I don't believe in evolution, I don't need to because its an observable fact. This does not mean that you can necessarily see it with your own eyes over the course of one human lifetime.
We accept many things that we can not see with the human eye, radiation, electricity, magnetism (we can see the effects these have on items but not the forces/ particles themselves)
Evolution is simply the fact that we can observe that there is a process by which different kinds of living organism have developed from earlier forms during the history of the earth
Re the micro v macro evolution non debate, what would you call the cumulative effect of lots of 'micro' evolution???
I accept the theory of evolution by natural selection (along with pretty much all scientist) as the explanation for the observation that living organisms have and do evolve (witness the evolution of Nylon eating bacteria within the life time of a lot of people on earth as one amongst many examples). Why do I accept this? Because it offers a reliable, repeatable mechanism for explaining the diversity of life observed. (note to people that have not yet cottoned on it does not seek to explain the existence of life ...ie the start that's abiogenesis)
Do I believe that therefore 'believing 'in evolution necessary excludes the possibility of a god? Well no not in a mostly deist sense of god. But if your religious belief is based on a book (or collection of books) that suggests that the earth was made by God 6,000 years ago in six days then I suggest that it does go quite some way to undermining that belief.
Although I may prefer to deal with 'moderate' religious people on a day to day basis as they may be a little easier to deal with I have to admit that I find them intellectually questionable. Either your religion is right or not. If not why is your god is true them why is he so useless and or capricious that he cannot accurately convey a set of rules for simple humans to follow?? I only judge a religion based on its religious texts as written. Why? because otherwise you are dealing with people who take there religion ala carte and I have to ask by what authority they feel that they can pick and choose which bits of there religious books they believe in. By the standards of the instructions laid down in the Abrahamic religious books I have read I feel confident have I have met a grand total of zero Christians (take no care for the morrow, hate your father and your mother, turn the other cheek etc).
Sure I have met a lot of people who claim to be Christians (and Muslims and Jews etc)
Finally no one does anything 'in the name of atheism'. Why? because atheism has no beliefs or dogma. Atheism is simply the rejection of a claim 'that god(s) do exist'. It does not in the strictest sense say that god does not exist it is simply the position that there is insufficient evidence to say that a god(s) do exist.
People however do 'do things in the name of religion' because sometimes religious texts do give specific moral instructions leading adherents to be able to claim scriptural authority (you shall not permit a witch to live, kill people who collect wood on the Sabbath, you shall not allow two men to lie together, etc etc)
You can be an atheist and be a fascist, a communist and pacifist, a sociopath, a person that believes in crystal healing, a homeopath and any number of many other things.
Stalin etc may have persecuted religious people and religions and declared their states to be 'atheist' states but they did this as they realised that religion was a competitor/ enemy to the states they were trying to set up/ maintain.
Personally I am a secular atheist that believes that there should be no compulsion either for or against religion. However that does not mean that I believe that intelligent design/ creationism should be taught in science lessons because it is not science based!
We accept many things that we can not see with the human eye, radiation, electricity, magnetism (we can see the effects these have on items but not the forces/ particles themselves)
Evolution is simply the fact that we can observe that there is a process by which different kinds of living organism have developed from earlier forms during the history of the earth
Re the micro v macro evolution non debate, what would you call the cumulative effect of lots of 'micro' evolution???
I accept the theory of evolution by natural selection (along with pretty much all scientist) as the explanation for the observation that living organisms have and do evolve (witness the evolution of Nylon eating bacteria within the life time of a lot of people on earth as one amongst many examples). Why do I accept this? Because it offers a reliable, repeatable mechanism for explaining the diversity of life observed. (note to people that have not yet cottoned on it does not seek to explain the existence of life ...ie the start that's abiogenesis)
Do I believe that therefore 'believing 'in evolution necessary excludes the possibility of a god? Well no not in a mostly deist sense of god. But if your religious belief is based on a book (or collection of books) that suggests that the earth was made by God 6,000 years ago in six days then I suggest that it does go quite some way to undermining that belief.
Although I may prefer to deal with 'moderate' religious people on a day to day basis as they may be a little easier to deal with I have to admit that I find them intellectually questionable. Either your religion is right or not. If not why is your god is true them why is he so useless and or capricious that he cannot accurately convey a set of rules for simple humans to follow?? I only judge a religion based on its religious texts as written. Why? because otherwise you are dealing with people who take there religion ala carte and I have to ask by what authority they feel that they can pick and choose which bits of there religious books they believe in. By the standards of the instructions laid down in the Abrahamic religious books I have read I feel confident have I have met a grand total of zero Christians (take no care for the morrow, hate your father and your mother, turn the other cheek etc).
Sure I have met a lot of people who claim to be Christians (and Muslims and Jews etc)
Finally no one does anything 'in the name of atheism'. Why? because atheism has no beliefs or dogma. Atheism is simply the rejection of a claim 'that god(s) do exist'. It does not in the strictest sense say that god does not exist it is simply the position that there is insufficient evidence to say that a god(s) do exist.
People however do 'do things in the name of religion' because sometimes religious texts do give specific moral instructions leading adherents to be able to claim scriptural authority (you shall not permit a witch to live, kill people who collect wood on the Sabbath, you shall not allow two men to lie together, etc etc)
You can be an atheist and be a fascist, a communist and pacifist, a sociopath, a person that believes in crystal healing, a homeopath and any number of many other things.
Stalin etc may have persecuted religious people and religions and declared their states to be 'atheist' states but they did this as they realised that religion was a competitor/ enemy to the states they were trying to set up/ maintain.
Personally I am a secular atheist that believes that there should be no compulsion either for or against religion. However that does not mean that I believe that intelligent design/ creationism should be taught in science lessons because it is not science based!
Last edited:
