(July 3, 2012 at 8:14 am)gringoperry Wrote: I actually agree with some of what this guy is trying to say; although I think his delivery is not quite conveying the message as he intended. None of us who have been around atheist/theist forums can deny that we've seen the same tired arguments over and over again. So it stands to reason that if we continue to get involved in them, at least some of us are searching for some sort of absolute truth; otherwise those people would just walk away. I'm guessing that the OP is agnostic, and thinks it's arrogant of either camp to claim the higher ground or victory in the debate, seeing as neither can absolutely prove the other wrong.

(July 3, 2012 at 8:14 am)gringoperry Wrote:

---

I actually agree with some of what this guy is trying to say; although I think his delivery is not quite conveying the message as he intended. None of us who have been around atheist/theist forums can deny that we've seen the same tired arguments over and over again. So it stands to reason that if we continue to get involved in them, at least some of us are searching for some sort of absolute truth; otherwise those people would just walk away. I'm guessing that the OP is agnostic, and thinks it's arrogant of either camp to claim the higher ground or victory in the debate, seeing as neither can absolutely prove the other wrong.

Further, I would imagine that the OP feels that atheists put too much stock in scientific methods, without have carried out experiments to verify that they work, and in doing so are as dogmatic as theists in their belief. However, I would say to the OP that there is a major difference between believing that gravity works and God existing. You don't need to have a PHD to test gravity, it's keeping you on the ground right now. Similarly, when examining anything, of course we start from a base of understanding. The difference between atheists and theists is, atheists start from a model that has demonstrable evidence of working. Moses was said to have parted the Red Sea, however, if I were to attempt the same thing, I wouldn't pray for it to happen. Instead I would start from the assumption that I need to displace the water in some way. Now, I know I can do this on a smaller scale using a straw, so I have at least one possible line of inquiry to start from. Let's assume that I have a lot more scientific knowledge than using straws to displace water: What do you think has the best chance of parting the Red Sea first, thousands of people praying or my science? You cannot say there is no way of knowing, because there is. We could ask that question of anything that has happened in recorded history, and the results are always the same. We trust in scientific method and reasoning because it has been proven to work - it's that simple. Prove that praying works and people will be happy to adapt it as a viable means of achieving results.

---

(July 3, 2012 at 10:36 am)gringoperry Wrote: lol I totally missed that, having only skimmed over all the back and forth from page 2 onwards. My bad.

(July 3, 2012 at 1:29 am)Moros Synackaon Wrote: I find it funny as fuck that the OP implies that one being in a wheel chair and being a scientist is somehow invalid when referring to metaphysics while the presuppositions inside OP's lint-filled head are not.

Tell me, do all the inmates at the asylum know the answers too? Or are you the only one?

Also, does your boss know you're posting from work?

I'm fairly certain he'd love to hear one of his employees using the company's vpn to troll remotely.

(July 2, 2012 at 11:52 pm)Selliedjoup Wrote: If it makes you feel any better I'm a creationist and evolution is a devil's concept.