flu virus’s that started off in their prospective animals but mutated to become infectious to humans.

        Example
        If there is white and black moths in a forest that has black and white tree trunks that the moths rest on for camouflage, then
        if a factory was built nearby that gave off pollution which covered the trunks with black soot then over the period of a year or so there would only be black moths left as the white ones would no longer have suitable camouflage and be seen and eaten.. and therefore not pass on their genetic code.
        The black moths would be best suited/fittest for their new enviroment and so the white and black moths species of that forest would have changed to be purely black.
        Thats survival of the fittest ..thats evolution.

        To see large jumps in evolution like the evolution of scales into feathers you would have to wait millions of years however..shame.

      • Xela777 says:

        I cannot find the pro arm/wing section. Copy/Paste.

        You’re just showing me how a species gets better. The moth will always stay moth. No matter how often you kill white moths, the gene will pop back up eventually.

        And the above experiment was faked, according to my sources. (But who’s to say whose sources are better?) While the principle found by it is correct, for clarity we’d prefer our moths to be able to move. (They were glued to the leaves and trunks. Birds will eat that.)

      • Durzal says:

        Its not so much a section, as explained in many parts of what i have already said ..I will summarise for you.

        The arm will not change into a wing overnight it will take millions of years for such a jump in evolution, there are many flightless birds who while they have wing/arms and do not use them to fly but they still have wing/arms that are useful in different ways like staying warm, balance, speed and some just for display/mating purposes(peacocks)
        Like your example of a half cain not being able to be used as a cain is right… but when its a half cain it wouldnt be used as a cain it might be used as a weapon and if mutation happens that makes it slightly longer it could be used as both a weapon and for support and therefore that trait would be advantageous and passed on to the next generation.
        A mutation that involves a limb that is pointless and unhelpful would die out.

        “You’re just showing me how a species gets better”…well yes, thats Evolution.

        The moth will still be a moth but it will have changed (Evolution).
        For the moths to change into a new species requires isolation and independant evolution so that 2 types of moth will no longer mate (share genetic code) much like how a alligator and a crocodile won’t mate.

        Its true to say that the trait for white pigmentation may pop back up in the moths but if the enviromental condition were the same then the white moths would die out not pass on the trait and the trait occuring would become more and more rare.. like the likelyhood of a child being born with a tail(which happens)

        The moths(OF BOTH COLOURS) were glued to trees because its hard to get accurate and credible data if your guessing how many moth of each colour have been eaten, by glueing BOTH COLOURS you can actually count that more white moths where eaten than the blacks, which means the black moths were better suited for their new enviroment(Evolution).

        Do you really believe scientists spend their time faking their experiments to piss you off or to discredit the religions of the world?

  80. janiceenberg says:

    A warm greeting to everybody! Hello to all,i am a new member of this forum and hope to have a good experience here

  81. MichaellaS says:

    tks for the effort you put in here I appreciate it!

  82. Durzal says:

    A reply to Patok’s last post
    https://askanatheist.wordpress.com/2009/01/05/did-god-created-the-universe-for-us/#comment-13301

    Well as i said before my definition of a God is a supreme being who created the universe and everything in it, whereas you dont acredit your advanced aliens with(unless im wrong) creating the universe in which they live, so theres a big difference right there.

    If you dont see that things “interpreted by humans” or “considered by men” as supreme, don’t actually make them supreme, then i would advise you also to revisit logic 101.
    (I consider myself a hunk, doesnt make it so im afraid)

    If these hypothetical advanced aliens did seed our planet(terafoming etc) then they could accuratly be called our creators, however i would suggest you refrain from calling them Gods as God (for most) implies the creator of the universe/souls/heaven and hell etc and i dont think this is what you are trying to imply.

    A much greater percentage of scientist’s of all fields do not believe in a God to those who do believe.(even in the US)
    http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html
    Whether more scientists believe than lawyers or any other select group is besides the point.

    You suggest that none belief is some decision people make to suite their own agenda’s..this is wrong,
    I dont believe because when i look at the world and the big questions i see no need for a deity or any evidence whatsoever to support such an idea….why then, would i believe?

    You also suggest that atheist’s are amoral>.<
    What would make you think this?
    If you didnt fear a God would you roam the streets raping and killing?..Of course not..Dont be silly!!

    I dont need to believe in your God(or aliens) to know how to behave well (nor does belief in a God mean you will either)

    There are plenty of people, aboriginal's for example who have never believed (heard of in some cases) your God and they dont go around offing each other, the reason for this is that screwing each other over is a evolutionary dead end, whereas teamwork and helping your fellow man isnt.

    This is all rather simple if you bother to think about it for more than 3seconds with an objective eye.

  83. The Atheist says:

    Thanks, MichaellaS.

    I’ve been tied up with work recently and unfortunately haven’t had time to post much myself. I’m grateful to all those who have been contributing posts and keeping this site alive & well with thoughtful & challenging debate! A very hearty “THANKS!!”

  84. Green Genius says:

    I was raised an Atheist in Nor Cal. I would like to ask The Atheist if a feeling of fear and guilt can be conjured in his or herself by religious condemnations. It happens to me since I was a child stemming from the pervasive Christian culture I grew up in. Luckily it hasn’t stopped me from being rational.

  85. The Atheist says:

    Hi Green, and thanks for the question. See your new thread here.

  86. Lee says:

    Is Deism tenable? I’m an atheist insomuch as I do not believe in any sort of theistic concept of a deity; however, I often wonder if there exists an impersonal, non-interventionist type of provisional “First Cause”.

  87. Green Genius says:

    Hi Atheist, what do you suppose is the real number of atheists in the US? Admitted is going to be less than actual. Also what about EU’s? And the world’s? And someone just told me that they were agnostic because they said some things can never be proven. I said back to him yes, but I doubt a supernatural being could ever be proven either and he agreed? So what is up with these agnostics?

  88. The Atheist says:

    Hi Lee, Thanks for the question! You can see your new thread here

  89. The Atheist says:

    Thanks for another good question, Green. Here is your thread.

  90. Plutjeterce says:

    What’s up, is there anybody else here?
    If there’s anyone else here, let me know.
    Oh, and yes I’m a real person LOL.

    Later,

  91. Xela777 says:

    DNA, Now What?

    Ok, so, let’s pretend I sit around for a billion years and watch 4.1 million A’s and G ‘s match up to their T’s and C’s and all those pairs amazingly find each other. I now have a strand of DNA. (4.1 million might be a little too many for the first organism, but that’s how many pairs E. coli has. http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/02_01/Sizing_genomes.shtml)

    Again, a strand of DNA. We have a randomly assembled bit of DNA code that somehow works (because if I hit a keyboard consisting of only 1’s and 0’s 8.2 millions times, and try this for 1 billion years, I will get a functioning program), and is capable of reproducing itself. I have two problems/questions about this.

    1. How does the DNA reproduce? Ok, sure, it splits in half somehow. It just gets and inkling to do that. So let’s pretend it splits in half. Now what? How do the two halves get their corresponding parts back? We do this now because we have RNA in our bodies that goes around and finds the letters from the nutrients we get, and brings it back, we have mechanisms to accomplish this. But what does that single strand of DNA have? Or are we going to jump ship and say we started with RNA? Then how does the RNA copy itself? It’s not as if carbon also happens to form around this code at the same time and we have an amoeba.

    2. Since there’s no carbon coming to form around the DNA code, (no skin, no encasing, no protection) how is this precious code protected from the swirling water, the radiation from the sun, and wind?

  92. apologia says:

    Well, I can’t believe that I am writing to an Atheist website for insight. You see, I’ve been a theist my whole life, although for the most part that was by default because I was not a part of any faith community.
    My belief in intelligent design extrapolates naturally to a creator(s), ergo; God!
    I have flirted with various religions at different times, particularly when they seemed to offer answers to my deepest questions. Unfortunately, when my questions became too awkward, I was generally told that I had been given the answer and must accept it by faith – not a very critical form of deliberation.
    Eventually, I stumbled upon some very learned, contemporary Christian apologists and my path to Christ was gradually laid. These ‘scholars’ were very convincing in their arguments for Christianity and after commiting to that faith I was soon immersed in learning and teaching (at the lay-level).
    I even taught a course on how to debate with atheists. This was done with the assumption that their objection to theism was either philosophically or scientifically based. I tell you this because I don’t want to come across as a gullible nutcase (as many Christians are perceived by those outside the faith). My primary instruction in the atheist course was to tell those attending to put away their Bibles because they might as well bring a copy of Bram Stoker’s Dracula for all the credibility it will carry with an atheist.
    Well, that’s enough history, where I am now (philosophically) is what is germain. The answer in a nutshell is that I am still a theist but my faith in the Bible as ‘inspired’ and my belief in the claims of Christianity are unravelling at an alarming rate. The problem is that I am still active (spiritually, socially, etc) within the faith.
    A group of us who were teachers and lay leaders within the church split away because of the institutional church’s lack of motivation to do the social work required – taking care of the disenfrancized, etc. As a result we formed a house church with no leader, denominational affiliation, established doctrine or theology, etc. We each naturally take leadership in areas where our talents lie. Despite what the institutional church members who oppose us believe (and there are many) it works beautifully and we are making a difference in our community. The trouble is that I now feel like a fraud due to my ever-widening disconnect with the Christian theistic position.
    So here’s the $64.000 question – how do I gently break away without damaging a lot of people?
    As a teacher I was very effective in rationalizing the faith of others so that they grew in confidence. My change of perspective has the potential to effect a lot of people, including my wife.
    Please don’t offer platitudes such as be true to your conscience, because I know that’s what I should do – and damn the consequences – but I just can’t. I need to find a way to do it gently. Your insight will be greatly appreciated.
    p.s. I came here because it would be impossible to get realistic advice from a Christian forum.

    • The Atheist says:

      apologia,

      Thanks for this very candid description of your journey and for asking this delicate question. See your new post here. Even though this is an atheist blog and I and other atheists are happy to respond, I hope some of the Christians who post here will offer their perspectives as well.

  93. How Could it be? says:

    Evolution and intelligent design are tied.

    Would you evolutionist agree that evolution and intelligent design are in a stand still if you look at it from a scholarly perspective. Yes, evolution has become the leading theory in society, but science has done as much to prove it as it has intelligent design. They both have one major flaw that prevents them from being fact. Evolution can’t explain how you get life out of no living chemicals; and intelligent design doesn’t have a designer. Untill the answer is solved they will both only be theories. No matter how much you want them to be fact its just not possiable without the proof.

  94. The Atheist says:

    Hello, “How Could It Be”. Thanks for the question! See the discussion here

%d bloggers like this: