There is absolutely no scientific evidence to support secular humanism. Why are they still around?

2015-11-25T02:18:55-05:00

Secular Humanist enjoy claiming they are the ' Rational Philosophy' yet everything about their belief system is man made with no basis in natural law. They enjoy using scientific theories against religious followers as a weapon but they dont seem to understand these same scientific theories do not support their beliefs in anyway. Evolutionary theory actually does more harm to their beliefs than it does to religious belief. Do they not understand evolutionary theory? Or are they just making things up as they go along?
It is not limited to Evolutionary theory, There is nothing in Quantum Mechanics, M-Theory, Complexity Theory, Relativity, Chaos Theory, Cosmology or any of the top scientific theories that we use to better understand the universe we live in, nothing at all that lays claims to their beliefs. So how do these humanist continue to find recruits?

Response by SN Greg Wright made Nov 25 at 2015 2:32 AM

2015-11-25T02:32:59-05:00

SrA Art Siatkowsky Give me a minute to get over the fact that this is an actual post.....
.....
.....
.....

Ok. Your statement is so wrong on so many levels that I hardly know where to begin. So I'll just throw out a question, and a fact. Neither of which you will ever be able to disprove. Fact is, I think you're drunk. No one sober and sane posts this shit. Anyway, here goes?

The Fact:

The Big Bang Happened. Period. There is incontrovertible proof that it happened. Nothing you say or fantasize will change this.

The Question:

How did you, Airman, come to share SEVENTY PERCENT OF YOUR DNA....with a tree?

I'll leave it at that.

Response by SSgt Private RallyPoint Member made Nov 25 at 2015 2:46 AM

2015-11-25T02:46:01-05:00

Perter Hitches basicallyagrees with you SrA Art Siatkowsky He has seen the bitterness and acrimony dealt out to Christians and almost mute on the side of Christianity.

Response by CPT Jack Durish made Nov 25 at 2015 9:32 AM

2015-11-25T09:32:57-05:00

Why is any belief system still around? Scientific evidence only extends so far. No matter how large the telescope or how powerful the microscope, many can only see so far and no farther. There is always another mystery just beyond our powers of observation, another unanswerable question and man simply can't abide leaving those unanswered. Some choose God and others No-God as an answer, and they will argue. It's simply our nature.

Response by SGT Jeremiah B. made Nov 25 at 2015 12:02 PM

2015-11-25T12:02:48-05:00

There really isn't any basic belief system that is falsifiable. The only system that has any edge is agnosticism as it assumes we can never actually know, but even that has problems. The basic problem with proving/disproving the existence of an enormously powerful, hyper intelligent being is that they are under no obligation to play along with our empirical attempts to identify them.

I personally believe that there is a God and that Jesus Christ was exactly what the Bible claims him to be, but I am under no illusion that this is something I could ever prove using a double blind experiment that relied only on quantifiable results. I think there are some great logical arguments and interesting pieces of evidence, but that only gets you so far.

Response by SrA Art Siatkowsky made Nov 26 at 2015 2:45 AM

2015-11-26T02:45:57-05:00

Discussing the basis of one’s moral code is like taking apart one of those wooden Russian eggs, each of which encloses a still smaller one: “I believe it is wrong to kill people.” “Why?” “Because I have respect for humanity.” “Why?” “Because I am human and recognize my brother’s kinship.” “Why?” etc., etc. If one believes in God, one finally gets down to an ultimate egg that is solid and so ends the taking-apart (analytical) process. God is simply and logically an absolute, an end and not a means, unique in our—that is, some of us—experience. But an unbeliever gets down to an egg that is hollow like the rest, but that contains no further egg. One’s belief turns out to rest, ultimately, on air—“I just feel it to be so.” This doesn’t bother me too much emotionally, but it is undeniably awkward from a logical point of view. 13

Response by SPC Boyd McFail made Nov 26 at 2015 6:45 PM

2015-11-26T18:45:24-05:00

Let me pose this. I believe that there is a Supreme Being (GOD) at this time I believe in the same God as Christians.

However let look at it this way. As in the Russian egg with a defined solid end to the question. The Secular Humanist will find that there is a solid Supreme Being in there quest. A being that seeded this planet with life. The how is not important, though I follow the bible on much of this in my feelings, and I will until proven otherwise.

We as a people are now on the verge of leaving this planet and exploring the universe. So let say that in the distant future we find a planet that will support our form of life. A new or older planet that has all of the stuff that we need for life, yet there is no life on that planet. So we either on purpose or by accident leave some amino acids on the surface. We leave and don't come back for a million years. We find that there is now life on that planet, maybe even a human or two. Could we or would be be considered that planets Supreme Being and or a God to that planets occupants?

Is that how we came about? I don't know. If so we owe a big thank you to the God of our planet.

The rest is history.

Response by SrA Art Siatkowsky made Nov 27 at 2015 12:12 AM

2015-11-27T00:12:24-05:00

The primary argument here is that secular humanist say there is no God and all we need is science and reason to move forward as a species. The problem I have with this is that all the claims secular humanist make ...people matter, animals matter, the ecosystem matters, things matter...science doesnt agree with any of these. If they claim their philosophy is derived from science then what science says about these issues matters. Natural law doesnt care about people or animals or the earth or anything at all. All these 'things' that secular humanist say are important to their philosophy are simply things they are making up with no support from science. Normally I wouldnt care what another philosophy cares about but these very same people attack religious people and say they are wrong because of science and reason when in fact there is no science to discredit religion and the arguments for a God are more reasonable than the secular humanist arguments for humanities manifest destiny or any of their other claims.
Thats the core issue here. Secular humanist ridicule a philosophy that is more sound than their own and act as if it has support from science. It doesnt, its all conjecture. They get to that last little russian egg and find nothing there...and start making stuff up.