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.
I would have thought that was obvious by my answer to you. Bob is NEITHER. He does NOT have a definitive state of mind about it. Whenever he elects to select a definitive state of mind, such as demanding a default position on it, THEN Bob has a BELIEF about it EITHER WAY.
He is calling anybody that doesn't "yes, I agree with you 100%" a non believer. I mean its 1/2 true.
It meaningless anyway. The point that has to be avoided is that any claim with a mechanism and repeatable predictions is more valid than one that is not. It doesn't matter what a person believes.
Like it doesn't matter that a person "lacks belief in evolution". Or that they "lack believe that we are part of a system" When a person fights either of two positions they are clearly 1/2 a tick off of reality. They are clinging onto a statement of belief about god (or lack of belief) like that belief is saving their life.
The video I posted from fermi lab at the 5:30 mark (I think ) summed it up perfecting.
It went something like: am not asking you to believe it, in fact you shouldn't. But the data matches exactly what we see.
But many are not here to settle on the best we have. they are here to fight any belief so that we do not, as trans said, "give them ammo". The site is set up that way. Its funnels all the data in one direction. Cuts out anything that might change the flow.
Insults aside, you seem not to understand the FACT that "a definitive state of mind" about ANYTHING is a BELIEF absent supporting evidence and for this metaphysical issue there can be no evidence for EITHER definitive BELIEF whatever valence, polarity, or "whatever" you assign to it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TRANSPONDER
You are still either failing to understand the significance about valid belief and invalid or just pretending to.
Just learn to read better. Absent evidence there can BE no valid belief either pro or con just BELIEF! You have no evidence either so your default belief (definitive state of mind about Reality) is not valid either, your nonsense about claims notwithstanding.
Quote:
If the evidence supports the god -claim, produce it.
If the evidence supports the no god-claim, produce it.
Quote:
Ok I know you produce your God-claim with a lot of science -jargon stuck onto it to make it look impressive, but that won't do. Your 'science' has been refuted several times and (despite your attempts to wriggle out of it) got nowhere on trying to submit your ideas on the science forum. Frankly, if you thought your ideas would stand up there, you'd try harder.
Are you an inveterate pathological liar or just a liar for atheism? My science has NEVER been refuted, not once, not by anyone! You have been given two reasons for the closing of the thread on the science forum yet you still lie and try to paint it as some sort of rejection of my science. That is a pathetic attempt to discredit what you seem incapable of comprehending. What bothers you more, Arq, that there are plausible scientifically supportable (not proven) hypotheses and actual evidence of the notion of space as a repository for BECs that forms the beginnings of evidential support for a more rigorous Resonance Theory of Consciousness (it exists, look it up)?
Or is it the fact that things once thought ridiculous in the ancient lore about God are finding surprising parallels in the science of today? Things like Heaven being "up there" (outer space). The "lakes of fire" being out there (galaxies). The "firmament" (material Reality) being separate from them. God's Spirit (Consciousness) bringing order to the chaos of the Big Bang. Humans being created from the "dust" of the stars (evolved hominids). Women being created from a "rib" of humankind (also known as an offshoot or separate branch of hominid).
Last edited by MysticPhD; 02-15-2021 at 06:04 PM..
We are talking about belief, not acceptance. Stay with those terms that you started with. Words have meaning. Acceptance is not belief. Ignorance is lack of knowledge, not lack of understanding. They mean different things. I think you understand all this very well and obfuscating because your argument has failed.
Acceptance is not belief? Explain please how you accept something is true or false without believing it is true or false? Acceptance of the proposition on god would be believing it, so my terms haven't changed the meaning of my post . Nothing has failed except your attempts to confuse the matter with wordsmithing .
Ignorance, BTW, can be both lack of knowledge and lack of understanding. Having never heard there is a country called Australia is a lack of knowledge. Knowing there is a place called Australia but thinking it is in Europe is a lack of understanding.
And being ignorant of something can equate to non belief, functionally speaking , which WAS the point. So please pay attention and don't get so caught up in your own mind you miss the point. There are aborigine peoples around the world that have never heard of the concept of Jesus Christ. That is why many sects send out missionaries. They are ignorant of the concept of Christian salvation and all it's tenets, so they don't believe. That they don't believe due to having never heard of Christianity is functionally no different from having heard the claims but rejecting them. In either case, they don't believe. And again, that WAS the point, so it would help if you didn't spend so much time trying to figure out how to dispute a post just for the sake of it , and a little more on comprehending the point being made.
Last edited by NatesDude; 02-15-2021 at 05:59 PM..
Just learn to read better. Absent evidence there can BE no valid belief either pro or con just BELIEF! You have no evidence either so your default belief (definitive state of mind about Reality) is not valid either, your nonsense about claims notwithstanding. If the evidence supports the no god-claim, produce it. Are you an inveterate pathological liar or just a liar for atheism? My science has NEVER been refuted, not once, not by anyone! You have been given two reasons for the closing of the thread on the science forum yet you still lie and try to paint it as some sort of rejection of my science. That is a pathetic attempt to discredit what you seem incapable of comprehending. What bothers you more, Arq, that there are a plausible scientifically supportable (not proven) hypothesis and actual evidence of the notion of space as a repository for BECs that forms the beginnings of support for a more rigorous Resonance Theory of Consciousness (it exists, look it up)?
Or is it the fact that things once thought ridiculous in the ancient lore about God are finding surprising parallels in the science of today? Things like Heaven being "up there" (outer space). The "lakes of fire" being out there (galaxies). The "firmament" (material Reality) being separate from them. God's Spirit (Consciousness) bringing order to the chaos of the Big Bang. Humans being created from the "dust" of the stars (evolved hominids). Women being created from a "rib" of humankind (also known as an offshoot or separate branch of hominid).
Understanding each other is not the primary goal here mystic. this is not what its about. Its not about you being right or wrong or even understanding you and just lacking belief.
This is about stopping anybody with any idea that "they" can use against us. Against our statement of belief about god.
That is not just "I lack belief". This is anti-religion activism fighting anything said by anybody at anytime. Unless of course they heel like good believers should.
Acceptance is not belief? Explain please how you accept something is true or false without believing it is true or false? Acceptance of the proposition on god would be believing it, so my terms haven't changed the meaning of my post . Nothing has failed except your attempts to confuse the matter with wordsmithing .
Ignorance, BTW, can be both lack of knowledge and lack of understanding. Having never heard there is a country called Australia is a lack of knowledge. Knowing there is a place called Australia but thinking it is in Europe is a lack of understanding.
And being ignorant of something can equate to non belief, functionally speaking , which WAS the point. So please pay attention and don't get so caught up in your own mind you miss the point. There are aborigine peoples around the world that have never heard of the concept of Jesus Christ. That is why many sects send out missionaries. They are ignorant of the concept of Christian salvation and all it's tenets, so they don't believe. That they don't believe due to having never heard of Christianity is functionally no different from having heard the claims but rejecting them. In either case, they don't believe. And again, that WAS the point, so it would help if you didn't spend so much time trying to figure out how to dispute a post just for the sake of it , and a little more on comprehending the point being made.
You seem to be very emotionally attached to whatever this is that you are doing. I am taking a break.
You seem to be very emotionally attached to whatever this is that you are doing. I am taking a break.
Not emotionally. I do enjoy a vigorous debate, especially with someone who's main objective seems to be to disagree just to disagree. And it's cold and snowy outside , I don't watch much TV, and I'm not out in the countryside to adequately enjoy the snow and weather properly , so there's this place
I do sense someone trying to gracefully exit and skitter away though. Think things through better before rushing to post next time . Until then , take care and stay warm.
Just learn to read better. Absent evidence there can BE no valid belief either pro or con just BELIEF! You have no evidence either so your default belief (definitive state of mind about Reality) is not valid either, your nonsense about claims notwithstanding. If the evidence supports the no god-claim, produce it. Are you an inveterate pathological liar or just a liar for atheism? My science has NEVER been refuted, not once, not by anyone! You have been given two reasons for the closing of the thread on the science forum yet you still lie and try to paint it as some sort of rejection of my science. That is a pathetic attempt to discredit what you seem incapable of comprehending. What bothers you more, Arq, that there are plausible scientifically supportable (not proven) hypotheses and actual evidence of the notion of space as a repository for BECs that forms the beginnings of evidential support for a more rigorous Resonance Theory of Consciousness (it exists, look it up)?
Or is it the fact that things once thought ridiculous in the ancient lore about God are finding surprising parallels in the science of today? Things like Heaven being "up there" (outer space). The "lakes of fire" being out there (galaxies). The "firmament" (material Reality) being separate from them. God's Spirit (Consciousness) bringing order to the chaos of the Big Bang. Humans being created from the "dust" of the stars (evolved hominids). Women being created from a "rib" of humankind (also known as an offshoot or separate branch of hominid).
Of course if there is no persuasive evidence either way then the belief for or against is of equal value. But the evidence does not support a god claim. If you deny that your science arguments have never been refuted you must have the memory span of a mayfly. I have had to remind you several times that your claim that EM energy is not measurable was refuted. Just for one.
Your attempt toclaim 'lakes of fire' quotes as science in the Bible is laughable.
Of course if there is no persuasive evidence either way then the belief for or against is of equal value. But the evidence does not support a god claim. If you deny that your science arguments have never been refuted you must have the memory span of a mayfly. I have had to remind you several times that your claim that EM energy is not measurable was refuted. Just for one.
Your attempt to claim 'lakes of fire' quotes as science in the Bible is laughable.
I never made any such claims. The parallels are just interesting. My claim about the EM energy that comprises our consciousness is that it is not directly measurable but as quanta are in the same range as the EM energy we CAN measure. That is like the Dark Energy we can't directly measure either. What causes your misinterpretations and misunderstandings is the paucity of your actual knowledge about the phenomena under discussion. Your common sense attempts to reconcile what you think I said results in your arrogant presumption that I have EVER been debunked.
I do sense someone trying to gracefully exit and skitter away though. Think things through better before rushing to post next time . Until then , take care and stay warm.
Did I skitter away? Hmm I must have forgotten I can do such a thing.
Again attributing motives to someone's post is a show of weakness when one is unable to respond with anything other than repeat the same thing. it gets boring and I stop responding to stuff that bores me.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NatesDude
Acceptance is not belief? Explain please how you accept something is true or false without believing it is true or false? Acceptance of the proposition on god would be believing it, so my terms haven't changed the meaning of my post ... .
You have interesting ways of using words. What kind of belief in true or false is involved if I accept an offer to sell my house? You may want to be more precise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NatesDude
Ignorance, BTW, can be both lack of knowledge and lack of understanding. Having never heard there is a country called Australia is a lack of knowledge. Knowing there is a place called Australia but thinking it is in Europe is a lack of understanding.
Ignorance is just one thing and it is always tied to an object/concept and it belongs to the individual. Mistaking Australia for Austria is not ignorance, it can be confusion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NatesDude
And being ignorant of something can equate to non belief, functionally speaking , which WAS the point. ...There are aborigine peoples around the world that have never heard of the concept of Jesus Christ. ... They are ignorant of the concept of Christian salvation and all it's tenets, so they don't believe. That they don't believe due to having never heard of Christianity is functionally no different from having heard the claims but rejecting them. ...
Ignorance is cured by knowledge, not belief. You cannot believe or disbelieve something you know nothing about. You can only not- know. Your bolded - I accept that this is what YOU believe. I believe you are wrong. You cannot disbelieve something you know nothing about.
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.
