Religion

[WildGunsTomcat]

Originally Posted by Effective

Sorry, I can't hear you over the sound of how pathetic any argument you've put out is. You've added nothing relevant here to this thread beyond "WAAHH DON'T DISRESPECT MY BELIEFS!"

Effective.

Bro.

This is the internet. You're taking it a little too seriously ;0)

Again, I don't give two shits nor a flying fuck if you believe what I believe, or even if you respect those beliefs.

I don't HAVE to give you proof dude, that's something morons like you don't get.

Do you know how pathetic YOU sound, screaming about shit like:

"OMG You have to give me evidence because I don't believe anything I can't see with my very human eyes....so therefore YOUR argument is pathetic."

You sound like a very tolerant person.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by WildGunsTomcat

Do you know how pathetic YOU sound, screaming about shit like:

"OMG You have to give me evidence because I don't believe anything I can't see with my very human eyes....so therefore YOUR argument is pathetic."

It's usually important for something to be verified. That is you don't have to observe it personally, but it should be reproducible and well tested. Your words do more harm than you might imagine. By saying that I infer that you hold onto things with no proof very strongly which I view as dangerous and shows me you put little thought in analyzing your faith for fear of the unknown.

I will point out that it's okay to have imaginary friends and hold onto such beliefs as long as it doesn't interfere with daily life. We have really strong imaginations so not everything has to be rigidly scientific as long as we can separate the two. That's one thing that worries me about people that hold too strongly to their beliefs solely because of their religious teaching without fully thinking about the topics for themselves.

// edit: also this has helped some people. Whenever you see someone talking about their deity replace it with "Santa" to see things from an Atheist perspective.

[Effective]

Originally Posted by WildGunsTomcat

Effective.

Bro.

This is the internet. You're taking it a little too seriously ;0)

Again, I don't give two shits nor a flying fuck if you believe what I believe, or even if you respect those beliefs.

I don't HAVE to give you proof dude, that's something morons like you don't get.

Do you know how pathetic YOU sound, screaming about shit like:

"OMG You have to give me evidence because I don't believe anything I can't see with my very human eyes....so therefore YOUR argument is pathetic."

You sound like a very tolerant person.

This is a debate forum. If you don't like it, you don't have to post here.

For someone who doesn't give a flying fuck, you sure tried hard to belittle those of us who don't believe in a god/gods/etc (especially coming up with several false reasons for why we think like that).

Your argument stands as such "God exists but I don't have to provide evidence for my belief, you're stupid for not believing in it. You cannot disprove the existence of my God"

This is no different from an insane person saying "Invisible pink unicorns exists but I don't have to provide evidence for my belief, you're stupid for not believing in it. You cannot disprove the existence of my unicorns"


You can't disprove bigfoot, the lochness monster, werewolves, vampires, zombies, chupacabra, the greek pantheon, santa claus, the Tooth fairy, mermaids. And several other fairy tails. It's absurd to believe these things are true, it's no different from God.

No it doesn't sound pathetic. It is a universal fact in any sense of scientific research and discovery. There needs to be evidence to make a claim, whether it be circumstantial or direct evidence (which you still have none). You ultimately don't have a real argument.

There is evidence for things that we can't see with the human eye (see germs)

I am a very tolerant person actually. As previously mentioned I have several friends from numerous religions/philosophy's. Buddhists, muslims, ****, christians (of several denominations), and a few more. I've never had any problems with them, we've actually gotten into several debates, with more relevant discussions, religion, ethics, science, and politics. They're still my closest friends.

As previously mentioned this is a debate forum. If you don't want to be criticized stop coming here.

[Warborn]

Vampires are real. I am a vampire. You must now disprove it. In the meantime, you will address me as Count Warborn.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Warborn

Vampires are real. I am a vampire. You must now disprove it. In the meantime, you will address me as Count Warborn.

This is simple. Someone get a be a stake. If he's a vampire then a stake to the heart will kill him. 100% success rate. Science!

[Elude]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

This is simple. Someone get a be a stake. If he's a vampire then a stake to the heart will kill him. 100% success rate. Science!

Maybe he just sparkles in the sun.

[Traak]

Originally Posted by Elude

Maybe he just sparkles in the sun.

Quote of the day award winner!

[Traak]

Originally Posted by Effective

Unlike God, there's actual tangible evidence for Darwin's existence, in several texts, credible publications, eyewitness accounts (not to mention photographs of the guy). I'm willing to bet you can find church based publications on the guy.

So the number of books talking about you qualifies your existence? What about comic books?

A lack of photographs erases someone's existence? How do you know who is in the photo? Oh, someone wrote that it was Darwin. And you believed it. Someone you have never met, and who is far more fallible than God wrote something of which you have no firsthand proof, and you believed it.

Originally Posted by Effective

It's odd how acts of God stopped happening when science began to explain how the world works (lighting, physics, etc) and when the camera was invented.

People laying things off on God that aren't acts of God, such as hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, the AIDS virus, or someone getting ripped off at a street vendor in Thailand doesn't make them acts of God.

Originally Posted by Effective

Have I ever seen evolution at work? Yes actually, it's called the Flu. Every year people have to take a new flu shot. Why? Because the virus will evolve and adapt to overcome the previous shot. If evolution did not exist, there would be no reason to take more flu shots every year.

Really? You have seen, with your own eyes, under a microscope, the actual flu virus mutate into something different, and done enough experimentation, yourself, without taking it through someone else's writings, that the flu virus evolves? No. You haven't. You believe it because someone you do not know wrote it.

Originally Posted by Effective

Here is a plain and simple fact. Evidence is everything. Making a conclusion without evidence is something that should die out. Evidence should be needed to make the conclusion.

You believe what you believe, as do most people, based almost completely, if not completely, in things written and found out by other people, most of whom are now dead. have you actually gone to a high place, and dropped two objects of identical drag/mass ratio, but of different masses, to see, measuring with exacting equipment to determine that gravity draws them both with equal increase in velocity over time?

No. Does this invalidate what you believe? No. But to say that God is not real because the Bible is the primary evidence we use of his existence is not valid. Just because YOU claim to have never seen or felt or tasted or whatever any evidence of God doesn't mean that anybody else hasn't.

Many of us have seen plenty of evidence of God's active work in the Earth. Do we care if you believe it? Not personally. In a general way, I would that all men were saved, because that is God's will. Even the purely evil men, I would prefer to see saved and on the road to heaven, even if it is in the last instant of their lives. But you not believing as I believe doesn't affect my life anywhere near as much as it affects yours.

The reason most don't see more evidence of God's reality is that they really don't WANT God to be real. Same reason I don't randomly go down the street smooching women who don't know me. Just because I exist, and I'm real, doesn't mean they all want to kiss me. So they will never find out much about me, especially anything about the affection, because they don't want to.

People believe what they believe largely based on what they choose. God doesn't force himself on people, and is not obligated to do parlor tricks to wow the unbelieving. People who sincerely want to know God or at least know if he's real will find out. People who don't want to know God or want to deny he exists will continue to do so.

But to say your evidence is better than my evidence? You would have to see every single thing God has done for, with, and near me, including what he is in my heart, spirit, innermost being on a moment-by-moment basis to judge whether your evidence is more credible than mine. People believe whatever they want.

People who hate God, love God, or don't believe he exists all find evidence to support that, otherwise they wouldn't choose whatever route they've chosen.

[TheSHiFT]

I was going to say you have no idea what empirical evidence is, but now I'm convinced you're a troll.

[Effective]

Originally Posted by Traak

So the number of books talking about you qualifies your existence? What about comic books?

A lack of photographs erases someone's existence? How do you know who is in the photo? Oh, someone wrote that it was Darwin. And you believed it. Someone you have never met, and who is far more fallible than God wrote something of which you have no firsthand proof, and you believed it.

No, the fact that I'm here, at this very moment, shows my existence. A comic book is a comic book, a ficition book used to entertain people as they go through their daily lives.

Does a lack of photographs invalidate someone's existence? Not necessarily. It certainly doesn't hurt. But as I said, there a re many public documents concerning the guy. Not to mention 25 books the man had published himself. Then we have british government records on the man. He also was a christian (and stopped completely when his daughter died), so you can probably find church records on him. There's a lot of evidence of the existence of Charles Darwin from several legitimate sources.

Originally Posted by Traak

People laying things off on God that aren't acts of God, such as hurricanes, earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, the AIDS virus, or someone getting ripped off at a street vendor in Thailand doesn't make them acts of God.

So... Everytime something good happens to you, it's god's work, everytime something bad happens... NO, he's not responsible for that! Ok then.

Originally Posted by Traak

Really? You have seen, with your own eyes, under a microscope, the actual flu virus mutate into something different, and done enough experimentation, yourself, without taking it through someone else's writings, that the flu virus evolves? No. You haven't. You believe it because someone you do not know wrote it.

Yes, I actually wanted to be a biologists back in high school, so I took several classes on the subject. You'd be amazed what labs we were able do.

And to the rather foolish main point of your post, taking in someone else's writing. The problem with your argument, is that unlike the claims the bible makes. Scientific theory goes through a process, someone creates a hypothesis, and then starts doing tests to see if it's true. Once they believe they have evidence needed, they publish it and make it available to other scientists in the same field of study, who then also test it. This process is called peer review. It is used to verify and check information. I've only given a very rough idea of how peer review works.

It's ultimately impossible to test everything yourself, rather then never believe in scientific publications. It takes years to learn everything in just 1 scientific field, and their are multiple fields of study. If I didn't have to worry about food and other daily needs then I would happily build myself a lab and begin working on every science I could, but I naturally can't do that. So I let qualified individuals who have the financial means to do so, whom if we didn't believe. We wouldn't have things like.

• Vaccines
• Cell Phones
• GPS
• Microwaves
• Refrigerators
• Speed measuring devices
• Radio-Isotope Cancer detection and treatment
• X-rays
• Potable water
• Solar panels

And more, these things wouldn't have been possible without science.

Originally Posted by Traak

You believe what you believe, as do most people, based almost completely, if not completely, in things written and found out by other people, most of whom are now dead. have you actually gone to a high place, and dropped two objects of identical drag/mass ratio, but of different masses, to see, measuring with exacting equipment to determine that gravity draws them both with equal increase in velocity over time?

No. Does this invalidate what you believe? No. But to say that God is not real because the Bible is the primary evidence we use of his existence is not valid. Just because YOU claim to have never seen or felt or tasted or whatever any evidence of God doesn't mean that anybody else hasn't.

Many of us have seen plenty of evidence of God's active work in the Earth. Do we care if you believe it? Not personally. In a general way, I would that all men were saved, because that is God's will. Even the purely evil men, I would prefer to see saved and on the road to heaven, even if it is in the last instant of their lives. But you not believing as I believe doesn't affect my life anywhere near as much as it affects yours.

The reason most don't see more evidence of God's reality is that they really don't WANT God to be real. Same reason I don't randomly go down the street smooching women who don't know me. Just because I exist, and I'm real, doesn't mean they all want to kiss me. So they will never find out much about me, especially anything about the affection, because they don't want to.

People believe what they believe largely based on what they choose. God doesn't force himself on people, and is not obligated to do parlor tricks to wow the unbelieving. People who sincerely want to know God or at least know if he's real will find out. People who don't want to know God or want to deny he exists will continue to do so.

But to say your evidence is better than my evidence? You would have to see every single thing God has done for, with, and near me, including what he is in my heart, spirit, innermost being on a moment-by-moment basis to judge whether your evidence is more credible than mine. People believe whatever they want.

People who hate God, love God, or don't believe he exists all find evidence to support that, otherwise they wouldn't choose whatever route they've chosen.

I see science, it provides tangible evidence, approved by peer review. For example, Einstein was nearly proven wrong about light being the fastest thing their is. Some scientists in europe discovered neutrinos. But after some retesting, it was discovered that Einstein was indeed correct. This is the scientific method. It isn't set into stone, it continues to constantly improve upon itself. It doesn't matter if the people who came up with the original theory are dead or alive. These theories are what make up our current understanding of the universe. Which if I had to guess, I'd say we understand less then 1% of it.

The bible most certainly not evidence. Not understanding why something happened is not evidence of God. Does this disprove god's existence? No, and I've said that multiple times. Ultimately ANYTHING is possible. However there is no testable evidence in regards to god. Besides what people "feel". But you can't disprove that right now, that you're in a metaphysical solipsism. Which basically means everything you see, feel, touch, understand, all of that is just generated inside your head. You cannot disprove that everything you see is generated by your imagination. This is same thing for god. We call this a unfalsifiable claim. It can not be tested to disprove it's existence. There is no reason to believe in it.

I don't believe because there is no evidence, it has nothing to do with want or need. If I believed everything that had no evidence, I would probably be conned into some scam or another and end up broke in no time. I actually would love if God existed, but the universe isn't perfect and I'm a realist. There is no evidence. That is a fact. You don't have evidence, you don't understand empirical research. You don't understand a lot of things. I don't understand a lot of things. But I don't let these things control how I live my life. I don't fear the unknown, I'm a naturally curious person and will continue to life my in that regard. I don't let myself be brainwashed by a 2000 year old religion that comes up with rules and meaning that make no sense, have no evidence, and teaches people to be bigots.

[Quovatis]

Thanks for the laugh Traak. It's hard to believe all that was serious.

[Vancha]

It says something when people start doubting the sincerity of your opinions.

Unless of course Traak is just messing with us.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Traak

Really? You have seen, with your own eyes, under a microscope, the actual flu virus mutate into something different, and done enough experimentation, yourself, without taking it through someone else's writings, that the flu virus evolves? No. You haven't. You believe it because someone you do not know wrote it.

I have. Fruit flies are fun for this purpose. Their generations are very quick so you can selectively breed them to create very distinct groups. Also when you say "mutate into something different" that happens after every generation. Humans tend to mutate (mitochrondrial drift for instance) which is are independent of parents. This is very obvious in fruit flies when analyzing their generations. Though you have to understand that not all mutations produce meaningful differences. Some do like color changes or physical traits change.

Most people aren't really exposed to this without going into the required classes or actively pursuing the research. For instance, you yourself could experiment and prove this much like a lot many gardeners do when they notice seedless fruits or purposely create them. (Random mutations cause seedless watermelons naturally which is a huge visible change and can be surprising if you expect seeds).

// edit, I think you make a really important point. A lot of people, like yourself, are ignorant because they lack the proper educational background so they haven't had hands on work in varying sciences. I myself have taken chemistry, biology, physics courses for fun along with my main field (computer science) since I wanted to know more and see how it worked. Not everyone gets to experience it so your doubt is probably reflected in other less educated religious people that might not have access to see things for themselves. Kind of troubling since this isn't going to change for a while probably with the US education system.

[AstroFool]

If you find God in a crackpipe, does it still count as salvation?

[ItsTheSheppy]

We may never know of Traak is trolling, because of Poe's Law:

"Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won't mistake for the real thing."

It doesn't matter if he's trolling or not, because the stuff he believes is so nuts, it could literally be both. It's like debating whether or not Schrodinger's Cat is alive or dead. It's both. It's not a debate worth having, because it goes forever and isn't even useful as a mental exercise.