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.
Proof? You want Proof? You can't handle the Proof! (with apologies to Jack..).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Hue
None of you guys can contribute to this area of discussion. None. The education is not here in the forum....anywhere.
Pretending to have a degree in Physics won't work....sorry.
Biology-Chemistry Physics Astronomy Mathematics....theres people with "multiple" degrees who challenge these subjects and argue issues.
These conversations are grade school baloney....PERIOD.
The attention span around here is getting pretty boring.
You guys just want to argue .....never ever do the ATHEISTS in this forum bring ANYTHING interesting to the table
NEVER. So the atheists here are simply not interesting. Good for getting the fingers nimble before the day begins ...
Nice to see your impressive and compelling opinions here, (I've thought better of you until now... sad!), Blue Hue.
As a reasonable and non-combative alternative explanation, I'd say there's plenty of educational experience represented here, at both the university and out in the real world levels. Mostly, of course, that IQ panel meter's needle is generally pegged way over towards the rational/atheist side (hey: even the renouned Mystc used to be an atheist unil a spacecraft landed near him and twiddled his mind that afternoon...)
The problem is that so many devout Christians have already made up their minds, and they feel important and credible to just have found and re-parrotted some essential tripe as being unassailably accurate. But sadly their happy continuation of nicely circular arguments here is legendary.
As well, they patently refuse to even quietly go look at any informative link(s) we provide for them, or if they do, they then keep the obvious logic and conclusions to themselves. They also probably want to send a shoe through the screen on their new laptop! The Very Nerve of those Mad Scientists! As noted, our anti-science heros here will then latch onto such inappropriate trivia as a mis-interpretarion of That danged Second Law thing.
OK: So be it! They prefer to use SBoC* ("Selective Beliefs of Convenience") as their primary intellectual benchmark and principle of operational thinking. No matter what the piles of evidence REALLY says...
Quote:
Originally Posted by looking4answers12
All I am left with right now is the question what is the purpose of this thread?
It seems to me some atheists sole purpose is to continue patting themselves and each other on the back, cuz those foolish theists can't prove God exists!
If this thread is a debate about "proof", then yeah, it's not the right thread for me. I've made it clear (in other threads) how I feel about that. Carry on!
Well, again, l4a, it was intended to provide a hopefully honest & polite debating forum for those who like to ponder such big questions. Too bad you have such heartburn over the sharing of ideas!
But those types of intellectually honest readers also like these pontifications to be at least slightly rational, and reflective of the latest accumulated thinking. It's not a forum where staunchly intransigent types will come to re-plow their same-old fields, over and over again, all while spouting combative insults against those who only came to have a lively debate.
You do know that there are some Christians here who literally can't stand to see the logic of our many well-defended and supported positions, yes? Hubris is far more of a Christian folly than one of the oft-berated and usually subdued and often emotionally battered scientist cohort.
On controversial subjects like abiogenesis, true scientists go through hell in the peer-reviewed process just to (potentially; there's never any guarantees of publication!) get their latest findings accepted. I'ts never some minor, simple process, unlike the vapid and undocumented claims made by Christian Genesis apologist/denialists. All they have to do is type it onto their own unajudicated website and, by golly, it's GOLD!
The purpose of the thread is to simply point out the logical fallacy of claiming that "God did it" is an explanation, when in fact it explains nothing. As posters interested in dealing with how to logically describe the universe, it can get frustrating to run into the same faulty arguments.
The thread is an attack on a straw man because "God did it" is not an explanation . . . it is a statement of fact a priori concerning the state of our reality. IOW . . . it just is. "Nature did it" is also NOT an explanation . . . the difference is it cannot account for life, consciousness or intelligence because if it has those characteristics it would be God.
Atheists bring nothing creative to the table and impose an arguement against fundy's , on all theism. Its always neatly tucked in there in order to railroad some credibility.
People can argue...but the bottom line is whats being sold?
Whats being sold? nothingness for nothingness. Earth, the pointless armpit of the universe obviously. I don't see any creative ideas and am logging out for good due to this waste of time.
Well, you stated that once before. Yet your presence endures. I'm not saying you should leave, but insulting all atheists deosn't help your case. Besides that, it isn't creative.
None of you guys can contribute to this area of discussion. None. The education is not here in the forum....anywhere.
Again: Speak for yourself. Maybe YOU do not know enough about areas of physics to discuss them, but that does not mean WE do not. I am more than aware of what my qualifications are in the field and I am happy to report that I am more than capable of discussing the topic.
So if you want to use the "2nd law of Thermodynamics" to evidence the existence of a god then by all means try to do so. Be warned that some of us actually are qualified in the field and will correct you on any errors you make while doing it.
Whoever if name calling people boring and uneducated is all you have to offer here then I am unsure as to why you even bother to post.
Some will probably think this is a stupid question, but I'll ask it anyway.
Why do you spend time trying to point things out to people who clearly are not going to see, understand, or agree with your logic?
Many reasons. I could spend all day listing them in fact. But I will give you a random sample:
1) In the past the power of religion was that people being sold it did not have access to information and counter arguments. With the internet however they do. So while you might not be able to change the mind of the person you are actually talking directly TO on a forum, there is some utility in ensuring that anywhere where these people post their ludicrous notions... the counter arguments are also posted for those who might happen along and read them.
2) Many of the ideas and claims of theism are just plain ludicrous. There is therefore utility in keeping theists talking as often the pure comical nonsense they come out with to defend their position is more damaging to their own cause than anything I could myself say against them.
3) Similar to 2 the character of many people when their position is questioned is embarrassing to people of faith. The pure ire, maliciousness and personal invective that people like mysticphd turn to when their baseless positions are exposed has utility. Again the best thing with people like that is to keep them talking and let the world see them for who they are.
4) I do not think I am perfect. I therefore know I must be wrong about SOME things. One very valid method of finding where is by conversing with people who disagree with me strongly. They can serve me by exposing to me the errors in my thinking, facts and ideas. While this happens less and less as each error of thought is corrected, it is still a worth pursuit. While no one has yet offered a shred of evidence, argument, data or reasons to suggest there even might be a god.... the people trying to do so have at least honed and perfected areas of my thinking on the subject and opened me up to new areas of thought I had not explored before.
5) I do not think it so hopeless however. I have met many people who have had their mind changed by argument and reasons. While I do not hold out hope for any personal specifically therefore... the discourse as a whole genuinely does change a lot of minds. The email inboxes of people like Dawkins, Dennett and Harris are full of people who have very much had their minds changed in this fashion and as a founding member of Atheist Ireland I find daily that so is mine.
6) As a species discourse is all we have really. It is our most powerful and important tool. I therefore use it. All the time. Even when the situation seems grim and hopeless. To do anything else is, for me, not an option.
Why is it that it seems to me that the people who say things like this are always the people you can happily bet firmly will be the most likely person to post again. To me it is like a person who stamps their feet in tantrum and storms out of a room... only to return seconds later saying "Oh and one more thing.....!".
The second I read you write this line I said to myself "I bet he posts again, and soon". Boy was I right. Always am. As you yourself said: "So predictable".
Why is it that it seems to me that the people who say things like this are always the people you can happily bet firmly will be the most likely person to post again. To me it is like a person who stamps their feet in tantrum and storms out of a room... only to return seconds later saying "Oh and one more thing.....!".
The second I read you write this line I said to myself "I bet he posts again, and soon". Boy was I right. Always am. As you yourself said: "So predictable".
So what..? you must have psi or something.
The reason I posted again was to show that I retracted post #64
Before I take my break and the reason I'm posting is the following...
1) I feel badly that my posts went sour due to being intimidated by name calling such as being compared to a muslim or fundy, along with other.
Fact is ...I have full confidence in evolution and don't think its fair that any notion otherwise is wrongfully assumed. ( I don't know how many times theists have to say this.
2) My intent was to conform, with OP style of approach as mentioned in this thread by referring to other interesting ideas with respects to properties of a Source.....not my ideas all together. Its obviously an area of interest to OP
3) It has not been a boring experience at CD and will happily retract this in above mentioned & explained sour entries.
4) The thermo idea is interesting and has to do with my particular approach to an idea in an area , which is being discussed. As well my extractions from the suggestion prob don't have anything at all to do with what is probably assumed.
5) So in all the effort was to stay on topic as usual.
You know Nozz I don't speed read posts, I think about what is being written...if it gets dicy no prob. It it gets just plain looking for arguements then whats the point. Anyway another day and have a good one...prob missed something, so you can fire away...or ignore.
Anyway again primitive notions and assumptions is what physics is founded upon...define string, spacetime. Whats being assumed when u use calculus in physics Nozz ?
Don't worry , taking a break
Not at all. I just observe past behavior and extrapolate it into a prediction. It is not complicated and does not need supernatural or paranormal explanations in order to explain it - even if you are the type of person keen to invent such explanations for easily explained phenomena.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Hue
The reason I posted again was to show that I retracted post #64
Your reason is irrelevant to my point. My point is just that if you see someone storm off in a huff saying they are not going to post again... then more often than not it is a safe bet that that person will post again. Your reason WHY is irrelevant to my point. And look, here you are posting again. Guess what my next prediction is? I predict you will do it again *shock horror*. Want to prove me right? Bet you will.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Hue
I feel badly that my posts went sour due to being intimidated by name calling
Pot, meet kettle. The name calling comes from you too. Calling people "boring and uneducated" is just as bad and you know it. So before you start whinging at how people treat you, clean up your own act first so you have a basis on which to speak.
Further, while you may not understand the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics you have no basis on which to extrapolate this into a claim that no one else does either. I certainly do and I am aware of a number of others who do. Your lack of education or qualification in the areas of science and specifically physics does not mean that this is not the education/career path the rest of us have engaged in and I can assure you I understand the law a lot more than you.
The problem I see is that too many theists have been told that atheism contradicts the 2nd law. So they repeat this over and over as they are convinced that it must be true.
Yet not one of them knows the law, understands it, or can adumbrate the reasoning behind its conflict with atheism. That is all my point was and aside from you calling the point boring I have not seen you counter that point. Nor will I since you are not posting again... even though we both know you will.
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.
Proof? You want Proof? You can't handle the Proof! (with apologies to Jack..).
