Science corrects its mistakes

[winsor 236]

Quote

Quote

Emotions and feelings should have no place in determining whether something exists or not. With out evidence of any diety the only reasonable conclustion is that there are none.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

'That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.'

Christopher Hitchens

[beowulf 1]

They don't vary that much.

Quote

core set of principles identified by many throughout the world

I don't think there is any such thing. Morality is relative to time, location and culture among other factors.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

I think it's pretty reasonable to say that he believed they existed before they could be proven to exist.

So why is HE right for believing and Christians wrong?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

In the bible...

The bible allows for many interpretations. Why this is so is viewed differently by different people. I see the ambiguity as being introduced over a very long period of time where religious authorities tried to codify daily existence. Throw in the difficulty of codifying anything in language, and one can understand the failures generally pointed out.

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Morality is relative to time, location and culture among other factors.

Another word to define and argue over. As you've used it, there's nothing to argue with.

We are all engines of karma

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

I think it's pretty reasonable to say that he believed they existed before they could be proven to exist.

So why is HE right for believing and Christians wrong?

There is no evidence to support Christians claim of their god existing. Their argument is weak and of poor logic.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I think it's pretty reasonable to say that he believed they existed before they could be proven to exist.

So why is HE right for believing and Christians wrong?

There is no evidence to support Christians claim of their god existing. Their argument is weak and of poor logic.

There was no evidence to support Pauli's belief in the neutrino existing at that point, either.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

You like to play word games.

I don't see mnealtx playing word games. I think he's trying to make a valid argument that you're not seeing.

Quote

Before we had evidence of Neutrino particles it wasn't reasonable to conclude they existed.

So, how would you describe that period of time when energy balances around radioactive decay didn't add up?

I disagree mnealtx is not making a valid argument.


I would say it didn't add up. What else is there to say?

I have yet to hear of a good argument for any deity. Evolution does a great job of explaining how humans came about. There is no evidence to support creationism.

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

I think it's pretty reasonable to say that he believed they existed before they could be proven to exist.

So why is HE right for believing and Christians wrong?

There is no evidence to support Christians claim of their god existing. Their argument is weak and of poor logic.

There was no evidence to support Pauli's belief in the neutrino existing at that point, either.

So you couldn't conclude that they existed at the time. Once evidence was found to support his theory then it was reasonable to conclude they do exist.

[winsor 236]

Quote

>I see where you're going, but it's a silly argument, IMO.

Can you think of an experiment that would prove the existence of God?

Pay attention to the bumper sticker:

"God said it, I believe it, that settles it."

Pretty persuasive stuff, eh?

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Quote

Quote

Quote

No one has yet to provide evidence of any deity.

So whether you like it or not faith in any deity is with out evidence. That is the definition of faith. If there were evidence then you wouldn't need faith.

Zero proof.

Lots of evidence. None of it is scientific, repeatable, experiemental data. It's usually anecdotal, personal and very very subjective. Kind of like eyewitness testimony in court. It has value as evidence, but isn't proof in any way, shape or form.

Big difference between evidence and proof.

The evidence I was referring to was defined earlier as scientific.

Yeah, I saw that you had narrowed your definition of "evidence" to the level of "scientific proof" after I made my post.

From dictionary.com

Quote

ev·i·dence
   [ev-i-duhns] Show IPA noun, verb, -denced, -denc·ing.

noun
1.
that which tends to prove or disprove something; ground for belief; proof.

2.
something that makes plain or clear; an indication or sign: His flushed look was visible evidence of his fever.

3.
Law . data presented to a court or jury in proof of the facts in issue and which may include the testimony of witnesses, records, documents, or objects.

I'm still going to disagree with you. Those are two different levels of evidence. You are looking for proof (of which there is none), I'm willing to accept the "grounds for belief" part.

YOU have a far, far stricter standard than me (or a few others here).

I have a stricter standard than some here.

That's ok.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

I have yet to hear of a good argument for any deity. Evolution does a great job of explaining how humans came about. There is no evidence to support creationism.

Bottom line, those folks who discuss God have chosen to pursue a discipline in their lives, effectively "running experiments", that you have chosen not to pursue. That's ok, doesn't make you a bad guy.

It shouldn't be surprising that you don't relate to whatever "observations" they choose to discuss/share. Just because you choose not to "run those experiments" does not invalidate their experience.

We are all engines of karma

[beowulf 1]

I love dictionary.com!

See how we can communicate better when we aren't redefining words.

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Pay attention to the bumper sticker:

"God said it, I believe it, that settles it."

Pretty persuasive stuff, eh?

But that's not accurate either

"I believe God said it, I believe it, that settles it - for me"

That would an honest bumper sticker. The first one still doesn't acknowledge real faith over blinders.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

]
Once evidence was found to support his theory then it was reasonable to conclude they do exist.

Only because people chose to run those experiments and seek those observations. If someone had not chose to do that, the neutrino would still be fictional.

We are all engines of karma

[billvon 3,107]

>The bible allows for many interpretations.

Yes. That's why I used those examples for my test, because they were all caused by God in response to prayer and well documented in the Bible. If you do that test over and over, and never get that result, you can say with some certainty "God as defined by his actions in Joshua 10:13 does not exist." Since the Bible has many such events (hard observable events) you could run those tests in several ways.

But of course that's just one interpretation of God.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

See how we can communicate better when we aren't redefining words.

So do I. I'm a big fan of word of the day.

How do we communicate better? In my view, language is firmly grounded in common experience. Without common experience in a given context, it is very difficult to communicate.

We are all engines of karma

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

I have yet to hear of a good argument for any deity. Evolution does a great job of explaining how humans came about. There is no evidence to support creationism.

Bottom line, those folks who discuss God have chosen to pursue a discipline in their lives, effectively "running experiments", that you have chosen not to pursue. That's ok, doesn't make you a bad guy.

It shouldn't be surprising that you don't relate to whatever "observations" they choose to discuss/share. Just because you choose not to "run those experiments" does not invalidate their experience.

They running piss poor experiments that can't be used to validate anything. It's all subjective and emotional and the results can't be reproduced.

I don't see Christians as having any better life then I do.
You will need to back up any claim that being a Christian will make your life any better.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Yes. That's why I used those examples for my test, because they were all caused by God in response to prayer and well documented in the Bible. If you do that test over and over, and never get that result, you can say with some certainty "God as defined by his actions in Joshua 10:13 does not exist." Since the Bible has many such events (hard observable events) you could run those tests in several ways.

Agreed.

I was raised as a fundamentalist Christian, even wanted to be a preacher (when I was 16). I reached a point where that belief system could not withstand the rigor of scrutiny I imposed on it. I am not a Christian.

Again, having said that, there is a core set within the Christian belief system that has value, especially to those that live it.

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

They running piss poor experiments that can't be used to validate anything. It's all subjective and emotional and the results can't be reproduced.

Who is "they", and have you ever been part of "they"?

Quote

I don't see Christians as having any better life then I do.
You will need to back up any claim that being a Christian will make your life any better.

I'm not making that claim, though I'm certain there are many Christians that are quite comfortable with their life. God bless them

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

I would say it didn't add up. What else is there to say?

Do you allow for a view of God that differs from the Christian God defined on dictionary.com?

We are all engines of karma

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

They running piss poor experiments that can't be used to validate anything. It's all subjective and emotional and the results can't be reproduced.

Who is "they", and have you ever been part of "they"?

Quote

I don't see Christians as having any better life then I do.
You will need to back up any claim that being a Christian will make your life any better.

I'm not making that claim, though I'm certain there are many Christians that are quite comfortable with their life. God bless them

I was referring to the people you were referring to.

Any experiment tha tis subjective, emotional and has results that can't be reproduced is a piss poor experiment.

I don't see how believing in any god or deity how ever you wish to define god improves anyones life in a way that can't be done with out it.

[beowulf 1]

Quote

Quote

I would say it didn't add up. What else is there to say?

Do you allow for a view of God that differs from the Christian God defined on dictionary.com?

Now you are talking about spiritualism. I don't believe in that either.

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

I was referring to the people you were referring to.

What makes you think I was referring to Christians alone?
I wasn't.

Were you raised in a faith? If so, which one?

We are all engines of karma

[StreetScooby 5]

Quote

Now you are talking about spiritualism. I don't believe in that either.

Call it what you want. Basically you have chosen to not live a discipline that others do, for whatever reason. There is no common experience there for you to fully appreciate whatever observations are made by those living a given discipline. That doesn't make you a bad guy, nor does it invalidate observations and experiences made by those living a discipline.

We are all engines of karma