Will you oppose to scientific conclusions if they'll lead to theology?

So, if they instead claim they met with Ganesha, the Hindu elephant god, that would be proof of the existence of said god? I suspect you don't accept that, so why do you accept the christian God on these grounds? Is it perhaps because you were born and raised in a christian environment instead of a Hindu one? Their experience could include a number of other exotic elements, but surely that isn't enough to accept any of them as true. You clearly haven't "exhausted" all explanations. For instance, have you considered that they could be lying? Or hallucinating? Both would explain a lot, even how it's possible that the particulars of NDE's are different in different religions.

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

That statement is a tautology. And it's also inaccurate insofar as it talks of atheists. It is not the case that atheists actively "believe there is no God". Instead, they simply lack a belief about God, much the same as they lack a belief about pixies. You are equating the word 'belief' with religion. I can believe I have enough money on me to buy a cup of coffee, and this belief may or may not be justified, but I am not religious about it. Of course it is, the evidence is the evidence, and it doesn't change depending on the views of whoever is looking at it. It's the interpretation of the evidence that's different. And whereas evolutionists do not rule out the existence of God based on the evidence, creationists do rule out evolution based on the same evidence. From this it is clear who are the more open-minded. If irrefutable evidence was found for the existence of God, then scientists would accept it. You are turning things around by claiming that science presupposes the non-existence of God and a billions-of-years-old earth. There is no such presupposition in science. First, science does not say God does not exist; in fact, science doesn't say anything about God, because the concept is not susceptible to scientific investigation. Second, that the world is billions of years old is merely the conclusion the data leads us to.If I may do some turning around of my own: with the presupposition that God does exist and that the world is not billions of years old, the data is completely baffling. That's just kicking out belief systems through the front door and letting them in again through the back entrance. On top of that, I suspect that the belief system you want to kick out is the supposed 'religion' of atheism, and the one you'd like to see allowed back in is your own religion. I'd always prefer no answer to the wrong answer.This message has been edited by Parasomnium, 23 February 2005 09:56 AM

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

Allright, then let me rephrase: "atheists simply lack a belief about God, much the same as they lack a belief about the Hindu pantheon."There are at least 800 million Hindus, to whom the many gods they believe in are a "very serious issue". You are now at liberty to affront them. Go ahead.

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

Thanks for you reply, Phatboy. Please look upon the following as good-natured comment. It may be very comforting to believe that the volcano, at the bottom of which you build your house, is not going to erupt in your lifetime, but that feeling soon vanishes when you are carried away by a lava flow. So it's rather important to draw the right conclusions, instead of the comforting ones. If it's irrefutable evidence, all you can do is accept it, regardless of whether it impresses you or not. That's what irrefutability is about.

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

On second thought, why do you dismiss Pixianity so off-handedly?I think it's only fair to thousands of Pixians that you provide convincing evidence that Pixies and God are not equivalent.

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

You are right, I was trying to be funny. If it offended you, I apologize. I tried, but I can't. I guess Pixians aren't that statistically inclined. Wrong. You are arguing the positive in disguise. You are in effect saying that - contrary to Pixies - God exists. I, on the other hand, am the one who is really arguing the negative - twice - in implying that both Pixies and God do not exist. Denying your claim that Pixies and God aren't equivalent is merely my roundabout way of pointing out that they are in fact equivalent, albeit in only one respect: their non-existence. In short, the burden of proof is not on me, the honour is yours. Oh dear. Or, as Charles Knight would have it: Oh dear. "Pixies versus evolution"? No, no, no, that would never do. Don't you know I could never find such a site? Pixies are a very scientific concept. Why, there is even The Atomic Pixie TheoryYes, nearly everyone. Not counting, of course, roughly 1 billion Hindus, most of 1.2 billion Chinese, just under 1 billion agnosticists, and give-or-take 250 million strong atheists. Stretching the term 'nearly' to the point of becoming meaningless, yes, well, you could say that, I guess. I sincerely regret giving you this easy way out. If you stay for debate, I promise I will ridicule your position quite humourlessly. I am dead serious about fighting religious and superstitious nonsense. And humour just happens to be one of the more effective weapons at my disposal. Although it's lost on some - notably, you - it usually provokes a response. It did now, anyway. Indeed. Quite true. But, to me, understanding the people behind the superstition is much more important. I can't talk to God, but I can talk to you. That is, if you stay for debate.

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins

Well, if it was, then I suppose we agree. I'll not bite your head off this time then.But you said this: so I'll stipulate exactly what my concept of God is, namely: an extremely dangerous meme that should be eradicated sooner than later. (And I should emphasize that it's the meme that should be gotten rid of, not the people carrying it, let that be absolutely clear.)Because, you see, it's not just in the past that these things happened. It's still going on today, and it could be on your doorstep tomorrow.

---

We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further. - Richard Dawkins