The summer 2011 totally legitimate and like official atheist thread, endorsed too

[bigboab]

Eskimo: "If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?"
Priest: "No, not if you did not know."
Eskimo: "Then why did you tell me?"

A dog could be a god to a dyslexic

Bigboab, Circa 10a.m.

[A]

A dog could be a god to a dyslexic

Only in English

[j2k4]

At one end of things, you are a collection of those types of people who hang together on internet boards anxiously awaiting a brave customer or two to come play cat/mouse.

You've had no takers.

At the other end of things, you argue amongst yourselves about the nature of a thing that is an opiate to great masses of people, a thing the base effect of which is (these days, at any rate) positive, it's entire cost born by it's adherents?

Really, now - tell us how we're an impediment to progress - it's water off a duck's back, friends.

[999969999]

[mjmacky]

I wrote post # 49 not 5 minutes before I passed out, there are some errors. Instead of fixing all of them, I'll just address your post directly.

If you are after proof, you have to wait; so that science (hopefully) advances to solve the ultimate questions relating to anything and everything. Or, you can contribute to the advancement by being a scientist yourself.

I am a scientist, and even though what I do can sometimes feel pointless and mundane, I know better than to make a mockery of my efforts by trying to apply science to exploring the existence of gods. At best, I feel it only deserves a philosophical debate, leave the joke of treating it seriously only to those who believe.

I pity the girl in that first post really. She makes fun of creationists, and yet she is a firm believer of the theory of evolution which she has no first hand knowledge of. What differentiates her from those creationists' out there? Oh wait, she must be a subscriber of American scientist, which makes her obviously right, right? People who preach what others have said to them are the lamest of all.

What are you claiming as first hand knowledge, and what do American scientists have to do with anything? Are you saying you feel sorry for someone who understands evolutionary theory and doesn't dispute it? I'm getting a vibe about you, please reveal more.

Proving absence of God is what the theory of non existence is trying to prove, Isn't it? How is it faulted by design?

The question is faulted because you can't prove what is essentially an infinite negative. Your only evidence to say that something doesn't exist in all time and all space. The only evidence able to provided is the absence in limited time and limited spaces. I feel I explained it poorly in my near slumber. I can ramble on more, but it feels like a redundancy of words, so I hope that covers it for now.

In comparison, there are all types of evidence that could be used to support the existence of gods, however it is completely deficient of any evidence.

Isn't that contradicting each other?

Not exactly. There are a number of different ways you can provide evidence of gods existence. A photograph of god as he sits down at your dinner table, lecturing your daughter about abortions. An amateur porno film as one of the gods comes down in the "form" of a beast and rapes a woman. Actual miracles (miracles != low chance of success). All of our kitchen appliances start running around preaching the gospel, etc. They are almost infinite, yet not a single shred of ACTUAL evidence to provide for the existence of gods. So I think I cleared up the points I was trying to make.

[mjmacky]

At one end of things, you are a collection of those types of people who hang together on internet boards anxiously awaiting a brave customer or two to come play cat/mouse.

You've had no takers.

At the other end of things, you argue amongst yourselves about the nature of a thing that is an opiate to great masses of people, a thing the base effect of which is (these days, at any rate) positive, it's entire cost born by it's adherents?

Really, now - tell us how we're an impediment to progress - it's water off a duck's back, friends.

I do this because I love discussion. I don't have any physical interest to go forth and disprove possibility of existence, "converting" others to disbelief. The discussion is fun, and for the most part, universal. There are all types of discussion I like to have, but I don't know anyone here I would discuss electron transfer processes leading to radical shifts (from cation to compound) and its stability as a catalyst, that raising PSI in the turbo leads to better gas mileage with the same driving practices, or that 9 reference frames vs. 5 reference frames is a rather pointless gain in bitrate efficiency. These things I discuss elsewhere. These things are also very limited in scope, thus I think I get more pleasure debating religion and spirituality than anything else.

So I'm not quite after the mouse. Have you ever had cats? Sometimes they just like to get a crazy look in there eyes and swat at the air. I actually find the question of existence to be insignificant myself, but I won't shy away from discussing it either. The more important questions I feel are: Does spirituality actually have a net positive effect (I think no)? Are our capabilities of managing and adapting morality with our system of laws and logic able to completely replace an imaginary system? Then again, they aren't that important either, to discuss them will really lead nowhere. But exploring your opinions, thoughts and logic on something always advances one's mind, and that can't be all that bad, can it?

[j2k4]

At one end of things, you are a collection of those types of people who hang together on internet boards anxiously awaiting a brave customer or two to come play cat/mouse.

You've had no takers.

At the other end of things, you argue amongst yourselves about the nature of a thing that is an opiate to great masses of people, a thing the base effect of which is (these days, at any rate) positive, it's entire cost born by it's adherents?

Really, now - tell us how we're an impediment to progress - it's water off a duck's back, friends.

I do this because I love discussion. I don't have any physical interest to go forth and disprove possibility of existence, "converting" others to disbelief. The discussion is fun, and for the most part, universal. There are all types of discussion I like to have, but I don't know anyone here I would discuss electron transfer processes leading to radical shifts (from cation to compound) and its stability as a catalyst, that raising PSI in the turbo leads to better gas mileage with the same driving practices, or that 9 reference frames vs. 5 reference frames is a rather pointless gain in bitrate efficiency. These things I discuss elsewhere. These things are also very limited in scope, thus I think I get more pleasure debating religion and spirituality than anything else.

So I'm not quite after the mouse. Have you ever had cats? Sometimes they just like to get a crazy look in there eyes and swat at the air. I actually find the question of existence to be insignificant myself, but I won't shy away from discussing it either. The more important questions I feel are: Does spirituality actually have a net positive effect (I think no)? Are our capabilities of managing and adapting morality with our system of laws and logic able to completely replace an imaginary system? Then again, they aren't that important either, to discuss them will really lead nowhere. But exploring your opinions, thoughts and logic on something always advances one's mind, and that can't be all that bad, can it?

Aye to all of that, I guess, and I have four cats, including a Pet Sematary reclamation - my one in-house experiment with cloning.

I guess it's that I've been through this particular discussion so many times there is little for me to add, apart from the preceding view.

I mean, they even have their own 'course' Book.

Let me put it to you this way:

If you are not of similar mind, what you have to fear from a believer could fit in a thimble, and when it comes to fighting religion, start with the worst first.

EDIT-

Funny that you should use a "turbo" analogy; my life has momentarily been turned upside-down by the death of a snail about the size of my fist.

[mjmacky]

I guess it's that I've been through this particular discussion so many times there is little for me to add, apart from the preceding view.

It's been a little while for me, and given circumstances felt it was time to revisit. I often find that even though my core viewpoints don't typically change, I'll often change the way I explain it, refining it and attempting to shorten it. Later on I'll sound even more like a pretentious intellectual. But with different people you can discover different perspectives, and indirectly pick up something by grabbing from the periphery.

my life has momentarily been turned upside-down by the death of a snail about the size of my fist.

Wait, what? How so?

[Hologram]

That shit isn't even remotely funny.

[megabyteme]

@macky: as a scientist, do you believe in the existence of dimensions beyond the 4 we are used to/can easily measure?


As for the idea that topics have been beaten to death, I disagree. While many of us have had these discussions here, and IRL, the argument could be taken to nearly any topic- and those who have spent more than a decade studying after high school would have little reason to discuss what they have learned. With a forum (a place to discuss topics of interest), it is valuable to open these things up, and see where they go.

That said, there also seems to be a growing anti-religion movement online. It appears to me popular to bash religion/God while online (not necessarily being done by the OP here, BTW).

I am personally moving in the direction of finding a place for religion, and possibly even Jesus, in my life. As someone who has now had the opportunity to attend two fantastic private universities, I have experienced what it means to be surrounded by people who live their lives in accordance to (many) of the teachings of JC. I have also studied a fair amount of philosophy (one class shy of a minor), I found contradictions, and failings in every one -with the exception of JC. You subtract the Son of God aspects out, and His teachings are quite exceptional.

So, for me, I see value in revisiting these "old" discussions as a way to reassess my life, and whether or not I am willing to "drink the kool-aid". The idea of a life story, and the growing thoughts that mine is coming together (with tragedies, and successes) almost like a pre-written novel, have made me consider that there is not only more than I can see, but that there may be something influencing my life that is beyond my understanding.