Just another roadside attraction

I recently re-investigated bigfoot and I found that there’s lots of tracks of something, lots of fuzzy photos of something, plenty of true believers who have seen something, but there is no physical evidence, so I conclude that bigfoot is just another roadside attraction no more credible than the contents of the gyp joints that used line the roads.Ufos? Same thing.Noah’s Ark? All you have to say is Ron Wyatt.I see a pattern here. If a thing isn’t real, then all it can have to support it are stories told by believers and experiences that can only be understood by believers.How about god? Since there is no concrete physical evidence that god exists and since all we have to go by are the stories believers tell, I feel god must be put in the not-real category along with bigfoot, ufo’s and Noah’s ark.God, just another roadside attraction.

It pretty much looks like your OP could be a response in any one of many threads here, but as it stands, it's not really thread material.Can you revise it to put it in the format of a potential discussion? If so we can take another look at it but as it stands it's just outlining your personal beliefs.

---

Why does the concept of god get a free pass.If you don't believe in bigfoot or ufos without physical evidence, why believe in any other entity without some facts.This message has been edited by DHA, 07-29-2005 09:06 PM

It doesn't. But it is simply a matter of Faith. So revise your OP to change it to something that could be seen as a discussion and we'll see about getting it promoted. Remember, in the Faith forums all someone needs to say is that they believe in GOD. They can expand if they want, but that all that's needed. In the Science forums, the key will be that it's impossible to prove GOD exists. Not much of a discussion there either.See if you can find a way to redo the OP so we could get a discussion out of it.

Moderators usually are not all of the same opinion. I inititally agreed with Jar, but as I thought about this it occured to me that you may be trying to come at this from a different angle. Some people believe in God as a matter of faith, but others believe because they think there's evidence of God. They see the conclusion of the existence of God as an inevitable conclusion from very obvious evidence. I'm guessing it's this type of believer you want a discussion with?If I'm on the right track then I think such a thread would be a great idea, but participants would have to realize that this wouldn't be a science thread, and so the standards of scientific evidence, like objectivity and repeatability, wouldn't apply. If someone offers as evidence that God speaks to them, or that they suddenly started awake at the same time that a relative was in an accident, then the usual arguments against this evidence wouldn't apply.Given this context, is this still a discussion you'd like to have?Of course, if someone wanted to argue there's scientific evidence of God we'd put the thread in the [forum=-11] forum.

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

deleted off topicThis message has been edited by DHA, 07-30-2005 04:54 PM

Given what you said no discussion is possible. If personal experience is evidence then we are all in the same boat.