Peter,
I would call that a conscious. We know that some animals are self aware. Chimps, and dolphins are. So who is to say that others aren't also. The reason we can't be certain what they think or how they feel is a lack of true communication. Doesn't mean its not there. All we really have to go on is observation. They videos and links we have provided you shows that many animals act in ways that are not purely instinctual. They obviously have thoughts. Emotions even.
The difference that we have said over and over is that science is not in the business of proving or disproving god. However there is real evidence for evolution. There is real evidence for a 4 to 5 billion year old earth. That is not faith.
What you believe is 100% faith based. No evidence, no testing can be done on it. To compare the two is to not understand the meaning of science. Of course we don't have all the answers to everything. Its silly to throw out everything we do know just because ALL your questions can't be answered. However to put all your "faith" into something that can't be backed up with one shred of evidence, to me is just willful ignorance.
How bout you start answering some of our questions for a change? This discussion needs to go both ways. We have answered you many times over and when we ask a question of you, your answer is another question. Some of the things you have ask can only be answered by you doing some actual educating of your self. You need to start reading more things like this....
Evolution 101
I am seriously not trying to be snarky with you, but some of the questions you have makes it blatantly obvious that you do not understand the simple basics of evolution and the science behind it.
quote:Originally posted by Jennifer:
'm asking you, if I am wrong, what is that "thing" that makes us so different from animals?
peter, i ALWAYS answer questions. i've nothing to hide from you, sir. and i do answer all your questions - repeatedly - but you are too ignorant to understand them.
ive answered this one for you before: the absolute only thing that makes humans different from other animals is our evolved intelligence. that's it.
you insist the difference is a "soul" which has no shed of evidence and you blatantly dodged my question of what happens to the souls of twins. in other words, you simply make stuff up to suit your current argument and when pressed, you dodge as you are doing now. the sad thing is that i really don't think that you know you are fooling yourself but you dang sure aren't fooling any of the rational thinkers here.
To say "evolved intelligence" is not an answer as can be proven by facts anymore than my answer of a soul. It's a guess. I'm fine with that being your answer, but you must admit that it is a guess and you really don't have any true evidence to prove any of it as fact. Seriously, that's it...that's all any of this boils down to with me. You can believe what you want and not believe what you don't want. But to discard one theory when your theory doesn't really prove anything different is a rush to judgement. It's that simple. You are an atheist because you don't believe in God. You are not an atheist because science has proven any alternate theory. And if you're answer to so many questions is "We don't really know for sure"...then how can you in good conscience, call someone else an idiot or stupid for believing something different from you? I find it moronic that folks fall for socialism...but the difference is, socialism has proven failure OVER AND OVER AND OVER again, thus going against known failure is backed up by proven facts. However, you may think it's moronic to have faith in a real God, but you have no facts that say that belief is incorrect. Every alternate theory you have has holes in it, and unknowns about the origin, and the difference between humans and all other animals. So without facts that disprove my belief, you can't say for certainty that I'm wrong, thus you look like the fool for calling me one. Get my point?
ps...read the Bible. I've never said it was a science book or that it explains in detail all the mysteries of the universe. I don't care about most of that junk quite frankly. But if you read the Bible, then there were some really intuitive guys that wrote it, wouldn't you say? If you really can't see the ties from the Bible to today, you are just as willfully ignorant about Biblical teachings as you say I am about science. It truely is a blade that cuts both ways.
ps...read the Bible. I've never said it was a science book or that it explains in detail all the mysteries of the universe. I don't care about most of that junk quite frankly. But if you read the Bible, then there were some really intuitive guys that wrote it, wouldn't you say? If you really can't see the ties from the Bible to today, you are just as willfully ignorant about Biblical teachings as you say I am about science. It truely is a blade that cuts both ways.
quote:To say "evolved intelligence" is not an answer as can be proven by facts anymore than my answer of a soul.
yes there IS! jesus peter. we have cranium measurements from fossils going back millions of years that show a dramatic increase in cranium size as our ancestors evolved. those measurements coincide with the earliest remains of man made fire found near trash pits where the ape-ancestors lived. they coincide with ice age events. there are a million points of data show show, very conclusively, that intelligence evolved slowly in our species over a very long period of time.
to compare the vast amount of evidence for this observation against the zero evidence for a soul is not just ignorant but profoundly stupid and, yes, i'll say that to your face.
quote:ps...read the Bible.
i have. i used to be a believer, peter. i know my bible.
I'm going to break down this comment bit by bit. Why? Because I have the time to do it today. And I am bored. 
Let's see, you are asserting that humans today have the same intelligence that pre-historic humans did. Not true. Evidence is obvious. Are we still living in a cave? Do we still live as hunter gathers? No. There is your evidence of evolved intelligence. In the simplest of terms.
Now your turn. Where is your evidence for a soul breathed into all humans by a god?
Which is a guess? The soul part of the evolved intelligence? If it is the soul you keep speaking of then yes I would agree with you on it being a guess. Or more like wishful thinking on your part. If you are talking about evolved intelligence then please see above.
Thank you for you permission to have my own thoughts and ideas. That means so much to me.
As for our "theory"...not sure which one you are talking about, but I think you mean evolution. Once again you should educate yourself on what this kind of "theory" means. To say it is a theory equal to your wishful thinking that there is a god, is wrong and ignorant. The theory of evolution is the same as the theory of gravity in the world of science. Do you think that gravity is just something you can choose to believe in or is it reality? A rush to judgement would be to say that it was all done by a god. End of story. No evidence, nothing scientific to back it up, just a book written by ancient men over a period of many centuries and translated many times over and interpreted by fallible humans. Many of the things contained in that book were stolen ideals from other religions and beliefs.
The theory of evolution does not disprove a god. It just makes the need for a god less logical. Once again science is not in the business of proving or disproving gods. Most people just understand that the mysteries of our beginnings are being unraveled every day and more and more we find there is nothing supernatural about it.
First to not have answers to all the questions does not negate the answers we do have. Second, I don't call you stupid or an idiot for believing in a god, I think you are an idiot for not educating yourself on the facts of evolution and then coming here and arguing about something you know very little about. There are a few christians here that believe in a god and yet understand and accept the science of evolution. Ever notice the lack of support you get from many of the more educated christians here on the forum? There is a reason.
Huh? What the heck is this about? Maybe you forgot which forum you were in for a second there...
It is very hard for me to understand how intelligent people still believe in a god. Especially the god of the bible. You are not that hard to understand.
What alternative theories? What you do is fill those holes with god. No evidence for it, just your belief. God did it. Many people refuse to just stick that in the equation with absolutely no proof. Me included. There is nothing wrong with not having all the answers to all the questions. What is wrong is to just assume that the answer is god and have no proof to back it up. That is why scientist keep working on new discoveries everyday. That is why we explore our universe. That is why we study fossils. We get more and more answers all the time. Refusing to accept proven facts because it does not make sense to you or because you don't understand it does not make them untrue.
I can not say with 100% certainty that there is no god. You are right. What I can say is that there is absolutely 0% proof that there is a god. There is tons of proof for evolution. Why would I discount that proof for something with zero proof? Get my point? I have never called you a fool for believing in a god. I say again, I call you a fool for closing your mind and eyes to real facts and instead put all your belief behind something you can not prove.
I have. You are right it is not a science book by any stretch of the imagination. So why are you putting it up against science? You have been saying for weeks now that your belief in a god based on the bible is the same as our stance on evolution and science. Which is it Peter? It is quite obvious that you don't care about that "junk". We got that loud and clear. Yet you seem to want to argue about that "junk"
Uh...no. I have read more impressive books. Like I said many of the things that are attributed to the bible are stolen from other religions and beliefs. It many times contradicts itself from book to book. It does have some wonderfully fantastical stories though. I will give it that.
Since I have no clue as to which parts of the bible you are referring to then no I can't say one way or the other. I can assure you though that my understanding and knowledge of the bible far exceeds your understanding and knowledge of science, based on your post here.
quote:Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
To say "evolved intelligence" is not an answer as can be proven by facts anymore than my answer of a soul.
Let's see, you are asserting that humans today have the same intelligence that pre-historic humans did. Not true. Evidence is obvious. Are we still living in a cave? Do we still live as hunter gathers? No. There is your evidence of evolved intelligence. In the simplest of terms.
Now your turn. Where is your evidence for a soul breathed into all humans by a god?
quote:It's a guess. I'm fine with that being your answer, but you must admit that it is a guess and you really don't have any true evidence to prove any of it as fact. Seriously, that's it...that's all any of this boils down to with me.
Which is a guess? The soul part of the evolved intelligence? If it is the soul you keep speaking of then yes I would agree with you on it being a guess. Or more like wishful thinking on your part. If you are talking about evolved intelligence then please see above.
quote:You can believe what you want and not believe what you don't want. But to discard one theory when your theory doesn't really prove anything different is a rush to judgement.
Thank you for you permission to have my own thoughts and ideas. That means so much to me.
As for our "theory"...not sure which one you are talking about, but I think you mean evolution. Once again you should educate yourself on what this kind of "theory" means. To say it is a theory equal to your wishful thinking that there is a god, is wrong and ignorant. The theory of evolution is the same as the theory of gravity in the world of science. Do you think that gravity is just something you can choose to believe in or is it reality? A rush to judgement would be to say that it was all done by a god. End of story. No evidence, nothing scientific to back it up, just a book written by ancient men over a period of many centuries and translated many times over and interpreted by fallible humans. Many of the things contained in that book were stolen ideals from other religions and beliefs. quote:It's that simple. You are an atheist because you don't believe in God. You are not an atheist because science has proven any alternate theory.
The theory of evolution does not disprove a god. It just makes the need for a god less logical. Once again science is not in the business of proving or disproving gods. Most people just understand that the mysteries of our beginnings are being unraveled every day and more and more we find there is nothing supernatural about it.
quote:And if you're answer to so many questions is "We don't really know for sure"...then how can you in good conscience, call someone else an idiot or stupid for believing something different from you?
First to not have answers to all the questions does not negate the answers we do have. Second, I don't call you stupid or an idiot for believing in a god, I think you are an idiot for not educating yourself on the facts of evolution and then coming here and arguing about something you know very little about. There are a few christians here that believe in a god and yet understand and accept the science of evolution. Ever notice the lack of support you get from many of the more educated christians here on the forum? There is a reason.
quote:I find it moronic that folks fall for socialism...but the difference is, socialism has proven failure OVER AND OVER AND OVER again, thus going against known failure is backed up by proven facts.
Huh? What the heck is this about? Maybe you forgot which forum you were in for a second there...
quote:However, you may think it's moronic to have faith in a real God, but you have no facts that say that belief is incorrect.
It is very hard for me to understand how intelligent people still believe in a god. Especially the god of the bible. You are not that hard to understand.
quote:Every alternate theory you have has holes in it, and unknowns about the origin, and the difference between humans and all other animals.
What alternative theories? What you do is fill those holes with god. No evidence for it, just your belief. God did it. Many people refuse to just stick that in the equation with absolutely no proof. Me included. There is nothing wrong with not having all the answers to all the questions. What is wrong is to just assume that the answer is god and have no proof to back it up. That is why scientist keep working on new discoveries everyday. That is why we explore our universe. That is why we study fossils. We get more and more answers all the time. Refusing to accept proven facts because it does not make sense to you or because you don't understand it does not make them untrue.
quote:So without facts that disprove my belief, you can't say for certainty that I'm wrong, thus you look like the fool for calling me one. Get my point?
I can not say with 100% certainty that there is no god. You are right. What I can say is that there is absolutely 0% proof that there is a god. There is tons of proof for evolution. Why would I discount that proof for something with zero proof? Get my point? I have never called you a fool for believing in a god. I say again, I call you a fool for closing your mind and eyes to real facts and instead put all your belief behind something you can not prove.
quote:ps...read the Bible. I've never said it was a science book or that it explains in detail all the mysteries of the universe. I don't care about most of that junk quite frankly.
I have. You are right it is not a science book by any stretch of the imagination. So why are you putting it up against science? You have been saying for weeks now that your belief in a god based on the bible is the same as our stance on evolution and science. Which is it Peter? It is quite obvious that you don't care about that "junk". We got that loud and clear. Yet you seem to want to argue about that "junk"
quote:But if you read the Bible, then there were some really intuitive guys that wrote it, wouldn't you say?
Uh...no. I have read more impressive books. Like I said many of the things that are attributed to the bible are stolen from other religions and beliefs. It many times contradicts itself from book to book. It does have some wonderfully fantastical stories though. I will give it that.
quote:If you really can't see the ties from the Bible to today, you are just as willfully ignorant about Biblical teachings as you say I am about science. It truely is a blade that cuts both ways.
Since I have no clue as to which parts of the bible you are referring to then no I can't say one way or the other. I can assure you though that my understanding and knowledge of the bible far exceeds your understanding and knowledge of science, based on your post here.
quote:Originally posted by Opie Cunningham:
Are you saying that Fluffy doesn't have a soul and won't be with me in heaven? Oh My God!!!! You Bastard!!!
sorry, op'. the truth hurts, buddy!
You are correct Jank.. I mistyped. I do believe in evolved intelligence over time. But what I meant was, that doesn't prove WHY ONLY HUMANS have the levels of intel we have. That's the point I was making. But you were correct to point that out to me. But to further my point with yours. No, we don't still live in caves or live only has hunters and gathers. But all other animals still live THE EXACT SAME WAY AS ALWAYS, except for ways that HUMANS have altered the lifestyle of animals. Bats still live in caves...they haven't figured out anything better. Birds still put sticks and twigs in a tree branch. What haven't any of them evolved? That, as I said, furthers my point that there is no explanation from ya'll's side of this fence that actually PROVES why ONLY HUMANS developed this level of near limitless potential of intellect while EVERY OTHER SPECIES has stayed the same EXCEPT with human alterations of their behavior.
The guess I was refering to is all of it. From origin to why humans are so different from all other animals. You can see the difference, but there is no science that explains why.
As for the theory section you typed. Simply put.... Can you tell me with 100% certainty that you know the origin as random from a singular rock, or that there was a "masterful creator" as Isaac Newton said?
How does evolution without God sound more logical that with? To go through reverse evolution you come to the origin and get what? You would rather say it logical to belive that nothing became something than to say that God created it?
I don't care about other folks "supporting" me on the TD forum. Buffalo nails ya'll with science all of the time and for some reason you never want to debate with him. Mine is not a position that says all the science you bring up is wrong, it is a postion that says all of that science doesn't prove anything alternate to God the Creator. You said yourself, science is not here to disprove God. But you could finish that with, science cannot dissprove God. Nor can it prove an alternate that would prove me wrong.
How should any proof in some kind of evolution cause you to automatically say there is no God. That makes no sense at all. There is evolution, just not the kind that is taught incorrectly in science books that we were talked to about comming up. Once again, to follow that logic takes as much faith as mine in God.
And here is what I'm gonna do. You call me an idiot because I lack your VAST AND WONDERFUL knowledge of science.. I'll call you an idiot because you have ZERO comprehension of the Bible. These so-called contradictions live only in your head because you don't understand the Bible. As for science...once again, I am not closed off to it. I love it. The thing that I hate is when folks spout off about science with the heading of "THERE IS NOT GOD THERE IS NO CREATION". That heading is invalid on it's face simply because science cannot prove that statement true. Is that really to hard for you to comprehend? I'm not saying all science is bad and wrong. Never once has that been my stance on this forum. It is that mixing science and atheism as natural companions is foolish when the two are completely independant of one another.
The guess I was refering to is all of it. From origin to why humans are so different from all other animals. You can see the difference, but there is no science that explains why.
As for the theory section you typed. Simply put.... Can you tell me with 100% certainty that you know the origin as random from a singular rock, or that there was a "masterful creator" as Isaac Newton said?
How does evolution without God sound more logical that with? To go through reverse evolution you come to the origin and get what? You would rather say it logical to belive that nothing became something than to say that God created it?
I don't care about other folks "supporting" me on the TD forum. Buffalo nails ya'll with science all of the time and for some reason you never want to debate with him. Mine is not a position that says all the science you bring up is wrong, it is a postion that says all of that science doesn't prove anything alternate to God the Creator. You said yourself, science is not here to disprove God. But you could finish that with, science cannot dissprove God. Nor can it prove an alternate that would prove me wrong.
How should any proof in some kind of evolution cause you to automatically say there is no God. That makes no sense at all. There is evolution, just not the kind that is taught incorrectly in science books that we were talked to about comming up. Once again, to follow that logic takes as much faith as mine in God.
And here is what I'm gonna do. You call me an idiot because I lack your VAST AND WONDERFUL knowledge of science.. I'll call you an idiot because you have ZERO comprehension of the Bible. These so-called contradictions live only in your head because you don't understand the Bible. As for science...once again, I am not closed off to it. I love it. The thing that I hate is when folks spout off about science with the heading of "THERE IS NOT GOD THERE IS NO CREATION". That heading is invalid on it's face simply because science cannot prove that statement true. Is that really to hard for you to comprehend? I'm not saying all science is bad and wrong. Never once has that been my stance on this forum. It is that mixing science and atheism as natural companions is foolish when the two are completely independant of one another.
quote:I don't care about other folks "supporting" me on the TD forum. Buffalo nails ya'll with science all of the time and for some reason you never want to debate with him.
Buffalo nails nothing. Buffalo never debated, he just posted nonsense. If that is your idea of an informed person there's no hope for you. I'd love to see him telling a paleontologist that dinosaurs lived with man and that the earth is only a few thousand years old.
Peter I'm truly interested in your answer to this question, do you not see all the contradictions in the bible? Did you know that those contradictions are one thing that gets a lot of people thinking about things and coming to the realization that it's bunk? As young as I was when I was reading the bible all the time I noticed the contradictions.
quote:Originally posted by Jennifer:
Peter I'm truly interested in your answer to this question, do you not see all the contradictions in the bible? Did you know that those contradictions are one thing that gets a lot of people thinking about things and coming to the realization that it's bunk? As young as I was when I was reading the bible all the time I noticed the contradictions.
Actually youth is the #1 cause of noticing so-called contradictions. I had those same wonders myself when I was young and dumb. It wasn't until my independent studies in my early 20's when the light came on. It's odd to say, but you could say I actually lived more on FAITH when I was young. I didn't understand or grasp a lot of what was being taught to me, or what I was reading. So I went on blind faith alone. However, when I studied as an adult and realized that when I was a kid in church I was overusing one component and underutilizng another.
As a youngster in church I went overboard on the emotion and left out logical progression of thought. That's why contradictions come in to your mind. Once I scraped off the emotional lense over my eyes and used logic, so much made sense from that point on. There are still some things tough to understand. A lot of that comes from translations and uses of words.
Books like Genesis, Exodus and Leviticus freaked me out as a kid...but it's because I never put what I was reading in CONTEXT to the times. That is a prime mistake made by most folks reading the Bible. One I've noticed you, and several others make on this forum. It's as simple an explanation as comparing a trip to visit your extended family back in 1901 to 2011. The trip would be very different due to the circumstances of the time. But the overiding theme would stay the same. It's the same when reading the Bible. If you make sure you understand the context of the passages before you read them, you'll notice the "contradictions" magically start disappearing.
So all of Buff's science is wrong but Uno's is right? Is that what you mean?
(Warning to all...this is long. Peter ask a lot of questions and brings up several issues.)
Peter, Peter, Peter....Please I beg you to read more on evolution. Of course other animals have evolved and changed, dramatically in some cases. I will say it this way. Yes we are the intelligent animal. That is our strong point. We have many weaknesses that other animals don't have due to their evolution in those areas. Our intelligence is not proof that we are created by some god. Its just our talent in the natural world so to speak. Where you believe it means we have a soul that was breathed into us by a god. I have ask you for your evidence that we have a soul you have yet to attempt to answer that.
I will say again that we are not THAT much more intelligent from some animals. Just because we have a greater intelligence and do things differently than other animals doesn't in any way make us specially designed by a god. I will say that I can not discount that possibility completely, however I have no, none, zero, zilch, evidence to support that. Neither do you. So that being said maybe we will understand all of these things one day. Maybe we will develop a way of communicating with animals and learn that some are MORE intelligent than we are. Who knows.....
I can not explain all of this to you for a couple of reasons. Number one it is complex and much of the science and language that is used to explain the big bang I am not qualified to discuss with any expertise. I suggest that you read more about this yourself. Here is a good place to start http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6024&page=3 . I can understand it fine. I just don't think I could explain it to you or anyone for that matter. Secondly, I would like for you to answer some of my questions before i just keep indulging your questions with nothing in return.
I would never say that nothing became something. That is not the facts so I would not make that kind of statement. Is evolution more logical without god? Well yes, of course it is. Especially since there is no evidence to support a creator.
The burden of proof is on you Peter. I have no reason or want to disprove a god or prove a god. I just have no reason whatsoever to believe in such a thing. I know you hate the comparison but there is just no better way of saying it than this...I also can't disprove leprechauns. I don't need an alternative to god. I am fine with nothing but the facts. If you want science to give you an alternative to god then you may be waiting for a long time. As far as I know there is no real research being conducted in that area.
As for Buffalo, he knows how I feel about him and he also knows how I feel about his views on certain science theories. We don't agree on many things. One thing we do agree on is that we are friends. He is very strong in his opinions and many other atheist here have put him on ignore. They don't debate with him anymore because they don't see what he is posting. Buffy likes to try and get a rise out of a couple of them and I think they just got tired of playing.
I didn't just pick up a book one day and learn about evolution and suddenly become atheist. I was atheist long before I truly understood what evolution was. What do you think is incorrect about the evolution that is taught in schools? You believe in evolution but not in evolution.....I do not understand what you mean by this.
I don't really have a vast knowledge of science. I enjoy it and use it every day. So do you. We all do. It is part of all our lives. It doesn't take a vast knowledge in science to understand the things we have been talking about here. As for the bible, you can believe what you want Peter. I know that I have a very good understanding of what the bible is. I am not going to start listing all the things I find wrong with it and common contradictions. I decided a while back that that endeavor is pointless with christians. You will always have a way of interpreting the bible to support your view. No matter how illogical it might be.
So you believe in science, just not what is taught in schools and universities , but you love it. Where do you get your science then? The only thing you have ever seen me say is that there is no evidence for a god or creator. So I don't believe in one. I can not prove something false or true with no real evidence.
You are right about atheism and science. They are independent of each other. It is also true of creationism and science. They have nothing to do with each other. I dont' try and blend any of those things. You are the one that has tried to tie these things together for several weeks now. If you are ready to admit that you were wrong then I am willing to accept your concession.
I really hope that you study and read some of the links that have been provided for you. The last one I linked here is very educational. Many of the questions you have are answered there. I hope you find the what you are looking for.
Evolution Library
quote:Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
You are correct Jank.. I mistyped. I do believe in evolved intelligence over time. But what I meant was, that doesn't prove WHY ONLY HUMANS have the levels of intel we have. That's the point I was making. But you were correct to point that out to me. But to further my point with yours. No, we don't still live in caves or live only has hunters and gathers. But all other animals still live THE EXACT SAME WAY AS ALWAYS, except for ways that HUMANS have altered the lifestyle of animals. Bats still live in caves...they haven't figured out anything better. Birds still put sticks and twigs in a tree branch. What haven't any of them evolved? That, as I said, furthers my point that there is no explanation from ya'll's side of this fence that actually PROVES why ONLY HUMANS developed this level of near limitless potential of intellect while EVERY OTHER SPECIES has stayed the same EXCEPT with human alterations of their behavior.
Peter, Peter, Peter....Please I beg you to read more on evolution. Of course other animals have evolved and changed, dramatically in some cases. I will say it this way. Yes we are the intelligent animal. That is our strong point. We have many weaknesses that other animals don't have due to their evolution in those areas. Our intelligence is not proof that we are created by some god. Its just our talent in the natural world so to speak. Where you believe it means we have a soul that was breathed into us by a god. I have ask you for your evidence that we have a soul you have yet to attempt to answer that.
quote:The guess I was refering to is all of it. From origin to why humans are so different from all other animals. You can see the difference, but there is no science that explains why.
I will say again that we are not THAT much more intelligent from some animals. Just because we have a greater intelligence and do things differently than other animals doesn't in any way make us specially designed by a god. I will say that I can not discount that possibility completely, however I have no, none, zero, zilch, evidence to support that. Neither do you. So that being said maybe we will understand all of these things one day. Maybe we will develop a way of communicating with animals and learn that some are MORE intelligent than we are. Who knows.....
quote:As for the theory section you typed. Simply put.... Can you tell me with 100% certainty that you know the origin as random from a singular rock, or that there was a "masterful creator" as Isaac Newton said?
I can not explain all of this to you for a couple of reasons. Number one it is complex and much of the science and language that is used to explain the big bang I am not qualified to discuss with any expertise. I suggest that you read more about this yourself. Here is a good place to start http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6024&page=3 . I can understand it fine. I just don't think I could explain it to you or anyone for that matter.
Secondly, I would like for you to answer some of my questions before i just keep indulging your questions with nothing in return. quote:How does evolution without God sound more logical that with? To go through reverse evolution you come to the origin and get what? You would rather say it logical to belive that nothing became something than to say that God created it?
I would never say that nothing became something. That is not the facts so I would not make that kind of statement. Is evolution more logical without god? Well yes, of course it is. Especially since there is no evidence to support a creator.
quote:I don't care about other folks "supporting" me on the TD forum. Buffalo nails ya'll with science all of the time and for some reason you never want to debate with him. Mine is not a position that says all the science you bring up is wrong, it is a postion that says all of that science doesn't prove anything alternate to God the Creator. You said yourself, science is not here to disprove God. But you could finish that with, science cannot dissprove God. Nor can it prove an alternate that would prove me wrong.
The burden of proof is on you Peter. I have no reason or want to disprove a god or prove a god. I just have no reason whatsoever to believe in such a thing. I know you hate the comparison but there is just no better way of saying it than this...I also can't disprove leprechauns. I don't need an alternative to god. I am fine with nothing but the facts. If you want science to give you an alternative to god then you may be waiting for a long time. As far as I know there is no real research being conducted in that area.
As for Buffalo, he knows how I feel about him and he also knows how I feel about his views on certain science theories. We don't agree on many things. One thing we do agree on is that we are friends. He is very strong in his opinions and many other atheist here have put him on ignore. They don't debate with him anymore because they don't see what he is posting. Buffy likes to try and get a rise out of a couple of them and I think they just got tired of playing.
quote:How should any proof in some kind of evolution cause you to automatically say there is no God. That makes no sense at all. There is evolution, just not the kind that is taught incorrectly in science books that we were talked to about comming up. Once again, to follow that logic takes as much faith as mine in God.
I didn't just pick up a book one day and learn about evolution and suddenly become atheist. I was atheist long before I truly understood what evolution was. What do you think is incorrect about the evolution that is taught in schools? You believe in evolution but not in evolution.....I do not understand what you mean by this.
quote:And here is what I'm gonna do. You call me an idiot because I lack your VAST AND WONDERFUL knowledge of science.. I'll call you an idiot because you have ZERO comprehension of the Bible. These so-called contradictions live only in your head because you don't understand the Bible.
I don't really have a vast knowledge of science. I enjoy it and use it every day. So do you. We all do. It is part of all our lives. It doesn't take a vast knowledge in science to understand the things we have been talking about here. As for the bible, you can believe what you want Peter. I know that I have a very good understanding of what the bible is. I am not going to start listing all the things I find wrong with it and common contradictions. I decided a while back that that endeavor is pointless with christians. You will always have a way of interpreting the bible to support your view. No matter how illogical it might be.
quote:As for science...once again, I am not closed off to it. I love it. The thing that I hate is when folks spout off about science with the heading of "THERE IS NOT GOD THERE IS NO CREATION". That heading is invalid on it's face simply because science cannot prove that statement true. Is that really to hard for you to comprehend? I'm not saying all science is bad and wrong. Never once has that been my stance on this forum. It is that mixing science and atheism as natural companions is foolish when the two are completely independant of one another.
So you believe in science, just not what is taught in schools and universities , but you love it. Where do you get your science then? The only thing you have ever seen me say is that there is no evidence for a god or creator. So I don't believe in one. I can not prove something false or true with no real evidence.
You are right about atheism and science. They are independent of each other. It is also true of creationism and science. They have nothing to do with each other. I dont' try and blend any of those things. You are the one that has tried to tie these things together for several weeks now. If you are ready to admit that you were wrong then I am willing to accept your concession.
I really hope that you study and read some of the links that have been provided for you. The last one I linked here is very educational. Many of the questions you have are answered there. I hope you find the what you are looking for.
Evolution Library
[quoteJank]There is tons of proof for evolution[/quote]
Jank dear,
You keep saying this; give us one single ounce out of the tons you claim for evolution as it would prove Darwinian evolution from a common ancestor.
Yes we all are aware of evolution as in adaptation but come on Jank man from monkeys ?
Your proof so far has been invisible. 
Jank
dear,You keep saying this; give us one single ounce out of the tons you claim for evolution as it would prove Darwinian evolution from a common ancestor.
Yes we all are aware of evolution as in adaptation but come on Jank man from monkeys ?
Your proof so far has been invisible.
some smart female says
yep. it could be that "intelligence" is actually detrimental to a species. we've only developed our intelligence (as defined by us) over the last few million years. that intelligence could very easily lead to extinction of our species. for all we know, this might be an immutable law of the universe in hat all species tend to die out in a sudden flash of fissionable material.
why would god allow us to get smart enough to build a nuke, anyway?
quote:I will say again that we are not THAT much more intelligent from some animals. Just because we have a greater intelligence and do things differently than other animals doesn't in any way make us specially designed by a god.
yep. it could be that "intelligence" is actually detrimental to a species. we've only developed our intelligence (as defined by us) over the last few million years. that intelligence could very easily lead to extinction of our species. for all we know, this might be an immutable law of the universe in hat all species tend to die out in a sudden flash of fissionable material.
why would god allow us to get smart enough to build a nuke, anyway?
quote:Books like Genesis, Exodus and Leviticus freaked me out as a kid...but it's because I never put what I was reading in CONTEXT to the times. That is a prime mistake made by most folks reading the Bible. One I've noticed you, and several others make on this forum. It's as simple an
Apparently you forget what you read, if you read it. I have stressed that the bible is a reflection of those times because the writers didn't know any other way to write, and it was coming from their imaginations and superstitions, not an all knowing, wise god. If you talk to a child, or explain something new to an adult even, do you go through long wordy explanations using dire threats to get your point across? Or do you simply tell that person in plain language what they should do with the new object? How about I write a manual telling someone how to assembly a book case and stress, using the strongest language that they MUST use 8 screws in a certain place, but as you read further I stress to only use 5in that same place. And remember, the consequences for not following these instructions are listed under both numbers . The contradictions in the bible are not explainable. They are there because once again the writers were putting down their thoughts. And I've said this before, christians never understand the contradictions, they just skip over the "bad" parts and stress on the "good" parts and pretend the contradictions aren't there.
[jank]Quote”I can not explain all of this to you for a couple of reasons. Number one it is complex and much of the science and language that is used to explain the big bang I am not qualified to discuss with any expertise. I suggest that you read more about this yourself. Here is a good place to start http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=6024&page=3 . I can understand it fine. I just don't think I could explain it to you or anyone for that matter. Secondly, I would like for you to answer some of my questions before i just keep indulging your questions with nothing in return. “
Jank dear, please please please stop this.
This link you provided to Peter is why I accuse the atheist candidate of categorical thinking.
There are many many links to white papers and lectures by PhD’s who are dyed- in -the -wool practicing atheist candidates who do not believe in God but would never call anyone who chooses to believe in God names.
Give links to those scientists. They are the ones presenting science in it’s present state.
Once you have listened enough to these lectures and read enough of these papers by these atheist candidates you will first be qualified to sit in silence for quite some time before even commenting as to the facts of physical science. If you listen enough you will reach a much different conclusion as to what has substance and what has little or none.
You must insist on truth not what may be popular.
If I thought for one second you were in the care of honesty I would join you but I have read and listened far to much to discount a Creator.
No two scientist or behavioral psychologist agree on the same thing unless one allows for categorical thinking and reasoning.
I don’t want the two lunatics responding to my posts and I never want to be seen as being involved in a debate.
I am not debating anyone on any subject.
I simply make true statements and anyone can choose to use them to their advantage or remain pigeon holed.
Jank dear, please please please stop this.
This link you provided to Peter is why I accuse the atheist candidate of categorical thinking.
There are many many links to white papers and lectures by PhD’s who are dyed- in -the -wool practicing atheist candidates who do not believe in God but would never call anyone who chooses to believe in God names.
Give links to those scientists. They are the ones presenting science in it’s present state.
Once you have listened enough to these lectures and read enough of these papers by these atheist candidates you will first be qualified to sit in silence for quite some time before even commenting as to the facts of physical science. If you listen enough you will reach a much different conclusion as to what has substance and what has little or none.
You must insist on truth not what may be popular.
If I thought for one second you were in the care of honesty I would join you but I have read and listened far to much to discount a Creator.
No two scientist or behavioral psychologist agree on the same thing unless one allows for categorical thinking and reasoning.
I don’t want the two lunatics responding to my posts and I never want to be seen as being involved in a debate.
I am not debating anyone on any subject.
I simply make true statements and anyone can choose to use them to their advantage or remain pigeon holed.
quote:Originally posted by buffalo:
[quoteJank]There is tons of proof for evolution
Jank
You keep saying this; give us one single ounce out of the tons you claim for evolution as it would prove Darwinian evolution from a common ancestor.
Yes we all are aware of evolution as in adaptation but come on Jank man from monkeys ?
Are you not seeing any of my links?
Me and you have been through this before Buffy.
You want to start again? I can't show you something you refuse to see. The last time we did this you said that most scientist were in some kind of big conspiracy to fool everyone. If you haven't changed your mind on that, then nothing I show you will make a difference.I am sure that you of all people are aware of the amazing things they have discovered since the genome was mapped. Is that faked too? Do you doubt the evidence found there? We share a common ancestor. It is a fact.
I edited because I just noticed I had misspelled genome.
quote:Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
Buffalo nails ya'll with science all of the time and for some reason you never want to debate with him.
Good lord, this crap is particularly pathetic. Unless you're a liar and/or utterly clueless on science, you must have no earthly inkling on how ridiculous buffalo is on this forum. No one talks to him as he reliably and shamelessly embarrasses himself. By all evidence, he isn't worthy of a response from atheists and theists alike. (why Jank puts up with his belligerence is beyond me. Maybe she's an atheist saint or they're related or something...) But trying to ascribe credibility to a religious troll who is roundly and often passed over by everyone is the absolute worst and weakest of imaginable arguments against science. Please try again. Preferably in a novel way this time.
So simply put... if I can put in a short phrase what all the atheists on this forum are saying...
"Only scientists who do not believe in God are smart. Only people who trust in science while not believing in God are smart. Any scientists that believe in God are dumb. Anyone who respects science while believing in God are dumb."
Is that the gist of it?? LMAO!!
What a horrible way to go through life. As a narcissistic elitist. Seriously... that's pretty pitiful.
Like I stated... scientists, by ya'll's defintion, should never make a CONCLUSIVE statement that cannot be proven as fact through testing, correct?
Talking about science with the heading of "THERE IS NO GOD, THERE IS NO CREATION" goes against the laws of science ya'll cling to so much. To make that statement would mean you have proven facts that can be tested which prove that statement as true. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SUCH FACTS!
So, in saying this, my point is, science and atheism are independent of one another. Hang all the PHDs on the wall you want, it doesn't change that fact. The reason why is because someone could have just as many PHDs on their wall and believe in God. Who are you to say that believer is and idiot for what he/she believes? Who are you to say I'm an idiot for what I believe?
Oh yeah... a narcissistic elitist... we already concluded that.
"Only scientists who do not believe in God are smart. Only people who trust in science while not believing in God are smart. Any scientists that believe in God are dumb. Anyone who respects science while believing in God are dumb."
Is that the gist of it?? LMAO!!
What a horrible way to go through life. As a narcissistic elitist. Seriously... that's pretty pitiful.
Like I stated... scientists, by ya'll's defintion, should never make a CONCLUSIVE statement that cannot be proven as fact through testing, correct?
Talking about science with the heading of "THERE IS NO GOD, THERE IS NO CREATION" goes against the laws of science ya'll cling to so much. To make that statement would mean you have proven facts that can be tested which prove that statement as true. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SUCH FACTS!
So, in saying this, my point is, science and atheism are independent of one another. Hang all the PHDs on the wall you want, it doesn't change that fact. The reason why is because someone could have just as many PHDs on their wall and believe in God. Who are you to say that believer is and idiot for what he/she believes? Who are you to say I'm an idiot for what I believe?
Oh yeah... a narcissistic elitist... we already concluded that.
quote:I am sure that you of all people are aware of the amazing things they have discovered since the genome was mapped. Is that faked too? Do you doubt the evidence found there? We share a common ancestor. It is a fact.
jank, that is what someone told you was genome proof of common ancestor. There is no proof of common ancestor in genetics. Yes we have common genes but that has not proven anything.
You are streaching the blanket of atheism to cover what you cannot prove. quit with it., 
Someone please inform this short li’l man Adot as we fondly refer to him, I do not speak against science.
I speak against pseudo interpretation of science such as he is likely to ‘deer in head lights’ blurt out.
Another example of categorical thinking this li’l egg.
I think I hear uno calling you.
I speak against pseudo interpretation of science such as he is likely to ‘deer in head lights’ blurt out.
Another example of categorical thinking this li’l egg.
I think I hear uno calling you.
quote:Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
What a horrible way to go through life. As a narcissistic elitist. Seriously... that's pretty pitiful.
Like I stated... scientists, by ya'll's defintion, should never make a CONCLUSIVE statement that cannot be proven as fact through testing, correct?
Talking about science with the heading of "THERE IS NO GOD, THERE IS NO CREATION" goes against the laws of science ya'll cling to so much. To make that statement would mean you have proven facts that can be tested which prove that statement as true. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SUCH FACTS!
So, in saying this, my point is, science and atheism are independent of one another. Hang all the PHDs on the wall you want, it doesn't change that fact. The reason why is because someone could have just as many PHDs on their wall and believe in God. Who are you to say that believer is and idiot for what he/she believes? Who are you to say I'm an idiot for what I believe?
I know it's a shocker, but when it comes to the question of whether or not gods exist, we think we're right. Both evidence and logic are overwhelmingly in our favor. If you continually feel inferior maybe that's the smart part of your brain trying to tell you something important. But thinking you're right and trying to display to people the reasons you are right is not arrogance. That's what everyone does and that's just process in an open marketplace of ideas where some ideas are better than others. Facts are better than myths, proofs are better than guesses. When an idea is wrong, we joyously chuck it and embrace the better idea. Our greatest strength is religion's greatest weakness. Religion remains stuck on the first rung of understanding with nowhere to go. Science reaches evermore for greater understanding in search of the truth. Here's the deal though, if we're wrong, just prove us wrong. If you believe in a God or gods who act upon our world, the world of cause and effect, then prove the cause. We abide by the best truth-seeking process ever known and can put it to the test. To continually accuse atheists of acting superior for speaking out and making our case is just another way of trying to stop us from speaking out and making our case. It's just another attempt to get us to shut up. Not. Gonna. Happen. Anymore. Welcome to modernity. Compete or kindly and humbly move out of the way.
buffalo,
I try not to get personal, but I fear for your sanity and happiness sometimes. I suspect you fear this too. I just want you to know that even though you continually try to engage me, I just don't feel compelled to respond because I don't want to delve in the type of head space in which I think you reside. Sorry.
I try not to get personal, but I fear for your sanity and happiness sometimes. I suspect you fear this too. I just want you to know that even though you continually try to engage me, I just don't feel compelled to respond because I don't want to delve in the type of head space in which I think you reside. Sorry.
quote:Originally posted by A. Robustus:quote:Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
Buffalo nails ya'll with science all of the time and for some reason you never want to debate with him.
Good lord, this crap is particularly pathetic. Unless you're a liar and/or utterly clueless on science, you must have no earthly inkling on how ridiculous buffalo is on this forum. No one talks to him as he reliably and shamelessly embarrasses himself. By all evidence, he isn't worthy of a response from atheists and theists alike. (why Jank puts up with his belligerence is beyond me. Maybe she's an atheist saint or they're related or something...) But trying to ascribe credibility to a religious troll who is roundly and often passed over by everyone is the absolute worst and weakest of imaginable arguments against science. Please try again. Preferably in a novel way this time.
.....so this is not your words Adot?
quote:Originally posted by A. Robustus:quote:Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
What a horrible way to go through life. As a narcissistic elitist. Seriously... that's pretty pitiful.
Like I stated... scientists, by ya'll's defintion, should never make a CONCLUSIVE statement that cannot be proven as fact through testing, correct?
Talking about science with the heading of "THERE IS NO GOD, THERE IS NO CREATION" goes against the laws of science ya'll cling to so much. To make that statement would mean you have proven facts that can be tested which prove that statement as true. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SUCH FACTS!
So, in saying this, my point is, science and atheism are independent of one another. Hang all the PHDs on the wall you want, it doesn't change that fact. The reason why is because someone could have just as many PHDs on their wall and believe in God. Who are you to say that believer is and idiot for what he/she believes? Who are you to say I'm an idiot for what I believe?
I know it's a shocker, but when it comes to the question of whether or not gods exist, we think we're right. Both evidence and logic are overwhelmingly in our favor. If you continually feel inferior maybe that's the smart part of your brain trying to tell you something important. But thinking you're right and trying to display to people the reasons you are right is not arrogance. That's what everyone does and that's just process in an open marketplace of ideas where some ideas are better than others. Facts are better than myths, proofs are better than guesses. When an idea is wrong, we joyously chuck it and embrace the better idea. Our greatest strength is religion's greatest weakness. Religion remains stuck on the first rung of understanding with nowhere to go. Science reaches evermore for greater understanding in search of the truth. Here's the deal though, if we're wrong, just prove us wrong. If you believe in a God or gods who act upon our world, the world of cause and effect, then prove the cause. We abide by the best truth-seeking process ever known and can put it to the test. To continually accuse atheists of acting superior for speaking out and making our case is just another way of trying to stop us from speaking out and making our case. It's just another attempt to get us to shut up. Not. Gonna. Happen. Anymore. Welcome to modernity. Compete or kindly and humbly move out of the way.
You say I need to prove a cause??? You are the one spouting as if you have all the answers as can be proven with facts, so YOU prove cause. PROVE the origin of the universe. Was it that singular rock that exploded(expanded)? If so, where did the rock come from? Was it always there or just appear? And finally, what CAUSED it to explode(expand)?
I'm not trying to mute you, I'm simply trying to find an atheist that would admit that science and atheism are independent of one another. Admit that there is no proven theory of the origin or the CAUSE for only humans having the levels of intellect we do. Ya'll admit to chucking something when it is proven wrong, yet ya'll chuck God and the creation without any proof at all that it is wrong.
I'll say it again. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. The burden of proof falls squarely upon you and your ilk. Take some responsibility for your incredulous beliefs or else you've got no standing in an intelligent and reasoned conversation. Them's the rules.
quote:Originally posted by A. Robustus:
I'll say it again. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. The burden of proof falls squarely upon you and your ilk. Take some responsibility for your incredulous beliefs or else you've got no standing in an intelligent and reasoned conversation. Them's the rules.
Adot,
I’m gonna have to call you down. You are trying to be nasty for the entertainment of uno and slim.
Peter’s “ilk” “incredulous beliefs” more folk hold those beliefs than atheism.
“intelligent reasoning and conversation”
I’ve ask you several science questions in the past and you didn’t know what -the-hell I was talking about.
Do you want me to ask you some more questions? That is the reason the bobbing heads crawled under a rock.
I’ll ask you one anyhow: Where is uno’s equal amounts of antimatter stored?
quote:Originally posted by buffalo:
...Peter’s “ilk” “incredulous beliefs” more folk hold those beliefs than atheism...
If you believe that the most popular opinion is the most reliable sign of truth, then by your own flawed logic, Christians are wrong too. Muslims are right. Convert.
quote:I'm not trying to mute you, I'm simply trying to find an atheist that would admit that science and atheism are independent of one another. Admit that there is no proven theory of the origin or the CAUSE for only humans having the levels of intellect we do. Ya'll admit to chucking something when it is proven wrong, yet ya'll chuck God and the creation without any proof at all that it is wrong.
Why? Even when they answer you keep going. Jank did that very thing and here you are again with the SSDD.
quote:Originally posted by buffalo:quote:I am sure that you of all people are aware of the amazing things they have discovered since the genome was mapped. Is that faked too? Do you doubt the evidence found there? We share a common ancestor. It is a fact.
jank, that is what someone told you was genome proof of common ancestor. There is no proof of common ancestor in genetics. Yes we have common genes but that has not proven anything.
Then how would you explain Chromosome 2?
No proof of common ancestor in genetics?! Come on Buffy, now you are just trying to be difficult.
Mapping of the genome has nothing to do with my atheism. As you well know it was a christian that did it first. He would take offense that you believed his work was to support atheism.
Oh yeah, no one told me....I read the papers. And the reviews. I bet you have too. Are you saying these scientist are all a bunch of liars and frauds?
quote:Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
So simply put... if I can put in a short phrase what all the atheists on this forum are saying...
"Only scientists who do not believe in God are smart. Only people who trust in science while not believing in God are smart. Any scientists that believe in God are dumb. Anyone who respects science while believing in God are dumb."
Is that the gist of it?? LMAO!!
What a horrible way to go through life. As a narcissistic elitist. Seriously... that's pretty pitiful.
Like I stated... scientists, by ya'll's defintion, should never make a CONCLUSIVE statement that cannot be proven as fact through testing, correct?
Talking about science with the heading of "THERE IS NO GOD, THERE IS NO CREATION" goes against the laws of science ya'll cling to so much. To make that statement would mean you have proven facts that can be tested which prove that statement as true. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SUCH FACTS!
So, in saying this, my point is, science and atheism are independent of one another. Hang all the PHDs on the wall you want, it doesn't change that fact. The reason why is because someone could have just as many PHDs on their wall and believe in God. Who are you to say that believer is and idiot for what he/she believes? Who are you to say I'm an idiot for what I believe?
Oh yeah... a narcissistic elitist... we already concluded that.
Do you even read the responses from me, or are you just having a private conversation with yourself?
For christ sake Peter, is this how you think you won all those debates back in junior college?
You can't just pull **** out of thin air. Please try and keep up and stay on topic. Or at least learn the rules of science and the difference between facts, theories and hypothesis.
Also do you know who Francis Collins is? Look him up and read about his work. I have a feeling he could be an inspiration to you.
quote:Sez A.Rob:
I'll say it again. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Indeed.
Such as...how life can spring from non-living matter...naturally.
Haven't seen that one yet.
quote:Originally posted by CageTheElephant:quote:Sez A.Rob:
I'll say it again. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.
Indeed.
Such as...how life can spring from non-living matter...naturally.
Haven't seen that one yet.
Well, the obvious answer must be; "God", right? That's simple minded, even for you.
quote:Originally posted by Jankinonya:quote:Originally posted by buffalo:quote:I am sure that you of all people are aware of the amazing things they have discovered since the genome was mapped. Is that faked too? Do you doubt the evidence found there? We share a common ancestor. It is a fact.
jank, that is what someone told you was genome proof of common ancestor. There is no proof of common ancestor in genetics. Yes we have common genes but that has not proven anything.
Then how would you explain Chromosome 2?
No proof of common ancestor in genetics?! Come on Buffy, now you are just trying to be difficult.
Mapping of the genome has nothing to do with my atheism. As you well know it was a christian that did it first. He would take offense that you believed his work was to support atheism.
Oh yeah, no one told me....I read the papers. And the reviews. I bet you have too. Are you saying these scientist are all a bunch of liars and frauds?
Chromosome 2
I assume you are referring to the %98 of human to chimp genes.
Yes the same gene calls for hip bones for walking but where you are making the mistake this same gene has different ‘flavors’. the variance in genes is what specifies different traits as I pointed out , a different pelvis.
Only %5 of DNA is used by coding. DNA actually knows nothing but is controlled by messengers.
We will talk about monkey man when we understand the remaining ninety five percent of DNA.
Well not really %95 we do know a bit more about splicing enzymes.
Beware bone head maverick paleontologists’ leave the big stuff to biologists.
P.S. Don’t forget the hormones creeping around in your body that are messengers too.
It’s really complicated. Have you ever considered that when you ride your horse you are coding your genes and the horse’s on a micro molecular level by gene regulators that will be passed on by you and your horse?
quote:Originally posted by Jankinonya:quote:Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
So simply put... if I can put in a short phrase what all the atheists on this forum are saying...
"Only scientists who do not believe in God are smart. Only people who trust in science while not believing in God are smart. Any scientists that believe in God are dumb. Anyone who respects science while believing in God are dumb."
Is that the gist of it?? LMAO!!
What a horrible way to go through life. As a narcissistic elitist. Seriously... that's pretty pitiful.
Like I stated... scientists, by ya'll's defintion, should never make a CONCLUSIVE statement that cannot be proven as fact through testing, correct?
Talking about science with the heading of "THERE IS NO GOD, THERE IS NO CREATION" goes against the laws of science ya'll cling to so much. To make that statement would mean you have proven facts that can be tested which prove that statement as true. YOU DON'T HAVE ANY SUCH FACTS!
So, in saying this, my point is, science and atheism are independent of one another. Hang all the PHDs on the wall you want, it doesn't change that fact. The reason why is because someone could have just as many PHDs on their wall and believe in God. Who are you to say that believer is and idiot for what he/she believes? Who are you to say I'm an idiot for what I believe?
Oh yeah... a narcissistic elitist... we already concluded that.
Do you even read the responses from me, or are you just having a private conversation with yourself?
For christ sake Peter, is this how you think you won all those debates back in junior college?
You can't just pull **** out of thin air. Please try and keep up and stay on topic. Or at least learn the rules of science and the difference between facts, theories and hypothesis.
Also do you know who Francis Collins is? Look him up and read about his work. I have a feeling he could be an inspiration to you.
Actually what you quoted there was not a direct response to any post of yours. Maybe I did miss the one you are referring to. Calm down... life will go on and I'm sure we will have plenty of round abouts as time goes on.
quote:Originally posted by A. Robustus:
I'll say it again. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. The burden of proof falls squarely upon you and your ilk. Take some responsibility for your incredulous beliefs or else you've got no standing in an intelligent and reasoned conversation. Them's the rules.
Ahhhh... so your claim is not extraordinary huh??? LMAO!!! That's some funny stuff there... POOF! from nothing randomly came something. And that very simplistic something morphed over time into undefinable complexity for no describable reason... yeah, your's is not an "extraordinary claim" at all is it??? Oh man... that's good stuff there.
quote:Originally posted by Peter Rielly:
Ahhhh... so your claim is not extraordinary huh??? LMAO!!! That's some funny stuff there... POOF! from nothing randomly came something. And that very simplistic something morphed over time into undefinable complexity for no describable reason... yeah, your's is not an "extraordinary claim" at all is it??? Oh man... that's good stuff there.
Maybe it would help to repeat and summarize things for you.
Be accountable to your incredulous beliefs.
Present your best evidence for your god to the marketplace of ideas.
Compete or fall by the wayside.
The other parts of your brain are begging for your attention.
NOTE:
i haven't read the other 14 pages to this thread.... i just say the question right this second, and decided i needed to add my thoughts, regardless of the label i wear.
how do athiest live their lives?
i think the primary difference to the daily life between an athiest and a believer is that the athiest has more free time on sundays and wednesdays.
i think the athiest also typically spend less tiem thinking they are better than other people.
( note: there are exceptions on both sides to this one.. but on the whole i think it's true)
i haven't read the other 14 pages to this thread.... i just say the question right this second, and decided i needed to add my thoughts, regardless of the label i wear.
how do athiest live their lives?
i think the primary difference to the daily life between an athiest and a believer is that the athiest has more free time on sundays and wednesdays.
i think the athiest also typically spend less tiem thinking they are better than other people.
( note: there are exceptions on both sides to this one.. but on the whole i think it's true)
Nagel, I disagree with you there. I have been an atheist at one point in my life, and am now a Christian. I can only speak for myself, but when I was an atheist, I truly believed, as the atheists on this board love to point out, that belief in God stems from fear, weakness of character, and weakness of understanding.
As a Christian, instead of believing that *I* have the answers, I know that only God has the answers, and that ALL of us are sinners, none of us are better than others, and that kindness is the only way to treat each other.
(But as a sinner, I admit I don't always react with kindness toward people like Jennifer and Opie.
)
As a Christian, instead of believing that *I* have the answers, I know that only God has the answers, and that ALL of us are sinners, none of us are better than others, and that kindness is the only way to treat each other.
(But as a sinner, I admit I don't always react with kindness toward people like Jennifer and Opie.
)