We've moved to a better place...

You will be automatically redirected to the new address. If that does not occur, visit
http://www.relativelytinteresting.com
and update your bookmarks.

Showing posts with label religion. Show all posts

Thursday, February 2, 2012 ~ Have your say...

Pseudoscience and Magical Thinking: What's the Harm?

What's The Harm is a website that lists cases where a lack of critical thinking has caused unnecessary harm, death, injury, hospitalization, major financial loss, or other damages.


Here are 10 striking examples where pseudoscience and a lack of critical thinking has lead to a great deal of harm.  WARNING:  Some readers might find this content disturbing.

Photo of Amora Bain Carson

Amora Bain Carson


Age: 13 months
Henderson, Texas
Died
December 2, 2008
They believed the child was possessed and tried to rid her of demons. They allegedly bludgeoned her and bit her more than 20 times. She died. Her mother and a man were arrested and held on $2 million bond.Read more



Photo of Isabella Denley

Isabella Denley


Age: 13 months
Kew, Victoria, Australia
Died (untreated epilepsy)
October 19, 2002
Isabella was prescribed medications for her epilepsy. Instead of using them, her parents consulted an iridologist, an applied kinesiologist, a psychic and an osteopath. She was being treated purely with homeopathic medication when she died. Read more & more



Photo of Brittney Dorcy

Brittney Dorcy


Age: 2
Vancouver, Washington
Murdered by her mother
June 12, 2004
Brittney's mom suffered from severe depression. Her medical treatment for this was very successful and lauded in a local news article. But she decided to discontinue medication and treat herself with St. John's Wort. A tragedy resulted. Read more & more



Myanmar's economy


Yangon, Myanmar
Economic collapse
September 1987
General Ne Win's astrologer and numerologist told him his lucky number was 9 and he would live to be 90 if he was surrounded by 9s. He reissued the currency in multiples of 9 causing mayhem and new insurgencies. He resigned within a year. Read more



39 cult members


Rancho Santa Fe, California
Mass suicide
March 26, 1997
The members of the Heaven's Gate cult convinced themselves that a UFO arriving with Comet Hale-Bopp would take them away. They committed mass suicide. Read more



Chayya Lal


Age: 16
Asharita, Sarangpur, India
Suicide
September 9, 2008
She was traumatized by TV programs about the opening of the Large Hadron Collider, which talked about the end of the world. Her parents told her not to worry and diverted her attention to no avail. She drank a pesticide from her father's farm. Read more & more

Photo of Harrison Johnson

Harrison Johnson


Age: 2
Tampa, Florida
Died (untreated wasp stings)
1998
Harrison was stung by wasps while his family was visiting church friends. They prayed over the boy but did not seek medical help because they believe doctors practice witchcraft. When an EMT was called 7 hours later, the boy was beyond help. Read more & more



Photo of Pam & Craig Akers

Pam & Craig Akers


Richwoods, Missouri
Told their son was dead when he was not
February 26, 2003
The Akers are the parents of Shawn Hornbeck, a child who was kidnapped. Sylvia Browne told them he was dead on national television. Four years later, he turned up quite alive. Read more





"Jane Roe"


Age: 56
Melbourne, Australia
Died (liver failure)
July 2002
A naturopath prescribed an herbal anti-anxiety pill containing kava. She later suffered fatigue, nausea and jaundice and went to the hospital. Her liver failed five days later and she had an emergency transplant, but died. Read more




thousands of Airborne customers


Bonita Springs, Florida
Misled that it could cure colds
March 3, 2008
Airborne is based on Chinese herbal remedies and large doses of vitamins. The box claimed it could cure a cold based on a study that was discovered to be bogus. A lawsuit awarded $23.3M to defrauded customers. The product is still on the shelves. Read more & more


Do your part, and SHARE THIS article.  Or better yet, visit whatstheharm.net to read more.

 

Friday, September 9, 2011 ~ Have your say...

A Map of the 'Flat' Earth

A Map of the Square and Stationary Earth

In June of 2011, the Library of Congress acquired an old map which was created by Prof. Orlando Ferguson in 1893.  The information it contains is a bit out of date...  but it is very interesting to look at nonetheless.

The text can be a hard to read, so here it is, verbatim:

Header:  Map of the Square and Stationary Earth.

Subheader:  Four hundred passages in the Bible condemn the Globe Theory, or the Flying Earth, and none sustain it.  This map is the Bible Map of the World.

Caption (right side):  These men are flying on the globe at the rate of 65,000 miles per hour around the sun, and 1,042 miles per hour around the center of the earth (in their minds).  Think of that speed!  (this caption was clearly meant to be a sarcastic jab to the Globe Theory)

Footnote:  Send 25 cents to the author, Prof. Orlando Ferguson, for a book explaining this Square and Stationary Earth.  It knocks the Globe Theory clean out.  It will teach you how to foretell eclipses.  It is worth its weight in gold.

The Flat Earth Society (yes, it's actually real)

The Flat Earth Society is a real organization led by a Virginian man named Daniel Shenton. Shenton believes in other scientific principles and facts, such as evolution and global warming, but he and his followers also believe that the Earth is a disc that you can fall off of.  In other words, that it's flat.

"I haven't taken this position just to be difficult," Shenton told The Guardian news a while back. "To look around, the world does appear to be flat, so I think it is incumbent on others to prove decisively that it isn't. And I don't think that burden of proof has been met yet."

In fact, the validity of the organization as come in to question so often that it's immediately addressed on the first line of the FAQ:

Q: "Is this site a joke?"

A: This site is not a joke. We are actively promoting the Flat Earth movement worldwide. There are members who seriously believe the Earth is flat, and their research is located in Flat Earth Believers.

Read through their FAQ, as they "explain" the seasons, sunrises, sunsets, and other phenomena.

Here's a map of the flat Earth that they present:


I'm not sure where to start when debunking the notion of a flat Earth, because the theory seems so unrealistic.  So I will only present one piece of evidence for the round Earth, and it's a simple picture:


'Nuff said.

  • To see more images of Earth, our Pale Blue Dot, click here.


References:
http://www.thehistoryblog.com/archives/11651
http://theflatearthsociety.org/cms/
http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=11211.0

Saturday, June 25, 2011 ~ Have your say...

The Very Best Of Relatively Interesting.com

Here’s a look back at some of our favorite articles over the last year.  How did we choose?  Well, the Popular Posts Blogger plugin certainly helped, but also, this list was generated based on user feedback via comments and email, and by our analytics reports.

No shocker here – people love animals, especially those that are creepy and weird.  The purpose of this article was to showcase the incredible diversity of life on Earth and the power of evolution.
  

Quickest Pick-Up on the Web
 
Astrology and Horoscopes Debunked
This one generated a huge amount of traffic in a very short period of time – mainly because it was coincidentally published at the same time that astrology fell under major scrutiny.  One of my favorite articles to write, because it’s very easy to test astrology for yourself.

This is one of my favorite posts for a couple of reasons:  1) it is an homage to Carl Sagan’s book, Pale Blue Dot, and 2) it leaves itself open for constant updates – the article gets better and better over time, as new pictures are released on the Web. 


The anti-vaccination movement is a thorn in the side of modern medicine and rational folks alike.  Since the publishing of this article, Andrew Wakefield has been stripped of his license, made into a martyr of sorts, and the anti-vax movement is still quite strong with Jenny McCarthy and other crackpots continuing to hold on to their beliefs, despite the lack of legitimate evidence to support their claims.


Nothing is more controversial than religion and politics… and while this blog does shy away from politics (for now…), we certainly don’t shy away from religion.  This post comprised of a collection of questions and thoughts collected from colleagues over the last few years.  They are questions that all theists and atheists should be allowed to debate freely.  It featured some great comments on both sides of the arguments presented in the article.



Tuesday, April 26, 2011 ~ Have your say...

Genesis: Revisited (squeezing the round peg of science into the square hole of religion)

Many of us, Christian or not, are familiar with the story of Genesis.  It tells us how the universe, our Earth and it's inhabitants were created.  It is similar to other Mesopotamian creation myths and offers a monotheistic (single god) perspective.  

But should it be taken literally?  Many Creationists will argue that it should. However, Michael Shermer has put forth a revised version of the myth.  Read on to watch a video, and read the transcript.  But first, let's review the story below...

The Story of Genesis


1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
 3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
 6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
 9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.
    11 Then God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: seed-bearing plants and trees on the land that bear fruit with seed in it, according to their various kinds.” And it was so. 12 The land produced vegetation: plants bearing seed according to their kinds and trees bearing fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good. 13 And there was evening, and there was morning—the third day.
 14 And God said, “Let there be lights in the vault of the sky to separate the day from the night, and let them serve as signs to mark sacred times, and days and years, 15 and let them be lights in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth.” And it was so. 16 God made two great lights—the greater light to govern the day and the lesser light to govern the night. He also made the stars. 17 God set them in the vault of the sky to give light on the earth, 18 to govern the day and the night, and to separate light from darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fourth day.
 20 And God said, “Let the water teem with living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the vault of the sky.” 21 So God created the great creatures of the sea and every living thing with which the water teems and that moves about in it, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good. 22 God blessed them and said, “Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the water in the seas, and let the birds increase on the earth.” 23 And there was evening, and there was morning—the fifth day.
 24 And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds: the livestock, the creatures that move along the ground, and the wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so. 25 God made the wild animals according to their kinds, the livestock according to their kinds, and all the creatures that move along the ground according to their kinds. And God saw that it was good.
    26 Then God said, “Let us make mankind in our image, in our likeness, so that they may rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky, over the livestock and all the wild animals,[a] and over all the creatures that move along the ground.”
 27 So God created mankind in his own image,
   in the image of God he created them;
   male and female he created them.
 28 God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.”
    29 Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food. 30 And to all the beasts of the earth and all the birds in the sky and all the creatures that move along the ground—everything that has the breath of life in it—I give every green plant for food.” And it was so.
    31 God saw all that he had made, and it was very good. And there was evening, and there was morning—the sixth day.

Michael Shermer's Genenis:  Revisited
"To convey the logical absurdity of trying to squeeze the round peg of science into the square hole of religion, I penned the following scientific revision of the Genesis creation story. It is not intended as a sacrilege of the poetic beauty of Genesis; rather, it is a mere extension of what the creationists have already done to Genesis in their insistence that it be read not as mythic saga but as scientific prose. If Genesis were written in the language of modern science, it would read something like this."




The transcript...

In the beginning — specifically on October 23, 4004 B.C., at noon — out of quantum foam fluctuation God created the Big Bang. The bang was followed by cosmological inflation. God saw that the Big Bang was very big, too big for creatures that could worship him, so He created the earth. And darkness was upon the face of the deep, so He commanded hydrogen atoms (which He created out of Quarks and other subatomic goodies) to fuse and become helium atoms and in the process release energy in the form of light. And the light maker he called the sun, and the process He called fusion. And He saw the light was good because now He could see what he was doing. And the evening and the morning were the first day.

And God said, Let there be lots of fusion light makers in the sky. Some of these fusion makers appear to be more than 4,004 light years from Earth. In fact, some of the fusion makers He grouped into collections He called galaxies, and these appeared to be millions and even billions of light years from Earth, so He created “tired light” — light that slows down through space — so that the 4004 B.C. creation myth might be preserved. And created He many wondrous splendors, including Red Giants, White Dwarfs, Quasars, Pulsars, Nova and Supernova, Worm Holes, and even Black Holes out of which nothing can escape. But since God cannot be constrained by nothing (can God make a planet so big that he could not lift it?), He created Hawking radiation through which information can escape from Black Holes. This made God even more tired than tired light, and the evening and the morning were the second day.

And God said, Let the waters under the heavens be gathered together unto one place, and let the continents drift apart by plate tectonics. He decreed sea floor spreading would create zones of emergence, and He caused subduction zones to build mountains and cause earthquakes. In weak points in the crust God created volcanic islands, where the next day He would place organisms that were similar to but different from their relatives on the continents, so that still later created creatures called humans would mistake them for evolved descendants. And in the land God placed fossil fuels, natural gas, and other natural resources for humans to exploit, but not until after Day Six. And the evening and the morning were the third day.

And God saw that the land was lonely, so He created animals bearing their own kind, declaring Thou shalt not evolve into new species, and thy equilibrium shall not be punctuated. And God placed into the land’s strata, fossils that appeared older than 4004 B.C. And the sequence resembled descent with modification. And the evening and morning were the fourth day.

And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creatures that hath life, the fishes. And God created great whales whose skeletal structure and physiology were homologous with the land mammals he would create later that day. Since this caused confusion in the valley of the shadow of doubt God brought forth abundantly all creatures, great and small, declaring that microevolution was permitted, but not macroevolution. And God said, “Natura non facit saltum” — Nature shall not make leaps. And the evening and morning were the fifth day.

And God created the pongidids and hominids with 98 percent genetic similarity, naming two of them Adam and Eve, who were anatomically fully modern humans. In the book in which God explained how He did all this, in chapter one He said he created Adam and Eve together out of the dust at the same time, but in chapter two He said He created Adam first, then later created Eve out of one of Adam’s ribs. This caused further confusion in the valley of the shadow of doubt, so God created Bible scholars and theologians to argue the point. 

And in the ground placed He in abundance teeth, jaws, skulls, and pelvises of transitional fossils from pre-Adamite creatures. One he chose as his special creation He named Lucy. And God realized this was confusing, so he created paleoanthropologists to sort it out. And just as He was finishing up the loose ends of the creation God realized that Adam’s immediate descendants who lived as farmers and herders would not understand inflationary cosmology, global general relativity, quantum mechanics, astrophysics, biochemistry, paleontology, population genetics, and evolutionary theory, so He created creation myths. But there were so many creation stories throughout the land that God realized this too was confusing, so he created anthropologists, folklorists, and mythologists to settle the issue. 

By now the valley of the shadow of doubt was overrunneth with skepticism, so God became angry, so angry that God lost His temper and cursed the first humans, telling them to go forth and multiply (but not in those words). They took God literally and 6,000 years later there are six billion humans. And the evening and morning were the sixth day.

By now God was tired, so God said, “Thank me its Friday,” and He made the weekend. It was a good idea.

In Conclusion...

What do you think?  Should the story of Genesis be taken literally?  If not, does it have room for science, or are they mutually exclusive?



References
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L9EVMzVQKTk
Darwin: A Norton Critical Edition (Selected and Edited by Philip Appleman.) 2001. New York: W.W. Norton: 625–626.
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Genesis+1&version=NIV
http://www.michaelshermer.com/2001/12/genesis-revisited/

Thursday, January 20, 2011 ~ Have your say...

10 Myths and Misconceptions About Evolution

Evolution VS Creationism:  How many times have you heard those words bundled together? 

Although there is no real debate in the scientific community with respect to evolution, creationists and “IDers” (those who believe in Intelligent Design, a fancy name for “creationism”) attempt to stir the pot in the quest to find the origin of life.

The Skeptic’s Society has once again created a wonderful ePamphlet that is available for download on their site.  It tackles the myths and misconceptions surrounding evolution, and is titled:  “Top 10 Myths About Evolution (And How We Know It Really Happened)”.

The myths include:

1)  If humans evolved from apes, why are apes still around?  (incidentally, this topic has been reviewed in a previous article on Relatively Interesting, called “If Humans Evolved From Apes, 
Why Do Apes Still Exist?”)


Humans, apes, and monkeys are only distant evolutionary “cousins.” We come not from apes but from a common ancestor that was neither ape nor human that lived millions of years in the past. In fact, during the last seven million years many human-like species have evolved; some examples include Homo habilis, Homo erectus, and Homo neanderthalensis. All of these went extinct at different times, leaving just us to share the planet with a handful of other primates.


2)  There are too many gaps in the fossil record for evolution to be true.


In fact, there are lots of intermediate fossils. Archaeopteryx, for example, is one of the earliest known fossil birds with a reptilian skeleton and feathers. There is now evidence that some dinosaurs had hair and feathers. Therapsids are the intermediates between reptiles and mammals, Tiktaalik is an extinct lobe-finned fish intermediate to amphibians, there are now at least six intermediate fossil stages in the evolution of whales, and in human evolution there are at least a dozen intermediate fossil stages since hominids branched off from the great apes six million years ago. Considering the exceptionally low probability that a dead plant or animal will fossilize it is remarkable we have as many fossils as we do. First the dead animal has to escape the jaws of scavengers. Then is has to be buried under the rare circumstances that will cause it to fossilize instead of decay. Then geological forces have to somehow bring the fossil back to the surface to be discovered millions of years later by the handful of paleontologists looking for them.

3)  If evolution happened over millions of years, why doesn’t the fossil record show gradual change?

Sudden changes in the fossil record are not missing evidence of gradualism; they are extant evidence of punctuation. Species are stable over long periods of time and so they leave plenty of fossils in the strata while in their stable state. The change from one species to another, however, happens relatively quickly (on a geological time scale) in a process called punctuated equilibrium. One species can give rise to a new species when a small “founder” group breaks away and becomes isolated from the ancestral group. This new founder group, as long as it remains small and detached, may experience relatively rapid change (large populations are genetically stable). The speciational change happens so rapidly that few fossils are left to record it. But once changed into a new species, the individuals will retain their phenotype for a long time, leaving behind many well-preserved fossils. Millions of years later this process results in a fossil record that records mostly stability. The punctuation is there in between the equilibrium.

4)  No one has ever seen evolution happen.

Evolution is a historical science confirmed by the fact that so many independent lines of evidence converge to this single conclusion. Independent sets of data from geology, paleontology, botany, zoology, biogeography, comparative anatomy and physiology, genetics, molecular biology, developmental biology, embryology, population genetics, genome sequencing, and many other sciences each point to the conclusion that life evolved. Creationists demand “just one fossil transitional form” that shows evolution. But evolution is not proved through a single fossil. It is proved through a convergence of fossils, along with a convergence of genetic comparisons between species, and a convergence of anatomical and physiological comparisons between species, and many other lines of inquiry. (In fact we can see evolution happen—especially among organisms with short reproductive cycles that are subject to extreme environmental pressures. Knowledge of the evolution of viruses and bacteria is vital to medical science.)

5)  Science claims that evolution happens by random chance. 

Natural selection is not “random” nor does it operate by “chance.” Natural selection preserves the gains and eradicates the mistakes. To illustrate this, imagine a monkey at a
typewriter. In order for the monkey to type the first 13 letters of Hamlet’s soliloquy by chance, it would take 2613 number of trials for success. This is 16 times as great as the total number of seconds that have elapsed in the lifetime of the solar system. But if each correct letter is preserved and each incorrect letter eradicated, the phrase “tobeornottobe” can be “selected for” in only 335 trials, or just seconds in a computer program. Richard Dawkins defines evolution as “random mutation plus nonrandom cumulative selection.” It is the cumulative selection that drives evolution. The eye evolved from a single, light sensitive spot in a cell into the complex eye of today not by chance, but
through thousands of intermediate steps, each preserved because they made a better eye. Many of these steps still exist in nature in simpler organisms.

6)  Only an intelligent designer could have made something as complex as the eye.

The anatomy of the human eye shows that it is anything but “intelligently designed.” It is built upside down and backwards, with photons of light having to travel through the cornea, lens, aqueous fluid, blood vessels, ganglion cells, amacrine cells, horizontal cells, and bipolar cells, before reaching the light sensitive rods and cones that convert
the light signal into neural impulses, which are then sent to the visual cortex at the back of the brain for processing into meaningful patterns. For optimal vision, why would an intelligent designer have built an eye upside down?

7)  Evolution is "only a theory".

All branches of science are based on theories, which are grounded in testable hypothesis and explain a large and diverse body of facts about the world. A theory is considered robust if it consistently predicts new phenomena that are subsequently observed. Facts are the world’s data. Theories are explanatory ideas about those data. Constructs and other nontestable statements are not a part of science. The theory of evolution meets all the criteria of good science, as determined by Judge William Overton in the Arkansas creationism trial:


• It is guided by natural law.
• It has to be explanatory by reference to natural law.
• It is testable against the empirical world.
• Its conclusions are tentative.
• It is testable and falsifiable.


If you can find fossil mammals in the same geological strata as trilobites then evolution would be falsified. No one has ever found such contradictory data.

8)  Evidence for human evolution has turned out to be fake, frauds, or fanciful.

Eager to discredit evolution, creationists ignore hominid fossil discoveries and cherry pick examples of hoaxes and mistakes in the belief that mistakes in science are a sign of weakness. This is a gross misunderstanding of the nature of science, which constantly advances by using both its mistakes and the successes. Its ability to build cumulatively on the past is how science progresses. The self-correcting feature of the scientific method is one of its most powerful assets. Hoaxes like Piltdown Man, and honest mistakes like Nebraska Man, Calaveras Man, and Hespero-pithecus, are, in time, corrected. In fact, it wasn’t creationists who exposed these errors, it was scientists who did so. Creationists simply read about the scientific exposé of these errors, and then duplicitously claimed them as their own. Piltdown Man and backwards? This “design” only makes sense if natural
selection built eyes from available materials, and in the particular configuration of the ancestral organism’s pre-existing organic structures. The eye shows the pathways of evolutionary history, not intelligent design.

9)  The second law of thermodynamics proves that evolution is impossible.

The Second Law of Thermodynamics applies to closed, isolated systems. Since the Earth receives a constant input of energy from the sun—it is an open-dissipative system—entropy may decrease and order increase (though the sun itself is running down in the process). Thus, the Earth is not strictly a closed system and life may evolve without violating natural law. As long as the sun is burning, life may continue thriving and evolving, just like automobiles may be prevented from rusting, burgers can be heated in ovens, and all manner of things in apparent violation of Second Law entropy may continue. But as soon as the sun burns out, entropy will take its course and life on Earth will cease.

10)  Evolution can’t account for morality.

As a social primate species we evolved a deep sense of right and wrong in order to accentuate and reward reciprocity and cooperation, and to attenuate and punish excessive selfishness and free riding. As well, evolution created the moral emotions that tell us that lying, adultery, and stealing are wrong because they destroy trust in human relationships that depend on truth-telling, fidelity, and respect for property. It would not be possible for a social primate species to survive without some moral sense. On the constitution of human nature is built the constitutions of human societies.

Bonus myth (not in the pdf):
  “Believing” in evolution is no different than believing in any faith based religion.

I think this is more of an error in semantics when using the word “belief or believe”.  For example, I don’t “believe” in evolution.  I accept evolution because there is a convergence of evidence in the scientific community that indicates that evolution is a completely viable theory to explain the diversity of life.

I find it interesting to observe the debate between evolutionists and creationists.  The myths listed above invariably come up in many discussions, and the creationist will cling to some obscure anomaly, thinking that this one “missing piece” can bring down the entire theory.  Since one fact does not prove a theory, one anomaly does not disprove it either.  Again, it’s the convergence of data that makes a theory sound.

In any case, I highly recommend the aforementioned download, as it can be used as a plain-English, simple way to defend evolution against its myths and misconceptions.


References:

Wednesday, December 15, 2010 ~ Have your say...

Questions for Theists, God, and Religion

This is a list of questions for theists, believers, faith, God, and religion.  They apply to all religions, though you will note that they are more Christian-centric only because this is the religion I am most familiar with. 

These questions are asked with the assumption that God exists and the text in the bible is true.  If these assumptions are false, then all of the questions become irrelevant.  To attempt to answer these myself would be a formidable task, so I shall leave the answers to you, the readers...


If there is one God and one religion, what happens to the rest of the people who do not belong to that religion?  Do they go to hell?  Why should they suffer if they were raised in an area which did not expose them to the “one true religion”?  For example, there are 1.2 billion Catholics.  What happens to the 5.6 billion people who are not Catholic?  What happened to the people who died prior to the organized religion or the concept of God – default to eternal damnation?

If God is all powerful, why does he not just destroy Satan, once and for all?  Why is Satan allowed to tempt humans?  Why would God even allow the creation of Hell? 

Do only humans go to heaven?  What happens to young humans who die and go to heaven?  What happens to a baby (assuming it’s baptized) – are they in heaven as a baby, permanently?  How then, do they communicate, with the others in heaven, since they haven’t had a chance to learn anything in life, or develop their own personality?

Why does a perfect God – who is all powerful and has all knowledge – require us to praise Him by going to Sabbath?  Should it not be sufficient for people to thank/praise the God in their own way?  Why does He require praise at all?  Why do only humans need to praise Him, while other species are off the hook?

If God created the Earth and all species that populate it, then why would God wait roughly 4.5 billion years before making humans on Earth.  Worse still, why wait roughly 13.2 billion years, the age of the universe, before creating life as we know it?

If humans are special, and the Earth is the only planet with intelligent life (at least as intelligent as humans), then why go to the trouble of creating the cosmos?  Why bother creating hundreds of billions of galaxies, and thousands of billions of stars? 

 "Finally, from what we now know about the cosmos, to think that all this was created for just one species among the tens of millions of species who live on one planet circling one of a couple of hundred billion stars that are located in one galaxy among hundreds of billions of galaxies, all of which are in one universe among perhaps an infinite number of universes all nestled within a grand cosmic multiverse, is provincially insular and anthropocentrically blinkered. Which is more likely? That the universe was designed just for us, or that we see the universe as having been designed just for us? (5()"
— Michael Shermer (Why Darwin Matters: The Case Against Intelligent Design)

If the Universe came to be in two ways:  from natural processes, or from God.  Theists will say “But what was there before the Big Bang?”.  The answer?  Scientists don’t really know, yet – but they are working on it.  But atheists can ask the same question, “What was there before God created the universe?”… to which theists will reply “God always was, and always will be!”.  Well that’s not very fair now, is it?  Circular reasoning is impermissible as evidence for truth.

If the Bible (or any other religious text) is “truth” and “law” – then is it not strange that humans are accepting laws written by men, and that there are many different versions seen from different perspectives?  Which one is correct?

Why is it acceptable to join a religion that was created by a single man?  For example, King Henry created the Church of England.  How do we know if God approves this religion?  How do we know that any religion is approved?  Why is it acceptable for religions to evolve?  Various religions have changed over time due to cultural pressures – how to we know these changes are “authorized”?  (Don’t get me wrong – it’s a good thing that religions evolve)

Why is there often contempt for those who question religion?  If humans were given the gift of intelligence and the freedom of choice, why should they be punished for using it?  Why is there continuous conflict between different religions, and between those who believe, and those who don’t?  How can anyone know if they are correct? 

Why is the universe, Earth, and life so imperfect?  Why would a god create a world where there is so much... wrong?  Neil Degrasse Tyson says it best in his speech, where he describes how it seems much more likely that our univere was put together by chance, rather than by design.  

For example, in our universe, most planet orbits are unstable; less than 3% of a gas cloud actually makes a star;  most places kill life instantly via heat, radiation, or cold;  galaxy orbits brings can bring us perilously close to a supernova;, and it appears that we live in a one-way universe that will wind down to oblivion.  

On Earth, we have earthquakes, volcanoes, hurricanes, tornadoes, floods, and tsunamis that ravage cities and villages; 2/3 of the surface of the Earth is uninhabitable by humans; mass extinctions occur from  disease, climate change, or asteroids;  90% of all life that ever lived is now extinct; and it took roughly 3.5 billions years before multicellular life arose.  

In humans, diseases are common:  childhood lukemia, hemophilia, sickle cell anemia, multiple sclerosis, epilepsy, Parkinsons, ALS, birth defects;, we succumb to vision loss with age, our teeth fall out, we get Alzeimers, cancer, and a host of other age related diseases;  our energy system is inefficient - we exhale most of the Oxygen we inhale;  since we are warm-blooded, must eat constantly compared to reptiles; we are practically comatose for 1/3 of our lives while we sleep; we can't detect dangerous magnetic fields, ionizing radiation fields, Radon, CO, CH4, CO2, and a host of other poisonous materials.  A perfect design?  An intelligent design?  It sure doesn't appear to be.  It's full of mistakes.

How should one respond?

There must be some rules to answering these questions…

Rule # 1:  Any response should be refutable; otherwise we’re no further ahead.  For example, “God always was and always will be.” or “God works in mysterious ways…”  or “There’s miracles everyday…”  are not acceptable answers– because it’s impossible to prove or disprove any of them.  It’s fine to believe in unfalsifiable theories, but you must recognize that the idea is then based on faith and not science.  The two should not be confused.

Rule #2:  Legitimate evidence should be provided for any claims.  Remember, the burden of proof rests on those making extraordinary claims, and that extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Rule #3:  When presenting a claim, avoid using any common logical fallacies.





References:



Thursday, December 9, 2010 ~ Have your say...

Should You Believe In God? A Look At Pascal's Wager

Do you believe in God?  Should you believe in God? 

In the seventeenth century, the mathematician Blaise Pascal presented an argument for the belief in God, which is as follows:
  1. If you erroneously believe in God, then when you die, you lose nothing (assuming that death is the absolute end and there is eternal “nothingness”);
  2. If you correctly believe in God, then when you die, you gain everything (a heavenly, infinite existence);
  3. If you correctly disbelieve in God, then when you die, you gain nothing (death is absolute and ends all)
  4. If you erroneously disbelieve in God, then when you die, you lose everything (eternal damnation).
PASCAL’S WAGER
IF GOD EXISTS…
IF GOD DOESN’T EXIST…
IF I BELIEVE IN GOD…
(A) Go to Heaven
(B) Nothing happens
IF I DON’T BELIEVE IN GOD…
(D) Go to Hell
(C) Nothing happens

Now place your wager:  how will you bet?

Regardless of any evidence for or against the existence of God, Pascal argued that failure to accept God's existence risks losing everything with no potential reward, and that your best bet is to accept the existence of God, because you at least have a chance of some positive gain.

There are several clear objections to Pascal’s wager, which, once analyzed, render it invalid:
  1. Assuming God is omniscient (all-knowing), He would not reward belief in Him based solely on your bet that He exists (that is, He’d know that you’re just gambling you way into Heaven and eternal bliss, and that you don’t really believe);
  2. A person cannot simply will himself to believe something that is evidently false to him;
  3. The wager must apply as much to belief in the wrong God as it would to disbelief in all gods, leaving the gambler no further ahead;
In response to a girl asking, “What if you’re wrong?” about Pascal’s Wager to Richard Dawkin’s, he replied:
"Well, what if I'm wrong, I mean... anybody could be wrong. We could all be wrong about the flying spaghetti monster and the pink unicorn and the flying tea pot. Uhm, you happen to have been brought up, I would presume, in the Christian faith. You know what it's like to not believe in a particular faith because you're not a Muslim. You're not a Hindu. Why aren't you a Hindu? Because you happen to have been brought up in America, not in India. If you had been brought up in Indu- in India, you'd be a Hindu. If you had been brought up in... in uh.. Denmark in the time of the Vikings you'd be believing in Wotan and Thor. If you were brought up in classical Greece you'd be believing in, in Zeus. If you were brought up in central Africa you'd be believing in the great Ju-Ju up the mountain. There's no particular reason to pick on the Judeo-Christian god, in which by the sheerest accident you happen to have been brought up and, and ask me the question, "What if I'm wrong?" What if you're wrong about the great Ju-Ju at the bottom of the sea?"
How will you bet on Pascal’s Wager?  Will you even play?

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...