Author Topic: The God Arguement (Read 6206 times)

Gunthr · « **Reply #165 on:** June 24, 2007, 11:13:12 AM »

I can tell you one thing for sure - if phookat published his opinions for review by his peers, as he described to Seagoon, he'd be laughed out of the scientific community for refusing to define his terms - atheist and agnostic.

phookat · « **Reply #166 on:** June 24, 2007, 11:18:26 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
I think it faulty reasoning to assume there is no evidence of the God many claim. I suggest that evidence abounds

OK. What is the evidence?

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
Attributing everything that is to the poorly understood magic of quantum mechanics as a means of denying accountability is certainly your prerogative (free will and all), at least for now.

Do you actually know anything about quantum mechanics? Do you know what others understand about quantum mechanics, and to what degree?

phookat · « **Reply #167 on:** June 24, 2007, 11:20:50 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunthr
I can tell you one thing for sure - if phookat published his opinions for review by his peers, as he described to Seagoon, he'd be laughed out of the scientific community for refusing to define his terms - atheist and agnostic.

I already posted a reply to you. Look further up on this page. And given the fact that what I posted about atheism is in probably what most atheists think, I think it'll pass peer review.

lazs2 · « **Reply #168 on:** June 24, 2007, 11:27:58 AM »

It would pass peer review so long as you were preaching to the athiest choir. A choir with similar er.... "flexible" honesty of agenda.

to the rest of us it seems pretty weak and dishonest.

If you don't have the courage of your beliefs then you simply need to not debate with anyone who holds a different view.

lazs

AKIron · « **Reply #169 on:** June 24, 2007, 11:30:36 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by phookat
OK. What is the evidence?

Do you actually know anything about quantum mechanics? Do you know what others understand about quantum mechanics, and to what degree?

The evidence of God is everywhere you look, especially in your own ability to look.

I have always been interested in science. I have read enough about quantum mechanics to know that probablity is only an obervation and not an explanation.

phookat · « **Reply #170 on:** June 24, 2007, 11:34:05 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
As to my posititon.. I believe in god... just as I have stated here and in the past...

Actually in the past you I thought you said you didn't believe in God. Some thing like (paraphrasing) "I don't believe in God, but I don't see why people have a problem with it. It's just good morals after all." I could be wrong.

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
I would not expect you to understand but I would expect you to be happy for me.

That's cool with me. Be happy yourself.

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
An athiest by pure definition.. would attack such a belief.. I believe that to attack others belief is an agenda.

Why should religious belief be immune to criticism, any more than any other belief? These are not completely private beliefs, after all. When someone says that we should deny the right of homosexuals to get married or ban gays in the military, they are proposing public policy on the basis of religious beliefs. Therefore those beliefs should be discussed.

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
An agnostic can have degrees.. unlike theist or athiest.. an agnostic has the right to say that he thinks that there is no god but that he admits the possiblility that there may be.. the athiest has no right to say such.

In that case almost everyone is an agnostic. This kind of definition equates the person who thinks there almost certainly is a God, and the person who thinks there almost certainly is not. Seems like a meaningless definition to me.

phookat · « **Reply #171 on:** June 24, 2007, 11:36:31 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
The evidence of God is everywhere you look, especially in your own ability to look.

Seems like you don't actually have any evidence. Just saying "evidence exists" does not make it magically appear.

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
I have always been interested in science. I have read enough about quantum mechanics to know that probablity is only an obervation and not an explanation.

OK. Sounds like you don't know very much about the subject though.

AKIron · « **Reply #172 on:** June 24, 2007, 11:49:56 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by phookat
Seems like you don't actually have any evidence. Just saying "evidence exists" does not make it magically appear.

OK. Sounds like you don't know very much about the subject though.

I'm saying that everything that is is evidence of Creation. That you can't or won't consider or allow for that doesn't make it go away.

I didn't claim to be an expert in quantum theory. I'm simply saying that denying casuality does not erase it. Please tell me what you know of quantum mechanics and how it can explain a creatorless creation?

Gunthr · « **Reply #173 on:** June 24, 2007, 11:50:25 AM »

Quote

I already posted a reply to you. Look further up on this page. And given the fact that what I posted about atheism is in probably what most atheists think, I think it'll pass peer review. - phookat

yes, you posted a reply. and you have refused to define your working terms for the following;

1. atheist

2. agnostic

considering it would only take you about 5 mins to do this, your continued refusal reveals you as a charlatan.

you would most certainly be laughed out of the scientific community if you somehow were able to get your incomplete position statement published.

McFarland · « **Reply #174 on:** June 24, 2007, 12:12:37 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by McFarland
Well, as I can see I cain't change your ignorance and save your souls, I shall do as the Holy Bible says to do, kick the dust off of my heels. Good day, may you someday find your Saviour.

Quote

Originally posted by phookat
I hear this a lot. All it means is that you're probably wrong, but you don't want to admit it. But whatever, believe what you like.

No, it means we have the sense to quit arguing when we know we won't change you anyways. We walk away and spend our valuable time and energy elsewhere, where we can actually make a difference, instead of wasting it on people like you that talk to hear themselves talk and would argue with a stump.

phookat · « **Reply #175 on:** June 24, 2007, 12:17:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
I'm saying that everything that is is evidence of Creation. That you can't or won't consider or allow for that doesn't make it go away.

I am willing to consider it. Give me evidence. Just making unsupported statements does not qualify as evidence. I have already stated earlier in the thread a good example of evidence that would convince me that God exists.

Quote

Originally posted by AKIron
I didn't claim to be an expert in quantum theory. I'm simply saying that denying casuality does not erase it. Please tell me what you know of quantum mechanics and how it can explain a creatorless creation?

I say what I said before. I don't know how to explain the universe. And neither do you. If you think you know, it is you who is guilty of certainty in the face of no evidence. As I said before, intuition usually fails at the extremes of science. I have explained why I think this is the case, and this notion is supported by our current understanding of reality. Are you trying to convince me of something AKIron? These are very pallid statements you're making, that would not and probably should not convince anyone (except the pre-indoctrinated).

phookat · « **Reply #176 on:** June 24, 2007, 12:21:27 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gunthr
yes, you posted a reply. and you have refused to define your working terms for the following;

1. atheist

2. agnostic

considering it would only take you about 5 mins to do this, your continued refusal reveals you as a charlatan.

I'll assume you just didn't see my reply. Here it is again:

Agnostic: thinks it is impossible to say anything about God one way or another, hence a-gnost (lack of knowledge). Therefore 50-50 chance that God exists.

Atheist: thinks there's no evidence for God. God as likely as Celestial Teapot orbiting Mars, and other non-disprovable non-falsifiable notions.

Those are the definitions you requested. Were you looking for something more? Please be specific.

Charlatan. LOL. Praise Jesus, he answers your prayers and heals your ills!

AKIron · « **Reply #177 on:** June 24, 2007, 12:26:13 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by phookat
I am willing to consider it. Give me evidence. Just making unsupported statements does not qualify as evidence. I have already stated earlier in the thread a good example of evidence that would convince me that God exists.

I say what I said before. I don't know how to explain the universe. And neither do you. If you think you know, it is you who is guilty of certainty in the face of no evidence. As I said before, intuition usually fails at the extremes of science. I have explained why I think this is the case, and this notion is supported by our current understanding of reality. Are you trying to convince me of something AKIron? These are very pallid statements you're making, that would not and probably should not convince anyone (except the pre-indoctrinated).

It would appear you know less of quantum mechanics than I. No problem, I haven't seen you claim to be a scientist either. It seems to me that any person with the least sense of curiosity would have to form a belief about their own existence.

phookat · « **Reply #178 on:** June 24, 2007, 12:26:38 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
to the rest of us it seems pretty weak and dishonest.

I see. Explain this then:

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
As to my posititon.. I believe in god... just as I have stated here and in the past... I have a Johnny Cash "personal Jesus" who listens to me and guides me and gives me strength when I could not have gotten the strength otherwise.

Quote

Originally posted by lazs2
I am not in the least religious but unlike you.... I don't see the christian teachings as a problem.... most are common sense moral guidelines that would not harm any child...

And you're calling me dishonest?

moot · « **Reply #179 on:** June 24, 2007, 12:29:23 PM »

"An Athiest is someone who has overcome his/her fear of being judged of their beliefs from a non-existant God."
BS. Fear is not a rational argument. Agnostic principle that no evidence can possibly prove or disprove God is a rational conclusion.

"If there is no evidence for God, then God is as likely as the Bogeyman"
No, lack of evidence doesn't prove inexistence. It may just be (among many other possibilities) that you simply failed to interpret evidence that's in plain sight.

"and there is no reason to fear either"
There's good (better than anything, or I'm all ears) reason to not fear anything.

" An agnostic says there's a 50-50 chance.
An agnostic says there's no judging it, no scaling it or any such quantifying. That's one of the simplest and most central notions of all the discussions on this topic, here in the OC and everywhere else.