You cannot argue with cultists...it doesn't work.

Uhhhh -- no. You made a bit of a leap by equating religion with no-belief in "evolution", and you felt that you completely disproved religion based on your logic. If you review your email, you'll see that you didn't even mention "evolution" until the last paragraph. You spent most of your time arguing that logic debunks religion, and only tagged evolution on at the end. I'm only asking that you apply the same logic analysis to Athiesm that you just applied to religion.

Disclaimer -- I'm most likely out of my league on this since I don't even know enough to throw around the latin, so if it's OK with you, all that I'm interested in is the plain English terms. I think that I'll be able to follow you.

http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/ear.gif

Trekkor, facts, verifiable facts are the only response that is meaningful. Save the preaching, fire and brimstone, guilt trips and other nonsense for your non-thinking friends. Go back and read the tripe you have put out. When people call you on it, you back down and say that not exactly what you meant or that OK, so there are some other factors but my main point is valid. Don't you put any effort into presenting a logical arguement or response?
As far as faith and prayer, you remember that when the last pope was ill, millions and millions of people prayed for his healing. Probablily more people praying for the same thing in the entire history of the world. Result? A dead pope. Yep, religions have such a great track record in saving people, curing illness, saving the enviroment, expanding mans medical knowledge (which I'm sure you are only too happy to use), etc. As far as governments failings, they can't be too bad (even with a religious nut in the whitehouse). After all 93% (according to the UN figures) of people in the world exist without war. That's better than any religion has done.

RPKESQ;
The fundimental issue that I have with your arguments is that you expect God to operate the way you want him to operate. God is in no shape, size or form human. God doesn't operate or think the way a human thinks. You see a starving person and ask yourself why doesn't God feed this person. You see a dead person and you're angry at God for not letting them live. You are looking at these problems like a human. Now I'm not God, and don't claim to know his mind. Unfortunately he doesn't call me up to tell me what's on his mind. I have been able to grasp a few things though...

1) Everyone dies. It's not a question of if, but when. It's pretty obvious that if (for the sake of discussion) God created the world, he chose to not populate it with immortal beings.

2) Bad things happen, all the time. You seem angry that God doesn't stop them. (BTW, if he did do it today, it would be the end of the world as we know it because bad things happen everywhere all the time.) But, if God wanted YOU to do something about the bad things, would he step in? Since we all have free will, if God wanted us to excercise that free will, he would need to give us choices. If you see someone who is needs help, you have a choice.

3) You seem to want to know why God (if he exists) hasn't stepped in already. But the Bible clearly says that God will return when we least expect it. So the fact that God hasn't stepped in yet doesn't mean that God doesn't exist, and it doesn't mean that God exists. It does mean that you have another day to try to help others and relieve suffering.

In theologic terms, what you are arguing is a form of Idality, specifically making God (or a god) in our terms. Christians believe that we didn't make God, but rather that God made us, in God's image. Does that mean that God has 2 arms and 2 legs? I doubt it, remember -- God is not human. The Bible says that God is Love, and "The Word". We humans have the capability to Love, just as God does, and thus are in his image. The Judaic-Christian God has always communicated through words. If you asked me to describe God to you, "Love" and "The Word" would be two of the best descriptions I could come up with. I'm sorry if they don't fit your image of God, but I can't help that.

I think you have missed the point, these arguments have been applied and are consistantly applied to Atheism and Science. Logic in and of itself is nothing more than a tool, and thus cannot debunk or prove anything. I disproved nothing, moreover I did show that your post was full of logical fallicies and this rendered your point moot. If you want to have creationism, religion, faith etc. treated as a science (or minimally respected) and debated then you better be prepared to have it scrutinized like one.


By the way Trekkor,

What have you done to try and stop the chaos?

Take a breath Zuffen! Did I even say that I wanted to have creationism, religion and faith treated as a Science??? Please don't argue against straw-man positions. That doesn't do this discussion any justice.

Being a professed Athiest, you believe that "There is no God". I'm just trying to understand if there is any logic that supports that choice, or are you in the same boat as Christians -- namely basing your belief on faith?

Let's put Science aside because I'm not arguing that point. I believe that God gave us senses with which to learn about our environment. Science is good. But back to Athiesm, I wasn't asking you to tell me that logic has been and is consistantly applied to Atheism. I asked asked you to apply logic to Atheism.

Funny coming from a plagiarist that never would have admitted he plagiarized, off a lying propagandist no less, unless I caught him red-handed in the plagiarism.

Jluetjen wrote:
The fundamental issue that I have with your arguments is that you expect God to operate the way you want him to operate. God is in no shape, size or form human. God doesn't operate or think the way a human thinks. You see a starving person and ask yourself why doesn't God feed this person. You see a dead person and you're angry at God for not letting them live. You are looking at these problems like a human. Now I'm not God, and don't claim to know his mind. Unfortunately he doesn't call me up to tell me what's on his mind. I have been able to grasp a few things though...
1) Everyone dies. It's not a question of if, but when. It's pretty obvious that if (for the sake of discussion) God created the world, he chose to not populate it with immortal beings.
2) Bad things happen, all the time. You seem angry that God doesn't stop them. (BTW, if he did do it today, it would be the end of the world as we know it because bad things happen everywhere all the time.) But, if God wanted YOU to do something about the bad things, would he step in? Since we all have free will, if God wanted us to exercise that free will, he would need to give us choices. If you see someone who is needs help, you have a choice.
3) You seem to want to know why God (if he exists) hasn't stepped in already. But the Bible clearly says that God will return when we least expect it. So the fact that God hasn't stepped in yet doesn't mean that God doesn't exist, and it doesn't mean that God exists. It does mean that you have another day to try to help others and relieve suffering.
In theologic terms, what you are arguing is a form of Idality, specifically making God (or a god) in our terms. Christians believe that we didn't make God, but rather that God made us, in God's image. Does that mean that God has 2 arms and 2 legs? I doubt it, remember -- God is not human. The Bible says that God is Love, and "The Word". We humans have the capability to Love, just as God does, and thus are in his image. The Judaic-Christian God has always communicated through words. If you asked me to describe God to you, "Love" and "The Word" would be two of the best descriptions I could come up with. I'm sorry if they don't fit your image of God, but I can't help that.




WOW!!!!!!!!
I must answer this. First, how you ever got this line of thought from my posts is amazing. I have never said I wanted god to do anything, in any manner. Why would you think this? I think you are lost in your reasoning.
All this mumbo-jumbo about god working in mysterious ways. Oh boy, do you ever realize that if you took your statements and substituted any mythological man-made deity in place of yours, they will all read the same. Try taking a comparative religions class. It’s all the same!
I don’t expect god to act in anyway. I don’t expect god to act at all. I don’t have any preconceived notion as how a mythical being will look, act or speak. I have no illusions as to how believing in a fantasy will change life. I don’t need the answers to be given to me. I don’t have any anger at what doesn’t exist. I have no judgment as to the proper course of action that a made-up invisible friend should or should not do. Believers have made these empty claims, not I. Believers have made the statements that god does this or god does that; or god will do this or that. I only requested you show me some of these actions. Bring it on! Let’s see some of this! Any historical records of these actions, by eye-witnesses? According to you, god’s actions are so mysterious, how in hell do you know what he wants, says, or does or doesn’t do? Been hearing voices again? If your god works for you, that’s just fine. But don’t try to push this mental garbage off on me.

Mulhollanddose wrote:
Funny coming from a plagiarist that never would have admitted he plagiarized, off a lying propagandist no less, unless I caught him red-handed in the plagiarism.


Null, this is your same sad pitiful response. Your one note song. How sad. Most people here know your infantile attacks are just the emotional crying of an underdeveloped child. You attempts at logic and rational thought are pathetic. Go on; sing your little one note whine. You couldn’t catch your ass with both hands and a native guide. Try rebuttals to the points, or is that too much effort for your clearly overtaxed brain.

John, proving a point. Not me expecting a made-up being to acually do something. But many of the faithful did.

jluetjen,

Ok I will not argue against strawman if you do not put them up...

I never said i believe there is no god, instead I can happily and confidently say that in my research based in my life from all of the facts around me I can conclude there is no god, none, nothing.....this is it, my one chance on this mortal coil. so in other words I know in my mind there is no god. when I apply Logic or ariadnes thread to this I keep coming to the same conclusion, if you want me to go into this further that is a topic of another thread.



I take the opposite approach. Evolution has allowed me to be a critical thinking being it was not bestowed upon me by some mythical being.
I do hold atheism up to this scrutiny and apply logic to it, and there are many arguments I can make but that is not the point of this thread. (although I would love to discuss this anytime in another thread)

You seemed to be hooked into what they were praying for. I don't know what they were praying for. I'm not even Catholic. I do suspect that many were praying for the Pope to have peace. What people pray for is between them and God. You tried to make a point countering a belief in religion, based on something that you cannot know -- basically what people were praying for. I think you slipped to argueing in the same fashion that you were accusing Christians of doing.

Oh well, we can move on. SmileWavy

My logic is that there is no compelling evidence of god(s) existence. Many people believe that a creature called Bigfoot exists (and no, I'm not comparing god to Bigfoot - insert the Loch Ness Monster or UFOs or something). Anyway, there is a lot of circumstantial evidence like footprints, blurry photos, recorded howling, etc. that something like Bigfoot exists, but to me, nothing compelling. So...I don't believe that he exists. Is it possible? Sure. But I don't think so. Is it logical to believe that Bigfoot exists just because other people do? I mean, their experience (sighting, whatever it was) was very intense and real to them? Is it logical for me to discount it? Yeah. I think so.

Now, if someone was to catch a Bigfoot (or Nessie or a UFO) and submit it for study by appropriate experts, etc. and the result was that, sure enough a new species had been found, then I would change my mind and accept that Bigfoot exists.

Now, we can argue what is compelling evidence and what is not, but I have not come to my decision of non-belief lightly and without considerable thought, so it must pass my litmus test of "compellingness". I get to make that rule.

Is my atheism logical? I think so. I am applying the same logic that I apply to everything else. It works for me.

Mike

Don't act like you have credibility when you lost it plagiarizing...It will take you some time to be taken seriously.

The exchange of words shows the typical lack of respect people like RPKESQ tend to show for anyone who disagrees with them. The holier than thou, put down, without anything to back it up. What the response also shows is the total lack of respect for the other peoples beliefs’. They claim to understand logic, science, yet display a genuine lack of understanding of science. They cannot see that all the partial differential equations and Laplace transforms in the world do nothing to explain why we are here.

Psudo science, like evolution (I call it a psudo science because it cannot be tested in ways that a true science can be tested, i.e. its sort of like political science or an oxymoron) is totally consistent with most Christian religions. Creationism assumes that an intelligence (not necessarily a god) used his understanding of science to create the life on this planet. Creationism, given the order of nature and the complexity of the life, is far more believable than just evolution by itself. No religion is required to believe in creationism.

Nothing in the advanced nuclear physics courses I took ever pretended to explain Why anything works, only how. I have stated this several times now, the HOW of science vs the WHY of religion but it apparently has gone over the heads of these master so called scientists. The fact that they are still looking for the WHY in science shows their immaturity, kind of like the 7 year old asks the questions, The 18 year old knows all the answers, but the much older and more mature finally understand what science really is, and is not.

By the way, what method is used to solve the typical differential equation, want to take a GUESS? I use the same method to solve non mathematical problems. Sometimes it works, sometimes not. But I will never be impressed by the solution(s).

John wrote:
You seemed to be hooked into what they were praying for. I don't know what they were praying for. I'm not even Catholic. I do suspect that many were praying for the Pope to have peace. What people pray for is between them and God. You tried to make a point countering a belief in religion, based on something that you cannot know -- basically what people were praying for. I think you slipped to argueing in the same fashion that you were accusing Christians of doing.

John, I have no idea what they were praying for. except when asked that, they all replied "for the pope to get well". So I go with what they tell me. Were they lying? Or maybe "get well" is some code for peace or whatever. Again this is to prove a point. Let's pick something small, pick a action that proves god works and is repeatable. It has to be verifiable by multiple uninvolved parties. Let's go, I'm up for this!

By the way I'm still waiting for an explanation as to how you know what god wants, besides YOUR intertpetation of the bible. Voices, visions, what and how?

Null wrote:
Don't act like you have credibility when you lost it plagiarizing...It will take you some time to be taken seriously.

Null our very own worthless one, quite snappy, not. Nice comeback, you practice this crap long? Brought your best to the table, have we? I have a long list of PM's and postings that don't agree with you. But I'm sure that's true of most people here. You always act like a little lost boy. Can't you find a real friend? You need the make believe invisible kind to lean on?

It's not for me to judge the content of others' prayers. But I sincerly doubt that God works to humans' agenda. According to the Bible though, God is pleased when we pray. Having all of those people pray I'm confident was a good thing. From your perspective I'm sure you'd at least agree that while they were praying they weren't causing any harm on the world. So it wasn't a bad thing. (BTW, I'm not arguing that the absence of a bad thing proves anything, merely that it wasn't bad, which in many respect is a good start.)

Personally I'm not claiming voices or visions. Voices or visions may be devinely inspired or not. So just the fact of voices or visions does not presume that they are communicating any particular truth.

the basic tenets of evolution have been tested countless times. It is science. Maybe you should read a molecular biology text book instead of nuclear physics.

btw, can we elect a president that can actually pronounce "nuclear" correctly?

Really?...Where is that missing link again?...The world should be brimming with crossover species waiting patiently to defy entropy and go human.

interesting thought, but they also weren't doing anything "good." In other words, is prayer the same as inaction? From a secular point of view, it is.

A Buddhist would look at it differently. Meditation is time spent in apparent inaction, but it can be argued that it is time spent getting better in touch with one's self so they can be a better person. In addition, there is the concept of tapping into the greater conciousness. And through this change can be effected.

snowman, I was answering direct personal insult by a known liar. I will not address this cretin with respect. Belief is personal, if you need my respect, earn it. I don't give out like it was candy. You keep harping on the fact science can't answer why. Well I think it answers that far better than religion does. Or does making up aswers fill your inner need? It doesn't do for me. I want verifiable, repeatable results or I admit I don't know. Something that if religions would do, they would loose members like Null has lost brain cells. Can you imagine a religion attacting members with the "we don't know if ours is the right way,or that we have all the answers, or the one true god, but we really like it, so we're going to go with it". Yep, I'm sure you'll have lines down the block just waiting to sign on.
Have you evered wondered why the more educated a culture becomes, the less religious it is? (I know, it's that damn devil again). Respect, needs to be earned. If you want to spout gibberish, don't expect it arriving from me soon.

you should try to avoid using words you don't understand

Missing links have been found, documented and peer reviewed in many different species including man. Ditch the comic books and try some adult reading. Caution, it may be wayyyyyy over your head.

RPKESQ,

I agree, if respect is wanted, then they have to earn it. Again if you want to set up creationism in the same light as evolution then you better be prepared to have it scrutinized and debated.

When I was in grad school and was giving my research in progress presentation to the whole graduate school, I had to fend off questions tougher than ones posed here simply answering in circular logic would been disasterous.

I wish that they (believers) would ask the same questions of their faith and creationism that we have, but alas they want to be spoon fed have everything dictated and how, what...to believe and then expect us to follow with out question.

Missing link? Sheesh.

If the theory of evolution predicted what you think it does, I wouldn't accept it either. Fortunately (for the theory) you don't know what you're talking about.

Learn, man! Open your mind! Use your head to actually learn something! It's not that hard.

Defy entropy? Hmmm, not sure I follow. Entropy is just the measure of the capibility of a system to undergo spontaneous change. It also means the measure of disorder in a system specified by statistical mechanics. I always just considered it to be the ability of a system to develop into its most comfortable state - like iron to rust.

I guess one could try to defy change but then again I'm not so sure you would be successful. One thing you can't fight is genetics and if the coil decides to move, you have little influence - you just have to go along for the ride and see where the mutation takes you.

School is in session...

Main Entry: en·tro·py
Pronunciation: 'en-tr&-pE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -pies
Etymology: International Scientific Vocabulary 2en- + Greek tropE change, literally, turn, from trepein to turn

2 a : the degradation of the matter and energy in the universe to an ultimate state of inert uniformity b : a process of degradation or running down or a trend to disorder.

Order does not come from chaos, certainly order does not come from long term chaos. There may be an arrangement of order in the midst of chaos, but the natural state of matter is in a process of degradation, or its overall trend trends toward decay...evolution is a sham.

I believe that Astronomers have settled on a Hubble constant which will result in the Universe continuing to expland and cool indifinitely. Basically, the Universe will eventually burn out, and that's it. The stars will go out and then good night. This existance will have run it's course.

PS: Don't go selling your portfolio yet, it won't happen in the life time of anyone that you know.

That does it. I'm outta here! :D

there is a difference between parroting and understanding.

Unfortunately that is another area that you don't quite fathom. But that's ok. God loves you. She doesn't really like you, but She loves you...

The study of little germs, some of them very evil germs, dosen't give anyone some special understanding of the world, let alone universe. We don't even understand the human body enough to determine how people develop type II diabetes. We don't understand the body well nuff to pevent the common cold, we have a VERY long way to go.

Physics is vastly superior to any other science. Why? Because we can test our theorys. Other sciences depend way to much on statistics to cover up the vast lack of knowledge in them. Many biological systems are non linear, and some illogical on the surface. Very very difficult to sort out the truth from fiction. What is the safe exposure to a toxic substance that is also necessary for health? And how does this work in detail? Such simple questions, such a black art with dabs of science.

uh snowman, molecular biology is NOT the study of microbes..that would be micrbiology or virology


and you are correct in that we are still learning about biological processes, however just because we do not know yet does leed us to say god did it

what biological systems are you refering to?

What are you talking about with regards to toxicity? there are simple experiments to determine the adsorption and efficacy of a drug. pharmacology is not a black art but to a religious person it must seem so

the more you know.....

pure comedy gold!

None get a choice. God already knows what you will choose, what I will choose. We are His children, He made us that way.

Tell you what. You stop talking about subjects you do not know anything about, and I will stop talking about subjects that are ridiculous like evolution.

The deal should be Null will stop talking about what he has little if any understanding of and rest of us can discuss this subject like adults.

Null, read your own posted definition on entropy: 2 a : the degradation of the matter and energy in the universe to an ultimate state of inert uniformity.

Now look up the word uniformity.

uniformity
The state of being uniform, alike and lacking diversity.

How in hell does that support your illogical statement:
Order does not come from chaos, certainly order does not come from long term chaos. There may be an arrangement of order in the midst of chaos, but the natural state of matter is in a process of degradation, or its overall trend trends toward decay...evolution is a sham.

Again and again, you spout this utter nonsense. School is definitly not in session for you (maybe never has been).

Cutting and pasting a definition from some web site is not the same as learning.

What happens to entropy when you introduce energy into the system?

Mike