So are you going to answer Bri or just keep repeating the same old nonsense?

(September 13, 2014 at 9:16 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Physical existence isn't the question. As there is no one that has proof. I cannot know, and neither can you. It's childish to cite any number of imaginary alternatives that cannot be proven. Doing so is avoiding the actual problem at hand.

So why the fuck are you childishly trying to claim your god then?

Now again it is not a matter of me disproving your claim. It is a matter of you proving your claim. You are stupidly expecting me to do your homework for you.

You simply like the idea of a invisible sky hero and that is it. It is your own flawed perception, the same flawed perception that lead the Egyptians to concoct their polytheist gods. The same flawed logic that causes others to believe falsely in Allah.

The earth is 4 billion years old. The universe is 13 billion years old. Humans were not around at the start of any of that. We were scientifically ignorant at our early evolution.

You like all religious people who claim all sorts of gods would stupidly have me believe that billions of years from now that your pet god claim will still be around even after our planet dies and our sun dies.

Froodo, I do not pick on you personally and I really don't give one shit who is making the claim or what name they give their pet invisible friend. Simple logic points to humans gap filling because of wishful thinking. This universe in reality never gave a shit about us and will never give a shit about us.

Now some humans see that as fatalistic. No it is merely accepting reality. I find it far more positive to face reality without kaleidoscope thinking than to bury yourself in fantasy.

All god claims in human history are a reflection, not of a real god, but of childish human desires. THAT IS a result of our species flawed perceptions.

I can move on from the fact that no transferable evidence exists of something non physical Wolfie. Bri, it seems, will not. Brian refuses to consider the actual problem on the basis of an illogical conclusion that God cannot exist because Brian doesn't have any square circles to prove it. No one has any round triangles, spherical cubes or tubular diamonds either. What more proof do you need!!!

(September 13, 2014 at 9:35 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I can move on from the fact that no transferable evidence exists of something non physical Wolfie. Bri, it seems, will not. Brian refuses to consider the actual problem on the basis of an illogical conclusion that God cannot exist because Brian doesn't have any square circles to prove it. No one has any round triangles, spherical cubes or tubular diamonds either. What more proof do you need!!!

You accused brian of being close-minded because he dismisses your god, but then brian pointed out that you've dismissed every other god, not even considering thor or vishnu. Which means, by your own standards, you are as close-minded as brian.

So, i'm going to ask again, are you both close-minded, or are neither of you?

I refuse to presume that after science says invisible beings are not required to explain anything about our existence to presume crap rooted in myth and superstition and wishful thinking.

If you want to pretend Santa for adults you have that human right to do so, but do not claim you know shit about the nature of reality because you do not. Pretending is not evidence it is merely wishful thinking.

You stupidly think I am being a dick for no good reason.

You, "The New York Yankees won the Superbowl"

Me, "No, the Yankees play baseball, not football"

You, "You are so close minded"

Me, "No I am not being closed minded, you are simply wrong."

You, "YOU HATE ME and you are just being a dick".

Me, "No I do not hate you but yes I am being a dick because I think humans can do better than filling in gaps with stupid claims of invisible magical super heros".

If you stupidly want to play Santa for adults, since you cant build a computer from scratch, then you might as well claim that computer fairies made computers and that computers run on pixy dust.

There is nothing wrong with accepting reality. There is nothing wrong with growing up. You do not need a god you simply think you do.

@ Brian : you are the one insisting on a physically extant God who is not physically extant. To me that's beyond belief. Like the hunt for square circles. How do you keep on with that?

I don't know how many times I've said this in this thread for you to keep on ignoring it: religion is not science. I don't replace any of my understanding of science with my belief in God. Can I get a confirmation that you acknowledge that I've said that? I'm sick of repeating it.

Progress in scientific knowledge doesn't change belief in God one little bit. It isn't the same subject. Understanding the universe and how it runs is not the subject of religion.

There is a point to religion, and scientific enquiry isn't it. I can't quite believe that has to be said to an adult. The point to religion is meaning and purpose. To improve your life by practical and sound knowledge.

What we have today is the misplaced faith in science to provide that knowledge, and of course science makes no comment on it.

How ignorant are we thinking we're so much better yet failing so badly.

(September 13, 2014 at 9:22 am)Bad Wolf Wrote:

(September 13, 2014 at 9:16 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Physical existence isn't the question. As there is no one that has proof. I cannot know, and neither can you. It's childish to cite any number of imaginary alternatives that cannot be proven. Doing so is avoiding the actual problem at hand.

So are both of you close-minded or are neither of you?

I am no more "closed minded" knowing the earth is a globe and not flat. Closed minded is the refusal to let go of the past.

(September 13, 2014 at 9:47 am)fr0d0 Wrote: @ Brian : you are the one insisting on a physically extant God who is not physically extant. To me that's beyond belief. Like the hunt for square circles. How do you keep on with that?

If your god affects reality then there must be some physical manifestation, and if there is a physical manifestation then we should be able to detect and measure it.

(September 13, 2014 at 9:47 am)fr0d0 Wrote: I don't know how many times I've said this in this thread for you to keep on ignoring it: religion is not science. I don't replace any of my understanding of science with my belief in God. Can I get a confirmation that you acknowledge that I've said that? I'm sick of repeating it.

No, you just ignore the parts of the bible where it's impossible.

(September 13, 2014 at 9:47 am)fr0d0 Wrote: Progress in scientific knowledge doesn't change belief in God one little bit. It isn't the same subject. Understanding the universe and how it runs is not the subject of religion.

People don't believe in Thor any more because we know what causes thunder and lightning.

(September 13, 2014 at 9:47 am)fr0d0 Wrote: There is a point to religion, and scientific enquiry isn't it. I can't quite believe that has to be said to an adult. The point to religion is meaning and purpose. To improve your life by practical and sound knowledge.

Practical knowledge? Yea like how to burn a witch at the stake, the correct way to stone homosexuals, the best way to slaughter an entire village for not believing the same as you.

(September 13, 2014 at 9:47 am)fr0d0 Wrote: What we have today is the misplaced faith in science to provide that knowledge, and of course science makes no comment on it.

Demonstrate that the information that that knowledge pertains to, exists.

(September 13, 2014 at 9:47 am)fr0d0 Wrote: How ignorant are we thinking we're so much better yet failing so badly.

Better? Better than who? Than what?

(September 13, 2014 at 9:47 am)fr0d0 Wrote: @ Brian : you are the one insisting on a physically extant God who is not physically extant. To me that's beyond belief. Like the hunt for square circles. How do you keep on with that?

I don't know how many times I've said this in this thread for you to keep on ignoring it: religion is not science. I don't replace any of my understanding of science with my belief in God. Can I get a confirmation that you acknowledge that I've said that? I'm sick of repeating it.

Progress in scientific knowledge doesn't change belief in God one little bit. It isn't the same subject. Understanding the universe and how it runs is not the subject of religion.

There is a point to religion, and scientific enquiry isn't it. I can't quite believe that has to be said to an adult. The point to religion is meaning and purpose. To improve your life by practical and sound knowledge.

What we have today is the misplaced faith in science to provide that knowledge, and of course science makes no comment on it.

How ignorant are we thinking we're so much better yet failing so badly.

Your stupid logic "You can't see air but you know it exists".

At one time humans did not know scientifically what caused hurricanes but you don't stupidly postulate Poseidon. Humans also did not know what caused lightening but you don't fill in that gap with Thor.

Scientific method is the opposite of faith. It demands the rigors of observation, testing and peer review. "Faith" is not a methodology anymore than believing in Santa explains where presents come from in reality.

Scientific method is why physics is accepted and why Newton gave up on alchemy. One worked and the other did not.

"Faith" in a god or a religion only proves our species can falsely group around flawed perceptions. It cannot nor ever should be equated to universal methodology of scientific method.

Ethical scientists when proven wrong do not see that as a threat to their ego, they see it as a learning opportunity. "Faith" in religion however is a sugar pill with the dangerous side effect of humans demanding taboos and defending the club. It is our species reflection of childish narcissism.

FUCK FAITH. It does not deserve a pedestal nor should it ever be free from being offended or be free from criticism. There is a huge difference between legal rights and human rights, and credibility of ANY sentence that comes out of your mouth.

FAITH IS FAITH IS FAITH, be it belief in Ra or Osirus or Thor or Vishnu or Mormon or Voodoo or Hindu. It is no different than a kid literally believing in Santa as a kid. Faith takes no brains to swallow. QUESTIONING and TESTING to insure quality of data is what takes brains.

Tell you what, I'll just wait around until you get over this faith is science thing you've got going

---

@ Wolfie : a physical manifestation of God is you. Go test yourself for existence.