Here is why, one can doubt God's existence. Because there is no proof or evidence, why believe? What I mean is... sure, there may not be eternal evidence of Santa Claus's existence, nor the easter bunny. But perhaps it is true.

The bible was written at a time prior to the printing press... I don't know 1843... whenever it was written. For someone to hand-copy all of those... it is so incredibly easy for anyone to misquote or state anything they feel necessary. Previously, people aged (thougn no one ages anymore.) How do you know that God didn't "age" and die? Quite possibly God may not have "unlimited power." Quite possibly, there are way too many people in this world for him to hear all prayers at once...
=================================
The truth is, I am sure many people pray all the time. Take the 9/11 tragedies. Quite possibly everyone on that airplane prayed repeatedly, yet everyone in the building, and towers died. Not a single person in that area even survived. Which brings my point. To me "doubting" God's existence is much like "doubting" the existence of any other folk tail, or fairy tale. However, the bible religion does seem to infer that if you choose to believe or "worship" any thing else, you are going to hell... or something like that... ask any christian and he'd tell you that. "I worship/believe this." "You are going to hell, and will get molested by Michaeal Jackson."

I guess the truth is, no one can "prove" that God doesn't exist. Though we cannot prove that he "does" exactly. Since anything spritiual like that scares/gives me nightmares. I am glad it is like this. I doubt praying actually works, though I probably do not have evidence. I also have no evidence that worshipping the "good-luck" fairy doesn't work either. For that reason, I see no point in praying or going to church. Most people have those religions... because their family or culture do so. There is also scientology. Though I cannot prove that Lord Xenu's thetans are in my body, I highly doubt paying over $300,000 in an exorcism would do any good... but still no evidence.

I personally, think religionw only slows one down. While one person could starve themselves for a month, get anally molested, or pay $300,000 to a church of scientology, I think it only wastes time for what could be spent really important... like watching T.V which is much more entertaining. I also see no reason to think you'd be rewarded for all of that time spent sacrificing animals, just for your belief. If I were a god, for how much I know... everyone could be worshipping the wrong person. Perhaps it is "Dog" who I should be worshipping. That "dog" wants me to make love to Marco Grubert's hot sister... in that case... because there is no evidence... everyone would be rewarded the same. It'd be all go down to if you are good, bad, or ***.

Someone has in their signature "if you do not believe in God, then look at the son. He makes blind in only those who sees believing." What about fairies, and gods? Or thetans in scientology? Do they all make me blind because I cannot see them... for how much I know... there are gods... or fairies... they can control how "good" or "bad" your luck is. They were "good" enough to make me the first person to learn that this generation of people is here to stay. Because I was the first to experience eternal youth. The world was created by fairly odd parents. They have no parents... how can that be? Divide 2 by three and you get an unlimited .66666666. That "infinite" number represents how there was NOTHING before them.

I've honestly had to speed read all the posts since my last visit. That teaches me to get a week of work in.

I've heard allot about faith, and its true, you have to have faith to think evolution is true. All things start with the faith that you exist. After that you have to pony up, and believe that other people exist, and finally that we all are bound by some type of general reality.

Scientific method is a way to derive what it true. (General reality) Its wrong allot, and this is where the creationalist seem to collect. This part is what science is all about. Build a model that will predict what will or has happened. If the model starts to fail, then cook up a new one. The re-due is almost the most important part. Empirical evidence supersedes anyone's model that doesn't match objective reality. If this fails to happen then we are no better than the creationalists who already predetermine what is true because its written in a book.

I've read allot about how scientific method is flawed, and I simply ask. What method do you prescribe to replace it?

@Irish_Farmer

This is one link on how bacterial mutation is beneficial for its own self.
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoMutations.html

The flu virus is another example. That's why the government is scared of bird flu. Right now, it's a minor disease, but if it mutates, then it's a danger.

I know there are million links that say different. I went through and read them. Not all of them mind you, but enough to make up my own mind again, since the last time I studied it 10 years ago, in school and on my own.

Higher organisms are tougher to detect, because of the high cycles needed to detect a beneficial mutation. Our life span is a problem, because its short. We can't see six hundred to a thousand generations of any complex creature. Its a shame cause I wouldn't mind living a couple of thousand years to watch the change.

the current h2no virus is allready mutated a couple of hundred times. The thing most scientists are worried about is the cross mutation of the flu and the h2no virus causing a pandemic spread.

but thanks to the creationists things like this cant happen and all of us are on the safe side.
good thing, and some allready wanted to research some antidode for it...what a waste of time.

cheers

Scramasax, I don't have the time to do it right now, but I will respond to those examples. Its probably going to take me two hours, but I need to be social at some point this week, plus my ex-girlfriend is offering to buy me dinner and I never refuse a free meal.

However, I found that exact website myself while searching for beneficial mutations. I grabbed a random example and used it as proof of how evolution within kinds happens and is twisted in a way to show evidence of change to and from kinds.

Now I suppose I'll have to go through each and every one. Notice the website never says what kind of evolution is happening here. They simply use the term evolution. But I'll get back on that in a little while.

Unfortunately, that site is somewhat technical, which isn't really a problem for me (only because its not insanely technical). However, it will require me to explain the way things work on a basic level, which will get long winded, because its not a quick explanation like they would have it seem. You don't have to be an expert to know this stuff, but it takes more than passive high school knowledge. So its going to take a while. But how about this. I promise to respond to each and every one of those claims. Although the only really compelling ones are where animals go from single cell to multi cell, or new metabolic pathways are gained. However, I'm going to have to get knee deep in technical fun. So be patient.

There is an explanation, and actually the explanation is rooted in some pretty interesting biological science, about why these conclusions (not the observations themselves) are wrong. You'll get a chance to learn about one of the most interesting organisms (in my opinion) ever. Mostly because it defies the current evolutionary thinking of how to classify animals. But that will require more research (to provide you with accurate information) as well as a more thorough and layman-friendly explanation of exactly what is happening during these 'evolutions.' The rest of the explanations are much easier than that.

all i will say as this thread has strayed away from it's original context, is that these "viewpoints" of evolution and all have not been proven, as someone said earlier on its a THEORY not a LAW there is a major difference. A law would be something like the world being round, this is proven because we can go there, we can go outside the world and watch it rotate. Evolution is just another way that a scientist is trying to use to help explain why we are here and how we got here, because they don't know. Man is always trying to explain his existance, but because he will not sit still and try to learn what he will, instead of forming a narrow-minded observation and turning it into a theory, will not help him find his origin. Most of the real science has left this thread because now its just a dispute over evolution and how to "form" it with christianity, it can't happen, people should not be stupid enough to make a theory part of their every-day belief, of course you will try and say to this that "God is nothing but a theory himself and that a christian is foolish for believing this way", but i say that it's childish to try and throw back at someone what they just threw at you, it's pointless to get hit by the same bat twice, so to speak. This debate has no longer been on a scientific basis, but a theoretic and faithful basis, the only reason you will not accept that God exsits is because your beliefs are attacked if you convert. No one is converting anyone, nor is anyone looking from a open-minded view in this topic. Scientists can prove things with their God-given talents, not because of some degree, a degree is nothing more that a paper saying you got good grades and passed. I cannot believe how either side of this debate can try and disprove what has already been proved from a scientific stand-point and from a christian stand-point. How can you disprove the earth's roundness, or physics, or that there is a moon thousands of miles away from this earth, YOU CAN'T. How can you disprove that there is a stronger power that helps a man keep his wits about him and make his decisions, how can you disprove that this power tells him when he is wrong, and when he is in a fatal accident, he lives, hmm i think i know this, YOU CAN'T. The narrow-minded views in this forum are foolish, and if a person who throws away his life and only lives by his own rules and doesn't agree with what is proven in his everyday life and around him is a fool to God, he is a fool to me. Answers are welcome to this, i am interested in what you say, foolish or not, but if you will attack at me or any other in this forum in the same way that we have attacked you, than you should go change your diapers, lol.

-Manslayer101 - inspired by the almighty