Best Theistic Arguments

[Angrboda]

I on the other hand base my statements on evidence.  
NDEs are evidence.  

NDEs are evidence that vibrations are alive, or that life only comes from life?  You're obviously on crack.

Obviously you haven't read much of NDEs experiences or you do not believe them in any case.
If you would have you would have noticed that almost all of them talk about vibrations and how all is connected to each other.

Incidentally, in reviewing several NDEs I came across the following NDE account in which the experiencer created multiple NDEs by taking the drug ketamine. So much for your claim that NDEs cannot be caused by chemicals in the brain. I think that's the end of any justification for believing uncorroborated NDE content.

https://www.nderf.org/Experiences/1fred_b_ketamine.html

---

Let's take this another direction so that I can illustrate one of the points I have about evidence from NDEs. Let's say, for the sake of argument, that last night I dreamed that I left my body and traveled to heaven where I met God and Jesus. They explained to me that God is the ground of being, that anything which happens in life is because He is causing it. The explanation for why vibrations exist is because He is causing them to vibrate. I happen to believe that the things that happen in dreams are actually real. (And we have evidence from prophetic dreams, both in the bible [here], as well as contemporary accounts that things dreamed about do in some cases reveal things the dreamer could not have known independent of the dream.) Now, given that I had a dream which showed me that vibrations are not alive, and that some dream content is independently corroborated, do I have justification for believing that vibrations are not alive based on this dream that I had?

[The Valkyrie]

(P)Rik.

The thread is entitled "Best Theistic Arguments", not "Most Regurgitated, Idiotic Theistic Claims".

Just so you know...

[Little Rik]

Obviously you haven't read much of NDEs experiences or you do not believe them in any case.
If you would have you would have noticed that almost all of them talk about vibrations and how all is connected to each other.

Incidentally, in reviewing several NDEs I came across the following NDE account in which the experiencer created multiple NDEs by taking the drug ketamine.  So much for your claim that NDEs cannot be caused by chemicals in the brain.  I think that's the end of any justification for believing uncorroborated NDE content.

https://www.nderf.org/Experiences/1fred_b_ketamine.html

Obviously the guy know that he did something quite wrong by trying to experience something that should only be given in a natural way by God.

When I was about 18 I also did experienced something big with the use of LSD.
I regret I ever did that but that is past.
LSD, ketamine or many other substances are able to open to a certain degree the pineal gland where God is.
The guy himself said that is cheating and cheating prevent you from see God.
All you can see are glimpses of the outside.
In this way the consciousness is unable to leave the body as in a real NDE experience where God welcome you.

Let's take this another direction so that I can illustrate one of the points I have about evidence from NDEs.  Let's say, for the sake of argument, that last night I dreamed that I left my body and traveled to heaven where I met God and Jesus.  They explained to me that God is the ground of being, that anything which happens in life is because He is causing it.  The explanation for why vibrations exist is because He is causing them to vibrate.  I happen to believe that the things that happen in dreams are actually real.  (And we have evidence from prophetic dreams, both in the bible [here], as well as contemporary accounts that things dreamed about do in some cases reveal things the dreamer could not have known independent of the dream.)  Now, given that I had a dream which showed me that vibrations are not alive, and that some dream content is independently corroborated, do I have justification for believing that vibrations are not alive based on this dream that I had?

Million of people dream all sort of things but those things never come through.
In very few instances dreams come through but that is the law of statistics.  

To conclude........NO.
You have no........ justification for believing that vibrations are not alive based on this pretend dream that YOU had?

[Foxaèr]

People applying sentience to inanimate concepts makes me question their human sentience.

[Little Rik]

 

Little Rik/LR



I am doing this to get your attention

I replied to you as well but you only responded to Jor

That's jaw-drop, not Jor-drop, by the way, (by the way why do you call her "Yog"? That always confuses me!)

At one stage your Jor said that she was a yogini.
A yogini is better known for a female who practice yoga.
Of course her experience in yoga must have been next to zero considering that yoga and atheism are at the two extreme.
So as the BS goes one BS attract more BS and now the poor thing is trapped in a corral of dogmas.
Anyway my calling her yog is a sort of nickname for yogini.  

I responded to you in a post already. Why will you not get back to me?

I do apologize for that but if you copy and paste the thing then I will reply to you.  

I also have a question for you. What do you mean by "life"? Do you mean anything biological or made or DNA? Or do you mean anything that is conscious regardless of whether it is biological or made of DNA?

Thank you for your time

Life is everything that exist.
There is no such a thing as non life anywhere.
Even a stone is full of life.
This life in a stone can not be expressed yet but life is there regardless.
Energy and consciousness are the two sides of the same sheet.
There can or can not be awareness within this life but life is there regardless so the awareness or lack of awareness is what turn life into a stone or into a human.
Full awareness is what make a human into God.

[Little Rik]

No question yog and the reason is that I quite agree with you in this case.
I always knew that your head is capable of banging on the wall or any hard surface with little damage.
All those who have a thick head can do that.
Unfortunately for you a head full of brains is much much better than a thick head.
I guess you never though of that yog, did you?    

Unfortunately for you, I have brains, too.  Something you critically lack.

To have brain is one thing.
To have a brain that works properly is a different question and unfortunately you lack a good working brain.

Obviously you haven't read much of NDEs experiences or you do not believe them in any case.
If you would have you would have noticed that almost all of them talk about vibrations and how all is connected to each other.

You tried similar nonsense in the evolution thread and despite my patiently listening to you for two weeks, you failed to justify your belief that the content of NDEs reflect reality.  You want to believe that because [maybe] there is some evidence for the truth of the OBE part of an NDE, that therefore the rest of an NDE is also real.  Besides the fact that you've been presented with evidence that the OBE portion itself does not correspond with reality, you failed to provide justification for believing that the rest of it is true, for reasons running the gamut from irreconcilable NDE claims and testimony, the lack of independent verification, the cultural dependence of NDE content, the inability to distinguish from NDE content reflective of prior belief versus that reflective of reality, and your inability to justify your belief that consciousness leaves the body during an NDE.  You want to believe that because the OBE portion of an NDE may reflect reality, therefore the rest of an NDE is therefore necessarily true.  That's something you may want to believe, but not something you are justified in believing.  Wanting to believe is not justification for believing.

In addition, I'd have to see the evidence, but if all that people are doing in these NDEs is talking about everything being vibrations and everything being connected is not evidence that vibrations are alive.  That would be a case of ignoratio elenchi, nothing more.

So, yeah, failing you overcoming all these hurdles, you're on crack.

FAIL AGAIN YOG.

1) Evidence is there because people who experience these NDEs exist, and because real death and back from death were witnessed by real doctors and hospitals are also real where records are kept.
2) Vibrations are alive because NDEs are real and because these people experienced that vibrations connect all life and all life is made of vibrations.

WRONG ONCE AGAIN YOG.


So far there is no evidence that life can come from non life.
NONE OF WHATSOEVER.

Pointing to a lack of evidence of life coming from non-life is an argument from ignorance, and so your conclusion is not justified.  If all the evidence you have that life only comes from life is that no one has managed to produce life from non-life, then you have failed.  An argument from ignorance is neither evidence for, nor reason to believe, that life only comes from life.  In addition, there is evidence in favor of the proposition that life may come from non-life.  So this is you once again simply not understanding what it would take to demonstrate your claims, and, presenting evidence that, even if true, wouldn't demonstrate your claim.  That's ignoratio elenchi yet again.

If life come from non life please produce this evidence yog.
As I already said you could win a Nobel prize as well.

In fact all the evidence that we have so far point to.......LIFE COME FROM LIFE.

That life in some cases comes from life is not evidence for the proposition that life only comes from life.  The former does not necessarily entail the latter.

 

Not in some case yog.
In fact IN ALL CASES that we know.

In the past and even now many people thought that matter equal to no life.
Fortunately not all people are so stupid to believe that matter is void of life.
Matter is energy-vibration as yoga say and as Einstein and other smart scientists found out.  

As I just pointed out to you, matter and energy being vibration is not support for the belief that vibrations and energy are alive.  You keep conflating that everything is vibrations with the proposition that vibrations are alive, despite my continually pointing it out to you. Motherfucking Christ you are dense!

Atheists see a rock then automatically think......there is no life in it.

After this they have even the audacity to say that they believe in science but science contradict them from top to bottom.
Energy is there and where there is energy there is consciousness.
Consciousness and energy are expressed in vibration and vibrations got to be alive to express life within.

FAIL AGAIN YOG.

Wrong again yog.

You can not say.........I AM AN ATHEIST........and at the same time say....... haven't made a claim in the matter.
Of course you do made a claim.
By saying I AM AN ATHEIST you imply that life does not come from a creator therefore it must pop up from non life.
Well if you do not know where this non life is or exist at all then don't you find extremely foolish to speculate that there is no creator?
That is highly stupid view.   

Last I checked, "I don't know," is still a valid answer.  It disturbs you that I am skeptical of the claims of believers.  That however is not in itself the expression of a claim.  Given that there are a billion threads on this site explaining the range of options available to an atheist,  I suggest you read some of them as you are woefully ill informed as to what atheism does entail.  As I stated, I make no claim that life came from non-life, and remain agnostic on that question.  Feel free to consult a dictionary for the meaning of 'agnostic' if you must.  Moreover, even if I did have some inclinations toward one conclusion or another, those conclusions are based on reasons and evidence, and so are not merely dogma, but justified conclusions.  Regardless, I'm also willing to accept that there might be a certain amount of faith undergirding some of my beliefs.  I'm okay with that.  You on the other hand have repeatedly emphasized that you believe that all your beliefs are justified with good reasons and evidence, and that you have no beliefs that are based simply on dogma or merely "wanting to believe something is true."  It is these latter beliefs of yours which I am challenging.  Since I do not have a corresponding belief that all the things I believe are well justified, I have nothing to defend in the matter.  Thus ends any further consideration of what I believe about the four propositions listed earlier, and we return to you being the focus of this discussion.

That is a load of BS.
To say........I AM AN ATHEIST is a claim in itself.
The very dictionary that you are always so eager to point to it clearly say that atheism is lack of God so to say that there is no God is a clear statement that require evidence.
Evidence that exist only in your dreaming mind and not anywhere else.

Not at all yog.
I was quite happy with the EVOLUTION thread but because you gave up on that I am here now.
If you think I ever lie then show me where these lies are.

Here, here, and here, along with my demonstration and explanation why these are lies, here, here, and here, respectively.

Look here, look there but I still can not see any lies.  

Christian or not Christian religions put together so many dogmas and false truth that now it has become a mountain of nonsensical and absurd thing to waste one's time and energy to go through all of them beside in several occasions I already explained how the system according to yoga works.
Low form of life are driven by instinct while in human life the instinct is checked by free will so God in this case does not usually intervene and the karma law at the end will sort out the unbalance which has been created by humans.

I don't give a flying fuck what you think about Christianity, your beliefs about Christianity are irrelevant to the question.  It wouldn't matter if the view in question were Zippy the Pinhead's view of the cause of vibration, until you refute the possibility that the vibrations' motion is caused by an external God, then you are not justified in concluding that vibrations are necessarily alive.  This is yet another case of ignoratio elenchi where, not only is your argument wrong, even if it were right and correct, it wouldn't prove what you're trying to prove!  Not only can you not put together a successful argument, you appear to have no fucking clue what a successful argument would be.  You gave the same essential response in the evolution thread, when, after a month of flailing and failing to produce anything of substance, you concluded, "I don't like Christianity, therefore the Christian God doesn't exist.  Hurr durr!"  Can you be anymore stupid?  I didn't give up on that thread.  You failed.  And the level of stupidity in your responses was getting so high that even I with my stern constitution could no longer stomach it.

How the system works "according to yoga" is irrelevant if those beliefs are based on dogma.  You don't demonstrate one unproven thing by appealing to an equally unproven thing. (Dumbass.)

 


Too bad yog.
If you could not see any evidence that vibrations are alive that is your problem.
The problem also to be left in the stone age of knowledge plus the problem to admit the evidence because this would means a total failure in your atheistic philosophy.

Inorganic matter has life too.
The thing is that life in matter lie in a latent, inactive or dormant stage.
That dictionary unfortunately doesn't consider this point.
So wrong again yog.

Mrmph.  Well, that's what you're here to demonstrate.  Simply repeating dogma that you believe isn't justifying it.

And again, if you're appealing to a concept of non-life which doesn't exist in the system you are trying to prove, you are once again guilty of the fallacy of the stolen concept, your argument is thus self-contradictory and therefore self-refuting, and therefore your conclusions aren't justified.

Not contradictory at all yog.
Evolution clearly show that everything and everyone point to more and more evolution so one form of consciousness in the lower form of life turn into a more form of consciousness.
None is excluded.
Even matter want to escape her situation as seen in uranium and other miner that release energy.

Thought is vibration.
Emotion is vibration.
Feeling is vibration.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqM3TE5TDw8

Check at 13.15 if you don't want to see all 24.29.

I did watch the whole video, and not a single bit of it supported your claim that vibrations are alive.  The bulk of the video claimed two things, a) everything is vibration, and b) thoughts, feelings, and emotions are vibrations.  Even if I accepted the latter proposition (I don't), that would not provide support for your belief that vibrations are alive.  It's possible that in the case of humans and animals, that their thoughts and feelings are vibrations, and that those vibrations can affect inanimate matter, it doesn't follow that the inanimate matter that is neither human nor animal is also alive.   Yet another case of ignoratio elenchi.

Obviously you are thick.
As you can see in that video emotions and feeling through vibrations clearly build a figure that show their state of being.
This is clear evidence that vibrations are alive.
Again too bad if you can't get it.
That is your problem.
A problem that if persist will surely will take you to total lost of mental balance.

So if we express thoughts, emotions and feeling they of course must be alive.
How can be dead?

Nobody is here disputing that we ourselves are alive.

 

If one is dead also the other is dead but because we know that feelings, emotions and thoughts are alive we also conclude that vibrations are alive.  

That simply doesn't follow, though if you believe it does, I think we may have pinpointed the reason you believe what you do.  You lack brain.  Do you have any evidence that you possess a brain?

I notice that you didn't bother to attempt to define life, non-life, or consciousness.  That's probably for the best, since it's obvious that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about when you use these words.  Any inchoate attempt on your part to make sense of your use of these words would probably only confuse things more.

You also neglected to provide any scientific evidence supporting these four beliefs of yours.  Congratulations.  You fail again.

(ETA:  Technically, your claim that if one is dead, the other is also dead is an unsound premise, not a non sequitur.)

Life is everything that exist.
Non life is nothing because there is no non life anywhere.
Consciousness is what everything is made of whether there is awareness of one existence or not.

Ok. now you can go back to your usual dreaming while I go to sleep (dreamless)
Ciao.  

[surreptitious57]

As an atheist I say there is no evidence for a creator rather than there is no creator
But I think that the lack of evidence makes the existence of said creator less likely


Life and non life are not fixed states but instead points on a spectrum
A creator is not required in order for biology to come from chemistry

All of existence is transition because everything is in a constant state of motion
The transition from non life to life is but just one point on this eternal spectrum
And so it is therefore no more or no less important than any other one really is
It is only human beings who think some events are more important than others

You fail very badly mate

By saying...........The transition from non life to life...........you already pretend that a non life exist right?

Where on earth is the non life Surr?

Where is the evidence that a non life exist?
That is exactly the question that I keep on asking to yog and that she keep on avoiding

Cant you see that atheism is based only on guesses and dreams?

For the first 800 million years there was no life on Earth as chemistry was not sufficiently complex for it to have developed during this time
When it did become sufficiently complex then life evolved and it had to come from non life because biology cannot exist without chemistry

Also atheism has nothing to do with either evolution or abiogenesis

[Angrboda]

Incidentally, in reviewing several NDEs I came across the following NDE account in which the experiencer created multiple NDEs by taking the drug ketamine.  So much for your claim that NDEs cannot be caused by chemicals in the brain.  I think that's the end of any justification for believing uncorroborated NDE content.

https://www.nderf.org/Experiences/1fred_b_ketamine.html

Obviously the guy know that he did something quite wrong by trying to experience something that should only be given in a natural way by God.

As you said in the evolution thread, the content of an NDE reflects the person's prior beliefs. So all that this shows is that he had a prior belief that by using ketamine he was cheating, it doesn't demonstrate that he actually was cheating. Regardless, it shows that your repeatedly claim that chemicals in the brain cannot produce NDE experiences is wrong.

When I was about 18 I also did experienced something big with the use of LSD.
I regret I ever did that but that is past.
LSD, ketamine or many other substances are able to open to a certain degree the pineal gland where God is.
The guy himself said that is cheating and cheating prevent you from see God.
All you can see are glimpses of the outside.
In this way the consciousness is unable to leave the body as in a real NDE experience where God welcome you.

You're just mouthing more dogma that you believe but have no evidence for. Pineal gland? Leaving the body? We've already shown these beliefs of yours are bullshit.

Let's take this another direction so that I can illustrate one of the points I have about evidence from NDEs.  Let's say, for the sake of argument, that last night I dreamed that I left my body and traveled to heaven where I met God and Jesus.  They explained to me that God is the ground of being, that anything which happens in life is because He is causing it.  The explanation for why vibrations exist is because He is causing them to vibrate.  I happen to believe that the things that happen in dreams are actually real.  (And we have evidence from prophetic dreams, both in the bible [here], as well as contemporary accounts that things dreamed about do in some cases reveal things the dreamer could not have known independent of the dream.)  Now, given that I had a dream which showed me that vibrations are not alive, and that some dream content is independently corroborated, do I have justification for believing that vibrations are not alive based on this dream that I had?

Million of people dream all sort of things but those things never come through.
In very few instances dreams come through but that is the law of statistics.  

To conclude........NO.
You have no........ justification for believing that vibrations are not alive based on this pretend dream that YOU had?

And yet we could say the same things about NDEs. That you choose to support NDEs because you believe it shows reincarnation and karma, and not dreams if they contradicts what you believe, shows that all you are doing is cherry picking what evidence to accept based on what you already believe. That's not a valid form of justification and undermines your claim that what you believe is not dogma. You pick your evidence based on what you believe instead of picking what to believe based on the evidence.

---

Obviously you haven't read much of NDEs experiences or you do not believe them in any case.
If you would have you would have noticed that almost all of them talk about vibrations and how all is connected to each other.

You tried similar nonsense in the evolution thread and despite my patiently listening to you for two weeks, you failed to justify your belief that the content of NDEs reflect reality.  You want to believe that because [maybe] there is some evidence for the truth of the OBE part of an NDE, that therefore the rest of an NDE is also real.  Besides the fact that you've been presented with evidence that the OBE portion itself does not correspond with reality, you failed to provide justification for believing that the rest of it is true, for reasons running the gamut from irreconcilable NDE claims and testimony, the lack of independent verification, the cultural dependence of NDE content, the inability to distinguish from NDE content reflective of prior belief versus that reflective of reality, and your inability to justify your belief that consciousness leaves the body during an NDE.  You want to believe that because the OBE portion of an NDE may reflect reality, therefore the rest of an NDE is therefore necessarily true.  That's something you may want to believe, but not something you are justified in believing.  Wanting to believe is not justification for believing.

In addition, I'd have to see the evidence, but if all that people are doing in these NDEs is talking about everything being vibrations and everything being connected is not evidence that vibrations are alive.  That would be a case of ignoratio elenchi, nothing more.

So, yeah, failing you overcoming all these hurdles, you're on crack.

FAIL AGAIN YOG.

1) Evidence is there because people who experience these NDEs exist, and because real death and back from death were witnessed by real doctors and hospitals are also real where records are kept.

Yeah, well I'm not going to get excited until you actually produce this evidence. If it's like your prior claims, you talk big until you're asked to actually produce the goods, and then you run away.

2) Vibrations are alive because NDEs are real and because these people experienced that vibrations connect all life and all life is made of vibrations.

You've yet to show that NDEs are 'real', but it does bring up an important question. How we determine that something is real?

WRONG ONCE AGAIN YOG.


So far there is no evidence that life can come from non life.
NONE OF WHATSOEVER.

Pointing to a lack of evidence of life coming from non-life is an argument from ignorance, and so your conclusion is not justified.  If all the evidence you have that life only comes from life is that no one has managed to produce life from non-life, then you have failed.  An argument from ignorance is neither evidence for, nor reason to believe, that life only comes from life.  In addition, there is evidence in favor of the proposition that life may come from non-life.  So this is you once again simply not understanding what it would take to demonstrate your claims, and, presenting evidence that, even if true, wouldn't demonstrate your claim.  That's ignoratio elenchi yet again.

If life come from non life please produce this evidence yog.
As I already said you could win a Nobel prize as well.

You claim that I'm the one without a working brain, yet it is repeatedly you that doesn't get even the simplest of points.

Whether I can produce an example of life coming from non-life is irrelevant because that fact isn't evidence for your belief that life only comes from life.

If you don't understand that, I suggest you reread my prior response until it sinks in.

In fact all the evidence that we have so far point to.......LIFE COME FROM LIFE.

That life in some cases comes from life is not evidence for the proposition that life only comes from life.  The former does not necessarily entail the latter.

Not in some case yog.
In fact IN ALL CASES that we know.

Yes, and as far as we know, that is only some cases. You don't know that the cases we know about encompasses all cases, which is why it's an argument from ignorance, and thus doesn't support your point.

In the past and even now many people thought that matter equal to no life.
Fortunately not all people are so stupid to believe that matter is void of life.
Matter is energy-vibration as yoga say and as Einstein and other smart scientists found out.  

As I just pointed out to you, matter and energy being vibration is not support for the belief that vibrations and energy are alive.  You keep conflating that everything is vibrations with the proposition that vibrations are alive, despite my continually pointing it out to you. Motherfucking Christ you are dense!

Atheists see a rock then automatically think......there is no life in it.

After this they have even the audacity to say that they believe in science but science contradict them from top to bottom.
Energy is there and where there is energy there is consciousness.
Consciousness and energy are expressed in vibration and vibrations got to be alive to express life within.

Yet more claims that science supports you. What I don't see is any actual science. You fail again.

The rest of this is just you mouthing Ananda Marga dogma.

You can not say.........I AM AN ATHEIST........and at the same time say....... haven't made a claim in the matter.
Of course you do made a claim.
By saying I AM AN ATHEIST you imply that life does not come from a creator therefore it must pop up from non life.
Well if you do not know where this non life is or exist at all then don't you find extremely foolish to speculate that there is no creator?
That is highly stupid view.   

Last I checked, "I don't know," is still a valid answer.  It disturbs you that I am skeptical of the claims of believers.  That however is not in itself the expression of a claim.  Given that there are a billion threads on this site explaining the range of options available to an atheist,  I suggest you read some of them as you are woefully ill informed as to what atheism does entail.  As I stated, I make no claim that life came from non-life, and remain agnostic on that question.  Feel free to consult a dictionary for the meaning of 'agnostic' if you must.  Moreover, even if I did have some inclinations toward one conclusion or another, those conclusions are based on reasons and evidence, and so are not merely dogma, but justified conclusions.  Regardless, I'm also willing to accept that there might be a certain amount of faith undergirding some of my beliefs.  I'm okay with that.  You on the other hand have repeatedly emphasized that you believe that all your beliefs are justified with good reasons and evidence, and that you have no beliefs that are based simply on dogma or merely "wanting to believe something is true."  It is these latter beliefs of yours which I am challenging.  Since I do not have a corresponding belief that all the things I believe are well justified, I have nothing to defend in the matter.  Thus ends any further consideration of what I believe about the four propositions listed earlier, and we return to you being the focus of this discussion.

That is a load of BS.
To say........I AM AN ATHEIST is a claim in itself.
The very dictionary that you are always so eager to point to it clearly say that atheism is lack of God so to say that there is no God is a clear statement that require evidence.
Evidence that exist only in your dreaming mind and not anywhere else.

The fact that you are ignorant and stupid is not something I can help you with. I have made my position plain. That you do not understand it is not my problem.

Not at all yog.
I was quite happy with the EVOLUTION thread but because you gave up on that I am here now.
If you think I ever lie then show me where these lies are.

Here, here, and here, along with my demonstration and explanation why these are lies, here, here, and here, respectively.

Look here, look there but I still can not see any lies.  

Lying about lying. Gee, what a shock. Regardless, unlike you, when asked to produce evidence of my claims then I produce it. Unlike you who runs away when challenged to produce the evidence.

Christian or not Christian religions put together so many dogmas and false truth that now it has become a mountain of nonsensical and absurd thing to waste one's time and energy to go through all of them beside in several occasions I already explained how the system according to yoga works.
Low form of life are driven by instinct while in human life the instinct is checked by free will so God in this case does not usually intervene and the karma law at the end will sort out the unbalance which has been created by humans.

I don't give a flying fuck what you think about Christianity, your beliefs about Christianity are irrelevant to the question.  It wouldn't matter if the view in question were Zippy the Pinhead's view of the cause of vibration, until you refute the possibility that the vibrations' motion is caused by an external God, then you are not justified in concluding that vibrations are necessarily alive.  This is yet another case of ignoratio elenchi where, not only is your argument wrong, even if it were right and correct, it wouldn't prove what you're trying to prove!  Not only can you not put together a successful argument, you appear to have no fucking clue what a successful argument would be.  You gave the same essential response in the evolution thread, when, after a month of flailing and failing to produce anything of substance, you concluded, "I don't like Christianity, therefore the Christian God doesn't exist.  Hurr durr!"  Can you be anymore stupid?  I didn't give up on that thread.  You failed.  And the level of stupidity in your responses was getting so high that even I with my stern constitution could no longer stomach it.

How the system works "according to yoga" is irrelevant if those beliefs are based on dogma.  You don't demonstrate one unproven thing by appealing to an equally unproven thing. (Dumbass.)

 
Too bad yog.
If you could not see any evidence that vibrations are alive that is your problem.
The problem also to be left in the stone age of knowledge plus the problem to admit the evidence because this would means a total failure in your atheistic philosophy.

This doesn't in any way answer the points raised. As usual, when given questions you can't answer, you simply change the subject.

How do you differentiate between your view and the Christian view that God is causing vibrations to vibrate. The reason I don't see any evidence is because you haven't presented any.

Inorganic matter has life too.
The thing is that life in matter lie in a latent, inactive or dormant stage.
That dictionary unfortunately doesn't consider this point.
So wrong again yog.

Mrmph.  Well, that's what you're here to demonstrate.  Simply repeating dogma that you believe isn't justifying it.

And again, if you're appealing to a concept of non-life which doesn't exist in the system you are trying to prove, you are once again guilty of the fallacy of the stolen concept, your argument is thus self-contradictory and therefore self-refuting, and therefore your conclusions aren't justified.

Not contradictory at all yog.
Evolution clearly show that everything and everyone point to more and more evolution so one form of consciousness in the lower form of life turn into a more form of consciousness.
None is excluded.
Even matter want to escape her situation as seen in uranium and other miner that release energy.

It's self-refuting by definition.

The rest of this is just more babbling about things that you have no reasons nor evidence for. I really don't care about your dogma concerning evolution if that's all it is.

Uranium's behavior is not evidence that she wants anything. As I just stated, that's what you're here to show. Simply repeating the claim is pointless.

Thought is vibration.
Emotion is vibration.
Feeling is vibration.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vqM3TE5TDw8

Check at 13.15 if you don't want to see all 24.29.

I did watch the whole video, and not a single bit of it supported your claim that vibrations are alive.  The bulk of the video claimed two things, a) everything is vibration, and b) thoughts, feelings, and emotions are vibrations.  Even if I accepted the latter proposition (I don't), that would not provide support for your belief that vibrations are alive.  It's possible that in the case of humans and animals, that their thoughts and feelings are vibrations, and that those vibrations can affect inanimate matter, it doesn't follow that the inanimate matter that is neither human nor animal is also alive.   Yet another case of ignoratio elenchi.

Obviously you are thick.
As you can see in that video emotions and feeling through vibrations clearly build a figure that show their state of being.
This is clear evidence that vibrations are alive.
Again too bad if you can't get it.
That is your problem.
A problem that if persist will surely will take you to total lost of mental balance.

If you're talking about the behavior of the water droplet in the video, that is not an example of emotions and feeling building a figure. The narrator clearly says that they are applying sound vibrations to the water. It's no fucking mystery that physical vibrations from one thing (the sound source) can cause vibratory behavior in something else physical. That has nothing to do with emotions and feeling.

But even if it were emotions and feeling causing the figure in the video, that wouldn't demonstrate that vibrations in inanimate matter are alive. We already know that we who have emotions and feelings are alive. That says nothing about whether inanimate matter vibrations are alive. If our emotions and feelings are vibrations, and they can provoke vibrations in other things, well, cool! That doesn't provide any evidence for your claim that vibrations in inanimate matter are alive.

You keep trying to say that I am the one who is a fool and an idiot without a working brain, and yet it is you that keeps presenting things that don't demonstrate what you think they demonstrate. The evidence from your own behavior in this forum is that you're a fucking moron, and all your claims about my worth are just the empty trash talk of a person not possessed of any intelligence or erudition.


 

If one is dead also the other is dead but because we know that feelings, emotions and thoughts are alive we also conclude that vibrations are alive.  

That simply doesn't follow, though if you believe it does, I think we may have pinpointed the reason you believe what you do.  You lack brain.  Do you have any evidence that you possess a brain?

So, you don't have any evidence that you have a brain? No matter. I'm more interested in seeing you support your claim that if one is dead, the other is also dead. I see no reason for supposing that this is true, and suspect it's just something you pulled out of your ass because you're running out of arguments.

I notice that you didn't bother to attempt to define life, non-life, or consciousness.  That's probably for the best, since it's obvious that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about when you use these words.  Any inchoate attempt on your part to make sense of your use of these words would probably only confuse things more.

You also neglected to provide any scientific evidence supporting these four beliefs of yours.  Congratulations.  You fail again.

(ETA:  Technically, your claim that if one is dead, the other is also dead is an unsound premise, not a non sequitur.)

Life is everything that exist.
Non life is nothing because there is no non life anywhere.

So, when you say that vibrations are alive, what you are really saying is that vibrations are everything? I don't have a problem with that. However, given that definition, the statement that vibrations are alive isn't support for your view of evolution. So you've essentially gutted your own claim. So what reason do we have for believing that rocks evolve into plants and so on, again?

Consciousness is what everything is made of whether there is awareness of one existence or not.

The dictionary defines consciousness as, "the state of being awake and aware of one's surroundings." If what you say is true, then rocks are aware, while at the same time they are not aware. I should've known better than to indulge you. When left to your own devices, you produce nonsensical shit.

Regardless, if you're still claiming that something which exists in human minds also exists in rocks, you'll need a better definition than this. I suggest we stick with dictionary definitions, so that everybody can follow along. According to the dictionary, life has properties that rocks do not. Consciousness is a property that rocks do not have. If you mean something else by these words, such as LRConsciousness, then you'll have to show that whatever that is, it exists in both humans and rocks. Until you do, your beliefs about the evolution of consciousness are just worthless dogma.

Ok. now you can go back to your usual dreaming while I go to sleep (dreamless)

Who are you kidding, you've been asleep your whole life.

[Divinity]

The best argument for God IMO is that there could be something out there beyond our comprehension. The question is: Why call it god at all? A Creator doesn't have to be a God.

But if you want to argue for a specific god, you're shit out of luck. None of the gods described in any of the religions around today stack up at all. They're all worthless pieces of shit and so are a lot of their followers.

[Edwardo Piet]

The best argument for God IMO is that there could be something out there beyond our comprehension.  The question is: Why call it god at all?  A Creator doesn't have to be a God.

But if you want to argue for a specific god, you're shit out of luck.  None of the gods described in any of the religions around today stack up at all.  They're all worthless pieces of shit and so are a lot of their followers.

I'm sure there is something out there beyond our comprehension. I'm sure we'll never be able to find the first cause because even when we find the first knowable cause that's different to the first cause.

But that doesn't have to be God or even a creator of any kind. Seems misleading to think of a cause as a creator when no intent was involved.