I bring up absolute truth because militant atheist treat their belief as such, same as a fundamentalist christian.
There's nothing absolute about it.
I said this in a facism thread once and I'll say it again, when you far enough to either side, you come around on the other side.
Those atheists who defend their beliefs as "the truth" as the same as fundamentalist christians. No one will believe otherwise, and therefore treat it as absolute truth.
Instead of saying why science can't prove this and that, how asking how science can prove something.
You may not be able to explain how something came about, but I bet you can expain the mechanics of such a thing. A mechanic may be able to tell you how a car runs, but I bet he can't explain the assembly line process involved.
Or you have the watchmaker analogy you can contend with.
Having said that, I always said if Christians wanted, they could have an easy out. The theory goes that the big bang happened, and all other process came about. But what caused the big bang? Insert god here.
Well, how do you explain evolution. New christians can say that our animals have always existed if false, plain and simple. It's okay to admit mistakes. Having said that, god could have set the entire mechanism into order and let it take it's course (the watchmaker). Just add god to the reason that our natural processes take place and there you go.
You see, the problem is that while science can explain how things work, it can't explain why or how those processes began.
Again, not my belief, but it is something.
Oh, and before you bring in the bible saying this and that about time and creation, the bible is not the literal word of god. Most christians will tell you that.
And anyhow, can you explain the similar flood stories I posted earlier?
In truth many cultures having flood stories is very difficult to explain. Floods are isolated events not experienced across the entire globe and it is very hard to believe that every culture on earth has experienced floods and incorporated stories of floods into their culture.
Let me know when every culture has a burning bush story.
For me it is believing in something one has no proof of to show others but it can have different meanings of course. Let's say you at the plate and you believe you are going to hit a homer..that is faith. Going up to a woman who is way out of your league and believing she is going to say yes when asked out is faith. Blind faith perhaps but faith none the less.
But yeah, believing in something is not actually faith I guess.
How would Native American (and Egyptians and Chinese and Mesopotamians near large rivers) view the flooding of the Mississippi?
How would people around the Indian and Pacific oceans have viewed tsunamis?
Is it really that hard to understand why so many cultures have a flood story?
And for the record, I agree with your take on hardcore atheists with a closed mind. Thats very similar to fundamentalist members of any religion.
says who?
Nobody previously mentioned naturalists here.Logical fallacy explained...??? when? I don't remember someone having obtained scientific evidence from the origin of time and space [or life for that matter]. All naturalists can do is speculate on the probable mechanisms... speculation which is clearly devoid of absolute truth in the context of KNOWING that x, y or ___ [take your pick] theory is the correct one.
more fallacy on your part.
I have faith there is more fallacy to come.
so which religion is correct?
those examples are testable to find out if true or not.
believing in something you can't see is faith.But yeah, believing in something is not actually faith I guess.
if you want to say that it's faith that people don't believe in God, then we are just playing around with definitions of faith.
just continue playing around with the words... you just LOVE those sarcastic digs.
The post you segmented was a response to RG. I pointed out that belief in a notion [one most athiests share] in which random chance, and natural processes are solely responsible for the origins of the universe and life still requires faith due to the lack of scientific evidence to positively back such a claim... AND seeing how that was the central focus of my post, the only fallacy here was your own ability to read.
My only error was engaging you in discourse... [yet again].
But go on... get the last word. You've always had it.
That is a correct statement.
Maybe because all of those ers were selling the same story in a slightly different way.
I take these types of similarities and do the opposite with them. Same thing with the story of Jesus...lol there have been a ton of "Jesuses" in different cultures throughout the world with identical life stories. They all support a different religion, and either one or none of the above have complete accuracy/truth throughout all of the scriptures (no other outcomes).
The fact that the 3 major religions have some similarity yet are radically different in many areas with each other...to the Muslims' eyes all Christians are going to , and vice versa, but they're using some of the same basic principles to sell themselves to followers... my bet is everyone's wrong.
Have you read "Demon Haunted World, Science as a Candle in the Dark" by Carl Sagan? I think you would like it. Plus, while it doesn't specifically mention an invisible pink unicorn, it does mention an invisible dragon with heatless fire breath whose skin does not "hold onto" any flour thrown on it and can anticipate your moves to avoid your hands trying to touch it. LOL
If you have read the book, you will get that, if you haven't it will seem crazy, until you know the context.
It is hands down my favorite book and if you read it, you will find that it seemingly follows your arguments here (and much more).
Show me what you have.
Just because you can't seem to comprehend something doesn't make it hodge podge of bad logic
But you do know its a type of food.I can tell you for certain what I had for breakfast today, but can't tell you what my co-worker had for breakfast.
It just means your not the right person to go around writing books on the subject.Does that mean I am wrong about what I had for breakfast?
Before or after the hodge podge of bad logic?This is the structure of mouse's "logic".
Then how do you call yourself a scientist if you don't know ?A scientist can tell you X, but can't tell you Y, therefore they must be wrong about X.
As long as you don't tell kids in the school books what man had for breakfast 20 million years ago your not really the problem.The truth about what I had for breakfast is completely independent on whether I can tell you what my co-worker had for breakfast.
Your mini rant adds nothing much to the topic. yes you and others like Manny focus on the topic starter and LOL at mouse, mouse is a re ,etc...
I think we get it. Anyone who still needs updates on me is either to new to make judgments themselves, or they are lacking in brain matter since they constantly need the immature reminders.
Do people who quote MLK have to remind people he was black?
Does Bill gates have to remind people what he accomplished before he orders Pizza over the www?
I honestly think I intimidate many for them to take the time to have to address me and my style of expressing myself before they can reply to any subject matter I present.
I would have said ID I said AD if you have problems reading then this topic may not be the place for you. (responding to your semi insults on page three)
see how immature you sound?
A judge may find OJ and Robert Blake to be innocent does that mean they are?Isn't that the theory that a judge found
Like I said before I don't support creationist please try and keep up.to be pretty blatantly motivated entirely by people pushing a literal interpretation of Christian Biblical creation?
That's quite a few people who do it on a daily basis you must do allot of LoL'ng.
There is scientific evidence the "earth" as a whole was flooded at one time around 6,000 years ago. Fossils that were known to be buried deep in the earth have been found on may mountain tops. So either there was a hug flood or else those fossils are not as old as the scientist claim them to be.
As for the original topic subject my point was I notice on many programs about the earth and space Darwin is not mentioned anymore, thus the reason for the Evolution may be slowing dying in many circles.
Were scientists simply trying to be ironic when they put "earth" in quotes?
If it was a response to RG, it was not clear......mainly because you very directly quoted me over that particular segment. Let me know if you need the link back to that post.
true or false: it takes faith to not believe in Santa Claus.I pointed out that belief in a notion [one most athiests share] in which random chance, and natural processes are solely responsible for the origins of the universe and life still requires faith due to the lack of scientific evidence to positively back such a claim... AND seeing how that was the central focus of my post, the only fallacy here was your own ability to read.
That wasn't your only error. The only one who thinks you are free from error in these threads is you.My only error was engaging you in discourse... [yet again].
Pretty much, but I have faith you'll try again to get it.But go on... get the last word. You've always had it.
How do you know? Were you there to see with your own eyes? Did they have cameras?
/mouse
I know I do a lot of LoLing at you.
Oddly enough, I dont think we have ever fully heard your alternative design theory. Please share.
AD is what it says. Alternative Design.
It gives many the alternative from the bible,creationism.Intelligent design, and Evolution.
We don't believe in the Ape to man theory.
We don't totally believe in the Bible. (the bible does has some historical facts)
We don't support creation.
We keep away from Intelligent design after they screwed up and used the word creation which domed them from the start and thus they lost in court.
Alternative Design allows for open minded people to consider alien beings or unknown powerful energy sources, and other creative thinking that we may not be able to mentally comprehend as a reason we may be on this planet but have the freedom to explore all possibilities.
We can't be labeled Evolutionist, bible thumper's, or Intelligent design supporters.
And we like to keep it that way.
I personaly back in 1978-79 and in 81 experienced a rare event that not only changed my life but my way of thinking about the universe and mankinds exzistance on this planet.
Its not fare I don't share this with others and time is getting near when I will have to reveal my given knowledge to those who deserve it.
Glad to be part of your everyday life experience.
creation is what it saysMain Entry: create
Synonyms: actualize, author, beget, bring into being, bring into existence, bring to pass, build, cause to be, coin, compose, conceive, concoct, cons ute, construct, contrive, design
So you are saying you are against Intelligent Design but still consider the idea that we are here by the design of intelligent alien beings.We keep away from Intelligent design after they screwed up and used the word creation which domed them from the start and thus they lost in court.
Alternative Design allows for open minded people to consider alien beings or unknown powerful energy sources, and other creative thinking that we may not be able to mentally comprehend as a reason we may be on this planet but have the freedom to explore all possibilities.
lol
Your AD theory isn't really a theory.
It's a support group (apparently of one member) that doesn't know what it's supporting.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
