A few days ago I linked this
article from
Not Very Useful Truths blog. The author posted based upon a post placed by Kiley at
We Were Going to be Queens. This post resulted in, at last count, a 93 entry Facebook debate on my
wall. It was a debate that was brought to me not one I sought out.
I enjoy, for the most part, Facebook debates about religion and especially Mormonism. This debate was no exception. However when engaging in an "intellectual" debate one would assume that presentation of evidence that was objective, peer reviewed and or based upon accepted scientific principles would be enough to receive an acknowledgement that the facts in the argument simply do not support the belief structure. Not when debating religion in general and especially, in this case, Mormonism.
The debate started of simply enough with an assertion that the doctrine was misunderstood. When probed for proof the proof offered simply did not support the argument. I certainly do not think of the LDS church, as a whole, is a force for good. I don't think their stands on homosexuality, sexuality in general, and specifically as it pertains to the development of sexual identity in our children is a force for good. I asserted in the argument that a church ran lawyers and MBAs cannot possibly run a church that is anything other than a corporation who looks out after its corporate interest first.
When the debate turned to the origin of the church and the lack of historical evidence that any of the claims are true; the debate turned interesting. One of the participants in the debate, a medical practitioner, denied the validity of universally applied DNA testing methods. He also denied that science has the ability to track the migration of populations based upon DNA. Even though the Human Genome Project has provided enough information that we can track the migratory patterns of humans and determine through genetics where your tribe migrated from. This is useful in the argument against the idea members of the so called Nation of Israel migrated to the Americas in 600 bce. It also disproves the assertion the Garden of Eden was in Missouri. What we know and now accept as fact is the human species originated in Africa. Not the Americas. The research has been published and peer reviewed. The National Geographic Society published the finding and produced the documentary
The Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey. When presented with the evidence this was the reaction:
Yeah right! And who's to say they're right or wrong? Their colleagues. I love so-called science that no one can prove or disprove. "This rock is 30 Billion years old". Who can refute it? I say it's 300 Billion years old! Wait, are we talking the age of it's creation, or the big bang formation of matter, in that case the rock is 600 trillion years old! Woah mama! These guys can throw around numbers with the best of them.
Wow, they disproved the garden of Eden was in Missouri? That's amazing! Oh the wisdom of men. They're so sure about things until another discovery comes along and disproved the whole notion.
I am not a fan of everything under the umbrella of "science". I am more a fan of applied science. You know, science that can actually be tested. The migration patterns of humans makes for good academic fodder, but there no way of testing thest theories.
(he hasn't seen the documentary but is willing to dismiss it outright)
The fact that years of science education and critical analysis training cannot break down the two decades of prior religious indoctrination is concerning. I think this graphic illustrates the discussion well.
I struggle to understand why, given the evidence, people of science trained in critical thought can find themselves sitting in pews of any religious order and especially orders that have assertions that are so easy to disprove such as Scientology and Mormonism. They invest 10s of thousands of dollars in tithes, offerings, and service hours to these organizations who sit at the fringe of intellectual thought.
So here is my challenge. If you come to my blog or Facebook page with assertions your religion is true. Prove it! Not with articles from the Ensign, FAIR, FARMS, The Catholic League, The Watchtower etc., but with peer reviewed scientific studies that have been published in secular scientific journals. Your doctrinal claims mean nothing without objective evidence to back it up. I have yet to see one ounce of credible evidence that any of the claims of Mormonism are based in fact. No migration. No great civilizations. No golden plates. However there is a great deal of evidence that disproves the migration, Eden in Missouri, the authenticity of the Book of Abraham. When added to the historically factual accounts of the miserable characters of both Joseph Smith and Brigham Young it makes it a hard pill to swallow. So if you feel the need to defend your faith from people like me... first bring your evidence.
But before you do you might want to brush up on you logical fallacies:
.
.
1 person
