ok i started another thread and every one jumped on me because i was trying to take the theory of evolution out of the mix and most here seem to believe in it so i will just say it.
the theory of major evolution is crap!
the theory is falling apart.
Hi Julia - here is a good explanation of losing our sense of smell. I like the suggested idea that since we walk upright we have less need of a close ground smelling sensory organ.
http://evoanth.wordpress.com/2012/11/15/our-sense-of-smell-is-devolving/
ok i started another thread and every one jumped on me because i was trying to take the theory of evolution out of the mix and most here seem to believe in it so i will just say it.
the theory of major evolution is crap!
the theory is falling apart.
Julia - if humans were designed we would not function as we do. We would not have lost our vitamin creating ability, our sense of smell would not have been reduced, our dna would not contain copy errors, genes would be more neatly arranged,our chomosone 2 would not be a fusion between two chromosones with the the telomeres fusion point recorded for all to see midway through the chromosone etc. Design shows economy of effort to achieve specified purpose. All life shows the hallmarks of evolutionary adaptation to changing pressures rather than design to meet unchanging requirements.
i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.
he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.
finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?
Each of us carries a representation of our reality in our heads and it is a totally constructed reality (sound , pictures, memories etc. are all electrical impules, nothing in our brain is playing a little media centre with real speakers and an lcd screen) and that includes our constructed relationships and perceptions of each other. When my wife sees me she does not have an actual me living inside her noggin but a set of neural pathways and electro-chemical reactions describing her view of me. Just as a painting is not the original, neither is our concept of reality.
A conceptual God absolutely exists in the mind of each believer. Most of us here at one stage had a mentally 'real' god in our heads. This god talked to us (via feelings, intuitions or for the select few via actual voices or visions) and we conversed back in various types of prayer and devotion. This inner god absolutely exists but it is a lone god with a beliver of one. The outer god (i.e. a real god existing independently of the imagination who exists independent of human thought) can never be this god of the imagination any more than a painting is a real vase of sunflowers. The proof of my existence is my material presence and its material relationship with the physical world. There are many conceptual versions of me (my mother has one, each of my kids and so on) but only I am real. Each conceptual version of me is different (my wife sees me as a hot , to-die-for, lover with buns of steel while my kids see me as fat, goofy guy who dresses like a scarecrow.) The god in each believer's head is different. No two believers have the same concept of God and the subjective descriptions of their god is next to useless in ascertaining whether a real person called Zeus, with magical powers and some awesome Greek real estate, actually lives.
Proof of me is not found in memories of those who know me. It is found in my material impact on the world. To prove that little green aliens exist we would need to have physical contact. Physical contact is recordable (cameras, audio recordings etc.) Even telepathy would be recordable (we might need to get some new tools to do it) - if it was actually happenning. Thus we must not pretend that god is found in subjective , anecdotal- my prayers were answered, I know love, my god shows me visions type scenarios - but if there is any god(s) they will be found in material ways. The god of the old testament did tangible real things that can be checked (global flood, no death before Adam, creation rather than evolution etc) and since these physical interactions have been proven not to have happened we can safely reject the OT god. The NT god did some recordable things and we can see if they happened (foundational stories such as the census in the nativity and the supposed rulers alive during that story can be checked - guess what didn't happen.) If we limit ourselves to physical interaction stories we can see time and time again that certain biblical events simply did not/do not happen (no mass opening of the graves with lots of resurrections - no return of a flying messiah within a 70 year generation - no miraculous healings shown as signs of those who follow 'him' and so on)
We are left with imagined gods who absolutely do not interact with reality and therefore are simply personal (powerful and life changing!) mental constructs. Mine radically chanaged my behaviour and lifestyle - this response of mine to a mental image does not prove my God and for any believer who is saying 'There is the proof of God' you must realise that my mental god caused me to preach mormonism door to door and perform masonic style rituals in a temple. JWs mental gods cause them to endanger life due to blood transfusions . Muslim gods encourage a small minority to die for the cause.
The whole debate rests upon each person's willingness to question themselves. This is not a momentary epiphany but an ongoing , learnt, habit. To provide proof of your God you must have evidence of physical interaction otherwise you MUST concede your image of god is constructed entirely by your imagination since nothing external to you has occurred.
the independent neswpaper uk - tues 18th june 2013 .
the bad science scandal - how fact fabrication is damaging uk's global research name.
after a string of high profile cases, a new agreement between scientists and the people who fund them aims to usher in a new era of .
So SBF how's your lifestyle since you turned your back on science and it's fruits? A good faithist like you will undoubtably enjoy praying away the worlds pain and ills , your food will be grown from good old heirloom low yield seed stock from the 18th century and will be fertilised in the three crop rotation system ( unless it's discovery by trial and error is too scientific for you in which case I'm sure you also will just pray over your hand sown wheat and tares .) I hope you don't sell your soul to the fraudulent scientific world by having cars , radios or computers. Your posts here are simply miracles woven into the fabric of this magic world caused by your incredible mustard seed faith.
Science is a method of approaching truth that is unsurpassed by any other process devised by the imagination of man. It is not a church, faith or composite whole claiming divine perfection or the right to dictate how the gullible live their lives. There will always be fraudsters who pretend, for fame and profit, to have knowledge. Thank goodness the scientific process has an inbuilt fraud detection process allowing incorrect and fraudulent claims to rapidly be exposed in a matter of years unlike bloody faith based religions who have to carve their way across millions of dead and dying and over thousands of years to realise their holy wars are just barbarism and that they've all been fooled by the priests and the pious idiots who see magic in the shadows and are so arrogant as to think divinity speaks through them.
I trust the scientific method over the opinions on reality of a supernaturalist - every time.
i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.
he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.
finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?
Qc - the problem with black and white faith statements like yours is that you need to be able to back them up with facts. Here are some to help.
Fact 1: Evolution is nothing to do with abiogenesis
Fact 2: Evolution - as a broad theory - is proven absolutely. The multitude of various mechanisms at work within evolution are now being explored by scientific methods and we have lots to learn.
Fact 3: Taking the bible as an example of faith based knowledge it cannot be used in any way to perform scientific enquiry because it bases all causitive action in supernatural events that cannot be tested. In addition to talking gibberish about such made up historical events like the global flood it also contains easily disproven concepts such as the firmament.
Fact 4: In the absence of any proof you have failed to provide an adequate justification for your imagined being and must stand alongside other unprovable whimsical fantacists like the Mormons, Muslims and Hellenists. Unless you can justify why your mind and ergo your imagination is superior to the majority of mankind (the ones who have believed in other gods than yours) then yours is as valid as theirs.
is it possible to be friends with a woman, text her, call her, etc and not be physically attracted to her?.
There is almost always an element of attraction between sexes , that's nature. It's possible to be very friendly with non spouse members of the opposite sex and have no actual feelings however, it is highly unlikely that both sides of the equation are equally disinterested in anything other than platonic friendship. How do you think affairs start? Very, very dangerous but also possibly innocent. My wife kiboshed an online chat relationship of mine with an ex uni friend which although innocent on my part was worrying to my wife. So now it's just the odd public Facebook post. Safe and sound, no one gets hurt.
does anyone find it odd that it seems there's less of a vocal apostate movement for scientology and mormons.
i'm getting this from google - i can't seem to find any majour forums like this one, or websites that are regularly updated exposing doctrines etc.. there is stuff out there, but from my search at least it doesn't seem to be as much as jw's.. strange considering mormons have 13 mill (?).
scientologists 'claim' 8 mill.. .
i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.
he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.
finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?
http://hinduism.about.com/b/2012/09/24/the-ganesha-milk-miracle.htm
If Jesus is proven by wine then why not Ganesh by milk
Hindus have a supernatural bridge. beat that christians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam's_Bridge
They found the 12000 year old city of Krishna
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQZFS9Hij0M
And did you know that Jesus was a Hindu and they have his actual grave?
..and they have science on their side - they argue for the big bang!
(1john2:22,23)who is the liar if it is not the one that denies that jesus is the christ?
this is the antichrist, the one that denies the father and the son.
23 everyone that denies the son does not have the father either.
Mormons believe Michael is Adam and Noah is Gabriel.
i have seen debates and shizzle about god or not god etc etc.. i was even confronted by an aggressive and trheatening muslim in the street, who was angry that i wanted proof that god existed.
he ranted on a load of old b0110cks about 'hell' and stuff.
finally he yelled at me: 'do you want god to write your name in the sky?
Sam - this thread is not a out how smart men are. Since we are now entering an era of genetic engineering I suspect we will be able to create all sorts of life forms within a few years. You must know that this argument holds no water. If God was a designer why did he do such a rubbish job of the human body? From a design pov it's atrocious. Unless god is a drunk we can only explain the absolute lack of design as adaptation of features to perform functions rather than features designed to perform functions. One very simple example is the collocation of the food and breathing pipe work leading to pointless choking deaths.
Tec - can you doubt that your experiences are objectively real, can you conceive of the possibility that you are fooled 100%? I suspect not, as you've alluded to many times you would not doubt your Christ. In fact imo you've moved into a religious phase where you have used mantra like phrases that don't actually mean anything ( Christ is light/love etc.) but do effectively stop a thought process. I will wager that your Christ will absolutely refuse to reveal a cure for cancer while millions die from it BUT will happily allow us, humanity, to inch towards medical solutions for these very illnesses Christ psssively ignor es. What I'm saying is that this internal dialogue with an imagined being is easy to understand ( I used to do it, Cofty did and anyone with a good imagination and a belief set regularly achieves whether it be with a saint, a deceased ancestor or some divine being.) The secret is to revealing the truth of the source ( our own mind) is in the quality of the information 'revealed', only if you can give quantifiable, testable info not available to your mind do you even have a hope of suggesting you aren't the source. We know over our long discussions here you have never been able to do so though your 'baby teeth contain the soul' revelation/idea was very inventive.
