|
Author
|
Topic: Detecting God
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
Message 29 of 271 (567757)
07-02-2010 1:13 PM
|
Reply to: Message 24 by ICANT
07-02-2010 11:16 AM
|
|
Re: Detection of God
But do you know anyone who ever quit cold turkey, no patches, no gum or helps of any kind without any withdrawl problems? Your god did not make you special in this regard. My father quit smoking cold turkey in the late 1970's. He was so upset that he was late to an important meeting because he was hunting for a cigarette. This was well before patches and nicotine gum. He was not and is not a religious man. God and religion played no part in his quitting. A few years later he quit drinking in a similar manner. I think he quit drinking out of spite, to prove to us he could. He went to a few AA meetings but was put of by the overtly religious aspect of them. He knew there was no higher power that could help him, instead he had to find it within himself. In case you do not think he had a severe problem, he drank about a qt of scotch a night and was on his 4 Dwi when he quit 27 years ago. Your praying to your god does not show that the faithful can quit substance abuse any easier than any one else. Confirmation bias much?
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 24 by ICANT, posted 07-02-2010 11:16 AM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 52 of 271 (567818)
07-02-2010 4:33 PM
|
Reply to: Message 51 by sac51495
07-02-2010 3:57 PM
|
|
Re: Detection of God
My point was that if Woodsy can say that he does not have to understand everything about how the Big Bang worked, then why should I have to explain perfectly the nature of God, if he can't even explain the nature of the Big Bang?
One reason is that he doesn't worship the Big Bang. Or think that it provides some sort of moral lesson.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 51 by sac51495, posted 07-02-2010 3:57 PM | | sac51495 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 71 by sac51495, posted 07-03-2010 12:52 AM | | Theodoric has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
|
Message 98 of 271 (569022)
07-19-2010 8:03 PM
|
Reply to: Message 97 by riVeRraT
07-19-2010 7:53 PM
|
|
Name these things please
Lot's of things are immeasurable, and are still part of the real world. Matter of fact, billions, and billions of things are immeasurable, yet part of the real world.
At risk of being told to reread what you wrote. Please tell us one or two of these billions of things that are immeasurable so we know what you are talking about. Do you see that your are, again, unclear in your argument? You need to give more information so people know what you mean. We can not agree or disagree with you if you do not give enough information.
Facts don\'t lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 97 by riVeRraT, posted 07-19-2010 7:53 PM | | riVeRraT has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 99 by riVeRraT, posted 07-20-2010 6:43 PM | | Theodoric has replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
|
Message 100 of 271 (569334)
07-21-2010 12:35 PM
|
Reply to: Message 99 by riVeRraT
07-20-2010 6:43 PM
|
|
Re: Name these things please
You are twisting your argument. And making erroneous statements. If there are planets in M101 they are potentially measurable. The fact that we cannot see them does not preclude the fact that they are potentially measurable. Your god is not even potentially measurable. A thought is measurable. Ever hear of the many types of brain scans. If there is no thoughts. Brain dead. Nothing shows on the scan. So measurable. Time is measurable. Your statement is ludicrous.
Facts don\'t lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 99 by riVeRraT, posted 07-20-2010 6:43 PM | | riVeRraT has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 102 by riVeRraT, posted 07-22-2010 8:35 AM | | Theodoric has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
|
Message 175 of 271 (573679)
08-12-2010 12:15 PM
|
Reply to: Message 169 by riVeRraT
08-12-2010 7:49 AM
|
|
Re: Science: objective? Nah.
Jesus's walk on the earth, and the miracles He performed are evidence. Since you have no evidence for either of these, they are not evidence for anything. Edited by Theodoric, : added quote
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 169 by riVeRraT, posted 08-12-2010 7:49 AM | | riVeRraT has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
|
Message 179 of 271 (574676)
08-17-2010 8:58 AM
|
Reply to: Message 177 by riVeRraT
08-17-2010 8:25 AM
|
|
Re: Science: objective? Nah.
My point was that evidence existed, and you confirmed it.
How is the bible evidence for jesus. Stories are not evidence. Show some something from outside of the bible that is contemporary. That would be evidence. Using your argument, The Adventures of Tom Sawyer is evidence for the existence of Tom Sawyer.
It is pretty funny how the most documented events of that time are some how today "not true". Where is the documentation? Show me the documentation.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 177 by riVeRraT, posted 08-17-2010 8:25 AM | | riVeRraT has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 195 by riVeRraT, posted 08-19-2010 7:49 AM | | Theodoric has replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
|
|
Message 200 of 271 (575281)
08-19-2010 10:03 AM
|
Reply to: Message 195 by riVeRraT
08-19-2010 7:49 AM
|
|
No first hand accounts?
Gee, I still don't see any first hand or contemporary accounts. There has already been a fantastic refutation on this board already. Kapyong destroyed this line of thought 5 years ago.
Message 8 Tom Sawyer is sold as a fiction book.
How is this relevant?
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 195 by riVeRraT, posted 08-19-2010 7:49 AM | | riVeRraT has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 202 by riVeRraT, posted 08-20-2010 6:57 AM | | Theodoric has not replied |
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
Misrepresentation?
Well, if we don't try and partly anchor our speculations in some observation, we end up chasing flying spaghetti monsters like my good buddy Dawkins. And reaching for the ridiculous like that is not very helpful in these kinds of discussions. From this line you seem to be implying that Richard Dawkins is some sort of whacko, who was instrumental in proposing and advocating the flying spaghetti monster.
The truth about his noodliness First of all Richard Dawkins is a very highly respected scientist. You may not agree with him, but a lot of people feel he has some very insightful views. His popular books on evolution are probably the world standard for explaining complex subjects in a way that many lay people can understand. Dawkins uses the FSM as an example of all other supernatural and god like beings mankind has had in the past and will have in the future. Also, uses FSM in the same way as Bertrand Russell's orbiting teapot.
quote:
"The onus is on somebody who says, I want to believe in God, Flying Spaghetti Monster, fairies, or whatever it is. It is not up to us to disprove it."
Wolf, Gary (November 14, 2006). "The Church of the Non-Believers". Wired News. You might want to read. Chasing for the ridiculous is very helpful in these conversations. Without it we cannot see the extent we are willing to go in order to justify and rationalize our own beliefs.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
Re: Misrepresentation?
You seem spring loaded to charge in and defend him, but I assure you Theodorc, I meant no attack to begin with. Just an idle reference. Are you implying something. The reason I called in question what you stated, was because the whole line seemed out of place for the whole conversation. Your premise seems ridiculous and your attempt to bring Dawkins in to strengthen your argument seems to have been intended to make his comments seem controversial. His comments are no more controversial than what Bertrand Russell stated a half century ago.
quote:
If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion provided I were careful to add that the teapot is too small to be revealed even by our most powerful telescopes. But if I were to go on to say that, since my assertion cannot be disproved, it is an intolerable presumption on the part of human reason to doubt it, I should rightly be thought to be talking nonsense. If, however, the existence of such a teapot were affirmed in ancient books, taught as the sacred truth every Sunday, and instilled into the minds of children at school, hesitation to believe in its existence would become a mark of eccentricity and entitle the doubter to the attentions of the psychiatrist in an enlightened age or of the Inquisitor in an earlier time.
Edited by Theodoric, : quote Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
CAn you read other posts?
Dawkins just came up with the spaghetti monster to be intentionally ridiculous, in order to mock those who do hold to a belief in a god. Again you continue to misrepresent. It was shown very clearly to you that Dawkins did not "come up with" the FSM. No matter how many times you assert this it will not be true. I also do not think he is mocking as much as trying to present an intellectual exercise to show what he thinks are ridiculous beliefs. If you feel that is mocking that is your issue. For Dawkins and many others of us, it is solely an intellectual exercise that shows that a belief in the supernatural is the same whether it is the christian god, FSM, IPU or faeiries at the bottom of the well.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
Re: What counts as detection?
Please note that the key word in my phrase is "observed." I point this out because even though you may think it is theoretically possible for something to originate without a cause, the question is have we only observed caused effects? This is no more than a rehashing of the "god of the gaps" argument. Just because we do not have an answer for an "original cause" it does not compute logically that it must have been a god. There could be many answers other than a god.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
Theodoric
Member Posts: 9133 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: 08-15-2005 Member Rating: 3.3
|
Maybe you should study first
There you are watching Sponge Bob and eating a bowl of cereal, and suddenly from the bowl you hear snap, crackle, BIG BANG!
Your ignorance about what the Big Bang Theory actually states comes shining out in this statement. As Huntard explained it was not an explosion. There fore any thoughts and ideas you have about the "Big bang" are not even worth considering. How about you do some reading and get back to us when you ahve a basic concept of what the Theory actually says.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
|
™ Version 4.2