MovieChat Forums > Cave of Forgotten Dreams (2011) Discussion > This documentary ends the debate on crea...

This documentary ends the debate on creationism

posted 12 years ago by Padwanna
14 replies | jump to latest

This movie was wonderful, yet I found it significant for one overriding theme; it literally disproves the religious claim of creationism. The subject matter of the film is a broad examination of the earliest cultural records from our long distant ancestors. The fact that the oldest cave specimens date at between 30,000 and 32,000 years ago is incontestable evidence for our species evolution from a prehistoric time. Based on this, it simply cannot be true that humanity came into existence according to theories of creationists. Anyone holding onto that set of beliefs after watching this film are individuals afflicted with a serious form of insanity.

Padwanna.

---
The internet has the ability to turn sane people into ranting fools!

[–] Reading_Rainbow 12 years ago

i think it was safe to assume that creationists were insane well before this movie...

1.61803399

[–] Korios 12 years ago

"Anyone holding onto that set of beliefs after watching this film are individuals afflicted with a serious form of insanity".

That serious form of insanity is called faith, particularly "blind faith". Faith is "choosing to believe" (as dr Shaw put it in Prometheus) in something despite all the evidence that clearly tells you that you are wrong. Goethe had said that faith is the graveyard of knowledge and reason. Faith is the womb of religion, and when we are talking about people en masse it is what gives birth to organised religion, churches and fanaticism.

I am non religious but not a real atheist. Atheists can be just as fanatic and dogmatic as religious people, and what's most annoying is that they fail to admit it. I also rely on faith (not blind though) and "empirical evidence" for some views of mine on how the universe really works, what happens after we die etc. I just want to stay light years away from organised religion, moral lessons, prejudice, and self-appointed divine middlemen telling me what to do or judging me. So I lie somewhere in the middle, viewing the two extremes as just as dogmatic - possibly two sides of the same coin.

sig. start:
The term "suspension of disbelief" was coined by LOLW, the League of Lazy Writers.

[–] Padwanna 12 years ago

I am non religious but not a real atheist

So do I read this as you saying you believe there is more to physical existence than just that which can be empirically measured?

That's a deeper and more relevant question to ask, but still the idea that something supernatural has to exist is where we diverge.

Yes some atheists are fanatic and dogmatic; I'm an atheist and more militant than some, however I stop far short of dogmatic and fanatic. Even so, I think those atheists have a right to be, after all they have to face off against religious zealots who have been fanatic and dogmatic for thousands of years. So much so that only a few centuries ago if you disagreed with them they would murder you with impunity. Even now in the modern world, for all the advancements of science, a large portion of religious people believe mythical stories over expert peer reviewed evidence. In the face of this kind of madness, it's total understandable rational people get frustrated to the point of appearing dogmatically fanatical.

Hopefully soon philosophy will take over from religion in the same way astronomy took over from astrology, and chemistry took over from alchemy. That will be a time when a new renaissance will come upon us.

I live in hope.

Padwanna.

---
The internet has the ability to turn sane people into ranting fools!

[–] samborrie 10 years ago

Padwanna, you talk a lot of sense and I agree with you. Excellent writing if I may say?

[–] time-bomb 9 years ago

Philosophy won't replace it, I get what you are trying to say about disagreeing in the past but even then thats too much of a simplistic bias point of view, as in past and even now in modern times their have and are and will always be people of science that also believe in a deity, that does not make them any less scientists or discredit them of the science in the area they work in you can't escape the prejudice of being human. People will always be a theist of some sort and have faith in a God, Science or both God and Science, Oprah or their countries government. It's human nature.

[–] Mugros 11 years ago

God created the paintings and only makes it look like they are 32000 years old. Checkmate, atheists.

Seriously, you can justify anything with religious believes.

[–] dwf-920-163383 11 years ago

If you believe this disproves creationism it is you that is insane

[–] xenophile2002 11 years ago

It has been said that you can't reason a person out of a position that he was never reasoned into. And if one is willing to accept supernatural arguments, then there's no point in arguing at all. Mugros already gave one example of that: God made the paintings look older than they really are. That's because He's testing our faith, I guess. You failed the test; enjoy Hell.

Nah, just kidding. God wouldn't do something like that. It's actually the Devil who faked the paintings. Satan carefully controlled the amounts of carbon and lead and whatever else he needed to, and you, well, I'm afraid you've fallen for Satan's lies. Enjoy Hell.

The truth of course is that the paintings really were painted by primitive man and there's nothing supernatural going on with those paintings. They are, however, only three thousand years old. All the scientists studying the paintings know this, but they're lying because, um... because they hate God? Yeah, that's it. Everybody knows that those scientist types hate the LORD. I mean hey, they're all lying about global warming, ain't they? Bunch of commies.

And here you are, falling for the global conspiracy. Enjoy Hell.

I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure you're not Hitler.
- Jon Stewart

[–] dwf-920-163383 11 years ago

I sure hope that wasn't a reply to me as it has no relevance.

[–] xenophile2002 11 years ago

Nah. It was a reply to the thread in general.

I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure you're not Hitler.
- Jon Stewart

[–] mikebeljak 7 years ago

LOL.

[–] Padwanna 11 years ago

At this point I'd challenge you for even a smidgen of evidence that could possibly support your position.

So please, enlighten me as to why you are not insane?

Padwanna

---
The internet has the ability to turn sane people into ranting fools!

[–] tjones202 11 years ago

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

Truth, facts, reason. None of these matter to persons of deep faith. They will never accept your facts and many will hate you for believing otherwise. We created our gods. Unfortunately, they've become bloated abominations that are often wielded like a sword. There's a zenith to every pyramid, and atop that high point are those that will never accept truth. They have too much to lose if their deity were suddenly to lose power and influence. That's why religions accept hate in their daily doctrines, as any follower can be an asset. It's why institutions exist only to teach their theology and why education is denied to those they wish to subjugate. Like with so many things, religion today is about money and power. Unfortunately, it's the flock of believers that usually suffers. You'll never see someone atop the pyramid strap a bomb to their chest, or rally in some hateful or violent protest. They send out their pawns for those duties.

[–] Simulacrum7 11 years ago

I agree. It is also noteworthy that there were no pictures of dinosaurs in the cave (creationists insist humans and dinosaurs lived together).

However, one aspect that was a little depressing (to me) was that the religion is as inherent to the human condition as sex. One interviewee even states we should be homo spiritualis instead of homo sapiens. I found the arguments that the cave was a place for religious ceremony (positioning of the cave bear skull) to be quite convincing.