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.

KJV

United States

#10757 Jan 9, 2013
KittenKoder wrote:
KJV, my calculations for the odds were not based on the reality of the situation, I did them using your own failed concept of the method of natural selection. That would be the odds if it "started from scratch" each time, since natural selection isn't random it doesn't do that, so the odds for success are much, much, much higher.

Here's why:

Suppose you have three doors, behind one is a great prize, you don't know which one. The announcer asks you to pick one, and you do. Your odds are 33% of choosing the correct one.

Then the announcer shows you one of the two doors you didn't pick, which don't contain the prize. Your odds of having chosen the correct door are still 33%... but then he let's you change your choice.

What are your odds of selecting the correct door if you change your decision? It's a simple answer. So ... what are your chances now?
Yes I'm quite familiar with that.
Not really sure if you can use it here with out including some sort of intelligent's at work.

I believe the scenario here to be more like the roulette wheel. Every spin same odds. No intelligent's at work.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#10758 Jan 9, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>Right – since science fraud is disturbing to you, don't read material from “apologetic websites” like The New York Times, The Washington Post, and the various scientific journals that have been posted over the past 3 months.
I doubt that there's any atheist with an interest in any of the sciences who is not well aware of its failures and faults.

What you, in your infinite hypocrisy, fail to recognize is your own religions faults and failures.

And, even more hypocritically, you post your crap on technology developed by the very science you claim to be such a total failure.

Science has clearly and irrefutably proven that your bible is loaded with lies and falsehoods, and that topples your house of cards.

Your particular version of religion has to adapt or die.

The choice is yours, but the truth, once found, cannot be unfound.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#10759 Jan 9, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes I'm quite familiar with that.
Not really sure if you can use it here with out including some sort of intelligent's at work.
I believe the scenario here to be more like the roulette wheel. Every spin same odds. No intelligent's at work.
Which means you ignore the laws of chemistry. Not every combination is equally likely, even if you require a one-step process. At the very least, some will have problems with steric hindrance, some will be stabilized by intra-molecular attractions, etc.

The point? Chemistry is not a random process even when no intelligence is at work. Certain reactions happen instead of others because of the properties of the atoms themselves.

“Think&Care”

Since: Oct 07

Location hidden

#10760 Jan 9, 2013
derek4 wrote:
Science tries to explain, but terminates in blind alleys.
Science has failed us.
http://www.economist.com/node/13813436
How did that article support what you said? If anything, it showed that science eventually works things out.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#10762 Jan 9, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>There is no proof that you accept - just asyou haven't provided proof of evolution. Both our sides have already stated it using your meaningless simplistic terms, which is why I elaborated. If you have nothing new to say, it's really pointless for you to post, lol. On the other hand, if posting it helps to reassure yourself of your fraudulent atheistic belief, feel free to do so. But to continue posting the same thing that you do for the next 40 years, doesn't change anything, nor help your lost cause.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/

http://www.newscientist.com/mobile/topic/evol...

http://m.guardiannews.com/science/blog/2013/j...

http://anthro.palomar.edu/evolve/evolve_3.htm

“There is no Truth in Faith”

Since: Dec 08

nowhere near a pound of $100's

#10763 Jan 9, 2013
KJV wrote:
<quoted text>
You believe nature designed us.
Anything capable of designing a human must I would think be intelligent.
Right? Or am I not understanding you correctly?
You can think whatever you like. Nature is what it is and that's all that it is.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10764 Jan 9, 2013
KJV wrote:
Part of their mission statement:

"We proclaim the absolute truth and authority of the Bible with boldness"

Except that *truth* about the ratio of a circle's circumference to its diameter being 3:1, eh?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10765 Jan 9, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
We don't have to deal with it since it doesn't exist.
We read the Bible, and when “religion” doesn't match up to what the Bible teaches, we recognize it as religious heresy, not Christianity, and we reject it.
Thank you for demonstrating this to us in your post 10590, where you refer to “religious fraud”, which isn't Christianity.
Given that there are older religions, it wouldn't be entirely true for me to say that Christianity is the oldest fraud going.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10766 Jan 9, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's painful to see you atheists fighting with each other, lol.
Given the thousands of different denominations of your death cult, I'd say that discord and division are rife in Christianity.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10767 Jan 9, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
So those who go to heaven are supposed to want to go to hell and be unhappy with those who made the wrong choice?
Not me.
But I'd suggest you don't go to heaven then. If you want to be unhappy in hell with the millions who chose it for themselves, that's your right.
Hi Dim

IANS isn't around but I'm sure he won't mind us laughing at you as you shake your scary chicken on a stick.

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10768 Jan 9, 2013
Just Think wrote:
<quoted text>
In other words, there is not now, nor has there ever been, any proof of any god's existence.
That's about the size of it.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10769 Jan 9, 2013
Just wanted to drop this off for Dim. It came up in "Prove there's a god" but seemed apropos here, too.
Lil Ticked wrote:
I wonder... are there any non-practicing atheists in the room?
That's pretty funny.

If you think about why it's funny, it kind of puts the "atheism is a religion" canard to the lie. If atheism were a religion, you could be a non-observant atheist - a jack atheist, if you will.

But the idea is absurd - in fact, grist for a joke. Can you see that? If you made the comment about any religion or denomination, it's not funny.

I wonder... are there any non-practicing Catholics in the room?
I wonder... are there any non-practicing Pentecostals in the room?
I wonder... are there any non-practicing Muslims in the room?

<crickets> Not funny. NF.

But with "I wonder... are there any non-practicing atheists in the room?" <cue up laugh track> hilarity ensues.

Because atheism isn't a religion.

“ecrasez l'infame”

Since: May 08

Atlanta, Georgia

#10770 Jan 9, 2013
derek4 wrote:
<quoted text>
So those who go to heaven are supposed to want to go to hell and be unhappy with those who made the wrong choice?
Not me.
But I'd suggest you don't go to heaven then. If you want to be unhappy in hell with the millions who chose it for themselves, that's your right.
Yep, you're psychopathic.

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#10771 Jan 9, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
Slaves, obey your earthly masters in everything you do. Try to please them all the time, not just when they are watching you. Serve them sincerely because of your reverent fear of the Lord.
Colossians 3:22
I had a sex slave named Colossian.

She had a colossal ass.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10772 Jan 9, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
You of course make some great points. What I am saying is that I think at times we allow them to frame the argument to their liking. When while we can certainly factually destroy their lame apologetic nonsense, we need to remind frame the argument properly and not allow them to do the old Jesus vs Darwin debate for example.
OK. I see your point. I agree. I try to never let the Christian frame the discussion whenever I'm aware its happening.
Givemeliberty wrote:
In my pharmacology classes we learned that there is rarely a neat and pretty answer, something the theist has trouble with.
Drugs, huh? Are you a pharmacist?
Givemeliberty wrote:
We don't necessarily even expect such a pretty perfect answer. Often instead we look for the most right answer. Example: say you read a list of a woman's medications and get a grasp of her conditions. The doctor calls your pharmacy ordering four new medications. Each of these medications have negative ramifications with the other medications and/or conditions. YIKES! Here it comes! Which of the four medications will you fill and why. You of course are not allowed to say none even though none of these are perfect medications for the individual. Instead you have to pick the most right answer and explain why. Make sense?
Sure. Interesting.
Givemeliberty wrote:
Now when dealing with the notion of deities and or Jesus/Yahweh/Allah/insert god here, it all boils down to either (insert god here) exists or doesn't exist. Now everything being equal what do we do? We weigh out the facts and come to the most right answer that we can. So when one examines the facts as they are, is the best answer that those facts lead us to there being a deity in question or not? This to me when it comes to the notion of deities is the key factor.
You seem to think that the theist is your target. If that's what you think, I suggest looking at what you're doing from another perspective. We're your audience - the other skeptics. There's really nothing urgent about the post to the theist like there is when you're on the phone to a prescribing doc trying to prevent an untoward drug reaction. You don't really have to get through to the theist. In fact, you can bet you won't.

Look at it like this: If it were only you and Dim in this thread, or if it were just you and him sending emails back and forth,how long ago would you have been out of here? First day? Second?

If that's so, doesn't it mean that you already understand all of that intuitively, even if you weren't explicitly aware of it?

We're your audience, you're a good communicator, and you don't have to choose your words carefully for us.

Did I understand you correctly? Are we discussing the same thing?

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#10773 Jan 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Just wanted to drop this off for Dim. It came up in "Prove there's a god" but seemed apropos here, too.

That's pretty funny.

If you think about why it's funny, it kind of puts the "atheism is a religion" canard to the lie. If atheism were a religion, you could be a non-observant atheist - a jack atheist, if you will.

But the idea is absurd - in fact, grist for a joke. Can you see that? If you made the comment about any religion or denomination, it's not funny.

I wonder... are there any non-practicing Catholics in the room?
I wonder... are there any non-practicing Pentecostals in the room?
I wonder... are there any non-practicing Muslims in the room?

<crickets> Not funny. NF.

But with "I wonder... are there any non-practicing atheists in the room?" <cue up laugh track> hilarity ensues.

Because atheism isn't a religion.
I would practice, but I'm already pretty good at it.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10774 Jan 9, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
Oh shit. I know why closed is a 7 and open is a 4. Am I crazy?
LOL. Funny. Wasn't that a good little anecdote? I've got a ton of them - all true, of course. How about this:

I was medical director for a local hospice, and we were caring for an unfortunate woman with renal carcinoma whose live-in caretaker was her schizophrenic daughter. Initially, the daughter had been taking her antipsychotic medications as prescribed, and was well controlled. The hospice staff was fond of her, and the visits at their home often ended with a hug from the daughter.

After a few months, however, the daughter began decompensating. She has discontinued her antipsychotics and was now behaving eerily. In addition to expressing concern about the safety of the home situation for both the patient and her daughter, the hospice staff was becoming spooked by the daughter’s increasingly bizarre behavior, and were becoming concerned about their own safety. They no longer felt good hugging the increasingly delusional daughter, and asked me for advice.

I sagely blurted out,“It sounds like a case for drugs, not hugs”.

I hope you're old enough to remember the "Hugs, Not Drugs" bumper stickers, because it's not too funny if you aren't/don't.
https://www.google.com/search...

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#10775 Jan 9, 2013
Khatru wrote:
Hi Dim
IANS isn't around but I'm sure he won't mind us laughing at you as you shake your scary chicken on a stick.
You rang?

Since: Apr 08

Watford, UK

#10776 Jan 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
You rang?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =an_by5r8EUcXX
Lol

Lurch was great

https://www.youtube.com/watch...

Holy holy

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#10777 Jan 9, 2013
It aint necessarily so wrote:
LOL. Funny. Wasn't that a good little anecdote? I've got a ton of them - all true, of course. How about this:
I was medical director for a local hospice, and we were caring for an unfortunate woman with renal carcinoma whose live-in caretaker was her schizophrenic daughter. Initially, the daughter had been taking her antipsychotic medications as prescribed, and was well controlled. The hospice staff was fond of her, and the visits at their home often ended with a hug from the daughter.
After a few months, however, the daughter began decompensating. She has discontinued her antipsychotics and was now behaving eerily. In addition to expressing concern about the safety of the home situation for both the patient and her daughter, the hospice staff was becoming spooked by the daughter’s increasingly bizarre behavior, and were becoming concerned about their own safety. They no longer felt good hugging the increasingly delusional daughter, and asked me for advice.
I sagely blurted out,“It sounds like a case for drugs, not hugs”.
I hope you're old enough to remember the "Hugs, Not Drugs" bumper stickers, because it's not too funny if you aren't/don't.
https://www.google.com/search...
It's never too early to instill conformity. I've got some ideas for advertising bumper stickers.

Babies who wear Huggies, never become druggies.

If you put Pampers on your child, they'll never go wild.

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
Christianity isn't based on... (Feb '10) 18 min Richardfs 327
What is of greater value for humanity: Chrisita... 1 hr par five 437
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 2 hr ATHEOI 21,403
News A Strong Muslim Identity Is the Best Defense Ag... 3 hr Moon Pie 9
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 4 hr Eagle 12 257,133
News Why Do Atheists Ridicule Christianity? (May '11) 4 hr Eagle 12 10,344
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 4 hr Aura Mytha 20,285
More from around the web