Religious Nonsense

[Write4U]

When you make a sweeping generalisation, expect it to be pointed out to you. If you assert that "atheists do not advocate for non-gods or non-religions" you are simply ignoring all those that do.

Sorry, Sarkus, I'm sure the fault for not making myself clear to you, is mine.

It's really a little turn of phrase. IMO, you can't "advocate" for a non-existent object .
However, from an atheist perspective, theist do.

 

[Sarkus]

Generally a atheist points out a belief in god is NOT a good basis to make law which is not exactly a advocate for non-gods or non-religions, more a keep your religious beliefs to yourself and don't use LAW to foster your religious beliefs onto others as well as so many religious beliefs have no basis in reality

If a secular LAW is required to force religious belief do you really think you have converted someone?

Or changed reality to fit religious belief?

Always remember "But it does"

Most atheists actually don't even do any pointing out. In my experience, at least, they are mostly apathetic about the whole shebang. What you seem to be arguing for is the irreligious. Personally, if God exists and if scripture is an effort to put us on the right path, then belief in God IS a good basis to make law, surely?

But I'm actually not too sure what your point is in the context of what I said. Could you elaborate?

No such animal exist

You think all of religion is unscientific? That there is nothing about religion that can be assessed by science?

They exist in the realm of touchy feely, feel good, but they also have no scientific explanation of god

No formula

No universal constant

Warm and fuzzy feelings do not lend themselves, or are capable of being, studied in science

Indeed - and the theistic scientists I know are all of that opinion: God is outside of the remit of science. Your point is...?

Well they can if they parrot beliefs

Or simply talk nonsense about religion.

And pray tell what theist KNOW (as in provable) about god

Non sequitur, Michael. It's not a matter of what people know, it's just a matter of whether they speak about that which they don't know. If you are of the view that the theist doesn't know about what they speak, then you would probably think they talk nonsense. Similarly if the atheist talks about something they don't know...?

 

[Sarkus]

Sorry, Sarkus, I'm sure the fault for not making myself clear to you, is mine.

It's really a little turn of phrase. IMO, you can't "advocate" for a non-existent object .
However, from an atheist perspective, theist do.

You can advocate for the notion of the non-existence of something, though.

 

[Write4U]

You can advocate for the notion of the non-existence of something, though.

I'm not so sure. Perhaps it's my lack of knowledge of language. It seems to me that one advocates for the existence or establishment of something, not for the existence or establishment of not something.

ad·vo·cate, noun
ˈ1. a person who publicly supports or recommends a particular cause or policy.
("he was an untiring advocate of economic reform" )

verb;
1.publicly recommend or support.
("they advocated an ethical foreign policy")

As atheist, I advocate for science rather than for non-religion. I advocate for objective treatment of information about something", rather than a mystical interpretation of not-something.
In short, I advocate for providing proof in support of an objective (not subjective) proposition.

 

[Michael 345]

Some theists believe in miracles, sure. Not all.

Belief in God is in and of itself q miracle



Might come back to the rest after breakfast

If not no great loss

 

[Dr_Toad]

Depends on what you have for breakfast, eh?

 

[Write4U]

Well you're the one who brought Carl Sagan in to it. One would assume that has something to do with exceptional performance unless one brought it up to mention his mediocre skill in playing Mario Bros. or something.

No, it was to demonstrate that smoking cannabis did not interfere with Carl Sagan's ability to communicate deep and profound scientific knowledge in a most entertaining and informative way to the lay audience. As it does not seem to inhibit the communication skills of Bill Maher.

You're just wrong in your assessment of the effects of Cannabis on the brain and body.

 

[iceaura]

Sure, some theists, possibly the majority (I don't know) have some difference of understanding,

It is not only a majority, it is such an overwhelmingly dominant majority as to call into question the mere existence of the minority you hypothesize exists.

To some theists, God picks up where science ends. That is their belief. Their understanding of science is the same as many scientists, possibly even you, in it being the study of the natural world. But they consider God outside of science. To them there is no overlap. No issue between their belief and their understanding of science.

The question is whether an outsider - an atheistic observer - would agree in that self-assessment of "overlap".
We have examples from Islam that Christians might find easier to recognize: science and the Koran do not overlap, in the view of many Islamic scientists. So Darwinian evolution of human morality, anthropological research into the social organization of sex and marriage that conflicts with the Koran, attempted physical or material analysis of angels who speak Arabic, any historical investigation of the origins of Islam that discovers the wrong things, etc, is not scientific.

Right?

 

[Michael 345]

To the theist God is the Universal constant

Of which they have no evidence

Have you seen a god meter permanently stuck on 1 because god is everywhere?

 

[Michael 345]

When you make a sweeping generalisation, expect it to be pointed out to you

Please accept the sweeping generality that sweeping generalisations are generally not to be taken as sweeping generalisations but should be considered to contain exceptions unless probably preceded by ALL

Generally

 

[Musika]

No, it was to demonstrate that smoking cannabis did not interfere with Carl Sagan's ability to communicate deep and profound scientific knowledge in a most entertaining and informative way to the lay audience. As it does not seem to inhibit the communication skills of Bill Maher.

You're just wrong in your assessment of the effects of Cannabis on the brain and body.

Ok, let's grant you the liberty of suggesting every nuanced behaviour of Carl Sagan contributed to the brilliance that was Carl Sagan (For the record, I also tie my shoelaces the "Carl Sagan way", just in case you were curious as to the source of my genius ... that star trek helmet is simply a red herring to bewilder the critics).

If he was smart enough not to take a toke before coming before large groups of people to discuss complex topics, operating dangerous machinery, or doing rigorous scientific work, it proves my point.

If one is not smart enough to adopt such a standard, it's apparent. Of course such people under the influence of such things tend to overestimate their abilities and not see how apparent it is .... at least for the time being.

 

[Michael 345]

two Popes no les

Whose bothering to count?

 

[Michael 345]

whether humans descended from apes.

Well the choice is apes or mud

 

[Write4U]

that star trek helmet is simply a red herring to bewilder the critics).

Why start with duplicity?

 

[Michael 345]

Personally, if God exists and if scripture is an effort to put us on the right path, then belief in God IS a good basis to make law, surely?

As has been pointed out in other post - fine make a law "on the right path" like "kill those collecting wood on Sunday"

 

[Michael 345]

You think all of religion is unscientific? That there is nothing about religion that can be assessed by science?

I'm happy to debate "something" or "anything" about religion which can be assessed by science

Please provide any examples for assessment

 

[Michael 345]

Why start with duplicity?

Well science says we are composed in part from star stuff descended from apes who themselves contain said star stuff

Bible says created from mud, dirt, earth, clay or some such

Personally a pope from mud makes sense

 

[Write4U]

If he was smart enough not to take a toke before coming before large groups of people to discuss complex topics, operating dangerous machinery, or doing rigorous scientific work, it proves my point.

What point? I already stipulated that a person should not drive while under the influence.
Discussing complex topics or doing rigorous scientific work is not impeded by judicial use of Cannabis.

In fact many writers, painters, musicians, thinkers, do their best work under the influence of a moderate amount of THC. I had a friend who was a race-car mechanic. He used to toke before melding with the engine for a delicate tune-up, that would give the car another .5 mph increase speed. He did this by ear.

Do you actually read what I post, or do you just pick a word or a phrase and ignore all else?

 

[Musika]

What point? I already stipulated that a person should not drive while under the influence.
Discussing complex topics or doing rigorous scientific work is not impeded by judicial use of Cannabis.

I said as much too, yet here you are desperate to start some disagreement.
Seriously dude, what are you on?

 

[Write4U]

Well science says we are composed in part from star stuff descended from apes who themselves contain said star stuff

Bible says created from mud, dirt, earth, clay or some such

Personally a pope from mud makes sense

According to Robert Hazen, mud (clay) is the most likely medium responsible for the chemical and evolutionary emergence of bio-molecules and life itself, due to it's astounding chemical surface area . A single cubic centimeter (sugarcube) of clay will coat a tennis court!!!!!!

In that respect one could be generous and agree with the biblical concept, but of course that does not include a 1 day creation of complex living organisms like humans.

More than likely, the process took some 3.5 billion years. Why not put that in the bible? It needs overhaul.

Lol, just realized I am advocating for scriptural editing. It would be a start.....