How do we go about proving metaphysical truths like "there is an external world" or "my 5 senses are reliable" or "there are other minds besides my own"?

also, if we are to understnad the world through science, how do we prove that science is actually a good epistemology?

Here is a link to the site Angry Astronomy, and a blog post that has a creationist trying to attack, more or less, the whole of science. Good fun.

http://angryastronomer.blogspot.com/2007/01/on-stellar-formation.html

Cheers!

Hey guys, what's up?

So I have an article I want to write about why in the past years, atheists have been, in my opinion, defending atheism more, and bashing religion. When I mean bashing, I mean that we have been getting more and more organized, and people like us are beginning to arm themselves to topple religion, like with 'The God Delusion'.

Human race will 'split into two different species'

By NIALL FIRTH - More by this author » Last updated at 16:18pm on 26th October 2007

Comments Comments (6)
The human race will one day split into two separate species, an attractive, intelligent ruling elite and an underclass of dim-witted, ugly goblin-like creatures, according to a top scientist.

100,000 years into the future, sexual selection could mean that two distinct breeds of human will have developed.

The alarming prediction comes from evolutionary theorist Oliver Curry from the London School of Economics, who says that the human race will have reached its physical peak by the year 3000.

Edinburgh Creation Group has a new video up on the Origin of Life. Video claims that even if the whole universe was filled with amino acids all reacting under ideal conditions, but with no DNA/RNA the chance of getting the proteins needed for even the simplest bacteria would be infinitesimally small. The talk is by Professor John Walton who is a fellow of the Royal Society of Chemistry and head of reactive Chemistry at St Andrews University.

http://edinburghcreationgroup.org/video.php

Dawkins suggests a multiverse is the most promising way round this what do you guys think?

Canadian team sees evidence of water on Mars

Mysterious substance in rover's tracks provides solid evidence, Guelph researchers say

Oct 17, 2007 04:17 PM
Greg Bonnell
THE CANADIAN PRESS

A mysterious white substance churned out of the Martian dust by the wheels of the Spirit rover is the first "on-the-spot" evidence of water beneath the surface of the Red Planet, researchers at a Canadian university declared Wednesday.

As scientists around the world work to determine if the basic requirement for life exists on Mars, the first solid evidence based on soil samples "clicks" with earlier satellite data suggesting the presence of water, said University of Guelph physicist Iain Campbell.

When we get there, it's the Creation museum. That place is designed for like...9 year olds. There is no science, no evidence, no logic presented at all. This is the gist of it all.

Your world view influences your conclusions. You can either accept Man's Reason, or God's Word. Man's Reason says this: describes evolution(one thing that annoyed me was they referred to astronomical and other stuff as evolution as well). God's Word says this: creationism. Who do you trust more?

They had this T-Rex. Now the average lab exerts about 100pounds psi with its bite. The crocodile exerts about 3000pounds psi.

2. The Bible Says the Moon is a Source of Light

As early as the first chapter of Genesis, the Bible asserts that the moon is its own light source.

Genesis 1:16 And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. Of course, we know today that the moon (presumably the “lesser light” in this verse) is not a light source. It simply reflects the light of the sun. Frankly, even the primitive authors of the Bible should have known better. The shadows that are cast on the moon as it "waxes and wanes" should have been enough of an indication. The Book of Isaiah continues with this view of the moon in a prophecy he relates about happy times for Zion characterized by abundant fertility, fruitful land and a brighter cosmos (bold emphasis added):

Humans created from a single man. 4: 1

Homosexual acts are condemned as unnatural. (Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you?) But, in fact, such acts are common in many other species. 7:80-81

Crucifixion is a Roman punishment, unknown in Egypt at the time this story supposedly occurred. 7:124

Humans created from a single man. 7:189

Joseph saw in a dream eleven planets. Does this mean that according to the Quran there are eleven planets in our solar system? 12:4

The sun rises and sets at particular places on a flat earth. At the westernmost point on earth, the sun sets in a muddy spring. 18:86, 90

,

I only learned this recently on antoher forum, but birds are actually classified under reptiles. Sorta. A guy mentioned it on another forum and I looked on wikipedia and he was right. For some reason, Aves is like a subclass of reptiles or something. I might be wrong, I don't know.

Also, if birds are reptiles, then that would make them dinosaurs. A dinosaur is a reptile with legs directly beneath it.

As that I think a new thread is needed, I will oblige. Mathematical competence and microbiological understanding may be required to understand all of the arguments here.

Evolution has several flaws in its mutation theory.

1. Information producing mutations. Even though deludedgod has convinced me that genome increasing mutations are theoretically possible, they are not observed. Even if a new gene length is added to an intron, natural selection will not select out the gene as beneficial until it has completed 2 requirements, becoming an extron, and being a functional protein for the task it is applied to. The probability for either of these is very low and requires an extreme number of point mutations, mostly silent.

Thanks, LeftofLarry.

http://www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/evolution/

The Howard Huges Medical Institute offers free DVD's. One of them was the 2005 Holiday Lecture series on EVOLUTION featuring Sean Carroll and David Kinsgley. They will give you insights to contemporary DNA evidence of evolution. Beyond Darwin there is DNA evidence. I highly recommend this DVD and it's FREE. At the end of this there is also a panels discussion on the topic of Religion and Evolution. It's free.....and it will give you some background knowledge to arm yourself with against those pesky anti-evolutionists. The DNA evidence is hands down the most prolific argument you can make in support of evolution. Of course every molecular biologists knows this. Even Francis Collins knows this (he does not deny evolution, he just believes god drove it). Anyway.... get your free DVD.

(I'm helping deludedgod to try to get some theists to respond to this.)

A few days ago I started a thread where a requested people to give me stupid myths of evolution. It was great and we assembled 30 things. Now, I realize that there are many theists who do not attack evolution, but the ones who do always beat the same dead horses. therefore, I have collated some of my evolution posts on this site as well as some old articles on evolutionary genetics I wrote, and assembled them into The fundamental axioms of evolution.

Theists, your challenge is to debunk this:

The axioms of Evolution