Hitchens writes about his cancer

While I will never agree with his opinions on faith and religion, he is artful with the English language. I wonder if facing death will change his stance on the afterlife and things outside our physical existence.
 
Thanks for this thread. Very sad to hear about his cancer. One of my favorite people. His debates on YouTube are greatness!
 
Which goes to show that the concept of the afterlife is based more on emotional, superstition and fear than anything else.
__________________________________________________

it doesnt show or prove anything. yes, some people may try to seek the truth of an afterlife after a traumatic event or while facing death but 90% of the planet believes in some form of an afterlife. I'm not particularly religious. I was raised episcopalian and am non-practicing. However, I've seen some crazy **** in my day, enough to convince me we are very spiritual beings with souls. I too think it is odd that people can take the words verbatim of scripture over 2000 years old, that has been translated hundreds of times and in hundreds of different versions and had entire books/sections thrown out and not view it with some skepticim but that is not what religion is about.

What i find interesting is that people think it is more likely that all the millions of life forms on this planet evolved from non-living matter rather than any alternative theory. There is not a single event in human history where a living organism arose from something non-living. It is simply not possible. Even well know evolutionists do not dispute this. Evolutionist Fred Hoyle said, The notion that… the operating programme of a living cell could be arrived at by chance in a primordial soup here on the Earth is evidently nonsense of a high order.
 
Because NewDoc say he wonders if Hitchens will change his stance on religion because he is sick does not show that religion is based on fear, superstition or emotional causes. That is your subjective conclusion with no basis in fact at all.
 
What i find interesting is that people think it is more likely that all the millions of life forms on this planet evolved from non-living matter rather than any alternative theory. There is not a single event in human history where a living organism arose from something non-living. It is simply not possible. Even well know evolutionists do not dispute this. Evolutionist Fred Hoyle said, The notion that… the operating programme of a living cell could be arrived at by chance in a primordial soup here on the Earth is evidently nonsense of a high order.


What does science say? I suggest you read up on evolution and chemistry. Your reasoning and conclusions are very poor. Just because something has not happened (or more precisely, recently observed to have happened), does not make such a thing impossible. You really need to get more up to date than Fred Hoyle (an anti-big banger who died in 2001).

As far as religion not being based on fear, superstition, or emotion, are you saying that religion is based on reason, rationality, or science? The desire for religion may be evolutionary.
 
Because NewDoc say he wonders if Hitchens will change his stance on religion because he is sick does not show that religion is based on fear, superstition or emotional causes. That is your subjective conclusion with no basis in fact at all.


On the contrary, it is hardly subjective and it is based in fact. Please see Temporal Lobe Epilepsy, loosely calling TLE an emotional cause.

Look, it's not like God actually came down and talked to humans and helped them write a book about Him. And if you do think that, then why isn't that book the Koran?
 
Just because something has not happened (or more precisely, recently observed to have happened), does not make such a thing impossible.
__________________________________________________

what are the mathematical probabilities of such an event occuring?
 
general, are you really that obtuse about science and probability?

Please don't try to "prove" Christianity, or the existence of God, by using science or mathematical probability. You're going to go nowhere fast. Which is what you're doing now.

I'd say the mathematical probabilities (guessing) are pretty good. Have you bothered to even google the topic?
 
Look, it's not like God actually came down and talked to humans and helped them write a book about Him. And if you do think that, then why isn't that book the Koran?
__________________________________________________

I'm not religious. I'm just saying I do not believe in hard core evolution theory. This is not to say I do not believe that species do not evolve, they have to over time or face extinction. I'm just saying I do not believe we came from non-living matter. I have spoken to chemists on this issue. They recognize this hole in evolution theory.
 
Look, general, the cause of life (the start of life) isn't really an evolutionary issue, so please stop calling it a hole in evolution theory.

As far as the chemists you've spoken to, what can I say? You may have spoken to competent ones, or not. I don't know.
 
the cause of life (the start of life) isn't really an evolutionary issue
__________________________________________________

Then why the obsession with it by educators? If evolution is just about the idea that we have 6 million species on earth and they change over time, some die out, others evolve, then why is it taught as the origin of life on earth? FYI, the mathematical probability from a evolution website is 1 in 10 to 40 to form one peptide. Of course, this is an astronomically high number but even so, it would require perfect chemical conditions. Further, oxygen would destroy any sort of chemical event like this happening which would mean we would have had a different atmosphere, then you are talking about these peptides surviving and evolving any further. I'm back where I began which is something external got life started on this planet.
 
Then why the obsession with it by educators? If evolution is just about the idea that we have 6 million species on earth and they change over time, some die out, others evolve, then why is it taught as the origin of life on earth?

You've kind gone off the deep end now. You weren't making much sense to start with and now it's gotten even worse. Imo, your facts are just wrong, i.e., you don't know what is taught or what "evolution theory" is.
 
your facts are just wrong
________________________________________

i find it interesting that you make personal attacks to prove your point. the math comes from a pro-evolution website. i didnt make it up. arent you curious about the origin of life or do you just want to believe evolution theory as taught and not challenge it in any way.
 
How is that personal? You have a horrible grasp of the facts here.

And you are still are confusing origin of life with evolution of life.
 
regarding a "death bed conversion", i read or saw some interview where hitchens appeared to leave the door open to that. he DEFINITELY said that it would mean that he lost his faculties but he definitely did not say it wouldn't happen. i thought that was interesting.
i'm sorry i don't have the link. i'll see if i can find it later.
 
It matters not what he said or didn't say.

What matters is what he does when the time comes. No one can predict what they will do when death is imminent.

If he "converts" then good for him. So be it. If not, same thing.
I don't care if he accepts Jesus, Allah, Buddha, or Vishnu. It's his business not mine. That's what religion should be: a private affair.

I don't want religious people trying to dictate science curricula, making laws based exclusively on their holy book, or putting their religion in the government, or saying that NOLA got slammed because of the gays.
 
Let's see, so you don't believe in Evolution because it lacks evidence; however, you have 100% faith in a sky daddy because it has rock-solid evidence? Let's say theory of evolution is false. Then how did it start? Where can I get a systematic theoretical framework to describe the process via which life (not just humans, but life in general) has evolved?
 
Cain and Abel seems to be a story more of familial obligation of the physical realm rather than some larger comment on religion, and whether one should care what, or any, religion one subscribes to.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict TEXAS-KENTUCKY *
Sat, Nov 23 • 2:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top