I noticed how nobody made any sly jokes about the spaghetti monster. wierd.

quote:

Originally posted by Fledz I'm close in thinking to you. While I don't strictly 100% believe in a higher power, I am open to the idea of one. Like any good scientist I take into account all proof and base my judgements on that but when it comes to an issue such as that, I don't mind delving more into the philosophical side of things purely because it's impossible to explain it in a scientific way.

that isn't scientific. its akin to leaving your "mind" so open your brain falls out. if youre taking into consideration ALL proof of god, you still come back with a big fat zero. by your way of thinking, its just as feasible to argue pink fairies live on the dark side of the moon, or that my cat is the cause of global warming.

quote:

Personally, I refuse to discredit the notion of a possible unexplained higher power which is why I'm so against atheism and consider it just as bad as religious zealotry.

how can you honestly believe that? could you make a list of all the crimes against humanity committed in the name of atheism? or list atheists that are enforcing their superstition into science classrooms? start wars in the name of atheism? preach intolerance and hatred in our societies because of a "good book"? stifle scientific discovery because of an arbitrary interpretation of a commandment? foster a "us" and "them" mentality that breeds deep resentment?

the only reason you might even know any atheists is because of religion's habit of thrusting itself into the public sphere where it does not belong. if every religious person worshipped privately and didn't use it, say, as an election platform, there would be no need for people like me to scream "bullshit!" from the rooftops. atheism is a natural counter-balance to religious oppression, superstition and influence. if religion minded its own business, so would we.

think about that for a second.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Religious folk can't prove 100% there is a god. Atheists can't prove 100% there isn't a god. Where are we at? Nowhere!! They cancel each other out! As an objective mind, one must understand this discrepancy. Most people who take this into account into their worldview tend to be more moderate, such as myself, where I fully admit there is no physical proof of a god, but philosophically speaking, we can still talk about god all day.

Same as me. I believe in the existance of a higher power but I can't say for certain whether it's true or not. I like philosophy because it lets you debate the endless possibilities out there.

___________________
Like Progressive and Deep House? Grab my latest mix below
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...s=#.UAv1rbRo3h4

currently reading George A. Morgan "What Nietzsche Means"

so far on page 62. good book.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN that isn't scientific. its akin to leaving your "mind" so open your brain falls out. if youre taking into consideration ALL proof of god, you still come back with a big fat zero. by your way of thinking, its just as feasible to argue pink fairies live on the dark side of the moon, or that my cat is the cause of global warming.

It's not meant to be scientific. It's philosphical.
I don't agree that there is 0 proof. The big bang happened correct? Where did all the matter that caused it come from? Surely you can't 100% say for sure that it wasn't due to something which we don't understand, ie a higher power?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN how can you honestly believe that? could you make a list of all the crimes against humanity committed in the name of atheism? or list atheists that are enforcing their superstition into science classrooms? start wars in the name of atheism? preach intolerance and hatred in our societies because of a "good book"? stifle scientific discovery because of an arbitrary interpretation of a commandment? foster a "us" and "them" mentality that breeds deep resentment? the only reason you might even know any atheists is because of religion's habit of thrusting itself into the public sphere where it does not belong. if every religious person worshipped privately and didn't use it, say, as an election platform, there would be no need for people like me to scream "bullshit!" from the rooftops. atheism is a natural counter-balance to religious oppression, superstition and influence. if religion minded its own business, so would we. think about that for a second.

What's that got to do with anything? My point is that you 100% believe there is no god yet you have no conclusive evidence to back up your point. I'm not saying there is a good but you cannot prove there is or isn't one which puts atheism and religious zealotry on the opposite ends of the scale but the total extremes. There is no moderation at all. One preaches the total existance, the other preaches the total non-existance.

Rubbish to both those points because anyone with half a brain shouldn't categorically dismiss something so complex, regardless of what side you are on.

___________________
Like Progressive and Deep House? Grab my latest mix below
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...s=#.UAv1rbRo3h4

Last edited by Fledz on Nov-27-2007 at 06:26

quote:

Originally posted by Fledz It's not meant to be scientific. It's philosphical. I don't agree that there is 0 proof. The big bang happened correct? Where did all the matter that caused it come from? Surely you can't 100% say for sure that it wasn't due to something which we don't understand, ie a higher power?

absence of knowledge does not = god.

quote:

What's that got to do with anything? My point is that you 100% believe there is no good yet you have no conclusive evidence to back up your point.

not true at all. i am more than happy to accept the existence of god when a suitable amount of evidence is presented.

quote:

I'm not saying there is a good but you cannot prove there is or isn't one which puts atheism and religious zealotry on the opposite ends of the scale but the total extremes.

ideas are more than just words on a page; how a body of thought influences the world is a 100x more important than supposed similarities on paper. they are definitely not the same.

quote:

There is no moderation at all. One preaches the total existance, the other preaches the total non-existance. Rubbish to both those points because anyone with half a brain shouldn't categorically dismiss something so complex, regardless of what side you are on.

so again, you must allow for the existence of pink fairies on the dark side of the moon for your argument to be consistent. now that's whate's rubbish. i think you would find most atheists are like myself, and do not discount the possibility, but being a non-believer in something due to lack of evidence is much more logical than being a believer due to lack of evidence.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by Krypton Religious folk can't prove 100% there is a god. Atheists can't prove 100% there isn't a god.

What has to be established first is whether "god" is even a meaningful term in the first place.

Oliver Leib = God

quote:

Originally posted by MrJiveBoJingles That's similar to Karl Popper's basic idea. If a theory is unfalsifiable, it may be because it's just really good at predicting stuff; on the other hand, it may be because it says little or nothing about the empirical world. Good theories, Popper said, are ones that forbid certain things from happening, because if those things happen, then the theory can be proved wrong; you can know what to expect and what not to expect. If a theory makes no predictions at all, it effectively asserts nothing. It's scientifically meaningless.

yea I think it came from popper, makes more sense now.

we can go as far as to say that as long as there is N C H and O available, amino acids can be formed spontaneously.

Once you have amino acids its not to hard to believe that RNA can be formed. Once RNA is formed you can easily get DNA that is replicable from there you have primordial life. And evolution speaks for itself.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller-Urey_experiment

But to explain how matter came out of nowhere. thats something a bit far fetched. you can talk about quantum physics all you want parallel universes. String theory. Lasers through the wall shit. I dunno. But i cant fathom the creation of pure matter and energy frmo nothing. If there was something there in the first place. what was it? and how did it get there? Everything else makes sense to me.

Guys science is empirical. There isn't just some guy sitting in a room somewhere pulling theories out of his ass so that he can then go disprove them. You observe the world. Look at your observations and then you try to apply a mathematical model to it. A great example of this is thermodynamics.

___________________
I've never been able to eat a whole baby.
Kill the women. Eat the children.
It's just one of those days where you want to bend over everyone you know and kiss their ass goodbye with a big sideways boot.

Latest Mix