Haha… I’m a Christian and I totally agree with this. I’ve done it before, you shouldn’t thank God for cooking your Turkey, thank your parents and love your family, this will make you good in God’s eyes without even praying to him.

Search the facts and you’ll discover that evolution is impossible to prove using the scientific method. It is neither observable nor repeatable.

The song of the scientifically illiterate. They think that science only proceeds by one method. Archeology is a science. Christians love to use it to support lots of Biblical claims. But it’s not observable or repeatable.
You didn’t really need me to tell you that though. You already knew it. But you wanted to stick to the limited perspective of what Gish/Morris/Ham/Hovind/Jones told you about science. It fit better with what you wanted to believe. Now open your eyes and engage your mind.

Empiric data fails us. And when “empiric” data is discovered, science undoes itself.

No it doesn’t. Again, you depend on remaining ignorant to believe what you’ve been told.

Argue as you may for carbon dating, helium dating dislodges the argument.

What the heck are you talking about? Never mind. You don’t know.

Search as long as you like; there are still no missing links.

One of the favorite outright lies of the creationists. There are just so many sources (and fossils) to shoot this down it’s hard to know where to start. Try going to http://austringer.net/wp/ and look there for Transitional Fossil Existence Challenge. It’s just a starting point.

And every hypothesis of “science” (to be sure, there are almost as many deistic/intelligent design scientists that aren’t Christians as there are evolutionists) is counteracted by an equally plausible theory of creation.

Uh huh.

To accept evolution you must extend yourself in faith. Only the object of your faith is your own mind.

Fine. I can put some faith in my mind. Better than in your ignorance, or the words of known liars like Gish, Morris, Ham, Hovind…..

I’m sorry, I’d rather put my life into the all-powerful hands of a God who loves me, and wants nothing but the best for me, than the capricious will of man.

What about a capricious God? One who willy-nilly wipes out people, kills babies, allows young women to be taken as war prizes, kills a man’s whole family while proclaiming him a good man, let’s one family suffer horribly while supposedly granting another a new car and mansion.

I’ve made enough decisions in life that lead to my own undoing. But, while following God’s will, I have NEVER made a decision I regretted.

If you ever did, you just told yourself, “Oops. I must have mistaken God’s will on that.” Dude, that’s a self-fulfilling prophecy. A classic fallacy.

Hey, if there’s no ultimate authority you’re responsible to, then selfishness and lying are commended in your survival-of-the-fittest mentality.

Again displaying ignorance of evolutionary theory because you let other people (and known liars at that) tell you what it’s about.

Guilt. Wow, Darwin never mentioned when that evolved. In fact, since there’s no real reason for it, I’m surprised it lasted the evolutionary process. …..
If there’s no ultimate truth then you’d better stop feeling guilty. Otherwise you might make it seem like you did something bad . . . and we all know there’s no such thing as sin. …….
In an evolutionary framework, guilt is unacceptable.

Again displaying ignorance of evolutionary theory because you let other people (and known liars at that) tell you what it’s about.

So to address head on your errors of the past couple lines:
–Survival of the fittest, genetic propagation, natural selection, and other evolutionary drives do NOT operate on the individual level. (Lamark was silly enough to think so. Since he was shot down only creationist continue to be sufficiently silly.) Evolutionary drives operate solely at the population level. So any individual greedy, selfish pig, or liar, or guilt-devoid sociopath may do just fine in life. (We need look no further than televangelists to see this.)
–BUT, guilt, selflessness, and honesty can all be seen to play a distinct and positive role in accomplishing evolutionary purposes. Guilt can prevent one from harming others of the species. (See here that the good of the species is the driver.) Honesty, by and large, makes life easier for all of us. (See again the good of the species at issue.) Selflessness may not preserve an individual’s life, but it may preserve other lives. (Once again, the species trumps the individual.)
–What’s notable in all this is that much of what works to improve conditions for the human species can be distilled to a simple formula. “Do to others as you would like to be done by them.” The “Golden Rule” as it is known. And it’s interesting to note that that simple formula pops up time and again in human history. In the code of Hammurabi, in the teachings of the Buddha and Confucius, in the mouth of Jesus and many more places.

the science of evolution isn’t science, it’s faith. The science supports creationism/intelligent design the more we learn about it.

Given your demonstrable ignorance of science, this statement carries no weight whatsoever.

The beautiful thing about de-conversion is you can successfully de-convert anyone from any religion . . . except Christianity. I don’t mean to sound arrogant, because it has nothing to do with me. No other religion promises eternal security. God tells us that once saved; always saved. A true believer in Jesus Christ may slide away for a time, but will always return. You can’t be de-saved. Once a child of God; always a child of God. “No man (not even a staunch atheist) can pluck [us] out of [His] hand.”
If you believe you’ve ever de-converted anyone . . . I say to you that person was never a convert in the first place.

DING! You win one point for your choice from the list of “Reasons decons must have left the faith”. It’s a lovely list of quick and easy reasons that can be tossed out to pigeon-hole ex-believers and thus save you any inconvenient need to understand them, or – perish forbid – actually consider what they have to say.

I will say that I have collegues nominated to a presidential board for evolutionary research.

a presidential board for evolutionary research? You’re kidding, right? Are you talking about President Bush? If so, what is the name of this panel?

You’re spot on too. I looked at his web site. He did indeed go to Bob Jones. I’d bet that you’re right about the evolutionary board too.

Without even looking at your web site first, then I’ll look.

You have no idea what I’ve studied.

You have not formally studied biology beyond the typical courses in high school. You may have taken a overview course post high-school, but it was most likely one with a creationist bent.

You have no idea what background I come from.

Fundamentalist evangelical. Best guess at denomination would be either Baptist or independent, non-denominational (e.g. unaffiliated community church)

You have no idea the times I’ve “questioned my faith.”

True.

You have no idea the degrees I have (and my bio doesn’t tell you all of them).

None in biology or science. Possibly something on the order of an associates degree in a general science overview curriculum.

You have no clue who I am and what I kow.

You are a fundamentalist Protestant who is absolutely convinced that he knows more about science that people who actually study it and thinks he can inform scientists about the “errors” in their fields. You actually know very little about science. And you are vastly ignorant about your ignorance.

You are very arrogant and sure of your mighty wisdom. You respond defensively to criticism or anyone who questions you. You are more concerned with informing people so they can be a “right” as you are, but you actually don’t care to understand them, or try to show them you give a damn about them.

You are a fine example of a Christian; reflecting Christ’s unconditional love to all.

Please don’t be so foolish to tell me what books I’ve read, how I’ve interpreted those books, and to what degree I don’t keep up with scientific journals.

You don’t keep up with the journals. Proof? Without using any internet search, name all the peer-reviewed research journals you read each month.

I could hazard a guess as to the books you’ve read on evolution. I’d bet that i’d score a hit on several of them. I’d miss most of the more recent ones.

What you can’t grasp is that when someone really is knowledgeable about something, one can quickly spot a pretender and assess the profundity of his/her ignorance.

But please don’t forget, though you may not believe in God . . . that doesn’t mean you God. You have no idea what I’ve studied. You have no idea what background I come from. You have no idea the times I’ve “questioned my faith.” You have no idea the degrees I have (and my bio doesn’t tell you all of them). You have no clue who I am and what I kow.

Please don’t be so foolish to tell me what books I’ve read, how I’ve interpreted those books, and to what degree I don’t keep up with scientific journals.

And even though I don’t feel the need to legitimize myself to you, I will say that I have collegues nominated to a presidential board for evolutionary research. I’m up to date just fine.

If you don’t want to believe in God . . . That’s fine. But ask yourself which person is more arrogant; the one who argues for his belief system/science based off his own research and studies . . . or the one who thinks he can read minds and constantly refers to the first as “arrogant”?

I’ll be visiting your site from time to time because I enjoy the debates. But if things constantly dissolve into name calling and petty arguments with no sound basis, what’s the point?

My recommendation is for you to be open wth your family about being an athiest. Until you do, you may constantly feel disingenuous around your family when it comes to saying grace, and other family matters where religion comes into play and you are expected to participate.

I completely agree. It’s something that is kind of awkward to bring up, and I haven’t found quite the right moment yet. I know my mother will become upset, but she’ll eventually accept my decision.

My stepdad on the other hand is someone I’m more worried about. He’s very stubborn and set in his ways when it comes to religion. He made my mother and I stop going to an Episcopal church that we were a part of for years just because they ordained a gay bishop. I personally did not have a problem with it, but stopped going just to keep peace within the family. I haven’t gone back to any churches since.

Of coure I have one question. Did you feel guilty? If you didn’t, why do you care if you lie to their faces? Why would it bother you to hurt them?

To answer your questions, no I do not feel any guilt. As others have said, I think I made the best decision for the given situation. I’m a bit confused as to why you’re drawing connections between lying and evolution. Especially here. I don’t have a “survival-of-the-fittest mentality” as you suggest. I love my family, and I want to do what is in their best interest..not my own.

Also, I’m interested as to why you seem to have this idea that morality is something that only Christians are capable of and bound to. Let me ask you this: Do you only tell the truth because you’re afraid of God’s punishment? If the bible didn’t say “Thou shall not kill” would you go out on a killing spree? Hopefully your answer to both of these questions is no. The reason I do not like lying to my family (or anyone for that matter) is because I believe it is intrinsically wrong.

When it comes to morality I like to think of Kant’s categorical imperative:

I should act only on that maxim that I could will it to become universal law.

Think of it as the equivalent to the biblical verse:

Love thy neighbor as thyself.

Lying isn’t something that I would wish for others to do to me. I don’t need religion to be able to distinguish what feels right from wrong.