Creationism vs Evolution: a Battle between Two Religions

注:
感兴趣的读者可以自己在这个网站下载这些签名科学家的名单:
http://www.dissentfromdarwin.org/sign_the_list.php

这个签名还在继续,如果您也是一位反对进化论的科学家,您可以通过发电邮到此地址参与:

Sign the List

Signers of the Scientific Dissent From Darwinism must either hold a Ph.D. in a scientific field such as biology, chemistry, mathematics, engineering,computerscience, or one of the other natural sciences; or they must hold an M.D. and serve as a professor of medicine. Signers must also agree with the following statement:

"We are skeptical of claims for the ability of random mutation and natural selection to account for the complexity of life. Careful examination of the evidence for Darwinian theory should be encouraged."

If you meet these criteria, please consider signing the statement by emailing

contact@dissentfromdarwin.org

我倒觉得没有必要去签什么名,达尔文的进化理论不值得这么大张旗鼓的去反对。虽然我不赞同人是从猿进化而来,但生物确实存在着进化(退化)的现象。达尔文他仅仅想象了后面几步,并没有说人是由一颗神奇的种子进化形成的。要反对的恰好是那些借此机会断章取义,拿达尔文理论来曲解生命起源的无神论者。
 
最后编辑:
Are you kidding me? "Discuss" involves logic which is not in the dictionary of religion.

之前你用了一个词-believing,然而当你提到religion的时候,不知何故又回避了。

让我们来看看各方的解释

牛津英文词典-believe:accept that (something) is true, especially without proof.

圣经(希伯来书)-faith: faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

中文-信:信由两部分组成,人 + 言。换言之,他人之言。

一杯水放在你面前,不能品尝却要你相信它是甜的,很难。如果10个尝了,得到10个回答“甜的”,或许是“托”。然而当1千个甚至1万个人品尝之后都回答“甜的”,而你仍然坚信是淡的,估计是脑子有问题了。

当然,我不是说你的脑子有问题,只是提醒你不要那么武断。
 
最后编辑:
之前你用了一个词-believing,然而当你提到religion的时候,不知何故又回避了。

让我们来看看各方的解释

牛津英文词典-believe:accept that (something) is true, especially without proof.

圣经(希伯来书)-faith: faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

中文-信:信由两部分组成,人 + 言。换言之,他人之言。

一杯水放在你面前,不能品尝却要你相信它是甜的,很难。如果10个尝了,得到10个回答“甜的”,或许是“托”。然而当1千个甚至1万个人品尝之后都回答“甜的”,而你仍然坚信是淡的,估计是脑子有问题了。

当然,我不是说你的脑子有问题,只是提醒你不要那么武断。
someone used a similar analogy as your "water" one years ago but he was Arabic talking about Islam. Buddhist would say the same and so would the Falungong followers and any other " gods" fearing religions.

I would not say you are completely ripped off reasoning and logic ability but you serve as a live example of what religions could do to a human's mind.
 
之前你用了一个词-believing,然而当你提到religion的时候,不知何故又回避了。

让我们来看看各方的解释

牛津英文词典-believe:accept that (something) is true, especially without proof.

圣经(希伯来书)-faith: faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen.

中文-信:信由两部分组成,人 + 言。换言之,他人之言。

一杯水放在你面前,不能品尝却要你相信它是甜的,很难。如果10个尝了,得到10个回答“甜的”,或许是“托”。然而当1千个甚至1万个人品尝之后都回答“甜的”,而你仍然坚信是淡的,估计是脑子有问题了。

当然,我不是说你的脑子有问题,只是提醒你不要那么武断。

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/201...ple-less-intelligent-atheists-_n_3747511.html
some very recent study for your leisure time entertainment.
Religious People Are Less Intelligent Than Atheists, Concludes New Study
Huffington Post UK | By Sara C Nelson Posted: 13/08/2013 09:33 BST | Updated: 20/09/2013 16:34 BST





Atheism, UK RELIGION, Richard Dawkins, UK NEWS, UK News

A review of 63 scientific studies dating back to 1928 has concluded that religious people are less intelligent than non-believers. Only 10 of the 63 studies showed a positive correlation between intelligence and religiosity.

SEE ALSO: Atheists In Parliament And Congress Highlights Disparate Political Cultures

The paper, entitled The Relation Between Intelligence and Religiosity: A Meta-Analysis and Some Proposed Explanations, was led by Professor Miron Zuckerman of the University of Rochester, and was published in the academic journal Personality and Social Psychology Review on 6 August.

o-RELIGION-570.jpg


The study found religious beliefs to be irrational and therefore unappealing to intelligent people who 'know better'


Zuckerman’s team studied decades worth of analysis, noting many atheism and intellect studies “share one central theme – the premise that religious beliefs are irrational, not anchored in science, not testable, and therefore unappealing to intelligent people who ‘know better’.”

The study defined intelligence as the “ability to reason, plan, solve problems, think abstractly, comprehend complex ideas, learn quickly and learn from experience.”

o-RICHARD-DAWKINS-570.jpg


The study comes after renowned atheist Richard Dawkins' apparently anti-Muslim tweets sparked fury


Religiosity is defined as involvement in some (or all) facets of religion, which includes belief in the supernatural, offering gifts to this supernatural, and performing rituals affirming their beliefs.

Further signs were measured using surveys, church attendance, and membership in religious organisations, Ars Technica writes.

Among the young, the study found more intelligent children were more likely to turn away from religion – as were those among the very elderly, with the vast volume of data giving some insight into why that seems to be the case.

The report adds:

“Intelligent people typically spend more time in school—a form of self-regulation that may yield long-term benefits… More intelligent people get higher level jobs [which] may lead to higher self-esteem, and encourage personal control beliefs… more intelligent people are more likely to get and stay married… though for intelligent people, that too comes later in life. We therefore suggest that as intelligent people move from young adulthood to adulthood and then to middle age, the benefits of intelligence may continue to accrue.”
The study comes after renowned atheist Richard Dawkins came in for criticism after tweeting: “All the world’s Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge. They did great things in the Middle Ages though.”
 
进化还是创造,这个问题曾困扰我很久。虽然我早已不相信进化,但之前对于创造论却不那么自信。我曾上网查过很多资料,听过国语宣道会办的讲座,都没有解开我的结,没有人能说服我。直到最近宾州一个科学家的解释,才让我明白生命只能由创造形成。

说实话,这些年来我觉得自己是基督徒(决志过了),但是生命起源问题这个巨大的坎始终横在我面前,一度很泄气,也不那么理直气壮的告诉别人我是基督徒。没想到这次去芝加哥参加同学聚会的时候,一个同学只用30分钟给大家作了个粗略的讲解,就把我带进一条通往光明的路。我的同学并非牧师,也不是长老,几年前才受洗,在宾州从事化学方面的研究。然而他对于生命起源问题有独到的认识,他从纯科学角度解释了为什么生命不可能源于进化,他非常缜密的逻辑推理让人无懈可击。正因为如此,现在我已经不会因为某个牧师有名气而去追看他(们)的布道视频了,尤其是生命起源问题上,我相信我的同学比许许多多有名气的大牧师解释得更精准。

我把同学提醒我的话(原文来源于网上)带来此与大家分享“任何人,不管他是何等的大师,他的话只能参考,不能高于圣经。我们可以不知道,说不知道并不能损害我们什么,那正是我们卑微的现状,是接受活水的正确心态“

很希望您能把您同学的那篇见解整理一下在这里分享。
 
很希望您能把您同学的那篇见解整理一下在这里分享。

那天聚会因时间有限,我的同学只把为什么进化论是谬误的理由粗略解释了一下。后来他通过screen share的网站一对一为我上课,共花费了8个小时。不仅仅是以文字形式,中间包含了大量的图片,涉及很多的逻辑推理和概率计算等等。。。所以目前无法放到这里,也许将来他会制作成视频。如果你想认识他,我可以把他的联系方式通过悄悄话告诉你。

摘录一段他给同学们的信-

要从理性上接受“有神”这件事的确很困难。特别是对我们这批高校里长大的孩子们,在父 母和环境的熏陶下,从小就学会了不住地问“为什么这”、“为什么那”,谁也不买谁的账,于 是这个槛也就越垒越高。但仔细想来“到底是有神,还是无神”这个问题并不涉及到任何宗教的 范畴。因为在这里,我们首先要讨论的这个“神”是不和任何宗教有联系的,是一个“泛指的 神”。这个“有神 vs. 无神”的探讨实际上纯属科学领域的论证。就象科学界在探讨那些永远没 法直接看见的基本粒子一样,只能通过我们所能观测的现象来间接地证明它的存在。也就象 NASA 在探讨太阳系外还有没有生命一样。从科学的态度出发,我们在讨论任何一种假设时,都 应该象法官那样,在听取双方举证以前要站在 50-50 绝对中立的出发点。可遗憾的是我们从小生 长在“无神论”的环境下,先天地失去了这个中立性,而把另一方的举证简单地带上个“迷信” 的帽子,就根本不再去听了。我自己也曾是个坚决的无神论者,这个结我花了十几年的时间才解 开。我知道这是条不容易走的路。
 
后退
顶部