home
RSS
April 29th, 2013
10:51 AM ET

New film examines science vs. religion

(CNN) – Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins discuss religion in the modern world and debate science in their new film.

- Dan Merica

Filed under: Atheism • Belief • Science

Next entry »
soundoff (1,595 Responses)
  1. Dyslexic doG

    Thank you Lawrence Krauss and Richard Dawkins. History will remember you as a light of sense and reason in a very dark and delusional time.

    April 30, 2013 at 4:39 pm |
    • {*}

      "History will remember you as a light of sense and reason in a very dark and delusional time." Going into the 20th century, rationalists had the same idea about science in general. Instead, science turned its attention, discovery, and technology into the bloodiest and most godless century in human history. It was probably not a theologian who greated nerve gas, biological weapons, mushroom clouds, global warming, space debris to a count of 300,000 items. And remember, Christians are too stupid to do what Dr. Mengele did. THe folks who carried out the Tuskegee Syphillis Experiments were scientists.

      April 30, 2013 at 5:04 pm |
    • derp

      "Christians are too stupid to do what Dr. Mengele did"

      Mengele was christian.

      "THe folks who carried out the Tuskegee Syphillis Experiments were scientists"

      Clark, Dibble and Wenger were christians.

      So much for that stupid argument.

      Next

      April 30, 2013 at 6:32 pm |
    • Mel

      Stalin not a Christian, Pol Pot not a Christian, ho chi minh neither... woo hoo. no relevence

      May 1, 2013 at 12:43 am |
    • sam stone

      When Stalin was sixteen, he received a scholarship to attend the Georgian Orthodox Tiflis Spiritual Seminary in Tbilisi. Although his performance had been satisfactory, he was expelled in 1899 after missing his final exams. The seminary's records also suggest that he was unable to pay his tuition fees.[14] The official Soviet version states that he was expelled for reading illegal literature and for forming a Social Democratic study circle.[15] Around this time, Stalin discovered the writings of Vladimir Lenin and decided to become a Marxist revolutionary, eventually joining the Bolsheviks in 1903

      May 1, 2013 at 9:38 am |
    • MarkP

      Lord Jeffrey Amherst sent smallpox infested blankets and such to the indians, perhaps the first instance of biological warfare in history, and he was a Christian.

      May 1, 2013 at 9:59 am |
  2. James Madison

    During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.

    April 30, 2013 at 4:05 pm |
    • Science

      Hey James Madison................religion has none it looks like.............with the comments on this blog.

      The Big question is ETHICS ! does religion have any ?

      The Ethics of Resurrecting Extinct Species

      Apr. 8, 2013 — At some point, scientists may be able to bring back extinct animals, and perhaps early humans, raising questions of ethics and environmental disruption.

      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130408165955.htm

      April 30, 2013 at 4:16 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      Humanism > Christianity (or any religion)

      Humanism offers a much better set of ethics than that offered by the bible, qu'ran, torah, etc. Humanism says we should follow reason and compassion to guide us. no orders to kill anyone. no prejudices (except toward ignorance). Humanism promotes education and science. Humanism recognizes, as shown through DNA, that we are all brothers and sisters.

      i challenge any Christian to compare their ethics to those offered by Humanism.

      April 30, 2013 at 4:23 pm |
    • trollintraining

      @Bootyfunk
      Why do i get the feeling that you think it is acceptable to hate people who dissagree with you?
      Oh yeah, it's right there in your post: no prejudice EXCAPT for what you call ignorance.

      April 30, 2013 at 4:32 pm |
    • Dyslexic doG

      keep training troll ... you need to write a coherent sentence to be provocative ...

      April 30, 2013 at 4:37 pm |
    • trollintraining

      Ah yes, ignore the content and attack a typo.
      Good arguement there you insecure dweeb

      April 30, 2013 at 4:41 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      you probably get that feeling because you can't see outside your own philosophy. it's untrue, however.

      i am prejudiced against bigots, racists, h.omophobes, misogynists, etc. yep, if you come in shouting a racist comment, i'll likely consider you ignorant.

      it is a kind of prejudice, i suppose - not liking prejudiced people. you think that i'm being unfair to the bigots?

      April 30, 2013 at 4:45 pm |
    • trollintraining

      Depends on how you define 'bigot', obviously.
      To judge everyone in the KKK i can see. But what about puting all boyscouts into one hated group. They do discriminate against gays.
      What if i want to decide all feminists are wrong and discriminate against them? Is that good for you?
      Where do you drop the self-rightous BS and treat ALL people like ..... people?

      April 30, 2013 at 4:53 pm |
    • Shabazmo

      "Where do you drop the self-rightous BS and treat ALL people like ..... people?"

      Where do you stop trying to fore people to accept and applaud grotesque & nasty lifestyles?

      May 1, 2013 at 12:48 am |
    • lol??

      C'mon cutsie bootsie,
      Explain the mystery of your iniquity. It should be easy for you. You know it quite well, being so proud of it.

      May 1, 2013 at 2:47 am |
    • Science

      Hey lol?? .............Truth = ethics...................sort of leaves out the fairy in the sky does it not ?

      May 1, 2013 at 6:09 am |
    • HUH!

      "Explain the mystery of your iniquity. It should be easy for you. You know it quite well, being so proud of it."
      You've got that right, lol!

      May 1, 2013 at 7:51 am |
    • Science

      HUH and lol?? ..................talking to each other ?

      May 1, 2013 at 8:01 am |
  3. Jason

    2013, and they still cling to their super being overlords who all promise an afterlife. The worst part is they believe almost anything written down, no matter how old and no matter anything to back it up but faith. Must be nice to live in ignorance after being brainwashed by their parents. What I find the most amusing is the fact if someone in the USA says that they talk to god, he or she will be under a 72 hour watch, and with good reason.
    Religions do nothing but battle for supremacy and normal people are caught in the middle. I look out the window of the train on my way to work and what do I see, churches, synagogues and mosques all buying up tax free properties all in a race to see who can recruit the most followers. Dark Ages all over again. What a world.

    BOW!!!
    YIELD!!!!
    KNEEL!!!!
    AND GIVE ME YOUR MONEY, ERR UMM, I MEAN DONATIONS!

    April 30, 2013 at 3:38 pm |
  4. lol??

    A great scientist is in a continuous state of repentance and awe.

    April 30, 2013 at 2:31 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      wrong. a great scientist puts supersti.tion aside and uses cognitive thinking to understand the world around him/her.

      btw, there is no such thing as sin. that's a disgusting concept used by the church to control people.

      April 30, 2013 at 2:35 pm |
    • ME II

      If by repentance, you mean continually reexamining your assumptions and being willing to change your mind based on the evidence, then I might agree.

      April 30, 2013 at 3:41 pm |
    • Richard Cranium

      Which great scientist...what's his/her name?

      April 30, 2013 at 3:43 pm |
    • Brian

      Actually many scientists suffer from depression. It's one of the side effects to not be ignorant of the world. As the saying goes, the more you know, the more you realize that you don't know.

      April 30, 2013 at 3:43 pm |
    • molly

      " the more you know, the more you realize that you don't know."

      And the better you are in understanding the difference, even if there are grey areas.

      April 30, 2013 at 3:47 pm |
    • HUH!

      "It's one of the side effects to not be ignorant of the world. As the saying goes, the more you know, the more you realize that you don't know"

      Now, here you've got a great contradiction. LOL!

      April 30, 2013 at 10:36 pm |
  5. Bootyfunk

    guilt, fear and ignorance are the pillars of religion, and they are crumbling. education and the internet are killing religion.

    April 30, 2013 at 2:26 pm |
    • mzh

      So B, you never felt guilt, never fear of anything and so on?

      I think there is not a single human who can say that 'I do not have any religion'... whoever says so is not entirely correct...

      Peace!!!

      April 30, 2013 at 3:07 pm |
    • meifumado

      Guilt, fear and ignorance are not only used by the religious, political movements can use them as well.

      @ mzh I have no religion, how is that incorrect? I follow no supersti.tions. so please explain.

      April 30, 2013 at 3:38 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      don't put words in my mouth. of course i've felt guilt and fear.

      religion uses them as weapons to dupe their sheep. politicians use them, too, but religious leaders really are just politicians...

      and no humans that have no religion...? what are you talking about?

      April 30, 2013 at 4:19 pm |
    • mzh

      @ meifumado
      I am glad that you asked that question…

      One of the basic definition of religion is to follow some rules which includes “Do” and “Don’t”… now I am sure you have a list to follow for these D & D…

      I think the question here is… where do I get the list of DD… either you come up with your own DD list or you may follow any of the books to get the DD list…

      Now how do I find a DD list from a book which would be authentic… here we have to put an effort to identify the correct one… and my humble advise to those who wants DD list from any book, please do not refer to any human/followers… because there are lots of human/followers who takes it incorrect either by knowing or not knowing… so one should go into the book and then take the DD list…

      The one who makes his own DD list is obviously would follow whatever he sees around him and will think of logic and will be wanting to see the prove… that’s why we see lots of human are turning as an Atheist (with due respect)… in my opinion about these people are seeing what their book tells them to do and what their preachers are doing in the name of religion… for example, lots of human in Christianity have difficulties to accept a human is God (referring to the teaching of Son on God or trinity concept) and they see all these teaching does not make any sense… so they turn not to believe in it and then since they do not go to second book they declare that there is no God… but my humble request to all is ‘please read all the books before you come to any conclusion’…

      April 30, 2013 at 4:24 pm |
    • mzh

      Dear B:
      “religion uses them as weapons”

      I do not agree with this… but I do agree that some of the followers of religion uses it with the banner of the religion… which does not mean the religion is corrupted… it’s the human… No religion teaches to be evil… it’s the human who decide or chose to be evil… you will not find a single religion which says to go and harm ur neighbors or steal money from others and so on… but all the religion teaches to be good to others… the only thing is missing from all the religion except Islam is ‘believe in Oneness of the Almighty Lord’…

      April 30, 2013 at 4:31 pm |
    • In Santa we trust

      mzh. Reading all the books will make little difference I suspect. I doubt that you have read all books for all religions and yet you decided.

      April 30, 2013 at 5:33 pm |
    • mzh

      Deal "In Santa we trust"

      I do study as on going process... you are absolutely correct that it will be lot difference not 'little'... here is the intellect part comes to be used...

      Nothing comes without effort... i find it very interesting that most of the human are not willing to study but rush to judge or come to a conclusion... i wish really wish the entire mankind would put an effort to get to the truth...

      peace!!!

      April 30, 2013 at 7:31 pm |
    • G to the T

      MHZ – I agree so much in what you say (kind of) that I ended up getting my degree in comparative religion and continue to study all of the world religions to this day. Religion has been one of the biggest driving forces in human history and I feel it's important to understand as much about it and how people relate to it as possible.

      That being said – a little study shows that there a huge holes in the beliefs of most religions and much that is self-conflicting. Texts and stories evolved over time and our understanding of these has evolved as well.

      I don't see religion as necessarily a bad thing, but I do see certainty as a bad thing. Once you are certain, you leave no room for growth.

      Now, I call my self an atheist. Does this mean I am CERTAIN there are no god(s)? Of course not, that's an impossible stance for anyone to take (or at the very least, it would require some kind of faith so say so). In this respect, I would be considered and agnostic. But that being said, I cannot live my life in a state of reserved judgement. Based on all I've studied and the probability of there being some kind of supreme being (I'm not even going to into the specifics of each religion), I find my self in a place where I can only honestly state that I don't know if there's is a god or not, but the I don't think there probably is.

      May 2, 2013 at 12:34 pm |
  6. questioneverything

    Ill start all over and copy the first statement in the the middle of this blog session, since nobody answered the thought,and some proceeded to bury all the posts that had relevance to the subject, some explained how things work but not where it all came from. all the words were chosen carefully so please read them carefully> let her rip!

    questioneverything

    strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force, electromagnetism, gravity are the forces that govern the universe, finely tuned, the periodic table explains mathematically the elements, not to mention<DNA,RNA, how did these complex systems first appear and how did they "evolve" into self reproducing cells that work together? left handed amino acids to produce proteins. Instinct in animals, glorious sunsets. the marvels of life go on and on. Since we have the ability to reason< it makes sense that the questions of origin of life should be answerable, as long as people are reasonable, and not predisposed to ideas that tickle their ears. we hear what we want to. This is a folly of man to think of himself so smart so as to deny accountability to a Creator, by dismissing the existence of one, especially since man is relatively new at real science. True Science and the belief of a God go hand in hand. people need to be humble and learn to ask the right questions. and challenge ourselves when we reach conclusions that don't explain satisfactorily why we are here, the human brain is really an amazing thing, False religion has misrepresented the Creator, and the egocentric Darwinists have misrepresented True science!

    April 30, 2013 at 2:04 pm |
    • Richard Cranium

      Deny the existance of a creator...no I dent the thoousands of god men have created to fill the void of ignorance.

      We are ignorant of many things, that does not indicate a creator.

      Which of the thousands of gods are given credit for creating everything....many of them. What evidence is there that any creator exists....absolutley not, zip, nada, nothing.

      April 30, 2013 at 2:09 pm |
    • Science

      questioneverything..................smell a snake ?

      And the old pope said what ?..........and Adam and Eve ?.............is there a talking snake here ?

      Pope praises science, but insists God created world updated Thur October 28, 2010
      Stephen Hawking is wrong, Pope Benedict XVI said Thursday – God did create the universe. The pope didn't actually mention the world-famous scientist, who argues in a book published last month that the laws of physics show there is no need for a supreme... \

      https://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/28/pope-praises-science-but-insists-god-created-world/

      April 30, 2013 at 2:12 pm |
    • Thoth

      "science and a creator go hand in hand".....

      No, not really. As much as your type try to present a precision crafted universe, it merely shows your lack of 'true' science; which evidences a quite random & imprecise universe...including our species which is quite fragile and flawed.

      April 30, 2013 at 2:19 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      offer a single shred of actual proof that there's a creator god. you can't. no one can. just like there's no proof that my left nut is god. if i say my left nut is god, just because there's no proof that it isn't, doesn't make it so.

      and anytime there's an unanswered question, only a fool says, "Goddidit. must have cause i can't think of anything else. derp!"

      April 30, 2013 at 2:30 pm |
    • Bootyfunk

      "it makes sense that the questions of origin of life should be answerable, as long as people are reasonable"

      that's the funniest statement in that pool of dribble you wrote. how does it make sense? how does god make sense at all? "reasonable"? you mean brainwashed. as long as people are in a religious cult, like you obviously are, they should accept the silly answers given them without question. that's pretty much what you're saying. turn your brain off, the bible has all the answers.! lol.

      April 30, 2013 at 2:33 pm |
    • JMEF

      q....g
      You think the creator is a hydrothermal vent, ok with me but seems rather silly.

      April 30, 2013 at 3:03 pm |
    • meifumado

      Why did your god take so long to reveal himself to humans?

      April 30, 2013 at 3:41 pm |
    • molly

      beautiful does not have to be "glorious"

      April 30, 2013 at 3:45 pm |
  7. Thoth

    How can you debate people that deal only in absolutes based entirely on manifested conjecture? Science is based on evidence, and continuously evolving, and open to global scrutiny. Religion holds rigid to speculative creeds written during a period of far less understanding, and attacks when questioned.

    April 30, 2013 at 1:52 pm |
    • Science

      THoth................Just the handle drives em NUTS !

      April 30, 2013 at 1:58 pm |
    • Science

      Oops............dang thumb..........Thoth

      April 30, 2013 at 1:59 pm |
    • Thoth

      @Science – I think you are being overly optimistic that they would recognize any god but their own....without Google or Bing of course. Studying early mythology helps understand the current versions...

      April 30, 2013 at 2:08 pm |
    • meifumado

      As I'm sure they have no idea of what mine stands for.

      April 30, 2013 at 3:43 pm |
    • Saraswati

      Yeah, a lot of these kinds of debates are pretty fake. Everyone pretends they are using words that mean the same thing and puts on a pretty show. I've always wondered how many people are really fooled.

      April 30, 2013 at 10:39 pm |
  8. derp

    " I was just watching a show last night in which these people, after touring the Amazon, walked around the desert there."

    There is no desert in the Amazon. The Amazon sits at nearly sea level. The nearest desert sits atop the Andes at thousands of feet above sea level.

    "They were finding clam shells left and right and supposedly people had found penguin fossils and other things that shouldn't be found there. Looks like evidence of the flood'

    No, it's evidence of tectonic plate shift, continental drift, global warming and cooling, and speciation. It is the same reason we find fish fossils on what is now dry land.

    "How did he do that?"

    By examining fossil records and sedimentary layering Hutton proved beyond a doubt the silliness of a "biblical flood".

    "No we haven't. The age of the Earth has changed by billions of years just since I was a kid. It changes all the time"

    The age of the earth was estimated to be over 3 billion years old in the late 1800's. Refinements in radiometric dating, and more recently discovered meteorite samples have placed it at right around 4.5 billion.

    I still find it unfathomable that there are functioning humans who still insist that the earth 6000 years old. You have to be so remarkably dumb to believe that, I don't see how you can navigate through live and not somehow end up dead.

    April 30, 2013 at 1:47 pm |
  9. Bob

    In this science vs. religion contest, it's funny that science keeps moving ahead and scoring new understanding of the universe, whereas religions such as Christianity and Islam have an increasingly negative score by all that they get wrong

    The scoreboard would look something like Science 100,000,000, to Religion with some big negative score thanks to all the flat/young earthies and religious failures in toipics in biology and medicine. Really it should just be game over since science has won, but the religious nuts have a vested interest in keeping their religious pyramid schemes going and pretending that they are in the contest in any valid way.

    Ask the questions. Break the chains. Join the movement.
    Be free of Christianity and other superstitions.
    http://whywontgodhealamputees.com/

    April 30, 2013 at 1:29 pm |
    • Bob

      *topics*

      April 30, 2013 at 1:30 pm |
  10. Answer

    "Whoa! I'm NOT Catholic.""

    ===Never said you were. I said "you people". I lump you clowns in as 'religious'. I may as well go with s-c-u-m, that is really what you people are anyways.

    April 30, 2013 at 1:02 pm |
    • Answer

      @Gopher

      And so goes the stuff "your Catholic.com". You freaks are spread out like the disease you are.

      April 30, 2013 at 1:04 pm |
    • lol??

      JW Gacy called his victims "punks". He was the clown.

      April 30, 2013 at 1:07 pm |
    • Answer

      Go get ready for your end times and fvck off.

      April 30, 2013 at 1:12 pm |
    • lol??

      Are you a one man god??

      April 30, 2013 at 1:19 pm |
    • Answer

      A fvcktard asking for a god?

      April 30, 2013 at 1:24 pm |
    • Akira

      I wonder how JW Gacy reconciled his murderous ways with his Christianity?

      April 30, 2013 at 1:40 pm |
    • fintastic

      @Akira.............." I wonder how JW Gacy reconciled his murderous ways with his Christianity?"

      It's ok, continue to murder, just make sure to come back to church every Sunday and you'll be forgiven every time.. then you can run out and do it again..... and be "forgiven" again..... it's like the ultimate religious get out of jail free card...

      April 30, 2013 at 2:00 pm |
    • Reality

      I have not been to Confession/Reconciliation for many a year and never plan to do so because this sacrament ( as with all the RCC sacraments) is flawed historically and theologically but to be fair, the priest's final words are "go and sin no more".

      The basis of the sacrament:

      ‘Peace be with you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.’ When he had said this he breathed on them and said, ‘Receive the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them. Whose sins you shall retain, they are retained.’ " (John 20:21-23) see other variations (1a) Matt 16.19 (1b) Matt 18:18).

      The flaws are thoroughly reviewed by Professor Gerd Ludemann in his book, Jesus After 2000 Years pp. 197-198, pp. 205-206 and pp. 575-580. His conclusion "The passages are inauthentic".

      April 30, 2013 at 3:06 pm |
    • Akira

      Fintastic:
      Oh, I know. The question was mostly to lol??, since lol?? made the original comment.
      I just wanted to see how lol?? would answer, because JWG was known for reading Bible passages, an attempt to hedge his bets, I suppose.

      Reality: I don't think there are enough Hail Marys to cover what Gacy did....

      April 30, 2013 at 3:33 pm |
  11. lol??

    From CNN's Gud News, Bad News Dept:

    GN:The BIG asteroid will miss the earth.
    BN: It will hit the moon.

    "Isa 24:20 The earth shall reel to and fro like a drunkard, and shall be removed like a cottage; and the transgression thereof shall be heavy upon it; and it shall fall, and not rise again."

    April 30, 2013 at 12:26 pm |
    • In Santa we trust

      Is this a reference to the suggestion that NASA "capture" an asteroid and put it in orbit around the moon?
      How exactly does that satisfy some vague prediction about the earth?

      April 30, 2013 at 12:51 pm |
    • meifumado

      Satan laughs, Damnation sinks it's talons deep into the womb of utopia spilling forth great rivers of virginal purity and bliss.

      April 30, 2013 at 1:08 pm |
    • midwest rail

      " BN: It will hit the moon. "
      Citation, please. Otherwise, this is just more end-times luna-cy (pun intended).

      April 30, 2013 at 1:11 pm |
    • lol??

      Just a possibility, a theory, so to speak. It's not like the moon has never been hit before. Is this allowed by the thought police?

      April 30, 2013 at 1:22 pm |
    • midwest rail

      When presented as "news", that is not a theory. You really don't understand the language, do you ?

      April 30, 2013 at 1:24 pm |
    • Brian

      Technically the earth is under a constant barrage of asteroids. The thing is that they are all too small. Also every scientist is in agreement that at some point in the future, a large asteroid will strike the earth a la the one that struck off the Yucatan penninsula. It's not an if. For science, it's a statistical certainty. So science and religion are in agreement when they say that a cataclysmic event is going to happen. The difference is that science uses statistics, and doesn't claim that it will "end the earth".

      April 30, 2013 at 3:55 pm |
  12. Answer

    @Gopher

    Ya why should you care? It's just a device.

    Underneath that device is the knowledge we humans have acquired. So you're not interested in finding out about it. You're walled to your delusion and comfy. Ya so why should you care?

    April 30, 2013 at 12:13 pm |
  13. Answer

    "Open a Bible and read the section on the Tower of Babel. It's just after the flood in Genesis. That might help you find the answer."

    ===There is your dodge.

    April 30, 2013 at 12:10 pm |
    • fintastic

      That's funny considering the bible IS the book of babble..

      April 30, 2013 at 2:29 pm |
  14. JMEF

    Topher
    The story seems to say what I thought, they were of one people with one language and god made many languages, it says nothing about changing an African into a Caucasian or Asian. Pretty weak explanation on your part want to try again and also the 8 people into 6 billion plus in less than 5000 years?

    April 30, 2013 at 11:50 am |
    • JMEF

      that's twice

      April 30, 2013 at 11:57 am |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      You might as well argue with a flat earther that the world is round.

      Young earth creationism is the definition of willfull ignorance.

      April 30, 2013 at 12:09 pm |
    • Science

      And the old pope said what ?..........and Adam and Eve ?.............is there a talking snake here ?

      Pope praises science, but insists God created world updated Thur October 28, 2010
      Stephen Hawking is wrong, Pope Benedict XVI said Thursday – God did create the universe. The pope didn't actually mention the world-famous scientist, who argues in a book published last month that the laws of physics show there is no need for a supreme... \

      https://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/10/28/pope-praises-science-but-insists-god-created-world/

      April 30, 2013 at 12:24 pm |
    • Topher

      JMEF

      " The story seems to say what I thought, they were of one people with one language and god made many languages, it says nothing about changing an African into a Caucasian or Asian."

      Fair enough. But it sets up the people traveling far away from Babel. Then you'd get into natural selection. Those in hotter climates who had the genes for more pigmentation survived and thus those people have different skin ... so on and so forth.

      How does the secular worldview explain the races? I'm actually curious.

      "Pretty weak explanation on your part want to try again and also the 8 people into 6 billion plus in less than 5000 years?"

      Don't ask me to do the math. But I have no problem see this considering exponential growth. I think within the last decade the population has increased by a billion, if I remember it right.

      April 30, 2013 at 12:24 pm |
    • Science

      The math has been done topher !.......................with DNA and you have seen them !

      April 30, 2013 at 12:37 pm |
    • Answer

      "I think within the last decade the population has increased by a billion, if I remember it right."

      ===There in your statement is the conditional attachment to the present condition. It takes a whole lot of people to procreate that 1 billion increase.

      What you have is developed a supposition that the population growth of the past has in relation to today's number. A fallacy in thinking.

      April 30, 2013 at 12:38 pm |
    • JMEF

      Topher
      Why not ask you to do the math, you made the claim that all people on earth came from the 8 on the ark? You can easily find out how humans populated the earth and how they migrated to all corners of the earth over millions of years. Do you REALLY believe that people managed to get to the America's, Asia, and Australia after the ark landed on the mountain with 8 people 4500 years ago?

      PS: Found a reference that the ark was constructed from "Gopher" wood, how appropriate.

      April 30, 2013 at 12:40 pm |
    • Answer

      You do not get 1 billion people from a 50,000 population in over a year. That supposition can be true when you factor in time to make babies.

      You will get a new 1 billion babies faster with a population of our current 7 (or so) billion over a year. That is already known.

      April 30, 2013 at 12:41 pm |
    • Science

      Topher .........you seem to be able to type...................can you read something besides the bible and believe it ?

      April 30, 2013 at 12:54 pm |
    • Topher

      JMEF

      "Do you REALLY believe that people managed to get to the America's, Asia, and Australia after the ark landed on the mountain with 8 people 4500 years ago?"

      Absolutely. I really don't see what your complaint is here.

      "PS: Found a reference that the ark was constructed from "Gopher" wood, how appropriate."

      You're right! "Gopher" is Biblical. Maybe I won't take such offense to it from now on. Thanks, dude!

      April 30, 2013 at 1:01 pm |
    • meifumado

      There's a lot of great research on language and its origins starting with proto-languages150,000-200,000 years ago.

      April 30, 2013 at 1:05 pm |
    • Answer

      "Absolutely. I really don't see what your complaint is here."

      ===Ya what's the complaint when you've already directed someone to the babble as the source of your own source to find the answer in which you have to reference the babble to direct the other person to the babble?

      April 30, 2013 at 1:06 pm |
    • Blessed are the Cheesemakers

      And why would you complain about the distibution of dangerous animals....... and marsupiels to only Austalia? Magic, god can do anything! Once you accept that answer there is nothing that can contradict the bible.

      April 30, 2013 at 1:13 pm |
    • Answer

      "The great hogwash loop called the babble."

      April 30, 2013 at 1:15 pm |
    • Science

      Topher..............how old does the bible say the earth is ?

      First Snapshot of Organisms Eating Each Other: Feast Clue to Smell of Ancient Earth

      Apr. 29, 2013 — Tiny 1,900 million-year-old fossils from rocks around Lake Superior, Canada, give the first ever snapshot of organisms eating each other and suggest what the ancient Earth would have smelled like.

      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130429154107.htm

      April 30, 2013 at 1:23 pm |
    • JMEF

      Topher
      According to a world population estimate chart I found there was approximately 20 million people populating the earth 4500 years ago not 8 people. What you believe is not physically possible considering the rates of reproduction and death and the fact that you can not account for the different races and the spread of humanity across the globe. Considering the societies in the America's date back to the time when you say the great flood occurred makes your argument, well, just plain ridiculous.

      April 30, 2013 at 1:25 pm |
    • Science

      JMEF ...................Like Adam and Eve suck the big one !

      April 30, 2013 at 1:29 pm |
    • JMEF

      Topher
      The earliest human remains found in Australia, the Mungo Man, date back 40,000 years. Get that Topher forty thousand years.

      April 30, 2013 at 1:33 pm |
    • Answer

      The short form of the same exchanges that always happens..

      1) Was the flood – a localized flooding?

      2) If it wasn't a localized flooding to just an small area... was it to a whole continent?

      3) Then we move on towards the world wide flooding.

      **This process above is called a logic of elimination. Going from the small to huge. To the whole planet.

      4) when the babbler refers to their babble and say it is a world wide flood, then -> how many people survive it?

      5) the babbler go "look in the babble"..

      6) "only Noah and family on big boat." <> babblers then clam up tight, retreat into bubble.

      April 30, 2013 at 1:44 pm |
    • Topher

      JMEF

      " The earliest human remains found in Australia, the Mungo Man, date back 40,000 years. Get that Topher forty thousand years."

      How did they come to that number?

      April 30, 2013 at 1:56 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Topher

      It's called science. Learn it.

      April 30, 2013 at 1:58 pm |
    • Ted Jones

      hawaiiguest

      @Topher

      It's called science. Learn it.
      .........

      He wont

      April 30, 2013 at 2:02 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      I know. It makes me sad

      "How did you get that number?"
      "Science"
      "NOPE, GOD GOD GOD GOD GOD GOD GOD GOD GOD GOD GOD GOD!!! I WIN"

      That's how the standard conversation goes with Topher.

      April 30, 2013 at 2:05 pm |
    • Topher

      It looks like Mungo has been dated several times with different results — all of which have since been questioned.

      April 30, 2013 at 2:05 pm |
    • Science

      Really topher.....................338,000 is even older you do have a Y don't you topher ?

      Was the bible around back then ?

      Human Y Chromosome Much Older Than Previously Thought

      Mar. 4, 2013 — The discovery and analysis of an extremely rare African American Y chromosome pushes back the time of the most recent common ancestor for the Y chromosome lineage tree to 338,000 years ago. This time predates the age of the oldest known anatomically modern human fossils.

      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/03/130305145821.htm

      No god(s) needed or required to graduate from public schools in the US

      Remember : Adam had to POKE himself hard with his OWN BONE to create Eve.

      No god(s) needed................... Old. DNA works..................also catches crooks !

      Ancient DNA Reveals Europe's Dynamic Genetic History

      Apr. 23, 2013 — Ancient DNA recovered from a series of skeletons in central Germany up to 7,500 years old has been used to reconstruct the first detailed genetic history of modern Europe.

      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130423134037.htm

      Peace

      April 30, 2013 at 2:08 pm |
    • JMEF

      Topher
      Why are you so obtuse, you can look that up your self. Twenty million people to 7 billion works over 4500 years, 8 people to 7 billion doesn't. The fact that there were people in the America's at the time of or shortly after the supposed flood shows your beliefs to be at best foolish.

      April 30, 2013 at 2:10 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      @Topher

      Good job implying more controversy than actually happened.

      The first estimate of LM3's age was made in 1976, when the team of paleoanthropologists from the Australian National University (ANU) who excavated LM3 published their findings. They estimated that LM3 was between 28,000 and 32,000 years old.[6] They did not test LM3's remains directly, but rather established an estimate by stratigraphic comparison with LM1, an earlier set of partially cremated remains also found at Lake Mungo.

      In 1987, an electron spin resonance test was conducted on bone fragments from LM3's skeleton, which established an estimate of his age at 31,000 years, plus or minus 7,000 years. In 1999 Thermoluminescence dating work was carried out on quartz from unburnt sediment associated with the LM3 burial site with the selective bleach results indicating a burial older than 24,600 ± 2,400 and younger than 43,300 ± 3,800 ka.[13] Later Thorne et al. (1999), arrived at a new estimate of 62,000 ± 6,000 years. This estimate was determined by combining data from uranium-thorium dating, electron spin resonance dating and optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating of the remains and the immediately surrounding soil.[14]

      However, this estimate was very controversial.[15][16][17] The lowest level of the LM3 which are as old as 43,000 years demonstrated that LM3 should not be older than the lowest layer. However, the ANU team had dated the stratum itself to be between 59,000 and 63,000 years old. The problems with using uranium-thorium dating on tooth enamel was criticized. The results from 25 additional OSL tests suggests that LM3 can not be older than 50,000 years BP. According to anthropologist Peter Brown, with the absence of the original deposit that once lay above the burial, a minimum age for the burial has not been established, only a possible maximum.[11]

      In 2003, collaboration of several Australian groups reached a consensus that LM3 is about 40,000 years old.[18] This age largely corresponds with stratigraphic evidence using 4 different dating methods. The age of 40,000 years is currently the most widely accepted age for the LM3, making LM3 the second oldest modern human fossil east of India. The study also found that LM1 was a similar age to LM3, and not 30,000 years old, as previously thought.[19] The LM1 remains are generally held to be the earliest evidence of human cremation yet discovered. [20]

      Dating methods get better, get over it.

      April 30, 2013 at 2:11 pm |
    • Ted Jones

      In addition all the species were magically created and placed on different continents as well. Perhaps one of Noah's sons built another ark and sailed over to Australia with newly unique species? Also in that short time span all the vegitation spread rapidly and turned into different species as well like you see in the desert verses forest. Everything was instant and magical. Topher you clearly are a fool and delusional

      April 30, 2013 at 2:12 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      And, as is usual, once Topher has been thoroughly refuted he has disappeared. The predictability and cowardice of Topher is truly a sad example of the typical Christian apologist.

      April 30, 2013 at 3:27 pm |
    • sam stone

      Hawaii: Do you really expect different behavior from Christ-Gopher?

      April 30, 2013 at 3:31 pm |
    • hawaiiguest

      We can always hope he'll start to value integrity and intellectual honesty someday. Until then, it's amusing to see him not answer anything and then run like a coward every day.

      April 30, 2013 at 4:37 pm |
  15. JMEF

    Topher
    Thank you, I will check out when the Tower of Babel was supposed to have happened. Please try to explain to me how 8 people can generate into ^ billion or so in 250 generation? I did think the Babel thing was more to do about languages and not changing physical characteristics.

    April 30, 2013 at 11:39 am |
    • JMEF

      meant as reply

      April 30, 2013 at 11:42 am |
    • Topher

      JMEF

      There was also some dispersion, yes?

      April 30, 2013 at 12:14 pm |
    • Brian

      8 people into 7 billion with combinations of mass death, disease, people just not having children, etc..

      April 30, 2013 at 1:12 pm |
    • Ted Jones

      Topher

      JMEF

      There was also some dispersion, yes?
      ...
      In addition all the species were magically created and placed on different continents as well. Perhaps one of Noah's sons built another ark and sailed over to Australia with newly unique species? Also in that short time span all the vegitation spread rapidly and turned into different species as well like you see in the desert verses forest. Everything was instant and magical. Topher you clearly are a fool and delusional

      April 30, 2013 at 2:10 pm |
  16. Topher

    Answer

    I'm not "Gopher" but I'll answer for him. You don't need to be scu.m. But you do have to humble yourself.

    April 30, 2013 at 11:19 am |
    • Answer

      Sure right s-c-u-m.

      You have a heavy stain of sin that you must enforce to your thinking. Your thoughts are monitored by your delusions. "Oh god I'm thinking of s-e-x.. I've sinned." "Oh god he is thinking of s-e-x – I know he is – sinner."

      "Oh these stains like a toxin ugly layer of filth. Oh how, I am s-c-u-m. And you too are s-c-u-m. Let's be friends and get saved together." <<– go and accept your s-c-u-m.

      I agree that you are s-c-u-m.

      April 30, 2013 at 11:24 am |
    • sam stone

      Of course you are

      April 30, 2013 at 11:34 am |
  17. catholic engineer

    "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. " From Shakespear's Hamlet.

    There are the concepts "moral", "immoral", and "amoral". The last means that a subject contains no moral content. An apple hanging from a tree is "amoral". The same applies to reason. Faith is not "rational"; it is not "irrational". It is a-rational. Rationality does not apply. Atheists insist that all things must be based on reason. When he askes for "rational" proof for "a-rational" subject he's wasting his powder and shot. Of course, whether atheists are 100% rational in their lives, or governed by their emotions, is beside the point.

    April 30, 2013 at 11:15 am |
    • Answer

      The freaks love their god.

      Doing everything they can prevent any besmirching of their god and the inevitable label of it being a "monster".

      April 30, 2013 at 11:20 am |
    • catholic engineer

      @ Answer Be aware of subtleties. Atheists set aside religion as so much "hokus pokus fairies in the pond." Then, they exalt Reason (usually their own) to such heights they seem to worship the God of Intellectual Prowess (created in the image and likeness of the atheist himself.)

      April 30, 2013 at 11:24 am |
    • Science

      But splat goes a fairy in the sky ! CE trolling again ?

      Einstein's Gravity Theory Passes Toughest Test Yet

      Apr. 25, 2013 — A strange stellar pair nearly 7,000 light-years from Earth has provided physicists with a unique cosmic laboratory for studying the nature of gravity. The extremely strong gravity of a massive neutron star in orbit with a companion white dwarf star puts competing theories of gravity to a test more stringent than any available before.

      http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/04/130425142250.htm

      April 30, 2013 at 11:25 am |
    • Pole dancing for Jesus

      CE. There is a rational explanation for species with overwhelming evidence. There are rational possibilities for the origin of life. There is nothing rational about believing centuries-old superstition especially when it contradicts observable evidence.

      April 30, 2013 at 11:29 am |
    • DavidTX

      Faith is never "A-rational" as it requires a leap to one side or the other. As close as you can get to a-rational as you have put it would be agnosticism, which really doesn't take much faith at all to just throw your hands up and say "who knows?"

      Faith is always irrational if the thing you have faith in is false. Faith would be rational if the thing hoped for is real. Problem is with most religions they tell you we won't know for sure until we die which is a total dishonest cop-out.

      April 30, 2013 at 11:29 am |
    • Answer

      "they exalt Reason (usually their own)" <<- you have no clue, do you?

      ===How does one person develop their own reasoning abilities? Yeah, education. Don't let the past generations come into the figure. Don't let the various trials and fails that mankind passes down in various records. Do we question our records? Find the errors and then take them down. Damn right we do. That is how our reason is perpetuated.

      Get that through your freak mind, loser.

      April 30, 2013 at 11:30 am |
    • Answer

      I have just one question for you 'catholic engineer' – what happens to a fire when you no longer have a source of fuel?

      April 30, 2013 at 11:33 am |
    • Answer

      Just explain your reasoning.

      Our reasoning, in that very simplistic question, is an experiment that is worldly tested. Corroborated by the empirical evidence.
      Observable. Repeatable. Can be tossed like a coin endlessly and then taught to future generations.

      Using just that we can develop. Perhaps you just want to invoke your magic deity on the fire. If it pleases you.. then just say it. "My god is the reason for the fire." If you do invoke that then I suggest you quietly just fvck off and die.

      April 30, 2013 at 11:37 am |
    • meifumado

      Silly reasoning and just plain delusional thought ,not sure how you religious folk get by day to day with such nonsense in your head.

      April 30, 2013 at 11:57 am |
    • Rupert

      Faith is not "rational";

      For once, I agree with catholic engineer.

      April 30, 2013 at 2:07 pm |
    • MarkP

      catholic engineer
      How can any decision-making belief system not be somewhere on the rationality scale? You, and everyone around you, either think that your beliefs lean more toward logical sense, or emotional reaction. The only other option is some crazy, nonsensical, seemingly random though process that makes decisions with no rhyme or reason. Which is it?

      May 1, 2013 at 8:23 am |
  18. Johnny Zoidberg

    @Rupert

    “Because believing in god requires you to suspend reason and logic which are both highly frowned upon in the scientific community. If you’re able to do that to support god, what’s stopping you from doing it to support something else that’s equally unfounded”

    The majority of scientists do believe in a higher power, albeit by a slight amount:
    http://articles.latimes.com/2009/nov/24/opinion/la-oe-masci24-2009nov24

    April 30, 2013 at 11:09 am |
  19. Reality

    Only for the newbies:

    The Apostles' Creed 2013: (updated by yours truly and based on the studies of historians and theologians of the past 200 years)

    Should I believe in a god whose existence cannot be proven
    and said god if he/she/it exists resides in an unproven,
    human-created, spirit state of bliss called heaven??

    I believe there was a 1st century CE, Jewish, simple,
    preacher-man who was conceived by a Jewish carpenter
    named Joseph living in Nazareth and born of a young Jewish
    girl named Mary. (Some say he was a mamzer.)

    Jesus was summarily crucified for being a temple rabble-rouser by
    the Roman troops in Jerusalem serving under Pontius Pilate,

    He was buried in an unmarked grave and still lies
    a-mouldering in the ground somewhere outside of
    Jerusalem.

    Said Jesus' story was embellished and "mythicized" by
    many semi-fiction writers. A descent into Hell, a bodily resurrection
    and ascension stories were promulgated to compete with the
    Caesar myths. Said stories were so popular that they
    grew into a religion known today as Catholicism/Christianity
    and featuring dark-age, daily wine to blood and bread to body rituals
    called the eucharistic sacrifice of the non-atoning Jesus.

    Amen
    (references used are available upon request)

    April 30, 2013 at 10:56 am |
  20. Robert

    It is quite irrational to believe that existence came from a steady state of absolute nothing or that the universe is eternal based on known science Atheism is a much less scientific religion than most religions.

    April 30, 2013 at 10:54 am |
    • Robert

      The above comment applies especially well to Dawkin's brand of atheism, anti-theism.

      April 30, 2013 at 10:55 am |
    • WASP

      @robert: HUH? that reads as incohearent gibberish. please re-write.

      April 30, 2013 at 10:56 am |
    • Reality

      As previously noted:

      o Think infinity and recycling with the Big Bang expansion followed by the shrinking reversal called the Gib Gnab and recycling back to the Big Bang repeating the process on and on forever. Human life and Earth are simply a minute part of this cha-otic, sto-cha-stic, expanding, shrinking process disappearing in five billion years with the burn out of the Sun and maybe returning in another five billion years with different life forms but still subject to the va-ga-ries of its local star.

      April 30, 2013 at 10:59 am |
    • sam stone

      It is quite irrational to see a creation (at best) and ascribe qualities to that possible creator

      April 30, 2013 at 11:00 am |
    • tallulah13

      I think what Robert is trying to say is that actual science is really really hard, so it's just easier just to say "god did it" and call it science.

      Of course, he's wrong, but it makes him feel better about himself.

      April 30, 2013 at 11:03 am |
    • WASP

      @robert: so you find it easier to believe god "snapped" his fingers and truly made everything from no material at all; than the universe has been renewing itself over unknown eons and started from energy combining to create simple elements then those created more and more complicated organisms?

      hmmmm, ok. you enjoy your "ideals" however do keep them out of the classroom.

      April 30, 2013 at 11:03 am |
    • SImran

      In continuation to WASP –

      And of course it will be quite RATIONAL to think that this so called omnipotent, omnipresent, omnibenevolent creator is watching every move and every thought of the billions and billions of men and women and children, and keeping records of their sins and good deeds!

      April 30, 2013 at 11:10 am |
    • Answer

      Religious freaks are so obsessed with "eternity".

      An eternal god.. eternal heaven. Eternal life.

      Start a fire and you'll see it will burn out. There is only so much fuel. When it runs out – guess what – there goes your fantasy.

      April 30, 2013 at 11:11 am |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
Next entry »
Advertisement
About this blog

The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.