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.
OK. Show us the evidence that scientific research institutions are deliberately avoiding any consideration of God Show us where they have promoted ANY idea that anything has nothing to do with "any religious concepts of God." Show us where science is avoiding God. Links. Studies. Policies. Anything.
Technically most are avoiding considering a god did it, but this is not deliberate, it is because the evidence for a god doing it is so low it is not worth considering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy
What I think happens is that research institutions get grants or other funding approved to look into things relevant to the field of science that the particular institution works in. If they said they wanted to research "the phenomenon of God," they would be required to present a hypothesis and a research plan, a budget, and a testing protocol, just like research for a new medicine.
Yes, the biologists I worked with when I was a student never started with the idea of gods, even the religious ones.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mensaguy
Show us where somebody has done that. Just for laughs, show us where somebody has TRIED to do that.
There was the prayer study that showed prayers do not work.
Another that dwells on feces. But that figures...because it is so representative of your character.
All you have is your erroneous (and disrespectful) opinion.
My perception is my perception...and...it comports definitively as God & objectively exists.
That is all that's needed for it to be fully meritorious. Your no account, rude, ignorant, comment (that you are so miserable & nasty to think is justified simply because my view differs from yours) notwithstanding.
Don't like that? Too bad. Either learn to suck it up, or just remain your miserable self.
With all due respect, where do you come up with this "stuff"?
The oldest and most common Theist concept in human history.
Predates the Religions you rail against by a long, long ways.
I'm sure you just spout off without having educated yourself about it to any degree. But...that is typical around here.
As respects the perceptions of God that Mystic and I have...ANY study studies God. And you know that.
God even IS the study...as well as the Scientific Method itself...and anything and everything else.
Only if your belief is true, something you have yet to show.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GldnRule
So...to demand "link studies", is not applicable.
There are other ideas about gods, and you still need to show your belief is true. So yes, you still need to provide evidence.
As I Said, mensa, "They have instantiated the idea that whatever it is, our Reality has nothing to do with any religious concepts of God, which is largely true from their perspective and interests." I spent 30+ years in that milieu and the issue of God never came up nor would anyone ever embarrass themselves by bringing it up in their professional work. They would never get anyone to pay them for their work if they did. I hid my mystical side for that very reason. That does not alter the fact that they only assume it is not God because they do not know WHAT the hell our Reality actually is. There is no way to scientifically ascertain that. That is the very definition of the unknown!
If there is no way to ascertain that, why are you asserting that it is true? You seem to be implying that there is a world wide conspiracy in the entire research community of every scientific discipline, conspiring to make sure that God isn't mentioned in any scientific study.
Why are you doing that? It would be impossible to maintain a conspiracy involving millions of people, so that obviously isn't happening. What evidence is there that any scientific study anywhere is deliberately omitting God from the studies?
You don't get to make statements like this without being challenged to provide support for it: "That does not alter the fact that they only assume it is not God because they do not know WHAT the hell our Reality actually is. There is no way to scientifically ascertain that. That is the very definition of the unknown!"
Why do you keep saying they (whoever "they" is) assume it is not God? While you're at it, why should they assume it is God?
Only if your belief is true, something you have yet to show.
There are other ideas about gods, and you still need to show your belief is true. So yes, you still need to provide evidence.
I've shown it 100%. The word/term is defined, I recognize that which exists in that context as God to me.. It's generic, and self-substantiating.
It is very simple & straightforward...completely innocuous...and only a rude, miserable person plagued with some strange "Godophobia" headtrip would have something negative to say about it.
Another may not have the same perception...but that in no way negates mine. And to claim my evidence based perception invalid, is indicative of a disrespectful person lacking couth and character.
Another that dwells on feces. But that figures...because it is so representative of your character.
All you have is your erroneous (and disrespectful) opinion.
My perception is my perception...and...it comports definitively as God & objectively exists.
That is all that's needed for it to be fully meritorious. Your no account, rude, ignorant, comment (that you are so miserable & nasty to think is justified simply because my view differs from yours) notwithstanding.
Don't like that? Too bad. Either learn to suck it up, or just remain your miserable self.
Sorry, but that's just not the way it is.
You may believe anything you wish. But once you start blathering about it in a public space where I am also located, then you're gonna get push-back.
It's not a problem that you think there is some sort of god or gods. It is a problem when you think others don't get to dispute that. Freedom of speech and freedom of thought goes both ways. The trouble is, you religionists feel that you are always in control. You're not.
As far as my language...yeah, "bull toddy" is so horrible. But just for the record, as I have said previously (but I won't cut and paste it), I find your attitude to be as insulting as any that I see in this forum. And as far as "our" criticisms of your broadcasted beliefs, "either learn to suck it up, or just remain your miserable self".
I've shown it 100%. The word/term is defined, I recognize that which exists in that context as God to me.. It's generic, and self-substantiating.
It is very simple & straightforward...completely innocuous...and only a rude, miserable person plagued with some strange "Godophobia" headtrip would have something negative to say about it.
Another may not have the same perception...but that in no way negates mine. And to claim my evidence based perception invalid, is indicative of a disrespectful person lacking couth and character.
self-substantiating. LOL. Then in that case everything that everyone things is true, is now true.
I've shown it 100%. The word/term is defined, I recognize that which exists in that context as God to me.. It's generic, and self-substantiating.
It is very simple & straightforward...completely innocuous...and only a rude, miserable person plagued with some strange "Godophobia" headtrip would have something negative to say about it.
Another may not have the same perception...but that in no way negates mine. And to claim my evidence based perception invalid, is indicative of a disrespectful person lacking couth and character.
And I have refuted your arguments 100%. That you need to misrepresent that and resort to ad hominems is so fundy-think.
self-substantiating. LOL. Then in that case everything that everyone things is true, is now true.
Wrong.
None of the meanings/definitions of the relative word/term is, "Everything that anyone thinks"...and you know that.
That's just a disrespectful, mocking, wiseguy statement (replete with the "LOL")...typical of your ilk.
OTOH, there are Religions that have Beliefs that are scientifically self-substantiating to be "true" (at the top of the Scale of Probability).
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.
But just for the record, as I have said previously (but I won't cut and paste it), I find your attitude to be as insulting as any that I see in this forum. And as far as "our" criticisms of your broadcasted beliefs, "either learn to suck it up, or just remain your miserable self".
