The Atheism Thread

[Alf4lf4]

well that's not necessarily true, they may be able to understand the results, but if you don't understand the math and how to get to the results, then you are still taking some ones word for it. i find if you talk technically and with confidence, people will generally believe anything you say. i'm not really an electrician, i'm a shelf stacker at lidl's. but yeah, it's not the same thing as believing in a deity that even the most adamant of believers only form of proof is that because things exist, a consciousness must have created it. probably the weakest argument conceivable

'that's not necessarily true, they may be able to understand the results etc., but they still end up having to take some ones word for it.' Sorry mate I beg to differ. If you feel the need to understand the science behind dna results etc. you can study the subject at the OU or some other higher education institution. The information is there. it exists. you can get at it if you really want to. By contrast, the information that proves the existence of 'god' is not to be found. no matter how hard you look.

[weed_G]

the paternity test is probably not a good example as most people wont be able to understand the results

that's exactly why it's a good example ...the reason why I asked the question is almost everyone without fail will say they will accept the results from the lab(as I would) ...without any evidence or observation that the results are correct other than some sheets of a4 popped through the post ...blind faith ...taking men on their word ..no even ..just some paper with writing on it ....now hold that thought and move across to say 'the bible' ..ok larger and older but just some more paper with some writing on it ...I think you can see were I'm going with this

dont get me wrong, science has its place ..I suppose all Im saying is ..so does an alternative viewpoint ...the universe is complicated ..don't expect too much from any one discipline ..use the best of all of them ..be wary of the worst ..don't become what you think you oppose(thinking out loud)

ps scrag

didnt have time to reply to your last post, but I especially liked this

'my only qualms are with organised religions involving rules, codes etc etc, and not the believing in some form of higher existence, i'm not atheist, nor theist. i would call this theism, not religion.'

@Alf4lf4

I dont think your grasping what im not explaining very well

Edited September 14, 2009 by weed_G

[Alf4lf4]

the paternity test is probably not a good example as most people wont be able to understand the results

that's exactly why it's a good example ...the reason why I asked the question is almost everyone without fail will say they will accept the results from the lab(as I would) ...without any evidence or observation that the results are correct other than some sheets of a4 popped through the post ...blind faith ...taking men on their word ..no even ..just some paper with writing on it ....now hold that thought and move across to say 'the bible' ..ok larger and older but just some more paper with some writing on it ...I think you can see were I'm going with this

dont get me wrong, science has its place ..I suppose all Im saying is ..so does an alternative viewpoint ...the universe is complicated ..don't expect too much from any one discipline ..use the best of all of them ..don't become what you think you oppose(thinking out loud)

ps scrag

didnt have time to reply to your last post, but I especially liked this

'my only qualms are with organised religions involving rules, codes etc etc, and not the believing in some form of higher existence, i'm not atheist, nor theist. i would call this theism, not religion.'

@Alf4lf4

I dont think your grasping what im not explaining very well

[ratdog]

the information that proves the existence of 'god' is not to be found. no matter how hard you look.

How do you know that Alf?

[scraglor]

the paternity test is probably not a good example as most people wont be able to understand the results

that's exactly why it's a good example .

it was a good example for the point you were trying to make, but not for the point i was trying to make

[Laramie]

the information that proves the existence of 'god' is not to be found. no matter how hard you look.

How do you know that Alf?

It was a smartie and he's eaten it.

[scraglor]

well that's not necessarily true, they may be able to understand the results, but if you don't understand the math and how to get to the results, then you are still taking some ones word for it. i find if you talk technically and with confidence, people will generally believe anything you say. i'm not really an electrician, i'm a shelf stacker at lidl's. but yeah, it's not the same thing as believing in a deity that even the most adamant of believers only form of proof is that because things exist, a consciousness must have created it. probably the weakest argument conceivable

'that's not necessarily true, they may be able to understand the results etc., but they still end up having to take some ones word for it.' Sorry mate I beg to differ. If you feel the need to understand the science behind dna results etc. you can study the subject at the OU or some other higher education institution. The information is there. it exists. you can get at it if you really want to. By contrast, the information that proves the existence of 'god' is not to be found. no matter how hard you look.

yeah, but it could take you 20 years, and a lot of people would never get it at all. the point weed g was making was that people take things on faith, but obviously your point i understand as it's the same point i've been trying to make all along

[scraglor]

just to add, i believe science also has limits, science can only explain HOW things work. but can NEVER explain why, and good scientists wouldn't claim this

Edited September 14, 2009 by scraglor

[ratdog]

the information that proves the existence of 'god' is not to be found. no matter how hard you look.

How do you know that Alf?

Sorry i misunderstood your post

[solarchild]

Dont want to muddy the waters any, its a good discussion, but aside from having to have some faith because of not knowing all the science about about a given thing, are we operating on faith a little bit when believing that existance is real?

Its a bit of a cliche but how do we know that anything is true? Science and before that religion enables us to make sense of something as we percieve it, we may well be percieving it all wrong anyway though.

[Alf4lf4]

the paternity test is probably not a good example as most people wont be able to understand the results

that's exactly why it's a good example ...the reason why I asked the question is almost everyone without fail will say they will accept the results from the lab(as I would) ...without any evidence or observation that the results are correct other than some sheets of a4 popped through the post ...blind faith ...taking men on their word ..no even ..just some paper with writing on it ....now hold that thought and move across to say 'the bible' ..ok larger and older but just some more paper with some writing on it ...I think you can see were I'm going with this

dont get me wrong, science has its place ..I suppose all Im saying is ..so does an alternative viewpoint ...the universe is complicated ..don't expect too much from any one discipline ..use the best of all of them ..be wary of the worst ..don't become what you think you oppose(thinking out loud)

ps scrag

didnt have time to reply to your last post, but I especially liked this

'my only qualms are with organised religions involving rules, codes etc etc, and not the believing in some form of higher existence, i'm not atheist, nor theist. i would call this theism, not religion.'

@Alf4lf4

I dont think your grasping what im not explaining very well

That's because you have no explanation to offer, just obscurantist bullshit. Our understanding of the universe and everything in it has progressed through science. Religion explains nothing and contributes nothing. You wrap a phrase such as Blind Faith up in your sophist bullshit and think you've put one of your nonsensical points across. I smell a rat in your corner weed. I've a suspicion that you are a creationist zealot. You are not taking part in a genuine debate you are simply using this thread and any others to advance your 'god dude' cause.

[ratdog]

are we operating on faith a little bit when believing that existance is real?

Its a bit of a cliche but how do we know that anything is true?

Fuck me Solar, it`s a bit early for that ain`t it?

I know what you mean though, everything`s a vibration right?

[solarchild]

Fuck me Solar, it`s a bit early for that ain`t it?

I know what you mean though, everything`s a vibration right?

I know mate, on a monday an all! Sorry

[Guest grandad]

there is no god.

[ratdog]

there is no god.

Oh Grandad, you could`ve dress it up a little.