Dawkinswatch

Exposing Evolution As A Mess and Atheism As Hot-Air!

You Know Evolutionists Do Not Like Thinking

with 14 comments

socrates I am going to get a lot of flack for  but before you do murder me, please answer my enquiry,  because i would like to please ponder on a fault in you thought processes.

Let us agree that you are right, yes those evil creationists have made an imagenary God but we have really descended from a rock and the earth is fifteen billion years old.

You must be pleased that you have won me over to your way of thinking but this is what I want to know?  We are the human at this stage of our development but what will we be in the next stage of evolution ?  Surely you must have thought about this.

Are we going to be gods? Maybe because we are not going to get any less evolved, we cannot be monkeys. that is the only logical choice. But that is my take on this but I would like you to tell me, what we will we evolve into?

Our Mormon friends really believe that godhood is a their calling and destiny, they are not the only ones because whoever has studied the New Age philosophies will know that they have a godhood complex. 

The foundation of all new age spirituality is the theory of evolution, without Charles Darwin Eastern mystism would have not have come to the West and found favou, witness the number of people who practise yoga. 

I refuse to get side tracked and any one who wants to answer has to anwer my question, thank you and thank you. 

Related to Yoga and the New Age  


AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Advertisements

Written by dawkinswatch

March 13, 2008 at 3:26 pm

14 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Please find more about thinking here: http://sahajapower.wordpress.com/
    🙂

    Peter

    March 13, 2008 at 3:54 pm

  2. We are the human at this stage of our development but what will we be in the next stage of evolution ? Surely you must have thought about this.

    That’s the deliciously frustrating part – we don’t know. I don’t know, you don’t know, none of us knows, unless someone really does invent a working crystal ball or time machine.

    Are we going to be gods? Maybe because we are not going to get any less evolved, we cannot be monkeys. that is the only logical choice.

    Well, that’s not completely true – the history of life is replete with examples of changes that are downward in complexity, rather than upwards (e.g. microbial parasitism, vestial features, etc.). But could we be gods? Well, it has been suggested that any sufficiently advanced beings or technologies would appear god-like to more primitive beings. We are already gods to man’s best friend, in that sense – but that’s not the conventional way in which we use the title “god,” is it?

    Kudos to making a thoughtful observation! I’ll have to downgrade my criticism of you now (darn, I was having fun). 😉

    Dan

    March 13, 2008 at 7:46 pm

  3. Dan you are a mormon.

    dawkinswatch

    March 13, 2008 at 8:41 pm

  4. One interesting contemporary perspective is that human selection is replacing or will largely replace natural selection now that we have genetic engineering to work with. That means our future is in our hands. I imagine that we will try to make ourselves more God-like – omnipotent and immortal, but probably not benevolent.

    I don’t think Darwin would have viewed this perspective favorably. Darwin wrote about the advantage of natural selection over human selection, and even ridiculed human selection. Many agree with him: Bill McKibben, for example.

    If global warming turns out to be catastrophic as many now believe, humanity may seek a way out through genetic engineering and climate control. But if it is truly catastrophic, the human population may not survive. We just may not be able to become God-like fast enough. In that, perhaps, lies the redemption of the world.

    Ken

    March 13, 2008 at 10:04 pm

  5. Ken

    Do not worry about global warming it is ploy get all to surrender our rights to the coming world government.

    Global warming is a deception, try to get a video called ” A report from Iron Mountain”

    dawkinswatch

    March 13, 2008 at 11:34 pm

  6. “Do not worry about global warming it is ploy get all to surrender our rights to the coming world government.”

    Fellow critics of Dawkinswatch, it is about time that we recognize that we are dealing with a genuine idiot. He is a person who doesn’t actually care about what is true. His mind is actually made of conspiracy theories. I’m not sure that continuing to point out his flaws is really a good use of our time.

    J. Frantz

    March 14, 2008 at 2:28 am

  7. “Do not worry about global warming it is ploy get all to surrender our rights to the coming world government.”

    Oh, just when I thought there was a glimmer of hope that dawkinswatch might be interested in even the slightest step towards thoughtful thinking, he shoots down my dream.

    Frantz – “genuine idiot” is probably a bit off. I would say “determined idiot.” One doesn’t achieve his level of arrogant insistence that he understands things despite not knowing anything about such concepts without sheer determination.

    Dan

    March 14, 2008 at 7:23 am

  8. Read a Kurt Lewin’s Report from Iron Mountain then we can talk about global cooling.

    Please can we discuss evolution and what we will become in the next stage.

    dawkinswatch

    March 14, 2008 at 4:20 pm

  9. Read a Kurt Lewin’s Report from Iron Mountain then we can talk about global cooling.

    You really need to get a clue. Leonard Lewin wrote “Report from Iron Mountain” 40 years ago, on war and economics not climage change, and it was found out to be a hoax in 1972.

    Go read the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) fourth assessment report.

    Please can we discuss evolution

    You’re welcome to respond to my comment on the matter (comment #2). Intelligently though, please (what was that “Dan, you’re a mormon” crap – was that even a complete thought?)

    Dan

    March 15, 2008 at 9:55 am

  10. I think what Dawkinswatch may be saying here is that the threat of a global catastrophe is being used to promote the political aims of some members of the United Nations and that the United Nations is something like a world government. This appears to be one of the ideas explored in Report from Iron Mountain. I have the impression that Iron Mountain has been read by some as being politically insightful, even if the reader believes that it is not a real government report.

    The IPCC report seems to say that modifying world politics and economics has the potential to mitigate global warming. While the IPCC report does seem to regard global warming as a potential catastrophe, it is more optimistic about our ability to mitigate it than others less involved in global politics believe, such as James Lovelock or Bill McKibben. It does seem unlikely that the world will embrace the United Nations solutions, even if eventually everyone believes that the results of global warming will be catastrophic. I think the United Nations wants the world to share the pain. I suspect that will not happen. Instead the pain will fall unevenly and there will be winners and losers – probably more losers than winners.

    It may be that the use of global warming for political aims by some nations and by Democrats in the United States has added to the resistance to the idea by those with different political and economic aims.

    I have to say that I admire Dawkinswatch’s ability to start a conversation, and, in spite of the tensions in that conversation, it has stimulated some rather humorous discussion.

    Ken

    March 15, 2008 at 7:22 pm

  11. I have the impression that Iron Mountain has been read by some as being politically insightful, even if the reader believes that it is not a real government report.

    Insightful in what way? People that believe all-too-readily in conspiracy theories such as the Roswell UFO reports, that 9/11 was a big hoax, and the like, from the sounds of it.

    Dan

    March 16, 2008 at 9:04 am

  12. I am thinking Report on Iron Mountain might be insightful in a political science kind of way. Maybe what the book does is bring out how politicians and others might use fear of catastrophe to promote themselves or their aims. I agree with you that it can also be used to support false conspiracy theories. I guess I am thinking that Iron Mountain can mainly be read in the way one might have read 1984 decades before 1984 – fiction that raises interesting questions about politics and human beliefs and behavior and the future. At the same time, I do not think it is fair for an author to present a hoax as truth. Nor, if what we read in Wikipedia is true, was it fair for John Galbraith to falsely claim he had participated in the group that produced the report. In addition, I do think literary hoaxes and other hoaxes are potentially dangerous.

    I am wondering how Dawkinswatch reads the report – literary hoax with important political insight and meaning, or real government report that is frightening.

    BTW, one of my favorite books about the desert was written by John C Van Dyke. He fabricated much of the story that he claims to be his real adventure in the desert, and yet the book does match in all important ways the experience of the desert by those of us who love it and it has played an important role in promoting the preservation of the desert wilderness.

    Ken

    March 16, 2008 at 3:26 pm

  13. My name is Mervyn. I find Dawkinswatch an interesting concept. I am a fan of Allistair McGrath, a theology professor at Oxford, who has debated Richard Dawkins.
    As a literalist Christian, I believe the end times prophecies in Matthew 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21. I believe that the good news is the Messiah will come in the nick of time to save the earth and its fauna and flora from total calamity for the benefit of all people. At that time “… the government will be on his shoulders.” (see Isaiah 9:6-7)
    I have decided to write a journal or memoir of my personal thoughts gleaned from church, the media and Bible reading; to pass on to my children. I hope to find an answer to the question – Can we reconcile the Bible and science today?

    mymoss

    May 28, 2008 at 4:55 pm

  14. While they last (2000 copies) I’ll send postpaid, no strings attached, no one will call, a hardbound copy of the damage control version of The REPORT FROM IRON MOUNTAIN to all those who send me their mailing address @ Harvey Howard, 501 Old Antioch Rd., Crab Orchard, TN 37723. By just reading the indices is enough to prove my point.
    I esteem this book as the second most important book printed in the 20th century. The most important one was the original 1903/1908 THE NEW TESTAMENT IN MODERN SPEECH, translated from the original Greek by Richard Weymouth. hdh

    Harvey

    January 6, 2009 at 10:30 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: