huxley:

Hello Derison,

Did my questions scare you off?  I am very sorry if they did for it was hard to tell just how solid your mettle is even though you appear to have taken action to educate yourself.

Huxley,

I didnt run away, i went to read on some of the things you said and I will like to correct some of the assumptions that u make

huxley:




1)  Evolution, and there being no transitional fossils
2)  Even if evolution was true, it must have been driven by an intelligent agent
3)  The cause or prime creator of ultimate reality
4)  The age of the earth and the inference of age drawn from the bible.

1)  There are no evident transitional fossils,  Correct
2)  Evolution does not prove the existence or not of a creator (U are getting me wrong there)
3)  Physics does not exactly state what was pre-big bang.
4)  Then the universal constants: the probability of its success is slim and if we were to look at mathematical probability,  it shouldnt have happened, and we shouldnt have been here.
5)  Where does intelligence come from:
6) Evolution remains seems rather speculative to me: e.g. this bird's beak is shaped like this because its ancestors had to adapt to the kind of nut on island x, why didnt they die off of hunger? Just like saying because i want to fly my descendants will grow wings.

I think its important, instead of u living with the fear or shame that your Boyfriend/girlfriend might not like u as much if she knew, if they cant handle it then know that u will find someone who will. That's my own 2 cents.

Mr, Huxley,

I will assume that u do not like religion because it is incoherent and lacks evidence, and for the most part I agree with u, there can only be one true way: that is the question that led me to agnosticism, is there a God, can we know him/her, and of all the religions that abound which is true? Now, evolution makes some guesses that seem logical (but are guesses nonetheless), and for one there is a lack of transitional fossils: and much as we know that we might have evolved (I say this because i suppose that if we did evolve, there might have been an intelligent being behind it: a thought i still don't take too seriously) we are not sure what sprung the process into being. In Dawkins Blind watchmaker, i find faults in his logic because he assumes that evolution is process that is lacking of a designer (I am yet to see a process that displays intent without thought: yes I am aware of Jay Gould's metaphor of spandrels, but spandrels are not as significant as the building) and then again if a process gets better then there must be intelligence behind it, and as I know evolution is a process (that is unintelligent: but at the same time intelligent> what could be more equivocal) that has nothing in mind but succeeds in getting better all the time.  What happened before the big bang remains a question to be answered, and more importantly we must ask the question how did intelligence arise from chemical compunds?  I may be asking questions that project me as confused, but if evolutionists ask for certainty I must ask how certain are u that we evolved, and that there wasnt an intelligent being behind that process, and the fact that we share genetic similarity with certain animals does not prove that we evolved, it proves that we need a certain makeup to survive life, saying that the fact that the only difference between our genetic make up and that of an ape is 1% is proof of evolution is as lame as saying that a counterfeit painting probably came from the same painter.

FYI,  I don't believe in a 6,000 yr old earth,  Genesis doesnt even agree with that.

i just want to say something briefly: I have read Dawkins, Hitchens, some of Dan Dennet and none of Sam Harris but have watched their video the four horsemen (they are the four most prominent Atheist world over) and I read a lot on evolution, and i consider myself an open minded christian, I was agnostic before that. Now in the light that we evolved, we must ask ourselves whether morality has a basis at all: all that atheists and agnostics say is that if we have a society with no religion of any sort such a society will be good for all of us, I am certainly sure that is a lie, people will always be good or evil, But we must first ask ourselves what role does good or evil have when all we are here to do is to ensure our genes survive. I have heard that we should not see God as a source of morals, but instead see morality as being shaped by human solidarity, now that is even a worse joke, I should be moral because of all of you, you all must be mad: I see it this way there is nothing wrong in stealing since the thief is more fit than the victim, and rape is just the male desire to ensure that his genes are spread wide and that he has more offspring than the rest of us, the truth is that if we remove religion, then there is nothing to hang unto other than another imaginary concept called human solidarity.

And as for the concept of evolution: you have to be kidding me, because it seems that the creatures wished their changes into being and then it happened overtime, i hope my oldest ancestor wished he could fly so in a billion years time my descendants will. Evolution and religion require a lot of faith, and if i might end it here the modern trend that secularism is taking is nothing short of the bigotry they accuse people of faith of.