Monday, October 30, 2023

Some Atheist Propaganda Videos

How Evolution Disproves God
Planet Curious, 10 Oct. 2023

3:37 You have just given a great argument against Theistic Evolution.

Now, for deciding between Theism (YEC version) and Evolution (Atheist version), do you have an argument?

5:51 If the scientific method developed over centuries, you cannot be sure that the method was preserved at its best, or that your concern of working around cognitive biasses is what gave Pascal a good wheelbarrow or Napier a good logarithm ... or Volta a good battery or Gottlieb Daimler and Nicolaus Otto and Carl Benz a good car.

So, no.

6:19 a) How can Theists get through actual multiple lines of evidence if at each thing where God is the obvious explanation you go, "no, you can't explain that with God, you have to prove He exists first" -- just asking? Say, if we have ten lines of evidence for God, we can't explain all ten at the same time, and at each presented you can do that stunt, and when you get to the tenth you have a certain amnesia about the other ones, so you do the same stunt once again when reminded of the first that was presented!

7:02 A social network is even more able than an individual to:

  • cluster around a false belief
  • and ignore all evidence presented against it.

Individuals inherently have intelligence. Social things can have shared content in their intelligences, but that shared content is certainly poorer, and not certainly more certain, than the content of each single actually extant intelligence.

So, I need to see someone else than myself? Fine, I'll see St. Thomas Aquinas or Riccioli ... wait, it has to be a contemporary within your own scientific and presumedly non-confessional community? Well, that's a pretty confessional attitude if you ask me ... "you must check with us, you can't check with them" is the attitude of certain Jews against Christian readings of Isaiah 53. "That text belongs to the Old Testament, and now it has no meaning at all any more" is the attitude of certain Christians (not the Catholics) against Jews. You are replicating both of these attitudes.

7:35 A Catholic (when allowed to live among Catholics) is often more happy than a guy like Sam Harris seems to be, so much for religion being the wrong tool for the job.

And his assessment "it is built on lies and self deception" is the regular fare of how religious confessions treat each other. And specifically Abrahamic ones.

8:19 I note that Dan Barker was once an Evangelical pastor, and shares the Evangelical attitude to what's these days popularly known as Narcissism ...

To some disciples of Spurgeon, the presence of Narcissism on an individual level is in and of itself a sign of sins like pride, "selfishness" (not identic to lovers of themselves, I presume), in the one case the identification is dubious, in the other the "sin" is so ... and Dan Barker somehow never came out of this ... no longer a disciple (even half baked such) of Christ, he's still a disciple of John Wesley or Charles Spurgeon.

"when you truly humble yourself"

Words he must have pronounced hundreds, if not thousands of times as an Evangelical pastor.

9:07 The Evangelicals who have lost their faith in God are those who felt a need for good reason.

I believe you.

So are the Evangelicals who gained a faith in the Catholic Church, as the one Church that Christ founded.

Why Science has Buried God
Planet Curious, 9 Dec. 2022

1:26 When you pretend that "superstition" and "magical thinking" is a "type one error" you are yourself making a connexion which may not be there.

For instance, we might not descend from Lucy in the grass of the savannah, Lucy on the savannah might not have the capacity to have any descendants able to speak, for one.

Meanwhile, you are showing yourself capable of
  • not proving someone is wrong
  • then explaining how or why that someone became likely to be wrong
  • then taking that explanation as a substitute for proving the person wrong.

1:59 And if you are looking for false positive agencies, your "mechanism" is as much a one producing error as a predator is one producing death.

3:18 "science works"

So does Theism. That two explanations work doesn't mean each can claim to be the true one because it works, it has to show the other one does not work.

3:22 I disagree that angels or in some cases demons of wind or sun or moon are buried.

1) Daniel 3 (Catholic longer version) obliges such spirits to praise God
2) while you may claim that explaining day and year and month purely by gravity and inertia, thus by masses of Earth, Sun and Moon involves some Occam reduction of agencies, I can claim that allowing angels and therefore sticking to Geocentrism allows me to stick to a simpler epistemology, doing an Occam reduction of epistemic turn-abouts (Occam himself was actually about neither, but about ontology)
3) while a cloud accumulating electric charges in relation to the soil must sooner or later discharge, the "sooner" or the "later" and the exact mileage of the wind that drives it or of its form in being driven still allows sufficient freedom for the process to be overseen by spirits.

It may be added, some aspects of Mark 4 and Luke 8 suggest the ones active in storms might not be God's most obedient angels. More like demons.

3:32 I did not know the meteorologist had any power to bring rain to places where it doesn't come ...

I suspect Krauss is not very acquainted with farmers, or only selectively acquainted with them. Catholic farmers certainly would pray for rain.

3:42 "will continue to improve as science continues to improve the one remaining god"

  • Krauss is ignorant about Medieval conditions
  • Krauss is ignorant or callous about modern conditions.

3:55 "who didn't even know the earth orbitted the sun"

Like, as if that were the measure of minimum acceptable knowledge, that's also a way to push an ideologeme through ...

No comments: