Don't dictate beliefs

Sep 5, 2012 Full story: The Star Press 11,175

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

Full Story

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#10300 Jan 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
No not at all. You see I understand your believe against all odds in spontaneous life, where nothing exploded and created everything. Gaps and falsified science to fill in the gaps and failed test.
I choose to believe in the Bible where 2000 prophecy have been fulfilled and the History of the Bible keeps getting proven right with each new city unearthed.
Right, it is so improbable that nature did it over billions of years with natural processes and natural laws, that it must be that "Gawd dunnit with MAGIC" ... yah uh huh! that's logical <NOT!>

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#10301 Jan 5, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Try to improve your self confidence. You shouldn't beg for constant confirmation from other posters. When you do that, you demean yourself.
So, you've still got nothing. Why am I not surprised?
KJV

United States

#10302 Jan 5, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>You've been told about the "Grand Unification Problem" about a half dozen different ways that I know of, probably a lot more.

What you are doing is known as the "God of the Gaps". If Science can not currently explain it, then "God dunnit!!"

This was stupid in the Dark Ages when we didn't understand what caused the Black Plague. Now we do, and it was not "God's wrath".

The "God of the Gaps" gets smaller with every scientific discovery.

You are worshiping a shrinking god that you cannot even prove exists.
Question for you.
You obviously believe that all life on earth has been traced back to a single speck of life. The first life form that self started in a very hostile environment ( of course it was not hostile to the first life form in fact it was perfect ) now science claims the earth is 4.7 billion years old.
And given that amount of time through natural selection we have all the live we see today plus all the the life that has gone extinct through natural selection.

Yet in 4.7 billion years a second life form never spontaneous started like the first life form. All life can be traced back to this first life form. All life has this DNA all put together the same way. No second alien type of life form in 4.7 billion years. Only once did this happen why not a second time. After all things on earth just got better and better for life (as we know it Jim) yet the Goo Pool never produced a second life form.

Why?
Why is all life related on earth and not a second life form, so to say a second blood line from a second original life form?

Why is that?

Do the math either life is not that special
And we should have by now seen a second very alien type of life. Or life is very very special and to think all this came from one speck of life is ludicrous.
KJV

United States

#10303 Jan 5, 2013
polymath257 wrote:
<quoted text>Please show the details of the calculation of these odds. Given that evolution almost inevitably follows from life, the independence of those two is known to be wrong. Next, the question of spontaneous life from the Big bang is essentially a question of initial parameters and we don't know how to calculate the probability of those parameters (or even if such a probability makes sense). Finally, from the known equations of physics, a Big Bang of some sort is inevitable (a universe expanding from a hot dense state).

[QUOTE]Look at those two sets of numbers.
The odds that the big 3 are correct and evolution has brought us all the way up to today."

Give that this is what happened (based on the evidence), the probability is 1. A priori probabilities, however, may differ.

[QUOTE]And the odds of those prophecies around 2000 all listed in one book all fulfilled to date leavening less then 500 prophecies that for tell the end time.
According to math it's no contest.
The Bible wins hands down. "

Except, of course, that the latter didn't happen. The 'prophesies' are either trivial (a kingdom will rise and wage war), self-fullfilling ( a man will ride through Jerusalem on a donkey), or were made *after* the events prophesied (all of the specific ones). So your probability is zero and mine is almost one.
"probability is 1" if and only if it did happen. There is only evidence there is no proof so you cannot use 1. You failed. You were given your chance to prove your theory. Instead you jump to the conclusion that some guesses are fact. This is known as Bad science.
You appear to be a prominent member of that club.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#10304 Jan 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Question for you.
You obviously believe that all life on earth has been traced back to a single speck of life. The first life form that self started in a very hostile environment ( of course it was not hostile to the first life form in fact it was perfect ) now science claims the earth is 4.7 billion years old.
And given that amount of time through natural selection we have all the live we see today plus all the the life that has gone extinct through natural selection.
Yet in 4.7 billion years a second life form never spontaneous started like the first life form. All life can be traced back to this first life form. All life has this DNA all put together the same way. No second alien type of life form in 4.7 billion years. Only once did this happen why not a second time. After all things on earth just got better and better for life (as we know it Jim) yet the Goo Pool never produced a second life form.
Why?
Why is all life related on earth and not a second life form, so to say a second blood line from a second original life form?
Why is that?
Do the math either life is not that special
And we should have by now seen a second very alien type of life. Or life is very very special and to think all this came from one speck of life is ludicrous.
So many assumptions. It wasn't "one," and likely it occurred in many locations. The chemicals needed for the protocells are also food for life today, so how do you propose that a new non-evolved life survive when everything around it eats it?
KJV

United States

#10305 Jan 5, 2013
Hedonist wrote:
<quoted text>And you apparently don't understand the first thing about probability theory.

Probability theory deals with populations of things. Given that out of a population of 1 universe we have observed exactly 1 universe which has life, the odds of a universe having life is 1/1, which = 100%.

And this same math holds true for any number of your supposed probabilities. Which is why statements about "odds" are ridiculous.

Without a population, probability theory is just so much smoke and mirrors designed to entertain the simple minded.
You apparently had trouble in school.
You see the question was not "is there a universe and is there life".
The question was how did the universes get here. You have NO proof of the Big Bang only evidence so you cannot start with 1 you must start with zero here.

Spontaneous life, no proof no evidence you must use zero here also

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#10306 Jan 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
Question for you.
You obviously believe that all life on earth has been traced back to a single speck of life. The first life form that self started in a very hostile environment ( of course it was not hostile to the first life form in fact it was perfect ) now science claims the earth is 4.7 billion years old.
And given that amount of time through natural selection we have all the live we see today plus all the the life that has gone extinct through natural selection.
Yet in 4.7 billion years a second life form never spontaneous started like the first life form. All life can be traced back to this first life form. All life has this DNA all put together the same way. No second alien type of life form in 4.7 billion years. Only once did this happen why not a second time. After all things on earth just got better and better for life (as we know it Jim) yet the Goo Pool never produced a second life form.
Why?
The conditions had to be other than they are now for life to form. Earth did not get "better and better" for life, life evolved to fit the changes on Earth, particularly those changes induced by life itself (Oxygen rich atmosphere). During the time the Earth had the right conditions for spontaneous life generation, multiple forms likely DID generate. The most successful one then ATE all the others. So you are incorrect, the Goo Pool generated several life forms in all likelihood. The most successful one ate the rest and then evolution commenced.
KJV wrote:
Why is all life related on earth and not a second life form, so to say a second blood line from a second original life form?
Why is that?
This is not correct at all either. Let's go with "blood line" as a concept. Many Mollusks have copper based blood chemistry, not iron as ours is. There is your "second" "blood" line.
KJV wrote:
Do the math either life is not that special
And we should have by now seen a second very alien type of life. Or life is very very special and to think all this came from one speck of life is ludicrous.
Life ain't all that special. We see life emerging in all kinds of environments that would be hostile to most others, under the Antarctic ice, on deep sea thermal vents, at the bottom of the deepest trenches in the ocean.
One speck would be all it would take.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10307 Jan 5, 2013
RHill wrote:
You know ... denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
Have you ever heard of the Crimea River? It's a straight shot from de Nile, right across the Mediterranean and up the Aegean.
http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/File:Crime...
KJV

United States

#10308 Jan 5, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Ad hom, you dodged the question completely. Nice to see you never change.

Oh, and never changing is always a bad thing.
"never changing is always a bad thing"

You better hope the the Sun doesn't change or the orbit of the Earth doesn't change. Or the angle of the axis of the earth would not change. Or the Ocean Waters Salinity. I could go on but I believe I have made my Point that KK's statement was ludicrous.

No KK somethings are much better left unchanged.
KJV

United States

#10309 Jan 5, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Again, show these "prophecies" that occurred after the fact, with actual evidence of them and not just assertions, also not including the forced one that people made happen simply because they wanted to justify it. You keep claiming these exist, yet you never provide more than "it says here" ... which is nothing more than an assertion.

As to your first point, no, we're here, life had to come from non-life somehow. Science looks for a way it could have happened, you ignore the entire situation with a non-answer. Most of us would rather have an answer than ignore it using a non-answer as a shield from the facts.
Read the bible. I know you claim you have but you must have missed like all of it.

Note: you cannot read type print with your eyes closed.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#10310 Jan 5, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
So you don't know when it was "added" ?
It wasn't added by “later writers”- just confirmed by "later writers".
From the Old Testament, Psalms 90:4
You've really been suckered into believing this ju-ju, haven't you?

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#10311 Jan 5, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Actually, you were right about the brotherly love among Christians, and I appreciate you recognizing it.
That's something atheists don't have. Be sure to read my other post about S.E. Cupp which confirms it, lol.
Really?

I don't believe you, Dim.

I didn't see any helping hands extended to KJV to get him out of that hole he dug for himself.

Since: Apr 08

Nottingham, UK

#10312 Jan 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Read the bible. I know you claim you have but you must have missed like all of it.
Note: you cannot read type print with your eyes closed.
What's the point?

After all, you say that "they" amend the Bible whenever a new document is found.
KJV

United States

#10313 Jan 5, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>Again, show these "prophecies" that occurred after the fact, with actual evidence of them and not just assertions, also not including the forced one that people made happen simply because they wanted to justify it. You keep claiming these exist, yet you never provide more than "it says here" ... which is nothing more than an assertion.

As to your first point, no, we're here, life had to come from non-life somehow. Science looks for a way it could have happened, you ignore the entire situation with a non-answer. Most of us would rather have an answer than ignore it using a non-answer as a shield from the facts.
I'm no longer playing that game KK.
I am supposable talking with intelligent well read atheist that all claim to know the Bible better then the Christians on theses threads. So I don't need to show you stuff on the Bible, you already know what I'm talking about or you're a lier and you are not knowledgable at all about the Bible and haven't a clue how to use Google.

Since: Mar 11

Chicago, IL

#10314 Jan 5, 2013
I merely asked a simple question and it has sent you theists into a rage. You up till now have failed miserably to even muster a basic answer.

Your temper tantrum about demanding is a projection. Plus you Christholes always want to storm the atheism forum with your off topic spam about abiogenesis, evolution and the Big Bang not to mention really bizarre spam ( goth chick costume jewelry!) lol yet when we ask a simple question you go ballistic? Sorry that's not how it works.

You can either answer the question or not. And this question actually deals with atheism/theism.

Why should anyone accept god as anything more than a product of someone's vivid imagination?

Inability to answer this should make any theist honestly question their faith for the bible says always be prepared to answer any question asked of you. This is a biblical command.
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh, you wanted a response? Why?
Then you got real demanding, as though you are dictating to other posters to answer you; dictating your beliefs, lol.
Most of us don't have to get input from other people in order to state our own beliefs.
You're as insecure as oogah boogah, lol.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10315 Jan 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You apparently had trouble in school.
You see the question was not "is there a universe and is there life".
The question was how did the universes get here. You have NO proof of the Big Bang only evidence so you cannot start with 1 you must start with zero here.
Spontaneous life, no proof no evidence you must use zero here also
No, I don't have to start with zero here, that's just you lack of understanding.

But you said to use mathematical probability. Based on probability theory there is a 100% chance that life will exist in every universe and on every planet where it is possible for life to exist.

Moving the goal post doesn't change the fact that you are wrong and you do not understand probability theory.

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#10316 Jan 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm no longer playing that game KK.
I am supposable talking with intelligent well read atheist that all claim to know the Bible better then the Christians on theses threads. So I don't need to show you stuff on the Bible, you already know what I'm talking about or you're a lier and you are not knowledgable at all about the Bible and haven't a clue how to use Google.
Most Christians don't even know there was a First Council of Nicaea. I suppose most assume the bible was delivered directly from God via angels or some such a thing.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10317 Jan 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
"probability is 1" if and only if it did happen. There is only evidence there is no proof so you cannot use 1. You failed. You were given your chance to prove your theory. Instead you jump to the conclusion that some guesses are fact. This is known as Bad science.
You appear to be a prominent member of that club.
And you still don't have a clue about probability calculations.

Please explain your understanding of how probability theory supports your position in any way, I could use a good laugh.

The truth is, probability theory is NOT applicable. It makes absolutely no sense to try and use probability, combination, permutation, standard deviation, sigma, not any other aspect of probability theory. But you brought it up. We're all just laughing at you about it.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10318 Jan 5, 2013
Ooogah Boogah wrote:
<quoted text>
Most Christians don't even know there was a First Council of Nicaea. I suppose most assume the bible was delivered directly from God via angels or some such a thing.
Yep. It's a shame the "son of god" never learned how to write.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#10319 Jan 5, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Read the bible. I know you claim you have but you must have missed like all of it.
Note: you cannot read type print with your eyes closed.
I studied it when I was young, everything in there was stated after the fact. End of story.

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
Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 11 min feces for jesus 230,118
Atheism to Defeat Religion by 2038 (Apr '12) 36 min Richardfs 23,004
Atheist because of art class 1 hr AtheistBodybuilde... 1
Does Being 'Spiritual But Not Religious' Really... 2 hr Thinking 6
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 2 hr Richardfs 1,404
Islam for peace, or violence? 4 hr Thinking 54
Adam Atheoi - the god of 'humanity' 4 hr Thinking 92
Our world came from nothing? 12 hr Thinking 1,061

Atheism People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE