857 replies to this topic

[Biff Wellington]

Beckys_Mom, on 25 January 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

Never mind my joke about my useless cat... Can you explain  why you feel science cannot prove living things?

You really don't like that cat do you?

[Beckys_Mom]

Biff Wellington, on 25 January 2012 - 07:57 PM, said:

You really don't like that cat do you?

Ehhhhhhhhh ...sigh.......  no ...I only keep him for his sisters sake

[gatekeeper32]

Only in death you will have all the answers and proof you need.

[Biff Wellington]

Beckys_Mom, on 25 January 2012 - 08:12 PM, said:

Ehhhhhhhhh ...sigh.......  no ...I only keep him for his sisters sake

Get her new brother. One she can beat up & be in command of.

[Beckys_Mom]

Biff Wellington, on 25 January 2012 - 08:39 PM, said:

Get her new brother. One she can beat up & be in command of.

She does, she pins him down, and he surrenders all the time..but only when she has had enough of his bullying ..She just unleashes kitty hell on his furry hide  each time trying to get up, she goes for his throat and pins him down again and he runs away lol  ..... He is never hurt...but I think she is saying - Bog off , you are not the boss of me ..Typical brother and sister..Later they are friends and play together..

Anyhoo this is off topic and I apologise to those reading

Edited by Beckys_Mom, 25 January 2012 - 09:14 PM.

[aquatus1]

Alienated Being, on 25 January 2012 - 01:13 PM, said:

Then what's the point in in investing belief in a God if you can't gather evidence of its existence?

Not that it has anything to do with your challenge, but I imagine that the point to believing in God is the same as the point of electing government officials.  It simply gives you a sense of comfort knowing that there is someone above you taking care of the things you don't worry about on a regular basis.

Quote

Using that logic, you may as well just invest believe in unicorns, dragons, leprechauns, faeries, etc.

I disagree.  I find that using formal logic and critical thinking, as well as a skeptical approach at the very outset, gives one many, many, more options than simply declaring that if one believes in one, one must believe in all.  The world is not black and white.

Quote

Are you a blind believer?

How fleeting fame...

Edited by aquatus1, 25 January 2012 - 11:15 PM.
Kant spel gud.

[Cassea]

Wonderful point aquatus1.  I have not understood the way atheists will try to pretend Christians are stupid.  Because we believe in X then we must believe in Y.  It is as if the atheist doesn't understand critical thinking.  I believe in God because I have evidence to do so.   If I had evidence to believe in fairies I might.  I wish there were fairies. So adorable.  But then not real.  We know what is real and what is not real.  I don't believe in Dragons.  I don't believe in monsters.  I don't believe in ghosts.  I do believe in God.  Why? Because it has been proven to me.  I can't prove my proof to you.  If you don't have proof. I feel for you.  But I understand why you don't believe.

[Daughter of the Nine Moons]

Alienated Being, on 25 January 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:

The difference between a belief in the psychic phenomenon and a belief in an omniscient, all-powerful deity is that the belief in the deity has NO evidential premises on which claims are based (other than a silly book),

Please respect the beliefs of other members - bashing and baiting is a no-no

Alienated Being, on 25 January 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:

while psychic phenomenon has been deemed as a possibility by scientists. Telepathic experiments have been conducted by the military, as well, and have produced some intriguing results.

Humans are also known to be highly intuitive.

Conclusively, I think the psychic phenomenon is an interesting concept to ponder; at least it has more of an evidential foundation than what God does.

"intriguing results" are not empirical evidence either. To my knowledge, no psychic ability has ever been experimentally demonstrated to work reliably in test conditions. Much like God, yet people continue to believe in both. Funny huh?

It's a shame you don't see your double standard

[Alienated Being]

Daughter of the Nine Moons, on 26 January 2012 - 12:42 AM, said:

"intriguing results" are not empirical evidence either. To my knowledge, no psychic ability has ever been experimentally demonstrated to work reliably in test conditions. Much like God, yet people continue to believe in both. Funny huh?

It's a shame you don't see your double standard

My point was not so much regarding the intriguing results that have been recorded, but rather the fact that there is more evidence available to support the existence of psychical ability (however miniscule it may be) than what there is to support the existence of a God, which is null.

Edited by Alienated Being, 26 January 2012 - 01:01 AM.

[MysticStrummer]

J. K., on 25 January 2012 - 01:54 PM, said:

According to the dictionary:

Definition of EMPIRICAL
1  originating in or based on observation or experience <empirical data>
2  relying on experience or observation alone often without due regard for system and theory <an empirical basis for the theory>
3  capable of being verified or disproved by observation or experiment <empirical laws>
4  of or relating to empiricism

------

Experience is a valid way of gathering evidence.

But the real question is: in the Christian belief, God exists in a dimension higher than our three-d world.  How could we gather evidence for something we can't fully observe?

This thread should have ended with this post.

[Englishgent]

Beckys_Mom, on 25 January 2012 - 07:50 PM, said:

Is this supposed to be some sort of  mockery of the Irish? ..... In case it isn't  I am  just curious..Why would you say this?

BM. Sorry if you were offended by what I said. As you know, us English have made jokes about the Irish for centuries and I am sure the Irish have made similar jokes about the English. Just as we have a dig at the Welsh and the Scots and they do the same to us. It is called humour, but obviously some people dont see it that way. If you are one of those people who cannot see the humour, then like i said, I apologise.

Paranoid Android, on 25 January 2012 - 04:27 PM, said:

Haha, I thought that was the English - fast-forward to 16:10, the scene goes until approximate 17:30 in the time-code:



Or is it the entire United Kingdom that likes to put animals on the witness stand

Had to watch it all. I love Blackadder lol

[Jonberry]

[Paranoid Android]

Beckys_Mom, on 25 January 2012 - 07:12 PM, said:

I'd still get rid of the bugger

Touche

Beckys_Mom, on 25 January 2012 - 07:12 PM, said:

What can science prove PA?   Since you think science would not be able to prove a cat can exist.....

Science can prove a cat exists.  I never said it couldn't.  What I said was that science cannot prove the cats name, nor can it prove who it belongs to.

[Biff Wellington]

Paranoid Android, on 26 January 2012 - 03:27 AM, said:

Touche


Science can prove a cat exists.  I never said it couldn't.  What I said was that science cannot prove the cats name, nor can it prove who it belongs to.

Science may be able to prove who the cat belongs to. Science might just have to look a little harder.

[The Silver Thong]

Paranoid Android, on 26 January 2012 - 03:27 AM, said:

Science can prove a cat exists.  I never said it couldn't.  What I said was that science cannot prove the cats name, nor can it prove who it belongs to.

However science can prove what a cats name is, what a cats medical history is, what it's regestered address is and the owners name. Science can even provide what has been done to that cat in the past, was it adopted was it a breeder was it part of a litter in a family's basement. If science wanted it could also tell what it's blood type is and what eye color fur color temperment blah blah blah.

It's called micro chipping. Hell we could even say science can tell if the cat likes wet or dry food or if has allergies or even if it likes to wear funny outfits.  What was the point again, oh ya science knowing more then we give it credit and a god that can't come close.