We debate origins of the Universe, life, Earth, humans, religion, atheism, using common sense, evolution, cosmology, geology, archaeology, and other sciences, to repel biblical creationism and other religious beliefs.

Location: Oxford University, England
Members: 4188
Latest Activity: Sep 14

The portrait is Charles Darwin, age 31, in 1840

We welcome comments and the opening up of new discussions in this busy group. So join us if you are not already in the group.

N.B. At the end of every discussion page is a box that you can tick if you want to be notified by e-mail about the arrival of fresh comments.

Discussion Forum

Neanderthals, Denisovans and ancestor X

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Joan Denoo Aug 7. 3 Replies

The evolution of work

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by Joan Denoo Jul 12. 61 Replies

Has man evolved?

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by John Elder Jun 18. 5 Replies

The Probability Of Being

Started by Joan Denoo. Last reply by John Elder Jun 11. 4 Replies

Johns Hopkins Receives $125,000,000 to Fight Cancer

Started by John Jubinsky. Last reply by John Jubinsky Apr 1. 2 Replies

A new theory explaining the origins of life?

Started by Donald L. Engel. Last reply by Donald L. Engel Mar 31. 5 Replies

Map of Archaic Ancestry

Started by Qiana-Maieev. Last reply by Joseph P Mar 29. 5 Replies

Homo Erectus food processing

Started by Ruth Anthony-Gardner. Last reply by Joan Denoo Mar 19. 1 Reply

Comment Wall


You need to be a member of ORIGINS: UNIVERSE, LIFE, HUMANKIND, AND DARWIN to add comments!

Comment by Dr. Terence Meaden on November 24, 2010 at 5:58am
Re Claudia, below:

That's a revealing anecdote expressed by Cardinal Newman himself about how he agonized and wriggled to uphold what is nothing but the apogee of religious farce.

As such it helps explain the origin and perpetuation of illogical beliefs.
Comment by Geraldo Cienmarcos on November 24, 2010 at 12:52am
I don't think you should clone Jesus in a lab.
I think he would be VERY!!! pissed to see what is being done in his name!

Comment by Geraldo Cienmarcos on November 23, 2010 at 4:21pm
a link to a YouTube video of a debate (participants including Dawkins, Shermer) : Does the Universe Havea Purpose?

Michael Shermer: "What is our purpose? We come from stardust. All of the elements of which we are made of were cooked inside stars, coalesced into new solar systems like ours, and here we are complex organisms. For 3 and 1/2 billion years life has evolved from one generation to the next not one broken chain in this long link. Darwin said instead of finding this to be depressing as our opponents think this is a grim world view, in fact it's an ennobling world view. Darwin said, "When I view all beings not as special creations, but as the lineal descendants of some few beings which lived long ago they seem to be to become ennoble. It's ennobling to think how fortunate we are to be part of that 3 and 1/2 billion year long chain. We are an integral link in that. What could be more uplifting than that. But there is more than that. We have big brains. We can do many different things to contribute to this lineal descent of hitting our genes into the next generation. In fact there is a science that studies this. It is what makes people happy, fulfilled, and feeling like they have purpose. There are four things you can do. 1. Deep love, family commitment, commitment to another person, even a person of the same gender ... 2. Meaningful work and career, that is doing something productive makes people feel fulfilled, happy and have a sense of purpose. Not just to make money, but to actually do something in the world that makes a difference. 3. We are a social primate species. How we interact with other people matters. So the third thing you can do is be involved socially, politically, in your community, not just your family and your extended family but people you don't know, strangers, manning the soup kitchens, volunteering for non-profits, helping other people in some way. This is one of the things that people report makes them feel better, happier, fulfilled, giving them deep purpose in their lives. And finally 4. Some sense of transcendence, something beyond you. Now religion claims this as their monopoly, their exclusive rights to the idea of being spiritually fulfilled. This is nonsense. The religious world view is so small, so medieval in this tiny little proscenium right here at the stage on earth of which we're acting out this drama just for some grand life to come. No, that's not what counts. What counts is the here and now. If there is no after life, if there is no God, how important it is now what you do. Now is when it counts. Your relationships with other people now is what counts and matters. Not so you can chalk up some points for next life, to get a bonus and move up the ranks of to some special country club on high. No, what you do now matters. Now I'm going to close with a quote from Helen Keller most of you probably know that Helen Keller was blind, deaf, and dumb, 1930s, who found deep significance, wrote, "I know no study that will take you nearer to the way of happiness than the study of nature and I include in the study of nature, not only things and their forces, but mankind and their ways and the molding of the affections and the will into an earnest desire not only to be happy, but to create happiness and it all comes down to this, the simplest way to be happy is to do good."
Comment by Tony Davis on November 22, 2010 at 9:09pm
Hello all. Well, I've been slacking since I posted the article on the Minimal Facts argument and its almost time for the next one. I think I will break down the Teleological Argument into the Argument from Design and the Fine Tuning Argument. Does that seem to make sense to everyone here or am I possibly confusing some issues? I am confident that I can show how either is wrong, I just want to make sure my terminology is all straight. I don't want some fundie to use my mislabeling an idea to make it seem as if "God really did do it all after all." ;-)

And by the way, thanks a lot to all of you who posted your ideas to my last article here as well as on the column itself!

Comment by david perry on November 20, 2010 at 3:06pm
Here's a nice series of essays from ActionBioscience pressing the case for I.D. with rebuttals by evolutionists.
Comment by Joseph P on November 20, 2010 at 3:03pm
@Mike K. & Greg Deering
Pretty much what Mike said, yeah. That's the edge that Scientology has over Christianity. Also, they knew not to tell someone about the batshit crazy stuff until after he/she was heavily financially invested in the cult. Shame about the people who broke out and posted the theology online.
Comment by Joseph P on November 20, 2010 at 2:56pm
The wafer is a conceptual Catholic pretzel for sure.

... and is apparently very good with queso.
Comment by Gregg Deering on November 20, 2010 at 2:38pm
My wife wonders is Dune is more internally coherent?
Comment by Gregg Deering on November 20, 2010 at 2:37pm
Besides the whole cannibalism ritualistic element - think about what the fascination with the body of Christ is - totally pointless.

Isn’t the whole deal about Christianity transcending the flesh? Is there any reason that Christ’s flesh is so special? Wasn’t his the body is an illusion or a necessary “vehicle” while on Earth? It was important that Christ be resurrected in the body, for some reason, but after that?

Jesus is definitively 1/3rd of God, and this has to be some incorporeal thing - the Trinity. So where is the separation when we bite into the wafer?

The wafer is a conceptual Catholic pretzel for sure.

Also, Christians have to get their story straight we have a Christ for children, or the simple folk- a God Jr. walking around letting birds land on him. As well as a 3-in-one-OmniMax god who watches us constantly, judges our thought and sends us to the fiery lake.
Comment by Samantha Thomas on November 20, 2010 at 1:40pm
Yes, Claudia, there are a lot of different interpretations of the dogma of transubstantiation. Your Franciscan friend was describing a version of 'consubstantiation,' favored by Martin Luther. Consubstantiation is a philosophical, rather than mystical, interpretation of the dogma. It never ceases to amaze me how people argue about disagreements in their personal interpretations of sh*t they made up from the outset. Cracks me up.

Members (4184)



Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2016   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service