There is no god!

[+Sherapy]

Zero, its over Sera got him fair and square be a good sport Namaste sheri

[ShaunZero]

You're so close minded, lol. You're not even trying to say I'm wrong(Not saying you can't do it) and you still act as if I am.

Reread that post I made, I edited it.

[+Sherapy]

Zero Namaste Sheri

[ShaunZero]

Hiding are you? Lol...

[Seraphina]

By the way, you're seeing the effect of air, not air. Air makes the bubble, but you can't see what fills the bubble.

That's because "air" is a concoction of a variety of transparant gases...however, if you prefer, there are many, many gases that are coloured. Most of them are rather dangerous though, and I wouldn't recomend you set out to see for yourself

We also have a variety of methods to detect things such as air pressure, or composition...suffice to say, there are numerous ways we can detect it that establish it is, without a shadow of a doubt, there. Unlike god.

You're not seeing gravity, you're seeing what gravity does to a book. =D You can't see gravity itself.

Well, again, "see" is perhaps not the correct term...however, again, there are several methods we have of detecting and measuring the force of gravity. Rather like air...we know it's there, because we can detect it, we can measure it, and we can observe it's effects in conditions that, when duplicated, continue to produce the same result.

None of these methods can be applied to god...god exists only in the minds of the people who follow him - there is no evidence of his presense, his influence, or his hand in anything going on in the world. For all intents and purposes, there is absolutely nothing to make your god any different from the gods worshipped by the ancient Greeks...the only difference being they had more imaginative names.

Like your god, they could neither be measured or observed and, like your god, belief in them gradually diminished. Given time, I'm sure Christianity will be replaced by something new, with go-faster stripes, and people will look back and wonder how anyone believed such rubbish...that's assuming society doesn't simply become athiest - we wonder that already.

[ShaunZero]

But they were only talking about SEEING things. Just because you can't SEE something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. We're not talking about testing, etc.... He only said seeing. I was just pointing out how what you said wasn't really correct as you can't see air nor can you see gravity so "owned" should be tossed out the window.

How could you have evidence of a being that exists beyond this universe? Just like scientist beleive there are other dimensions, yet they can't proove it.

Let's say there was something that existed beyond this universe. And you somehow knew this, and you're the only person in the world to know. How would you proove this thing existed? You can't, it's not of this physical universe. Everyone would tell you you're just making up a fairy tail and all.

Edited November 8, 2005 by ZeroShadow

[Seraphina]

But they were only talking about SEEING things. Just because you can't SEE something, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. We're not talking about testing, etc.... He only said seeing. I was just pointing out how what you said wasn't really correct as you can't see air nor can you see gravity so "owned" should be tossed out the window.

Zero, for someone who expects me to accept such an abstract idea as a mythical entity who created the world, and for which there is absolutely no evidence, you're being extremely literal with the term "seeing". I'm sure you realise full well that "seeing" is simply a blanket term for determining that something exists.

So yes, he's still owned

Let's say there was something that existed beyond this universe. And you somehow knew this, and you're the only person in the world to know. How would you proove this thing existed?

If I can't prove it, then that obviously means there's no evidence to speak of...in which case I don't "know" anything. All I have is a supposition, and I'm not stupid enough to tout a supposition, or a "gut feeling" as fact.

There's more evidence for the existance of sasquatch than there is of god.

[zandore]

finaly someone eles that doesn't believe

First, welcome to UM. May your stay be educational, fun, and satisfying. And may you meet many new friends here.

Now, if you looked around some, you will find that there are many who share your (dis) belief here.

Oh, and this thread should be merged with the other one.........

I second that....Welcome SA!

A fellow NB.

[zandore]

If I can't prove it, then that obviously means there's no evidence to speak of...in which case I don't "know" anything. All I have is a supposition, and I'm not stupid enough to tout a supposition, or a "gut feeling" as fact.

Sera....please be kind to an unarmed opponent in a battle of wits.

There's more evidence for the existance of sasquatch than there is of god.

May I remind you that there is evidence for Santa Claus but there is none for Jesus, or God for that matter.

[RedX]

Zero, it seems like you need to take a brake and think of away out of this argument. Im not trying to make fun of you but you sound like you just talked yourself into a cage.

[+Sherapy]

Zero Zero Zero I see your still argueing Namaste Sheri

[ShaunZero]

So yes, he's still owned tongue.gif

Funny.

And you guys are very sensitive, I wasn't being rude or anything, I was being literal. She said you can see gravity by dropping a book, I only corrected her. It's ok guys.

:: passes around a tissue ::

Edited November 8, 2005 by ZeroShadow

[Big cheese]

Hi all

Being new to these forums please forgive me if what IV posted has already been done

Having read most of the arguments within this thread one thing seems to stick out and that is that althoe god may or may not exist (I think the later) the believe in one is widespread and inherently human it crosses cultures race and gender much like chicken pox so to me it would seem a innately human trait you don’t see many chickens gathering on a Sunday morning for a quick prayer. Now to me any thing that widespread throughout any species’ (yes we are just an animal like every thing else) would have to be more substantial than cultural memes or a social necessity perhaps Therese a god gene that makes some more prone to believe than others in the same way eye colour can be recessive or dominant in which case any argument against will fall on deaf ears.

Now is the believe in a god a good or bad thing, that is an entirely different problem and more important than the existence of any such god althoe some religions do set a moral guide line I fail to see how the fact I don’t go killing everyone because I don’t believe in god is proof of said god I put that down to my social environment and my own values of what is right and wrong set by my upbringing and nothing to do with some omnipotent force guiding me and to use this line of argument is just not valid after all I would say more pain has been caused by religion than elevated by it

To me the evidence is all around I see evolution as an on going process all-around me you only have to open your eyes I see the vastness of the universe and its workings and understand the processes involved sure there’s lots I don’t know but I don’t need to create a religion to explain them or comfort my ignorance

So the bottom line is if blind faith gives you comfort without understanding then fair enough if understanding gives you faith then fair enough or even if you don’t care at all then so be it one thing is certain we are a diverse and complex people and that alone should be valued above all else live and let live

[Jodie.Lynne]

welcome Big Cheese to UM.

So the bottom line is if blind faith gives you comfort without understanding then fair enough if understanding gives you faith then fair enough or even if you don’t care at all then so be it one thing is certain we are a diverse and complex people and that alone should be valued above all else live and let live

I've been saying the same thing for months.......

[+Paranoid Android]

*Picks up a book, and drops it to the floor*

All I see is a book dropping. Nothing to say that there's a specific force behind it.

*picks up a bottle of cola, and points at the bubbles*

All I see are bubbles. THere are always bubbles in Cola.

You're move Show me a picture of god, and we'll call it even.

By the same reasoning as these first two points you've made, I will show you a church

Or a forrest.

Or a baby boy.

You can see God in all of these.

Regards, PA

[RedX]

All I see is a book dropping. Nothing to say that there's a specific force behind it.

All I see are bubbles. THere are always bubbles in Cola.

By the same reasoning as these first two points you've made, I will show you a church

Or a forrest.

Or a baby boy.

You can see God in all of these.

Regards, PA

You see the result of that force. The act of it falling tells you that theres a force behide it...If there were no force moving it it wouldnt move .

Those bubbles are caused by air being traped by the Pepsi( F cola Im calling it Pepsi

), so thats HARD proof that its there. It must obey the laws of nature there for it makes bubbles and the book falls.

A church is proof that people believe in a kind of religion. We dont make the laws of nature so anything we make is a produce of what some people think (examp: Its like saying that pokemon are real because people made a building for them or to pray to them.)Just because a few people think something is real and make something for it dosnt make it so.

All that other stuff is just things you place with "god's" power, they are only proof to you (unlike the other examples you were trying to debunk).

[+Paranoid Android]

Nor does a book dropping have to be evidence of gravity. We know there is gravity, because we have other methods of testing and seeing it. A book dropping, is a book dropping.

As a quote I saw once, the definition of a net is simply holes tied together with string I'm not really sure if it fits here, but it sounds good.

[Stellar]

Now hold on there for a sec.

Gravity: The natural force of attraction exerted by a celestial body, such as Earth, upon objects at or near its surface, tending to draw them toward the center of the body.

That force can clearly be seen by dropping a book. If there was no force of attraction, that book wouldnt drop.

We know there is gravity, because we have other methods of testing and seeing it.

Im curious... what are you talking about?

[ShaunZero]

The force can be seen, yes, but gravity itself cannot be seen, wich is what I've been trying to say. PA was right also. You're just seeing the effect it has on a book.

Just like if I were to cut you with an invisible knife. Seeing the cut does not mean you see the knife.

Edited November 10, 2005 by ZeroShadow

[Stellar]

The force can be seen, yes, but gravity itself cannot be seen, wich is what I've been trying to say

Umm, did you not see the definition of gravity? It is the the force exerted by a celestial body (the Earth in this case) on objects on or near its surface, drawing them towards its center. The book being dropped and falling down on the ground, on a trajectory which, uninterupted, would bring the book to the center of the Earth. So, by dropping the book, you see the force attracting the book (an object near the surface) to wards the center of the Earth... That is the very definition of gravity!

Just like if I were to cut you with an invisible knife. Seeing the cut does not mean you see the knife.

Thats not like it at all. It would be more along the lines of cutting you with an invisible knife, seeing the cut, and then saying "see? I see the cut!"

[Ourmoonlitsun]

About seeing the effects of something (a book dropping), even though you can't see the thing itself (gravity)... people observe such events and realize there must be something causing it so they create theories and formulas that can be tested and proven false. The Theory of Gravity actually uses testable numbers! The "Theory of God" does not. The idea of "God is all. God creates all" is so general and widespread that it doesn't even allow itself to be tested. Comparing "you can't see gravity" to "you can't see God," and thinking they are similiar is not understanding certain concepts applied to each.

[Stellar]

About seeing the effects of something (a book dropping), even though you can't see the thing itself (gravity)

[+Paranoid Android]

Imagine if you will, a world without the knowledge of gravity. They don't know there's a massive universe out there, and they absolutely no idea that if gravity did not exist, they'd all happily float away into the hereafter.

They see a book drop. What caused it? To them, it just happens. There's no magical force (gravity) behind it. It just is.

I hope you understand where I am coming from now.

Regards, PA

[Ourmoonlitsun]

I was trying to explain it in a way so that everybody could understand. But if you really want to challange the concept of gravity, we can in another forum. I was a physics major. Gravity is still not fully understood, Stellar. You cannot "see" gravity. No one knows why gravity works as it does, they only know that it works AS it does.

[Stellar]

I was trying to explain it in a way so that everybody could understand. But if you really want to challange the concept of gravity, we can in another forum. I was a physics major. Gravity is still not fully understood, Stellar. You cannot "see" gravity. No one knows why gravity works as it does, they only know that it works AS it does.

Im not trying to challenge the concept of gravity at all. Im trying to point out that we can see gravity because of the definition of gravity.