Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
When the whole premise is having zero evidence to offer for your views, it seems to me THAT is the empty room. But to each their own!
You atheists confuse the abundance of evidence with no evidence because you arbitrarily assign all the evidence as "Not evidence of God." There is no scientific way for you to make any such determination about the evidence. It is preference and caprice. It is the same problem between measuring a complete absence versus an infinite presence which would give the same result to any measurement device you could construct.
Our Reality is ubiquitous and probably infinite. How can you possibly KNOW that the evidence we are gathering about it is NOT evidence of God?? Just creating a name for it like "Nature" without any conceivable idea of what it actually IS or any justification for assuming it is NOT God (it IS our Creator after all) does NOT qualify as a scientific basis.
You atheists confuse the abundance of evidence with no evidence because you arbitrarily assign all the evidence as "Not evidence of God." There is no scientific way for you to make any such determination about the evidence. It is preference and caprice. It is the same problem between measuring a complete absence versus an infinite presence which would give the same result to any measurement device you could construct.
Our Reality is ubiquitous and probably infinite. How can you possibly KNOW that the evidence we are gathering about it is NOT evidence of God?? Just creating a name for it like "Nature" without any conceivable idea of what it actually IS or any justification for assuming it is NOT God (it IS our Creator after all) does NOT qualify as a scientific basis.
And yet you have tried to tell us that your one-man experience is scientific.
You atheists confuse the abundance of evidence with no evidence because you arbitrarily assign all the evidence as "Not evidence of God." There is no scientific way for you to make any such determination about the evidence. It is preference and caprice. It is the same problem between measuring a complete absence versus an infinite presence which would give the same result to any measurement device you could construct.
Our Reality is ubiquitous and probably infinite. How can you possibly KNOW that the evidence we are gathering about it is NOT evidence of God?? Just creating a name for it like "Nature" without any conceivable idea of what it actually IS or any justification for assuming it is NOT God (it IS our Creator after all) does NOT qualify as a scientific basis.
Quote:
Originally Posted by phetaroi
And yet you have tried to tell us that your one-man experience is scientific.
No, you misunderstand. I see no way to determine EITHER basis as irrefutable fact which is why I not only balk, I actively denigrate your automatic assumption that such a thing as "Nature" exists separate from God. There is no way to determine that, period!!! It is purely preference and caprice! Of course, my personal experiences carry more weight with ME, which is why I am certain of their truth value!
No, you misunderstand. I see no way to determine EITHER basis as irrefutable fact which is why I not only balk, I actively denigrate your automatic assumption that such a thing as "Nature" exists separate from God. There is no way to determine that, period!!! It is purely preference and caprice! Of course, my personal experiences carry more weight with ME, which is why I am certain of their truth value!
And so I can equally say that my experience is just as valid as yours. And billions of others with different experiences can say their experience is just as valid as yours and mine. Which is no different than saying that anything goes...and that's not science.
And so I can equally say that my experience is just as valid as yours. And billions of others with different experiences can say their experience is just as valid as yours and mine. Which is no different than saying that anything goes...and that's not science.
Saying that all the evidence we are gathering is Nature NOT God is not science either!
I am bumping this thread for no other reason than to ask, where are all the A&A regular posters? I wasn't gone that long but it looks like a ghost forum. What's going on?
Probably a few posters derailing almost every thread with the same old nonsense has made the R & S and A & A forums less than interesting to many people, whether atheists or believers.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
You atheists confuse the abundance of evidence with no evidence because you arbitrarily assign all the evidence as "Not evidence of God." There is no scientific way for you to make any such determination about the evidence. It is preference and caprice. It is the same problem between measuring a complete absence versus an infinite presence which would give the same result to any measurement device you could construct.
Our Reality is ubiquitous and probably infinite. How can you possibly KNOW that the evidence we are gathering about it is NOT evidence of God?? Just creating a name for it like "Nature" without any conceivable idea of what it actually IS or any justification for assuming it is NOT God (it IS our Creator after all) does NOT qualify as a scientific basis.
As I said, some posters posting the same old refuted nonsense.
You atheists confuse the abundance of evidence with no evidence because you arbitrarily assign all the evidence as "Not evidence of God." There is no scientific way for you to make any such determination about the evidence. It is preference and caprice. It is the same problem between measuring a complete absence versus an infinite presence which would give the same result to any measurement device you could construct.
Our Reality is ubiquitous and probably infinite. How can you possibly KNOW that the evidence we are gathering about it is NOT evidence of God?? Just creating a name for it like "Nature" without any conceivable idea of what it actually IS or any justification for assuming it is NOT God (it IS our Creator after all) does NOT qualify as a scientific basis.
Mystic, my classification of how persuasive evidence is to me, is not arbitrary. Nor do I claim to have scientifically disproven a negative or something that's not even subject to scientific inquiry. I do not claim to possess gnosis that I don't have. At the same time, I don't default to belief based on that absence of gnosis, either. You are certainly within your rights to have different assumptions or defaults, of course. I just can't see a probability of the divine in my lack of omniscience. Vastness isn't proof of anything but relative size.
No, you misunderstand. I see no way to determine EITHER basis as irrefutable fact which is why I not only balk, I actively denigrate your automatic assumption that such a thing as "Nature" exists separate from God. There is no way to determine that, period!!! It is purely preference and caprice! Of course, my personal experiences carry more weight with ME, which is why I am certain of their truth value!
And when you can demonstrate in ANY meaningful way, the value of calling nature god, and that meaning ANYTHING different than what science already calls nature, your game of word swap shall continue to be demolished. Your argument is indistinguishable from the reasoning of a child.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
