General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Neil deGrasse Tyson destroys argument for intelligent design [View all]robersl
(83 posts)I guess it all depends on how we define evidence. I would cite two things that constitute evidence to me:
1) Life - somehow a complex group of inert chemicals can move around, breathe, reproduce, grow from two cells to adulthood.
2) Self-awareness - you are capable of contemplating yourself, your own existence. You can think about your own thoughts.
These are two points of evidence that seem to point toward a deity as opposed to the idea that this is all just an extremely complex happenstance.
I didn't say Occam's razor was evidence, I just said that it appears to be on my side.
Also, how is saying "eventually science will be able to explain how the big bang got started" any different from some fundamentalist saying "Eventually, Jesus will come back"? I'm glad you have such absolute faith in the scientific method, but if you look over the last 500 or 1000 years, the mystics have told a pretty consistent story, but Science changes its story over and over again.
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):