Conversation with atheist continued

The following statements occurred in an exchange I had with an atheist in a comment thread on a post about the recently released movie, “EXPELLED, No Intelligence Allowed.” I will show his statements in bold red followed by my answers. His comments were in response to a comment of mine so I will give background where necessary. Also, the only supreme being that I recognize or will defend is the triune Christian God of the Old and New Testaments.

Also, we don’t know that matter/energy came into existence from nothing; they may have always existed in some form.

Since something coming from nothing apart from any outside cause is nonsense, this is the only possibility. Something must have the power of self-existence and being in and of itself. Either matter/energy has had an eternal self-existence or some form of intelligent being is eternally self-existent.

About ten or so years ago scientists concluded that the expanding universe will continue to expand and will in time burn out much like a candle. This expanding and dying universe points to a beginning. If the matter/energy of the universe were eternal then this end would have already happened. This also point to a beginning. Scientists refer to this beginning as the big bang. Therefore, the matter/energy of the universe had a beginning. Since it is nonsense to assert that matter/energy came from nothing without a cause, which leaves the possibility of the universe beginning without an uncaused cause (supreme being) about as close to impossible as you can get.

Your assertion that a lack of belief in the existence of something for which there is no evidence is equivalent to the belief in something for which there is no evidence is absurd.

While the Christian religion requires faith, it is not without evidence. You may discount all the evidence without considering the claims, but it is there and many believe it nonetheless. The following is a list of some of the evidence that certainly enhances faith:

1) Historical record of the nation of Israel from Old Testament writings spanning over a thousand years.

2) Archeological verification of Old Testament history.

3) Many Old Testament prophecies of Jesus Christ that were fulfilled by the historical Jesus.

4) New Testament gospels and epistles written by eyewitnesses of the miracles and resurrection of Jesus.

5) The resurrection of Jesus with over 500 witnesses who saw him after the event.

6) The New Testament gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts that were written by Dr. Luke who asserts that he made careful investigation with eyewitnesses of things he wrote about.

7) The fact that the 11 Apostles that were frightened to death shortly after the execution of Jesus suddenly became emboldened and started the Church in spite of persecution and ultimately execution for all but one them. Perhaps one or two people would be so deluded as to be persecuted and die for a lie, but it seems they have a strong case for their writings.

8) Saul of Tarsus. His change from persecutor of Christians to leading spokesman due to his Road to Damascus experience is compelling.

9) Time measured in BC and AD referring to the life of Jesus

Therefore, your assertion is incorrect when you state there is no evidence. There is plenty of evidence

The point of the movie is to make money by mischaracterizing scientists, spinning recent events in academia, and trotting out long-refuted absurdities that make select movie-goers feel good about their philosophical commitments………… To that, I say that if these clowns were genuinely concerned about truth, they could have spent the time and energy to educate themselves about matters in which they are profoundly ignorant, instead of making a movie that supported their naive and uniformed beliefs.

Slander and personal attacks are a characteristic of debating tactics from the left. Although I don’t know for sure, I would guess that you are liberal in your politics and world-view. If so you are resorting to one of their favorite tactics rather than stick to the issues.

Despite immense evidence for evolution and none for any gods, people stubbornly cling to their unsupported belief systems, and accuse others of close-mindedness or stifling debate or even oppression.

The debate here is not about the evidence for evolution, but is about the possibility that intelligent design may be at work in the origin of the species. Since a non-intelligent design evolution cannot even offer a theory on how life began from non-life, I would think the possibility of intelligent design being the cause would at least be worthy of investigation. Instead, the Darwinists will not even allow this to be investigated. As I pointed out earlier, the evidence for the Christian God of the Bible is considerable, yet you and the Darwinists say there is none whatsoever. From a scientific standpoint this is not about clinging to a belief system. It is about allowing scientists to consider and attempt to prove I.D. without being fired and black-balled. Firing proponents of I.D. has been a matter of public record for many years and to deny this is rather disingenuous. The current PC policy on I.D. is no debate allowed and you know it. A close similarity can be seen in the man made global warming hysteria debate where Al Gore and many others have arrogantly declared, “The debate is over.” Do you really expect objective discerning people not to notice this kind of manipulation, coercion, and propaganda?

On the subject of man made global warming you said….. Evidence determines the consensus; not the other way around. What motivation do scientists have for suppressing or ignoring evidence?

It should work that way, but in the global warming debate I have seen and can prove that data manipulation and propaganda from the news media has been used to drive public opinion and consensus. Time Magazine’s latest cover has a green simulation of the flag raising of Iwo Jima of soldiers pushing up a tree. Time also had a cover with eggs frying on pavement. Of course 30 years ago during a cooling period they were warning of the coming ice age. Glacier calving in Glacier Bay National Park was used by CNN as evidence of global warming the very week I visited that Park and read in their brochure where the glaciers had receded 50 or so miles from the late 1700’s to around 1870. Check out on their website. The world started coming out of a little ice age about 200-300 years ago. The earth has been in a warming trend since then. Prior to the little ice age people were farming in Iceland, but they were forced to leave during this cooling period. Factors such as the Sun burning hotter in last ten or so years (check it out with google) has also had an effect. There are also mini cooling and warming cycles. You say that science has really improved since they were warning of cooling in the seventies. Really, how can you be so sure with so many scientists saying that our CO2 contributions are insignificant.

Surely you can see some motivation for suppressing, ignoring and spinning evidence when huge amounts of money for grants are at stake and it is well documented that those who do question the consensus lose grant money and come under much criticism and political pressure.

Example: CNSNews.com) - The political climate isn't good for scientists with dissenting views on global warming, leaving some researchers to fear that honest research could be blackballed in favor of promoting a "consensus" view. A dispute erupted this week in Oregon, where Gov. Ted Kulongoski is considering firing the state's climatologist George Taylor, who has said human activity isn't the chief cause of global climate change.

I even heard global warming activists blame the unseasonably cold weather of April 07 on global warming.

I could go on with more examples and evidence, but you get idea.

In closing the movie "EXPELLED" is not about promoting I.D. as it is about showing the intimidation and tactics used to shut down any attempt to investigate I.D. If evolution were a ten story building it would have no foundation and no first floor. It would be held up by cranes and cables. You would think that the owner of such a building would be eager to build a foundation and a first floor.


Sweet Jazzy Cat