(November 15, 2015 at 7:08 am)Whateverist the White Wrote:

(November 15, 2015 at 4:56 am)Little Rik Wrote: Meat is s.hit but low form of consciousness could deal with that.

All this talk of low vs high forms of consciousness is based on .. what, exactly?  What makes the quality of consciousness supported by vegetarianism 'higher'?  What you call 'lower' is what I would call your humanity.  You eschew that in order to obtain what you call 'higher' consciousness.  But even if you could, why would you want to leave behind your humanity?  What urgent business requires such a sacrifice? Becoming a 'disembodied' intelligence is essentially an escapist mission.  I leave you to it.

Few hundred years ago there were no cars, no planes so people used to travel by foot or on carriages pulled by horses.
There was nothing wrong with that really.
In those times people never see the advent of cars and planes.
They were happy with what they had.
We are also happy the way we are.
We do not really think seriously that in the future we may get all our nourishment by swallow a tablet and we may travel from planet to planet in short time with a spacecraft.
Things change Whatever.
I don't really put down our ancestors for the way they used to live.
All i am saying is that as the time goes things must change in order to progress.
What used to work more or less in the past can not possibly work these days.
The vehicles of today run on a particular type of fuel.
The vehicles of tomorrow will need a different type of fuel.
In the same way the consciousness of today can not possibly carry on with the same type of material-physical-mental nourishment of yesterday.  

(November 16, 2015 at 7:57 am)Evie Wrote: @ Little Rik?

Plagarism? Do you know what Plagarism actually is?

Giving people the plague?

(November 16, 2015 at 7:53 am)Ben Davis Wrote: Hi Rik, I'm going to try one last time but since you've not been responding to my messages, this might be a complete waste of time.

Here's to hoping  

(November 15, 2015 at 3:20 am)Little Rik Wrote: You guys say that atheism is not unscientific but science contradict you at every step.

No. No-one has said that. The only comment made about that has been that atheism has nothing to do with science as it's only the disbelief in theistic propositions.

You clearly do not understand the human psychology.
To sustain an idea you must first build some sort of foundations.
No foundation = no idea.
Believing or not believing make no difference.
In both cases there got to be something that make you deciding.
By not believing in something you still search in your mind for a reason not to believe.
Here is where science play his role.
Atheists always rely on science to disbelieve a possible God.
How many times i have read ...........THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT THERE IS GOD.
But wait a minute Ben.
When an atheist say this doesn't he-she rely on physical evidence?
And who study the physical world other than physical science?
That's it Ben.
It is all connected.
Physical science is there in the conclusion that God doesn't exist so yes it has to do with science.
Physical science of course otherwise if you use the correct science you wouldn't have any problem in realize that God exist.  

Quote:Physically speaking the rule is that a clever and bright mind can only be such when the body is healthy.

Quote:Stephen Hawking would have words with you about that.

Gee, i just had my dinner.
I don't really feel like laughing.
Hawking who?
That dreamer?
The bloke state that there is no God but where is his evidence?
Clever people can do without dreamer like him.  

Quote:By introducing rubbish in your body such as smoke, booze, drugs, meat and so on the chances that your body and mind can be in top nick are very very slim and considering that most of you don't care about it show how unscientific you are.

Quote:So smoking etc. are 'atheistic' practices are they? And all atheists are smokers etc.? Really? Are you really claiming that?

Wrong again Ben.
I didn't say that atheists are such and such.
I instead say that most of you don't care about it.
Care about what?
Care whether smoke, drink, drugs and meat are good or bad.
How did i work this out?
By reading pages after pages of posts in which atheists say that they enjoy these things.
Got it now?    

Quote:The evidence?

Quote:You have none. None. You're making things up.

3-4 month spend try to contradict me over the meat issue is enough evidence to say that atheists in this forum believe that meat is good.    

Quote:You think that the mind can do so many things but you don't even understand the differences between outer mind and inner mind so how the hell can you hope to make any progress in this place?

Quote:No, you don't understand the way the mind works. You've demonstrated this with every comment you've made about how you think the mind works. It's not even as if you're the type of woo-merchant who takes modern scientific discovery and twists it in to something woo-ish, you simply lie to people and claim esotericism as your defense. That's despicable.

All this intellectual jargon to say nothing that make any sense?
If you really think that you know how the mind works why don't you tell me what is the difference between outer and inner mind?    

Quote:No progress of whatsoever and then you have the audacity to say that it is me that is in denial.

Quote:I'll say again; physician, heal thyself.

I always said that intellectuals are losers.  

Quote:Science contradict you guys so you lost.  

Quote:Science doesn't contradict the 'atheist' position in any way because atheism, as you've been told a hundred times or more, has no doctrine, let alone one that refers specifically to science. However, you know what science can do? It can demonstrate that specific claims, made about gods, are false. It's been doing this for a long time now.

You just contradict yourself Ben.
First you say that science doesn't contradict atheism and then you say that science can demonstrate that claims about God are false.
Are you kidding me by telling me that science play no role in no believing?  

I hate reading incoherent rambling so much.   

(November 16, 2015 at 11:00 am)Little Rik Wrote: Atheists always rely on common sense to disbelieve a possible God.

Fixed it for.

I bet there would be very few religious people left if beliefs weren't passed down from parents and family, would also help if there weren't so many gullible people that believe everything they are told without doing any research.

(November 16, 2015 at 11:39 am)Stimbo Wrote:

Very very good mate.  
I like that.  
Now i really believe that you are ultra confident that by THIS Christmas you will be able to tell me the
meaning of Philosophy.  
I always knew that sooner or later you will put aside your shyness and pop out with a glorious answer that will shatter the skeptics in pieces.
Many kudu kudos in waiting Stim.  

(November 16, 2015 at 1:23 pm)Red_Wind Wrote:

(November 16, 2015 at 11:00 am)Little Rik Wrote: Atheists always rely on common sense to disbelieve a possible God.

Fixed it for.

Misquoting is against the forum rule Wind.  

Quote:I bet there would be very few religious people left if beliefs weren't passed down from parents and family, would also help if there weren't so many gullible people that believe everything they are told without doing any research.

My catholic parents try and try to pass me down their religions.
It works only until i was 13-14.
After that i was fed up with religions but i never stop believing in God
and at the age of 20-21 i started doing research which end up in yoga which is
not a religion.  

(November 16, 2015 at 11:43 am)DespondentFishdeathMasochismo Wrote: I hate reading incoherent rambling so much.   

I am so sorry to hear that Des.  
You tell me who force you to read these posts and i promise you that i will fix these bullies once and for all.  

(November 17, 2015 at 8:29 am)Little Rik Wrote:

(November 16, 2015 at 11:43 am)DespondentFishdeathMasochismo Wrote: I hate reading incoherent rambling so much.   

I am so sorry to hear that Des.  
You tell me who force you to read these posts and i promise you that i will fix these bullies once and for all.  

The OP is just a general example of a religious person trying to disprove atheists. I was expressing my distaste for reading it, which I think could be understandable. Why you're against me expressing my distaste for something leaves me scratching my head.