Prove there's a god.

“Spelin 'n' tpyin...”

Since: Feb 08

...are my strong suits!

#549328 Oct 11, 2012
Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
<quoted text>Yes, in...
<scroll>

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#549329 Oct 11, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Wait, wait, wait.....
You mean the unproven, hypothetical Big Bang Theory, right?
It's not hypothetical , or just a best guess. There is multiple evidences that points to the fact. As I said the convergence of evidence is proof.
OCB

United States

#549330 Oct 11, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
For my buddy OCB:
How are husbands like lawn mowers?
They're hard to get started, they emit noxious odors, and half the time they don't work
--
How does a man show he's planning for the future?
He buys two cases of beer instead of one.
--
What has eight arms and an IQ of 60?
Four guys watching a football game.
--
Why do doctors slap babies' butts right after they're born?
To knock the penises off the smart ones.
--
Why do men have a hole in their penis?
So their brains can get some oxygen now and then.
--
Why did God create man before woman?
He didn't want any advice.
Well done -funny stuff RR- gonna tell them all to my man tonight- LOL!

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#549331 Oct 11, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Isn't that the same beginning that the BBT shows? The origin of everything resulting in a "first cause"?
BBT does not question what caused "if caused" or if it was even subject to causality.

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#549332 Oct 11, 2012
Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
<quoted text>We agreed, evoltuion is simply abstract superstition and fantasy. Evolution is like trying to put a trillion piece puzzle together, while only having 4 visible pieces.
Black Thunder 42 wrote:
<quoted text>Philosophy and abstract superstition answers nothing. It creates a world of fantasy, which you try, in desperation, to incorporate into actuality. It is self delusion.

Deluded reply...(evolution)
We agreed, evoltuion is simply abstract superstition and fantasy. Evolution is like trying to put a trillion piece puzzle together, while only having 4 visible pieces.

LOL!

Twisted crister {{{Holey Pokey}}} Dance!!

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#549333 Oct 11, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
Are any uncaused causes known to physics?
There are events that appear to break causality , and events that once happen effect the past. We as humans are bound to the arrow of time. But the with the uncertainty principle and particles coupled with the Higgs field the micro particle world is not bound to the arrow of time , this is how a photon exists in your eye but is 10 billion years old. For the photon time simply does not exist,
So it exists simultaneously the length of its trajectory and everywhere between, causality is a human perception.

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#549334 Oct 11, 2012
ChristineM wrote:
<quoted text>
Yes seen it, there are several people who seem quite gleefully willing to point it out to me and although it sickens me it in no way changes my argument. There are two issues here.
1 As I have always said, a person is responsible for their actions.
2 you need to remember that we are talking about grossly fundamental people here who are willing to fight (and kill children) for their point of view. What they consider an excuse to murder is not the norm in the west nor to the majority of Muslims.
You made that post and so you are responsible for making that post. She spoke her mind and she is responsible for speaking her mind, although her age mitigates that responsibility to some degree.
The gunman who shot her for speaking her mind, is responsible for shooting her.
That shooting does not shift the responsibility for her statements, she said whatever she said, she is responsible for saying what she said.
Certainly in the west just because she spoke her mind would not be an excuse to shoot her however the western attitude does not make the gunman any more or less responsible.
Also consider that I have come across several westerners on topix who have threatened to kill for their beliefs and rights, I believe you are one. What? Not the same thing? Think about it.
The difference is I threatened to kill the men who would kill little baby girls for speaking freely. This is exactly what I meant Christine. They seek to squash freedom and liberty , they seek to subjugate people and dominate them with force.
They do not wish women to learn and go to school.
They do not want women to speak period.
They want them to hide their faces and be slaves to them.

They do not accept anything the west holds dear.
Including the freedom of women to speak their minds.

I will not be intimidated and silenced by them.
I do not intend that they will silence you.
I intend to go in harms way because of this.



Liberty will come.

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1077/106285619...

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#549335 Oct 11, 2012
Hidingfromyou wrote:
<quoted text>
No, natural selection explains design. That's all natural selection does is explain design.
Natural selection is not abiogenesis. Those are separate theories. NS can tell you about human phylogeny, but it cannot tell you how life started.
Life happens b/c you take in equal or more energy than you expend, on average. Breathing helps.
Consciousness exists b/c humans are k-type species, highly social. Our universe is a social one. Your consciousness is an adaptation to keep you alive. It doesn't come close to governing most of your body, even though you can make your body do stuff.
Each sperm and egg contain half the parents' genomes. They combine and begin building an organism. The proteins align because of chemical gradients. Genes are switched on and off by controller genes called "HOX" genes. It's extremely complicated and very well worked out. Google it, I'm not going to explain it all here. Sorry.
Individuals are products of their environment + genetics. You developed within a certain environment and it cued your genes (they were responding to environmental input) to make you.
You're an encultured social animal. Your brain was "imprinted" with the culture and language you grew up in. You experience your culture as "normal and natural" and act as if your culture is a human universal (we all do this). Your experiences are cultural constructs, but they are also 100% real to you. Your - as in RR's - universe is a Christian universe, subjectively experienced as real and you mistakenly believe that it is objectively real for all people because of your enculturation.
It isn't. Other people in other cultures are encultured for their cultures and religions. They subjectively experience those as real and believe that their way of understanding the universe around them is normal and natural for all people.
These concepts are hard to grasp. Sorry if they are esoteric to you. Most people aren't used to thinking about their realities as learned, products of their social lives. We are adapted to treat our worldviews as if they were objectively real, so it's jarring to learn that they aren't. But they aren't. Sorry. I include myself in this, I'm human, too.
I am going to sleep now. It's quite late here. G'night!
Nice post.

If I seemed to be less interactive with you and others, it's because I haven't had much time to read the good guys' posts this week - we've been away from home with friends since last Saturday, and so I have limited time for the Internet, as well as limited Internet access. I have to visit the local restaurant for WiFi. So, I read the theists, and of course any replies to my posts, almost exclusively.

But this caught my eye.

We'll be back to our routine beginning Sunday.

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#549336 Oct 11, 2012
RickBlaine wrote:
<quoted text>
The First Cause, Prime Mover, argument isn't now and never was intended to be a mathematical proof of the existence of God. What it is though, is a powerful argument from experience and one stone in the foundation of the overall and overwhelming argument for the existence of God.
I would guess that in your experience you accept the causal argument in nearly every case except this one. I feel confident that, you, if while walking with companions in the verge, came upon an abandoned toaster would not require that they provide mathematical proof that the toaster didn't,(1) spontaneously generate from nothing for nothing, by nothing, or (2) that it was eternal. This is, of course, silly. And yet, you would have me believe, that when walking, we come upon the most complex machine ever encountered, or we observe the most complex system of all, that the burden of proof is on me to prove that it didn't spontaneously generate, from nothing, by nothing, for nothing. This is to take silliness to exponential hights. This is why atheists and evolutionist tend toward loudness and belligerence. They suppose that in the face of their aggression, no one will notice the absurdity of the positions they espouse.
No one, who isn't a religious atheist to begin with, would embrace those views.
So this, it seems to me, is where we stand. You began to argue from the spontaneous generation of something, from nothing, for nothing. Perhaps this wasn't your intent and I misunderstood, but this is currently the most commonly held position of religious atheists. Then you moved to (or perhaps started from) the argument from the perpetual motion machine. And you think belief in God is unreasonable?
There is no evidence of god.
But now you adhere to god being the cause.
What created god?
Why do you suppose god does not need a cause?
If causality holds true then god is not exempt.

This means it is more logical in the absence of evidence of any god. That the universe caused itself and therefore eliminating the
confusion from the start. No god required.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#549337 Oct 11, 2012
Gate Keeper 1 wrote:
<quoted text>Try turning the page, you are stuck on a lie. What you are saying is that the 1000s of gays who are complaining and directly or indireclty involved in suing 12 government officials, so they can continue therapy, don't really know that it is helpful. In fact, you know best.
I would quibble with your language, but yes - that's essentially correct. I know better than people hoping the be cured of "the gay." So does the State of California.

“Life may be sweeter for this”

Since: Nov 08

Fennario

#549338 Oct 11, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
Your opinions are testimony to the damage that your religion does to people, including you.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Then, by that account, would the ACTS of the people he's describing be testimony to the damage that having no religion causes?
No. I'm not aware of irreligiosity doing damage. If religion does damage, having no religion is better.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#549339 Oct 11, 2012
Aura - Convergence of evidence only shows that evolution (or something like it) may have happened. It doesn't prove that it did.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“ Ah see's lanlubbers Cap'n BT!”

Since: Oct 10

Location hidden

#549340 Oct 11, 2012
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>PRAYER has been "tested"? Oh PUH-lease.
And listen- stop misquoting Gandhi- you have NO clue as to what his views were on science.
You just can't STAND that he was SPOT on regarding the majority of Christians when he said:
"I like your Christ. But I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ".
Your misquote is not at all clever or witty and while what Gandhi actually DID say about Christians makes sense- your misquote makes NO sense at all.
Yes it has...and it failed...

Expanding upon philosophical “God versus world” arguments, a number of scientists and
philosophers have advocated an empirical approach to the evaluation of supernatural claims. For
instance, Dawkins argues that the existence of God is a legitimate scientific hypothesis that has
observational consequences which may be confirmed or disconfirmed by the available evidence:
The presence or absence of a creative super-intelligence is unequivocally a scientific
question, even if it is not in practice- or not yet- a decided one. So also is the truth or
falsehood of every one of the miracle stories that religions rely upon to impress
multitudes of the faithful.(Dawkins, 2006, p. 58-59)
As an example of an empirical test of the God hypothesis, Dawkins cites a recent doubleblind, controlled study investigating the efficacy of intercessory prayer on the health and recovery
outcomes of 1,802 patients undergoing coronary bypass surgery. The study, published in the
American Heart Journal and funded by the John Templeton Foundation, which supports research
on spirituality, showed no significant difference in recovery outcome between patients who were
prayed for and those who were not (Benson et al., 2006; Dawkins, 2006). In fact, subjects who
knew that they were being prayed for actually fared worse than subjects who were blind with
regard to their experimental group assignment, possibly due to anxiety caused by learning that
they were being prayed for (Dawkins, 2006). The essential point is that methodologically sound
studies published in reputable scientific journals have been conducted to directly test the
consequences of a supernatural hypothesis.

“Proud Member”

Since: Dec 10

The Basket of Deplorables

#549341 Oct 11, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
<quoted text>
The Creator needs a creator arguement?
A being such as God, that is omnipotent, omnipresent & eternal needs a creator?
That would negate the possibility that God is eternal...
There is no succession in God. God is without succession or chance. It is a quality of eternity; "from everlasting to everlasting he is God,"
Then produce one , should be easy if it's true the evidence should be staggering. It should manifest itself in every aspect of life. We should see see the burning bush on every corner.
Go ahead , Prove There's A God!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#549342 Oct 11, 2012
Aura - BBT doesn't show "cause" because it's an effect...
Is it an effect without a cause?
...
It'd be the only one.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#549343 Oct 11, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =t4-AKcH3eC8XX Better.
.. my 9-year-old took an on-line college level course on evolution at the university where HFY teaches ..

.. she gives of her time freely because that's who she is. You now have the opportunity to learn without surrendering your belief system. Will you take advantage of it or also call her an idiot ??..

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#549344 Oct 11, 2012
God is exempt from causality. He created it & it's laws as we know them.
A human can create a dog cage. A dog can understand the boundaries & laws of that cage, but can in no way ever attempt to create a cage OR break through it's boundaries.

Judged:

10

10

10

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#549345 Oct 11, 2012
IANS - Religion does not do damage, people that misinterpret it do. Most religious people are very peaceful & keep to themselves, but some are (embarassingly) overzealous & arrogant. Don't clump all religious people into one insane group.

Judged:

11

11

11

Reply »
Report Abuse Judge it!

“MEET KIKI -She Seeks Home”

Since: Oct 10

With Established Harem

#549346 Oct 11, 2012
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Aura - Convergence of evidence only shows that evolution (or something like it) may have happened. It doesn't prove that it did.
.. yes, it does ..

.. to continue denying the evidence of evolution, you must reject everything HFY wrote today ..

.. you will. She's wasting her time on you ..

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#549347 Oct 11, 2012
It aint necessarily so wrote:
<quoted text>
<quoted text>
No. I'm not aware of irreligiosity doing damage. If religion does damage, having no religion is better.
Just overheard on BBC's Top Gear programme, regarding an Australian/US car:

"Some years ago, we exported a lot of convicts to Australia, and the God squad to America..."

The audience seemed to think it was funny. So did I.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 7 min truth 659,015
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 27 min RiccardoFire 45,630
Poll Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 29 min Neville Thompson 283,056
Israel End is Near (Feb '15) 35 min Neville Thompson 789
The Christian Atheist debate (Jun '15) 1 hr Aura Mytha 71,230
News Reason to cringe: Female voters react to Trump 1 hr emperorjohn 299
Should Black People Forgive White People for Sl... (Jun '07) 3 hr gundee123 5,104
More from around the web