In a world dominated by magical thinking, superstition and misinformation, give yourself the benefit of doubt. This is one skeptic's view of the Universe.

"Tell people there’s an invisible man in the sky who created the universe, and the vast majority believe you. Tell them the paint is wet, and they have to touch it to be sure."

-George Carlin

“If people are good only because they fear punishment, and hope for reward, then we are a sorry lot indeed”.

-Albert Einstein

“Skeptical scrutiny is the means, in both science and religion, by which deep thoughts can be winnowed from deep nonsense.”

-Carl Sagan

The person who is certain, and who claims divine warrant for his certainty, belongs now to the infancy of our species. It may be a long farewell, but it has begun and, like all farewells, should not be protracted.

-Christopher Hitchens

 

nonplussedbyreligion:

Thinkingtheist, you’ve clearly never spent any time on my blog. Had you done so you would have learned that not only was I a Christian until I was in my 30s, I also attended a seminary and studied apologetics. When I say that I will not accept biblical, creationist, or apologetics sources, it’s because I’ve read almost everything those sources provide and instead of strengthening my faith, they helped to solidify my disbelief in God. As for not being able to get through to me, I’ve spent time on your blog, and none of your arguments have caused me to pause and reconsider my departure from Christianity. People far better versed in scripture, biblical history, and theology than you have tried their best to “save” me and failed.
I’m actually very open minded, I’m just selective about who or what I chose to spend my time on. I’m not going to address the rest of the things you’ve said about me, because I’m not into arguing with people in life or in tumblr. I will however re-issue, or re-word my challenge, since you were so offended before.
Evolution is not substantiated by evolution as you put it.  Those of us who believe in evolution do not go around quoting On the Origin of Species as our gospel.  Biology, genetics, chemistry, bio-chemistry, physics, paleontology, sociology, anthropology, and history are just a few of many independent disciplines that support evolution.  Presenting me with a link to a Christian site does not even come close to supporting your claim.  I want you to provide me undisputed, peer reviewed, universally accepted, non-biblical proof or evidence of periods when both men and dinosaurs were co-inhabitants of the earth. While I love science, I’m the first to admit that I’m not well versed on all scientific research and discoveries.  I’m also really good about apologizing when someone points out that I’m wrong, and I’ll do so if you are able to provide me with the information I’m requesting.
There is nothing wrong with using your bible to support your faith. However, in order for you to make a convincing argument, your primary source cannot be the very book you are trying to support.  Using the bible to support the bible is like writing a book report, and that’s not what I’m after.  That kind of circular reasoning will not get you very far with me, or any other atheist, skeptic, agnostic, freethinker, or non-theist. ~ Kim
thinkingtheist:

nonplussedbyreligion:

I’d love to read more about the scientific evidence that proves dinosaur lived alongside humans.  Please don’t provide any biblical, creationist, or apologetics sources, because those will not be considered. ~ Kim
thinkingtheist:

nonplussedbyreligion:

In the beginning, dinosaurs and creationist lived happily in the Garden of Eden.

Interesting you’d post something like this, there’s actually a lot of scientific evidence that dinosaurs lived alongside humans, but evolution says that dinosaurs came millions of years BEFORE humans, so… how you’d explain that I wouldn’t know.


uh yeah that is probably one of the most biased statements I have ever heard in my entire life. Your statement that “biblical, creationist, or apologetical sources will not be considered” summarizes so well why no one can get through to you. You have shut yourself up in this pen of secularism. Rather than bravely facing the evidence and arguments provided by Christian theists you cowardly say they “will not be considered.” Who now is the close-minded one, I ask?
And no, miss NonPlussed, I am not obliged to provide completely secular sources as support. I am free to provide evidence from sources on my side of the debate, in the same way as you appeal to talk-origins.com. I am sorry for my outburst, but you had to know that the sort of arrogance that you showed in your reply was extremely provocative. Saying that I cannot substantiate Christianity by using Christian sources is like me saying to you that you cannot substantiate evolution using sources from evolutionists. Who else is going to substantiate Christianity but Christians?
Even if I am deluded I am open to evidence from both parties. You on the other hand put yourself on this kind of pedestal and erect a sort of close-minded bastion around you into which you allow only secular material.
So here is your link. It is a Christian link, of course. I did not feel like looking for secular sources for you on this topic, to tell you the truth, but I did it anyways for the sake of the discussion. I did not find any, primarily because the existence of dinosaurs with humans is an area with important Creation-related implications. All the links I visited had something to do with God or Creation. And if you don’t want to read it just because it’s “religious,” then fine but that is an act of extreme pettiness and immaturity. 
http://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/ancient.htm


Wow. Ladies and gentleman, this is called “Projection”:

 the tendency to ascribe to another person feelings, thoughts, or attitudes present in oneself, or to regard external reality as embodying such feelings, thoughts, etc., in some way.

Also, we have a major case of Begging the question/circular reasoning.

One cannot use the source of a claim to varify a claim. You cannot varify the acuracy of a story by reading the story. If a story book told of a place called Wagamaroo, but you’d never heard of such a place, wouldn’t you consult a map for proof instead of just citing the pages of the story where Wagamaroo is mentioned? Maybe several different maps? Or would you point to the story’s description of Wagamaroo and say “well, see? It says here that they have streets and houses in Wagamaroo, that is proof that it’s a real place!”? In other words, you can’t prove Hamlet existed just by citing Shakespeare.   

ThinkingTheist has one single source to support their claim, and that is the source making the claim in the first place. When that source is barred from the debate, this thinker has nowhere else to turn. Nonplussed cites many independent sources from different COMPETING disciplines of science to support her claim of evolution. Barr biology from the debate, we’ll cite genetics, barr that, we’ll cite geology, barr that and we’ll cite chemistry, barr that and we’ll cite history, palentology, archeology, astronomy, physics ect. The competition factor is very important. Apologists for creationism work on proving each other RIGHT, Scientists work on proving each other WRONG. When scientists agree on something it’s because they have tried and failed to prove it wrong. I’d love to find a creationist who’s mission is to disprove any part Genesis.

Nonplussed refuses to consider one source of evidence out of many, many alternative sources and thinkingtheist refuses to consider ANY source other than the bible. And thinkingtheist claims that it is nonplussed who is close-minded and biased. This is the kind of irony I’m all about folks. It’s both comedic and tragic.

nonplussedbyreligion:

Thinkingtheist, you’ve clearly never spent any time on my blog. Had you done so you would have learned that not only was I a Christian until I was in my 30s, I also attended a seminary and studied apologetics. When I say that I will not accept biblical, creationist, or apologetics sources, it’s because I’ve read almost everything those sources provide and instead of strengthening my faith, they helped to solidify my disbelief in God. As for not being able to get through to me, I’ve spent time on your blog, and none of your arguments have caused me to pause and reconsider my departure from Christianity. People far better versed in scripture, biblical history, and theology than you have tried their best to “save” me and failed.

I’m actually very open minded, I’m just selective about who or what I chose to spend my time on. I’m not going to address the rest of the things you’ve said about me, because I’m not into arguing with people in life or in tumblr. I will however re-issue, or re-word my challenge, since you were so offended before.

Evolution is not substantiated by evolution as you put it.  Those of us who believe in evolution do not go around quoting On the Origin of Species as our gospel.  Biology, genetics, chemistry, bio-chemistry, physics, paleontology, sociology, anthropology, and history are just a few of many independent disciplines that support evolution.  Presenting me with a link to a Christian site does not even come close to supporting your claim.  I want you to provide me undisputed, peer reviewed, universally accepted, non-biblical proof or evidence of periods when both men and dinosaurs were co-inhabitants of the earth. While I love science, I’m the first to admit that I’m not well versed on all scientific research and discoveries.  I’m also really good about apologizing when someone points out that I’m wrong, and I’ll do so if you are able to provide me with the information I’m requesting.

There is nothing wrong with using your bible to support your faith. However, in order for you to make a convincing argument, your primary source cannot be the very book you are trying to support.  Using the bible to support the bible is like writing a book report, and that’s not what I’m after.  That kind of circular reasoning will not get you very far with me, or any other atheist, skeptic, agnostic, freethinker, or non-theist. ~ Kim

thinkingtheist:

nonplussedbyreligion:

I’d love to read more about the scientific evidence that proves dinosaur lived alongside humans.  Please don’t provide any biblical, creationist, or apologetics sources, because those will not be considered. ~ Kim

thinkingtheist:

nonplussedbyreligion:

In the beginning, dinosaurs and creationist lived happily in the Garden of Eden.

Interesting you’d post something like this, there’s actually a lot of scientific evidence that dinosaurs lived alongside humans, but evolution says that dinosaurs came millions of years BEFORE humans, so… how you’d explain that I wouldn’t know.

uh yeah that is probably one of the most biased statements I have ever heard in my entire life. Your statement that “biblical, creationist, or apologetical sources will not be considered” summarizes so well why no one can get through to you. You have shut yourself up in this pen of secularism. Rather than bravely facing the evidence and arguments provided by Christian theists you cowardly say they “will not be considered.” Who now is the close-minded one, I ask?

And no, miss NonPlussed, I am not obliged to provide completely secular sources as support. I am free to provide evidence from sources on my side of the debate, in the same way as you appeal to talk-origins.com. I am sorry for my outburst, but you had to know that the sort of arrogance that you showed in your reply was extremely provocative. Saying that I cannot substantiate Christianity by using Christian sources is like me saying to you that you cannot substantiate evolution using sources from evolutionists. Who else is going to substantiate Christianity but Christians?

Even if I am deluded I am open to evidence from both parties. You on the other hand put yourself on this kind of pedestal and erect a sort of close-minded bastion around you into which you allow only secular material.

So here is your link. It is a Christian link, of course. I did not feel like looking for secular sources for you on this topic, to tell you the truth, but I did it anyways for the sake of the discussion. I did not find any, primarily because the existence of dinosaurs with humans is an area with important Creation-related implications. All the links I visited had something to do with God or Creation. And if you don’t want to read it just because it’s “religious,” then fine but that is an act of extreme pettiness and immaturity. 

http://www.genesispark.com/genpark/ancient/ancient.htm

Wow. Ladies and gentleman, this is called “Projection”:

the tendency to ascribe to another person feelings, thoughts, or attitudes present in oneself, or to regard external reality as embodying such feelings, thoughts, etc., in some way.

Also, we have a major case of Begging the question/circular reasoning.

One cannot use the source of a claim to varify a claim. You cannot varify the acuracy of a story by reading the story. If a story book told of a place called Wagamaroo, but you’d never heard of such a place, wouldn’t you consult a map for proof instead of just citing the pages of the story where Wagamaroo is mentioned? Maybe several different maps? Or would you point to the story’s description of Wagamaroo and say “well, see? It says here that they have streets and houses in Wagamaroo, that is proof that it’s a real place!”? In other words, you can’t prove Hamlet existed just by citing Shakespeare.

ThinkingTheist has one single source to support their claim, and that is the source making the claim in the first place. When that source is barred from the debate, this thinker has nowhere else to turn. Nonplussed cites many independent sources from different COMPETING disciplines of science to support her claim of evolution. Barr biology from the debate, we’ll cite genetics, barr that, we’ll cite geology, barr that and we’ll cite chemistry, barr that and we’ll cite history, palentology, archeology, astronomy, physics ect. The competition factor is very important. Apologists for creationism work on proving each other RIGHT, Scientists work on proving each other WRONG. When scientists agree on something it’s because they have tried and failed to prove it wrong. I’d love to find a creationist who’s mission is to disprove any part Genesis.

Nonplussed refuses to consider one source of evidence out of many, many alternative sources and thinkingtheist refuses to consider ANY source other than the bible. And thinkingtheist claims that it is nonplussed who is close-minded and biased. This is the kind of irony I’m all about folks. It’s both comedic and tragic.

  1. pixiechixie36 reblogged this from skepticalavenger
  2. proudtobegodfree reblogged this from skepticalavenger and added:
    ^