(August 11, 2015 at 10:07 pm)lkingpinl Wrote:

(August 11, 2015 at 9:58 pm)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote: Would you quit it! You're making it hard for me to build a reputation as a theist hater with your kudos worthy replies!

You're a closet theist lover. Cmon admit it. We aren't all westboro loonies.

Well, you all aren't as obvious about it.

I think it's been said but it's worth repeating, since I can be a grammar Nazi...

The way the title is written can be somewhat correct: the unscientific do believe...

(August 11, 2015 at 10:44 am)Redbeard The Pink Wrote:

(August 11, 2015 at 10:16 am)Little Rik Wrote: I was on my way to bed but as i saw your disgusting post i hang on for few more minutes.

1) The outer mind can not have knowledge of bad things from your previous life but your superconscious mind
can that is why people born with a good or bad attitude to life.
Nothing happen by good or bad luck.
You carry with you your karma whether you are aware or not.
The evidence that there is karma is that after you pay for your debts you feel so much better within.

2) You got no evidence of whatsoever that the Universe IS blind luck, operating within a system that is governed by consistent physical laws.
None of whatsoever. 

1) "Blah blah blah unsupported assertions blah blah more unsupported assertions blah blah blah..."

Evidence or get the fuck out.

2) At the risk of sounding like a design apologist, Rik, EVERYTHING is evidence that the Universe is a system operated by blind luck within consistent laws. Everything we can find indicates that the Universe is kept moving by some combination of gravity, electromagnetism, the strong atomic force, the weak atomic force, and inertia. Aside from that, it's just a matter of what which things are close enough together to interact. No conscious, deliberate action is required on the part of anyone. For all intents and purposes, the Universe seems to be grinding on with no supervision or guidance whatsoever. There is a MOUNTAIN of evidence to support this assertion, as just about everything in science is supporting me on this one. Nobody makes the Universe happen. It is just happening.

Sure.
There is a mountain of evidence but you are not showing a single grain of it.
If you would be able to show that the energy doesn't go hand in hand with consciousness you also would be able
to show that you can act as a man without having a mind.
Can you do that Pinky?   

(August 11, 2015 at 12:34 pm)robvalue Wrote:

(August 11, 2015 at 9:32 am)Little Rik Wrote: Holy, holy Rob.
You are in a total mental mess. 
There is no such a thing as a philosophical naturalist.
Philosophy is all about wisdom and wisdom can not come from a limited arena as the universe
in which the positive and negative always balance each other.
On the contrary the definition given for the word philosophical naturalist mean someone who believe that the natural world is all there is.
How the hell can someone who believe that the natural world is all there is and at the same time talk about philosophy which goes outside the physical world.
Total madness Rob. 

Yes, a philosophical naturalist is someone who believes the natural world is all there is. You continually misrepresent atheists as such, now you're saying such people don't exist?

That is the agreed definition, and it's what I'm talking about. If you want to use your own definitions, that's fine, but you don't get to tell me what I mean when I use words. If you do, I can make more Yoga memes.

No, philosophy is not concerned only with the supernatural, that's again your own made up definition. Philosophy generally deals with abstract ideas.

1) I am saying that the word......philosophical naturalist..........is a contradicting word not that people 
who believe in the meaning of that word exist or not.
That is irrelevant.
2) Abstract ideas that do not lead to wisdom have absolutely nothing to do with philosophy.
So philosophy is all about progress in the real of wisdom.
All the rest is not philosophy. 
This is what the Greek word meant.
If you instead like to vandalize the original meaning and give a meaning of your own
please yourself but don't tell me what is the original meaning of the word philosophy.
You wouldn't have a clue about it. 

(August 11, 2015 at 9:54 pm)SnakeOilWarrior Wrote:

(August 11, 2015 at 9:13 am)Little Rik Wrote: Yeah.      

Well, at least you spared us all your lame denial of having moved the goalposts. Thanks for that.

Little Rik show you that he was correct when he was saying that the small always merge in the big.
Little Rik is still here to show that atheism is 100% unscientific. 

(August 14, 2015 at 9:39 am)Little Rik Wrote: Little Rik is still here to show that atheism is 100% unscientific. 

:fanfare:

For those who thought it would never happen, RIK'S JUST SAID SOMETHING THAT'S TRUE!!

You're right, Rik. Atheism IS unscientific because all it is is a word to describe an absence of belief in god/s. It has absolutely nothing to say about the reasons why one may not believe, only that one doesn't.

(August 14, 2015 at 9:18 am)Little Rik Wrote: Sure.
There is a mountain of evidence but you are not showing a single grain of it.
If you would be able to show that the energy doesn't go hand in hand with consciousness you also would be able
to show that you can act as a man without having a mind.
Can you do that Pinky?   

Pick a piece of scientific evidence, Rik. Pick one. Any damn one in the fucking world, and it's evidence that natural processes do not have to be governed by any kind of consciousness in order to work. Everything is made of particles that do what they do without anyone apparently telling them to. They act with automatic and unconscious consistency, and they interact with whatever happens to be in their environment. They cannot and do not decide to do anything unless over time they can become a mass of particles capable of thinking (like a brain, for instance).

(August 14, 2015 at 9:39 am)Little Rik Wrote: Little Rik show you that he was correct when he was saying that the small always merge in the big.

(emphasis is mine)

Little Rik made this claim, got proven wrong and moved the goal posts to "the small eventually merge in the big." Glad see you put the goalposts back, even though that position was dead wrong.

(August 14, 2015 at 9:39 am)Little Rik Wrote: Little Rik is still here to show that atheism is 100% unscientific. 

Good luck with that, ass-hat.

(August 14, 2015 at 9:39 am)Little Rik Wrote: Little Rik is still here to show that atheism is 100% unscientific. 

sci·ence
ˈsīəns/
noun
noun: science

1. the intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment.
   "the world of science and technology"
   synonyms:
   branch of knowledge, body of knowledge/information, area of study,discipline, field
   "the science of criminology"
   • a particular area of this.
     plural noun: sciences
     "veterinary science"
     
   • a systematically organized body of knowledge on a particular subject.
     "the science of criminology"
     synonyms:
     physics, chemistry, biology; More
     

Per the third definition: atheism is, in fact, a body of knowledge on the subject of disbelief in god. So according to this particular definition, atheism can actually be classified as scientific.

I do admit that atheism does not fit into the frame of the first definition, though. You cannot observe or test the fact of disbelief in god.