Doesn't this say that we can't create complex machines? (yet) Until the 1950's, science couldn't synthesize table sugar either. And I can't hear the "screams" of intelligent design.

[EDIT]

Then who created this god? It implies some sort of meta-god, does it not? And then it begs the question of who created the meta-god. If you say "god just is" then you're falling into the trap of truth by assertion.

[EDIT for Neil Roy's edit]

You know how the infrared sensing "pits" in a pit viper work? You can feel the heat of the sun beating on your skin? It doesn't take much imagination to narrow the aperture of the "pit" (becoming more like a pinhole camera) along with mutations that make the light sensing cells more sensitive to allow for the reduced light of the smaller aperture.

http://www.atheists-online.com/

[EDIT]

Answering Neil Roy's edit: http://www.allegro.cc/forums/thread/606868/910756#target

Edit: debate ended, at least for me.

I don't pray to it or give it money on Sundays. I believe that it sufficiently explains our existence. I'm not religiously linked to the idea. I'm not a scientist so it's not my job or interest to study it. I also don't consider it very important for my life; at least not directly. That is, I'd much rather write code, play video games, or watch TV than read scientific journals. It's good for humanity as a whole to understand as much as we can, but it isn't necessary for each of us to understand the minuscule details of the science behind it.

Most people don't need to know it in their everyday life. It doesn't matter much where we came from (assuming the Bible is bullshit). Each of our lives are insignificant to the big picture. People should live their lives and enjoy them. If studying scientific journals is fun then go for it. If studying the Bible is fun then go for it. If playing video games and drinking beer is fun then go for it. Some people find joy in pushing the boundaries of science and that's great. It doesn't mean all atheists have to be scientists to justify their lack of belief in any deities.

I don't take evolution blindly. I understand it on a simple scale. High school science classes gave me a sufficient understanding to comprehend what evolution is and why it occurs. It makes sufficient sense to me. It makes a lot more sense than the Bible does. I don't define myself by my beliefs in science though. As a matter of fact, I'm usually only an atheist when I'm debating with religious people (or making fun of them ). I'm just a computer programmer when I'm not.

We have a new smartest post in the thread.

Once again, Darwin is well over 100 years ago, so you're looking at some very outdated science... Science may never fully explain everything, but that's no reason to stop trying to explain what we can... It explains a lot, which BTW is what brings this community together at all. Religion doesn't really explain anything. It just calls it a black box and calls it a day. How original.

I was merely quoting to something this guy http://www.barrylong.org/ said.

The vailidity of Darwin's theories doesn't change simply because it's old anymore than a Pythagoras' theorem is getting outdated.

I wasn't saying that science is no good to us, just that it doesn't help in terms of self-knowledge.

Nothing new has been said in this thread, so whatever.

To be fair, the theories have developed a lot since then. Like, a lot lot.

Is there a religion that posits "explanation" as its primary purpose? Or is this still that belief that religion is the old science?

Depends on the religion. Enlightenment, salvation, karma, reincarnation, power ... what do they say?

This is ridiculous. I'm 'religious' and I'm not in the ruling class, nor does it give me power over people. Nor do I follow Christianity to achieve either of those aims.

I meant the ruling class uses it to get people to do what the ruling class wants. "Divine right" and all that.

At the end of the movie, you learn that Eli is blind and had the entire Bible memorized.