Atheists, What Would Suprise You Most?

[EvoUK]

*Assuming you agree that the TOE is accurate, and, obviously, only non-theists can post in the poll, we will know who you are!*

If tomorrow, you were presented with irrefutable, overwhelming, persistent, verifiable, testable, and widely confirmed evidence of one of these two propositions, which would surprise you the most? And, most importantly, why?

[Gilgaron]

I'd be more surprised if common descent were false, due to the body of pretty solid empirical evidence. Jesus=salvation leaves a great deal of wiggle room, including the rest of the Bible being bunk.

[C. D. Ward]

I would have to agree with Gilgaron, for pretty much the same reason. Although I would certainly be quite surprised if basic Christian theology turned out to be true, it seems to me more improbable that common descent should be false.

[HRG_new]

I would have to agree with Gilgaron, for pretty much the same reason.

Same here. Common descent leaves unambiguos traces, which we can objectively investigate in the here and now.

[EvoUK]

Interesting. I chose the opposite option because the second senario falls squarely in the realm of scientific possibility. The first does not.

While the complete falsification of evolutionary theory is, as this point, seemingly absurd and impossible, it's still within the realm of science.

[BeHereNow]

I would more readily believe that an alien race originated some species on the planet before I'd believe basic Christian theology. It seems more likely.

[nitekat]

Wow - that's a hard one! I didn't submit a vote in this pole because I think that I would be equally surprised. I have strong opinions on both issues - very strong.

So, I'll think about it some more and cast a vote if my answer leans more one way then the other.

But right now, the jury is still out on this one. . . . .

[Superbug]

Interesting. I chose the opposite option because the second senario falls squarely in the realm of scientific possibility. The first does not.

What guarantees that Christian theology is false? It might not be in the realm of scientific possibility but it is in the realm of possibility.

While the complete falsification of evolutionary theory is, as this point, seemingly absurd and impossible, it's still within the realm of science.

We have a lot of evidence for common descent and (almost?) none for Christian theology. If it is shown that Christian theology is true, it won't contradict anything because there is nothing to be contradicted. If it turns out that common descent is false, how will we explain all those fossils, the pseudogenes etc?

[The Bard's Song]

Given the (perceived) logical contradictions in Basic Christian Theology (i.e. the omnimax god) I would be far more surprised to find that logical absurdities can be true and deductive logic is gravely flawed than I would to find that the ToE and common descent is false, which obviously lies within the nebulous realm of scientific possibility. Actually, I have no clue what kind of evidence could override my understanding of logical deduction. It is currently inconceivable, though certainly not impossible.

This is assuming I've interpreted their god model correctly; they can be rather vague and conflicted on the subject.

[bandecoot]

*Assuming you agree that the TOE is accurate, and, obviously, only non-theists can post in the poll, we will know who you are!*

If tomorrow, you were presented with irrefutable, overwhelming, persistent, verifiable, testable, and widely confirmed evidence of one of these two propositions, which would surprise you the most? And, most importantly, why?

I would have to say having thought about this for a few days the first would surprise me the most. The only caveat being not by much.

The first has had 2000 years to come up with evidence and so far has put forward only Apologetics.

The second is Potentially Falsifiable. But in the 150 years it has been used all the evidence stacks in its favour.

So the second could possibly be wrong, thats the nature of anything in science. It is however so unlikely that I would say the chances of it happening are as remote as can be imagined.

The first would require something only slightly less earthshattering that the second. The proof of something that heretofor has been in the realm of Personal and subjective revelation.

To drop into Australian vernacular at this point:

Would not the first being proven true be a kick in the guts for the theists? If anyone could simply contact God by a verifiable means and just ask his opinion on something, that would put most of the Apologists and TV preachers out of work for good, not to mention pastors, priests, Gurus, Bonzes, et al.

No need for intercession or interpretation, we could just ask. It would drive religion out of business.

[Ryokan]

The first defintiely. The second, not likely, but hey, you never know. Science isn't perfect.

[Archimedes]

I can easily imagine the evidence for evolution being set up by aliens, gods, intelligent beings who run the universe in a computer simulation, or a number of other entities. However I cannot imagine how someone could make sense of Christian theology.

[Gilgaron]

No need for intercession or interpretation, we could just ask. It would drive religion out of business.

When I started down the path away from religion, although long before I had significantly distanced myself from theism, I had this thought. Revelation to a select few prophets seemed to me to be about the most inefficient, problematic and error prone methodology for a deity to use to get his points across, especially if they were supposed to be particularly important.

[rach12]

I'd be more surprised if common descent were false, due to the body of pretty solid empirical evidence. Jesus=salvation leaves a great deal of wiggle room, including the rest of the Bible being bunk.
ditto.

[Cloud_Walker]

The first one because it doesn't make sense. If those things were even indirectly confirmed, then they would necessarily be able to influence the natural world, and would therefore not be "magical" or "supernatural" in any way. Heaven, for example, would just be a really cool place in the universe.

To sum it up, theology is only possible through faith.

[Mentalist]

Such things as:

a. There were seperate lines of evolution

b. Some life was imported from elsewhere in the universe via meteors

c. Aliens planted us here

Would all be less suprising to me that belief in Jesus would send me to heaven.

However, the way you have worded your question, it seems to allow for the possibility that Jesus was a devious alien, whom might send you to a place (planet?) called heaven and use advanced technology to resseruct you or other such possibilities with a probablility greater than 0. If you had included ideas about the Christian god then the probability would have been 0.

So both are highly improbable, but I would be more suprised about heaven.

[Kulindrichnus]

This is a really good question. I voted for the truth of Christianity being more surprising, because its basic claims (everybody lives forever) are so far removed from the normal frame of human reference as to count as an absurdity or delusion. Although it is very unlikely that common descent is false, the means by which it would have to be shown to be so would have to be within our frame of reference.

Philosophically it is the difference between showing a delusion to be true, with the consequence that all knowledge becomes suspect, or showing a single rationalisation, no matter how important, to be untrue, with little consequent effect on the wider validity of human knowledge. Really its a no-brainer.

K

[ilkhani'tus]

Same as Gilgaron

I'd be more surprised if common descent were false, due to the body of pretty solid empirical evidence. Jesus=salvation leaves a great deal of wiggle room, including the rest of the Bible being bunk.

[Alchemist]

I voted for the first option being more surprising. Afterall which has happened before?

1. Supernatural claims coming true

or

2. Major scientific ideas being overturned

Considering human history, only the second has ever happened (and multiple times) making it more likely to happan than the first. That being said I would still be VERY shocked if the theory of evolution was wrong, though it would be interesting to see what scientific theory would replace it.

[Pastafarian]

It's just about a toss up for me I think. There's no evidence for supernatural dieties. But the evidence for evolution is overwhelming. I guess it comes down to a matter of time. Theist have have thousands of years to bring forth any proof and have failed. As where science has only had only a century of evolution studies. So I'd lean toward the supertitions as being true as the biggest surprise.