Regardless, going from believing in one thing of which there is no evidence to support it to another thing of which there is no evidence to support it. Big deal.
FamiBox
Well that is also no different from going from the belief there is something for which there is no evidence to not believing in something for which there is no evidence against.
My post was referring TO the religious folks, since you know, im one of them.JudgementEden
FamiBox knew that your post was referring to LJS and Snipes. Personally, I don't mind the debate. I think LJS and Snipes are civil human beings and I think they make these forums a better place. If they want to listen to your advice then that's fine. I don't think you should imply though that us atheists are stubborn and can't be persuaded otherwise by calling this debate "pointless". Don't worry about it though. It's not offensive.
Regardless, going from believing in one thing of which there is no evidence to support it to another thing of which there is no evidence to support it. Big deal.
Acemaster27
Well that is also no different from going from the belief there is something for which there is no evidence to not believing in something for which there is no evidence against.
No evidence against huh? :|
Sure I can't prove god doesn't exist 100%
I can't prove the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist 100% too.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I believe my car can fly. I have no proof of that. Thus I cannot justify that belief.Genetic_Code
Then religion is automatically unjustified as well since there is no proof of that.That is not true. There is proof. It's just not the proof you are expecting.
[QUOTE="JudgementEden"]My post was referring TO the religious folks, since you know, im one of them.Genetic_Code
FamiBox knew that your post was referring to LJS and Snipes. Personally, I don't mind the debate. I think LJS and Snipes are civil human beings and I think they make these forums a better place. If they want to listen to your advice then that's fine. I don't think you should imply though that us atheists are stubborn and can't be persuaded otherwise by calling this debate "pointless". Don't worry about it though. It's not offensive. If it's not offensive than why go to these lengths to explain it in that fashion? The fact of the matter is, Atheists ARE stubborn, thats undeniable. Christians are also stubborn. Everyone is to an extent. And this debate that started IS pointless.
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]I believe my car can fly. I have no proof of that. Thus I cannot justify that belief.LJS9502_basic
Then religion is automatically unjustified as well since there is no proof of that.That is not true. There is proof. It's just not the proof you are expecting. enlighten us on your "proof"... if it requires faith then it isn't proof by definition.
There are many things including but not limited to the scriptures which led me to become a Christian. We all have to choose which path we will take. I chose mine and have never regretted my decision to become Christian.
You just proved my point. Someone didn't randomly say "Oh, Hey, God's a Cool name for a Being that is Infinite" (Writes Bible with Friends) :|
Genetic_Code
God's a title, not a name. I highly doubt Judaism is the first religion to originate the term "god". In fact, it probably started from the polytheistic beliefs of the ancient Egyptians and atheists and Christians both believe that those gods don't exist. Your argument can be used to justify the Qur'an, yet the Qur'an and the Bible can't both be true because they contradict.
I believe my car can fly. I have no proof of that. Thus I cannot justify that belief.LJS9502_basic
Then religion is automatically unjustified as well since there is no proof of that.
The Muslims use God in a Different context though. IT's not an Argument, IT was just a sarcastic remark :P
[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"][QUOTE="JudgementEden"]My post was referring TO the religious folks, since you know, im one of them.JudgementEden
FamiBox knew that your post was referring to LJS and Snipes. Personally, I don't mind the debate. I think LJS and Snipes are civil human beings and I think they make these forums a better place. If they want to listen to your advice then that's fine. I don't think you should imply though that us atheists are stubborn and can't be persuaded otherwise by calling this debate "pointless". Don't worry about it though. It's not offensive. If it's not offensive than why go to these lengths to explain it in that fashion? The fact of the matter is, Atheists ARE stubborn, thats undeniable. Christians are also stubborn. Everyone is to an extent. And this debate that started IS pointless.
It might not be entirety pointless.
There are alot of people on the fence about religion.
Even little posts on forums such as these can add up to which way might sway them. Not that I'm out to convert people or anything, but it would be nice to know if someones mind wasn't lost to religion.
"when an atheist walks into a room and see a 2000 piecejig saw puzzleon on the floor. Then he says wow ist it amazing how it put its self together by accident "
"when an atheist walks into a room and see a 2000 piecejig saw puzzleon on the floor. Then he says wow ist it amazing how it put its self together by accident "
dontshackzmii
except that line proves that the writer doesn't understand natural selection...
[QUOTE="Genetic_Code"] Then religion is automatically unjustified as well since there is no proof of that.
mfp16
That is not true. There is proof. It's just not the proof you are expecting. enlighten us on your "proof"... if it requires faith then it isn't proof by definition.Theory of Justification.....is a proof by definition.
If it's not offensive than why go to these lengths to explain it in that fashion? The fact of the matter is, Atheists ARE stubborn, thats undeniable. Christians are also stubborn. Everyone is to an extent. And this debate that started IS pointless.JudgementEden
Not everyone is stubborn. Don't have such a negative view of people. You might misjudge someone because of your view on humanity. I didn't explain why I found it offensive. The reason I didn't find it offensive was because as you said, everyone is stubborn, but it seemed like your point only applied to atheists since that's who you were referring. It could be taken as offensive, but I thought you didn't mean it that way. Your point equally applies to both theists and atheists alike.
"when an atheist walks into a room and see a 2000 piecejig saw puzzleon on the floor. Then he says wow ist it amazing how it put its self together by accident "
[QUOTE="mfp16"][QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]That is not true. There is proof. It's just not the proof you are expecting.
LJS9502_basic
enlighten us on your "proof"... if it requires faith then it isn't proof by definition.Theory of Justification.....is a proof by definition. but there are better explanations than "god made it"... so it's proof of nothing as far as religion goes..
I'm a Muslim, and I think posting videos about people converting is worse than Westboro Baptist Church protesting at highschools. Seriously, what was the point of this topic? :?
People can't say that the bible isn't proof of God, and then pick up their science textbook/magazine etc. and say that's proof of whatever scientific theory they're trying to prove.
Bible=Textbook
Unless you've seen electrons floating around a nucleus, the tectonic plates drifting, and the big bang; how can you justify YOUR opinion? Everyone has their own faith and belief, and until something groundbreaking happens, nobody will win.
People can't say that the bible isn't proof of God, and then pick up their science textbook/magazine etc. and say that's proof of whatever scientific theory they're trying to prove.
Bible=Textbook
Unless you've seen electrons floating around a nucleus, the tectonic plates drifting, and the big bang; how can you justify YOUR opinion? Everyone has their own faith and belief, and until something groundbreaking happens, nobody will win.
ushotdead
no, one is backed up by repeatable scientific inquiry...
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"][QUOTE="mfp16"] enlighten us on your "proof"... if it requires faith then it isn't proof by definition.mfp16
Theory of Justification.....is a proof by definition. but there are better explanations than "god made it"... so it's proof of nothing as far as religion goes.. Yeah that isn't exactly what the theory states....
[QUOTE="LJS9502_basic"]Theory of Justification.....is a proof by definition.LJS9502_basic
but there are better explanations than "god made it"... so it's proof of nothing as far as religion goes.. Yeah that isn't exactly what the theory states.... enlighten me...
People can't say that the bible isn't proof of God, and then pick up their science textbook/magazine etc. and say that's proof of whatever scientific theory they're trying to prove.
Bible=Textbook
Unless you've seen electrons floating around a nucleus, the tectonic plates drifting, and the big bang; how can you justify YOUR opinion? Everyone has their own faith and belief, and until something groundbreaking happens, nobody will win.
mfp16
no, one is backed up by repeatable scientific inquiry...
Not to mention scientific evidence is able to be demonstrated (repeatedly) (which is why it's evidence.)
So you're saying you just believe those scientists? They publish a book and voila! It's suddenly fact? Couldn't you say the same thing for God and people claiming they've seen evidence of God and then publishing a book about it? (bible)
atheists have no prove that atheism is right. They mostly only focus on Christian's and not much els. far more in the world then just mono theism .
Science talks faith as well. Seems like every day Science changes its mind about some thing . You need faith to trust the science we have now is right.
People think cus you cant see or touch god he is not real. But i guess its like Dark matter you cant see , touch , smell or even taste it. yet they think its real .
atheists have no prove that atheism is right. They mostly only focus on Christian's and not much els. far more in the world then just mono theism .
Science talks faith as well. Seems like every day Science changes its mind about some thing . You need faith to trust the science we have now is right.
People think cus you cant see or touch god he is not real. But i guess its like Dark matter you cant see , touch , smell or even taste it. yet they think its real .
dontshackzmii
atheism doesn't only reject chrisitians it rejects it all... Science requires no faith at all, only evidence. The fact that I cannot touch "god" is not the reason I reject the idea of him but rather the contradictory, oppressive, and flat out implausibility of his existence is what I reject.
So you're saying you just believe those scientists? They publish a book and voila! It's suddenly fact? Couldn't you say the same thing for God and people claiming they've seen evidence of God and then publishing a book about it? (bible)
ushotdead
once again... one is based on repeatable scientific inquiry and observable evidence, the other is not.
atheists have no prove that atheism is right. They mostly only focus on Christian's and not much els. far more in the world then just mono theism .
Science talks faith as well. Seems like every day Science changes its mind about some thing . You need faith to trust the science we have now is right.
People think cus you cant see or touch god he is not real. But i guess its like Dark matter you cant see , touch , smell or even taste it. yet they think its real .
mfp16
atheism doesn't only reject chrisitians it rejects it all... Science requires no faith at all, only evidence. The fact that I cannot touch "god" is not the reason I reject the idea of him but rather the contradictory, oppressive, and flat out implausibility of his existence is what I reject.
You need faith to take the evidence into Action. many times in history people thought some thing was 100% true and it turns out it was wrong . 97% of the time when i hear an atheist talking its about Chistians .
So you're saying you just believe those scientists?
ushotdead
Scientific evidence is continually scrutinised by scientists themselves. It goes under incredible amounts of lengthy testing and demonstration before is is considered evidence.
It's not like scientists are some kind of cult, trying to prove a particular thing. The evidence leads them to conclusion, not the other way round (like religion.)
atheists have no prove that atheism is right. They mostly only focus on Christian's and not much els. far more in the world then just mono theism .
Science talks faith as well. Seems like every day Science changes its mind about some thing . You need faith to trust the science we have now is right.
People think cus you cant see or touch god he is not real. But i guess its like Dark matter you cant see , touch , smell or even taste it. yet they think its real .
dontshackzmii
atheism doesn't only reject chrisitians it rejects it all... Science requires no faith at all, only evidence. The fact that I cannot touch "god" is not the reason I reject the idea of him but rather the contradictory, oppressive, and flat out implausibility of his existence is what I reject.
You need faith to take the evidence into Action. many times in history people thought some thing was 100% true and it turns out it was wrong . 97% of the time when i hear an atheist talking its about Chistians .
no you don't need faith to take evidence into action (whatever that means), the reason you hear a lot of talk about christians is because that is because most atheists that talk openly about it are ex-christians or at least westerners... Other religions would get just as much "talk" but the people who live in the areas where those religions are popular would be killed, burned alive, or arrested for saying it...
So you're saying you just believe those scientists?
FamiBox
Scientific evidence is continually scrutinised by scientists themselves. It goes under incredible amounts of lengthy testing and demonstration before is is considered evidence.
It's not like scientists are some kind of cult, trying to prove a particular thing. The evidence leads them to conclusion, not the other way round (like religion.)
but what if all the scientists were in league with the devil to deceive us simple folk :P
What is a scientific inquiry? A couple people getting together and doing some tests? This doesn't mean anything. People have been doing this for thousands of years. In fact, people used to think the world was flat, and that the sun revolved around earth and that we were the most important thigns ever. It is now generally accepted that that is false. Who says this won't happen again?
Also, I just want to point out that I am not trying to change anyone's faith or trying to defend religion and bash atheism/science. I'm trying to take an unbiased stand and look at both sides. What one says about one thing, it can be said for the other.
So you're saying you just believe those scientists? They publish a book and voila! It's suddenly fact? Couldn't you say the same thing for God and people claiming they've seen evidence of God and then publishing a book about it? (bible)
ushotdead
I often say the very same thing. Most people who believe science is be all end all haven't actually done their OWN research. They just take these scientists conclusions as fact.
So you're saying you just believe those scientists? They publish a book and voila! It's suddenly fact? Couldn't you say the same thing for God and people claiming they've seen evidence of God and then publishing a book about it? (bible)
JudgementEden
I often say the very same thing. Most people who believe science is be all end all haven't actually done their OWN research. They just take these scientists conclusions as fact. Such as?
So you're saying you just believe those scientists? They publish a book and voila! It's suddenly fact? Couldn't you say the same thing for God and people claiming they've seen evidence of God and then publishing a book about it? (bible)
ushotdead
What are you talking about? :?
The thing about science is that every single experiment absolutely has to be repeatable. What that means is that anyone who doubts the conclusion can simply do it themselves and see for themselves. I really do not understand where you got the idea that just because something is in a textbook, that is what leads people to believe it's true. People believe it's true because they have seen the evidence presented in its favor.
So you're saying you just believe those scientists? They publish a book and voila! It's suddenly fact? Couldn't you say the same thing for God and people claiming they've seen evidence of God and then publishing a book about it? (bible)
JudgementEden
I often say the very same thing. Most people who believe science is be all end all haven't actually done their OWN research. They just take these scientists conclusions as fact. ...and what is your argument for the people who did do the research?
In fact, people used to think the world was flat, and that the sun revolved around earth and that we were the most important thigns ever. It is now generally accepted that that is false. Who says this won't happen again?
ushotdead
The entire reason why that happened is because people were looking in a book for answers rather than doing actual research. Today, the modern scientific method makes things incredibly formal and weeds out that which does not have sufficient evidence in its favor.
So you're saying you just believe those scientists? They publish a book and voila! It's suddenly fact? Couldn't you say the same thing for God and people claiming they've seen evidence of God and then publishing a book about it? (bible)
Assassin1349
I often say the very same thing. Most people who believe science is be all end all haven't actually done their OWN research. They just take these scientists conclusions as fact. Such as? I really shouldn't have to state any specifics, use your brain. But to give you a hint, most things that people believe about science today. All of us are spoon fed conclusions. How much we eat up depends on the person. I dont think its popular these days to go against the grain and say "I will NOT believe everything science teaches until I see undeniable proof it is the way they say it is."
What is a scientific inquiry? A couple people getting together and doing some tests? This doesn't mean anything. People have been doing this for thousands of years. In fact, people used to think the world was flat, and that the sun revolved around earth and that we were the most important thigns ever. It is now generally accepted that that is false. Who says this won't happen again?
Also, I just want to point out that I am not trying to change anyone's faith or trying to defend religion and bash atheism/science. I'm trying to take an unbiased stand and look at both sides. What one says about one thing, it can be said for the other.
ushotdead
There is a bit of difference here in your example of sciences mistakes... those scientists don't tie the ones who point out errors and burn them alive... You also forget the notion that the sun revolved around the earth was put forth by religion and refuted by scientists... the very things you point out as mistakes of "science" are actually mistakes of faith as there was no scientific evidence of them, but thanks for proving my point.
So you're saying you just believe those scientists? They publish a book and voila! It's suddenly fact? Couldn't you say the same thing for God and people claiming they've seen evidence of God and then publishing a book about it? (bible)
GabuEx
What are you talking about? :?
The thing about science is that every single experiment absolutely has to be repeatable. What that means is that anyone who doubts the conclusion can simply do it themselves and see for themselves. I really do not understand where you got the idea that just because something is in a textbook, that is what leads people to believe it's true. People believe it's true because they have seen the evidence presented in its favor.
Oh good. you're here.
I still don't quite get you beliefs though GabuEx.
[QUOTE="Assassin1349"][QUOTE="JudgementEden"] I often say the very same thing. Most people who believe science is be all end all haven't actually done their OWN research. They just take these scientists conclusions as fact.JudgementEden
Such as? I really shouldn't have to state any specifics, use your brain. But to give you a hint, most things that people believe about science today. All of us are spoon fed conclusions. How much we eat up depends on the person. I dont think its popular these days to go against the grain and say "I will NOT believe everything science teaches until I see undeniable proof it is the way they say it is."
No offense, but don't you kind of see any contradiction between the assertion that people should disbelieve until they see undeniable proof, and the fact that you are saying that you shouldn't have to state any specifics? :P
[QUOTE="JudgementEden"][QUOTE="Assassin1349"][QUOTE="JudgementEden"] I often say the very same thing. Most people who believe science is be all end all haven't actually done their OWN research. They just take these scientists conclusions as fact. Such as? I really shouldn't have to state any specifics, use your brain. But to give you a hint, most things that people believe about science today. All of us are spoon fed conclusions. How much we eat up depends on the person. I dont think its popular these days to go against the grain and say "I will NOT believe everything science teaches until I see undeniable proof it is the way they say it is." ahh... so science is held to a state of "undeniable proof" but god is not huh?
People believe X religion is true because they've seen evidence and BELIEVE IT'S TRUE. All I'm saying is that you really can't prove either way. That's why it's called faith and belief.
[QUOTE="JudgementEden"][QUOTE="Assassin1349"] Such as? GabuEx
I really shouldn't have to state any specifics, use your brain. But to give you a hint, most things that people believe about science today. All of us are spoon fed conclusions. How much we eat up depends on the person. I dont think its popular these days to go against the grain and say "I will NOT believe everything science teaches until I see undeniable proof it is the way they say it is."
No offense, but don't you kind of see any contradiction between the assertion that people should disbelieve until they see undeniable proof, and the fact that you are saying that you shouldn't have to state any specifics? :P
Your right, I did contradict. I guess I just didn't want to leave it at that.
People believe X religion is true because they've seen evidence and BELIEVE IT'S TRUE. All I'm saying is that you really can't prove either way. That's why it's called faith and belief.
ushotdead
...but they haven't seen evidence, it's completely based upon faith.
People believe X religion is true because they've seen evidence and BELIEVE IT'S TRUE. All I'm saying is that you really can't prove either way. That's why it's called faith and belief.
mfp16
...but they haven't seen evidence, it's completely based upon faith.
And tell me, exactly what evidence have you seen to support your scientific theorys?
Log in to comment