Don't dictate beliefs

Don't dictate beliefs

There are 11177 comments on the The Star Press story from Sep 5, 2012, titled Don't dictate beliefs. In it, The Star Press reports that:

No one else can say otherwise? That is basically saying those who do "believe in God" are better? Hardly.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at The Star Press.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#9593 Dec 29, 2012
To our atheist scientists in the forum, here's a question:

Is prostate cancer linked to the XMRV virus? Scientists told us it was, but unfortunately their papers were retracted since they were false.

This was reported in September, 2012. The link is below.

http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2012/09/...

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#9594 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"That is the business of science, correcting itself when it is wrong."
It's also the business of the law to stop fraud. Which they find way more of in science then science does.
"When does religion correct itself?... "
All the time!!! Every time older documents are found they make the appropriate changes to the Bible. It's usually pretty miner changes but they do keep the Bible updated with the oldest know writings. And no one goes to jail for fraud. LOL
You can't be serious.

I'm sorry.

Of course you can.

Pardon my jots and tittles.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#9595 Dec 29, 2012
Why did Dr. Dipak K. Das publish fake data describing the health benefits of red wine?

Dr. Das allegedly falsified scientific data more than 100 times. ELEVEN journals had to be informed of his misconduct, and consequently retract papers.

Undoubtedly, there are people who acted on his advice, thinking red wine would benefit their health. They probably thought they could rely on the advice of scientists. After all, if we can't rely on our scientists, who can we rely on?

Was the peer review group for Dr. Das' work asleep or were they perhaps protecting fraudulent research? Can't we depend on the peer review groups? After all, atheists tell us science is “self-correcting”- right? LOL

This link has the CBS News report on Dr. Das:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-573577...

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#9596 Dec 29, 2012
Do you realize that science fraud and cheating is moving at a faster pace than science itself?

The increase in retractions has been 10 times more in the past 10 years than previously.

What is the motivation for corrupt scientists?

Could it be money?

This link confirms the statements in this post:
http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/04/20/22...

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

Since: Nov 11

Location hidden

#9597 Dec 29, 2012
It's especially alarming when scientists falsify papers on safety in a nuclear dump project.

Although such a thing seems incredible, it happened, according to federal agencies.

Is MONEY more important to scientists than the safety of our citizens?

Apparently so......

The full story can be found at this link:

http://articles.philly.com/2005-03-17/news/25...

No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#9598 Dec 29, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Post 9575 has been reported to the moderators for reasons which are obvious.
I'll let you know when I hear from them.

Feel free to start holding your breath now.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#9599 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"So, stating a simple fact is abuse to you. "
Seriously? This kind of statement is all BS and you know it.
F-bombs and other profanity does not need to be tolerated.
Now KK you know that when a Theist post some thing they get the full scale on slot from the atheist. They ask for degrees or link ( or it's BS ). Why even when the link or professor is quote they are written off as writing about something out of their field of expertise.
Or an unreliable sources Like scientific journal or the New York Times.
You need to do better.
So ... you are against one type, a specific subset of words, of profanity yet not the other types?

Also, it's onslaught. The outdated information is not "written off," it is explained as being outdated, which it is, it's all outdated and old, and the very arguments you and Derek are using have all been addressed for the last decade, you just either don't care to know that you're making fools of yourselves, or your delusions have completely destroyed your connection to reality.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9600 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
Your thoughts and morals and standards are nothing more then random chemicals firing off in your brain. Why does that make you able to judge anyone or anything. The dog in the chicken yard that kills every last chicken and then leave them to rot is just following its chemicals reactions in its brain. Evolution by default means nothing can be wrong. It's all just random chemicals working the same way as random mutations created you.
Evolution isn't concerned with right/wrong

I've already told you how I get my morals. It's certainly not from a book which provides instructions to kill people.
KJV wrote:
" murder of homosexuals ". Why does this bother you so much? It's just one set of chemical reactions vs another. It is survival of the fittest is it not? "By means of natural selection " who can say then that this would not be means of natural selection? It's all just evolution from Bactria with mutations and chemical reactions and survival of the fittest.
What are you talking about?

Murder of anyone bothers me. It clearly doesn't bother you as we all know that your morality is based on accepting that it's good to kill not just homosexuals, but also people who practice freedom of religion, wives who aren't virgins on their wedding night, rebellious offspring, etc.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#9601 Dec 29, 2012
derek4 wrote:
Why did Dr. Dipak K. Das publish fake data describing the health benefits of red wine?
Dr. Das allegedly falsified scientific data more than 100 times. ELEVEN journals had to be informed of his misconduct, and consequently retract papers.
Undoubtedly, there are people who acted on his advice, thinking red wine would benefit their health. They probably thought they could rely on the advice of scientists. After all, if we can't rely on our scientists, who can we rely on?
Was the peer review group for Dr. Das' work asleep or were they perhaps protecting fraudulent research? Can't we depend on the peer review groups? After all, atheists tell us science is “self-correcting”- right? LOL
This link has the CBS News report on Dr. Das:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-573577...
No copyrighted material was reproduced in this post.
Do you have anything that isn't a fallacy to say? not linguine, but ... you know ... your own words or something? An original thought? Anything that offers us evidence that you are not a bot?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9602 Dec 29, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Depending on how you look at it, there is a lot of truth in that.
I gauge the successes of science by it's ability at explaining our reality.

That's real and tangible truths.

Not the superstitious mumbo jumbo we get from religion.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9603 Dec 29, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Reporting post to moderators.
You're getting desperate, aren't you?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9604 Dec 29, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Reporting post to moderators.
Yeah, desperate right enough.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9606 Dec 29, 2012
derek4 wrote:
The included link concerns atheist negativity and how it is destroying them.
“Anti-something” movements are doomed, since they merely display negativity.
We must stand for what we believe, not for what we disbelieve.
So be positive, or be prepared to fail.
Excellent point.
http://scienceblogs.com/purepedantry/2007/09/...
Statements in this post were authored by the poster and are not copyrighted material.
From your link

"Last year we discovered two such clouds that appear to have the exact abundances of Hydrogen and Helium predicted by Big Bang Nucleosynthesis, and none of the heavier elements that would exist in gas that was polluted by prior generations of stars."

Nice to know you subscribe to the Big Bang Theory.

You do realise how very old that makes our universe, don't you?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9607 Dec 29, 2012
derek4 wrote:
Statements in this post were authored by the poster and are not copyrighted material.
Can't help but notice you've taken to adding the above rider.

You've been warned! LOL

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9608 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
That's like calling a car reck a great example of good driving.
You do know that if you can't come up with any real in put on a post that you don't have to post a response right?
Science fraud is a "great successes of science." LOL
Hello? Your brains chemical reaction and out puts have really let you down.
The very fact that scientific fraud is found out serves to demonstrate the great strength of science.

Contrast that with religion and its ongoing failure at keeping its house in order.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9609 Dec 29, 2012
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Look back thru the forum, Hill, and see who made remarks about reporting me. I wasn't the one to report other posters, until they reported my posts.
And to everyone: I will summarize copyrighted material in my own words and provide the links. It is not necessary that I copy and paste the material. But the points will still be made, and the links will still be provided.
And I will report any post considered abusive. I may or may not post notice to the forum which posts I have reported to Topix.
ROFLMAO!!

You have been warned.

That not only explains why you now post a rider but also your weak attempts at retaliation by reporting other people for nothing at all.

Don't be dim, Dim.
KJV

United States

#9610 Dec 29, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>Obviously, Dim. It was intended to be a history lesson.

Science tells us that it couldn't have happened. That's a science lesson.

Hope that helps.
"Obviously, Dim. It was intended to be a history lesson."

Wikipedia : the Star of Bethlehem, also called the Christmas Star,[1] revealed the birth of Jesus to the Biblical Magi, and later led them to Bethlehem.

Wikipedia : The star of Bethlehem (the word star being used in its astrological connotation, a portent associated with a heavenly configuration, as in the phrase "his star is rising")
KJV

United States

#9611 Dec 29, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>Obviously, Dim. It was intended to be a history lesson.

Science tells us that it couldn't have happened. That's a science lesson.

Hope that helps.
"Science tells us that it couldn't have happened. That's a science lesson."

Actually this is wrong.
Science tells us that this in fact did happen.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9612 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Dark matter? Did some one say Dark matter? Khatru you're clueless as to what's going on in dark matter.
"The Soudan Underground Laboratory.( In one of Minnesota's deepest Iron mines ) is a general-purpose science facility, which provides the deep underground environment required by a variety of sensitive experiments. The Lab currently hosts two large projects: MINOS, which investigates elusive and poorly understood particles called neutrinos; and CDMS II, a "dark-matter" experiment which may help explain how galaxies are formed. Both were built for basic research - exploring how the universe works - but similar efforts have spawned practical (if unforeseen) byproducts, including the world-wide web and even advanced medical imaging techniques."
"The Gopher (University of Minnesota) ecosystem is often regarded as the effective predecessor of the World Wide Web."
Who said anything about dark matter? I certainly didn't.

Anyway, seeing as you mentioned it:

Dark matter and energy are provisional hypotheses used to explain real phenomena. Unlike your mythology, no-one is required to believe them.

If someone comes up with a better hypothesis based on further observations, they could be heaved out of the door. When does anything analogous ever happen in religion?

The answer to that question is of course, never.

This puts your god somewhere around the level of a failed hypothesis

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#9613 Dec 29, 2012
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Untrue. You believe all you want but the Bible has at lest 2000 things over all you gods that you keep trying to throw up on pedestals.
"Unique among all books ever written, the Bible accurately foretells specific events-in detail-many years, sometimes centuries, before they occur. Approximately 2500 prophecies appear in the pages of the Bible, about 2000 of which already have been fulfilled to the letter—no errors.
(The remaining 500 or so reach into the future and may be seen unfolding as days go by.) Since the probability for any one of these prophecies having been fulfilled by chance averages less than one in ten (figured very conservatively) and since the prophecies are for the most part independent of one another, the odds for all these prophecies having been fulfilled by chance without error is less than one in 102000 (that is 1 with 2000 zeros written after it)!"
Unlike your sad attempt at putting other gods as the Bibles Gods equal.
Ah yes.

So what you're saying is that your superstitious mumbo jumbo is better than other peoples' superstitious mumbo jumbo.

Your truths are better than theirs.

Your holy book is better than their holy books.

Your miracles are better than their miracles.

Etc, etc, etc...

Also, you know this not because you've carried out in-depth studies of the hundreds (maybe thousands) of different belief systems, but because you just know.

Lol

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 28 min Bob of Quantum-Faith 20,230
What is of greater value for humanity: Chrisita... 40 min Bob of Quantum-Faith 420
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr Joncy David 45,427
News Atheism vs. Theism: Knowns and Unknowns (Sep '14) 3 hr ATHEOI 420
News Atheist Rev. Gretta Vosper should be terminated... 3 hr ATHEOI 5
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 3 hr ChristineM 10,330
Evidence for God! (Oct '14) 4 hr Thinking 538
More from around the web