Thread: Is it possible for us as men to have a discussion on God

The analogy between scientific theories being capricious endeavors in dot connecting and religious belief falls flat because it assumes that there is no wieght to plausibility, not to mention because one is based on hearsay, the other on testable data, reviewable artifacts, and logical thought processes.

If we would just go out to a museum, find a bunch of coincidental fossils and spout any random theory about their interconnectedness, sure, your analogy would work.

But speciation is known to occur, the time span we're talking about allows for the plausibility of large scale differentiation once speciation occurs, and if given more time than the couple of decades since DNA was discovered, we're more than likely to find more solid proofs.

How do you reconcile a track record that shows religion to be, not just wrong, but embarrassingly so on every occassion that it has butted heads with the scientific community?

How do you reconcile the fact that Neanderthals were a different species but shared our toolmaking capabilities and a sort of abstract expression that is seen nowhere else in nature? And the bible makes no mention of these advanced creatures, God assumes no credit for their existence. Has it ever been shown that the bible makes mention of humanoid creatures living 130,000 years ago?

Even if you want to reserve judgment on which side is right, give it some time, we're still in the relative infancy of evolutionary biology.