Quick Poll - Do you believe in God?

[Little Rik]

[quote='Little Rik' pid='993818' dateline='1437036414']
Religions on the other hand do not practice spirituality.

This will come as a shock to most religions, for whom spirituality is a primary and critical component.  You keep claiming that they're different, yet your explanations simply show how they are the same.

Do me a favor Ton.
Talk to a Christian and ask whether God is to be found inside or outside
and how to find Him.
You see Ton a lot of people believe a lot of things but when you confront them they come up with the old dogmas.
One thing is to say something.
A different thing is to prove that what they say make sense.

If you born under a corrupted dictatorship you either put up with the sewer or you die in the effort to get rid of the rotten dictator.
You have no choices.

They DO have choices, especially today.  People have overthrown oppressive governments in the past, and people have escaped oppressive governments in the past.  Most people make the choice to not only remain under such a regime, but to work to support it.  This is where religion can be at its worst, in that it either supports such regimes, is used by such regimes to maintain control, or is used by the people as a way to tolerate their oppressors.
Attitudes like yours are why so many dictatorships still thrive in the modern age.

You are hilarious Ton.
It seems like you never watch the news.
Doesn't the Arab spring ring any bell in your ears?
Was any thing achieved? 
Let me know Ton.   

You think that by getting in one place at the end of the day you have accomplished something.
I got bad news for you Ton.
Someone is playing with you.

Wow.  How miserable and bitter must your life be, that you never feel as if you are making progress?  If scientists had your approach to things, we would still be living in caves and thinking that rain was caused by the gods weeping.  More likely, this is another case where you redefine a term in order to suit a point you are trying to make.  At this point it's clear that you're being dishonest just to avoid conceding a point.

Open your eyes and your ears Ton.
First i never said that researchers in the physical-material arena are rubbish.
On the contrary i always said that it is important to continue all the time in order to solve the problems of the day.
As you say without it we would be down in the sewer.
But what all this has got to do with real progress?
Does a lifejacket represent progress?
All it does is to put you back on your feet on the ground as you were before you got into trouble.
Secondly i do not feel miserable at all.
Real progress is possible but not in the physical-material arena so don't tell me that i don't believe in progress.

Let us see who is dishonest.

You are.  And this part is a clear example.  You deleted the part of my post that you are responding to, before you quote the sources that you claim support what you said.  This is something you haven't done in any of your previous posts during this discussion.  Lets bring back those quotes and compare them directly:
YOU SAID: Ages ago
YOUR QUOTED SOURCE SAID: Recent malaria history is fraught with grand pronouncements that turned out to be baseless.
LIE NUMBER 1: "Ages ago" is not "recent."

The report goes back to the 1984 and the late 90.
What is not ages ago for you can be for different people.
One day of torture can be long long like ages while a day of happiness can be an instant for different people.
A disease can make you feel like hell on earth with the time that never goes.
The same time can be felt as eternal for some and very very fast for other.
So, wrong again Ton.   

YOU SAID: they say that they got rid of malaria.
YOUR QUOTED SOURCE SAID: "MALARIA VACCINE IS NEAR," announced a New York Times headline in 1984. "This is the last major hurdle," said one U.S. scientist quoted in the article. "There is no question now that we will have a vaccine.
LIE NUMBER 2: They did not say "they got rid of malaria."  They said they were certain they would have a vaccine soon.

Here Ton i show you the report again.

Recent malaria history is fraught with grand pronouncements that turned out to be baseless. "MALARIA VACCINE IS NEAR," announced a New York Times headline in 1984. "This is the last major hurdle," said one U.S. scientist quoted in the article. "There is no question now that we will have a vaccine. The rest is fine-tuning." Seven years of fine-tuning later, anotherTimes headline summarized the result: "EFFORT TO FIGHT MALARIA APPEARS TO HAVE FAILED." In the late 1990s, Colombian immunologist Manuel Patarroyo claimed, with much media fanfare, that he had found the answer to malaria with his vaccine, SPf-66. Early results were tantalizing, but follow-up studies in Thailand showed it worked no better than a placebo.

1) It say...........Colombian immunologist Manuel Patarroyo claimed, with much media fanfare, that he had found the answer to malaria with his vaccine
What this means other than saying that he solved the problem?
And if he said that he solved the problem doesn't this means that according to him malaria can be eradicated?
And what about the other guy that said that NOW we will have a vaccine?
2) I said that their statements say that they got rid of malaria not that the malaria has been eradicated.
In fact it all turned wrong just as i try to explained you in order to show you how science can not get rid of
problems in a permanent way but you mix all around in order to show that you are correct and i am wrong.
Failed again Ton.   

YOU SAID: malaria is still the No1 killer globally speaking.
YOUR QUOTED SOURCE SAID: It is a leading cause of death and disease in many developing countries.
LIE NUMBER 3: Being ONE OF the leading causes of death in SOME parts of the world is not "the number 1 killer globally speaking."
So not only were you dishonest in your initial claims, you were dishonest in your interpretation of your sources, and you dishonestly tried changing your claims several times in order to try and cover for your initial dishonesty.  Now you deleted the portion of my post from your quote in order to make another attempt to cover for your dishonesty with MORE dishonesty!  Did I NOT explain to you that your posts are still visible and your lies quite plain for all to see?  Your lack of character is shocking, in light of the persona that you pretend to aspire to in your posts.

Open your eyes and your ears Ton.
The statistics that we have in the developed countries can not possibly take into account what happen in less developed countries where people have no access to hospitals and medical centres because they are too poor to afford doctors or there are no doctors around.
Million of people every year die in the streets, in the jungles or in many different places.
How would you now about it.
And how those who make statistics in the developed countries would know? 
Would you bother to go in India or Lesotho or Borneo and check the statistics?
Don't be ridiculous Ton.
For every person known who die of malaria there got to be at least 20 times more that go unreported that is why i don't believe in 
the official statistics.
 

It is a reality that a step forward always go hand in hand with a step backwards.
The monitor that you are watching right now deliver you radiations and by sitting down you also get weaker plus plus all the rest.

Errr... no.  The monitor represents considerable progress on a number of levels.  Your "step back" regarding radiation is so minimal that we can't even find a health risk in spite of ongoing research.  Second, that monitor allows me to find information on the internet on how to eat better, exercise better, and live better, so that I can counteract the "sitting down and getting weaker" part as well.  Like I said, lots and lots of steps forward for every step backwards.

You can show me the progress of sitting in front of the monitor and i can show you the bad side of it.
Do you really want to bet that the progress is bigger than the bad side?
How much you want to bet Ton? 
You say that the radiations are minimal.
All depend on how long you sit in front of the monitor.
In any case even minimal radiations cause some damage.
What about getting your body weaker by sitting down?
Don't forget that sitting down long time affect also your little uncle dick not just your muscles.
What about your partner that will complain about it?
And what about your family that will get less attention from you because you are spending hours on the computer?
And what about your kids that because they haven't got your attention and care spend more time on the computer become therefore addicted?
And what about the power bill that will cost you more?
And the cost of your computer?
It all add up Ton and believe me the bill will not be cheap.

But of course you are free to believe otherwise Ton.

This condescension in light of how wrong you've been so far is just... bizarre.

If you think i am wrong let us be judged by an independent panel and see who is wrong. 

What about you Ton.
How can you make any progress if you..........cling to wrong ideas.......such as believe  in untested guessing that the mind is a function of the brain?

Two things:
Science progresses because it does not cling to wrong ideas.  Even when it comes to a conclusion that appears correct, people keep testing and working and researching, and often we overturn old theories and replace them with better ones.

That's ok. Ton.
So if science overturn old theories that means that science did and keep on doing mistakes.
Doesn't it Ton?
That is exactly what i am saying.
The point however is............if coming up with a new and better theory that in the future will be discarded in the rubbish bin of history
to be replaced by a new theory can this be called real progress or just a temporary patch up?

Second, the fact that the mind is a function of the brain is not an untested guess.  The beliefs and claims that you keep making about gods and spirits and souls?  THOSE are untested guesses.  I think it's very telling that you place more trust in your own beliefs based on untested guesses than you do on scientific research that must produce testable claims and verifiable results.  You have it all backwards, and you appear willing to lie to both yourself and to others to maintain your delusion.  The world is going to pass you by, Rik.

For Christ sake Ton stop dreaming.
The idea that the mind is a function of the brain IS an untested guess.
The only way to say for sure whether this idea is right or wrong is for someone to die and then come back to life as in the NDEs experiences.
All the rest is just guessing.  

[Excited Penguin]

I don't get it. Why is this thread still alive? Who necroposted?

[robvalue]

No one, this is where Little Rik lives and tells us about his "intuitional science".

I wouldn't advise trying to figure out what that is.

[Little Rik]

[...]
I wish you would be my philosopher master so i could learn all has got to be learn. [...]

Yeah, no - you're not fit for philosophy. That's for smart people. Take up sports, or something. And maybe some English lessons(?)...

Thanks very very much Nutter for your advise.
Well, considering that you are an expert in philosophy can you please explain to me what is the meaning of philosophy
and who qualify to be a philosopher?
Please Nutter try to help Little Rik to understand these ABC of philosophy. 

[Little Rik]

Ton.
I got to update the damages caused by sitting in front of a computer.
Just today i was scrolling the news in an Italian site.
Something interesting attracted my attention also because yesterday i was talking about the issue.
Scientists (yes Ton those Scientists that you take in top consideration) said that by getting informations from the computer
prevent our brain from exercise and therefore our mind get weaker and weaker.
And not only the computer.
Also the mobile phones are not much good either.
In the past where the old phone didn't have the storage capacity we had to remember the phone numbers of our dear one.
Today by the click of a button we get the number straight away so in this way we don't exercise our brain to remember almost anything.
All the information are available by a click of a button.  
Sorry Ton for the bad news but believe me the bad news also go hand in hand with the good news.
The good news Ton is that this will help you to wake up and grow up so in the future you will start to understand that
in the physical-material arena the progress doesn't exist.   



http://www.repubblica.it/scienze/2015/07...HRLV-17was

[Whateverist]

I don't get it. Why is this thread still alive? Who necroposted?

I believe this thread got sticky'd so that new members could also indicate their god belief status.  That would mean necro-posting wouldn't apply.

Of course, it was created by the founder of this site to get a quick read on where people stand without a lot of fluff to get in the way.  But Rik has perverted it to his own purposes.  Being a pervert doesn't clearly run afoul of the rules so Little Rik gets to camp out here.

[Little Rik]

I don't get it. Why is this thread still alive? Who necroposted?

I believe this thread got sticky'd so that new members could also indicate their god belief status.  That would mean necro-posting wouldn't apply.

Of course, it was created by the founder of this site to get a quick read on where people stand without a lot of fluff to get in the way.  But Rik has perverted it to his own purposes.  Being a pervert doesn't clearly run afoul of the rules so Little Rik gets to camp out here.

Whatever i am so sorry to camp in the wrong place.
Ok now i will move to a better place where i just open a new thread.

http://atheistforums.org/thread-34809.html

Oh by the way i am the only pervert or are also perverts those who engage a discussion with me? 

[Tonus]

You see Ton a lot of people believe a lot of things but when you confront them they come up with the old dogmas.
One thing is to say something.
A different thing is to prove that what they say make sense.

Your lack of self-awareness is staggering.  You don't seem to realize that you are in exactly the same boat.

It seems like you never watch the news.
Doesn't the Arab spring ring any bell in your ears?
Was any thing achieved?

So... you're saying there was no progress in a region of the world under heavy religious influence?  That supports the point I was making.  Do you even understand that you are reinforcing what I am saying, and specifically undermining your own claims?

Does a lifejacket represent progress?
All it does is to put you back on your feet on the ground as you were before you got into trouble.

The life jacket means you survive an event that would otherwise kill you.  So yes, that is progress.

Real progress is possible but not in the physical-material arena so don't tell me that i don't believe in progress.

So real progress is only possible in a realm that doesn't exist, but you claim to believe in progress.  Amazing.  Yet again you redefine a term into uselessness in order to support something you claimed.  You are deliberately reducing your worldview to nonsense, for some weird reason.

The report goes back to the 1984 and the late 90.
What is not ages ago for you can be for different people.

So you continue to pile more dishonesty on top of your dishonesty.  I'd like to say that I'm surprised, but I am not.

2) I said that their statements say that they got rid of malaria not that the malaria has been eradicated.
In fact it all turned wrong just as i try to explained you in order to show you how science can not get rid of
problems in a permanent way but you mix all around in order to show that you are correct and i am wrong.
Failed again Ton. 

Correcting your lies is not "mix[ing] all around."  You said they claimed that they got rid of it.  Past tense.  They were claiming that they felt they had the cure and could eradicate it, not that they had.  I will also point out your hypocrisy, in playing word games with the phrase "ages ago" and then playing the exact opposite game with the quotes from scientists.  And then daring to claim that I am the one playing word games.  Does your dishonesty know no depths?  You're so wrong at this point that you cannot salvage your claim, but you are determined to pile lie on top of lie for reasons that I can't even fathom.

For every person known who die of malaria there got to be at least 20 times more that go unreported that is why i don't believe in the official statistics.

So you just make up statistics when the real statistics don't support your claim?  Are you TRYING to find new ways to be dishonest?  This is just appalling.  You could have simply admitted that you exaggerated your claims and tried to find some other way to make your point, but this constant doubling-down on lies and dishonesty is just bizarre.  It really is.

And your attempt to use this one example to show that science doesn't progress is silly.  We have almost completely eradicated diseases like polio and smallpox and measles.  Why haven't we been able to completely eradicate them?  Because of people like YOU, who make false claims and try to drag us backwards, then complain that we're not making progress.  It's tragic.

You can show me the progress of sitting in front of the monitor and i can show you the bad side of it.

All you can do is list things that I already showed are not an issue, and things that are easily remedied with additional knowledge, which can be retrieved via the computer attached to that monitor.  Just because you repeat something that is wrong, does not make it less wrong.

If you think i am wrong let us be judged by an independent panel and see who is wrong.

If there was any question as to how wrong you are, this might be a reasonable request.  But go ahead and find an independent panel if you need further corroboration on how insane you sound.

The point however is............if coming up with a new and better theory that in the future will be discarded in the rubbish bin of history to be replaced by a new theory can this be called real progress or just a temporary patch up?

Most of those theories are not completely discarded, they are modified in light of new discoveries and information.  We do not learn by discarding everything, we learn by discarding what is wrong and keeping what is right.  That is how we progress in knowledge and understanding.  We build upon the good and remove the bad.  Even the stuff that was wrong served a purpose in many cases, allowing us to know what didn't work as well as what did.

The idea that the mind is a function of the brain IS an untested guess.

No, it is not.  I have already explained how we know this.  Much of our current research already takes advantage of this fact, and would not provide consistent results if it were not true.  As I've said before, your rejection of reality does not change reality.  And lying to cover your claims doesn't either.  And redefining terms doesn't either.  You're going about it all wrong and it's gone from amusing to sad.  As I said before, the world is simply going to pass you by, Rik.  And that's a good thing.

[Tonus]

Scientists (yes Ton those Scientists that you take in top consideration) said that by getting informations from the computer
prevent our brain from exercise and therefore our mind get weaker and weaker.

This is a well-understood phenomenon about how our brain works. It maximizes efficiency. The mind doesn't get weaker, it simply utilizes our tools to make us more efficient. If your phone stores more data and puts it at your fingertips, you do not have to bother memorizing that data. Makes perfect sense. The idea that the mind gets weaker is wrong. The computer also puts a huge additional amount of data and challenges within reach, to which we can apply those extra mental cycles that are not being used to store birthdays and telephone numbers.

But you would know this if you read your own link, which says the same thing.

[Little Rik]

Scientists (yes Ton those Scientists that you take in top consideration) said that by getting informations from the computer
prevent our brain from exercise and therefore our mind get weaker and weaker.

This is a well-understood phenomenon about how our brain works.  It maximizes efficiency.  The mind doesn't get weaker, it simply utilizes our tools to make us more efficient.  If your phone stores more data and puts it at your fingertips, you do not have to bother memorizing that data.  Makes perfect sense.  The idea that the mind gets weaker is wrong.  The computer also puts a huge additional amount of data and challenges within reach, to which we can apply those extra mental cycles that are not being used to store birthdays and telephone numbers.

But you would know this if you read your own link, which says the same thing.  

Wrong again Ton.
The link say a lot of things.
One of this thing is that the mind that doesn't get exercised act like our muscles that are not getting exercise.
What this means Ton?
You guess. 
Ok. considering that this simple point is far too difficult for you to understand i will act as a tutor and explain to you the meaning.
Muscles that don't get exercised become flaccid and weak.
Researchers that study the brain find out that the same problem happen to our brain that doesn't get exercised.
It become weak.
To summarise.
What's the point in getting more informations at our fingertip when we loose something else like our strength in the brain?
You never thought about it Ton, didn't you Ton?