God from the Investigation of Existence

[Crazy Horse]

45 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Smarter people than I do the thinking, thousands of them in fact, I merely do my best to take in as much as is possible. 

Nobody has used any gimmicks, if you think you are inspiring people your sadly mistaken, you just sound like a crazy religious person ranting. 

You have not demonstrated that and only shown biased unfounded opinions so I feel your opinion can be readily dismissed in light of his accomplishments. 

That's right, none exists only evidence of a natural universe, not much more to discuss really. You've shown nothing to illustrate that view as incorrect. You have merely expressed what appears to be a fanatical opinion. 

I have to agree with jmccr8. Sounds like an opinion to me. 

That's what Clockwork_Spirit does, your just going in circles. 

Oh right..

You ain't capable.

[XenoFish]

3 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

And yet you have life.

Life CANNOT come from non-life.

Please explain where your life-force came from.

Are you certain we are actually alive? 

[XenoFish]

1 minute ago, Crazy Horse said:

Oh right..

You are not capable.

Fixed it for you.

[cormac mac airt]

14 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

And yet you have life.

Life CANNOT come from non-life.

Please explain where your life-force came from.

Care to try again as Amino acids, the building blocks of life, have been shown to be carried through space aboard cosmic impactors (comets and asteroids) to earth. Amino acids evolved into RNA which then evolved into DNA. You’re getting less and less relevant to the discussion all the time. 

cormac

[Crazy Horse]

25 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Are you certain we are actually alive? 

Only you can answer that for sure..

[XenoFish]

Just now, Crazy Horse said:

Only you can answer that for sure..

Are we alive? Do we have actual life in a none philosophical way? 

[Crazy Horse]

25 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Fixed it for you.

Mate, we are capable for many for things things that we can even imagine..

Please try harder..

[Crazy Horse]

2 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Are we alive? Do we have actual life in a none philosophical way? 

In a non philosophical way..?

That is up to each and every one, person, to decide.

[XenoFish]

3 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

Mate, we are capable for many for things things that we can even imagine..

Please try harder..

Are we alive in a none philosophical way? What is organic life other than a chemical and electrical process? 

[Crazy Horse]

1 minute ago, XenoFish said:

Are we alive in a none philosophical way? What is organic life other than a chemical and electrical process? 

Compared with one plant who feels loved, and that one who doesn't?

This is proved..

One plant is loved, taken care of, the other plant isn't, and guess what? The plant that is loved, is much better then the other plant that never took.

 

[Crazy Horse]

8 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Are we alive in a none philosophical way? What is organic life other than a chemical and electrical process? 

Are we a live in a non-philosophisophical way?

Well you tell me mate..

Wirhout touching the keyboards .. .. .

[XenoFish]

8 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

Compared with one plant who feels loved, and that one who doesn't?

This is proved..

One plant is loved, taken care of, the other plant isn't, and guess what? The plant that is loved, is much better then the other plant that never took.

 

That doesn't answer my question? 

[XenoFish]

4 minutes ago, Crazy Horse said:

Are we a live in a non-philosophisophical way?

Well you tell me mate..

Wirhout touching the keyboards .. .. .

Answer my questions. 

[Crazy Horse]

1 hour ago, psyche101 said:

An atheist perspective is supported by knowledge. 

You speak as though it's a real world debate. It's not. Theistic perspectives are debated but the subject it not, its a discussion. There is more than enough hard evidence supporting biological, astrological and physics explanations to consider them as the best explanation we currently can have with the information available to us. Religion is more a hobby aspect, somthing people choose to subscribe to, it's not considered 'another view' its a cultural practice. 

What knowledge does an atheist have, compared to a Believer?

[Crazy Horse]

2 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

That doesn't answer my question? 

Exactly what questin was you enquiring after?

Because, I sometimes forget.. 

[Crazy Horse]

4 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Answer my questions. 

Only if you please..

[XenoFish]

You're not worth my time.

[+joc]

2 hours ago, psyche101 said:

An atheist perspective is supported by knowledge. 

You speak as though it's a real world debate. It's not. Theistic perspectives are debated but the subject it not, its a discussion. There is more than enough hard evidence supporting biological, astrological and physics explanations to consider them as the best explanation we currently can have with the information available to us. Religion is more a hobby aspect, somthing people choose to subscribe to, it's not considered 'another view' its a cultural practice. 

As I ...and I am thinking probably you as well...know, the experience of Jesus is one of Conviction...a human emotion..bolstered by the 'feeling' ...a certain chemical reaction in the brain...of a certain type that is driven by adrenaline and dopamine in the brain...and because of these chemical reactions...some believe that Jesus ....is their personal saviour...this chemical reaction is a drug induced stupor which can only be duplicated by the same...'conviction'...that happens when one gives one's self over to the 'spirit'.   But it is also quite provable that these chemical reactions are exactly that...and can be duplicated by...a ...religious...experience.  Which is why ...those who believe they know, not only Know that they Know...they know because of the Experience that which they know they know...and..like a drug addict...seek this experience over and over, through worship services designed to embellish this experience as much as it can be embellished.

 

[Crazy Horse]

4 hours ago, psyche101 said:

An atheist perspective is supported by knowledge. 

So what knowledge of the afterlife do you actually have?

 

[Crazy Horse]

2 hours ago, XenoFish said:

You're not worth my time.

What does your time cost, exactly?

Because I am putting all my pennies into a great big bottle - and well, it might be worth at least 2.35 minutes of your time..xx

[Only_]

6 hours ago, psyche101 said:

An atheist perspective is supported by knowledge. 

You speak as though it's a real world debate. It's not. Theistic perspectives are debated but the subject it not, its a discussion. There is more than enough hard evidence supporting biological, astrological and physics explanations to consider them as the best explanation we currently can have with the information available to us. Religion is more a hobby aspect, somthing people choose to subscribe to, it's not considered 'another view' its a cultural practice. 

So atheism is ''incontrovertibly true'' and everything else is necesserely false. Isn't that the definition of fundamentalism? You seem to be very literal-minded, pretending to be the bearer of the sole source of objective truth. I think this kind of exclusivity can lead to dangerous grounds.

 

Edited March 18, 2018 by Clockwork_Spirit

[psyche101]

On 18/03/2018 at 9:31 AM, Crazy Horse said:

And yet you have life.

Indeed

On 18/03/2018 at 9:31 AM, Crazy Horse said:

Life CANNOT come from non-life.

Yes it can from chemical biology. The Urey Miller experiment shows us this process. 

On 18/03/2018 at 9:31 AM, Crazy Horse said:

Please explain where your life-force came from.

What are you referring to? Our bodies work on a charge created by tiny ion pumps on our nervous system. When you do the residual energy is transferred to the atmosphere concerted to heat. That's as close to a 'life force' as we have by definition. 

[XenoFish]

19 hours ago, Clockwork_Spirit said:

So atheism is ''incontrovertibly true'' and everything else is necesserely false. Isn't that the definition of fundamentalism? You seem to be very literal-minded, pretending to be the bearer of the sole source of objective truth. I think this kind of exclusivity can lead to dangerous grounds.

 

I think you're reading more into what's been written than need be.

I do have a question for you Clockwork.

If you were never told of god, nor had any sources on god. Would you believe? Without an external input from others. 

[psyche101]

On 18/03/2018 at 9:35 AM, Crazy Horse said:

Why don't you talk, write, to folks as any normal person would do?

In a couple of paragraphs.

You ought to do the same as I so your contribution is clear to all. 

That's the point of a discussion forum. To discuss subjects. Many whom engage Many here are obviously not college professors so it takes a bit to get the whole picture across, can you yell me why your being a class jerk about it? 

[psyche101]

On 18/03/2018 at 9:37 AM, Crazy Horse said:

Oh right..

You ain't capable.

Of what? 

Try me, I don't find much beyond my capabilities when I apply myself.