Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
crookedspiral

Atheism is incompatible with science

3,143 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

psyche101
34 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

There is nothing odd or ominous about being on a forum, in a section on skepticism, practicing critical thinking skills on a variety of perspectives. Psyche ‘s goal is to examine the arguments to shed light on the assumptions,  false premises, and logical errors. His objective has been to engage in discourse that seeks to uncover these errors, assumptions of logic so the best conclusions are being advanced. IMHO, Hab., you would be served better in the Spirituality and Beliefs section an area that connects like minds for the sole purpose of sharing in your mutual journeys of the supernatural with no one challenging their plausibility. 

 

 

 

I've suggested the same to him in the past. For some reason the irony of his protest seems to comfortably clear his head at mach + speeds. 

I have no idea what Hab is hoping to accomplish with posts like that. Very strange one that. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
Posted (edited)
15 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

I've suggested the same to him in the past. For some reason the irony of his protest seems to comfortably clear his head at mach + speeds. 

I have no idea what Hab is hoping to accomplish with posts like that. Very strange one that. 

It is about as weird as why do we respond to Walkers posts, going as far as calling us Walker Stalkers.

Well one couldn’t buy the kind of education and practice in argumentation one gets from dissecting his posts. 

It is all there too, logical errors, assumptions, cognitive biases of every kind, rationalization, false  premises for days.

He really does offer the best real life examples of many fallacies. 

Pure woo...

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by Sherapy
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
10 hours ago, DieChecker said:

The Bible is the word of God as written by men. It's a written history that is used to teach, not a science book.

This is comment is badly phrased Die Checker.  The way you have expressed it, one might be excused for thinking that you are sugesting that science texts are written by god, which is hilarious.

Also, are you seriously suggesting that your Deity doesn't inspire the people who work on his holy text to get it right?  Most people who work on translating the Bible are pretty devout, and pray before and after they set about their translations.  Why doesn't the holy spirit help them get it right?  Why are there so many errors in the Bible?  Why would an all knowing god allow such mistakes to be made in his name?  Why would an all-powerful god not move to correct the errors?  How could a perfect god allow mistakes about him to be perpetuated?  Why would a totally benign god allow people to be misled and potentially go to hell over those errors?  There is only one answer that fits the evidence.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
40 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

This is a discussion forum for views skeptical of extraordinary claims. The discussion forum only exists for this reason. How many have a hobby of telling posters that they should not post in a skeptical view in a forum created for skeptical discussion? That's a lot weirder isn't it? 

Nope, you aren't sceptical, you say we can be quite certain that it is a fact ! No doubt is entertained by you, so please don't talk about scepticism being your attitude.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
29 minutes ago, Alchopwn said:

This is comment is badly phrased Die Checker.  The way you have expressed it, one might be excused for thinking that you are sugesting that science texts are written by god, which is hilarious.

Also, are you seriously suggesting that your Deity doesn't inspire the people who work on his holy text to get it right?  Most people who work on translating the Bible are pretty devout, and pray before and after they set about their translations.  Why doesn't the holy spirit help them get it right?  Why are there so many errors in the Bible?  Why would an all knowing god allow such mistakes to be made in his name?  Why would an all-powerful god not move to correct the errors?  How could a perfect god allow mistakes about him to be perpetuated?  Why would a totally benign god allow people to be misled and potentially go to hell over those errors?  There is only one answer that fits the evidence.

Why does God not require people to update/correct the Bible? Seriously?

Imagine if the Bible got a re-write every 20 years... people would just laugh at it. How can you claim an ancient lineage when you've altered something a thousand times?

The Message of Jesus is so powerful because it hasn't been changed. 

As to why it is allowed... Free Will.

We have to decide for ourselves what to believe. And, if you ask me, the inconsistencies of the Bible are just minor details to the overall Message.

Also, there have been many Councils that have dealt with this exact issue, and they didn't see fit to alter much. Some denominations have more, or less, books in their Bible. Which is again just details on the Message.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DieChecker
1 hour ago, eight bits said:

Not much of a history book, either.

True enough... :tu: a religious (mythic) history... to be taken as history by the believer anyway.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
49 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Nope, you aren't sceptical, you say we can be quite certain that it is a fact ! No doubt is entertained by you, so please don't talk about scepticism being your attitude.

Hab., I am countering that Psyche is a skeptic.

A skeptic is one who puts their trust in Science and a skeptic will follow the evidence not their prior beliefs, in other words, a skeptic will change his/her mind if the evidence warrants it. 

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
3 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

Hab., I am countering that Psyche is a skeptic.

A skeptic is one who puts their trust in Science and a skeptic will follow the evidence not their prior beliefs, in other words, a skeptic will change his/her mind if the evidence warrants it. 

 

He is a dogmatist who invents "science" that doesn't exist, to "support" his dogma. 

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
49 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Nope, you aren't sceptical, you say we can be quite certain that it is a fact ! No doubt is entertained by you, so please don't talk about scepticism being your attitude.

Of course I'm skeptical. I've asked you on numerous occasions to support your claims. You reply with gibberish and nasty remarks. One does not need be a rocket scientist to work out that you are full of BS and seeking validation. 

Do you honestly see your argument from ignorance and claiming that you know that world leading physicists is any more in touch with reality than Walkers trips through the galaxy in one night? 

twonapoleons.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
2 minutes ago, Habitat said:

He is a dogmatist who invents "science" that doesn't exist, to "support" his dogma. 

Please provide an example of your lie. 

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
19 minutes ago, DieChecker said:

Why does God not require people to update/correct the Bible? Seriously?

Imagine if the Bible got a re-write every 20 years... people would just laugh at it. How can you claim an ancient lineage when you've altered something a thousand times?

The Message of Jesus is so powerful because it hasn't been changed. 

As to why it is allowed... Free Will.

We have to decide for ourselves what to believe. And, if you ask me, the inconsistencies of the Bible are just minor details to the overall Message.

Also, there have been many Councils that have dealt with this exact issue, and they didn't see fit to alter much. Some denominations have more, or less, books in their Bible. Which is again just details on the Message.

Actually, there are a LOT of retranslations of the Bible, in case you weren't aware.  It has been retranslated less than once every 20 years recently.  Bible Retranslations link

So, you tell me?  The way I see it, there are a lot of sects, and they frequently want to get their word of God updated.  You say the message of Jesus is powerful because it hasn't been changed... Umm...

That is sort of true, but also sort of false.  You see, religious spin doctors have always been twisting what Jesus says.  Take for example the saying "It is easier for a camel to go thru the eye of a needle than for a rich man to get into heaven", it probably should have been translated as "It is easier for a hawser to go thu the eye of a needle" (hawsers are huge nautical ropes btw).  But then you have people in the Catholic church who say that in Jerusalem one of the towers of the city was called the needle, and while it was narrow, a camel could pass thru it, as a justification for their religiously embarrassing surfeit of wealth.  Of course in the USA protestant community they don't even worry about that, they hate poor people and love money because the Bible tells us to according to the prosperity gospel prosperity theology and if Jesus disagrees he can take a hike, son of god or not.

Now then you go on to say that Free Will is to blame for this.  This is the Christian default position to explain everything that is bad, and it is hollow.  I mean, when things go right, it was God's Will, and when things go wrong for people you don't like it was God's Will, but when things go wrong for Christians you like, it is the Devil's doing, and when people do things that God should intervene to stop it is Free Will.  The fact is, if God is almighty, and all-seeing then Free Will is an illusion.  There can only be free will if there is no god, otherwise, everything is controlled by a hidden dictator who controls all the levers and serves as the ultimate conspirator, the true eye in the pyramid of the Illuminati.  Yes, the eye of providence is s symbol for god btw.

I won't go into the message of Jesus, which is seriously flawed, as that will take too long.  The fact is that the Bible has been spin doctored in many ways over the years, and has even had the most glaring errors removed on occasion, such as the Parable of the Mustard seed:

"The Kingdom of Heaven is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took, and sowed in his field; which indeed is smaller than all seeds. But when it is grown, it is greater than the herbs, and becomes a tree, so that the birds of the air come and lodge in its branches." — Matthew 13:31–32

So, how is it that the so-called Son of God, who as access to all the knowledge in the Universe doesn't even know that a poppy seed is smaller than a mustard seed, when poppies are on record as being cultivated in the region of Judea at the time?  No excuses.

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
6 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Of course I'm skeptical. I've asked you on numerous occasions to support your claims. You reply with gibberish and nasty remarks. One does not need be a rocket scientist to work out that you are full of BS and seeking validation. 

Do you honestly see your argument from ignorance and claiming that you know that world leading physicists is any more in touch with reality than Walkers trips through the galaxy in one night? 

twonapoleons.jpg

Argument from authority BS doesn't cut it. Nor do references to Mr Wooker.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
12 minutes ago, Habitat said:

He is a dogmatist who invents "science" that doesn't exist, to "support" his dogma. 

You know the drill, provide proof of this. :P

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
3 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Argument from authority BS doesn't cut it. Nor do references to Mr Wooker.

The only thing that does is supported evidence 

And there's more than enough to question your claims. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
4 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Argument from authority BS doesn't cut it. Nor do references to Mr Wooker.

You made the claim you must support it, we are both asking. All claims must be supported with the evidence. Otherwise you are flame baiting. 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
Just now, psyche101 said:

The only thing that does is supported evidence 

And there's more than enough to question your claims. 

Nothing wrong with questioning, but outright repudiation of something you really can't know is true or untrue, is another thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherapy
1 minute ago, psyche101 said:

The only thing that does is supported evidence 

And there's more than enough to question your claims. 

A., he has to support his claim. 

Otherwise it is a post intending to flame bait. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
1 minute ago, Sherapy said:

You made the claim you must support it, we are both asking. All claims must be supported with the evidence. Otherwise you are flame baiting. 

 

There is no science that can refute the possibility of the afterlife, you must know that, surely.

  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
Just now, Habitat said:

Nothing wrong with questioning, but outright repudiation of something you really can't know is true or untrue, is another thing.

Why? There are lots of things we do actually know. Just because they don't fit into your pet theory does not invalidate them by any means. It means if things like you claim are actually happening, and considering your approach there's every reason to doubt that, then there has to be a better answer than old superstition or arguments from ignorance. Claiming embracing the irrational is rational is just crazy talk Hab. Your thinking is 11th century stuff. 

If its real there has to be an answer, that's just how **** works Hab whether that suits you or not. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
7 minutes ago, Habitat said:

There is no science that can refute the possibility of the afterlife, you must know that, surely.

And yet that very science has been repeatedly illustrated on this forum. 

Repeated requests for you to refute the information has only ever resulted in your handwaving, footstomping, bad manners and attacks. 

What's that say about you? Do you honestly feel that behaviour validates your claims? 

4dd36bd2fbcd8b1e13a89276c11cfc79.jpg

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
psyche101
17 minutes ago, Sherapy said:

A., he has to support his claim. 

Otherwise it is a post intending to flame bait. 

I'm pretty sure that's just his style :lol:

Must be fun at parties :rofl:

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
9 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

Why? There are lots of things we do actually know. Just because they don't fit into your pet theory does not invalidate them by any means. It means if things like you claim are actually happening, and considering your approach there's every reason to doubt that, then there has to be a better answer than old superstition or arguments from ignorance. Claiming embracing the irrational is rational is just crazy talk Hab. Your thinking is 11th century stuff. 

If its real there has to be an answer, that's just how **** works Hab whether that suits you or not. 

The only thing that suits me is facts. I know the facts, you are guessing, the complete reverse of what you imagine yourself to be in possession of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Habitat
6 minutes ago, psyche101 said:

And yet that very science has been repeatedly illustrated on this forum. 

It may have been demonstrated to your fevered imagination, but in reality, the wider world, not at all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Alchopwn
Posted (edited)
22 minutes ago, Habitat said:

Nothing wrong with questioning, but outright repudiation of something you really can't know is true or untrue, is another thing.

To be fair, that depends on the quality of the claim and its supporting evidence.  Outrageous claims require equally outrageous evidence.  Claims made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Edited by Alchopwn
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Will Due
On 5/21/2019 at 8:52 PM, psyche101 said:

'The unbelieving materialist'? 

 

That's a pretty good descriptor isn't it?

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.