"The Origin of Specious Nonsense"

Mr. Boo

J C wrote: »

... but it isn't self contradictory ... its just ironic ... that Materialists don't have physical, i.e. material. evidence for their origins beliefs ...
... yet Theists have physical evidence for the actions of a transcendent creative entity AKA God.

Just nothing to link the evidence to the alleged actions, or the alleged actions to an imaginary deity.

I'm not seeing irony. Just delusion (on your part, just to be clear).

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

Best not to watch any more ... if you don't want to lose your faith in Atheism.:)

Atheism doesn't require faith.

J C

wrote:

Originally Posted by J C
... the truth can be painful ... but it will set you free.

Sarky
All you have to do is replace the word "truth" with "work", and you have the slogan for Nazi death camps. Therefore, J C is a Nazi. QED, [UNNECESSARY-WORD-DELETED].

The Nazis substituted Biblical truth ... for enslaved work ...
... so while enslaved work will never set anybody free ... the truth will set you free.

J C

dlofnep wrote: »

Atheism doesn't require faith.

... oh yes it does ... it requires much greater faith than Theism, actually.:)

Sarky

I notice you didn't actually disprove my conclusion. Interesting.

Delirium

still waiting on the proof god created the universe, JC.

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

... oh yes it does ... it requires much greater faith than Theism, actually.:)

No, it does not. Atheism is a lack of a belief in a Deity. Nothing more, nothing less. You clearly do not understand what atheism is.

Galvasean

J C wrote: »

... oh yes it does ... it requires much greater faith than Theism, actually.:)

Explain

J C

dlofnep wrote: »

No, it does not. Atheism is a lack of a belief in a Deity. Nothing more, nothing less. You clearly do not understand what atheism is.

... Atheism is a complete worldview, replete with its axioms and scientific pre-conceptions ... like Abiogenesis and Spontaneous Evolution.

... and anybody looking at a living organism ... and concluding that it was produced without any input of external intelligence ... has very great faith indeed.:D

dlofnep

J C wrote: »

... Atheism is a complete worldview, replete with its axioms and scientific pre-conceptions ... like Abiogenesis and Spontaneous Evolution.

Atheists do not have to believe in evolution, or abiogenesis to explain complex life on earth. You're over-complicating a simple term - it merely involves a lack of a belief in a deity.. nothing more, nothing less. It may be true that the majority of atheists subscribe to the self-evident reality of evolution, and abiogenesis - but that does not make either of those two mandatory to subscribe to in order for someone to be an atheist.

For example - Someone could be an atheist and believe that complex life from outside of earth planted life here, or that an asteroid with primitive bacteria hit earth and spawned life.

J C wrote: »

... and anybody looking at a living organism ... and concluding that it was produced without any input of external intelligence ... has very great faith indeed.:D

No, they do not. What faith do I require for any of the above?

HUNK

dead one

Galvasean wrote: »

Explain

dlofnep wrote: »

No, it does not. Atheism is a lack of a belief in a Deity. Nothing more, nothing less. You clearly do not understand what atheism is.

Right now you are quite certain, maybe even sure, that there is no Creator. So you consider free from dwelling as if this existence is all that matters. For you, you imagine there is no punishment awaiting those who reject the "so-called holly book of God"
Yet it takes aa huge leap of faith to trustingly assert that there is no Creator. Now consider, the rectangle below which shows all the knowledge in the Universe. And let's further assume that the portion shaded 'w' shows everything that you know. (You don’t have absolute knowledge about everything there is to know, do you?)

---

| WW |
| |
| |

---

Now, do you accept that Maker could present in the other portion of the rectangle - the portion about which you have clearly no knowledge? To advocate with assurance that Maker does not present or exist you would have to school all things in the Universe. You aren't able to create this type of clear assertion regarding a universal negative.

Let me clear..... I am mentioning about a Creator who designed the Universe, and one day he will raise you.... we aren't mentioning about some type of completely ridiculous hypothesis which cann0t be dispr0ven. It very scientific to believe that all the arrangement and fairness in the Universe isn0t the work of accidents, time, chances, energy and matter- but rather the beautiful work of an Intelligent creator.

Delirium

J C wrote: »

... Atheism is a complete worldview, replete with its axioms and scientific pre-conceptions ... like Abiogenesis and Spontaneous Evolution.

... and anybody looking at a living organism ... and concluding that it was produced without any input of external intelligence ... has very great faith indeed.:D

says the person who has yet to post any evidence of their claims that a god created the universe.

dead one wrote: »

Right now you are quite certain, maybe even sure, that there is no Creator. So you consider free from dwelling as if this existence is all that matters. For you, you imagine there is no punishment awaiting those who reject the "so-called holly book of God"
Yet it takes aa huge leap of faith to trustingly assert that there is no Creator. Now consider, the rectangle below which shows all the knowledge in the Universe. And let's further assume that the portion shaded 'w' shows everything that you know. (You don’t have absolute knowledge about everything there is to know, do you?)

---

| WW |
| |
| |

---

Now, do you accept that Maker could present in the other portion of the rectangle - the portion about which you have clearly no knowledge? To advocate with assurance that Maker does not present or exist you would have to school all things in the Universe. You aren't able to create this type of clear assertion regarding a universal negative.

Terrible argument. "We don't know everything, so lets just say god did it". Especially as you're arguing for a creator with no evidence to back it up.

Let me clear..... I am mentioning about a Creator who designed the Universe, and one day he will raise you.... we aren't mentioning about some type of completely ridiculous hypothesis which cann0t be dispr0ven. It very scientific to believe that all the arrangement and fairness in the Universe isn0t the work of accidents, time, chances, energy and matter- but rather the beautiful work of an Intelligent creator.

It definitely is not scientific to believe in something with no evidence to support it.

Penn

dead one wrote: »

Let me clear..... I am mentioning about a Creator who designed the Universe, and one day he will raise you.... we aren't mentioning about some type of completely ridiculous hypothesis which cann0t be dispr0ven. It very scientific to believe that all the arrangement and fairness in the Universe isn0t the work of accidents, time, chances, energy and matter- but rather the beautiful work of an Intelligent creator.

We aren't?

Genghiz Cohen

And so on...

http://memegenerator.net/Creationistdebater

Galvasean

Fun...

dlofnep

dead one wrote: »

Right now you are quite certain, maybe even sure, that there is no Creator.

I deal in probability based on the evidence provided. I see very little probability in a creator being the cause of the universe and life.

dead one wrote: »

So you consider free from dwelling as if this existence is all that matters. For you, you imagine there is no punishment awaiting those who reject the "so-called holly book of God"
Yet it takes aa huge leap of faith to trustingly assert that there is no Creator.

About the same leap of faith that it requires to believe that there are no unicorns, no Thor or Zeus, no pixies, etc. Which is absolutely none.

dead one wrote: »

Now consider, the rectangle below which shows all the knowledge in the Universe. And let's further assume that the portion shaded 'w' shows everything that you know. (You don’t have absolute knowledge about everything there is to know, do you?)

No, and I never claimed to have absolute knowledge. Theists however claim to know for certain that a god created the universe and life. Atheists make no claim.

dead one wrote: »

Now, do you accept that Maker could present in the other portion of the rectangle - the portion about which you have clearly no knowledge? To advocate with assurance that Maker does not present or exist you would have to school all things in the Universe. You aren't able to create this type of clear assertion regarding a universal negative.

Once again - I accept that the possibility of a God exists, right on par with the possibility of unicorns and fairies. The possibility is absurdly small.

dead one wrote: »

Let me clear..... I am mentioning about a Creator who designed the Universe, and one day he will raise you.... we aren't mentioning about some type of completely ridiculous hypothesis which cann0t be dispr0ven. It very scientific to believe that all the arrangement and fairness in the Universe isn0t the work of accidents, time, chances, energy and matter- but rather the beautiful work of an Intelligent creator.

So tell me - where is the science behind it? Name me 3 scientific principles that support it. I'll await your answer.

dead one

koth wrote: »

It definitely is not scientific to believe in something with no evidence to support it.

So, why do you believe in magic of camera....

dlofnep wrote: »

No, and I never claimed to have absolute knowledge. Theists however claim to know for certain that a god created the universe and life. Atheists make no claim.

When you say no to God or when you say there is no creator--- You indirectly claim to have absolute knowledge.... it means you have seen and searched every portion / part of this universe before making this huge knowledgeable claim....

dlofnep wrote: »

So tell me - where is the science behind it? Name me 3 scientific principles that support it. I'll await your answer.

Ah science, Do you believe in science, you believe in your own science, you need no science to believe what you prefer to believe.... Science is just and excuse to torch your reason, you leave science where it doesn't match you hypothesis.... Here are some point which i posted again and again

here are some more scientific points----
a. Smart designers made artificial intelligence. Thus it is testable proof that intelligence or brilliance is made by an intelligent/smart designer. The scientific treatment was invented by and relies on intelligence. Testable, uncontradicted proofs confirm that you need intelligence to make something smarter , to make artificial intelligence, or to increase knoweldge...
b. All scientific laws, rules and processes whether man-made or not, have common meanings: rules attempts physical regularity; Processes are a sequence of functions towards an end.
c. A human designer/manufacturer is basically present behind during the design / process, but is not basically detected when noticing their perfect design / process. So, one can't say an undetected Maker/Manufacture to reject a Maker.
d. It is Scientific that a Smart human being creates forces. Thus, this is scientific proof forces like gravity,magnetism, nuclear etc. are ultimately resulted by an intelligent God.
e. It is scientific that a smart human being creates,processes senses, , and stores information. Thus, this is scientific proof that any information stored,processed ,,found or in nature was ultimately result by an intelligent God

dlofnep

dead one wrote: »

When you say no to God or when you say there is no creator--- You indirectly claim to have absolute knowledge.... it means you have seen and searched every portion / part of this universe before making this huge knowledgeable claim....

I have never made such a claim. I stated that there is no evidence to suggest that a God exists, and as such - the probability for one existing is very low. Combined with the fact that we perfectly understanding of many things in 2011 through science, which dispels any notion of a 'creator'.

dead one wrote: »

Ah science, Do you believe in science, you believe in your own science, you need no science to believe what you prefer to believe.... Science is just and excuse to torch your reason, you leave science where it doesn't match you hypothesis.... Here are some point which i posted again and again

So what do you suggest - I replace common sense and rationality that goes with science, and believe the word of goat-herders from 2000 years ago?

dead one wrote: »

here are some more scientific points----
a. Smart designers made artificial intelligence. Thus it is testable proof that intelligence or brilliance is made by an intelligent/smart designer. The scientific treatment was invented by and relies on intelligence. Testable, uncontradicted proofs confirm that you need intelligence to make something smarter , to make artificial intelligence, or to increase knoweldge...
b. All scientific laws, rules and processes whether man-made or not, have common meanings: rules attempts physical regularity; Processes are a sequence of functions towards an end.
c. A human designer/manufacturer is basically present behind during the design / process, but is not basically detected when noticing their perfect design / process. So, one can't say an undetected Maker/Manufacture to reject a Maker.
d. It is Scientific that a Smart human being creates forces. Thus, this is scientific proof forces like gravity,magnetism, nuclear etc. are ultimately resulted by an intelligent God.
e. It is scientific that a smart human being creates,processes senses, , and stores information. Thus, this is scientific proof that any information stored,processed ,,found or in nature was ultimately result by an intelligent God

Not one of those is scientific. You're going to have to try harder.

I'm going to ask you a question - let's see if you can answer it.

Does Zeus, the God of Sky and Thunder exist?

Delirium

dead one wrote: »

So, why do you believe in magic of camera....

I never said magic was involved in photography. That's something you came up with all by yourself.

liamw

dead one wrote: »

So, why do you believe in magic of camera....

WITCHCRAFT :eek:

papu

:rolleyes:

Doc_Savage

dead one wrote: »

When you say no to God or when you say there is no creator--- You indirectly claim to have absolute knowledge.... it means you have seen and searched every portion / part of this universe before making this huge knowledgeable claim....

"When you say yes to God or when you say there is A creator--- You indirectly claim to have absolute knowledge.... it means you have seen and searched every portion / part of this universe before making this huge knowledgeable claim...."

see what i did when i rewrote your statement... if you want to claim the existence of a creator then you must also have absolute knowledge!

And you seriously can't see the problem with this argument?

Galvasean

Too much?

dead one

dlofnep wrote: »

I have never made such a claim. I stated that there is no evidence to suggest that a God exists, and as such - the probability for one existing is very low. Combined with the fact that we perfectly understanding of many things in 2011 through science, which dispels any notion of a 'creator'.

Do you know how huge this universe is??? and what do you mean by "evidence".... Are you saying that God should show himself... You want to see live God.... That is impossible...See, for this purpose God has sent his revelations, why people can't see God in this world.... Here are some point if you leave your arrogance behind

1) No man can see the maker in the life of this world ( http://quran.com/6/103)
2) On the Day of Judgment, your sight will be acute, very sharp and piercing. (Verse http://quran.com/50/22 )
3) Only the Believers will see their LORD in the Hereafter ( http://quran.com/75/22-23 ).
Now when you say no to God and when you say there is no evidence which support existence of God..... You are making a claim to have absolute knowledge... because you are speaking on behalf of yourself.... I ain't speaking on behalf of myself but a book which claim to be from the Lord of all universe.... you have any doubt here is exact verse

And it was not [possible] for this Qur'an to be produced by other than Allah , but [it is] a confirmation of what was before it and a detailed explanation of the [former] Scripture, about which there is no doubt, from the Lord of the worlds.
http://quran.com/10/37

again when you say there is no evidence for God, you are talking on base of your bias..... You claim to have absolute knowledge --- As you have seen and searched every part of this universe...

dlofnep wrote: »

Not one of those is scientific. You're going to have to try harder.

then believe what you prefer to believe...
I'm going to ask you a question - let's see if you can answer it.

dlofnep wrote: »

Does Zeus, the God of Sky and Thunder exist?

You believe in non intelligent evolution which is greater myth than of zeus, If i were you i would prefer to believe in zeus than believing in non intelligent materialistic god... I make no difference between you and those who believe in zeus....

dead one

koth wrote: »

I never said magic was involved in photography. That's something you came up with all by yourself.

koth, you have problem with understanding, i ain't sayingthat you believe voodo or blah blah----
You said

Originally Posted by koth
It definitely is not scientific to believe in something with no evidence to support it.

and then i said, why do believe in camera (leave the magic) ---

Originally Posted by dead one
So, why do you believe in magic of camera....
WITCHCRAFT

There has come a new game "limbo"-- play it i hope i the puzzles of this game would build your mind and understanding....:)

POINTBREAK

It must all be true. It was written in a book!

Delirium

dead one wrote: »

koth, you have problem with understanding, i ain't sayingthat you believe voodo or blah blah----

You're the one who said magic, obviously you don't understand what the word magic means

and then i said, why do believe in camera (leave the magic) ---

It's nothing to do with belief as I own a camera. I can hold it in my hands, use it to take photos. I have physical evidence for the existence of cameras. It's really quite simple when you think about it.

POINTBREAK

dlofnep wrote: »

So what do you suggest - I replace common sense and rationality that goes with science, and believe the word of goat-herders from 2000 years ago?

LOL.

POINTBREAK

koth wrote: »

You're the one who said magic, obviously you don't understand what the word magic means


It's nothing to do with belief as I own a camera. I can hold it in my hands, use it to take photos. I have physical evidence for the existence of cameras. It's really quite simple when you think about it.

-
But if you read in a book that you owned a camera, surely that would be all the evidence you need? Obviously, it would be a special invisible camera that will burn you in hell forever, if you don't worship it.