PDA

View Full Version : Question for the resident AT atheists


Pages : [1] 2

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 12:54 PM
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

LinuxIdiot
09-15-2009, 12:55 PM
Nope, I just dont care one way or the other. Can you give me one justifiable proof that he does exist?

schneiderguy
09-15-2009, 12:56 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

lol

Give me one scientific fact that proves Unicorns, fairies, and leprechauns don't exist.

You can't prove they don't exist, therefore they must exist :confused:

joesmoke
09-15-2009, 12:56 PM
goddamn you

urinesane
09-15-2009, 12:57 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Does not compute.

TruePaige
09-15-2009, 12:59 PM
I'm not getting involved one way or the other, but as someone who <3's science...that is the most retarded question I have ever seen.

Can you please give me one scientific fact that proves a giant monster that is invisble, weightless, and dreams of killing us all lives in the center of the earth?

venkman
09-15-2009, 12:59 PM
flame bait thread is flame bait

Pheran
09-15-2009, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

/facepalm

I hope this is an intentional trolling attempt and not a serious question.

dainthomas
09-15-2009, 01:00 PM
Weak troll thread is weak.

venkman
09-15-2009, 01:00 PM
Originally posted by: TruePaige

Can you please give me one scientific fact that proves a giant monster that is invisble, weightless, and dreams of killing us all lives in the center of the earth?

wha.....WHO TOLD YOU?!?!?!? :|

Dirigible
09-15-2009, 01:01 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Yes. I can.

I probably will choose not to share it though. Maybe if you send me all your money and let me kick your ass I'll whisper the astounding truth into your ear. Maybe.

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by: dainthomas
Weak troll thread is weak.

not trolling in the least. I've tried to make it clear that I only post questions like this when they have been sitting on my mind for a while.

Just looking for some insight.

AyashiKaibutsu
09-15-2009, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by: schneiderguy
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

lol

Give me one scientific fact that proves Unicorns, fairies, and leprechauns don't exist.

You can't prove they don't exist, therefore they must exist :confused:

qft

surfsatwerk
09-15-2009, 01:03 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Law of conservation of energy

You can't get something from nothing.

Crono
09-15-2009, 01:04 PM
This thread is worthless from either the theist or atheist approach (no offense, NSFW).

Both views coincide on the fact that there can never be physical evidence that proves the existence of God (or gods, if you will, assuming the god in question is supposedly not part of the created universe) because it requires belief in what is not seen.

TruePaige
09-15-2009, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by: venkman
Originally posted by: TruePaige

Can you please give me one scientific fact that proves a giant monster that is invisble, weightless, and dreams of killing us all lives in the center of the earth?

wha.....WHO TOLD YOU?!?!?!? :|

It was on this month's cover of "Crazy People Monthly".

What, did your subscription lapse?

sash1
09-15-2009, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by: TruePaige
Can you please give me one scientific fact that proves a giant monster that is invisble, weightless, and dreams of killing us all lives in the center of the earth?

Text (http://pics.bbzzdd.com/users/AunixM3/gvsatan.jpg)

ViviTheMage
09-15-2009, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by: urinesane
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Does not compute.



I think that is the point.

Krynj
09-15-2009, 01:06 PM
A smart atheist identifies as agnostic.

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by: Crono
This thread is worthless from either the theist or atheist approach (no offense, NSFW).

Both views coincide on the fact that there can never be physical evidence that proves the existence of God (or gods, if you will, assuming the god in question is supposedly not part of the created universe) because it requires belief in what is not seen.

Crono...I know that you believe in things that aren't seen.

I wasn't making this thread for a debate...just wanted some good points to look into.

Turin39789
09-15-2009, 01:08 PM
Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
A smart atheist identifies as agnostic.

A smart atheist identifies as an agnostic atheist.

OCGuy
09-15-2009, 01:09 PM
6/10 troll.

Also, you dont prove a negative.


You can, however, laugh at the brainwashing horseshit that is in the Bible, such as an old man gathering two of every animal and putting them on a boat.

On another note, please prove that the FSM does not exist.

Crono
09-15-2009, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: Crono
This thread is worthless from either the theist or atheist approach (no offense, NSFW).

Both views coincide on the fact that there can never be physical evidence that proves the existence of God (or gods, if you will, assuming the god in question is supposedly not part of the created universe) because it requires belief in what is not seen.

Crono...I know that you believe in things that aren't seen.

I wasn't making this thread for a debate...just wanted some good points to look into.

Well, pretty much every valid point will just be a variation on what I said.
Everything else will be either nonsense, insults (veiled or open), or completely unrelated posts.

For instance, I like cheesecake.

Hang on, I forgot there's a Junior's in Manhattan. Mmm, I could kill for some Junior's cheesecake *drools*...what was I saying?

So
09-15-2009, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

The burden of proof lies with you. Either prove that the extraordinary claim for which you refuse to provide evidence is real.

BoomerD
09-15-2009, 01:12 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Nope...can you prove a negative? Please provide actual scientific proof that GAWD DOES exist.

I don't consider myself to be an atheist, more of a doubter. If all the universe was created out of nothing...where was it created? What were the building materials? WHO created it, and where was the creator BEFORE the universe was created? Where did this creator come from is there was no "from" before the universe was created?

Just too many holes in the plot for me to buy into it.

So
09-15-2009, 01:13 PM
Edit: Not taking trollbait.

Atomic Playboy
09-15-2009, 01:13 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
not trolling in the least. I've tried to make it clear that I only post questions like this when they have been sitting on my mind for a while.

Just looking for some insight.

I wouldn't advertise that this is a question that has been sitting on your mind for a while unless you're proud to publicly announce that your brain has atrophied.

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 01:14 PM
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

The burden of proof lies with you. Either prove that the extraordinary claim for which you refuse to provide evidence is real.

I already have the proof I need but I was hoping to get some points to ponder.

Apparently the answer to this thread is that there are none?

And cheesecake does sound awesome.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 01:15 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

The burden of proof lies with you. Either prove that the extraordinary claim for which you refuse to provide evidence is real.

I already have the proof I need but I was hoping to get some points to ponder.

Apparently the answer to this thread is that there are none?

And cheesecake does sound awesome.

The answer is that there is no need for atheists to prove your imaginary friend doesn't exist. If you want other people to believe as you do, you need to prove your own claims. Why don't you understand this?

BeauJangles
09-15-2009, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

The burden of proof lies with you. Either prove that the extraordinary claim for which you refuse to provide evidence is real.

I already have the proof I need but I was hoping to get some points to ponder.

Apparently the answer to this thread is that there are none?

And cheesecake does sound awesome.

Yes, there is no scientific proof that god does or does not exist. Many atheists argue, though, that just because there is no direct evidence proving or disproving his existence doesn't mean that the chances he actually exists are 50/50.

jonks
09-15-2009, 01:17 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

An omnipotent God can do anything.
If so, He can make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it.
But if he cannot make such a rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.
And if he cannot lift the rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.

There. God made neatly impossible in one logical paragraph.

OILFIELDTRASH
09-15-2009, 01:19 PM
He exists.

Atheists seem so angry when you bring up God. If its just a fairy tell how come you won't get so angry when someone mentions zombies or leprechans etc.?

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 01:19 PM
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

An omnipotent God can do anything.
If so, He can make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it.
But if he cannot make such a rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.
And if he cannot lift the rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.

There. God made neatly impossible in one logical paragraph.



So, you're saying... the rock is God? I'm on board.

speg
09-15-2009, 01:20 PM
weak

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 01:20 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
He exists.

Atheists seem so angry when you bring up God. If its just a fairy tell how come you won't get so angry when someone mentions zombies or leprechans etc.?

The people who believe in zombies and leprechauns don't often insist that I should do the same, or use their belief as excuse to do shitty things to other people.

BoomerD
09-15-2009, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

The burden of proof lies with you. Either prove that the extraordinary claim for which you refuse to provide evidence is real.

I already have the proof I need but I was hoping to get some points to ponder.

Apparently the answer to this thread is that there are none?

And cheesecake does sound awesome.

No, the answer to this thread is that there is as much verifiable scientific proof of GAWD's existance as there is that "he" doesn't exist...none either way.

Remember, cheesecake is pie.

daniel1113
09-15-2009, 01:24 PM
Originally posted by: BeauJangles
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

The burden of proof lies with you. Either prove that the extraordinary claim for which you refuse to provide evidence is real.

I already have the proof I need but I was hoping to get some points to ponder.

Apparently the answer to this thread is that there are none?

And cheesecake does sound awesome.

Yes, there is no scientific proof that god does or does not exist. Many atheists argue, though, that just because there is no direct evidence proving or disproving his existence doesn't mean that the chances he actually exists are 50/50.

Would you say that the chance of finding a rainbow colored unicorn is 50/50?

xSauronx
09-15-2009, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

The burden of proof lies with you. Either prove that the extraordinary claim for which you refuse to provide evidence is real.

I already have the proof I need but I was hoping to get some points to ponder.

Apparently the answer to this thread is that there are none?

And cheesecake does sound awesome.

The answer is that there is no need for atheists to prove your imaginary friend doesn't exist. If you want other people to believe as you do, you need to prove your own claims. Why don't you understand this?

he's likely just bored.

BassBomb
09-15-2009, 01:25 PM
Originally posted by: So
Edit: Not taking trollbait.

Edit not found

OILFIELDTRASH
09-15-2009, 01:26 PM
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

Nik
09-15-2009, 01:26 PM
Originally posted by: LinuxIdiot
Nope, I just dont care one way or the other. Can you give me one justifiable proof that he does exist?

Atheism != Agnosticism

Don't get them mixed up.

Originally posted by: schneiderguy
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

lol

Give me one scientific fact that proves Unicorns, fairies, and leprechauns don't exist.

You can't prove they don't exist, therefore they must exist :confused:

That doesn't mean they do exist because you can't prove they don't. It just means you can't prove it either way. Agnosticism is more logical than atheism.

BoomerD
09-15-2009, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
He exists.

Atheists seem so angry when you bring up God. If its just a fairy tell how come you won't get so angry when someone mentions zombies or leprechans etc.?

Just saying "he" exists doesn't prove it.

Hell, I believe that the Sasquatch and Yeti exist, but I can't prove it...therefore leaving them also in the realm of mythical creatures.

Do leprechauns exist? Could be...but I've never seen one...and there is no verifiable evidence to support the claim...except a bunch of drunken Irishmen...and we all know how they lie! :P

AFAIC, if someone wants to believe in the magic sky fairies...it's fine with me, as long as they don't try to shove their beliefs down my throat, nor try to force me to live by their "value system" that's based on those beliefs.

daniel1113
09-15-2009, 01:28 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

Fail post is full of fail.

Nik
09-15-2009, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by: daniel1113
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

Fail poster is full of fail.

Fixed and QFT.

shocksyde
09-15-2009, 01:31 PM
I would put the burden of proof on the people who believe in an all-powerful being watching us from the sky, not on the people who don't believe.

So, what say you?

KeithTalent
09-15-2009, 01:31 PM
Originally posted by: LinuxIdiot
Nope, I just dont care one way or the other.

This.

Ban for OP. Totally worthless thread.

KT

ManyBeers
09-15-2009, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

I tried has hard as my brain would allow but i couldn't find one. I hate being stumped.
On a side note NSFW do you have cuticles?

Crono
09-15-2009, 01:33 PM
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

An omnipotent God can do anything.
If so, He can make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it.
But if he cannot make such a rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.
And if he cannot lift the rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.

There. God made neatly impossible in one logical paragraph.



Your logic is based on human intelligence in this universe.
If God is omnipotent, then He isn't limited by that, now is He? He could
even recreate the universe such that such a contradiction in logic makes perfect sense, or such that you never asked that question to begin with. The "rock" question is a stupid one for anyone that understands what the word "omnipotent" means. The only good answer to that question is "BBQ Sauce".

BoomerD
09-15-2009, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by: KeithTalent
Originally posted by: LinuxIdiot
Nope, I just dont care one way or the other.

This.

Ban for OP. Totally worthless thread.

KT

Waidaminit...YOU are the one in posession of teh banstick...:P

You want him banned...YOU hit him.

Troll threads like this shouldn't necessarily justify teh bannation.

cliftonite
09-15-2009, 01:36 PM
Originally posted by: Crono
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

An omnipotent God can do anything.
If so, He can make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it.
But if he cannot make such a rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.
And if he cannot lift the rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.

There. God made neatly impossible in one logical paragraph.



Your logic is based on human intelligence in this universe.
If God is omnipotent, then He isn't limited by that, now is He? He could
even recreate the universe such that such a contradiction in logic makes perfect sense, or such that you never asked that question to begin with. The "rock" question is a stupid one for anyone that understands what the word "omnipotent" means. The only good answer to that question is "BBQ Sauce".

Yet he hasn't done any of that.....

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by: shocksyde
I would put the burden of proof on the people who believe in an all-powerful being watching us from the sky, not on the people who don't believe.

So, what say you?

I'd say that I have been doing a lot of reading lately. My theological journey turned to philosophy which has now turned more towards science.

Nik
09-15-2009, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by: Crono
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

An omnipotent God can do anything.
If so, He can make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it.
But if he cannot make such a rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.
And if he cannot lift the rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.

There. God made neatly impossible in one logical paragraph.



Your logic is based on human intelligence in this universe.
If God is omnipotent, then He isn't limited by that, now is He? He could
even recreate the universe such that such a contradiction in logic makes perfect sense, or such that you never asked that question to begin with. The "rock" question is a stupid one for anyone that understands what the word "omnipotent" means. The only good answer to that question is "BBQ Sauce".

Very good. However, ask the question "why did he create us" and you won't find an answer that doesn't undermine that omnipotency. Most will say "for his glory" but what does he need glory for? God can't 'need' anything.

There are great questions that our feeble little human minds can come up with that defeat the idea of the god described in the judeo christian bible.

Crono
09-15-2009, 01:38 PM
Originally posted by: cliftonite
Originally posted by: Crono
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

An omnipotent God can do anything.
If so, He can make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it.
But if he cannot make such a rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.
And if he cannot lift the rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.

There. God made neatly impossible in one logical paragraph.



Your logic is based on human intelligence in this universe.
If God is omnipotent, then He isn't limited by that, now is He? He could
even recreate the universe such that such a contradiction in logic makes perfect sense, or such that you never asked that question to begin with. The "rock" question is a stupid one for anyone that understands what the word "omnipotent" means. The only good answer to that question is "BBQ Sauce".

Yet he hasn't done any of that.....

And He doesn't have to.
Chicken fried rice.

Nik
09-15-2009, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by: Crono
Originally posted by: cliftonite
Originally posted by: Crono
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

An omnipotent God can do anything.
If so, He can make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it.
But if he cannot make such a rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.
And if he cannot lift the rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.

There. God made neatly impossible in one logical paragraph.



Your logic is based on human intelligence in this universe.
If God is omnipotent, then He isn't limited by that, now is He? He could
even recreate the universe such that such a contradiction in logic makes perfect sense, or such that you never asked that question to begin with. The "rock" question is a stupid one for anyone that understands what the word "omnipotent" means. The only good answer to that question is "BBQ Sauce".

Yet he hasn't done any of that.....

blah blah blah I don't really have anything to add but I like to post in all religious threads just for the sake of posting blah blah blah troll troll troll feed the troll feed the troll feed the flaaaaaaaaaaaaaaming trolls!

Translated! :P

skace
09-15-2009, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by: Nik
Originally posted by: LinuxIdiot
Nope, I just dont care one way or the other. Can you give me one justifiable proof that he does exist?

Atheism != Agnosticism

Don't get them mixed up.

Go learn what Atheism encompasses please.

BeauJangles
09-15-2009, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

If you bothered to read anything Einstein wrote instead of echoing talking points, you'd realize that his conception of god is nothing like the conception we're talking about here.

"I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws.

IMO, after reading what he's written on the subject, that is probably the best single-sentence summary of his beliefs. He was neither a deist nor an atheist. He wholeheartedly rejected the idea of a god who could / would / did intervene in the lives of people. Basically, his belief of god was like many people -- he used god to fill the gaps in our knowledge, to contextualize his existence, and to address some of the unknowns that existed in the universe.

To use him as proof that atheists are wrong or something like that is utter nonsense.

Nik
09-15-2009, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by: skace
Originally posted by: Nik
Originally posted by: LinuxIdiot
Nope, I just dont care one way or the other. Can you give me one justifiable proof that he does exist?

Atheism != Agnosticism

Don't get them mixed up.

Go learn what Atheism encompasses please.

Did I post something incorrect? Please, correct me.

Blackjack200
09-15-2009, 01:49 PM
Originally posted by: Crono
Your logic is based on human intelligence in this universe.
If God is omnipotent, then He isn't limited by that, now is He? He could
even recreate the universe such that such a contradiction in logic makes perfect sense, or such that you never asked that question to begin with. The "rock" question is a stupid one for anyone that understands what the word "omnipotent" means. The only good answer to that question is "BBQ Sauce".

So God is invisible, intangible, inaudible, oder free, tasteless, and he is not anything we can logically conceive of?

At what point does it not matter if God exists? Because he seems completely inconsequential.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by: Nik
Originally posted by: skace
Originally posted by: Nik

Atheism != Agnosticism

Don't get them mixed up.

Go learn what Atheism encompasses please.

Did I post something incorrect? Please, correct me.

Agnosticism could be considered a subset of atheism.

Crono
09-15-2009, 01:50 PM
Originally posted by: Nik
Originally posted by: Crono
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

An omnipotent God can do anything.
If so, He can make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it.
But if he cannot make such a rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.
And if he cannot lift the rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.

There. God made neatly impossible in one logical paragraph.



Your logic is based on human intelligence in this universe.
If God is omnipotent, then He isn't limited by that, now is He? He could
even recreate the universe such that such a contradiction in logic makes perfect sense, or such that you never asked that question to begin with. The "rock" question is a stupid one for anyone that understands what the word "omnipotent" means. The only good answer to that question is "BBQ Sauce".

Very good. However, ask the question "why did he create us" and you won't find an answer that doesn't undermine that omnipotency. Most will say "for his glory" but what does he need glory for? God can't 'need' anything.

He doesn't "need" glory, but that is what He wills. It's the only thing of value to Him, anyway, since nothing that is created can be more valuable than the creator. So He values what He Himself does because He is infinitely valuable to Himself. Humans and the universe are part of the story that is, ultimately, about God. Why did He write the story? Because He wanted to. Does that answer all our questions? No. Does God have to answer all our questions? No. Is God accountable to anyone but Himself? No. Does He hold Himself to His own promises which are revealed in His self disclosure that is recorded in the Bible? Yes.

If you are looking for every answer to every question, you'll be a very sad person. You can try, of course, but questions that extend above and before the universe can only be answered by one who is greater than the universe, God. To think that it is even possible to know all things is to put yourself in the position of God. To say that the universe has always existed is to say that the universe is god. To say that all things die, even the universe, is to say that nothing or death is god. No matter what, there is a god, an ultimate force within the universe, but you can see, if you wish, that force as being a ultimately a good being(no possibility of it/him being evil, since the standard of righteousness would necessarily be measured by that being) or you can see it as being an unwielded force (no such thing as randomness/chaos, because even that becomes a united thing when you assign a concept to it).

So you either believe that God exists, or you just refuse to accept that and look for something else to fill that position in your view of everything.

Crono
09-15-2009, 01:52 PM
Originally posted by: Nik

blah blah blah I don't really have anything to add but I like to post in all religious threads just for the sake of posting blah blah blah troll troll troll feed the troll feed the troll feed the flaaaaaaaaaaaaaaming trolls!

Translated! :P[/quote]

Yeah, because that just added a whole lot to the thread :D

I think I might just ignore all your posts just on the basis of the disclaimer that was in your signature.

torpid
09-15-2009, 01:52 PM
There is no such thing as a "scientific fact" that "proves" something. A scientific fact is a repeatable, objective observation that either supports or disproves a theory/hypothesis.

surfsatwerk
09-15-2009, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: shocksyde
I would put the burden of proof on the people who believe in an all-powerful being watching us from the sky, not on the people who don't believe.

So, what say you?

I'd say that I have been doing a lot of reading lately. My theological journey turned to philosophy which has now turned more towards science.



Please leave science alone. We have enough wackjobs poking around and making us look bad by completely misrepresenting what we're about to the knuckle dragging masses.

Atomic Playboy
09-15-2009, 01:58 PM
Originally posted by: Crono
He doesn't "need" glory, but that is what He wills. It's the only thing of value to Him, anyway, since nothing that is created can be more valuable than the creator. So He values what He Himself does because He is infinitely valuable to Himself. Humans and the universe are part of the story that is, ultimately, about God. Why did He write the story? Because He wanted to. Does that answer all our questions? No. Does God have to answer all our questions? No. Is God accountable to anyone but Himself? No. Does He hold Himself to His own promises which are revealed in His self disclosure that is recorded in the Bible? Yes.

If you are looking for every answer to every question, you'll be a very sad person. You can try, of course, but questions that extend above and before the universe can only be answered by one who is greater than the universe, God. To think that it is even possible to know all things is to put yourself in the position of God. To say that the universe has always existed is to say that the universe is god. To say that all things die, even the universe, is to say that nothing or death is god. No matter what, there is a god, an ultimate force within the universe, but you can see, if you wish, that force as being a ultimately a good being(no possibility of it/him being evil, since the standard of righteousness would necessarily be measured by that being) or you can see it as being an unwielded force (no such thing as randomness/chaos, because even that becomes a united thing when you assign a concept to it).

So you either believe that God exists, or you just refuse to accept that and look for something else to fill that position in your view of everything.

If God's self-esteem is so low that he exists solely to be glorified by his creations, why bother giving his creations free will? Why make millions upon millions of species which are incapable of the complex rational thought required to glorify a deity? Why continue to put up with a whole bunch of people who don't believe in him when he could appear, say, "Hey, I'm God, look, all I really want is for you to worship me and marvel at my creations, which, by the way, you're one of, and in return you get to spend forever in paradise, dig?," and convince all the skeptics in one fell swoop? Why continue letting bad things happen if his only goal is to be loved and adored? What proof do you have that his intentions are solely to be glorified through his creations? Words written by men a few thousand years ago? Sounds a bit sketchy to me...

What if you're wrong?

SphinxnihpS
09-15-2009, 02:01 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

I would say that most people are not really concerned with god at all. I think people are much more concerned with what comes after they die. It is scary to think that once you die here that you will not continue elsewhere. I think this is why people are so willing to fight over god; because they simply do not wish to even conceptualize a time when they no longer exist. It is far too menacing. If you look at most religions you will see a common thread; do god's will here and you will be rewarded with a pleasant or even blissful afterlife, cross him and the afterlife won't be so pretty- worth fighting for, and ironically dieing for, if you are terrified by the notion of nothingness. If you could get them to answer honestly, this would be the reason people give for "having to" believe in god.

Now I can give you a pretty ironclad reason as to how the afterlife DOES NOT MATTER.

Take someone who has sustained severe head injury which causes them to forget everything that occurred in their life prior, but otherwise leaves them mentally unscathed. To them, since they can not recall one thing about their life prior to the injury, their previous life never happened at all; it is just as if they died and were reborn in a new body, and for all intents and purposed their former self did indeed die.

Since it is our brains, and not some phony notion of a soul, which stores all or memories and experiences, when we die this will rot in the ground taking every experience with it. So what if a "soul" goes on to an "afterlife". Since all our experiences rot away with our dead brain, it would be as if this life never happened at all. There would be no recollection of what happened while we were "alive", so what would it matter to this soul?

That right there is biggest reason I can give you as to the absolute IRRELEVANCE of "god".

I can't prove there is no god, but I can say that even if there is, it does not matter one bit to your life here, so why all the fuss?

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 02:03 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

Not really.

"I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it."

"I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals himself in the lawful harmony of all that exists, but not in a God who concerns himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."


Yet he also denied atheism, and in fact was critical of overzealous atheists.

"What separates me from most so-called atheists is a feeling of utter humility toward the unattainable secrets of the harmony of the cosmos."

"The fanatical atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who--in their grudge against traditional religion as the 'opium of the masses'-- cannot hear the music of the spheres."


You can also find some interesting commentary on Einstein's spiritual journey and how it was tied to his cosmological constant and the study of relativity.

El Guaraguao
09-15-2009, 02:07 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?


Because I don't have to go to church to give up 10% of my income just so I can be on the VIP list?

"It is easier for a camel to walk through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom"


Does this applies to pastors?



Church. Serious Business.

DesiPower
09-15-2009, 02:09 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Please define "God"

DesiPower
09-15-2009, 02:11 PM
Originally posted by: Pheran
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

/facepalm

I hope this is an intentional trolling attempt and not a serious question.

couldn't help laughing out loud, everyones looking at me... (@ work)

polarbear6
09-15-2009, 02:13 PM
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

DaveSimmons
09-15-2009, 02:14 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

So you also believe in Zeus, Kali, Buddha and the Flying Spaghetti Monster?

Do you go to a different church or shrine each day of the week to worship them equally?

TwiceOver
09-15-2009, 02:16 PM
Define "God" first.

DaveSimmons
09-15-2009, 02:19 PM
What does God need with a starship?

jagec
09-15-2009, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
I'd say that I have been doing a lot of reading lately. My theological journey turned to philosophy which has now turned more towards science.


Theology and philosophy ask the same questions. Science and theology do not.

JulesMaximus
09-15-2009, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Why is the burden of proof on us? We aren't the ones claiming to believe in something that cannot be proven.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 02:22 PM
Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

WTF are you even asking? Are you asking someone to explain the behavior of objects in orbit? Is it evidence of God's existence because you don't understand it?

A5
09-15-2009, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

Your ignorance of math and physics is not a proof of God.

Blackjack200
09-15-2009, 02:27 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

WTF are you even asking? Are you asking someone to explain the behavior of objects in orbit? Is it evidence of God's existence because you don't understand it?

lol, the "big ball explodes into pieces" is a hilarious display of astronmical ignorance.

torpid
09-15-2009, 02:28 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

WTF are you even asking? Are you asking someone to explain the behavior of objects in orbit? Is it evidence of God's existence because you don't understand it?

Don't be absurd. He's only asking to explain why objects orbit each other in the first place, not what they do once they start orbiting. Give him some credit... or something.

Blackjack200
09-15-2009, 02:35 PM
Originally posted by: torpid
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

WTF are you even asking? Are you asking someone to explain the behavior of objects in orbit? Is it evidence of God's existence because you don't understand it?

Don't be absurd. He's only asking to explain why objects orbit each other in the first place, not what they do once they start orbiting. Give him some credit... or something.

How Orbbit is formed?

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 02:41 PM
Originally posted by: torpid
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

WTF are you even asking? Are you asking someone to explain the behavior of objects in orbit? Is it evidence of God's existence because you don't understand it?

Don't be absurd. He's only asking to explain why objects orbit each other in the first place, not what they do once they start orbiting. Give him some credit... or something.

Well, obviously God made some things explode and other things orbit and that's just the way it is. This guy polarbear6 shouldn't ask so many goddamn questions.

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: NSFW
I'd say that I have been doing a lot of reading lately. My theological journey turned to philosophy which has now turned more towards science.


Theology and philosophy ask the same questions. Science and theology do not.

Sure they do.

TruePaige
09-15-2009, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

Jeesh..what the hell man?

surfsatwerk
09-15-2009, 02:52 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: NSFW
I'd say that I have been doing a lot of reading lately. My theological journey turned to philosophy which has now turned more towards science.


Theology and philosophy ask the same questions. Science and theology do not.

Sure they do.

God is not at the end of any questions that science asks.

God is at the end of every question Theology asks.

jonks
09-15-2009, 03:24 PM
Originally posted by: DaveSimmons
What does God need with a starship?

i lold (http://3**************.com/_DL9YnvUGwWA/Sn7ctYCNGaI/AAAAAAAAALY/ZYTLY3HDK2M/s400/f-i-lold-7020.jpg)

Turin39789
09-15-2009, 03:30 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: Nik
Originally posted by: skace
Originally posted by: Nik

Atheism != Agnosticism

Don't get them mixed up.

Go learn what Atheism encompasses please.

Did I post something incorrect? Please, correct me.

Agnosticism could be considered a subset of atheism.

Theism = active believe in a god
Atheism = no active belief in a god

gnostic = knowing
Agnostic = not so sure


Gnostic Atheist = I damn sure know there is be no god okay
Agnostic Atheist = I don't believe in a god, but I don't claim to know 100% that it doesn't exist

TridenT
09-15-2009, 03:34 PM
Originally posted by: schneiderguy
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

lol

Give me one scientific fact that proves Unicorns, fairies, and leprechauns don't exist.

You can't prove they don't exist, therefore they must exist :confused:

Originally posted by: venkman
flame bait thread is flame bait

Originally posted by: Pheran
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

/facepalm

I hope this is an intentional trolling attempt and not a serious question.

torpid
09-15-2009, 03:35 PM
Originally posted by: Turin39789
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: Nik
Originally posted by: skace
Originally posted by: Nik

Atheism != Agnosticism

Don't get them mixed up.

Go learn what Atheism encompasses please.

Did I post something incorrect? Please, correct me.

Agnosticism could be considered a subset of atheism.

Theism = active believe in a god
Atheism = no active belief in a god

gnostic = knowing
Agnostic = not so sure


Gnostic Atheist = I damn sure know there is be no god okay
Agnostic Atheist = I don't believe in a god, but I don't claim to know 100% that it doesn't exist






There's also:

It is not humanly possible to know if "God" exists, so I consider the question irrelevant.

GagHalfrunt
09-15-2009, 03:36 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

If God existed he'd give his believers more ammunition to work with so that they wouldn't be forced to start such lameass threads.

SphinxnihpS
09-15-2009, 03:37 PM
Originally posted by: Turin39789

Theism = active believe in a god
Atheism = no active belief in a god

gnostic = knowing
Agnostic = not so sure


Gnostic Atheist = I damn sure know there is be no god okay
Agnostic Atheist = I don't believe in a god, but I don't claim to know 100% that it doesn't exist



failbarge

theism = with god
athism = without god

gnostic = knowledge
agnostic = without knowledge

TridenT
09-15-2009, 03:42 PM
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

If God existed he'd give his believers more ammunition to work with so that they wouldn't be forced to start such lameass threads.

:thumbsup:

JTsyo
09-15-2009, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by: polarbear6
Well .. Certain proof that god exists that is .. Our planetary motion ..

If a big ball explodes into pieces ... How the hell will the parts starts moving around the remaining mass, instead of falling right on to it .. ??

I just realised that this can happen .. If only the pieces are projected at a angle with the original big ball's normal ... Could any one confirm this for me ..

Now try it a with a ball that's spinning. The angular momentum needs to be conversed and orbits are formed. Look at all the celestial bodies, what percent about the size of our moon or larger spin?

And for the OP, Text (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_proof)

I wish people would stop with trying to tie religion and science. Religion is a spiritual matter, not one that falls under physical analysis. If you try to justify religion through science chances are you'll fail. Or if you use religion for the physical world. But when it comes to other matters, religion can serve you much better than science.

pray4mojo
09-15-2009, 03:48 PM
http://atheistmovies.blogspot....here-is-no-god-in.html (http://atheistmovies.blogspot.com/2008/09/homer-simpson-proves-there-is-no-god-in.html)

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 03:48 PM
Originally posted by: Turin39789
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy

Agnosticism could be considered a subset of atheism.

Theism = active believe in a god
Atheism = no active belief in a god

gnostic = knowing
Agnostic = not so sure


Gnostic Atheist = I damn sure know there is be no god okay
Agnostic Atheist = I don't believe in a god, but I don't claim to know 100% that it doesn't exist


Like I said. Agnostic atheism is a subset of atheism, and I believe this is what most people mean when they describe themselves as agnostic. You might say that agnosticism or "agnostic atheism," if you prefer, is another term for weak atheism. But inevitably, a self-described agnostic will come along and insist that they not be identified as an atheist.

The problem is that these terms get bandied about so much that they don't really help anybody accurately describe what they do or do not believe, because some smartass will always come along to challenge the label and force the addition of an extra modifier.

Demon-Xanth
09-15-2009, 03:48 PM
Christians don't believe in Allah
Muslims don't believe in Gaia
Wiccians don't believe in Jesus

I just happen to agree with all three on those particular points :)

There have been Greek gods, Roman gods, Mayan gods, Aztek gods, Chinese gods, and Japanese gods. And Christians dismiss all of them as easily as I dismiss the Christian god.

GagHalfrunt
09-15-2009, 03:52 PM
Originally posted by: Demon-Xanth
Christians don't believe in Allah
Muslims don't believe in Gaia
Wiccians don't believe in Jesus

I just happen to agree with all three on those particular points :)

There have been Greek gods, Roman gods, Mayan gods, Aztek gods, Chinese gods, and Japanese gods. And Christians dismiss all of them as easily as I dismiss the Christian god.


I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours. ? Stephen Roberts

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 03:55 PM
Originally posted by: torpid
Originally posted by: Turin39789

Theism = active believe in a god
Atheism = no active belief in a god

gnostic = knowing
Agnostic = not so sure


Gnostic Atheist = I damn sure know there is be no god okay
Agnostic Atheist = I don't believe in a god, but I don't claim to know 100% that it doesn't exist



There's also:

It is not humanly possible to know if "God" exists, so I consider the question irrelevant.

I find it funny there are even specific labels for this type of position. If you say, "I don't know, I can't know, and I don't care to waste time on thinking about it or justifying my position," someone will be glad to tell you you're a strong agnostic. You can put that on resumes.

SWScorch
09-15-2009, 03:55 PM
Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. :) I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

coloumb
09-15-2009, 04:03 PM
Originally posted by: SphinxnihpS
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

I would say that most people are not really concerned with god at all. I think people are much more concerned with what comes after they die. It is scary to think that once you die here that you will not continue elsewhere.

Dying and not coming back isn't what scares me. I don't believe in a god, but I do believe we either are reincarnated or forced to walk the earth in a ghostly form until we can be reincarnated. :)

The end of the universe is what does scare me - that's when nothing can return [I have this vivid view of the end of the universe - collapses into permanent nothingness]

Scientific proof that a "god" does not exist? Are humans the only creatures that believe in a higher power which they label as "god"? Is it possible humans didn't start believing in god until they could understand reading/writing?

This would probably prove there is no god:

Send a new born to an island cut off from the rest of the world [think of the tv show LOST -without all of the drama and people] - ensure the child is equipped for survival for at least 100 years. Highly advanced and infallible robots raise the child and stay with the child during it's entire life. Everything the child learns is devoid of any reference to a "god".

Would that child ever think or believe in a "god"? I don't think the child would because he/she was never taught a god exists.

The question reminds me of the question asked in the movie Contact:

"Prove that your father loved you."

torpid
09-15-2009, 04:11 PM
Originally posted by: coloumb
This would probably prove there is no god:

Send a new born to an island cut off from the rest of the world [think of the tv show LOST -without all of the drama and people] - ensure the child is equipped for survival for at least 100 years. Highly advanced and infallible robots raise the child and stay with the child during it's entire life. Everything the child learns is devoid of any reference to a "god".

Would that child ever think or believe in a "god"? I don't think the child would because he/she was never taught a god exists.


Um... no. Replace god with "In & Out Burger" and the same conclusion could be drawn based on your strange logic above, yet we know they exist.

jonks
09-15-2009, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by: torpid
Originally posted by: coloumb
This would probably prove there is no god:

Send a new born to an island cut off from the rest of the world [think of the tv show LOST -without all of the drama and people] - ensure the child is equipped for survival for at least 100 years. Highly advanced and infallible robots raise the child and stay with the child during it's entire life. Everything the child learns is devoid of any reference to a "god".

Would that child ever think or believe in a "god"? I don't think the child would because he/she was never taught a god exists.


Um... no. Replace god with "In & Out Burger" and the same conclusion could be drawn based on your strange logic above, yet we know they exist.

Ditto. Conversely, obviously the child has no knowledge of scripture if not provided to him, but if he asked questions the robots couldn't answer, certain philosophical questions which have no answer, and the child/man eventually came to the conclusion on his own that there were some greater nameless force at work in the universe, that wouldn't be any evidence at all for the existence of god.

So
09-15-2009, 04:12 PM
Originally posted by: SWScorch
Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. :) I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

You ARE (by every reasonable definition) an atheist then.

jonks
09-15-2009, 04:19 PM
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: SWScorch
Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. :) I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

You ARE (by every reasonable definition) an atheist then.

If he aint, then no one is, as his definition is essentially Dawkin's definition. Since god cannot be disproved, no scientist would state that there is 0% chance of his existing.

GagHalfrunt
09-15-2009, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by: torpid
Originally posted by: coloumb
This would probably prove there is no god:

Send a new born to an island cut off from the rest of the world [think of the tv show LOST -without all of the drama and people] - ensure the child is equipped for survival for at least 100 years. Highly advanced and infallible robots raise the child and stay with the child during it's entire life. Everything the child learns is devoid of any reference to a "god".

Would that child ever think or believe in a "god"? I don't think the child would because he/she was never taught a god exists.


Um... no. Replace god with "In & Out Burger" and the same conclusion could be drawn based on your strange logic above, yet we know they exist.

Replace God with In & Out Burgers and the world would be a better place.

GodlessAstronomer
09-15-2009, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: SWScorch
Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. :) I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

You ARE (by every reasonable definition) an atheist then.

I got blasted by some of the more militant ATOT atheists for claiming I was aa atheist using pretty much that definition. Sure, in a very technical sense, that describes an agnostic. But I'm agnostic towards god in the same way I'm agnostic towards unicorns and bigfoot - I actively disbelieve, but I don't think my own beliefs trump the very laws of logic. As far as I'm concerned, that is atheistic, not agnostic.

destrekor
09-15-2009, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

no he did not.

He was a Pantheist if you dig deeper into all the times he mentioned God.

A Pantheist is essentially someone who puts a name and face on the Universal Laws. A Pantheist essentially labels Nature or the Universe itself as 'God', but does not attribute it anything other than governance - it isn't animated or considered omni-anything. Simply, the law is the law, and said law governs how everything else can come to function.

Einstein's 'god' didn't smite, didn't create in image, didn't have conversations with people. Essentially, it wasn't a deity, a lifeform of any sort.

So
09-15-2009, 04:42 PM
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: torpid
Originally posted by: coloumb
This would probably prove there is no god:

Send a new born to an island cut off from the rest of the world [think of the tv show LOST -without all of the drama and people] - ensure the child is equipped for survival for at least 100 years. Highly advanced and infallible robots raise the child and stay with the child during it's entire life. Everything the child learns is devoid of any reference to a "god".

Would that child ever think or believe in a "god"? I don't think the child would because he/she was never taught a god exists.


Um... no. Replace god with "In & Out Burger" and the same conclusion could be drawn based on your strange logic above, yet we know they exist.

Replace God with In & Out Burgers and the world would be a better place.

Is it ironic that the owners of In-N-Out Burger really, REALLY want you to find god?

Atomic Playboy
09-15-2009, 04:43 PM
Originally posted by: coloumb
This would probably prove there is no god:

Send a new born to an island cut off from the rest of the world [think of the tv show LOST -without all of the drama and people] - ensure the child is equipped for survival for at least 100 years. Highly advanced and infallible robots raise the child and stay with the child during it's entire life. Everything the child learns is devoid of any reference to a "god".

Would that child ever think or believe in a "god"? I don't think the child would because he/she was never taught a god exists.

That doesn't prove or disprove the existence of God though; it only shows how the child reasons when attempting to explain what he sees in his environment. Say the child were given adequate food and shelter, but no formal schooling. He would learn which food was OK to eat and which could kill him, but he wouldn't know the history of human beings in general. He wouldn't be trained in any mathematics or science; everything he knew would be based around his own experience in the world.

How would he explain the tides in the ocean? We know about gravitational forces, and how the gravitational forces of the moon and sun, combined with meteorological and geothermal forces cause the water in the oceans to move. But though the child can see the sun and the moon, can feel the weather, can see volcanic activity even (perhaps), he will not necessarily conclude that all these forces combine to create tidal activity. Perhaps he will merely think that water does that if there's enough of it about. Maybe he will compose a story of a great creature swimming the oceans that causes the wake he sees. Maybe he will conclude it is the work of a deity. But just because his story may satisfy his own limited knowledge, it does not make it fact. And just because he may not arrive at what we hold to be fact does not make our knowledge of the world untrue.

How exacty does one person coming up with God on their own prove or disprove anything about the nature of the metaphysical in our Universe?

destrekor
09-15-2009, 04:47 PM
Originally posted by: BeauJangles
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

If you bothered to read anything Einstein wrote instead of echoing talking points, you'd realize that his conception of god is nothing like the conception we're talking about here.

"I'm not an atheist. I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws.

IMO, after reading what he's written on the subject, that is probably the best single-sentence summary of his beliefs. He was neither a deist nor an atheist. He wholeheartedly rejected the idea of a god who could / would / did intervene in the lives of people. Basically, his belief of god was like many people -- he used god to fill the gaps in our knowledge, to contextualize his existence, and to address some of the unknowns that existed in the universe.

To use him as proof that atheists are wrong or something like that is utter nonsense.

Never understood why he didn't simply call himself a Pantheist, but I guess that is the intelligent side of him speaking - to say you fall under a simple label is denying more information to everyone else.

Everything else in my other post is my opinion based on every other quote I remember. Technically he might not be a pantheist, because he used atheist-agnostic messages, such as the above quote, to really express his understanding of everything. He used God to refer to what we couldn't entirely explain with our limited knowledge, but never goes on to express a belief in a deity, and never makes an attempt to discuss the concept of a deity existing as an impossibility.

And that, my friends, is why only the completely ignorant folk ever use the word atheist without any further qualifiers. Very few "atheists" actually exist, and they are the most painful people to have a discussion with.
Then there are "atheist-agnostics", and then simply "agnostics".

Agnostics are simply just sort of "there" in a belief pattern - they mostly just don't care, and don't trouble themselves with trying to define themselves in faith. They neither believe nor disbelieve in a deity, and see it as a situation of "a deity might exist, but I don't really know either way". They are neutral.

Atheist-agnostics are a little below neutral. They basically state they don't believe in any deity, and subscribe mostly to scientific explanations for things (unless they have personal beliefs of science being wrong, that's not unheard of in those that subscribe to science - it's an evolving system of knowledge). But they refuse to completely go out on a limb and say there is absolutely no way a deity exists, because these people acknowledge the very point of this thread itself - proof of existence of a deity(ies), and/or proof a deity does not exist, are believed to be impossible to realize. And to say something cannot possibly exist without any evidence of it not existing, is really the same faith as believing something DOES exist without evidence. But they do take a stance, unlike agnostics as described above, and say they do not believe a deity exists but describing further that at some point evidence could come along describing otherwise.

I'm an atheist-agnostic myself. I basically believe no deity exists, specifically a deity as described as the ultimate creator, but mostly avoid dabbling into "he does exist/he does not exist" and rather completely ignore that vagueness and go for the natural explanations for everything.

manowar821
09-15-2009, 04:50 PM
Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
A smart atheist identifies as agnostic.

Don't be an asshole.

There shouldn't even be a word for not believing in fairy-tales.

manowar821
09-15-2009, 04:52 PM
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: SWScorch
Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. :) I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

You ARE (by every reasonable definition) an atheist then.

I got blasted by some of the more militant ATOT atheists for claiming I was aa atheist using pretty much that definition. Sure, in a very technical sense, that describes an agnostic. But I'm agnostic towards god in the same way I'm agnostic towards unicorns and bigfoot - I actively disbelieve, but I don't think my own beliefs trump the very laws of logic. As far as I'm concerned, that is atheistic, not agnostic.

You're absolutely right, and I'm the same way.

destrekor
09-15-2009, 04:54 PM
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: SWScorch
Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. :) I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

You ARE (by every reasonable definition) an atheist then.

I got blasted by some of the more militant ATOT atheists for claiming I was aa atheist using pretty much that definition. Sure, in a very technical sense, that describes an agnostic. But I'm agnostic towards god in the same way I'm agnostic towards unicorns and bigfoot - I actively disbelieve, but I don't think my own beliefs trump the very laws of logic. As far as I'm concerned, that is atheistic, not agnostic.

well, So was a little off.
jonks was also a little off.

In all technical terms, that stance is of an atheist-agnostic. As described as Dawkins, an atheist is one who states there is absolutely no chance a deity could exist.
An atheist-agnostic adds a little logic by stating there is some chance a deity could exist, but ultimately stands by a disbelief in any form of deity.

El Guaraguao
09-15-2009, 05:00 PM
Where is Cerpin Taxt? Did he get temp or perm banned?

GodlessAstronomer
09-15-2009, 05:01 PM
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: SWScorch
Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. :) I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

You ARE (by every reasonable definition) an atheist then.

I got blasted by some of the more militant ATOT atheists for claiming I was aa atheist using pretty much that definition. Sure, in a very technical sense, that describes an agnostic. But I'm agnostic towards god in the same way I'm agnostic towards unicorns and bigfoot - I actively disbelieve, but I don't think my own beliefs trump the very laws of logic. As far as I'm concerned, that is atheistic, not agnostic.

well, So was a little off.
jonks was also a little off.

In all technical terms, that stance is of an atheist-agnostic. As described as Dawkins, an atheist is one who states there is absolutely no chance a deity could exist.
An atheist-agnostic adds a little logic by stating there is some chance a deity could exist, but ultimately stands by a disbelief in any form of deity.

The term "atheist-agnostic" is redundant, contradictory and unnecessary. 'Atheist' should describe the person who (reasonably) allows the logical possibility that there is a god, but still actively disbelieves. You can consider the other "atheist" to be atheistic if you like, but I would just call him unreasonable. He believe that his opinion is worth more than the well established logical axiom that we can't prove a negative.

slightlyhuman
09-15-2009, 05:02 PM
idiots.

Jeff7
09-15-2009, 05:03 PM
Originally posted by: schneiderguy
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

lol

Give me one scientific fact that proves Unicorns, fairies, and leprechauns don't exist.

You can't prove they don't exist, therefore they must exist :confused:
Pretty much.


And I mean, I've also got my Elvis religion. Elvis is God, and His Followers have even more faith than Christians, Muslims, Jews, and so on. We don't even have a holy book, which is often pointed to by followers of other religions as justification, or dare I say proof, of their beliefs.
There are also people alive today who saw Elvis in person, and some were even so blessed as to be in the general path of His Hip Thrusts. Uh huh baby.

Therefore, Elvis is God.

And you can no more disprove that than you can disprove any of the major religions. You also have no right to call it "nonsense" for much the same reason - it's every bit as valid and believable as any major religion.

videogames101
09-15-2009, 05:04 PM
Default position is disbelief, I don't need to prove he doesn't exist. You need to prove he DOES.

videogames101
09-15-2009, 05:06 PM
Also, an athiest means NOT-THEISTIC. That nowhere claims that a god doesn't exist, just that an atheist doesn't believe it. To claim that an undetectable being does or doesn't exist is impossible with 100% certainty, it's just very, very, unlikely to exist.

Oceandevi
09-15-2009, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by: schneiderguy
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

lol

Give me one scientific fact that proves Unicorns, fairies, and leprechauns don't exist.

You can't prove they don't exist, therefore they must exist :confused:

fairies are real. They are the group of angels that did not take sides during the heavenly civil war. They were cast down to live among us. Of course god is not real so this cant be true.. or can it!!!1

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 05:07 PM
Originally posted by: destrekor
In all technical terms, that stance is of an atheist-agnostic. As described as Dawkins, an atheist is one who states there is absolutely no chance a deity could exist.
An atheist-agnostic adds a little logic by stating there is some chance a deity could exist, but ultimately stands by a disbelief in any form of deity.

You're redefining these terms again, and incorrectly. What's the point?

Oceandevi
09-15-2009, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by: FetusCakeMix
A smart gambler atheist identifies as agnostic.

Oceandevi
09-15-2009, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by: jonks
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

An omnipotent God can do anything.
If so, He can make a rock so heavy he cannot lift it.
But if he cannot make such a rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.
And if he cannot lift the rock, he is not omnipotent, and thus, not God.

There. God made neatly impossible in one logical paragraph.



make a tshirt right naw!

Turin39789
09-15-2009, 05:09 PM
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: SWScorch
Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. :) I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

You ARE (by every reasonable definition) an atheist then.

I got blasted by some of the more militant ATOT atheists for claiming I was aa atheist using pretty much that definition. Sure, in a very technical sense, that describes an agnostic. But I'm agnostic towards god in the same way I'm agnostic towards unicorns and bigfoot - I actively disbelieve, but I don't think my own beliefs trump the very laws of logic. As far as I'm concerned, that is atheistic, not agnostic.

well, So was a little off.
jonks was also a little off.

In all technical terms, that stance is of an atheist-agnostic. As described as Dawkins, an atheist is one who states there is absolutely no chance a deity could exist.
An atheist-agnostic adds a little logic by stating there is some chance a deity could exist, but ultimately stands by a disbelief in any form of deity.

m-w tells me -


agnostic is a noun or adjective

atheist is only a noun

agnostic atheist.

Oceandevi
09-15-2009, 05:11 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

yeah crazy people are sometimes very smart.

Oceandevi
09-15-2009, 05:13 PM
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

no he did not.

He was a Pantheist if you dig deeper into all the times he mentioned God.

A Pantheist is essentially someone who puts a name and face on the Universal Laws. A Pantheist essentially labels Nature or the Universe itself as 'God', but does not attribute it anything other than governance - it isn't animated or considered omni-anything. Simply, the law is the law, and said law governs how everything else can come to function.

Einstein's 'god' didn't smite, didn't create in image, didn't have conversations with people. Essentially, it wasn't a deity, a lifeform of any sort.

That is a really beautiful view of things.

Hayabusa Rider
09-15-2009, 05:13 PM
This thread delivers!

:P

Jeff7
09-15-2009, 05:15 PM
Originally posted by: destrekor
well, So was a little off.
jonks was also a little off.

In all technical terms, that stance is of an atheist-agnostic. As described as Dawkins, an atheist is one who states there is absolutely no chance a deity could exist.
An atheist-agnostic adds a little logic by stating there is some chance a deity could exist, but ultimately stands by a disbelief in any form of deity.
What kind of "chance" are we talking about here? Getting in a car accident? Winning the lottery? Dragons popping out of the Large Hadron Collider?

videogames101
09-15-2009, 05:15 PM
Originally posted by: Oceandevi
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

no he did not.

He was a Pantheist if you dig deeper into all the times he mentioned God.

A Pantheist is essentially someone who puts a name and face on the Universal Laws. A Pantheist essentially labels Nature or the Universe itself as 'God', but does not attribute it anything other than governance - it isn't animated or considered omni-anything. Simply, the law is the law, and said law governs how everything else can come to function.

Einstein's 'god' didn't smite, didn't create in image, didn't have conversations with people. Essentially, it wasn't a deity, a lifeform of any sort.

That is a really beautiful view of things.

In that sense the word "god" serves no purpose whatsoever.

Oceandevi
09-15-2009, 05:18 PM
Originally posted by: videogames101
Originally posted by: Oceandevi
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

no he did not.

He was a Pantheist if you dig deeper into all the times he mentioned God.

A Pantheist is essentially someone who puts a name and face on the Universal Laws. A Pantheist essentially labels Nature or the Universe itself as 'God', but does not attribute it anything other than governance - it isn't animated or considered omni-anything. Simply, the law is the law, and said law governs how everything else can come to function.

Einstein's 'god' didn't smite, didn't create in image, didn't have conversations with people. Essentially, it wasn't a deity, a lifeform of any sort.

That is a really beautiful view of things.

In that sense the word "god" serves no purpose whatsoever.

There are some things that are the way that they are. We can see these things. We can witness some of the rules or laws of the universe. We also do not know why they are there. Is there even a why? Just acknowledging that there seems to be a LAW behind the universe is peaceful.

It is a violent place. But with the right knowledge, we can understand it.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 05:24 PM
Originally posted by: videogames101
Originally posted by: Oceandevi
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

no he did not.

He was a Pantheist if you dig deeper into all the times he mentioned God.

A Pantheist is essentially someone who puts a name and face on the Universal Laws. A Pantheist essentially labels Nature or the Universe itself as 'God', but does not attribute it anything other than governance - it isn't animated or considered omni-anything. Simply, the law is the law, and said law governs how everything else can come to function.

Einstein's 'god' didn't smite, didn't create in image, didn't have conversations with people. Essentially, it wasn't a deity, a lifeform of any sort.

That is a really beautiful view of things.

In that sense the word "god" serves no purpose whatsoever.

Einstein had what he considered a religious reverence for the universe and the underlying truths about it. He used the term so that the people who kept asking him about God might understand the depth of that feeling.

Edit: I also think that this is a good foil for the pervasive attitude of theists that seems to imply that atheists must feel purposeless and empty without spiritual belief. One can have just as much humility and curiosity about existence without relying on absurdities like faith.

SlitheryDee
09-15-2009, 05:25 PM
Originally posted by: videogames101
Originally posted by: Oceandevi
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Albert Einstein believed in God. I guess you guys would consider him a naive fairytale believer and that you have superior intelligence too.

no he did not.

He was a Pantheist if you dig deeper into all the times he mentioned God.

A Pantheist is essentially someone who puts a name and face on the Universal Laws. A Pantheist essentially labels Nature or the Universe itself as 'God', but does not attribute it anything other than governance - it isn't animated or considered omni-anything. Simply, the law is the law, and said law governs how everything else can come to function.

Einstein's 'god' didn't smite, didn't create in image, didn't have conversations with people. Essentially, it wasn't a deity, a lifeform of any sort.

That is a really beautiful view of things.

In that sense the word "god" serves no purpose whatsoever.

That's right. It turns out that the habit of calling the physical universe "god" is something many great physicists had. It's a good way to transmit the beauty and grandeur of the universe and all but theists have a nasty habit of trying to claim them as their own due to snippets of quotes taken out of context when the individual in question is no longer around to actively explain their real position.

PlasmaBomb
09-15-2009, 05:27 PM
Originally posted by: BoomerD
Originally posted by: KeithTalent
Originally posted by: LinuxIdiot
Nope, I just dont care one way or the other.

This.

Ban for OP. Totally worthless thread.

KT

Waidaminit...YOU are the one in posession of teh banstick...:P

You want him banned...YOU hit him.

Troll threads like this shouldn't necessarily justify teh bannation.

He doesn't have the ATOT ban stick.

Hayabusa Rider
09-15-2009, 05:36 PM
Arguing religion on the internet is like bowling for puss.

OILFIELDTRASH
09-15-2009, 05:37 PM
I could go through Albert Einstein quotes all day to prove that he believed that God existed. Maybe not in the Christian sense but that there is a force or being that pulls the strings. I have witnessed and felt many instances where I felt God was there.

Tell me why the majority of the top scientists believe in God? I know your smarter than them too.

destrekor
09-15-2009, 05:39 PM
Originally posted by: Turin39789
Originally posted by: destrekor
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: SWScorch
Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. :) I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

You ARE (by every reasonable definition) an atheist then.

I got blasted by some of the more militant ATOT atheists for claiming I was aa atheist using pretty much that definition. Sure, in a very technical sense, that describes an agnostic. But I'm agnostic towards god in the same way I'm agnostic towards unicorns and bigfoot - I actively disbelieve, but I don't think my own beliefs trump the very laws of logic. As far as I'm concerned, that is atheistic, not agnostic.

well, So was a little off.
jonks was also a little off.

In all technical terms, that stance is of an atheist-agnostic. As described as Dawkins, an atheist is one who states there is absolutely no chance a deity could exist.
An atheist-agnostic adds a little logic by stating there is some chance a deity could exist, but ultimately stands by a disbelief in any form of deity.

m-w tells me -


agnostic is a noun or adjective

atheist is only a noun

agnostic atheist.

yeah, but they're both nouns. So order is meaningless when using a hyphen. :P

But the correct, dual-noun order is atheist-agnostic. It's a dual noun applied to a person, not an adjective attached to a noun.

But you can use the adj-noun combination and have the same result. But the dual-noun version adds the weight to the first in order.

Jeff7
09-15-2009, 05:41 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I could go through Albert Einstein quotes all day to prove that he believed that God existed. Maybe not in the Christian sense but that there is a force or being that pulls the strings. I have witnessed and felt many instances where I felt God was there.

Tell me why the majority of the top scientists believe in God? I know your smarter than them too.
Repeat a lie often enough, especially at a young age, and people will believe it.

PlasmaBomb
09-15-2009, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: SWScorch
Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. :) I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

You ARE (by every reasonable definition) an agnostic then.

Fixed.

So
09-15-2009, 05:46 PM
Originally posted by: PlasmaBomb
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: SWScorch
Hmm, I guess this is why I'm a self-described agnostic. :) I don't believe in god, but given that it's impossible to prove one way or the other, I'm open to the fact that I guess it is theoretically possible for an invisible, undetectable, omnipresent, omniscient sentient force to exist, but I just don't think so. But I'm not arrogant enough to say that I know for sure one way or the other. But the very premise just seems laughable to me.

You ARE (by every reasonable definition) an atheist then.

Fixed.

Re-fixed.

GodlessAstronomer
09-15-2009, 05:47 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I could go through Albert Einstein quotes all day to prove that he believed that God existed. Maybe not in the Christian sense but that there is a force or being that pulls the strings. I have witnessed and felt many instances where I felt God was there.

Tell me why the majority of the top scientists believe in God? I know your smarter than them too.

Einstein was very clear - he simply did not believe in a personal god. Now that we have that appeal to authority out of the way, your next appeal to authority: 93% of National Academy of Sciences members do not believe in god. Source (http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html).

OILFIELDTRASH
09-15-2009, 06:03 PM
I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts. The rest are details. (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, 2000 p.202)
Albert Einstein

On whether he accepted the historical existence of Christ: "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."


On how he feels about atheist efforts to claim him as an ally: "There are people who say there is no God, but what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views."

booyah

shall I continue?

videogames101
09-15-2009, 06:07 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I could go through Albert Einstein quotes all day to prove that he believed that God existed. Maybe not in the Christian sense but that there is a force or being that pulls the strings. I have witnessed and felt many instances where I felt God was there.

Tell me why the majority of the top scientists believe in God? I know your smarter than them too.

Are you dumb? A higher % of scientists are atheists then the average population. Learn to use statistics. /thread just stop

also, Being a top scientist does not give one's agreement any more validity, argument form authority, logical fallacy, tldr: you lose

OILFIELDTRASH
09-15-2009, 06:08 PM
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I could go through Albert Einstein quotes all day to prove that he believed that God existed. Maybe not in the Christian sense but that there is a force or being that pulls the strings. I have witnessed and felt many instances where I felt God was there.

Tell me why the majority of the top scientists believe in God? I know your smarter than them too.

Einstein was very clear - he simply did not believe in a personal god. Now that we have that appeal to authority out of the way, your next appeal to authority: 93% of National Academy of Sciences members do not believe in god. Source (http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html).

Sorry I trust this site more than stephanjaygould.com thanks though
http://www.livescience.com/str...11_scientists_god.html (http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/050811_scientists_god.html)

Vageetasjn
09-15-2009, 06:09 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts. The rest are details. (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, 2000 p.202)
Albert Einstein

On whether he accepted the historical existence of Christ: "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."


On how he feels about atheist efforts to claim him as an ally: "There are people who say there is no God, but what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views."

booyah

shall I continue?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/scie...opleinscience.religion (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/12/peopleinscience.religion)

GodlessAstronomer
09-15-2009, 06:11 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts. The rest are details. (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, 2000 p.202)
Albert Einstein

On whether he accepted the historical existence of Christ: "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."


On how he feels about atheist efforts to claim him as an ally: "There are people who say there is no God, but what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views."

booyah

shall I continue?

1) Einstein famously disregarded details in pursuit of the big picture. This says nothing about a personal god

2) Most historians believe Jesus was a real figure. So what? This says nothing about his divinity

3) You've taken that quote out of context. The quote goes, "In the view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognise, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support for such views." Once again, he says nothing about a personal god and he is angry because he is quoted by people who claim to know with certainty. I have already labelled those people unreasonable, and they're not the kind of 'atheist' that anyone should listen to.

Like I said, Einstein was very clear on his religious views:
I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.

videogames101
09-15-2009, 06:12 PM
Originally posted by: Vageetasjn
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts. The rest are details. (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, 2000 p.202)
Albert Einstein

On whether he accepted the historical existence of Christ: "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."


On how he feels about atheist efforts to claim him as an ally: "There are people who say there is no God, but what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views."

booyah

shall I continue?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/scie...opleinscience.religion (http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/may/12/peopleinscience.religion)

"I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind." -Einstein
ISBN 0-471-11459-6

Anyways, it doesn't really matter anyways. Whether Einstein believed in god or not has very little to do with whether he exists or not.

GodlessAstronomer
09-15-2009, 06:13 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I could go through Albert Einstein quotes all day to prove that he believed that God existed. Maybe not in the Christian sense but that there is a force or being that pulls the strings. I have witnessed and felt many instances where I felt God was there.

Tell me why the majority of the top scientists believe in God? I know your smarter than them too.

Einstein was very clear - he simply did not believe in a personal god. Now that we have that appeal to authority out of the way, your next appeal to authority: 93% of National Academy of Sciences members do not believe in god. Source (http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html).

Sorry I trust this site more than stephanjaygould.com thanks though
http://www.livescience.com/str...11_scientists_god.html (http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/050811_scientists_god.html)

I see you tried to seamlessly change your argument. You initially claimed that "the majority of the top scientists believe in God", now you post a link that surveys scientists in general in a attempt to rebut my refutation of that statement. If you're going to argue, please be honest about it. Also I see you're attacking the messenger instead of the source - the numbers on the site I posted came from Nature, one of the most prestigious scientific journals out there.

TridenT
09-15-2009, 06:15 PM
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I could go through Albert Einstein quotes all day to prove that he believed that God existed. Maybe not in the Christian sense but that there is a force or being that pulls the strings. I have witnessed and felt many instances where I felt God was there.

Tell me why the majority of the top scientists believe in God? I know your smarter than them too.

Einstein was very clear - he simply did not believe in a personal god. Now that we have that appeal to authority out of the way, your next appeal to authority: 93% of National Academy of Sciences members do not believe in god. Source (http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html).

Sorry I trust this site more than stephanjaygould.com thanks though
http://www.livescience.com/str...11_scientists_god.html (http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/050811_scientists_god.html)

I see you tried to seamlessly change your argument. You initially claimed that "the majority of the top scientists believe in God", now you post a link that surveys scientists in general in a attempt to rebut my refutation of that statement. If you're going to argue, please be honest about it. Also I see you're attacking the messenger instead of the source - the numbers on the site I posted came from Nature, one of the most prestigious scientific journals out there.

Yeah.. It varies widely only because they have two categories: Pseudoscience and science. :D

nick1985
09-15-2009, 06:16 PM
Originally posted by: urinesane
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Does not compute.



lol

Kadarin
09-15-2009, 06:18 PM
If you make the assertion that God exists, but cannot point to any evidence to support your claim, I would posit you are engaging in wishful thinking. If you make that assertion, it's not for me to disprove, it's for you to prove. Personally, I make no such assertion as I have yet to see any quantifiable, measurable evidence to support God's existence.

For those of you who choose to believe in God as some form of "higher power", why do you assume that "God" must be singular? Why not more than one such "God"?

magomago
09-15-2009, 06:37 PM
At the risk of skipping most of the conversation in this thread (correction: almost all , save for a quick portion about einstein being pantheistic, but not even sure I have the whole thing)

How does one scientifically prove God doesn't exist? You can't. You can't scientifically prove God exists either. Now if a 'God' does exist, the question is what kind of God is it. I would argue that if God created everything in this universe, then it must be something greater than the universe. If its outside the limits that we observe in this world, then we must construe God as all absolutely powerful within our framework of existence. If god is outside the limits of this world, then clearly we have no capacity to truly understand God within our current existance because we are limited by the physical existance around us. Thus any real human description of God that says "this is exactly how God is and nothing more" must be false because it suggests that God entirety can be explained within our existance. That is how I'd reject Flying Spaghetti Monster because it tries to actually define God down to the T.
I would argue that 'God' has to be understood (to the best our limits) outside the word because the word implies as if we try to contain God as this specific entity. For all we know, the universe itself could be God and has awareness in some type of unmeasurable way that we don't understand.

But again, none of this proves God which is the problem. We could attend a star party and watch the beautiful stars pass overhead and say "Wow the universe is sooo fast, yet our own little earth is also equally detailed and full of life, something must exist that created this all!" yet its not scientific proof of God because as a statement it simply can't be measured. And if you can't measure and test, it ultimately isn't science.
On the same note understanding so much through science isn't proof of the lack of God either. Saying, "Oh wow we've so many discoveries the past 100 years that the idea of a God, whatever its manifestations, is just BS. I trust science will figure it all out" isn't valid because science brings up more questions than answers. The more we learn the more we find there are more complex and deeper questions that we initially thought. God could be the root of all complexity, yet if we constantly find and hit new questions we will never actually reach that root.

Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
Arguing religion on the internet is like bowling for puss.
And Hayabusa hits the nail on the head. Usually its rarely a discussion between anyone actually interested in talking about it. Its more about cocky bitches on both sides who refuse to listen to the other side at all and are full of their own specific religious or atheistic pride. In these types of conversations the only thing that can really be agreed upon (if we want to logically approach it knowing that we cannot know what created everything) is that we simply can't prove existence nor absence.

shadow9d9
09-15-2009, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I have witnessed and felt many instances where I felt God was there.


Humans are known to be very very wrong about feelings. Especially if you are looking to make a connection. our brain rationalizes the difference.

BeauJangles
09-15-2009, 06:38 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts. The rest are details. (The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton University Press, 2000 p.202)
Albert Einstein

On whether he accepted the historical existence of Christ: "Unquestionably! No one can read the Gospels without feeling the actual presence of Jesus. His personality pulsates in every word. No myth is filled with such life."


On how he feels about atheist efforts to claim him as an ally: "There are people who say there is no God, but what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views."

booyah

shall I continue?

Continue with what? You're basically arguing that because some guy believed in god, we should all believe. Your argument sucks.

moshquerade
09-15-2009, 06:41 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 06:43 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Just as many as you could give me that pink unicorns, the flying teapot or the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist.

Now a reasonable man won't exclude any possibility but won't accept anything without reasonable evidence to support it.

Thus, the onus is on the one who lays forth the argument that something exists.

I mean, you don't think the flying teapot is read, do you? And if i claimed that it was wouldn't it be up to me to prove that it is rather than you trying to disprove something you cannot possibly disprove, if you manage, i'll just move the goalposts, just like Christianity has done for 2k years.

Praxis1452
09-15-2009, 06:44 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Perhaps if you could define god physically then it may be an answerable question. Science is also not just about the facts you seem to require. It's about evidence, and how much there is for a particular viewpoint compared to others.

magomago
09-15-2009, 06:45 PM
Originally posted by: shadow9d9
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I have witnessed and felt many instances where I felt God was there.


Humans are known to be very very wrong about feelings. Especially if you are looking to make a connection. our brain rationalizes the difference.

Yup, we seek to make meaning in our lives around us. So 'this can't be a coincidence' simply doesn't work for me because i know that most of the time is IS A coincidence.

However I do believe that we have an innate desire to think about the idea of 'God/Force'. However its impossible to prove if it is just a coincidence, or if it is actually built into us by God. Again, its a question about God and you can't prove/disprove the existance of God

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 06:45 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Could you please provide me evidence that an invisible immaterial unicorn does not reside in your cooch and controlls the universe?

Go ahead and try to disprove it, it may actually exist, right?

magomago
09-15-2009, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Just as many as you could give me that pink unicorns, the flying teapot or the flying spaghetti monster doesn't exist.

Now a reasonable man won't exclude any possibility but won't accept anything without reasonable evidence to support it.

Thus, the onus is on the one who lays forth the argument that something exists.

I mean, you don't think the flying teapot is read, do you? And if i claimed that it was wouldn't it be up to me to prove that it is rather than you trying to disprove something you cannot possibly disprove, if you manage, i'll just move the goalposts, just like Christianity has done for 2k years.

I think its a shame to compare that to a question of pink unicorns. The question of God arises from "Where did existance come from?". "Did something make this existance?". The response to that is "There may be \ is a creator that generated existance".
This isn't the case of someone walking up and saying "zOMG teh pink unicorn!". What question would actually come up with Mr. Pink Unicorn?

moshquerade
09-15-2009, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Could you please provide me evidence that an invisible immaterial unicorn does not reside in your cooch and controlls the universe?

Go ahead and try to disprove it, it may actually exist, right?


Honestly, you want honesty? I cannot stand you. I will not entertain you with any responses. You are rude, brash, and full of yourself.

You are the one who accused me of being someone who was prejudiced against gays. There was no rhyme or reason to the accusation, and it was so far off the mark that I'm surprised you held onto the planet and didn't fall off after spewing that garbage.

So go ask your questions to someone who gives a damn about you and responding to you. I do not.

magomago
09-15-2009, 06:48 PM
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

Perhaps if you could define god physically then it may be an answerable question. Science is also not just about the facts you seem to require. It's about evidence, and how much there is for a particular viewpoint compared to others.

Which is why its an unanswerable question.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 06:50 PM
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
Originally posted by: GodlessAstronomer
Originally posted by: OILFIELDTRASH
I could go through Albert Einstein quotes all day to prove that he believed that God existed. Maybe not in the Christian sense but that there is a force or being that pulls the strings. I have witnessed and felt many instances where I felt God was there.

Tell me why the majority of the top scientists believe in God? I know your smarter than them too.

Einstein was very clear - he simply did not believe in a personal god. Now that we have that appeal to authority out of the way, your next appeal to authority: 93% of National Academy of Sciences members do not believe in god. Source (http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/news/file002.html).

Sorry I trust this site more than stephanjaygould.com thanks though
http://www.livescience.com/str...11_scientists_god.html (http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/050811_scientists_god.html)

You're a jackass. How about TIME magazine?
http://www.time.com/time/magaz...0,9171,1607298,00.html (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1607298,00.html)

Not that it even matters. Even if Einstein held religious beliefs, your whole argument about OMG UR NOT SMARTER THEN EINSTINE is laughably stupid.

Praxis1452
09-15-2009, 06:51 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Quite a horrible question that does not even seek an answer.

Something that cannot be proved nor disproved is something not studied by science, why would you require a scientific fact? Oh, because you're retarded.

moshquerade
09-15-2009, 06:52 PM
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Quite a horrible question that does not even seek an answer.

Something that cannot be proved nor disproved is something not studied by science, why would you require a scientific fact? Oh, because you're retarded.

typical.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 06:53 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Could you please provide me evidence that an invisible immaterial unicorn does not reside in your cooch and controlls the universe?

Go ahead and try to disprove it, it may actually exist, right?


Honestly, you want honesty? I cannot stand you. I will not entertain you with any responses. You are rude, brash, and full of yourself.

You are the one who accused me of being someone who was prejudiced against gays. There was no rhyme or reason to the accusation, and it was so far off the mark that I'm surprised you held onto the planet and didn't fall off after spewing that garbage.

So go ask your questions to someone who gives a damn about you and responding to you. I do not.

That's all well and good Mosh, but I can't help notice you've sidestepped the real issue and didn't actually deny the omnipotent unicorn that resides up in your lady parts.

moshquerade
09-15-2009, 06:55 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Could you please provide me evidence that an invisible immaterial unicorn does not reside in your cooch and controlls the universe?

Go ahead and try to disprove it, it may actually exist, right?


Honestly, you want honesty? I cannot stand you. I will not entertain you with any responses. You are rude, brash, and full of yourself.

You are the one who accused me of being someone who was prejudiced against gays. There was no rhyme or reason to the accusation, and it was so far off the mark that I'm surprised you held onto the planet and didn't fall off after spewing that garbage.

So go ask your questions to someone who gives a damn about you and responding to you. I do not.

That's all well and good Mosh, but I can't help notice you've sidestepped the real issue and didn't actually deny the omnipotent unicorn that resides up in your lady parts.

I noticed what he typed. Isn't he clever? Hahaha, I am slapping a knee here over the immense amount of humor. He loves breaking out words that relate to female anatomy.

Praxis1452
09-15-2009, 06:55 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Quite a horrible question that does not even seek an answer.

Something that cannot be proved nor disproved is something not studied by science, why would you require a scientific fact? Oh, because you're retarded.

typical.

Your response is stupid. It is NOT a good question. Your statement while true is meaningless. YOU are typical. I'm sure you've seen this type of argument pop up numerous times, and so have I. I fail to see how NSFW's question, which you recognized as an "excellent question", is a good question at all. Your response proves the point.

GagHalfrunt
09-15-2009, 06:55 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox. Maybe the dragon and your god can get together and do lunch at Darth Vader's house.

moshquerade
09-15-2009, 06:56 PM
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

Praxis1452
09-15-2009, 06:57 PM
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox. Maybe the dragon and your god can get together and do lunch at Darth Vader's house.I never concern myself with proving that god doesn't exist. I don't even care about god to be quite honest. But I do like shattering the pathetic arguments I see in favor of this thing they can't define. I mean hell it's easy, and fun.

magomago
09-15-2009, 06:58 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Could you please provide me evidence that an invisible immaterial unicorn does not reside in your cooch and controlls the universe?

Go ahead and try to disprove it, it may actually exist, right?


Honestly, you want honesty? I cannot stand you. I will not entertain you with any responses. You are rude, brash, and full of yourself.

You are the one who accused me of being someone who was prejudiced against gays. There was no rhyme or reason to the accusation, and it was so far off the mark that I'm surprised you held onto the planet and didn't fall off after spewing that garbage.

So go ask your questions to someone who gives a damn about you and responding to you. I do not.

That's all well and good Mosh, but I can't help notice you've sidestepped the real issue and didn't actually deny the omnipotent unicorn that resides up in your lady parts.

You can look at my response then, as oppose to side stepping the fact that it isn't just mosh in this discussion

sash1
09-15-2009, 06:59 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Could you please provide me evidence that an invisible immaterial unicorn does not reside in your cooch and controlls the universe?

Go ahead and try to disprove it, it may actually exist, right?


Honestly, you want honesty? I cannot stand you. I will not entertain you with any responses. You are rude, brash, and full of yourself.

You are the one who accused me of being someone who was prejudiced against gays. There was no rhyme or reason to the accusation, and it was so far off the mark that I'm surprised you held onto the planet and didn't fall off after spewing that garbage.

So go ask your questions to someone who gives a damn about you and responding to you. I do not.

Text (http://2**************.com/_IVI5W8Eg3Gs/SI8lYL-M6jI/AAAAAAAAABE/hJEyACF7rNQ/s320/YouMad.jpg)

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 07:01 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Could you please provide me evidence that an invisible immaterial unicorn does not reside in your cooch and controlls the universe?

Go ahead and try to disprove it, it may actually exist, right?


Honestly, you want honesty? I cannot stand you. I will not entertain you with any responses. You are rude, brash, and full of yourself.

You are the one who accused me of being someone who was prejudiced against gays. There was no rhyme or reason to the accusation, and it was so far off the mark that I'm surprised you held onto the planet and didn't fall off after spewing that garbage.

So go ask your questions to someone who gives a damn about you and responding to you. I do not.

Ahhhh, so there goes the "it might actually exist" bullsheit right out the window, because you can't prove that anything immaterial and invisible doesn't exist, it's the way it is.

Too bad you had to make a work around for something that i never said to get around the question, right?

I'm sorry Mosh, i know i rub your sensible little ego the wrong way, it's a tough world here on ATOT, go cry in the corner until you feel better.

GagHalfrunt
09-15-2009, 07:02 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

moshquerade
09-15-2009, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Could you please provide me evidence that an invisible immaterial unicorn does not reside in your cooch and controlls the universe?

Go ahead and try to disprove it, it may actually exist, right?


Honestly, you want honesty? I cannot stand you. I will not entertain you with any responses. You are rude, brash, and full of yourself.

You are the one who accused me of being someone who was prejudiced against gays. There was no rhyme or reason to the accusation, and it was so far off the mark that I'm surprised you held onto the planet and didn't fall off after spewing that garbage.

So go ask your questions to someone who gives a damn about you and responding to you. I do not.

Ahhhh, so there goes the "it might actually exist" bullsheit right out the window, because you can't prove that anything immaterial and invisible doesn't exist, it's the way it is.

Too bad you had to make a work around for something that i never said to get around the question, right?

I'm sorry Mosh, i know i rub your sensible little ego the wrong way, it's a tough world here on ATOT, go cry in the corner until you feel better.

You said it. I remembered correctly. It was so outlandish that I cannot forget it.

And with that, I am done with you.

moshquerade
09-15-2009, 07:07 PM
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why am I not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 07:08 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
That's all well and good Mosh, but I can't help notice you've sidestepped the real issue and didn't actually deny the omnipotent unicorn that resides up in your lady parts.

I noticed what he typed. Isn't he clever? Hahaha, I am slapping a knee here over the immense amount of humor. He loves breaking out words that relate to female anatomy.

I didn't think it was particularly clever or funny, but then I started thinking that you might just be keeping the unicorn all to yourself. On the off chance you are indeed the Great Unicorn Mother, I will cease and desist because I don't want you feeling hostile.

I still like you. i/expressions/rose.gif

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 07:11 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Could you please provide me evidence that an invisible immaterial unicorn does not reside in your cooch and controlls the universe?

Go ahead and try to disprove it, it may actually exist, right?


Honestly, you want honesty? I cannot stand you. I will not entertain you with any responses. You are rude, brash, and full of yourself.

You are the one who accused me of being someone who was prejudiced against gays. There was no rhyme or reason to the accusation, and it was so far off the mark that I'm surprised you held onto the planet and didn't fall off after spewing that garbage.

So go ask your questions to someone who gives a damn about you and responding to you. I do not.

Ahhhh, so there goes the "it might actually exist" bullsheit right out the window, because you can't prove that anything immaterial and invisible doesn't exist, it's the way it is.

Too bad you had to make a work around for something that i never said to get around the question, right?

I'm sorry Mosh, i know i rub your sensible little ego the wrong way, it's a tough world here on ATOT, go cry in the corner until you feel better.

You said it. I remembered correctly. It was so outlandish that I cannot forget it.

And with that, I am done with you.

I said what, where? I haven't even been around for three months so don't expect me to remember everything about what i wrote to some silly twat more than three months ago, i can honestly say that if you told me that this was our first conversation i couldn't dispute you on that.

GagHalfrunt
09-15-2009, 07:14 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why I am not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

Because you can't. If the silly, tired old "well, you can't disprove god..." inanities are the extent of your debating skills you simply lack the capacity to argue at this level. Pray for guidance. If the invisible man in the sky wanted you to win in threads like this he would have blessed you with the ability to do so. The fact that you get kicked around every single time and the fact that you simply can't stay out of these threads must be part of his divine plan for you.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 07:15 PM
Lets try another one, an invisible immaterial anything what so ever that you want it to be is wherever you want it to be and now disprove that....

You can't disprove anything that is immaterial and invisible no matter how ridiculous it is, it could be a pink unicorn up a cooch or an invisible immaterial monkey living in your right index finger, try to disprove it...

There is no way to disprove it so it's a ridiculous question that the onus is upon those who dispute the invisible monkey living in the index finger to disprove it. Perhaps if someone could prove it to lend it some kind of credibility it would actually be something people COULD know, you know, like God who is also immaterial and invisible.

Turin39789
09-15-2009, 07:16 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.



Could you please provide me evidence that an flying spaghetti monstor does not reside in Pittsburgh and controls the universe?

Go ahead and try to disprove it, it may actually exist, right?


edit - You're free to believe in whatever you want, but that statement doesn't help your point.

Praxis1452
09-15-2009, 07:16 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why I am not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

What is there to insult....?

moshquerade
09-15-2009, 07:19 PM
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why am I not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

Because you can't. If the silly, tired old "well, you can't disprove god..." inanities are the extent of your debating skills you simply lack the capacity to argue at this level. Pray for guidance. If the invisible man in the sky wanted you to win in threads like this he would have blessed you with the ability to do so. The fact that you get kicked around every single time and the fact that you simply can't stay out of these threads must be part of his divine plan for you.
Alright, I will answer my question to you, since you avoided it.
Why am I not insulting your atheism? Because I'm a nicer person than you. Why am I a nicer person than you? Not difficult to figure that one out.

moshquerade
09-15-2009, 07:20 PM
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why I am not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

What is there to insult....?

my beliefs. why does it bother you that i have a belief unlike yours? your non belief doesn't bother me that i feel the need to attack you over it.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 07:23 PM
Originally posted by: magomago
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
That's all well and good Mosh, but I can't help notice you've sidestepped the real issue and didn't actually deny the omnipotent unicorn that resides up in your lady parts.

You can look at my response then, as oppose to side stepping the fact that it isn't just mosh in this discussion

Even though we haven't had any prior interaction in this thread, ok. I guess you just want some attention.

I understand your point that some may ponder existence and suppose that something must have caused it, and these people might name that supposition "God." But the fact remains that this theory is just as impossible to disprove as the goofy pink unicorn example. You might find it demeaning to make such a facile comparison, but they're equally illogical conclusions even if you can see a natural thought process that would lead to one and not the other.

It's okay to say "I don't know" instead of making something up.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 07:27 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why I am not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

What is there to insult....?

my beliefs. why does it bother you that i have a belief unlike yours? your non belief doesn't bother me that i feel the need to attack you over it.

What he meant is "how could you possibly insult atheism"?

It's not a belief system, it requires no rules or regulations, all it is is a lack of belief in the invisible immaterial god/gods/unicorns up cooches/ whatever.

If it was insulting that i meantiond *your* cooch then i take that back, i don't even know if you have one.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 07:30 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: magomago
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
That's all well and good Mosh, but I can't help notice you've sidestepped the real issue and didn't actually deny the omnipotent unicorn that resides up in your lady parts.

You can look at my response then, as oppose to side stepping the fact that it isn't just mosh in this discussion

Even though we haven't had any prior interaction in this thread, ok. I guess you just want some attention.

I understand your point that some may ponder existence and suppose that something must have caused it, and these people might name that supposition "God." But the fact remains that this theory is just as impossible to disprove as the goofy pink unicorn example. You might find it demeaning to make such a facile comparison, but they're equally illogical conclusions even if you can see a natural thought process that would lead to one and not the other.

It's okay to say "I don't know" instead of making something up.

Yeah, the god of the gaps grows ever smaller as science progresses and religion regresses.

There is a possibliity that we may NEVER know, and i agree fully that "i don't know" is a far better answer than trying to fill it with something for which there is no evidence what so ever, regardless of what that something is.

alyarb
09-15-2009, 07:30 PM
mosh, believing or not believing in god doesn't make you a nice person. you were raised in an environment that taught you how to meet your own standards and disregard the standards of others, and adverse conversation is simply not enough for you to dishonor yourself while for others it may be. these principles have little to do with having any faith, even though most faiths teach such principles. atheist children as well as christian children are subject to uphold certain levels of discipline during development pending their parents and other pillars of authority, not just faith. removing faith from this equation does not remove discipline, and as such we have good atheists, bad atheists, as well as good christians as bad christians. of course you do not need god or christianity in order to commit good deeds and take ethical consideration for your thoughts and actions, and in fact most people who are very ethical get along better without religion because they don't have a social club they go to once a week to gossip and compete over who is the best christian, or to consolidate their xenophobic prejudices, or sing lame songs while they throw up their hands waiting for god to high-five them. they have even more time to contribute their productivity to their community, or not. it's their choice and they are not socially confined to some ancient framework. some people choose to eat fast food and play xbox all day, and that's fine because it's just as constructive as people who hang around church all day singing. a famous quote reads "traditions are in place to prevent the unpredictable in a society," and it's a nice tight way to sum up the whole purpose of organized religions of all kinds, in all societies in all historical periods.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 07:32 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
What is there to insult....?

my beliefs. why does it bother you that i have a belief unlike yours? your non belief doesn't bother me that i feel the need to attack you over it.


If anything, it seems like both sides try to get a rise out of each other here. There have been a lot of atheist-baiting threads lately, so you're likely to get some aggravated responses if you profess your faith and then try to mount some logical defense in a thread like this that is little more than trollbait.

Edit: Broke'd my quotes...

Praxis1452
09-15-2009, 07:35 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why I am not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

What is there to insult....?

my beliefs. why does it bother you that i have a belief unlike yours? your non belief doesn't bother me that i feel the need to attack you over it.

Oh, I'm hardly bothered, and as to why? Look at history, this isn't unusual or something, don't act shocked that people are voicing negative opinions about your beliefs. Beliefs are an aspect that defines people. Saying that people should not criticize these aspects is laughable. And by criticizing these beliefs it is only natural to criticize you for having these beliefs or whoever has them really. Beliefs do not exist independent of the object that contains them.

videogames101
09-15-2009, 07:36 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why am I not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

Because you can't. If the silly, tired old "well, you can't disprove god..." inanities are the extent of your debating skills you simply lack the capacity to argue at this level. Pray for guidance. If the invisible man in the sky wanted you to win in threads like this he would have blessed you with the ability to do so. The fact that you get kicked around every single time and the fact that you simply can't stay out of these threads must be part of his divine plan for you.
Alright, I will answer my question to you, since you avoided it.
Why am I not insulting your atheism? Because I'm a nicer person than you. Why am I a nicer person than you? Not difficult to figure that one out.

Ad Hominem fail.

It's not insulting it, it's pointing out what your beliefs are from a different perspective, be it accurate or not.

lyssword
09-15-2009, 07:37 PM
The idea of God exists, in the minds of religious people. But the idea that there is no god also exists in the minds of non-religious.

moshquerade
09-15-2009, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why I am not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

What is there to insult....?

my beliefs. why does it bother you that i have a belief unlike yours? your non belief doesn't bother me that i feel the need to attack you over it.

Oh, I'm hardly bothered, and as to why? Look at history, this isn't unusual or something, don't act shocked that people are voicing negative opinions about your beliefs. Beliefs are an aspect that defines people. Saying that people should not criticize these aspects is laughable. And by criticizing these beliefs it is only natural to criticize you for having these beliefs or whoever has them really. Beliefs do not exist independent of the object that contains them.


Not shocked at all. Like I said, it's typical, the intolerance.
I am just saying I don't insult your beliefs... or your non-beliefs as it is, but yet you feel it's fine to criticize mine. Nothing I have just said is untrue.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 07:41 PM
Originally posted by: lyssword
The idea of God exists, in the minds of religious people. But the idea that there is no god also exists in the minds of non-religious.

Thanks for the insight. This is the type of thing that people might think is poignant and deep only when they're high.

Fritzo
09-15-2009, 07:42 PM
Originally posted by: schneiderguy
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

lol

Give me one scientific fact that proves Unicorns, fairies, and leprechauns don't exist.

You can't prove they don't exist, therefore they must exist :confused:

I'm Catholic, but I also have to say there is no known way to prove something does not exist. You can gather evidence to support one way or the other, but existence can not be ruled out.

moshquerade
09-15-2009, 07:43 PM
Originally posted by: videogames101
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why am I not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

Because you can't. If the silly, tired old "well, you can't disprove god..." inanities are the extent of your debating skills you simply lack the capacity to argue at this level. Pray for guidance. If the invisible man in the sky wanted you to win in threads like this he would have blessed you with the ability to do so. The fact that you get kicked around every single time and the fact that you simply can't stay out of these threads must be part of his divine plan for you.
Alright, I will answer my question to you, since you avoided it.
Why am I not insulting your atheism? Because I'm a nicer person than you. Why am I a nicer person than you? Not difficult to figure that one out.

Ad Hominem fail.

It's not insulting it, it's pointing out what your beliefs are from a different perspective, be it accurate or not.

sure it's insulting when someone compares my beliefs to a pink unicorn living up my cooch. don't tell me that's not insulting. :confused:

sash1
09-15-2009, 07:44 PM
stop nesting quotes

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 07:45 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why I am not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

What is there to insult....?

my beliefs. why does it bother you that i have a belief unlike yours? your non belief doesn't bother me that i feel the need to attack you over it.

Oh, I'm hardly bothered, and as to why? Look at history, this isn't unusual or something, don't act shocked that people are voicing negative opinions about your beliefs. Beliefs are an aspect that defines people. Saying that people should not criticize these aspects is laughable. And by criticizing these beliefs it is only natural to criticize you for having these beliefs or whoever has them really. Beliefs do not exist independent of the object that contains them.


Not shocked at all. Like I said, it's typical, the intolerance.
I am just saying I don't insult your beliefs... or your non-beliefs as it is, but yet you feel it's fine to criticize mine. Nothing I have just said is untrue.

Being intolerant of the intolerant is a double negative, it means that you are tolerant, IOW, being intolerant to opression makes you tolerant.

And religion is opression by it's very definition since it excludes.

IronWing
09-15-2009, 07:45 PM
I can prove it mathematically.

2 + 2 = 4

There is no room for god in that equation. If you put god in there, the equation won't balance. If you add god to your life, either your life won't balance or, if you believe god provides balance, this suggests you were unbalanced to begin with.

destrekor
09-15-2009, 07:46 PM
Originally posted by: videogames101
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

It's frightening that THAT is the logic that wannabelievers use to justify their fairy tales. Fine. Your invisible man in the sky has EXACTLY as much merit as the 1000 foot tall purple dragon that lives in my mailbox.
To each his own. I am not asking you to believe in anything. Am I?

No, it's just that your grasping at straws strikes me as nothing more than desperation and while I admit it's amusing it's also sort of sad. Tonight, why don't you pray to the invisible man in the sky to provide you with some sort of logic that doesn't make the rest of us howl in derisive laughter at your expense. Surely an omnipotent invisible man in the sky can handle such a simple request. It's not like he's busy with world peace, an end to hunger, stopping disease and reigning in his hand-selected pedophiles.

Really, that's insulting, but if that's your intention, congratulations. You have succeeded.

Why am I not insulting your atheism? Hmmmm....

Because you can't. If the silly, tired old "well, you can't disprove god..." inanities are the extent of your debating skills you simply lack the capacity to argue at this level. Pray for guidance. If the invisible man in the sky wanted you to win in threads like this he would have blessed you with the ability to do so. The fact that you get kicked around every single time and the fact that you simply can't stay out of these threads must be part of his divine plan for you.
Alright, I will answer my question to you, since you avoided it.
Why am I not insulting your atheism? Because I'm a nicer person than you. Why am I a nicer person than you? Not difficult to figure that one out.

Ad Hominem fail.

It's not insulting it, it's pointing out what your beliefs are from a different perspective, be it accurate or not.

What a lot of people don't understand, is you have to go beyond the way things are said and think about the actual meaning. A lot of people have trouble conveying exactly how they feel in a way everyone can understand.

For instance, I'd argue most atheists are not trying to be condescending when conveying their logic to someone who believes opposite. Rather, most are trying to have an intelligent conversation, trying to bring the other person into an understanding of their mindset, and of course, trying to bring others into the same realm of logic. We infinitely believe we are better than though believers. :P :laugh: So, of course we want to convert you. Ooops, shit that's just like religion. Well, goes to show we are all the same regardless of what we believe. :P

But seriously, to someone who hears an opinion so radically opposite their own, coupled with the fact that this belief transcends everything and to oppose it is to be considered a damaged individual. For them to hear any words of the topic from an atheist, immediately they will be deeply offended. They will sometimes react differently, but that is the feeling we all share. We are all just trying to bless upon the world what is truly right. Of course, only one of us can be right, ahem us. But we are trying to be peaceful in our messages, others less and others quite righteous, and we want you to understand. :)

lyssword
09-15-2009, 07:47 PM
By the way NSFW, if you're trying to investigate if god exists or doesn't, your actions are that of an atheist. "True" Christians (which I was at one point) wouldn't even let the thought in their mind. If you continue to use good logic you'll become either agnostic or atheist. Or maybe you aren't really trying to find answers and just trolling, like other posters said.

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Quite a horrible question that does not even seek an answer.

Something that cannot be proved nor disproved is something not studied by science, why would you require a scientific fact? Oh, because you're retarded.

But I thought that science was in conflict with Creation?

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 07:47 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade


sure it's insulting when someone compares my beliefs to a pink unicorn living up my cooch. don't tell me that's not insulting. :confused:



I didn't mean that to be insulting and i explained it to you, what more do you want?

But yeah, the irrational belief of something immaterial and invisible that there is no evidence for is indeed comparable to anything else that is immaterial or invisible, in the future i'll use the flying teacup so i won't hurt your sensitive little girlie feelings.

IronWing
09-15-2009, 07:48 PM
Quote trimming is in order, thank you.

destrekor
09-15-2009, 07:48 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: lyssword
The idea of God exists, in the minds of religious people. But the idea that there is no god also exists in the minds of non-religious.

Thanks for the insight. This is the type of thing that people might think is poignant and deep only when they're high.

and this is where religion was born my friend... in highness.

destrekor
09-15-2009, 07:49 PM
ironwing: Quote trimming is in order, thank you.
-----

Thanks for the tip. I'll take it into consideration.

;)

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 07:50 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Quite a horrible question that does not even seek an answer.

Something that cannot be proved nor disproved is something not studied by science, why would you require a scientific fact? Oh, because you're retarded.

But I thought that science was in conflict with Creation?

Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

Nik
09-15-2009, 07:51 PM
IDONTKNOWWHATWEREYELLINGABOUT

Praxis1452
09-15-2009, 07:52 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Quite a horrible question that does not even seek an answer.

Something that cannot be proved nor disproved is something not studied by science, why would you require a scientific fact? Oh, because you're retarded.

But I thought that science was in conflict with Creation?

edit: I retract my previous statement if anyone saw it.

Science is in conflict with creation because their is more evidence for evolution, that is if you believe both views to be incompatible.

Science is not in conflict with an idea of god. God cannot be explored by science. You are again corrected, this time more accurately.

alyarb
09-15-2009, 07:53 PM
the real story of creation is so much cooler anyway

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 07:53 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

so the Big Bang Theory is wrong?

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 07:53 PM
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Not shocked at all. Like I said, it's typical, the intolerance.
I am just saying I don't insult your beliefs... or your non-beliefs as it is, but yet you feel it's fine to criticize mine. Nothing I have just said is untrue.

Well, to be fair, the only logical way to insult someone for non-belief is if there's clear evidence to support belief and it's being ignored. I guess some atheists feel justified in being condescending because faith is fundamentally unreasonable, and atheists tend to hold reason in high regard, which may naturally lead them to unfavorable conclusions about those who espouse faith.

I don't think it does anyone any good to be unkind about it either way.

So
09-15-2009, 07:54 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Quite a horrible question that does not even seek an answer.

Something that cannot be proved nor disproved is something not studied by science, why would you require a scientific fact? Oh, because you're retarded.

But I thought that science was in conflict with Creation?

Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

We don't know exactly where and when the first organism was created, but I believe that it has been demonstrated that abiogenesis was possible under the conditions found on primordial earth.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

so the Big Bang Theory is wrong?

It might be rigth, it might be wrong, right now we don't know, no one can claim knowledge on that part of creation.

Is it the most plausible explanation, well yeah, to date it actually is but that doesn't mean much considering the lack of evidence.

Reasonable people demand reasonable evidence before they claim knowledge on something.

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 07:57 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

so the Big Bang Theory is wrong?

It might be rigth, it might be wrong, right now we don't know, no one can claim knowledge on that part of creation.

Is it the most plausible explanation, well yeah, to date it actually is but that doesn't mean much considering the lack of evidence.

Reasonable people demand reasonable evidence before they claim knowledge on something.
and you have searched for that evidence?

destrekor
09-15-2009, 07:57 PM
Originally posted by: ironwing
I can prove it mathematically.

2 + 2 = 4

There is no room for god in that equation. If you put god in there, the equation won't balance. If you add god to your life, either your life won't balance or, if you believe god provides balance, this suggests you were unbalanced to begin with.

whoa, man

of course, most people are unbalanced, and thus the reason religion propagated with much ease. :P

but to suggest we are unbalanced, suggested that... woaahhh, god too is unbalanced. :shocked:, for "we were created in his image"
:laugh:

wait, adding god to unbalanced equation, which is to add something that we formerly were without, and suddenly it appears we couldn't have been created without balance to only later gain balance... my mind man...
but i think i get it...

:laugh:

Praxis1452
09-15-2009, 07:57 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

so the Big Bang Theory is wrong?

It might be rigth, it might be wrong, right now we don't know, no one can claim knowledge on that part of creation.

Is it the most plausible explanation, well yeah, to date it actually is but that doesn't mean much considering the lack of evidence.

Reasonable people demand reasonable evidence before they claim knowledge on something.
and you have searched for that evidence?


I don't see what you're leading to.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 07:59 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

so the Big Bang Theory is wrong?

I really wonder what you're trying to do here. Are you looking for a physical cosmology lesson, or are you still just trolling?

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:00 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

so the Big Bang Theory is wrong?

It might be rigth, it might be wrong, right now we don't know, no one can claim knowledge on that part of creation.

Is it the most plausible explanation, well yeah, to date it actually is but that doesn't mean much considering the lack of evidence.

Reasonable people demand reasonable evidence before they claim knowledge on something.
and you have searched for that evidence?


I've been kinda busy (trying to conduct research in a windshield in the desert is not very rewarding, i assumed, so i didn't even try) so no, i haven't, why would i, i'm confident that people much brighter than me will present it in such a way that the information is easy to learn and understand, like they have with evolution, and when when that happens, i'll study it.

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 08:01 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

so the Big Bang Theory is wrong?

It might be rigth, it might be wrong, right now we don't know, no one can claim knowledge on that part of creation.

Is it the most plausible explanation, well yeah, to date it actually is but that doesn't mean much considering the lack of evidence.

Reasonable people demand reasonable evidence before they claim knowledge on something.
and you have searched for that evidence?


I've been kinda busy (trying to conduct research in a windshield in the desert is not very rewarding, i assumed, so i didn't even try) so no, i haven't, why would i, i'm confident that people much brighter than me will present it in such a way that the information is easy to learn and understand, like they have with evolution, and when when that happens, i'll study it.

so then you are claiming to have no knowledge of the issue that you have been so vocal about in this thread?

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 08:01 PM
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW

so the Big Bang Theory is wrong?

It might be rigth, it might be wrong, right now we don't know, no one can claim knowledge on that part of creation.

Is it the most plausible explanation, well yeah, to date it actually is but that doesn't mean much considering the lack of evidence.

Reasonable people demand reasonable evidence before they claim knowledge on something.
and you have searched for that evidence?


I don't see what you're leading to.

My spider-sense is tingling. I'm foreseeing some funny argument about accepting scientific evidence "ON FAITH!!!"

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:02 PM
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

so the Big Bang Theory is wrong?

It might be rigth, it might be wrong, right now we don't know, no one can claim knowledge on that part of creation.

Is it the most plausible explanation, well yeah, to date it actually is but that doesn't mean much considering the lack of evidence.

Reasonable people demand reasonable evidence before they claim knowledge on something.
and you have searched for that evidence?


I don't see what you're leading to.

Don't worry, i know exactly where he's going, "have you not gazed upon the stars and wondered" and all that crap. He's talking about spiritual enlightenment which i've only experienced once, on peyote and if god isn't a big fucking cat, well then that enlightenment wasn't worth much.

destrekor
09-15-2009, 08:04 PM
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: moshquerade
Originally posted by: NSFW
Could you please give me one scientific fact that proves God doesn't exist?

excellent question.

what cannot be proved and yet cannot be disproved may actually exist.

Quite a horrible question that does not even seek an answer.

Something that cannot be proved nor disproved is something not studied by science, why would you require a scientific fact? Oh, because you're retarded.

But I thought that science was in conflict with Creation?

Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

We don't know exactly where and when the first organism was created, but I believe that it has been demonstrated that abiogenesis was possible under the conditions found on primordial earth.

This.

We very much know believe that a billion or two billion years ago, the Earth was likely in a condition very much lethal to actual life, but perfect breeding ground for early life form chemistry. As the Earth cooled, these materials were there (or could have been brought by icy comets and the like), and as water filled the surface, tidal pools formed. Remember, this was all after an object collided with Earth and sent the Earth's molten innards out to form the Moon. Quite a bit after.

These tidal pools, with an early atmosphere, gave way for insane amounts of radiation to pelt the surface. For random bits trapped in a tidal pool, radiation helped create further chemistry. RNA may have already been present from earlier chemical reactions, and mutations in RNA gave way to self-replication.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:05 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield


Then you thought wrong, the real answer is that we don't know about creation, just that the concept of creationism is wrong as it pretends that the fact of evolution isn't a fact, hell even the Catholic Church has admitted it's a fact.

We don't know about the origin of the first organism, we do know what happened after it.

Ok?

so the Big Bang Theory is wrong?

It might be rigth, it might be wrong, right now we don't know, no one can claim knowledge on that part of creation.

Is it the most plausible explanation, well yeah, to date it actually is but that doesn't mean much considering the lack of evidence.

Reasonable people demand reasonable evidence before they claim knowledge on something.
and you have searched for that evidence?


I've been kinda busy (trying to conduct research in a windshield in the desert is not very rewarding, i assumed, so i didn't even try) so no, i haven't, why would i, i'm confident that people much brighter than me will present it in such a way that the information is easy to learn and understand, like they have with evolution, and when when that happens, i'll study it.

so then you are claiming to have no knowledge of the issue that you have been so vocal about in this thread?

Not at all, do you have a comprehension problem or do you just blurt out shit like this because you are very high?

I've never claimed knowledge of a big bang and no one asked me before you did either.

You are building a man of straw to punch down, but it has nothing to do with me.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:08 PM
Actually, the only thing i was vocal about was regarding whether it's reasonable to demand that someone disproves something immaterial and invisible, like the examples i gave above.

alyarb
09-15-2009, 08:08 PM
even if you could prove that the big bang was how things started, it wouldn't disprove god. it's been shown in many many ways across many many scientific disciplines that the anthropological, geological history of the planet bears no resemblance to the story of creation. so if the big bang theory were ever proven true, how could it elicit a response at all different from religion's previous responses to discovery?

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 08:08 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Not at all, do you have a comprehension problem or do you just blurt out shit like this because you are very high?

I've never claimed knowledge of a big bang and no one asked me before you did either.

You are building a man of straw to punch down, but it has nothing to do with me.

You said the concept of creation is wrong.

I was asking what evidence you have found to support that.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 08:09 PM
This is one thing I don't get. How does discrediting a cosmological model of the origins of the universe -- like the Big Bang Theory -- support the view that God exists? Even if you manage to scientifically disprove some commonly-held notions like these, the real explanation would still be absent. You don't just get to plug "God" in there to make it work and call it a day. The same goes for arguments against evolution.

Mo0o
09-15-2009, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
This is one thing I don't get. How does discrediting a cosmological model of the origins of the universe -- like the Big Bang Theory -- support the view that God exists? Even if you manage to scientifically disprove some commonly-held notions like these, the real explanation would still be absent. You don't just get to plug "God" in there to make it work and call it a day. The same goes for arguments against evolution.

Yeah pretty much.

sdifox
09-15-2009, 08:13 PM
Originally posted by: Crono
He doesn't "need" glory, but that is what He wills. It's the only thing of value to Him, anyway, since nothing that is created can be more valuable than the creator. So He values what He Himself does because He is infinitely valuable to Himself. Humans and the universe are part of the story that is, ultimately, about God. Why did He write the story? Because He wanted to. Does that answer all our questions? No. Does God have to answer all our questions? No. Is God accountable to anyone but Himself? No. Does He hold Himself to His own promises which are revealed in His self disclosure that is recorded in the Bible? Yes.

If you are looking for every answer to every question, you'll be a very sad person. You can try, of course, but questions that extend above and before the universe can only be answered by one who is greater than the universe, God. To think that it is even possible to know all things is to put yourself in the position of God. To say that the universe has always existed is to say that the universe is god. To say that all things die, even the universe, is to say that nothing or death is god. No matter what, there is a god, an ultimate force within the universe, but you can see, if you wish, that force as being a ultimately a good being(no possibility of it/him being evil, since the standard of righteousness would necessarily be measured by that being) or you can see it as being an unwielded force (no such thing as randomness/chaos, because even that becomes a united thing when you assign a concept to it).

So you either believe that God exists, or you just refuse to accept that and look for something else to fill that position in your view of everything.


So you are saying god is vain?

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
This is one thing I don't get. How does discrediting a cosmological model of the origins of the universe -- like the Big Bang Theory -- support the view that God exists? Even if you manage to scientifically disprove some commonly-held notions like these, the real explanation would still be absent. You don't just get to plug "God" in there to make it work and call it a day. The same goes for arguments against evolution.

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

Not at all, do you have a comprehension problem or do you just blurt out shit like this because you are very high?

I've never claimed knowledge of a big bang and no one asked me before you did either.

You are building a man of straw to punch down, but it has nothing to do with me.

You said the concept of creation is wrong.

I was asking what evidence you have found to support that.

NO, in ONE post (if that is being oh so vocal about it what if i said it twice, would the forum explode?) is that the concept of creationism is wrong.

There is a difference, creation starts before life starts and creationism encompasses both that and how every species came to be.

Creationsim is obviously wrong, has no evidence what so ever while Evolution is critisised for missing SOME (imaginary) evidence. Yet evolution is what brought us the Swine Flu and resistant bacteria as well as macro evolved things (i'm going to add this even though macro and micro evolution are just made up terms) like Darwins finches and E. Coli bacteria.

There is no doubt that evolution is a fact, no reasonable human being can say it's not, you have to deny, deny, deny and choose to stay ignorant and uneducated on the subject to not understand it and if you do... well then you know evolution.

You see, you can't "believe" in evolution, you either know the scientific theory or you don't, there is nothing to believe.

alyarb
09-15-2009, 08:14 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.


how does a theory serve as evidence? you have to realize that the big bang theory is merely the corollary to hubble's constant. we know the universe is expanding and that's one of the few solid pieces of information that we have. so we rewind our models to a point where the universe was probably very, very small, very very hot, and very very dense. this still is not the beginning, we have just turned time back to an early time before all of this expansion. the big bang theory says there was a bang but it really has done a poor job of describing the bang or finding the source of the input energy. can this universe take on energy from another universe? how else could you start up this universe if it were vanishingly small? there are still no good explanations for baryogenesis, naturally occuring antimatter and of course dark matter. things are way, way too asymmetric right now for us to simply surmise how universe A got to universe B, and trading the biblical story of creation for the big bang theory isn't going to get you anywhere in your personal beliefs. you merely go from one stooge-pandering idea to the next. both stories are incomplete and tell us nothing about the present state of the universe, just as the COBE graph tells us nothing about prehistory other than we have a LOT of asymmetry to decode. explaining the beginning is stupid, anyway. we have a pretty good history of the solar system and that's good enough. the universe wasn't any good until earth anyway.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:15 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
This is one thing I don't get. How does discrediting a cosmological model of the origins of the universe -- like the Big Bang Theory -- support the view that God exists? Even if you manage to scientifically disprove some commonly-held notions like these, the real explanation would still be absent. You don't just get to plug "God" in there to make it work and call it a day. The same goes for arguments against evolution.

Short answer... it doesn't make God more or less likely, it just brings science forward every time it's falsified.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 08:16 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
This is one thing I don't get. How does discrediting a cosmological model of the origins of the universe -- like the Big Bang Theory -- support the view that God exists? Even if you manage to scientifically disprove some commonly-held notions like these, the real explanation would still be absent. You don't just get to plug "God" in there to make it work and call it a day. The same goes for arguments against evolution.

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.

Okay, well that's a strange twist. What could possibly make you think this?

Mo0o
09-15-2009, 08:16 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
This is one thing I don't get. How does discrediting a cosmological model of the origins of the universe -- like the Big Bang Theory -- support the view that God exists? Even if you manage to scientifically disprove some commonly-held notions like these, the real explanation would still be absent. You don't just get to plug "God" in there to make it work and call it a day. The same goes for arguments against evolution.

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.

I mean this pretty much sums it up.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:18 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
This is one thing I don't get. How does discrediting a cosmological model of the origins of the universe -- like the Big Bang Theory -- support the view that God exists? Even if you manage to scientifically disprove some commonly-held notions like these, the real explanation would still be absent. You don't just get to plug "God" in there to make it work and call it a day. The same goes for arguments against evolution.

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.

Actually, the Big Bang Theory, if you understood it, pretty much does away with god, no spacetime before beginning, no infinity or eternality so that problem is solved, it was always there, thus, no beginning neccessary.

You really don't have a clue what you are talking about, do you?

Praxis1452
09-15-2009, 08:19 PM
Originally posted by: alyarb
Originally posted by: NSFW

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.


how does a theory serve as evidence?

This.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 08:22 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
This is one thing I don't get. How does discrediting a cosmological model of the origins of the universe -- like the Big Bang Theory -- support the view that God exists? Even if you manage to scientifically disprove some commonly-held notions like these, the real explanation would still be absent. You don't just get to plug "God" in there to make it work and call it a day. The same goes for arguments against evolution.

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.

Actually, the Big Bang Theory, if you understood it, pretty much does away with god, no spacetime before beginning, no infinity or eternality so that problem is solved, it was always there, thus, no beginning neccessary.

You really don't have a clue what you are talking about, do you?

I don't think this is accurate either. The Big Bang Theory does nothing to either support or disprove God's existence. To play devil's advocate, a wily theist might claim that God himself exists outside of spacetime, so naturally he could be the catalyst that "caused" the Big Bang (even though cause and effect are a little meaningless when time doesn't exist).

But naturally, that's just another unfalsifiable, goofball theory and it's basically what I'm expecting from NSFW.

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 08:23 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
This is one thing I don't get. How does discrediting a cosmological model of the origins of the universe -- like the Big Bang Theory -- support the view that God exists? Even if you manage to scientifically disprove some commonly-held notions like these, the real explanation would still be absent. You don't just get to plug "God" in there to make it work and call it a day. The same goes for arguments against evolution.

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.

Actually, the Big Bang Theory, if you understood it, pretty much does away with god, no spacetime before beginning, no infinity or eternality so that problem is solved, it was always there, thus, no beginning neccessary.

You really don't have a clue what you are talking about, do you?

Huh?

So there is no beginning but there is no infinity? I've been reading a ton on the Big Bang, the laws of thermodynamics and causuality. Pretty interesting stuff.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:25 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
This is one thing I don't get. How does discrediting a cosmological model of the origins of the universe -- like the Big Bang Theory -- support the view that God exists? Even if you manage to scientifically disprove some commonly-held notions like these, the real explanation would still be absent. You don't just get to plug "God" in there to make it work and call it a day. The same goes for arguments against evolution.

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.

Actually, the Big Bang Theory, if you understood it, pretty much does away with god, no spacetime before beginning, no infinity or eternality so that problem is solved, it was always there, thus, no beginning neccessary.

You really don't have a clue what you are talking about, do you?

I don't think this is accurate either. The Big Bang Theory does nothing to either support or disprove God's existence. To play devil's advocate, a wily theist might claim that God himself exists outside of spacetime, so naturally he could be the catalyst that "caused" the Big Bang (even though cause and effect are a little meaningless when time doesn't exist).

But naturally, that's just another unfalsifiable, goofball theory and it's basically what I'm expecting from NSFW.

Actually, think about it, before the expansion that was the Big Bang there was neither time nor space, so nothing had to come before it since the concept of "before" didn't exist before it happened.

That removes the need for a beginning.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:27 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
This is one thing I don't get. How does discrediting a cosmological model of the origins of the universe -- like the Big Bang Theory -- support the view that God exists? Even if you manage to scientifically disprove some commonly-held notions like these, the real explanation would still be absent. You don't just get to plug "God" in there to make it work and call it a day. The same goes for arguments against evolution.

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.

Actually, the Big Bang Theory, if you understood it, pretty much does away with god, no spacetime before beginning, no infinity or eternality so that problem is solved, it was always there, thus, no beginning neccessary.

You really don't have a clue what you are talking about, do you?

Huh?

So there is no beginning but there is no infinity? I've been reading a ton on the Big Bang, the laws of thermodynamics and causuality. Pretty interesting stuff.

The laws of thermodynamics and causality exists only in this universe, not in whatever was before it.

There is no need for a beginning if there was neither time nor space.

Praxis1452
09-15-2009, 08:28 PM
Originally posted by: sdifox
Originally posted by: Crono
He doesn't "need" glory, but that is what He wills. It's the only thing of value to Him, anyway, since nothing that is created can be more valuable than the creator. So He values what He Himself does because He is infinitely valuable to Himself. Humans and the universe are part of the story that is, ultimately, about God. Why did He write the story? Because He wanted to. Does that answer all our questions? No. Does God have to answer all our questions? No. Is God accountable to anyone but Himself? No. Does He hold Himself to His own promises which are revealed in His self disclosure that is recorded in the Bible? Yes.

If you are looking for every answer to every question, you'll be a very sad person. You can try, of course, but questions that extend above and before the universe can only be answered by one who is greater than the universe, God. To think that it is even possible to know all things is to put yourself in the position of God. To say that the universe has always existed is to say that the universe is god. To say that all things die, even the universe, is to say that nothing or death is god. No matter what, there is a god, an ultimate force within the universe, but you can see, if you wish, that force as being a ultimately a good being(no possibility of it/him being evil, since the standard of righteousness would necessarily be measured by that being) or you can see it as being an unwielded force (no such thing as randomness/chaos, because even that becomes a united thing when you assign a concept to it).

So you either believe that God exists, or you just refuse to accept that and look for something else to fill that position in your view of everything.


So you are saying god is vain?


Of course god is vain. In fact god is an egoist.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:30 PM
Originally posted by: Praxis1452
Originally posted by: sdifox
Originally posted by: Crono
He doesn't "need" glory, but that is what He wills. It's the only thing of value to Him, anyway, since nothing that is created can be more valuable than the creator. So He values what He Himself does because He is infinitely valuable to Himself. Humans and the universe are part of the story that is, ultimately, about God. Why did He write the story? Because He wanted to. Does that answer all our questions? No. Does God have to answer all our questions? No. Is God accountable to anyone but Himself? No. Does He hold Himself to His own promises which are revealed in His self disclosure that is recorded in the Bible? Yes.

If you are looking for every answer to every question, you'll be a very sad person. You can try, of course, but questions that extend above and before the universe can only be answered by one who is greater than the universe, God. To think that it is even possible to know all things is to put yourself in the position of God. To say that the universe has always existed is to say that the universe is god. To say that all things die, even the universe, is to say that nothing or death is god. No matter what, there is a god, an ultimate force within the universe, but you can see, if you wish, that force as being a ultimately a good being(no possibility of it/him being evil, since the standard of righteousness would necessarily be measured by that being) or you can see it as being an unwielded force (no such thing as randomness/chaos, because even that becomes a united thing when you assign a concept to it).

So you either believe that God exists, or you just refuse to accept that and look for something else to fill that position in your view of everything.


So you are saying god is vain?


Of course god is vain. In fact god is an egoist.

Ah, but whatever God wills is good, how can it not be when he makes up the definitions himself? If god wills his slaughter to be good, then it is good, who are we to question god?

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 08:32 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.

Actually, the Big Bang Theory, if you understood it, pretty much does away with god, no spacetime before beginning, no infinity or eternality so that problem is solved, it was always there, thus, no beginning neccessary.

You really don't have a clue what you are talking about, do you?

I don't think this is accurate either. The Big Bang Theory does nothing to either support or disprove God's existence. To play devil's advocate, a wily theist might claim that God himself exists outside of spacetime, so naturally he could be the catalyst that "caused" the Big Bang (even though cause and effect are a little meaningless when time doesn't exist).

But naturally, that's just another unfalsifiable, goofball theory and it's basically what I'm expecting from NSFW.

Actually, think about it, before the expansion that was the Big Bang there was neither time nor space, so nothing had to come before it since the concept of "before" didn't exist before it happened.

That removes the need for a beginning.

Well, exactly. But of course that ties people up in knots just as much, because even if you accept that there was no "before," one naturally might wonder how the whole thing got started from nothing at all. God becomes another explanation for people who otherwise have no idea. Other theories might exist (multiverse theories are pretty interesting), but might be just as unfalsifiable.

rudeguy
09-15-2009, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

The laws of thermodynamics and causality exists only in this universe, not in whatever was before it.

There is no need for a beginning if there was neither time nor space.

So then the universe is eternal?

Jeff7
09-15-2009, 08:33 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Huh?

So there is no beginning but there is no infinity? I've been reading a ton on the Big Bang, the laws of thermodynamics and causuality. Pretty interesting stuff.
Problem is, a lot of thermodynamics and causality, among other things, simply fall to pieces when you're talking about the Big Bang.
A LOT of what we do day-to-day in terms of calculations and simple engineering math is grossly simplified. You want to use Newton's equation for gravity? Guess what, your answers are wrong. You didn't account for relativistic effects.
What about your watch? Its inherent inaccuracy notwithstanding, what happens when you drive to work? Your relative velocity changes, thus time dilation occurs. Your watch is now slow.

The nice thing is, a lot of those errors are incredibly small for what we do every day. x = 0.5atē does a pretty good job here on Earth.

But if you're talking about a time when the entire volume of this Universe comfortably rested in a spot smaller (possibly MUCH smaller) than a marble, the laws we have now, forged through observation of the Universe in its present state, simply don't apply. I don't even know if you could measure things like temperature or gravity in a singularity like that. Matter as we know it couldn't really exist. I don't know if you could even call any of it "energy."

Whatever the case may have been, observations of the present state of the Universe make it look very much like, at some point about 13 billion years ago, the Universe was very very tiny, and very very hot.



Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

The laws of thermodynamics and causality exists only in this universe, not in whatever was before it.

There is no need for a beginning if there was neither time nor space.

So then the universe is eternal?
"Eternal" is itself a term which requires time to be at all valid.

CoinOperatedBoy
09-15-2009, 08:36 PM
Originally posted by: Jeff7
But if you're talking about a time when the entire volume of this Universe comfortably rested in a spot smaller (possibly MUCH smaller) than a marble, the laws we have now, forged through observation of the Universe in its present state, simply don't apply.

Not just much smaller, infinitely smaller.

Jeff7
09-15-2009, 08:38 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: Jeff7
But if you're talking about a time when the entire volume of this Universe comfortably rested in a spot smaller (possibly MUCH smaller) than a marble, the laws we have now, forged through observation of the Universe in its present state, simply don't apply.

Not just much smaller, infinitely smaller.
I've read things about its estimated size being anywhere from a meter in diameter down to a true singularity, an infinitesimally small point, from which space, time, and energy erupted/expanded.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:40 PM
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: CoinOperatedBoy
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield
Originally posted by: NSFW

The Big Bang Theory is pretty clear evidence that God does exist IMHO.

Actually, the Big Bang Theory, if you understood it, pretty much does away with god, no spacetime before beginning, no infinity or eternality so that problem is solved, it was always there, thus, no beginning neccessary.

You really don't have a clue what you are talking about, do you?

I don't think this is accurate either. The Big Bang Theory does nothing to either support or disprove God's existence. To play devil's advocate, a wily theist might claim that God himself exists outside of spacetime, so naturally he could be the catalyst that "caused" the Big Bang (even though cause and effect are a little meaningless when time doesn't exist).

But naturally, that's just another unfalsifiable, goofball theory and it's basically what I'm expecting from NSFW.

Actually, think about it, before the expansion that was the Big Bang there was neither time nor space, so nothing had to come before it since the concept of "before" didn't exist before it happened.

That removes the need for a beginning.

Well, exactly. But of course that ties people up in knots just as much, because even if you accept that there was no "before," one naturally might wonder how the whole thing got started from nothing at all. God becomes another explanation for people who otherwise have no idea. Other theories might exist (multiverse theories are pretty interesting), but might be just as unfalsifiable.

It does? I did not know that that annoyed people.

"nothing" is a human construct, this happened hundreds of billions of years ago. It's useless to use such a construct to comprehend it.

It's like, where were you before you were born? That is also something people can't comprehend logically, it doesn't mean that we actually began as thinking adults because we can't comprehend it.

Well, adding god just adds more complexity, obviously god has to be more complex than this univers and obviously he had ... NO BEGINNING...

And there we are back at square one again only this time we have added unneccessary complexity that there is no need to add.

Look up Lawrence Krauss, an excellent physisist who has a very understandable explanation of QM and MV, if you want the most eloquent debate to tie it together, search for Dawkins and Krauss on youtube, they had a "debate" there which i remember i thought should be school material because they entwine the whole business into one in such a way that you can easily understand it.

Obviously i don't know if it's still there, but try it.

JohnOfSheffield
09-15-2009, 08:42 PM
Originally posted by: NSFW
Originally posted by: JohnOfSheffield

The laws of thermodynamics and causality exists only in this universe, not in whatever was before it.

There is no need for a beginning if there was neither time nor space.

So then the universe is eternal?

Such a concept is just a human construct, no one can know that so i'll go with "i don't know" just like i don't know if there was a beginning, i find it fascinating that BB theory actually doesn't require a beginning.