Prove there's a god.

“I see quantum effects”

Since: Jan 11

In the macro world.

#620526 Apr 29, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>Hmm,ok.. I dont have a problem with science per say, its people like you i have a problem with.

So are you speaking about the sharpened and revised Radiometric Dating they now use? If so, isnt it also flawed as well??
You have a HUGE problem with science.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#620527 Apr 29, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:

Whenever an atheist and a theist have a debate about religion, it's usually the case that the confirmation bias of the theist causes them to make all sorts of errors.
Well I can't play this game with you, seriously if you're gonna act like atheists don't use a confirmation bias to support their opinion then you're either really, really stupid or you're a liar. I don't think you're stupid.
If you understood religion as well as I do, the cognitive dissonance that would produce in you would be so uncomfortable that you would live in constant turmoil. You can't understand, as a believer. It would wreck your faith. Understanding religion results in atheism, in almost every case.


I disagree, I think the more one learns about their religion the more they believe in it, mot the less they believe in it.

See? You, an atheist, are using confirmation bias to support your opinion.
It is in error. Where is the justice in torturing a human for eternity, for any crime a human can commit? Would it be justice for me to kill you and your family in return for you flicking a booger at me?
It is an error to attribute such a fictional character with anything close to justice, when it gratuitously punishes the vast majority of human souls for an eternity.
Oh give me a break, that's like telling the judge that the fine for speeding was too much because the speed limit is unfair.

You know the speed limit so you have a choice, either you obey it and everything's fine for you disobey it and you pay the penalty.
You're an idiot.

You're an idiot.
Not once, but twice you use the atheist handbook because you have nothing else to say, no defense.

Imagine that.
My "belief" that no deities exist is based on statistical analysis.
No it isn't, it's based purely on conjecture, opinion and your 'gut feeling'. That's hardly evidence.
Not even close.
If you're not going to put effort into it, I'm not going to bother with you.
I'm sorry that you're getting all butt hurt over this, but that's your downfall, not mine.

“Rising”

Since: Dec 10

Milky Way

#620528 Apr 29, 2013
psalms 23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Hmm,ok.. I dont have a problem with science per say, its people like you i have a problem with.
So are you speaking about the sharpened and revised Radiometric Dating they now use? If so, isnt it also flawed as well??
If you mean does it have people like you saying it does then yes.
If you mean is there actually a problem with it, then no.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#620529 Apr 29, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
So I heard.
The rumors of my ASSimilation are greatly exaggerated.

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#620530 Apr 29, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Well I can't play this game with you, seriously if you're gonna act like atheists don't use a confirmation bias to support their opinion then you're either really, really stupid or you're a liar. I don't think you're stupid.
A confirmation bias is like a filter. When new information comes in, a confirmation bias influences you to elevate the quality you perceive in information that confirms your bias, and suppress the quality you perceive in information that contradicts your bias.

All it takes is a lack of confirmation bias, and rational skepticism, to reject all god claims.

Your claim isn't exactly clear. If you're claiming that atheists have a confirmation bias, you'll have to tell me what you think it is, because I don't know. Make sure you specify if your claim applies to all atheists, most atheists, some atheists, or specific atheists.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I disagree, I think the more one learns about their religion the more they believe in it, mot the less they believe in it.
See? You, an atheist, are using confirmation bias to support your opinion.
I was speaking about the system of religion, but what I said also applies to individual religions, though to a lesser or greater extent, depending on the religion.

Once a person has faith in their religion, and builds a system of beliefs in their mind, they have a confirmation bias, so all the learning they do will likely support their beliefs, unless they can discard their faith. Once faith is discarded, and the confirmation is gone, you can objectively evaluate, or learn in earnest.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Oh give me a break, that's like telling the judge that the fine for speeding was too much because the speed limit is unfair.
You know the speed limit so you have a choice, either you obey it and everything's fine for you disobey it and you pay the penalty.
That was pathetic.

I shouldn't have attempted an analogy, because there is no analogy for eternal punishment. I was trying to express that there is no justice in eternal punishment. It will always be infinitely more punishment than what is deserved, no matter what the crime.

Does this work for you? Let's say you live your entire life without ever hearing of God, you die, and you are tortured for an eternity. Where was the justice in that?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Not once, but twice you use the atheist handbook because you have nothing else to say, no defense.
Imagine that.
What you said was so idiotic, that it didn't merit a response. If you can't do any better, I will continue to treat you in a manner befitting your senseless drivel.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
No it isn't, it's based purely on conjecture, opinion and your 'gut feeling'. That's hardly evidence.
No, it's based on statistical analysis.

I tell you. That's how it works.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I'm sorry that you're getting all butt hurt over this, but that's your downfall, not mine.
I'm fine.

Try a little harder next time.
youtube

AOL

#620531 Apr 29, 2013
.

100% PROOF Pope Francis is ANTICHRIST_______



.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#620532 Apr 29, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:

A confirmation bias is like a filter. When new information comes in, a confirmation bias influences you to elevate the quality you perceive in information that confirms your bias, and suppress the quality you perceive in information that contradicts your bias.
I know what a confirmation bias is, but thanks.

I say you use confirmatory bias because you do. Not only do you favor the evidence that supports your hypothesis/theory/belief that there are No deities, but you misrepresent the opposing evidence or even the people that argue in favor of the side you oppose.
All it takes is a lack of confirmation bias, and rational skepticism, to reject all god claims.
Your claim isn't exactly clear. If you're claiming that atheists have a confirmation bias, you'll have to tell me what you think it is, because I don't know. Make sure you specify if your claim applies to all atheists, most atheists, some atheists, or specific atheists.
But you have a confirmation bias, Tide. Why can't you see that?

Theists are immoral. Theists deny evolution. Hitler was a theist. Theists don’t understand science. Theists don’t understand atheists... Etc.

Your misrepresentations are many because of your preexisting confirmation biases.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#620533 Apr 29, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:

Once a person has faith in their religion, and builds a system of beliefs in their mind, they have a confirmation bias, so all the learning they do will likely support their beliefs, unless they can discard their faith. Once faith is discarded, and the confirmation is gone, you can objectively evaluate, or learn in earnest.
Uh huh....

It goes both ways, man.

Once a person has believes religion is false, and builds a system of beliefs in their mind, they have a confirmation bias, so all the learning they do will likely support their beliefs, unless they can discard their faith.

Some people's minds are so entrenched in their belief that there is no God, nothing will change their mind. Even if God Himself *poofed* in next to you, you'd probably call it a hallucination or alien invasion or something.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#620534 Apr 29, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
Does this work for you? Let's say you live your entire life without ever hearing of God, you die, and you are tortured for an eternity. Where was the justice in that?
That's your biblical ignorance and your confirmation bias talking...

The Bible says God will judge all people righteously. There will be a stricter judgment for people that have rejected Jesus than those who have never heard of Him.

Paul tells us that those who have never heard of the law are not attributed to sin under the law.

The people who have never heard of the law are judged by the law of God which He has placed into their hearts:

Romans 2:14-16

14 Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law.
15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.
16 This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.

“Ditat Deus”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#620535 Apr 29, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:

No it isn't, it's based purely on conjecture, opinion and your 'gut feeling'. That's hardly evidence.
Tide with Beach wrote:

No, it's based on statistical analysis.
I tell you. That's how it works.
Is it? Because you 'told me'?

What statistical analyses have you done on God?

What data have you collected on God, how was it interpreted, who did the collecting and how was it organized?

If you're gonna make that kind of claim, "it's based on statistical analysis", Ima hold your feet to the fire....

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#620536 Apr 29, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I know what a confirmation bias is, but thanks.
Oh?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
I say you use confirmatory bias because you do.
Where? When?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Not only do you favor the evidence that supports your hypothesis/theory/belief that there are No deities, but you misrepresent the opposing evidence or even the people that argue in favor of the side you oppose.
Says you. I say you're wrong. You present no argument, so why should I?
RiversideRedneck wrote:
But you have a confirmation bias, Tide. Why can't you see that?
You're telling me that I have a confirmation bias, yet you can't identify it.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Theists are immoral. Theists deny evolution. Hitler was a theist. Theists don’t understand science. Theists don’t understand atheists... Etc.
How ironic. Your next statement here applies to what you just did.

Those are not my positions, dolt.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Your misrepresentations are many because of your preexisting confirmation biases.
My opinions are rationally derived.

Why can't you accept that?

Is it too uncomfortable?

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#620537 Apr 29, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Uh huh....
It goes both ways, man.
Once a person has believes religion is false, and builds a system of beliefs in their mind, they have a confirmation bias, so all the learning they do will likely support their beliefs, unless they can discard their faith.
It does not go both ways, man.

Lacking a belief, or even rejecting a belief, is not the same as adopting a belief. No faith is required. No bias is required. Only skepticism is required.

You're just childishly turning my arguments around against me.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Some people's minds are so entrenched in their belief that there is no God, nothing will change their mind. Even if God Himself *poofed* in next to you, you'd probably call it a hallucination or alien invasion or something.
I would entertain countless possible explanations, in any scenario, before believing an impossible explanation.

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#620538 Apr 29, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
That's your biblical ignorance and your confirmation bias talking...
Or yours.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
The Bible says God will judge all people righteously. There will be a stricter judgment for people that have rejected Jesus than those who have never heard of Him.
Paul tells us that those who have never heard of the law are not attributed to sin under the law.
The people who have never heard of the law are judged by the law of God which He has placed into their hearts:
Romans 2:14-16
14 Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law.
15 They show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts sometimes accusing them and at other times even defending them.
16 This will take place on the day when God judges people’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.
Is this an argument that the God character never tortures a single person for an eternity? It doesn't look like it.

Eternal punishment negates justice, love, and mercy.

“What's left to defend?”

Since: Jan 11

Freedom

#620539 Apr 29, 2013
RiversideRedneck wrote:
Is it? Because you 'told me'?
What statistical analyses have you done on God?
None.

I said my opinion on gods is based on statistical analysis.

My conclusion regarding your specific god, that you call God, is based on the Bible and logic. I didn't need a statistical analysis for that one.
RiversideRedneck wrote:
What data have you collected on God, how was it interpreted, who did the collecting and how was it organized?
If you're gonna make that kind of claim, "it's based on statistical analysis", Ima hold your feet to the fire....
Well, it would help if you got it right.

Since: Sep 10

Long Beach, CA

#620540 Apr 29, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
Or yours.
<quoted text>
Is this an argument that the God character never tortures a single person for an eternity? It doesn't look like it.
Eternal punishment negates justice, love, and mercy.
"The doctrine of eternal punishment is in perfect harmony with the savagery of the men who made the orthodox creeds. It is in harmony with torture, with flaying alive, and with burnings. The men who burned their fellow-men for a moment, believed that God would burn his enemies forever."— Robert Green Ingersoll, "Crumbling Creeds."

“Rising”

Since: Dec 10

Milky Way

#620541 Apr 29, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"The doctrine of eternal punishment is in perfect harmony with the savagery of the men who made the orthodox creeds. It is in harmony with torture, with flaying alive, and with burnings. The men who burned their fellow-men for a moment, believed that God would burn his enemies forever."— Robert Green Ingersoll, "Crumbling Creeds."
We can only think that we no longer can even come close to understanding how savage men were 4,000 years ago, with little recourse of punishment of crimes by men who caught others in crimes
and with little justice in the world. I suppose they needed to instill some kind of fear in men to stop him from being the savages, we know he can be even now. Look at how the world would be today with little chance or your being caught in crimes by fingerprints, DNA, video, and little to no long range communications, communication even over short range limited,
no knowledge of blood types no microscopes no technology to thwart crime.

Even today men knowing these things can become a savage monster with little care of consequences.

“THE LORD IS MY SHEPHERD;”

Since: Apr 09

Location hidden

#620542 Apr 29, 2013
Aerobatty wrote:
<quoted text>
I have a hunch you haven't truly sought out true and satisfying answers to the nature of the world you live in.
I have, but not through your eyes and mind set. I set and gaze at the beauty that springs forth this time of year, and in the fall with all its colors as well. And just try to comprehend the power and force and the love and compassion He has for us, that he would Create such a beautiful place for us to dwell in for a short time.
The bible holds no satisfying answers for me.
Your choice, your right.
I don't know what will happen to me after I die, but I suspect it will be much like before I was born.
I'm trying to learn and enjoy THIS life and have as little negative impact on the world and people around me as I can.
And where possible I try to have a positive impact.
If your god doesn't like that, tough shit.
Happy trails..

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

#620543 Apr 29, 2013
OCB wrote:
<quoted text>Thanks, boooots, but given what you rightly say about the lack of working brain cells within RR, I don't think he understands much of anything at all.
At any rate, you may be detecting considerably more frustration than I am actually feeling.
That being said, I have a very low tolerance for willful ignorance and intellectual laziness such as RR constantly indulges in and displays for all to see.
Yes, I do too, which is why I attempt to not post to him.

“Truth is beyond wavelength ”

Since: Jan 11

Location hidden

#620544 Apr 29, 2013
timn17 wrote:
When we think, we can see increased blood flow to the appropriate area of the brain, increased synaptic activity in the appropriate area of the brain, etc.
Please consider this.

Part of the problem is likely to be that most people believe we are unconscious when we sleep (in the absence of dreaming). Most of us can agree that the hardware is turned off in this case. But there are many angles here. First, ask yourself this. What's different about brain activity while dreaming versus while awake? Is there some kind of 'half-@$$ mode' of hardware function that allows for dreaming?

What I'm saying is if we are "unconscious" when we sleep then how can we experience conscious phenomenon in the form of dreams? Could it be that a quantumly rooted consciousness is causing the dreams? Molecules would be involved either way. You have association of molecules whether consciousness is quantum or molecular.

Who says we are not conscious while sleeping? We may not be aware of what happens around us but who's to say whether we are not aware of our being in the present? We can't even prove it to ourselves because it is beyond our means. As I've postulated so many times,'just being' is not an "event", therefore there is no memory of it, and therefore, when we wake, it only *seems* like we have been unconscious because there is no memory of our "being" while sleeping.

Even while awake, can you remember your sense of being from a day ago? An hour ago? A minute ago? You know what it feels like to be "alive" but you can't remember your actual 'sense of being' because there is no memory of it unless we can associate an event with that timeframe. An event like sudden onset of puking your guts out, or from a case of the runs.

“There is no such thing”

Since: May 08

as a reasonable person

#620545 Apr 29, 2013
Tide with Beach wrote:
<quoted text>
It does not go both ways, man.
.
Yes it does. Everything does. Equal and opposite, man.

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
LOUD CRYIN' SPOILED Black Kids in Wal Mart!!!!! 3 min Knock off purse s... 63
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 4 min Just Sayin 596,495
the real reason Obama allowed and mosque near G... 4 min Knock off purse s... 7
Jehovah's Witnesses are true disciple of Jesus ... (Mar '07) 7 min Bella Italia 40,712
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 13 min End Times 612,636
Submit Website URL Free to Best Search Engines (Aug '10) 42 min abdullah199898 4
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 44 min An NFL Fan 177,211
The Christian Atheist debate 1 hr HipGnosis 1,032
Why I’m no longer a Christian (Jul '08) 7 hr I Am No One_ 444,356
More from around the web