An Atheist Speaks

[beowulf 1]

Is there a question in your post? It doesn't make any sense at all. I consider the scientific process the only way to attempt to make any sense of the world around us. A scientific explaination is not needed for things to exist. Why would I need to prove that humans are a "cut above" the rest of the animals on earth? Souls and spirits are imagined by superstitious people like you.

[Royd 0]

Quote

Is there a question in your post? It doesn't make any sense at all. I consider the scientific process the only way to attempt to make any sense of the world around us. A scientific explaination is not needed for things to exist. Why would I need to prove that humans are a "cut above" the rest of the animals on earth? Souls and spirits are imagined by superstitious people like you.

I edited my post, but your post proves my point.

[beowulf 1]

I am still confused as to what exactly is your point? Science can't explain everything?! Duh We already know that. If science could explain everything then there would be no need for any more experiments or any further studies. You seem to be trying to say they we treat science the same way you see your God. That couldn't be further from the truth.

Don't expect any more replies I am going to bed. CYA tomorrow.

[thirdworld19 0]

Quote

I do recognise the point you're making despite the fact billions of people throughout the world have, and continue to believe in a God of some form or other.

XXX years ago, most people belived the world was flat. The fact that so many people believed it obviously makes it true. Democracy determines fact, not fact.

[JackC 0]

Quote

I'm sure it is. I'll have a proper look when I've time - what I've seen so far is your normal intellectual type reasoning over subjects they're unable to answer properly.

They can answer, it's just not the answer you want. That's the thing about science, you follow the evidence and not your gut. But it seems you are intent on following the latter in spite of the former. It's not a position that commands any respect but if you insist on it, bon voyage.

[jakee 1,259]

Quote

Not at all. I spent considerable effort trying to explain the difficulty I have in substantiating my point,

That's exactly what I just said you muppet - you've admitted you cannot substantiate your point with evidence, "It just is. It's something I feel".

Quote

Your essay questions a non-starter. This SC bollox is hard enough work. Still, I'm glad you found my statements of increased social immorality being related to reduced churchgoers as funny. But going back to your smartarse essay question. Your again avoiding constructive discussion of the subject.

Oh for fucks sake. What I found hilarious was your statement "It's that simple". My essay question was intended to make you realise that it's not that simple. With the massive changes society has undergone in the last century or two you simply cannot point to congregation sizes and say "That. That must be the problem!" It's like linking the rising number of TV channels with the falling price that farmers get for milk and making a definite connection. The fact that you have refused to consider any wider social factors even when prompted shows what a pathetic level of critical thinking you've committed to this hypothesis.

Quote

Religions not making individuals good? You've said that, not me. The point was religions effect on communities and societies - not individuals.

And why is their effect irreplaceable? If people can be good without religion (which you have said) then why not communities?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[base_nz 0]

Im definitely not as sharp as most of you on the subject but at the end of the day if you didnt have any religion in a society, you would still have money and the quest for power. And a lot of the time religion is just the cloak worn by the other two.

And what is a good society? Sydney? ...nice place, good laws, Tens of thousands of people homeless. Junkys shooting up on my back door, Whores lined up in the main road. Cant imagine any major citys much different........

Dont get rid of religion the place might turn to shit

Being religious doesnt make you a good person! If i walk up to a stranger and stab them in the face its going to feel wrong ( you would hopeIs a suicide bomber a good person. If a priest sodomizes a young boy...........

You can see where im going ..........

Religion wont increase the number of good people ..... Only Good people can increase the number of good people! But then your talking about good and bad.... Whats good for one person is bad to the other .And arnt our notions of good and bad based mainly on religion? does that mean with out religion there IS no good and bad....Or is it just measured bay another means?........AAAAaaaaaaaaggggghhhhh

Definitely out of my depth here
]

.....And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!!

[Royd 0]

Quote

I am still confused as to what exactly is your point? Science can't explain everything?!

That's right, and it probably never will. Since it can't, why do you continue to use it as your base of proof that something you cannot see, touch , feel or measure doesn't actually exist?
If you don't believe it exists because you really don't want it to exist, just say so, which, btw, is nothing more than a statement of faith. Quit trying to use some weak ass discipline, such as science, to explain the grand, complicated workings of the universe, when, in reality, you ain't got a clue.

[base_nz 0]

Thats right GOD created everything in the Universe!!!!!!


He did it in the dark aswell!!!!.......Now thats a talented fella in anyones book!

.....And you thought Kiwis couldn't fly!!!!

[beowulf 1]

Science can not explain everything, but neither can religion. In fact religion doesn't explain anything. Religon just pretends to explain everything. Just saying God did it doesn't explain anything. It's just a lazy way of explaining things with out having to do any research or experiments.

If you think science is "weak ass discipline" why do use computers, cars, vaccines, electricity? All of that and much much more has been discovered through the use of the scientific process. If we waited for god we would all be sitting in the dark in a cave.

Your posts are become more nonsensical as we go.

Bottome line there is no evidence of any deity so it makes no sense for me to believe in any deity. That doesn't mean that I am replaceing deitys with science.

[SpeedRacer 1]

Quote

Science can not explain everything, but neither can religion. In fact religion doesn't explain anything. Religon just pretends to explain everything. Just saying God did it doesn't explain anything. It's just a lazy way of explaining things with out having to do any research or experiments

Not quite correct. As has been pointed out, YES religion has been used as an attempt to EXPLAIN thngs. But the main thing that people are doing when they practice their religion is NOT trying to explain the physical universe, but to make themselves become spiritually closer to God.

Attempts by religion to explain things are a secondary (at best) reason for religion.

So yes, Science is better than Religion at explaining physical phenomena, because that is what Science is for.

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[JackC 0]

Quote

But the main thing that people are doing when they practice their religion is NOT trying to explain the physical universe, but to make themselves become spiritually closer to God.

But in many cases, the concept of god is sold specifically as an explaination for the origin of the universe and that is very definately a scientific question. These scientific questions that religion seeks to answer (and it does even if you choose to ignore it) are the things that link god to the real physical world. Now if you remove all the "scientific" questions from religion, you remove the link between god and the real world. Religion then becomes completely and utterly esoteric, abstract and disconnected. It's not even up to the deism level of god-world linkage (and that is about as weak as you can get without actually going down the atheist route). If god ceases to be the explaination for some real world event, god ceases to be.

[kallend 1,648]

Quote

Quit trying to use some weak ass discipline, such as science, to explain the grand, complicated workings of the universe, when, in reality, you ain't got a clue.

You like that computer you're typing on? I doubt many priests were involved in developing it.

You like jumping out of airplanes? How many priests did it take to figure out airplane aerodynamics?

Do you have a cell phone? How many priests did it take to figure out electromagnetic communications theory?

YOU, Royd, are simply spouting ABSOLUTE RUBBISH. Religion has not explained one single thing about the workings of the universe - in fact, throughout history, it has been an obstruction to the increase of our knowledge.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

Quote

Quit trying to use some weak ass discipline, such as science, to explain the grand, complicated workings of the universe, when, in reality, you ain't got a clue.

It ain't nothin' a good ol' book burning won't fix.

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

I do recognise the point you're making despite the fact billions of people throughout the world have, and continue to believe in a God of some form or other.

XXX years ago, most people belived the world was flat. The fact that so many people believed it obviously makes it true. Democracy determines fact, not fact.

You're out of the context I meant.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm sure it is. I'll have a proper look when I've time - what I've seen so far is your normal intellectual type reasoning over subjects they're unable to answer properly.

They can answer, it's just not the answer you want. That's the thing about science, you follow the evidence and not your gut. But it seems you are intent on following the latter in spite of the former. It's not a position that commands any respect but if you insist on it, bon voyage.

Well, thanks! I missed the part where evidence was provided for the theories made.

But statement's such as this are quite encouraging:

"In fact, it turns out that religion really does make you feel better. Recent sociological studies have shown that compared with non-religious people, the actively religious are happier, live longer, suffer fewer physical and mental illnesses, and recover faster from medical interventions such as surgery. All this is bad news for those of us who are not religious, but it might at least prompt us to ask why and how religion imparts its feel-good factor. And we'll come back to that later."

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[vortexring 0]

Fair enough - but the billions of people who have faith in God don't have conclusive evidence either.

So what's your point?

You need evidence to believe in something? Fine - it makes the people who believe in God a bit odd then in that context doesn't it?

I guess faith is really the better word to use in this context then.

People might have faith through many ways; I mentioned a couple of simple possible reasons earlier. What reasons would they have, to have faith in Carrowolves? None.

So it's a poor point.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

But statement's such as this are quite encouraging:

"In fact, it turns out that religion really does make you feel better. Recent sociological studies have shown that compared with non-religious people, the actively religious are happier, live longer, suffer fewer physical and mental illnesses, and recover faster from medical interventions such as surgery. All this is bad news for those of us who are not religious, but it might at least prompt us to ask why and how religion imparts its feel-good factor. And we'll come back to that later."

As an agnostic, I can credit religion's personal and societal benefits as a placebo effect. And gratefully so, I have friends that are religious and the comfort they get from it is a real effect.

You won't get that type of concession from hard core atheists typically.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[maadmax 0]

If that's the case, then I must admit to misunderstanding many of your posts. Could you please precisely define spiritual truth as you are using it.***

My belief is this. Spiritual(moral) Truth exists just as does scientific truth. Both have been established by God, and knowledge of both are vital to survival.This knowledge is acquired through study, faith, experimentation, and validation. Truth needs to be embraced and increased, not corrupted and molded to serve our evil purposes.

_______________________________________

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Fair enough - but the billions of people who have faith in God don't have conclusive any evidence either.

There, I fixed the statement for you.

Quote

So what's your point?

Simply that most atheists don't believe because there is a lack of any evidence of a deity. It would be very illogical to assume the existence of a deity without any evidence to suggest the possibility.

Quote

You need evidence to believe in something?

Me personally? Typically, yes.

Quote

Fine - it makes the people who believe in God a bit odd then in that context doesn't it?

I suppose it depends on how one defines God. There are definitions that are not at odds with science, and by their very definition are supported by observable evidence. One such definition would be that God is the universe. No deity necessary.

Of course, those that worship deities can tend to appear a bit odd at times, but then who doesn't appear a bit odd at times?

Quote

What reasons would they have, to have faith in Carrowolves? None.

Correct. Absolutely none. That was the exact point of their creation as fictional, uh, things.

Quote

So it's a poor point.

Why is it a poor point? You understood it. There's no evidence to suggest the existence of carrowolves. Just like deities.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[JackC 0]

Quote

Well, thanks! I missed the part where evidence was provided for the theories made.

Like I said, it was first published in New Scientist magazine. If you looked up the original article on the New Scientist web site, you'd find that they provide references so you can follow up the evidence if you can be bothered to look for it. Sheesh, people want everything on a plate these days.

.

[jakee 1,259]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I do recognise the point you're making despite the fact billions of people throughout the world have, and continue to believe in a God of some form or other.

XXX years ago, most people belived the world was flat. The fact that so many people believed it obviously makes it true. Democracy determines fact, not fact.

You're out of the context I meant.

How is it out of the context you meant? Also, since the great majority of those billions of people believed in a specific God/set of Gods, the great majority of them must be wrong anyway.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[vortexring 0]

Then if it's not substantiated enough, feel free to provide your opinion on why it's bullshit in the first place.

That's essentially what I've been asking and you've been continually avoiding; so whilst your efforts to bring ridicule onto the matter and demonstrate intellectual superiority are amusing, make the effort.


Regarding other factors to take into consideration, to say I haven't is completely ridiculous - this is your attempt, again; to highlight your superior intellect on the matter, to bring ridicule, bla, bla, bla. The deduction I've made is simple. It's a simple deduction from two facts. Prove me wrong. Prove the theory wrong. Demonstrate your intellect instead of gobbing off.

Again, did I say communities without religion couldn't be good? Again, your making things up, again to continue your trend of being overtly critical - now; by imaging statements I've made. Still, it seems we now have this statement to consider;

"In fact, it turns out that religion really does make you feel better. Recent sociological studies have shown that compared with non-religious people, the actively religious are happier, live longer, suffer fewer physical and mental illnesses, and recover faster from medical interventions such as surgery. All this is bad news for those of us who are not religious, but it might at least prompt us to ask why and how religion imparts its feel-good factor. And we'll come back to that later."

Any comments to this? It kind of supports what I've been saying along doesn't it?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

If that's the case, then I must admit to misunderstanding many of your posts. Could you please precisely define spiritual truth as you are using it.

My belief is this. Spiritual(moral) Truth exists just as does scientific truth. Both have been established by God, and knowledge of both are vital to survival.This knowledge is acquired through study, faith, experimentation, and validation. Truth need to be embraced and increased, not corrupted and molded to serve our evil purposes.

First, scientific truth is established by observation and repeatable experimentation, not God. Nor does it require faith. That's what is so great about science. There's no faith required.

Back to spiritual truth:

If it was established by God (another term that requires a definition), how is it different from religion?

If spiritual truth is vital to survival, how are non-spiritual atheists able to survive?

Can you offer some examples of validated experimentation regarding spiritual knowledge?

Also, could you please define evil? It is another term, like spiritual and God, which is often used, but rarely defined.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

• Quote

[vortexring 0]

Quote

Quote

But statement's such as this are quite encouraging:

"In fact, it turns out that religion really does make you feel better. Recent sociological studies have shown that compared with non-religious people, the actively religious are happier, live longer, suffer fewer physical and mental illnesses, and recover faster from medical interventions such as surgery. All this is bad news for those of us who are not religious, but it might at least prompt us to ask why and how religion imparts its feel-good factor. And we'll come back to that later."

As an agnostic, I can credit religion's personal and societal benefits as a placebo effect. And gratefully so, I have friends that are religious and the comfort they get from it is a real effect.

You won't get that type of concession from hard core atheists typically.

Where is the evidence it's simply a placebo effect?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'