Disproving evolution won’t save creationism, atheist activist says

[LostOne4Ever]

[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#dcdcdc; padding-bottom:5px; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-bottom:none; border-radius:0.4615em 0.4615em 0em 0em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/09/24/disproving-evolution-wont-save-creationism-atheist-activist-says/[div class="excerpt" style="background-color:#f0f0f0; border:1px solid #bfbfbf; border-top:none; border-radius:0em 0em 0.4615em 0.4615em; box-shadow:3px 3px 3px #999999;"]By Travis Gettys
Tuesday, September 24, 2013 12:01 EDT

Disproving evolution cannot save creationism, a prominent atheist activist told a convention of free thinkers.

“Even if a god appeared and started poofing things out of nothing, that still wouldn’t prove the Bible because that collection of contrived and plagiarized fairy tales has already been disproved beyond redemption, and not even the existence of god could change that,” the video blogger Aron Ra said Sunday during Apostacon.

The annual conference of humanists and free thinkers gathered Friday through Sunday in Omaha, Neb.

Aron Ra discussed his efforts in his home state, Texas, to improve science education standards and fight back creationist themes in textbooks...

More at Link

[Warpy]

1. Evolution is an established fact, based on a huge amount of evidence

The only thing still up for grabs is the mechanism. Darwin favored slow, steady changes with the more successful becoming dominant until they were permanent over time. Unfortunately, the fossil record is discontinuous, with creatures staying utterly stable for millions of years until there is some big leap.

Environmental pressure is one mechanism. Another is RNA viruses (yes, they've established this with the reproductive systems of sheep). There are likely many, many others out there.

Catholics say god did it, but these are the means he used when they talk about evolution and how it happens.

Creationism is religious, only, and needs to be confined to wingnut churches. Unfortunately, wingnuts are allowed to be as goofy as they want to be, it's a constitutionally protected right.

[LostOne4Ever]

2. Exactly

And that is exactly what Aron Ra says in the video.

Its long but so much good stuff in there I had to post it here

[Lordquinton]

3. Thank you

I love Aron Ra, and miss the videos he used to make, but I'm glad he's getting more exposure, and being active in his state, where we really need it.

[ShadowLiberal]

11. Technically evolution is still a 'theory', because you can't prove it in a lab test

Hence part of why there's still as much debate about evolution as there is even though there's tons of evidence to back it up. If evolution could be proven in a lab test it would be the Law of evolution, rather than the Theory of evolution.

[Warpy]

12. It has been proven

directly in a lab by subjecting fruit flies to extreme environmental stress.

http://genetics.thetech.org/original_news/news78

Evolution is a fact, proven by the fossil record and now in the lab. Environmental stress is one of the theories about how and why and when it occurs.

[Alittleliberal]

13. You don't understand a Scientific theory

So is gravity.

[Act_of_Reparation]

14. No, no, no, no, no

Laws are statements describing some aspect of the world, and posit no explanations or mechanisms for its occurrence. The Law of Conservation of Mass simply states matter cannot be created nor destroyed; it makes no attempt to clarify why or how this happens.

Theories differ from laws in that they do posit mechanisms and/or explanations for phenomena. Inclusive to the Theory of Evolution is several possible hypotheses attempting to clarify the mechanism by which evolution occurs (natural selection, punctuated equilibrium, punctuated gradualism, etc).

Theories and Laws are not separate rungs in a hierarchy of terms.

[progressoid]

4. Hey, Omaha!

I wasn't around over the weekend, so I wouldn't have been able to attend though.

[DetlefK]

5. You know what's funny? Scientists are about to disprove Intelligent Design.

The argument of Intelligent Design revolves around Entropy, how only an intelligent being could lower the entropy in a system to create order from chaos.

The most recent theory, how organic molecules were created on a barren, hostile earth, revolves around icy meteorites.

1. It's known for about a century that Entropy can be destroyed by purely random processes under very narrow circumstances that aren't part of your usual physics-textbook. ("Physicists don't go by the book!&quot

2. The theory is that organic molecules were created from molecules like H2, N2, O2, H2O, CO2... that were embedded in an icy comet. If this comet is subjected to a massive thermodynamic non-equilibrium-state (e.g. the pressure resulting from crashing into a planet), the entropy-argument is mute and the molecules could form complex organic molecules. Those molecules could then form primitive lipids and amino-acids in an electrochemical process readily understood.

3. There are real experiments going on, where they really shoot doped ice-chunks into targets to see what turns up. Results so far: promising. And there is a german research-group that focuses on simulating such crashes with computer-programs with an atom-by-atom-resolution. So far no results but the laws of math are on their side.

[Curmudgeoness]

6. I don't know.

If a god did appear and start poofing things out of nothing, I might have to take notice of that.

But it ain't happening.

[FiveGoodMen]

7. Yeah, but he's saying that god wouldn't be YHWH

...wouldn't be the bible god.

I don't think he said he wouldn't take notice.

[Iggo]

15. Yep. He just said that the bible woud still be bullshit.

[sakabatou]

8. I love me some Aron Ra.

[LostOne4Ever]

9. I never heard of him before this

But I loved the video! Im definitely going to have to keep an eye out for more stuff from him.

[sakabatou]

10. This is probably his most famous list of videos

Starting with the first one.