69 replies to this topic

[Setton]

Alienated Being, on 02 October 2012 - 10:47 AM, said:

Your definitions are entirely personal, of course; and you are more than welcome to believe in whatever you like. I can concoct absolutely anything in my mind, and convince myself that it is true.... however, that does not indicate that it is true. Just don't include your illogical beliefs in the realm of science.

In what way is the uncaused cause idea illogical? Or do you just mean you don't understand it or it doesn't fit with your preconceived notions?

I'll include what I like, where I like. Where all science can offer is 'I don't know', anything can be put forward. Please don't presume to be the ultimate authority on science and what may or may not be included. It comes across as arrogant in the extreme.

[dougeaton]

TheDarkEnergy, on 30 September 2012 - 11:22 AM, said:

The whole process of formation of life and religion can be described in the below steps:

How Life formed in earth

1. In the earlier days of solar system, earth had the optimal distance from the sun to support the temparature needed to support life billions of years later.
2. As earth cooled down, the surface got rigid and atmosphere formed with hot gasses which was hold tightly to the planet by gravity.
3. Solar activity and volcanism caused disturbances in the dense atmosphere and crust of early earth as a result frequent electrical storms and heat combined elementary gasses and metals to form compund gasses and other minerals needed to support life.
4. The comets from outer space bombarded the early earth with ice which was melted to water by hot surface temparature and thus oceans formed.
5. The oceans could hold their water content unlike any other planet due to the optimum surface temparature and thick atmosphere.
6. the ocean water allowed minerals to dissolve and mix with each other and form complex compounds.
7. millions of years later complex inorganic componds bonded with each other in a earth full with volcanic and electrical activity and formed elementary organic compunds.
8. Billions of years later more chemical reactions created the simple organic compounds to bond together to create amino acids, the building block of life.
9. From the amino acids, simple one cell organisms formed years after, the first chemical object which can be considered as 'Alive'.
10. After this eventually evolution created more complex life form, and after millions of years later, created us, the humans from apes.

How religions formed in earth

11. In the earlier days humans were scared of natural disasters like thunderstorms, earthquakes and foreast fire. they started to believe that those events are created by some invisible supreme being whom they can not see.
12. Wild animals used to hunt people by night and during daytime the animals used to hide in the forest. and thats why sun was considered to be a watchful protector.
13. When humans learned to use fire as a protection, they believed that it's a part of the sun god which protects them, because both causes heat and light. thats how worshipping the gods began.
14. When thunderstorms, solar eclipses and earthqulakes used to happen, people used to cry out for help to the invisible gods, and naturally after some time the storms/quakes used to stop obviously. people believed that the gods are responding to their prayers.
15. When worshipping became an integral part of human life, it became necessary to teach the young children to worship the gods. thats why myths and legends about the gods began.
16. since no two person thinks alike, gradually the myths started to differ from each other and every myth got their own gods and their own stories. thats how different religions formed.
17. As ages passed by, the myths and legends found their places in written texts, over the years imaginative human minds, blind faith and fear of god allowed the glory of the so called gods to find its place into deep roots of human minds.

So my question to theists are, if all the religions were started by humans, then why do you believe in gods? do you believe in the below points?.

1. You find "God created life and universe" theory more acceptable than evolution and scientific theories about creation of universe which has been experimentally proven.

2. You have experienced miracles in life which forces you to believe that God exists. When a bus collides with a wall, only 3 things can possibly happen. [A] you are safe. [B] you get injured [C] you die.

the problem is when you are safe you think god saved you, when you get injured you think god saved you from death, only when you die, you realize the truth that god is not there. but again you are dead already hence you are unable to get the truth.

You always think in such black and white concepts......you sound like a robot.  I have noticed that many atheist seek to do that, be all head, facts (often not true).

doug

[TheDarkEnergy]

dougeaton, on 02 October 2012 - 04:36 PM, said:

You always think in such black and white concepts......you sound like a robot.  I have noticed that many atheist seek to do that, be all head, facts (often not true).
doug

Truth is always black and white. Truth has no shades of grey.

Edited by TheDarkEnergy, 02 October 2012 - 04:48 PM.

[Alienated Being]

Setton, on 02 October 2012 - 02:50 PM, said:

In what way is the uncaused cause idea illogical? Or do you just mean you don't understand it or it doesn't fit with your preconceived notions?

Oh, I understand what you are getting at, alright.

Quote

I'll include what I like, where I like. Where all science can offer is 'I don't know', anything can be put forward. Please don't presume to be the ultimate authority on science and what may or may not be included. It comes across as arrogant in the extreme.

You may, but to accept such a fantastical idea until it is proven wrong is nothing short of illogical. Science is about testing, observing, asking questions and finding answers... not accepting an idea that really has no foundation whatsoever (other than your misinterpreted personal experience, which somehow lead you to believe that there is a god).

[Setton]

Alienated Being, on 02 October 2012 - 06:18 PM, said:

Oh, I understand what you are getting at, alright.

So you can't explain why the uncaused cause idea is illogical. You've just decided it is. Thanks for clearing that up.

Quote

You may, but to accept such a fantastical idea until it is proven wrong is nothing short of illogical. Science is about testing, observing, asking questions and finding answers... not accepting an idea that really has no foundation whatsoever (other than your misinterpreted personal experience, which somehow lead you to believe that there is a god).

Oh so now, without knowing anything about me or my experience you can say, with absolute certainty, that I misinterpreted it. So now who's being unscientific? Dismissing something without considering the evidence is a pretty big no-no in science. And before you ask, no, I'm not going to share my experiences with you because, hard though it may be for you to understand, I have no wish to convince others I am right and am well aware that personal experiences would not do so. I certainly have no wish to discuss it with an anti-theist such as yourself.

Suffice to say, I am happy with my life and won't interfere if someone is happy with theirs. If you could extend others that courtesy, it would be much appreciated. Remember, if you try to force atheism down people's throats, you're no better than those who force religion on people.

The OP asked a question. I answered. If you don't like my answer, find someone who cares and you can have a nice chat about why we're all crazy

[Kazoo]

You realize all theist did not even bother to click on the thread? Don't think they are unaware of this. If they been on the internet they seen this thread before.


Its not about logic. You should know that by now.

[Setton]

Kazoo, on 02 October 2012 - 08:31 PM, said:

You realize all theist did not even bother to click on the thread? Don't think they are unaware of this. If they been on the internet they seen this thread before.


Its not about logic. You should know that by now.

Did you actually read the thread? Or have anything useful to contribute? If you had read it, you would see that at least half a dozen theists have already answered.

[Alienated Being]

Setton, on 02 October 2012 - 08:17 PM, said:

Oh so now, without knowing anything about me or my experience you can say, with absolute certainty, that I misinterpreted it.

Well, yes; I most certainly can. The concept of gods is very unscientific. You have already stated that you believe that it is god, and that a belief in "gods" is the only thing that makes sense at this point. You have concluded that.

Quote

So now who's being unscientific? Dismissing something without considering the evidence is a pretty big no-no in science.

Well, considering we have literally no empirical evidence in reinforcement of a deity, I would say that you are the one who is being unscientific, in asserting that because you had an unexplained experienced, it must be the work of a deity, and that it is the only explanation that makes sense. That is unscientific.

Quote

And before you ask, no, I'm not going to share my experiences with you because, hard though it may be for you to understand, I have no wish to convince others I am right and am well aware that personal experiences would not do so. I certainly have no wish to discuss it with an anti-theist such as yourself.

Of course you don't. Even if you did wish to do so, the only individuals whom you could convince are those as fickle as yourself.

Quote

The OP asked a question. I answered. If you don't like my answer, find someone who cares and you can have a nice chat about why we're all crazy

Well, I care. That's one person. I am sure that there are others.

Edited by Alienated Being, 02 October 2012 - 10:54 PM.

[Mr Walker]

Alienated Being, on 02 October 2012 - 10:49 AM, said:

Sources? Data? I have data that suggests that prayer is detrimental for your health.

http://www.ncbi.nlm....pubmed/16569567

http://www.templeton...7STEP_paper.pdf





Next time you pray for somebody, you may not want to tell them that they are being prayed for. IT MIGHT NOT WORK IF YOU DO.

I've provided sources/ scientific evidences for all my points many times before. They exist. If you dont believe me, you look them up, or otherwise maintain a false belief. No skin off my nose. No prayer is required for physical effects of belief/faith  to manifest, only the belief /faith itself.

I don't pray for peoplee unless they specifically ask me to The connection between god and a person is individual god doesnt necesarly respond to my prayer for another. God does what is best for that individual given any relationship between the person and god. But faith, and the effect of faith, is not dpenedent on the reality of god. It may well be an effect purely of faith itself

[Setton]

Alienated Being, on 02 October 2012 - 10:53 PM, said:

Well, yes; I most certainly can. The concept of gods is very unscientific. You have already stated that you believe that it is god, and that a belief in "gods" is the only thing that makes sense at this point. You have concluded that.

I actually said it's the only explanation I've heard that fits. And without knowing my experiences, you cannot, as a 'scientist' dismiss them as misinterpretation.

Quote

Well, considering we have literally no empirical evidence in reinforcement of a deity, I would say that you are the one who is being unscientific, in asserting that because you had an unexplained experienced, it must be the work of a deity, and that it is the only explanation that makes sense. That is unscientific.

That is not what I have asserted. I have said that it is the explanation I have been offered that makes most sense. Which is what science is all about. You consider evidence available and make a conclusion based on your observations. The only difference here is that my evidence cannot be reproduced. That is why I would not present it to others or as scientific fact. It is a belief. With as much or little validity as your belief that there cannot be a god.

Quote

Well, I care. That's one person. I am sure that there are others.

So go and talk to yourself about how crazy us believers are.

I notice you have still given nothing to support your statement that the uncaused cause idea is illogical. And yet you have the nerve to call me fickle. At least I will always stand by what I say and support it rather than avoiding difficult questions. This is the last time I'm asking. If you won't back up your statements, I will have to assume you are only here to bash others ideas and not answer comments on your own. In which case, we have nothing more to discuss.

[Arbenol68]

Mr Walker, on 02 October 2012 - 07:45 AM, said:

Because the act of believing has been proven, empirically, to be good for your psychological and physical health.

No, it hasn't. You can keep on claiming this but it doesn't make it true.

A review of the literature shows that people who are actively involved with a religious institution will generally live longer. Incidentally, this also applies to atheists who attend church regularly, for example (unlikely sounding, I know, but there are those that go regularly if their partner is religious). So it's pretty clear from this that the important factor here is not faith in itself, but going to church.

What has been shown is that faith and member of a religion can be associated with a reduced incidence of depression and anxiety-related disorders. There are modest associations with some other disorders too.

Basically, the evidence suggests that religious affiliation and belief may have some effect on health related issues - but that this is far from being "proof". For example, if you attend a church then statistically you're less likely to smoke (as well as other health threatening behaviours). It's very difficult to pick out if faith in itself is the important variable, or whether faith is simply associated with a healthier lifestyle.

[The Silver Thong]

Arbenol68, on 03 October 2012 - 03:17 AM, said:

No, it hasn't. You can keep on claiming this but it doesn't make it true.

A review of the literature shows that people who are actively involved with a religious institution will generally live longer. Incidentally, this also applies to atheists who attend church regularly, for example (unlikely sounding, I know, but there are those that go regularly if their partner is religious). So it's pretty clear from this that the important factor here is not faith in itself, but going to church.

What has been shown is that faith and member of a religion can be associated with a reduced incidence of depression and anxiety-related disorders. There are modest associations with some other disorders too.

Basically, the evidence suggests that religious affiliation and belief may have some effect on health related issues - but that this is far from being "proof". For example, if you attend a church then statistically you're less likely to smoke (as well as other health threatening behaviours). It's very difficult to pick out if faith in itself is the important variable, or whether faith is simply associated with a healthier lifestyle.

Probably due to the myth god will provide that eases some stress on the death process.  Believers have less to worry about leaving behind loved ones.

Edited by The Silver Thong, 03 October 2012 - 03:39 AM.

[Kazoo]

Setton, on 02 October 2012 - 09:13 PM, said:

Did you actually read the thread? Or have anything useful to contribute? If you had read it, you would see that at least half a dozen theists have already answered.

And thats barely any at compared to the amount on this forum.

[Habitat]

Alienated Being, on 02 October 2012 - 10:53 PM, said:

Well, yes; I most certainly can. The concept of gods is very unscientific. You have already stated that you believe that it is god, and that a belief in "gods" is the only thing that makes sense at this point. You have concluded that.


Well, considering we have literally no empirical evidence in reinforcement of a deity, I would say that you are the one who is being unscientific, in asserting that because you had an unexplained experienced, it must be the work of a deity, and that it is the only explanation that makes sense. That is unscientific.

Where is the "evidence" that science is the only portal to knowledge ? That is just an assumption on your part, and one I am satisfied is wrong. But I don't expect you to believe that, nor should you. And neither should you expect that others submit to your insistence on science as the "one true way". That is just dogma.

[Kazoo]

Setton, on 02 October 2012 - 02:50 PM, said:

In what way is the uncaused cause idea illogical? Or do you just mean you don't understand it or it doesn't fit with your preconceived notions?

I'll include what I like, where I like. Where all science can offer is 'I don't know', anything can be put forward. Please don't presume to be the ultimate authority on science and what may or may not be included. It comes across as arrogant in the extreme.

Anyway "I don't know" is a better answer then making up a story. I could say our world was created by a giant hamster. I had a personal experience with this giant hamster and I do infact believe he is real. This giant hamster makes more sense to me then scientific data.

I'm sure whatever "phenomenon" you faced could be explain threw science.

You saying that you have a person experience with god while NO ONE ELSE did is not arrogance? Sounds a lot more arrogance then science....

I honestly wanted to let you continue with your delusion at first....But then I had to say something useful.

Edited by Kazoo, 03 October 2012 - 03:55 AM.