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.
How is it that you continually fail to recognize that YOU miss the mark for a similar reason - A priori lack of faith in God. The only difference is that you believe you are right and there is no God which is NOT supportable by anything but your preference and choice of evidence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
Thanks Mystic. Again you validate a claim I have made about your - take note folks.
Logic says that the burden of proof is on the one making a claim, not on the one who doubts it.
Since it is currently not knowable and not falsifiable, neither of us can rely on EITHER belief state as the "right one," despite your scam concern about "claims." A lack of belief is a belief state just as my belief is. Neither has your "burden of proof" nonsense because neither is a so-called claim. IF you are claiming your belief state is the one that is "right" and comports with Reality, that would become a claim invoking the burden. You don't get to default your way into your preferred belief state. That is why "We do not know." As long as we do NOT have any irrefutable answers about why we are or what our Reality IS, God questions remain in the area of belief states.
Modern physics breaks down with the concept of the initial singularity that is postulated to be the state of the universe prior to the big bang, this is correct. Theoretically, the universe existed in a state in which all matter/energy was compressed so completely that no space existed. Space and time are equal partners, however.
Wikipedia
Spacetime
In physics, spacetime is any mathematical model that fuses the three dimensions of space and the one dimension of time into a single four-dimensional continuum. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spacetime
If no space existed, than no time existed. If no time exists than nothing should occur. Yet another apparent example of a violation of the law of noncontradiction.
Since the concept of the initial singularity is simply a result of a conclusion, that reversing the expansion of the universe leads to the condition of a singularity, and since that condition leads to a contradiction, it is fair to surmise that the condition of a true and complete state of a singularity is not possible. Which leads to the conclusion that something else must occur before the state of a true singularity occurs. What apparently occurred is a titanic explosion we refer to as the big bang. What exactly occurred prior to the big bang is still in question. We have every right to suppose that the big bang is simply the effect of an earlier cause. That earlier cause is the subject of current investigation.
Is the universe itself an "isolated system?" Or is the universe drawing energy from another source? Provide evidence that would serve to prove either conclusion.
Since you don't "care about the different religious views", may I assume you'll stop posting?
I should stop posting in the Religion forum because I am more accepting of religion?
I have already accepted that this is the unofficial Atheist-B forum. What more do you want? But I don't have to respect your ugly belief system. Sometimes I think you are a closet Christian apologist because your ugly tone helps to support religious belief. Am I possibly correct?
Harold walks down the street. Fifty people see Harold. They clearly recognize Harold. Now some might think he's nice, or not nice, generous, or stingy. But everyone who knows Harold will recognize him and could point him out in a police lineup.
If there is a god, those same fifty people won't be able to identify the same being. And the answer to that is -- more pablum for the masses.
if people all are describing the traits of the same harry will see some overlap and we can assume that the overlaps are more valid than the traits only one or two claim.
Since it is currently not knowable and not falsifiable, neither of us can rely on EITHER belief state as the "right one," despite your scam concern about "claims." A lack of belief is a belief state just as my belief is. Neither has your "burden of proof" nonsense because neither is a so-called claim. IF you are claiming your belief state is the one that is "right" and comports with Reality, that would become a claim invoking the burden. You don't get to default your way into your preferred belief state. That is why "We do not know." As long as we do NOT have any irrefutable answers about why we are or what our Reality IS, God questions remain in the area of belief states.
'God' exists is a claim. Not beleiving the claim is not. You have to justify it. Just calling everything 'God' is a cheat. Everyone can see this and they probably see that Cosmic Intelligence is the Least that is required to make 'God' exist. Just making us is not - evolution does that.
Ok, you concede that we do not know. So - why then believe? Faith? Faith is no good reason for believing anything.
You experiences? There are other interpretations of those. God putting truth into your head? God might start with a basic grasp of 1st year logic to begin with.
I should stop posting in the Religion forum because I am more accepting of religion?
I have already accepted that this is the unofficial Atheist-B forum. What more do you want? But I don't have to respect your ugly belief system. Sometimes I think you are a closet Christian apologist because your ugly tone helps to support religious belief. Am I possibly correct?
keep in mind ozzy, phet was scared by religion. so I am not sure "ugly tone" fits as much "hurt tone".
it doesn't mean everything she says is wrong. But we need to evaluate the stance based on the conditions. Religious people saying a certain segment of the population are an abomination is the problem. That teaching is wrong and produces adult children of abuse that in turn, mess with the rest us.
the scared person, then, confluences that into anti-god thinking. Any and all talk of anything related to god is thought dangerous. thats not right or wrong, it just is.
'God' exists is a claim. Not beleiving the claim is not. You have to justify it. Just calling everything 'God' is a cheat. Everyone can see this and they probably see that Cosmic Intelligence is the Least that is required to make 'God' exist. Just making us is not - evolution does that.
Ok, you concede that we do not know. So - why then believe? Faith? Faith is no good reason for believing anything.
You experiences? There are other interpretations of those. God putting truth into your head? God might start with a basic grasp of 1st year logic to begin with.
I would say that Atheism is a bigger claim that needs more support. Why? Because most people just don't believe in it. Atheism has absolutely no scientific support.
I would say that Atheism is a bigger claim that needs more support. Why? Because most people just don't believe in it. Atheism has absolutely no scientific support.
Numbers prove nothing. I do not accept that science does not support atheism. The sheer lack of valid scientific support for Theism hands the win by default to atheism. You can try, but the debate has gone on a long time, and theism has not done too well.
Neither has the attempt to dismiss negative evidence. The parameters of the world and universe we live in are known. The banana is not apparently in the drawer, therefore the conclusion is, there is no banana there.
A banana we don't know about or a banana in Tuvalu is irrelevant. It's why Deism is the other side of the coin from atheism.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OzzyRules
I should stop posting in the Religion forum because I am more accepting of religion?
I have already accepted that this is the unofficial Atheist-B forum. What more do you want? But I don't have to respect your ugly belief system. Sometimes I think you are a closet Christian apologist because your ugly tone helps to support religious belief. Am I possibly correct?
No You have tried the 'Oh they are trying to ban me!' whine before. Nobody is stopping you from posting and nobody is stopping us from calling you and anyone else on whatever claims anyone thinks deserve query.
It's called 'discussion and debate' and is why we are here (and maybe the Forum, too). However, if you consistently complain about the waste of time or futility of doing it (it doesn't look like it to us), then anyone is justified in asking whether or why you want to carry on. It just looks pathetic to pretend that is some kind of attempt to ban you.
We couldn't even if we wanted to. And, Ozzy, as persistent pain in the ass nuisances go, you aren't very high on the list.
keep in mind ozzy, phet was scared by religion. so I am not sure "ugly tone" fits as much "hurt tone".
it doesn't mean everything she says is wrong. But we need to evaluate the stance based on the conditions. Religious people saying a certain segment of the population are an abomination is the problem. That teaching is wrong and produces adult children of abuse that in turn, mess with the rest us.
the scared person, then, confluences that into anti-god thinking. Any and all talk of anything related to god is thought dangerous. thats not right or wrong, it just is.
I agree, but neither extreme is a good place to be. One can never be spiritually whole that way.
'God' exists is a claim. Not believing the claim is not. You have to justify it. Just calling everything 'God' is a cheat. Everyone can see this and they probably see that Cosmic Intelligence is the Least that is required to make 'God' exist. Just making us is not - evolution does that.
Those are YOUR beliefs about the issue of God. Pretending they are NOT beliefs is ludicrous. A belief state is a belief state whatever constitutes it. God is a belief about WHY we exist and WHAT our Reality IS. Until we have irrefutable proof of either, issues of God are belief states pro AND con. Your scam and con about claims and burden of proof are bogus and designed to instantiate your belief state as the "Right or Correct one" without having to substantiate it. It is not surprising that your atheist cohorts agree with the con. But a state of belief about an issue is a belief, like it or not. It is not a claim when we legitimately do NOT know WHY we exist and WHAT our Reality IS. Your preferred beliefs about those issues do NOT decide the issue.
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.
You have tried the 'Oh they are trying to ban me!' whine before. Nobody is stopping you from posting and nobody is stopping us from calling you and anyone else on whatever claims anyone thinks deserve query.