Atheists please answer this

Discussion in 'Religion Archives' started by Joe K., Aug 11, 2010.

  1. machaon Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    733
    There is no reason to include a god within the framework of science. If that not is what god wanted he would let us know. If god did not exist that is exactly what he would do.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    We cannot directly observe reality.
    See?

    I really do not see what is so hard about this.

    You're not going to deny what you saw?
    Pareidolia.

    See- this is where reality kicks in and your failure to percieve it. You then try to turn the tables and accuse me of it... Claiming that I intimidate and arrogantly bully my opinion... Would you claim a psychiatrist was doing that to a patient or a school teacher was doing that to a student that didn't agree with the math?
    What you're doing is the same as the patient or the student in that example.
    Your accusations and your excuses are absurd.


    No, I did the equivalent of supporting my claims. Something you have yet to do.
    It's Not My Job To Do Your Work For You.

    I can sit here and type at you until I'm blue in the face and you and I both know that you'll just rationalize it away- as you are doing in this post.
    So- I post the information (Supportive evidence) for YOUR examination.
    Again- Stick to reality, here.
    I have provided clear answers. Your denial of that does not change the fact that I have.
    No, you just prattle on with nonsense, ignore evidence and assert your opinions without research.
    You don't do ANY work- you just talk.

    SNOOPING?!

    Reading a public site to learn the information they provide for you (Free of Charge!) is SNOOPING?!
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. lightgigantic Banned Banned

    Messages:
    16,330
    huh?
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. scifes In withdrawal. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,573
    it's when circular arguments get....circular?
     
  8. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    i got confused at 'If that not is what'
     
  9. deicider got omnicidead Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    443
    Ridiculous,you're all pathetic,to see humans than have fallen so low,corrupted logic,ignorance that makes your brain bleed,the ridiculously selective knowledge.
    And all this for an imaginary insurance company.

    The biggest misconception made both by theists and atheists is that there is no scientific evidence that disproves god.
     
  10. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    I disagree... Nothing, scientifically, can ever be proven or disproven.

    However, evidence can be very compelling.

    So while God may never be disproven (Or a negative proven), there's overwhelming evidence that no god exists.
     
  11. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    and the argument goes in circles again..
     
  12. geeser Atheism:is non-prophet making Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,305
    How so, explain!
     
  13. Jan Ardena Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,112
    Neverfly,

    Let's say I'm observing planets and stars.
    At what point does my observation become "directly observing reality"?
    Untill that point arises, what would be my status regarding "observing reality"?
    How does one decide what is reality and what is not?

    No.
    I saw an image of a face in the piece of toast, and I saw an image of a face
    on that shower curtain. That's my perception, perception = reality, even if it's my own.

    If I know that I don't percieve the images, but convince myself that I have, then I am deluded.

    So do you see facial images in both items.

    If a psychiatrist tried to tell me that I was deluded because I saw a facial image in the toast, yes.
    If I had an experience which led me to believe that that was a vision of Jesus, and he argued that I was deluded, but couldn't account for my personal experience. I would say yes.

    Regarding the student. It would depend on the circumstances.

    You haven't supported your claims.
    You have yet to answer my question which was directed at you, then you post a link to talk origins home page.
    Just answer the question for cryin out loud.

    You post irrelevant information, like definitions of words, pictures, talk origins, with no explanation.

    You claim we cannot directly observe reality, an illogical assumption straight of the bat. All you have done is assert this over and over again without any explanation.

    And talking's not work?
    I'd be interested to hear what I've said that's non-sensical, and why you've
    come to that decision.
    Who am I kidding? You're not going to.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    Figure of speech. (FOS)

    jan.
     
  14. iceaura Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    29,383
    My guess is because that's how it is - the simplest explanation, and a very good fit to the evidence.
    I don't agree. Everything we know points to life having emerged from non-living substrates on this planet. We certainly don't know otherwise.
    If that were so, you'd never trip over a chair in the dark - and you'd never know it was even possible to trip over a chair in the dark. When children covered their eyes, their mothers would really not be there.
    After a few thousand experiences of accounting for the more common delusions, we are entitled to put the burden of proof on those claiming that some given instance is not delusion.

    Labeling something that appears to be, by all the evidence, a delusion, "delusion" is accounting for it, to a first approximation. Delusions, like chickadess, exist. Properly labeled, they are to that extent accounted for.
    It's an observation. We lack the means to directly observe, period. It's hard to imagine what a direct observation in the sense here would be, even - a copy, maybe?
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2010
  15. NMSquirrel OCD ADHD THC IMO UR12 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,478
    and everyone arguing with you never even considered..this.
     
  16. Neverfly Banned Banned

    Messages:
    3,576
    Is this argument still going on?
    Jeez...

    If we could directly observe reality- there would be no such question as you just asked.

    If you believe that the percieved images are real, of divine source or representative of a spiritual communication- You are deluded.

    Yes, you should argue with the expert when you're the one who needs help- Brilliant.

    Liar.
    Very well... Repeat the question.

    With all of your pussy footing around, I can't even remember what it was anymore.


    Hardly.

    It was more likely an attempt at obfuscation and deception on your part.
     

Share This Page