Page 19 of 71 FirstFirst ... 91516171819202122232969 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 708

Thread: Psalm 14: Who was Jesus' grandpa?

  1. #181
    Fenn
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Delphinus View Post
    This is not science. This is a particular hypothesis. You are not doubting the scientific method.
    What? What is "this?" Stupid indefinite pronouns.

    I know I wasn't doubting the method. But I think when faithful people try to convert to science and see how often studies and theories contradict each other, they become hesitant and turned off.

  2. #182
    Super Senior Member Delphinus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,339
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenn View Post
    What? What is "this?" Stupid indefinite pronouns.
    The things you said in the post I quoted, silly. :P

    Quote Originally Posted by Fenn View Post
    I know I wasn't doubting the method. But I think when faithful people try to convert to science and see how often studies and theories contradict each other, they become hesitant and turned off.
    You don't 'convert' to science - accepting science isn't a matter of faith, it's just a matter of accepting the evidence of observations of the physical world and how they're connected. The way the scientific method works is bound to give birth to contradictory theories about certain topics, and in my opinion the more theories (that are coincident with observed phenomena) the better - observations that weaken one theory may strengthen another.

  3. #183
    Fenn
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Delphinus View Post
    The things you said in the post I quoted, silly. :P


    Well I feel sheepish.

    Quote Originally Posted by Delphinus View Post
    You don't 'convert' to science - accepting science isn't a matter of faith, it's just a matter of accepting the evidence of observations of the physical world and how they're connected. The way the scientific method works is bound to give birth to contradictory theories about certain topics, and in my opinion the more theories (that are coincident with observed phenomena) the better - observations that weaken one theory may strengthen another.
    I get it now. But it bothers me to think we can undauntingly belive in something that could have important implications (like X chemical is good for you) and have it turn out dead wrong (X chemical actually causes cancer). It's a hell of a lot more reliable than religion and far less harmful--usually--but it doesn't provide the guaranteed, 100% certain answer people often desire. Then again, as has been stated on the old forum the only certain truths are a priori statements.

    And I would say you could "convert" to science if you formerly held a contrary position, like acceptance of faith. It's kind of just semantics though.

  4. #184
    Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President Kodos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,960
    Anyone who appears on Fox News is an idiot. Period. I love Dawkins, but I can't stand that he appears on Fox. The proper response to that vile network is to ignore them at all times. They are barbarians and should be treated as such.

    Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!

  5. #185
    Regular Member M3S1H's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Outside your house.
    Posts
    172
    ...I don't want to be a kick in the nuts, but I think we should get back on topic...

  6. #186
    One Thousand Member toast's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    the preakness
    Posts
    1,076
    Quote Originally Posted by M3S1H View Post
    ...I don't want to be a kick in the nuts, but I think we should get back on topic...
    I am pretty sure this thread is on topic.. it becomes off topic when everyone starts to talk about chinese food or something

  7. #187
    Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President Kodos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,960
    Wo Hops in Chinatown makes the best Beef Chow Fan on Eris' green earth and if you disagree you are objectively wrong.

    Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!

  8. #188
    Lord of Death jubeh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Space
    Posts
    12,825
    Stay on topic or I will ban you

  9. #189
    Fenn
    Guest
    Mkay...

    On topic, if there's no God, what is the final word on the very fact anything exists rather than nothing?

    Also, the KNOWN reality could just be a very small portion of an even greater reality (think the ending of Men In Black). While it would be foolish to even pretend to know or believe in any specific idea about this greater truth, would it not be equally foolhardly to proclaim with any certainty that there is NOTHING beyond our own universe that may be affecting it in ways we may one day come to know or percieve?

    According to the Law of Conservation of Matter, matter cannot be created or destroyed. So how is there anything to begin with?

  10. #190
    Bad Enough Dude to Rescue the President Kodos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,960
    Quote Originally Posted by Fenn View Post
    Mkay...

    On topic, if there's no God, what is the final word on the very fact anything exists rather than nothing?
    The existence or non-existence of God has absolutely no bearing on the question of solipsism.

    Also, the KNOWN reality could just be a very small portion of an even greater reality (think the ending of Men In Black).
    And there could be aliens on other planets. And there could be Godzilla in the mariana trench. And there could be a parallel universe where, right now, I am having sex with Scarlett Johansson, Christina Hendricks, and Kim Kardashian. and And everything you think you know could actually be wrong and you are the victim of the most organized and massive conspiracy ever as literally every single person you have ever met has been lying to you and part of this conspiracy.

    There are infinite possibilities and most things are impossible to disprove. This is why skepticism is necessary. You must prove propositions, not disprove them. This is why the onus of proof is always on the theist. They are the one positing a thing, and thus they must prove that thing.

    While it would be foolish to even pretend to know or believe in any specific idea about this greater truth, would it not be equally foolhardly to proclaim with any certainty that there is NOTHING beyond our own universe that may be affecting it in ways we may one day come to know or percieve?
    No, it would not. There is something very foolish about saying "There is something affecting us in ways we don't understand! I literally know nothing about what this thing is, or how it is affecting us, or what its effects are, but somehow I know it exists even though I literally cannot name a single quality about it and ergo am completely full of nonsense!"

    According to the Law of Conservation of Matter, matter cannot be created or destroyed. So how is there anything to begin with?
    That's only a mystery if you assume that matter and energy were created. If you assume a steady state universe (in regards to the amount of matter in it, not the configurations, obviously) then this is not a problem at all. Also, again, it has nothing to do with God since using God to "solve" this "problem" just makes it worse.

    For the billionth time, here's why.
    The argument from first cause:
    Premise 1. All things must have a creator.
    Premise 2. The universe exists.
    Conclusion 1. The universe has a creator.
    Conclusion 2. The creator is God.
    Now ignoring the fact that none of the premises suggest, let alone necessitate, that second conclusion, here is why that argument is literally worthless. If we accept the first premise then we run into:
    Premise 3. God exists.
    Conclusion 3. God has a creator.
    Premise 4. God's Creator exists.
    Conclusion 4. God's Creator has a creator.
    Premise 5. God's Creator's Creator exists.
    Premise 6. God's Creator's Creator has a creator.
    So on and so forth into infinity. The apparent solution to this is to, of course, say that God is different and has no creator. But then you've modified the argument. Now the initial argument has become this:
    Premise 1. Most things have creators.
    But by modifying that first premise you now have weakened the argument. It's no longer a logical necessity, now it's merely a inductive argument. Thus the theist must somehow prove that God is uncreated but that the universe requires a creator. If they cannot offer any evidence either way then the logical thing is to resort to occam's razor in which case we assume that the universe is uncreated since that is the simpler explanation.

    Do you like big boobs? Dragons? Ninja? Martial arts? Wizards? Then click here and make all your wildest dreams come true!!

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •