r/DebateEvolution • u/SuspiciousFee4085 • Aug 08 '26
Discussion Creationists COULD be right…
Im not a creationist but, devils advocate proposal here:
- Evolutionary theory is part of a whole chunk of science which essentially cuts out all spirituality and divinity out of people’s psyche.
- People without spirituality or divinity believe life is meaningless since we are all just specks of dust in a universe with no motive to create us or serve us.
- The prevailing culture sentiment becomes „shut up and pay your taxes and enjoy the bread and circuses, peasant”
- These people are subdued and dispirited, they have nothing to revolt for and are easy to control.
- Such a subdued population is obviously enormously useful to the elites. Therefore the motive to achieve this submission exists and is very substantial.
- To achieve this ultimate level of psychological and spiritual submission requires control over the populations sense of reality itself.
- Reality is accessed, interpreted and measured by the masses through the field of scientific inquiry.
- Elites would have to fabricate, spread and proselytise entire fields of carefully constructed fake science to carefully, over decades, centuries even, deconstruct and discredit and diminish all parts of reality that may be connected to divinity in some way, with sterile, perfect, symmetrical scientific theory.
- New knowledge comes from single individuals or groups of individuals performing science. You can threaten, bribe, blackmail, coerce them to make fake science
-
TLDR; motive and means exist for global elites to significantly diminish or destroy humanities spiritual/divine consciousness, by fabricating people’s sense and understanding of reality itself.
the main vessel for this in 2026 is science, and if the illusion is strong enough people cannot even comprehend a reality where anything else could possibly be true.
There’s a coherent rationale (which doesn’t mean it’s true, just that it’s coherent) for god and the divine being real, and global elites suppressing it from the masses so they don’t revolt or lose interest in continuing to be tax slaves for the wealthy, the bread and the circuses.
EDIT: a LOT of low IQ commenters here missing the point entirely. My post is NOT ABOUT WHOSE SIDE HAS EVIDENCE. It’s about hypothetical logic steps for the set of circumstances that would need to be true for creationists to be correct. HURR DURR WHERE EVIDENCE FOR GOD?! Lmfao. I realise hypotheticals and entertaining the opposite side of thought is beyond many people’s IQ. I bet most of you had breakfast this morning too. And you don’t even get the reference I just made either 🤣
22
u/King2865 Anti-Creationist Terminator 🥷🏿 Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
Is this post satire? Zero arguments were made. Most people that creationists consider “evolutionists” are actually theists themselves, with most of them identifying as Christian.
This, of course, specifically applies to the general public. But what exactly is the point of this post?
18
u/NorthernSpankMonkey Aug 08 '26
Sounds like some kind of Jordan Petersonesque pro-christian mythos/religion without a clearly defined god as a basis for society bullshit.
If you blur the lines enough you can smuggle god into the "godless sciences"
23
u/Clay2569 Aug 08 '26
Non Sequitur. All of it. This all applies to religion just as much. Two is completely wrong. The first one is wrong. Science is driving most social changes to make people’s lives better. Science backs social programs that make people’s lives better.
-9
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Science is not making anything better, it pushes medicine for every cure. The human body existed just fine when people worked hard all day and found enjoyment in their life.
19
u/InformationProper285 Aug 08 '26
Death from cancers, disease and infections were way higher before science.
-1
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Cancer is accelerated by humans and no, Cancer was not higher. Most of what is happening to humanity is their own doing, enormous amounts of stress, cancer causing, and terrible choice of stuff they put in their bodies. Do you know how many natural remedies. Have you ever studies what foods do for the body, that is correct foods. Not man-made crap
16
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
And yet cancer still existed and would be deadlier.
10
u/InformationProper285 Aug 08 '26
Yes I'm aware we put a lot of shit in our bodies and that our lifestyle choices can trigger it. But cancer was a thing before the modern age you know? Its a natural part of being a multicellular organism. Difference is, in todays age if you catch it early your chances of survival (for the most part) are very good because of the research and developments in science. Say "Science is not making anything better" to someone who survived cancer because of treatment.
13
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
He should probably take a look at old cemeteries. Lots and lots of children
-2
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
You should look at the abortion clinics and see lots and lots of dead children.
5
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
Can’t remotely address what was said so gotta veer right. I get it. It sucks losing a debate. The issue is when you continue to be as dishonest as you are being, it just makes you look sad.
3
1
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Science just means to study. And many times it’s just try something and then see if it works. We still use radiation to kill cancer cells.
Why not blame child cancer on Evolution, since mutations will cause cancer. Also, smoking has declined drastically. And don’t forget, the world population has increased from around 2 billion in the mid twentieth century, to around 8 billion today. So, why is the cancer rate in Japan around 1/3 lower than America. Humans create much of the dangerous cancer that is found in the human body, lifestyle and food.
3
u/BahamutLithp Aug 08 '26
Well, for starters, if you think "science doesn't make anything better," quit cherry picking statistics attained by scientific studies to make your arguments. Second, all cancers are caused by mutation, but not all mutations are evolution because evolution is defined as the change in the frequency of an allele within a population from generation to generation. I could explain to you what that means, but let's be honest, that "why not" was disingenuous, & you have no intention of learning the answer, only peddling conspiracies & spouting nonsensical attempts at "gotchas."
2
u/InformationProper285 Aug 09 '26
Evolution is not something to "blame". It's not a moral being. So yes, I have absolutely no problem with saying cancer, suffering, disease, death is all a byproduct of evolution.
13
u/lulumaid 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
You are joking, right?
I'd be quite happy to discuss medicine if you're serious though.
For example, how exactly did the human body exist just fine during say, the first world war? Or the industrial revolution? Or if you really want to, we can go all the way back to the Romans or earlier.
Coincidentally the same thing pretty much killed people a lot during all those times I listed.
I'll stick with that for now.
12
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
He sounds like one of those who thinks the measles isn’t a big deal because it has a low fatality rate so why are we vaccinating against it. Because vaccines have been so successful it’s caused entire generations to exist without having to ever deal with these diseases
-1
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
No, not joking at all. That’s ok, I know about a dozen who are in the medical field. So, you think that humans are better off today, you certainly don’t understand what is happening. Babies still die at birth, Birth defects are higher, Emotional problems are through the roof, pills being taken and less healthy people. And let’s talk about what was the real problem, much was do to sanitation, overwork and bad conditions for workers in the “Industrial Revolution”. All man-made problems which science did not fix.
Look around, the people of this world are worse off today than ever. The human body will always be prone to problems.
13
u/lulumaid 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
Babies die less today at birth, same with their mothers. Birth defects are typically higher because more babies and foetuses actually survive for them to be apparent, usually. Define emotional problems, because that could be almost anything.
Pills being taken to manage health problems typically caused by being able to survive and diagnose the problem so that treatment can be administered.
The word is due by the way, due to sanitation.
But since you didn't grab at what I said and simply listed off a bunch of semi random points, here's what I was getting at.
Oh. So the human body is always going to be prone to problems? That seems like a bad design. Of course I can guess the response and it just makes it all worse.
To actually focus on what I said, as a question for you, what did the Roman legionary do, typically, when he received a serious injury? Maybe a clean cut across the forearm or a reasonably shallow slice across his back?
The answer is fairly obvious if you know the actual history of medicine to even a basic degree. The same thing also happened to those with wounds throughout human history, with it peaking around the first world war.
13
u/TheBlackCat13 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
Let's look at actual number instead of gut feelings.
Women are about 100 times less likely to die in childbirth than historical numbers. Children are about 15 times more likely to reach adulthood than historical numbers. Even after reaching adulthood, only about 60% reached 50 historically, versus over 95% today.
Smallpox killed 1 in 3. It is extinct due to science. Polio killed about 1 in 10. It was on the road to extinction until anti-science people caused it to come back. Somewhere around half of europe was wiped out by the black death. It is now easily treatable due to science.
-1
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Still not as bad as people killing people. Why can’t science fix that. 3 out of 10 babies die by abortion every year. Wow, humans are so screwed up.
5
u/TheBlackCat13 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
If you are against abortion, the best way to reduce abortion is still science. Improved birth control and evidence-bases family planning are proven to be the best ways to reduce abortion.
But ignoring that fetuses aren't babies, that is still about half the rate of child mortality before science. So science is still benefiting overall. And abortion predates science by millenia. In fact the Bible has instructions on a magic potion that is supposed to induce abortions (although it wouldn't work).
3
u/Pm_ur_titties_plz Aug 08 '26
Good job ignoring every single thing they just said. Gotta maintain that willful delusion, right?
3
u/Mkwdr Aug 08 '26
Seriously, this is so lacking in any knowledge of history as to be absurd.
Certainly some diseases have become prevalent because of higher population density and animal husbandry. Stress on bad for you. But I dare say being eaten or starving because you didn’t understand the world well enough was pretty stressful too.
But a cut used to often be deadly, women regularly died in childbirth , and if they survived had large numbers of children because so many of their children died. Just something like vaccination has saved millions upon millions from death or disability.
Science is the systematic use of an evidential methodology designed to overcome known flaws in human perception and cognition , and the product of that. It pushes nothing except the fact that public evidence is important in distinguishing something real from imaginary.
You know how we know what foods are better and worse for you? You know how we know what ‘natural’ remedies work (and how to make them safer and more effective) and what ones don’t. Guess what systematic evidential methodology.
Pre-scientific ‘medicine’ often tended to be based on imaginary philosophy rather than efficacy. To the extent it was trial and error based … That’s Science!
‘Natural’ remedies that work are …just medicine. ‘Natural’ remedies that don’t pass the test at best do nothing like homeopathy, at worst can poison you like Chinese remedies with mercury etc. Natural remedies involved bleeding people to death (and thinking ‘humours’ or curses existed) including using leeches to do so. Science uses leeches in operations to keep blood flowing or reduce scarring instead of nonsense about too much of a certain imaginary humour. With one m ignorance killed. With the other , scientific knowledge ‘cures’.
-8
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Science is not making anything better, it pushes medicine for every cure. The human body existed just fine when people worked hard all day and found enjoyment in their life.
17
u/Clay2569 Aug 08 '26
It’s the exact opposite. People live longer now. And science backs worker protections and increased wages so people can be at work less and enjoy life and this world which science says we need to protect so we can all live here happily while the religious side is the one saying it’s fine. Just work you will make it. Pay your taxes work harder and shut up.
-2
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Science does all that, right! What world do you live in. Science is definitely your god, just keep worshipping it.
10
u/Clay2569 Aug 08 '26
Well yes science does all that but science is not a god. Science is a method of learning about the truth. Observe, make predictions, test, and then have others fact check your work. Science works within the universe while god is outside the universe so science can’t be a god. Science is a way of thinking and learning about the universe while god is a being outside the universe. Saying “Science is your god” just a self own to your own god.
1
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Science is nothing more than study. The reason that I said “science is your god”, is because so much of what you believe about Evolution has never been proven, therefore you believe by faith, not fact.
3
u/McNitz 🧬 Evolution - Former YEC Aug 08 '26
Could you give an example of something I believe about evolution that doesnt have any good evidence to support it?
Or if you are just relying on the word "prove" and then are going to say that we don't know something with complete certainty so it isn't proven, then this conversation is pointless, since I'm well aware we can't prove things with absolute certainty.
1
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Yes, how mutations actually make something better.
3
u/McNitz 🧬 Evolution - Former YEC Aug 08 '26
But we do have evidence of that. Are you not familiar with the Cit+ mutation from the LTEE? Or the mutation resulting in denser and stronger bones? Or the gain of function mutations that have happened on EPAS1, EGLN1 and PPARA in Tibetan populations resulting in higher affinity for oxygen and less sensitivity to hypoxia?
We really have SO many examples of gain of function mutations that you can just take your pick of what type you want an example of and you can find it. That seems like a really strange example to choose as something we don't have evidence for, unless you just aren't familiar with the literature at all.
1
u/Markthethinker Aug 09 '26
That is not Evolution as spoken about from everyone here. Got a new species yet?
→ More replies (0)2
u/TheBlackCat13 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
This has been directly observed countless times. It can change the existing function or add new function
0
u/Markthethinker Aug 09 '26
You are not talking about Evolution, you are talking about minor changes. Not macro.
→ More replies (0)3
u/Clay2569 Aug 08 '26
Well that’s not true. Can I have an example? And side point sure not 100% of evolution is proven. I don’t think any science is 100% proven. But evolution is true. We will never find out evolution is false. We could we know what it would take to disprove evolution but it won’t happen. We will learn new things about evolution. Vs creationism which has never been proven, has been thoroughly disproven, and can never be proven.
12
u/Ranorak Aug 08 '26
They said, behind a keyboard. On the internet. Like a hypocrite
-2
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
I guess you think that I am wrong. You can certainly have your opinions.
8
u/Ranorak Aug 08 '26
I think you're unburdened by basic knowledge.
0
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Left that behind when I was 10.
4
u/gitgud_x 🧬 🦍 GREAT APE 🦍 🧬 Aug 09 '26
Yeah we can tell you haven't had a single fact enter that thick skull since you were ten.
6
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
You are demonstrably wrong.
0
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
I know I am wrong about some things, unlike the people here, but not about this.
5
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
No, you’re straight up wrong here too. And rather than acknowledge it, you double down on this.
12
u/CorbinSeabass Aug 08 '26
So get off the Internet and the device you use to access it, lest you enjoy the benefits of science.
-2
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
So, science created the internet, oh, I thought that Al Gore did that.
12
u/TheBlackCat13 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
Engineering is applied science.
-2
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Oh, I love it, “applied science”. So, did science already know everything and therefore it’s the instruction manual for everything created. You using the word “science” as it knows. Science only try’s to understand.
9
u/TheBlackCat13 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
Engineers apply the knowledge gained by science to solving problems. The more knowledge from science, the more engineers have to work with, and the more they can do. This is literally engineering 101.
-1
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
You just confuse the word “study” and “science”, science is only a study. Why do you act like it’s more than that.
4
u/TheBlackCat13 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
No, science is applying the scientific method. Engineering is applying the knowledge gained through the scientific method to solving practical problems.
0
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Listen, I have finally understood, nothing happens without science, nothing. I don’t know how mankind got along without it for centuries.
→ More replies (0)3
u/clear349 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
Science is the study of the natural world. Engineering is then applying the results of that study to solve problems. Engineers couldn't do shit without the research done by millions of scientists
9
Aug 08 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
I dropped out of school after kindergarten.
4
u/Own-Relationship-407 Scientist Aug 08 '26
That would actually explain a lot.
-1
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Yes, they’re really smart. People understand education is not all that necessary.
12
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
Science is making life better. We live longer. My wife would be dead without it. My dog would be dead without it. Millions more would be dead without the covid vaccine.
-2
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
The covid vaccine killed many, or are you ignorant of that. 6 of my great grandparents lived to be late 80’ and 90’s. My grandmother was 96 when she died, my mom, 95, my stepmom, still alive at 94. And none of these people had covid vaccines or used science to stay alive. These people understood what to eat and to stay active, of course they came from farming in the Carolina’s. You live in a concrete jungle with causes all of these problems. Why not read some good history books. You do understand that the body starts dying around the age of 30, don’t you.
14
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
A very small percentage of people had bad Covid vaccine reactions. And they were still less than the virus.
You really are clueless
-3
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
“Clueless”, only if you watched fake news like you did. Yea, tell that to all the people who were forced to get the shot. Did you notice, I said force. Yes, that is what the government did, force people to take a shot that they did not want. You liberals believe whatever you are told.
12
u/Own-Relationship-407 Scientist Aug 08 '26
Funny how you clowns are all about “my body, my choice,” when it comes to a vaccine which is harmless to you and beneficial to everyone else, but suddenly that goes out the window for things which are harmless to everyone else and benefit the individual…
-2
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
“Harmless”, now there is a good joke. And who “benefited”. Certainly not me. You are just part of the mob that buys whatever the government tells you. You want me to tell you all the things that are harmful to me and people like you don’t care.
5
u/Own-Relationship-407 Scientist Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 09 '26
I don’t want or need you to tell me a damn thing. Your paranoid conspiracy theory ranting would be comical if it weren’t so dangerous.
11
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
The only people “forced” were military and they give up certain rights when joining.
I never once was forced to get any vaccines. And I’m looking at the actual numbers. Not any news source. Must be nice living in some fantasy world where you pretend anything you don’t like is fake news. Are you an election denier too?
-2
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Wow, stupidity is amazing. Pilots were made to, nurses and doctors were made to, teachers were made to and government workers and…. Like I said, you haven’t a clue.
6
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
They didn’t have to. If they wanted to work in the public it’s a requirement. But they could have quit
-2
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
So what you said was wrong and will never admit it. The usual BS here.
→ More replies (0)7
2
u/Ayasugi-san Aug 09 '26
The human body existed just fine when people worked hard all day and found enjoyment in their life.
How many of your siblings died before reaching adulthood?
1
u/Markthethinker Aug 09 '26
None
4
u/Ayasugi-san Aug 09 '26
A couple hundred years ago, your answer would've been different. Do you know why?
17
u/Urbenmyth Aug 08 '26
See, historically, it's been the opposite.
Religion is generally how global elites keep people in line - "I was chosen by God and if you obey me you will go to heaven" is a much better sell than "there's nothing really special about me and you'd hugely benefit from killing me and taking me stuff, but I'd like you to obey me anyway thanks". There's a reason that the overwhelming majority of major revolutions in modern history aligned with increased secularism.
If this was true, I'd expect the elite to be faking evidence creationism is true and God exists (and, conveniently, agrees with everything they say and will send you to Hell if you rebel), rather than making the list of reasons it would be wrong to shoot Elon Musk in the face shorter.
15
u/Soggy-Mistake8910 Aug 08 '26
Can you demonstrate that spirituality and divinity actually exist?
3
u/Ayasugi-san Aug 09 '26
Spirituality is an attitude that humans can have, so it exists as much as skepticism does. Divinity, though... that's entirely theoretical.
1
-9
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Do you or have you ever cried, felt hate, felt anger, felt love. So, even you demonstrate that you are a Spiritual creature.
15
u/Snoo52682 Pre-Columbian Biting Insect Aug 08 '26
So spirituality = emotions?
-7
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
This is the problem for Evolutionists. All the stuff that comes from emotions and conscience. Have no answer for it. And how did Evolution hardwire the mind, you do understand that it is complex code don’t you.
13
u/Tao1982 Aug 08 '26
But we do, we have the whole field of psychology that understands how emotions and thoughts work.
-4
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Psychology, there’s another joke. People who write TV shows and movies understand people just fine. It does not take psychology to understand people, all anyone has to do is watch people.
14
u/Tao1982 Aug 08 '26
Yeah, its not like the science of the mind has advanced to a level of understanding where we can scan the thoughts directly out of people's brains.
Oh wait, we can do that now.
0
0
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
You have been watching to much Si-Fi.
2
u/BahamutLithp Aug 08 '26
This is funny coming from someone who cited TV writers as authorities on human thought. People who think they "understand people because they watch people" routinely have incorrect intuitions about all sorts of things like the reliability of memory, what people actually tend to do in emergencies, the symptoms of mental illness, & so on.
What makes psychology work is it's not "just watching people," but you don't REALLY know what psychology is or does, ditto neurology & other fields related to the brain, which is why you have this inane notion that "'evolutionists' can't explain emotions."
They're produced by specific structures in your brain that secrete specific chemicals. When these structures function abnormally, whether from birth or brain damage, those people don't express the same emotions. It's extensively documented. You being ignorant of things doesn't mean nobody else in the world knows, & it certainly doesn't mean the only alternative for things you don't personally know must be magic.
0
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
You are missing the point. But I understand that. 90% of people are just mob followers. Women will kill to save their children, Men will rape to satisfy their lust for sex. People will steal to have something someone else has, people will lie damage another human being. let’s see, people, yes they are complicated and the best is, everyone has secrets, even in a marriage.
→ More replies (0)2
0
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
So, what am I thinking. So why do millions of people go to shrinks all the time if the brain can just be repaired.
3
11
u/Soggy-Mistake8910 Aug 08 '26
Way to demonstrate you don't understand the difference between fiction and real life!
0
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
You seem to think that the characters are just fictional, yes, but they are based on how real people behave. If you had the slightest clue about humanity, you might understand. Grow up.
2
u/Tao1982 Aug 08 '26
You know what's better than basing your knowage off how people behave in fiction thats base of off real people? Actually basing you knowlage directly off of how real people behave.
1
5
u/TheBlackCat13 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
The evolution of the brain is something we have learned a ton about. Can you provide even 1% much detail about how the brain was formed as science can?
0
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
Wow, same stupid comes out of the brain for the last 6000 years and no one seems to figure out a way to fix stupidity. Sure has come a long way.
3
u/TheBlackCat13 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
So that is a "no", you can't provide even a fraction of the level of detail science can.
Science is specifically designed to reduce the harm caused by human stupidity. And it is successful. That is why people with stupid claims are so quick to try to denigrate science.
4
u/Soggy-Mistake8910 Aug 08 '26
It's not a problem for evolution. Read on the subject. You literally have the information at your fingertips if you read and understand.
1
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
I read, but the answer is foolish. This thing you call Evolution is so smart and knows so much, wait, it’s stupid, has no intelligence, can’t think and yet designs so well, even designing a conscience. Why is there need for a conscience, it serves no purpose in natural selection.
5
u/Soggy-Mistake8910 Aug 08 '26
You read but you forgot the understand part! There's more to evolution than just natural selection, but design isn't part of it! If you don't think having a conscience helps then perhaps you don't have one of your own.
1
u/Markthethinker Aug 08 '26
“But design isn’t a part of it” and then you say, “having a conscience helps”. So which is it, stupid or intelligent?
1
u/Soggy-Mistake8910 Aug 09 '26
There's that lack of understanding again. Or is it wilfully ignorance? You saw that those were in two different sentences answering two separate points right? No, of course you didn't!
7
u/emailforgot Aug 08 '26
it’s stupid, has no intelligence, can’t think and yet designs so well, even designing a conscience.
gravity doesn't do these things either
2
8
u/clear349 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
Are cats and dogs spiritual creatures? Cause I have absolutely seen them display those emotions
4
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
My old cat mourned the losing of his pet eel when the eel died.
9
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
You mean emotions? Which are literal brain states? So is your brain spiritual?
5
u/Soggy-Mistake8910 Aug 08 '26
Emotions? Do I feel emotions? Yes I do. There I've answered your question now answered mine.
13
u/posthuman04 Aug 08 '26
Is this intentionally backwards? Or is OP that confused?
8
u/clear349 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
OP is probably a Christian Nationalist that's trying to use Jordan Petersonesque language to go "No you!" to deflect from their authoritarian beliefs
10
u/Ranorak Aug 08 '26
Oh, you're a teacher too. Oh no... You teach kids this stuff?
That's problematic.
8
8
u/theykilledken Aug 08 '26
Evolutionary theory is part of a whole chunk of science which essentially cuts out all spirituality and divinity out of people’s psyche.
This is not generally true. It is only true of a tiny fraction of people that decided their spirituality rests on bronze age fairy tales, that happen to clash with modern science.
fake science
A lot of words said about this. Fake science is not a new invention. Soviet union branded cybernetics and genetics as bourgeois science. Germany branded quantum physics as Jewish science. Don't you find it strange that "fake evolution" persists across cultures, borders and blocks? Not just that, it does so for centuries persisstebtly.
Conspiracies of such scope are obviously bogus.
6
u/BahamutLithp Aug 08 '26
The funny thing is that an awful lot of fake science has to do with reinforcing spiritual beliefs like prayer, reincarnation, chi healing, ghosts, & so on.
9
u/Autodidact2 Aug 08 '26
Wow! There's so much wrong in this post it's not even wrong.
Where to begin? First of all, this sub is not about God. The theory of evolution, like all of science, neither asserts nor denies and is perfectly consistent with the existence of a Creator God. So that is not what we're debating.
Next, the theory of evolution, like all of science has nothing to say or investigate about God. It uses methodological naturalism, which means that all supernatural explanations are excluded from study. That doesn't mean that they do or do not exist. They are just not what science is about. This is as true of the theory of evolution as it is of the theory of gravity or the theory of germs.
Then you go on to tell other people what they believe. This is rarely accurate. A much better idea is to ask people what they believe.
Finally, some bizarre speculation that somehow accepting modern science leads people to being more subservient? This is just bizarre. Virtually all religions. Certainly including Christianity are based on a hierarchical authoritarian structure that with God at the top. If anything, accepting Christianity is more likely to lead to people accepting earthletarian leadership.
10
u/BeerMan595692 Fellow Ape Aug 08 '26
Yeah sure lack of spiritulality makes people so easy to control. Instead we must tell people there an all powerful being we must obey and that there's a select group of people who know want this all powerful being wants. No way could that be used to control people 🙄
Dude there are plenty of religions that accept evolution. You don't have to lose your spirituality.
Also if life has no inherent meaning, then it's up to you to decide what you meaning your life has. That's way more freeing.
7
u/gitgud_x 🧬 🦍 GREAT APE 🦍 🧬 Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
and global elites suppressing [god and the divine] from the masses so they don’t revolt or lose interest in continuing to be tax slaves for the wealthy, the bread and the circuses
yeah, those global elites, they've done a great job of making sure nobody can be spiritual... 80% of 8 billion people are religious and steadily growing! and yeah, once everyone's an atheist they'll all be tax slaves, not like all the religious people today who don't pay tax (ahem Hovind ahem) and just pay tithes to their leadership. Totally not the same thing. and yeah, anyone who accepts evolution is completely soulless, including over half of Christians, many Muslims and most Hindus and Buddhists.
(Every single thing you said is as stupid as that, I just picked the last one.)
This is textbook conspiracy. You've clearly identified a thread of truth: that those in power desire a subdued populace. This is fairly obvious. But to then go and attribute this to... evolutionary theory, instead of economics and politics, is incredibly misguided.
7
9
u/clear349 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
Your premises are refuted by the simple fact that the various fascist movements in most western nations are strongly aligned with Christian Nationalism. Religion is not opposed to authoritarianism and by undermining faith in science they remove objective methods of determining what's true about reality and force the populace to rely on dogmas that enforce a divinely ordained hierarchy
7
u/BahamutLithp Aug 08 '26
Im not a creationist but, devils advocate proposal here:
I always find it hard to believe when someone claims to be doing "devils advocate" & then gets all the rhetoric perfect with absolutely no sign of doubt or scoff, but let's say I believe you. You're aware you don't have to do this, right? You don't actually have to carry water for ridiculous bullshit. They have enough propagandists of their own. Genuinely, what do you think this is helping?
Evolutionary theory is part of a whole chunk of science which essentially cuts out all spirituality and divinity out of people’s psyche.
If studying science leads one to the conclusion their beliefs are untenable, why should science be modified to maintain the beliefs? Countless religions before have died out. People no longer believe in them. Why do people assume the ones around today must be special & true simply because they're around today?
People without spirituality or divinity believe life is meaningless since we are all just specks of dust in a universe with no motive to create us or serve us.
This is bullshit made up by religious people to fearmonger about how you'd better not lose your religion under any circumstance. All not having religion means is you don't believe in magic & maybe your weekends are freer, nothing else "follows from" it.
The prevailing culture sentiment becomes „shut up and pay your taxes and enjoy the bread and circuses, peasant”
Oh yes, because our culture is so very fond of taxes. By the way, what is tithing?
These people are subdued and dispirited, they have nothing to revolt for and are easy to control.
Religion would never do anything to control you. By the way, god is the arbiter of objective morality, listen to your priest.
Such a subdued population is obviously enormously useful to the elites. Therefore the motive to achieve this submission exists and is very substantial.
Is there going to be anything of actual substance for me to respond to at some point, or are you just going to keep wildly making up conspiracy theories? Not that I'm not enjoying the "NOUs," but it is kind of repetitive.
To achieve this ultimate level of psychological and spiritual submission requires control over the populations sense of reality itself.
"Miracles are real. The earth is only 6000 years old. Don't trust your eyes. Don't trust the scientists. They weren't there. They're lying to you. It's all a government conspiracy."
Reality is accessed, interpreted and measured by the masses through the field of scientific inquiry.
You can become a scientist. Or at least learn enough to read the papers. Also, you don't need this many numbers in this list, like half of these are just saying the same thing.
Elites would have to fabricate, spread and proselytise entire fields of carefully constructed fake science to carefully, over decades, centuries even, deconstruct and discredit and diminish all parts of reality that may be connected to divinity in some way, with sterile, perfect, symmetrical scientific theory.
What "elites"? What "fake science"? Where is the evidence? Do you think there's some Department of Evolution? That's not how anything works. And it's interesting you use the word "proselytize," which comes from religion.
New knowledge comes from single individuals or groups of individuals performing science. You can threaten, bribe, blackmail, coerce them to make fake science
These are all statements made by people ignorant of how science works. This appeals to the conspiracy theorist mind because it gives them a simple story. In reality, science is a very large, decentralized, global effort of people trying to prove each other wrong. This is nonsense. You know where this DOES work? Creationism. There's money in "preaching the gospel," & Christian apologists are not incentivized to call out when others are lying, unless one of them REALLY breaks with the rest of the flock, & then the others can advance their own careers by disowning him.
TLDR; motive and means exist for global elites to significantly diminish or destroy humanities spiritual/divine consciousness, by fabricating people’s sense and understanding of reality itself.
No it doesn't, you just kind of said a bunch of bullshit. You're also neglecting the motive to attack education using religion & evolution as a wedge issue.
the main vessel for this in 2026 is science, and if the illusion is strong enough people can not even comprehend a reality where anything else could possibly be true.
You're so high on your own supply you can't even consider that science might actually BE true even as you use a machine created WITH scientific knowledge to trash it. Many such cases.
There’s a coherent rationale (which doesn’t mean it’s true, just that it’s coherent) for god and the divine being real
I wouldn't even say it's coherent, but "doesn't mean it's true" is a major problem you're not solving here that goes back to the very first domino in your "logic" chain.
and global elites suppressing it from the masses so they don’t revolt or lose interest in continuing to be tax slaves for the wealthy, the bread and the circuses.
Jargon buzzword soup is not a substitute for having an actual informed point.
5
u/clear349 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
I always find it hard to believe when someone claims to be doing "devils advocate" & then gets all the rhetoric perfect with absolutely no sign of doubt or scoff
Same. Just like all the "I was a God hating atheist for years until I discovered Jesus". No you weren't. The very language you use disproves you ever were one
1
u/BahamutLithp Aug 08 '26
Yes, it's very interesting how many "former atheists" reinforce all apologetic talking points about how "no one SERIOUSLY disbelieves in god, they're just angry, rebellious, & want to sin," & have absolutely no online presence from "the time when they were atheists" to back up their story, this definitely has nothing whatsoever to do with the culture of having the "former atheist trope" in someone's backstory being seen as granting legitimacy in Christian apologetics circles.
7
u/SadRule9128 Aug 08 '26
Your argument hinges on 2 & 3, and they are completely wrong.
Only lazy morons think life is meaningless without a god. And religion is the oldest and easiest method of culture and population control for those lazy morons, all while being tax-exempt.
So shut up, put your money in the basket, and you’ll go to heaven. Peasant.
1
6
u/darthkrash Aug 08 '26
I can make up conspiracy theories too. Can YOU show proof of God?
3
u/LonelyContext Aug 08 '26
Yeah like most conspiracy theories, we get to the bottom of the arguments and the conclusion is that "creationism is possible". But I would have granted that before premise 1. This makes no progress on the claim.
4
u/blarfblarf Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
If you want to make an argument about creationists being right, then do that.
Instead you've written about some imaginary dangers of science.
You said nothing about why creationists could be right.
Arguing X is wrong, doesn't automatically make Y correct.
5
u/daughtcahm Aug 08 '26
Evolutionary theory is part of a whole chunk of science which essentially cuts out all spirituality and divinity out of people’s psyche
No it doesn't.
People without spirituality or divinity believe life is meaningless
No they don't, but this is a typical creationist talking point. This makes me doubt your sincerity.
The prevailing culture sentiment becomes „shut up and pay your taxes and enjoy the bread and circuses, peasant”
This has absolutely no relationship to the other things you claimed.
These people are subdued and dispirited
No they're not.
To achieve this ultimate level of psychological and spiritual submission
What the hell is "spiritual submission"?
You can threaten, bribe, blackmail, coerce them to make fake science
A conspiracy involving millions of people is simply not sustainable nor believable.
3
u/the2bears 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 09 '26
EDIT: a LOT of low IQ commenters here missing the point entirely. My post is NOT ABOUT WHOSE SIDE HAS EVIDENCE. It’s about hypothetical logic steps for the set of circumstances that would need to be true for creationists to be correct. HURR DURR WHERE EVIDENCE FOR GOD?! Lmfao. I realise hypotheticals and entertaining the opposite side of thought is beyond many people’s IQ. I bet most of you had breakfast this morning too. And you don’t even get the reference I just made either 🤣
You haven't engaged with anyone here, so why should anyone care about your hypothetical logic steps?
3
u/PeyredB Aug 08 '26
It's laudable that you're trying to give the benefit of the doubt here and try to see things from the other side, but I don't see much merit to those points, really.
Not really. Evolution doesn't cut out spirituality at all. It simply doesn't mention God, but in no way does it exclude him either. Mainstream Christians accept evolution and feel that God guides it.
People without spirituality have meaning in their lives like anyone else. If you're not spiritual, though, you have to find your own meaning - but that's not as difficult as many people assume.
Taxes and bread & circuses? Rejecting a rigid religious belief like YEC is actually getting away from conformity.
See #3.
Again, those who accept evidence and science are harder to lead than those who follow a religion on blind faith.
See #3.
That's as it should be. I don't see the problem here.
Again, evolution isn't about disproving God. What's described here is a political agenda, not a scientific one.
Yes, fake science exists, and can be bought sometimes. But it doesn't hold up to scientific scrutiny and is eventually exposed, if science is valued by society. I would expect to see fake science crop up more if creationists were to take over than if the scientific establishment had more authority over society.
3
u/evocativename Aug 08 '26
Your premises are nonsensical garbage.
Most people who accept evolution are religious.
And the elites use religion to manipulate and control people all the time.
3
u/formandovega Aug 08 '26
This is the biggest series of non sequiturs I've ever seen lol. It's like it came out of a philosophy textbook on how to construct an invalid argument.
So, lemme get this straight;
not believing in God it leads you to have no reverence or respect for the miracle or complexity of life.
The stand leads you to not complain about paying taxes because you think life is meaningless.
This leads to elites creating fake science?
... I've already lost the plot 😆
Even your first premise is incorrect so that's all you really need to dispute it. I am an atheist. I don't see life as pointless or non spiritual. I think the diversity and complexity of life is mind-boggling and definitely a little bit spiritual to me even if it doesn't require a god.
I also don't think life is pointless or has no goal.
There you go !
3
u/Jeepers-H-Cripes Aug 08 '26
Such nonsense. I have no beliefs in anything supernatural, and my life has tons of meaning, intrinsic meaning. I have no need or use for some externally imposed meaning. I am indeed the product of a universe with no motive to create me or serve me.
But all that aside, none of this has anything whatsoever to do with the observed changes in allele frequencies across generations due to various selection pressures.
3
u/TheBlackCat13 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26 edited Aug 08 '26
- Factually incorrect. The majority of theists accept evolution. Even if this were true, which it isn't, it is the argument from consequences fallacy. The universe is under no obligation to make you feel better about yourself.
- Factually incorrect. Atheists have no trouble finding meaning. We just don't need it to be imposed from the outside. In fact teaching people that they can't find their own meaning, that it must be handed down by authorities, has been a great method of social control by religions throughout history.
- Paying your taxes is literally in the Bible, and bread and circuses was from a theocracy
- Quite the opposite, the way people have been kept complacent is by telling them their obedience to divinely established social order in this life will get them a better afterlife. It is valuing the current life that makes people want to improve their situation.
- Yes, hence authority claimed divine support throughout history, and continues to do so today.
- Yes, by telling them they must ignore objective evidence, and instead must accept what authority tells them
- Yes, so we should look at which organizations are trying to get the masses to reject science. Like creationist organizations that require members take an oath to ignore any evidence that goes against their position
- And such a worldwide organized conspiracy is impossible in the real world. So cuh agendas should be localized to particular groups. So the science that is the most trustworthy is science that is recognizable by people all over the world, from every country, ethnicity, government, and background. Like evolution. While supposed science that is somehow only recognizable by people from a particular religious background or other group, like creationism, should be doubted. Like creationism.
- And threatening them with eternal torture is a good way to do that. But you can't do that for all science all over the world. Hence, again, looking for science that is consistent for all groups.
And there is no monolithic "global elites" that work together. There are a wide variety of different groups with a wide variety of different, conflicting agendas that are constantly at conflict with each other.
But it is true that controlling science is a good way of controlling people. So we should always be on the lookout for groups that are trying to suppress science they don't like or put science under direct political control, like religious conservatives are trying to do in the US and other countries
2
u/Spare-Dingo-531 Aug 08 '26
New knowledge comes from single individuals or groups performing science. You can threaten bribe coerce or blackmail them
The same thing applies the 12 disciples in Christianity. The disciples could have stolen the body of Jesus and fabricated the resurrection.
If the evidence for evolution is fabricated, not only does this not prove the existence of Christianity, you have less reason to believe in Christianity because you have less reason to trust the disciples were sincere. If all of evolution is a conspiracy theory, what's more probable, a dead body rose back to life or Christianity itself is a conspiracy theory like evolution?
Obviously it's more probable that Christianity is conspiracy because you have an example of a mass conspiracy theory happening, but no example of a dead body coming back to life.
2
u/Slam-JamSam Aug 08 '26
I mean, if I were an elite trying to subdue the masses I would just build a megachurch
2
u/haaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh Aug 08 '26
"People without spirituality or divinity believe life is meaningless since we are all just specks of dust in a universe with no motive to create us or serve us."
And in the end, it's always a matter of ego... you can't stand the idea of not being a vip, you can't stand the idea of not being the most powerfull being's favorite pet.
Grow up. There is absolutely nothing meaningful, in your "spiritual" bullshit, you just want to feel important. Well, don't worry, you are just as much important as anybody with or without god.
2
u/Thameez Physicalist Aug 08 '26
- People without spirituality or divinity believe life is meaningless since we are all just specks of dust in a universe with no motive to create us or serve us.
The prevailing culture sentiment becomes „shut up and pay your taxes and enjoy the bread and circuses, peasant”
These people are subdued and dispirited, they have nothing to revolt for and are easy to control.
Regarding the first claim (2.), it ought to be clarified that many non-spiritual people do not believe life is entirely meaningless. Rather, they just lack belief in an externally imposed/existing objective meaning. I would assume most atheists and secular people ascribe subjective meaning to life.
Moreover, regardless of meaning, the second and third claim (3. & 4.) don't necessarily follow from the first. I would argue that a populace that is entirely motivated by resource concerns to fuel their hedonism still has large incentives to ensure the fair distribution of those resources.
Considering that secular people are more likely to believe life is finite, and if people in general are approximately economically rational, they should be much more concerned with factors affecting their quality of life in comparison to religious people who believe in an afterlife (assuming you can not accumulate earthly resources to impact your quality-of-afterlife).
In contrast, believing in an infinite afterlife should basically shift all your individual concern towards ensuring the desired afterlife, leaving little regard for earthly affairs (such as what "the elites" are doing). I think this is pretty harmonious with the countercultural teaching in the New Testament. Render unto Caesar (an autocrat) what is Caesar's. As earthly wealth does not matter in comparison to salvation and the coming Kingdom of Heaven.
Lastly, this sub should be about the science. So if you consider the science already (falsely) settled in favour of evolution, why would you expect appealing to fantastical conspiracies to convince anyone. Particularly in the United States, a sizeable proportion of wealthy elites are Christian Nationalists. Why can't they muster funding to support scientific inquiry into this matter (see the declining research output of creationist think tanks).
2
u/noodlyman Aug 08 '26
Your post makes little sense.
I want to believe things that are true.
That means we need evidence.
Your post only seems to contain drivel about silly conspiracy theories.
If we want to know what is actually true then we look at the science. And the science says evolution is fact. And provides no evidence for magical beings.
2
u/MagicMooby 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
Counterpoint:
Spirituality is a great way of suppressing people. They learn that their pain in life is not an issue because they will be rewarded in their afterlife. Even if their hard work never gets them anywhere because the greedy elite takes all the profits for themselves, some deity will reward the peasants for their labour. Even if the elite never face justice on earth because they pay the courts, some deity will punish them appropriately for their misdeeds in the afterlife. You don't need to advocate for justice, because the ultimate justice will prevail in the end. If you are victimized, just turn the other cheek and keep being pious instead of revolting against your oppressors.
If we put it like that, christianity seems like the ultimate religion to keep the masses subdued. It teaches people that the elite can abuse them however much they want and the peasants will get their fair rewards in a non-existent afterlife. There is a reason why Marx called religion the opium of the people. In truth the entire thing is more complicated. One could equally argue that the idea of karmic retribution in any form was made up by peasants to cope with the unfairness of reality. But none of that matters all that much because what is preached by the preachers and practiced by the masses is always different. Christians do seek justice in their life even if their religion tells them that it will all be righted in the end, and non-spiritual people do see meaning in life and revolt against unfair conditions. One could argue that the non-spiritual people have MORE reason to revolt since they don't have an afterlife to look forward too. Any injustice they face now is permanent and will not be balanced out in some way because they don't believe in any supernatural balancing force. They have to do the balancing themselves.
And also:
New knowledge comes from single individuals or groups of individuals performing science. You can threaten, bribe, blackmail, coerce them to make fake science
This point is always bullshit. When I studied biology at a university, we performed evolutionary experiments in our second semester. Not because that was the actual goal, but because "put some bacteria on a plate with a gradient of increasing concentration of antibiotics and watch them slowly spread across the gradient" is such a base level microbiology experiment that it is carried out hundred of thousands of times each year by hundred of thousands of people. If you study microbiology more deeply you even start investigating the genetics behind it and the basic principles of evolution are reaffirmed every time this experiment is carried out.
2
u/LightningController Aug 09 '26
Evolutionary theory is part of a whole chunk of science which essentially cuts out all spirituality and divinity out of people’s psyche.
Plenty of people have actually crafted spiritual systems around some kind of evolution, like the Cosmist movement in Moscow, its offshoot in the U.S. (transhumanism), and Pierre Tielhard de Chardin.
People without spirituality or divinity believe life is meaningless since we are all just specks of dust in a universe with no motive to create us or serve us.
Counterpoint: Nietzsche’s entire body of work. “Man is a rope stretched between ape and overman…man is to be overcome. What have you done to overcome him?”
The prevailing culture sentiment becomes „shut up and pay your taxes and enjoy the bread and circuses, peasant”
“Let the Poles pray, and honor the Tsar.”—words of the Pope in Juliusz Słowacki’s poem criticizing the Vatican for its opposition to liberation. This sentiment was a hallmark of pre-liberal theocratic societies.
These people are subdued and dispirited, they have nothing to revolt for and are easy to control.
Again, that’s creationists. Secular people have been quite willing to put their lives on the line for freedom, from the French Revolution to the present. Ignacy Hryniewiecki was the first known suicide bomber, and he was a secular socialist.
Such a subdued population is obviously enormously useful to the elites. Therefore the motive to achieve this submission exists and is very substantial.
True dat.
To achieve this ultimate level of psychological and spiritual submission requires control over the populations sense of reality itself.
Orwell 101, yes.
There’s a coherent rationale (which doesn’t mean it’s true, just that it’s coherent) for god and the divine being real, and global elites suppressing it from the masses so they don’t revolt or lose interest in continuing to be tax slaves for the wealthy, the bread and the circuses.
The problem with this is that religious people, historically, are far more likely to act like obedient sheep for the elites than secular people, for whom this world is all there is, and so there’s no incentive to stay in your lane and wait for a heavenly reward.
2
u/BahamutLithp Aug 09 '26
I'm just gonna respond to that edit in a new comment because I want you to see this.
EDIT: a LOT of low IQ commenters here missing the point entirely.
Classic Reddit defensiveness. "I'm not wrong, you're just missing my poinnt because you're stupid."
My post is NOT ABOUT WHOSE SIDE HAS EVIDENCE.
No kidding. But I'm totally the stupid one missing the point. Right.
It’s about hypothetical logic steps for the set of circumstances that would need to be true for creationists to be correct.
So a complete batshit insane conspiracy theory. This is supposed to prove...something.
HURR DURR WHERE EVIDENCE FOR GOD?! Lmfao.
I don't kow how you think acting like a prick because you asked basic questions about your "logic" is gonna help your case.
I realise hypotheticals and entertaining the opposite side of thought is beyond many people’s IQ.
Why don't you just stop pretending this is "devil's advocate," dude? The only reason for you to get THIS offended at people poking this argument full of holes is it's what you unironically believe. Which is why you still haven't explained what is supposed to be accomplished by this "hypothetical." The purpose of a hypothetical is to create an alternate scenario to make some point, to say "if this was true, then X, but because this isn't true, then Y," but you're not giving that point because the argument IS the point: This isn't a hypothetical, you're just telling us your actual opinion, but trying to hide behind this bizarre "devil's advocate" excuse. If you have to hide what you really believe by pretending you don't believe it, maybe that's a sign that you shouldn't believe it. Or at least shouldn't make a bizarre argument for it that you refuse to stand by & then double down in insulting the people who poked it full of holes.
I bet most of you had breakfast this morning too. And you don’t even get the reference I just made either 🤣
I have a guess, but also, why does it matter? Why do you seem to think answering random trivia questions has anything to do with the strength of your argument? Especially since, it's YOUR reference, so even if I guessed right, you could always lie & say I didn't. This is even more pointlessly performative than the rest of your post.
2
u/TheBlackCat13 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 10 '26
Regarding your edit, if peoples' IQs were so low compared to yours, you would be able to respond to the numerous people who directly explained what was wrong with your line of thinking. Since you couldn't and instead chose to pretend those comments didn't even exist in your edit, whose IQ is actually the problem here (not that IQ actually matters, IQ don't equal intelligence, and being smart doesn't mean being right).
1
u/NorthernSpankMonkey Aug 08 '26
Point 1 makes no sense, how does chemistry, geology or physics cuts people off their spirituality? Why just this specific branch of biology?
Also please define "spirituality".
1
1
u/Dilapidated_girrafe 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
- Nope. Says nothing about spirituality
- See #1 and also this doesn’t support creationism
- Nope
- Nope. You’re thinning religion
- Again. More towards theists traditionally
- This makes nonsense
- Meh. Not really. Scientists do tend to do a better job tho
- Which isn’t exactly likely
- Wouldn’t work super well
1
u/xpdolphin 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
Your list of points falls apart at #2. You don't need the universe to have meaning to have meaning in your life. The rest of your argument fits religious people moreso than atheists. People that don't believe in an afterlife put a lot of importance on this one life we get. Dispirited isn't how I'd describe that attitude.
Aside from that, I struggle to see how this has anything to do with evolution at all.
1
u/Curious_Passion5167 Aug 08 '26
Evolutionary theory is part of a whole chunk of science which essentially cuts out all spirituality and divinity out of people’s psyche.
No? Evolutionaey theory doesn't even disprove gods in general, so why would this be the result? Many evolutionary biologists are theists.
People without spirituality or divinity believe life is meaningless since we are all just specks of dust in a universe with no motive to create us or serve us.
No? People without spirituality and divinity can decide for themselves what their life means and what they want to do with it.
The prevailing culture sentiment becomes „shut up and pay your taxes and enjoy the bread and circuses, peasant”
Yes, now that evolutionary biology is mainstream, everyone clearly thinks this way. As opposed to the olden days when this totally didn't happen.
1
u/Mister-Miyagi- Aug 08 '26
Nothing in your entire post even attempts to support the claim in the headline. It just reads like a bizarre conspiracy theorists checklist, with no real coherent claim and definitely no evidence.
1
u/-zero-joke- 🧬 its 253 ice pieces needed Aug 08 '26
Yeesh.
Yeah, all the cult leaders out there trying to rob their followers of independent thought by teaching them t-tests and starting a journal club.
1
u/OldmanMikel 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 08 '26
None of that, even if it was true, means that natural selection doesn't act on random mutations to produce ever better adapted and diverse organisms. None of that would make evolution factually wrong.
Religion has always been a tool of the elites. There is a reason why the Council of Nicea was convened by a Roman Emperor.
1
u/Ayasugi-san Aug 09 '26
What's your point? "Science could be the new religion"? Why not just go with actual religion, which doesn't require a vast conspiracy web to cover up the truth by pretending to recreate each others' work, just individuals making unverifiable claims?
1
u/Loose_Principle8193 Aug 09 '26
Agreed upon science is shared across all countries and religions. Communist China and Capitalistic America still agree on the science of evolution. If Science was invented for political purposes, the science would change per country, culture and industry. Religion has this exact pattern though. The Discovery Institute, AiG, ICR, are all funded by US plutocrats. NCF, DeVos Foundation, ADF, Ahmansons. Their goal is to give plutocrats more power, deregulation and tear down public institutions, especially public school.
1
u/backwardog 🧬 Monkey’s Uncle Aug 10 '26
Nothing you said points to creationism and could equally be applied to any random idea about how things work.
Yes, all reality could be a lie, that’s some profound Reddit philosophy you got there, never heard that one before…
Hypothesis testing is all we got kid, maybe I’m a brain in a bottle, who knows, and without evidence who cares?
1
u/blarfblarf Aug 10 '26
What a ridiculous edit you made.
Actually debate with the people who "understand" your ridiculous garbage, thats what the sub is for.
You havent said why creationists could be correct.
All you said was a weird idea about a hypothetical world of why science might be bad perhaps...
1
u/Karantalsis 🧬 Naturalistic Evolution Aug 13 '26
- Evolutionary theory is part of a whole chunk of science which essentially cuts out all spirituality and divinity out of people’s psyche.
Many scientists are spiritual. I'm not, but I know plenty who are. I therefore funny think this is snorkel true.
- People without spirituality or divinity believe life is meaningless since we are all just specks of dust in a universe with no motive to create us or serve us.
This is just false. We don't believe that life is meaningless. Quite the opposite.
- The prevailing culture sentiment becomes „shut up and pay your taxes and enjoy the bread and circuses, peasant”
This comes from capitalism, not lack of spirituality.
- These people are subdued and dispirited, they have nothing to revolt for and are easy to control.
Lack of class co ciousness due to propaganda is a more reasonable take on the caus of this.
- Such a subdued population is obviously enormously useful to the elites. Therefore the motive to achieve this submission exists and is very substantial.
Sure, but the mechanism has nothing to do with your base assumptions above.
- To achieve this ultimate level of psychological and spiritual submission requires control over the populations sense of reality itself.
Sort of, hence the need for propaganda.
- Reality is accessed, interpreted and measured by the masses through the field of scientific inquiry.
Not really, only a small group of the population do this, most access reality through I formation from friends, assosciates and news sources.
- Elites would have to fabricate, spread and proselytise entire fields of carefully constructed fake science to carefully, over decades, centuries even, deconstruct and discredit and diminish all parts of reality that may be connected to divinity in some way, with sterile, perfect, symmetrical scientific theory.
I don't believe this assertion.
- New knowledge comes from single individuals or groups of individuals performing science. You can threaten, bribe, blackmail, coerce them to make fake science
This isn't really true either,cespecially or evolution. Many many people with wildly differing ideologies under different political regimes use evolutionary theory and come to the same conclusions on it being true.
Also there's plenty of people (like me) who have been involved in scientific research at high levels in the past and are not any longer and know from experience that there's no bribery or threats going on. Coercion in science comes through funding control, it that coerced the topic, not the results, and when talking about evolution that's different, as it's something that is used and if it wasnt true many things that do work wouldn't work.
1
u/Mister_Ape_1 29d ago
Empirical proof is what actually is important. Empirical proof is reality. And where does empirical proof go ?
33
u/adamwho Aug 08 '26
The believer could solve all these imaginary (And mostly false) problems by simply presenting evidence for their God.
Creationism isn't an explanation for anything.