LINEOFPROGRESSION_____________________

Dr. Francis Collins: Naive?

2009-12-10T22:08:00.000-08:00

Dr. Francis Collins is an American physician and geneticist, armed with an M.D and Ph.D. In July 2009, he earned the title as Director of National Institutes of Health, and has been acclaimed as "one of the most accomplished scientists of our times" by the Endocrine Society.

Dr. Collins has undoubtedly aided many scientific advances, in particular, he is most known for his impressive discoveries of disease genes, and his authority in the Human Genome Project, which was highly successful, and exposed much unknown knowledge in regards to the structure of DNA. But along with his support from the scientific community, Dr. Collins has received much criticism for his religious beliefs. Some of that criticism is based on the type of religion that he is associated with, which is evangelical Christianity. In 2006, Dr. Collins released his book entitled, The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief.

This book is one of the main reasons for his criticism, and in my opinion it’s very easy to see why upon reading it. Many fellow scientists have said such religious commitment could be a sign of "mild dementia" (*1). And I must say that I agree with this. It is troubling to me that some can be so intelligent, as to reveal undiscovered scientific truths and have such high academic regards, yet also believe in religious fairy tales.

But Dr. Collins hasn't always been an evangelical Christian. In fact, he claims to have been atheist for years before he discovered Jesus Christ. To me, it seems quite evident as to why Dr. Collins is a believer, and I don't think it has much to do with scientific facts (although that is his claim). In his book, he talks about how he was a confident non-believer until he started working in the medical field. Upon viewing all of the dying patients, he was moved to find the truth about God. Already, it can be seen that at this point, that he had a hidden agenda of emotional attachment. He was now searching for God because of the death of his patients. Therefore, he wanted to find God. If you start to research into something, already wanting that something to be a certain way, chances are you will conclude your research in a state of how you want it to be, regardless of how it really is. Understandably, dying patients is not an easy thing to witness, but no matter how sad it may be, it doesn't change the facts.

There are a few other things that Dr. Collins discusses in his book that disturb me. In this book, he talks about the day he was converted to Christianity, and how he surrendered to Christ after two years of self debating, (two years after he had started searching for God, upon dealing with the death of his patients). He wrote that he was hiking in the Cascade Mountains, and came across a beautiful frozen waterfall. Upon seeing this waterfall, he felt he could no longer resist. His knees hit the grass, his doubts were removed, and he surrendered to Christ. In an interview for New York Times, he even said that there were three streams in the waterfall, which he believed symbolized the trinity. Is that a scientific conclusion? It’s hard to see that such a brilliant man refuses to use the great principles of science, towards questioning Gods existence. Principles that he is very familiar with.

Two years of research, and what finally converted him? A waterfall. If that isn't a hidden agenda of emotional attachment, I don’t know what is. This whole situation in very similar to extremists in Islam. Many of these Islamic members are extremely well educated. There are Islamic members who are so intelligent, that they have the ability to create nuclear bombs, as well as many other intelligent designs. These are the same people who believe that after they sacrifice their lives in the name of Allah, there will be 72 virgins waiting for them in heaven.

As crazy as that may sound, the truth is this. Smart people can be fooled. You can be very well educated, and still lack common sense. What is common sense to me when it comes to religion? It is this. Extraordinary claims, call for extraordinary evidence. Not extraordinary claims or emotion. Simple as that. If you say your god is real, I'll ask, based on what evidence? Because when you ask why I deny the existence of your God, I show you substantial amounts of proof. Without emotion.

I encourage you to view the video below, in which Dr. Collins briefly describes why he is a believer. For more information about his beliefs, research his book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief.

(*1) reference: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/06/health/06nih.html

Deism: On The Rise

2009-12-08T23:03:00.000-08:00

Deism is a religious and philosophical belief, that a "supreme being" of some kind created the universe, and also established all of the laws that the universe is held to. Although this is the same basic belief of most religions, Deism is very different from Theism or Creationism. Deists within this religion see things differently at times, but most believe that a supreme being created the universe, and allowed it evolve and prosper on its own, in accordance to the established laws. The thought of God abandoning its creation is very uncomfortable to most, but this is the core belief of Deism. However, there is no central authority that defines or interprets the beliefs of Deism. Therefore, various beliefs are seen within this religion.

The most common Deism beliefs are:

God does not intervene with human affairs, all things in the universe are purely bound by the laws of nature. Therefore, miracles do not occur.
Humans were not made in the form or image of God, and God has no human sentiment, such as hate, love, fear, etc.
God did not necessarily create the universe for humans, and may not even be aware of the existence of humans.
God cannot be contacted through prayer or any religious associations.
Humans can behave in a moral fashion without adherence to religious text, or threats of eternal damnation.
All religions that claim God has created text or writings (such as the bible), to communicate with humans,are wrong.

The acclaimed principle that surrounds deism is reasoning, rather than the religiously traditional "faith".
Although, there are some Deists who believe that God does at times, intervene with the natural forces, and does make impacts on human affairs.

Other beliefs uncommon in Deism are:

God intended for the existence of humans, and wanted them to behave morally, and use the concept of reason.
God created the universe AND governs everything within the universe (rather than abandoning it).
Humans have souls, and there is an afterlife of some kind.

     Deism prominently surfaced in the 17th and 18th century during the Age of Enlightenment,
and since, has sustained an ever-growing population.With the advance of science and numerous evidential proofs exposing the falsehood of theism, many people have turned to the acclaimed rational alternative. In 1990, their were only approximately 6,000 Deists in the U.S.A. But in the year 2001, that number had grown to almost 50,000. That's a 719% increase in just 11 years!!! It is thought that the proof of evolution which surfaced in this 11 year period, has much to do with the increase of Deists. Upon viewing the evidential proof of evolution, many current Deists were not satisfied with Theists shallow claims to deny such evidence. Therefore, they turned to more rational views, views that worked in harmony with science.

    Most Deists were raised in Christianity, and found that they did not believe in that prophecy, or any similar claims of communication with God. Yet, they are Deist because they do believe that a creator is responsible for the universe. Hence, in general, a thin line divides Deists between atheists. The only core difference is that most atheists believe in theory's such as abiogenesis, or the big bang theory, to explain the creation of the universe. As far as moral and ethic regards, Deists and Atheists hold very similar beliefs. Typically, Atheism and Deism stand for the same movement of secularism (separation from government and religion).

    Personally, I do not believe in Deism because of the lack of evidence. However, I DO NOT deny the basic claims of deism, as I deny the existence of all gods pertaining to theism and creationism. I view Deism as a much more reasonable belief than any other religion, simply because Deism is based on knowledge. Using what is known with the aid of reasoning, to determine what may be, rather than denying science and all of its principles, to convince yourself that a divine plan has been set for us.

~~L__I__N__E__O__F__P__R__O__G__R__E__S__S__I__O__N~~

In Addition

2009-12-07T15:00:00.000-08:00

~~L__I__N__E__O__F__P__R__O__G__R__E__S__S__I__O__N~~ has been added to The Atheist Blogroll. You can see the blogroll in my sidebar. The Atheist blogroll is a community building service provided free of charge to Atheist bloggers from around the world. If you would like to join, visit Mojoey at Deep Thoughts for more information. Truth is coming..............

UNDENIABLE Parallels

2009-12-01T21:03:00.000-08:00

If you are associated with Christianity, or any other religion, you most likely think that your Bible or spiritual literature derived from god, is original, right? It must be if its the actual truth. This post is based on one of the facts that I stumbled upon years ago, that helped me in the right direction towards truth. And this is definitely a truth that any religious authority does not want you to discover (that's if they are even aware). In the video below, you will gain staggering amounts of evidential proof that the religion of Christianity and many others, are guilty of plagiarism. Yes, plagiarism. The paste and copy method. After watching the video, compare your concluding thoughts on the matter with mine (below the video). In my opinion, if you watch this video with a truly open mind, and a neutral aspect of reasoning, you will see this matter just as I do. And keep in mind, everything in this video is backed by SCIENCE, not just words or shallow claims. Actual proof. Enjoy.

Well......................? What do you think? I think the the evidence from this video is very assuring to truth. And the material in this video is really just the "tip of the iceberg" when it comes to all of the evidential proof pertaining to religious plagiarism. If it were all covered in a video, well, it would have to be a 2 hour movie, with 5 sequels. IDK about that, but the fact is that their is more proof like this out their, and I encourage everyone to research the material from the video to confirm that this is ACTUAL proof.

I wonder why religious associations don't show material like this to potential customers, or long time members..........................?After all, testing of the faith is a good thing, right? When truth like this happens to be exposed to a religious association (church) classically, the leaders of the association will try to keep it in the shadows. And if that doesn't work, the never ending, and at times, humorous responses are applied. "Well I see the similarities but, well............those religious weren't real......and mine just is". Ive said, "Keep in mind that all of these similarities were waaaayyyyy BEFORE Jesus was even born" The most outrageous claim Ive heard in response that statement is this. "Satan must have known of some of the things that Jesus would do in the future, so he possessed the Ancient religions to mimic those things so that in the end of times, people like you would lose faith and serve eternity in hell fire" Yes, i really have received such responses. But my favorite are ones like this, (Ive seen a few of these on Youtube in response to similar videos) "I think that God intended for those similarities, so that we would have to go through enough questioning of our faith in order to be deserving of heaven". Such claims like this strongly support my belief that emotional attachment is the root of believing in religion. Do you think that people like this would hold the same beliefs, if they had been exposed to videos like this, or anything else that reveals truth with support of evidence, before they were promised eternal life in heaven? I highly doubt it. But sadly, for most, religion is being force fed before you even get the chance to say your first words. It seems very unfair to reality, but the great thing about TRUTH is this, although not everyone has discovered it, it will never change. You just have to find it.

I encourage everyone who has an opinion on this matter to comment, I am ALWAYS open to new thoughts and perspectives. Just as science is.

~~L__I__N__E__O__F__P__R__O__G__R__E__S__S__I__O__N~~

False Virtue From Sentiment

2009-11-30T16:44:00.000-08:00

I still find myself in awe when I hear people talk of "Jesus", or any other god in literal context, though in ways, I understand why. Approximately 77% of Americans currently believe in the existence of a god associated with religion. Such a high percentage seems almost unbelievable to me. Science has come so far, provided so much, and revealed countless truths. Most religious people seem to have no problem using science to drive to church, yet don't give science the time of day to present a few of the undeniable facts that prove religion is nothing but a very successful fable.

So the question remains........................How can so many down to earth, reasonable, and even highly educated people, believe in such fantasy? I think in most cases, the root cause for belief in a god is quite simply that, "I want to".

Compare stories such as Jack and the Beanstalk, the Tooth Fairy, and the Story of Paul Bunyan to stories from the Bible. In comparison, at first glance, the readings of Adam and Eve, Jonas and the Whale, and Noah's Ark, seem no more plausible than any other tall tales. So why are so many people deceived by these fictions? It’s simply because these stories (the Bible) claim to bring amazing benefits along with belief. Let’s face it, if the Tooth Fairy left million dollar checks in place of nickels and dimes underneath pillows, she would be worshiped, and the denture business would definitely be banking. People don't believe in Jack and the Beanstalk because nothing is promised from it. If the bible preached everything as it does, with the exception of salvation, eternal life in heaven, and every kind of hope you can imagine, hardly anyone would believe in it.

What’s the first thing you hear from any theist or creationist trying to convert you? Most likely it will be claims of all the awarding virtues that await you if you just have faith. Or maybe they first present the classic claim of saving you from "damnation to hell". Either way, the first intentions will be to fill you with false hope, or scare you into submission with warnings of eternal atrophy. But is that really reasonable? This is what people don't seem to understand. If someone is going to speak of actual truth or fact, they will start from the ground up. Preachers of religion do the opposite. They will first tell you all about the end results of their beliefs, such as life in heaven, and how you can be saved. If they were preaching the truth, why wouldn't they start from the roots of the bible? Why wouldn't they tell you when and how the bible was translated? Why wouldn't they speak of their religions full history? The answer is simple. If these were the first things that they truthfully explained, then you could easily use a small amount of reasoning to determine that the bible belongs on the bookshelf, right next to the story of Peter Pan.

So why 77%? It’s all about the delivery. They will first fill you with hollow assertions, lies that seem to make everything come together. "You will have eternal life in heaven". "All of your loved ones who have passed, you will see again". "You will have the guidance and direction of the Holy Spirit, which can get you through anything". Once they have accomplished in gaining your emotional attachment to these claims, your strings are officially being pulled. And this is why it is so hard for people to see the actual light. Denial. The truth is that facts are not as appealing as fiction. I would sleep much better at night if I were certain there was a higher power watching over my family, and keeping them safe. But I know this inst so. No words can change the facts.

I believe that one of the most common reasons people will set aside such staggering evidence that proves god doesn't exist, is purely because they can't handle the truth. What’s so bad about the truth? Well to anyone who has faith in a religion, truth is threatening to take away all of the following; guaranteed life in heaven with all of their passed loved ones, their best friend, their whole outlook on life, everything they have worked towards, and their peace of mind. I completely understand why theists and creationists have such a hard time in regards to truth. This is why I do not hate them, or wish anything negative upon them, as stubborn as they can be. Why not just let them be then? Because I most certainly believe that although religion has great initial renderings, (such as peace of mind), it is the largest threat to society and global safety.

I had experienced many feelings of denial in the past myself, when I started to do extensive research on my religion. I was born into Christianity, and for the most part, believed it without question until I was about 11 or so. But it wasn't until I was 15, when I decided to put real effort into my endeavor for truth. It took about 2 months of tedious inquiry for me to draw my final conclusion, (at the time I had limited tools for research). And I can easily say that it was the hardest thing that I have ever let go of. All of my hopes and dreams of "everything just working out in the end", gone. But I’ve come to realize that all of the great feelings I have experienced from religion, prior to my discovery of truth, are still with me. People can still live a great and meaningful life without all the non-sense of religion. But sadly, for some, religion is the last thread of life that they have to hold on to, which is why they ignore the facts.

To support this claim, look at the staggering difference in polls relating to the belief of a god. In America, the atheist/non-believing citizens make up about 12% of the population. In contrast, less than 1% of prisoners in America are atheist/non-believing. 1%!!!!!!!! Why do you think this is? Let’s look at this rationally. People that have paved their way to prison (not jail, PRISON) are most likely not highly moral, caring, nice people. And they most certainly do not live by the most popular fundamental principles of the bible. So why do they believe? Because that's all they have. Desperation is very powerful. 25 to life doesn't promise much, and I can only imagine the emotional state in which anyone would be, upon learning that they would spend the rest of their life in prison. I only wish that we knew all of these prisoners’ religious beliefs BEFORE they were sent to prison, and took polls based on that information. I'm very confident that such polls would read an all time low in belief, compared to belief polls for current inmates.

In conclusion, the main statement I'm trying to depict from this post is this, emotional attachment. This is easily evidenced by the classic responses I have received over the years of questioning people’s beliefs. When asked why they believe in god, the most popular answers are; "I had a certain experience, and now I just know he's real, I can feel it". "I have divine faith, no matter what". "Life would have no point without God, and I would have no purpose". "When a close relative of mine passed, I could feel his/her presence". "God has provided me sign's to reveal his existence". These are really just a few of the most common claims. Notice, that all of these statements contain the root of EMOTIONAL ATTACHMENT. I have nothing against sentiment. But when it comes to making logical and reasonable decisions, emotion has no proper place. Would you want your tax preparer to be in an emotional state while he/she is analyzing your 10-40A?

Would it be wise for an architect or a civil engineer to make all of their decisions with emotional attachment? That would just be unsafe! But yet, it’s a "different story" with religion. Which in my opinion, happens to be the most unsafe, and threatening aspect of civilization.

~~L__I__N__E__O__F__P__R__O__G__R__E__S__S__I__O__N~~

Three Principles In Accordance

2009-11-28T19:50:00.000-08:00

Logic, Science, Proof,..................... Do you believe in a god?

What if someone presented the following statement: Using LOGIC and SCIENCE, I can PROVE that GOD does not exist.

To understand the full claim of this statement, lets look at the four main content words (as highlighted in red)

1)GOD: the one Supreme Being, the creator and ruler of the universe.

In most religion, god is stated to be the creator of everything, including the earth and everything upon it. Keep this in mind as we progress through the article.

2) LOGIC: the system or principles of reasoning applicable to any branch of knowledge or study.

Logic is built upon three laws:

Law of identification
Law of non-contradiction
Law of excluded middle

Since the main subject of the statement is GOD, under the law of identification, GOD=GOD. GOD does not equal lampshade, or table etc.

(note: I know this is common sense to most, but bear with me, this is necessary knowledge to understand the concept of the statement)

With gods existence in question, the law of non-contradiction states that GOD cant exist and also not exist. He must be existent or non-existent, as to oppose contradiction.

And finally, the law of excluded middle states that GOD cannot kind of exist. He either exists in full, or doesn't exist at all.

3) PROVE/PROOF: the establishment of the truth of anything.

Their are two types of proof: Evidential proof, and absolute proof.

Evidential Proof: This is the type of proof that we use every day. For example, we use evidential proof to establish that their is no traffic coming before we cross the road. The evidential proof is provided through our vision and hearing. Evidential proof is also the method used in court systems, and just about everything in life, big or small. Evidential proof has a cap limit of 99.9% accuracy.

Absolute Proof: Absolute Proof can only be attained from logic based principles. For example, I can provide absolute proof that 7+4=11. Why? Because mathematics are based on fundamental principles that do not change. Since absolute proof can only be attained through logic based principles, it can not be used to provide any answers to questions outside of these logic based principles. Therefore, absolute proof cannot be used to determine the existence or non-existence of god. Just as absolute proof cannot be used to determine that their is not a pink unicorn hovering above your head, singing Elvis's greatest hits. Such a claim is outrageous, but still, you cant use absolute proof to say that its true or false. So you would resort to evidential proof. As we will in drawing a conclusion to the statement.

4)SCIENCE: systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.

Science is built from the Scientific Method. This is the method that has been used to obtain such knowledge necessary to engineer nearly all the products that we use on a daily basis, such as your cell phone, computer, automobile, etc.

The Scientific Method consists of the following steps:

Ask a question
Obtain background information pertaining to the question
Create a hypothesis (note that a hypothesis is very similar to a theory in context, but has no evidential proof behind it)
Perform an experiment in regards to your hypothesis
Analyze the results
Draw a conclusion (only if substantial evidence is obtained from step 5)
Label hypothesis as a theory (if all the steps have been thoroughly engaged)

A very common misconception is labeling a hypothesis as a theory. A hypothesis must go through all of the steps in the method to achieve such a title.

Because all the claims derived from literature within religions cannot be properly tested under the scientific method, all religion remains a mere HYPOTHESIS. On the other hand, in contradiction to the claims of religion, we have the evolution THEORY, the abiogenesis THEORY, and many other actual THEORIES that oppose the shallow claims of religion. And keep in mind, religion is nothing more that a HYPOTHESIS. So why would you believe a hypothesis over a theory? A theory that went through all the steps in the scientific method, and has evidential proof to back its claims. Such a closed mindset is not reasonable. For example, lets say I had a hypothesis that my friend "Joe" was 22 years old. But Joe's mother claimed that he was 19. I have no evidence to support my claim, so it remains a hypothesis. But Joe's mother has much substantial evidence to support her hypothesis (birth certificate, etc). So after going through the steps, she has a theory. So why would anyone believe my hypothesis over her theory? Just because i want Joe to be 22 so he can buy me whiskey (lol), it doesn't change the facts. Theory overrides hypothesis.

In conclusion, we know that under the law of non-contradiction in logic, god cannot be existent and non-existent. With that in mind, look at this simple contradicting comparison, the THEORY of abiogenesis and the HYPOTHESIS of religion/god. Abiogenesis is the THEORY that states "chemical evolution", the study of how life on Earth could have arisen from inanimate matter. That THEORY is contradicting to the hypothesis of religion, which states that GOD created the universe and everything within it. Another example, their are theories on how old the earth is. One THEORY in particular states that the earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old. Compared to the claim from the HYPOTHESIS of Christianity, which states that the earth is only approximately 6,000 years old. So which will you believe? Hypothesis or Theory?

A very useful tool in processing all of this information to draw a conclusion is REASONING. REASONING, along with LOGIC, SCIENCE, EVIDENTIAL PROOF, and the thought process, can provide assuring answers to the most compelling questions.

~~L__I__N__E__O__F__P__R__O__G__R__E__S__S__I__O__N~~

All Time Low

2009-11-27T23:05:00.000-08:00

Just when i thought i had heard it all............................. Today on yahoo news, i found a story of a woman who had remains of residue on the bottom of her iron, that of which she insists is the image of Jesus Christ himself. If that is what Jesus looks like, then beauty must really be on the inside. Another shallow attempt to manipulate reality and venture towards a nonexistent relationship with Americas favorite imaginary friend. The link is below if you need a good laugh, it made my day.

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/image-of-Jesus-Christ/photo//091127/480/dd3bc10d1d26484aa8cbc75d45fc97be/

~~L__I__N__E__O__F__P__R__O__G__R__E__S__S__I__O__N~~

All Videos

2009-11-25T15:56:00.000-08:00

INFORMATIVE

SATIRE