Gladring

Joined

• started 35 topics
• posted 223 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Gladring

• 
  45

  Atheists/Theists: What is the best argument FOR theism (a God's existence) you have heard?

  by Spook in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have lived for the last 3 years with two phd philosophers as roomates, both in the last year of their dissertation at reputable institutions (notre dame, penn/uic respectively).

  they are both moderate semi-christian theists after having been fundamentalists as youths.

  i have a sceince and engineering background and am a naturalist atheist former jw.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gladring

  arrrrghhhhhh!!!!!!

  'tis why I sleeps with an eyepatch and bandana..........

  nice to see the somalians doing their bit for global warming

  grrr, and burrrrrrrrrr
• 
  45

  Atheists/Theists: What is the best argument FOR theism (a God's existence) you have heard?

  by Spook in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have lived for the last 3 years with two phd philosophers as roomates, both in the last year of their dissertation at reputable institutions (notre dame, penn/uic respectively).

  they are both moderate semi-christian theists after having been fundamentalists as youths.

  i have a sceince and engineering background and am a naturalist atheist former jw.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gladring

  I think I've expressed this before but anyway - as I made my way out of JW land, I absorbed loads of information on the god subject. I still love listening to debates/discussions between prominent atheists/theists. During that time, as I began to realise that belief in god was no longer defensible, I actually found a great sadness that even the best theologians and church leaders and laiety could not come up with a credible defense for belief in god.

  I think that one of the hardest beliefs to shake is when a person believes that they have personally felt God's presence or been touched by his noodly appendage.

  Also, I have heard Dawkins answer this question by saying that the argument from design is probably the most convincing, at least superficially.
• 
  150

  Article: The Atheist's Dilemma

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  campos: the atheist's dilemmaby paul camposwhy is stanley fish so much smarter than richard dawkins?

  that question occurred to me last week, while attending a lecture at which fish, the well-known literary and legal theorist, did the thing he always does, which is to make the following point over and over again:.

  "no believer will find his faith shaken by evidence that is evidence only in the light of assumptions he does not share and considers flatly wrong.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gladring

  RAmen Brother Damocles, well said.
• 
  40

  What is the most damning scripture in the Bible?

  by viva in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  for many years, i had serious issues with alot of scriptures.

  the creation account, the flood, jonah in the whale, etc.

  scriptures that are scientifically falsifiable.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gladring

  For me -

  (2 Samuel 12:15-18) . . .And Jehovah proceeded to deal a blow to the child that the wife of U?ri′ah had borne to David so that it took sick. 16 And David began to seek the [true] God in behalf of the boy, and David went on a strict fast and came in and spent the night and lay down on the earth. 17 So the older men of his house stood up over him to raise him up from the earth, but he did not consent and did not take bread in company with them. 18 And it came about on the seventh day that the child gradually died.. . .

  Oh, and I hate the Song of Solomon.
• 
  150

  Article: The Atheist's Dilemma

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  campos: the atheist's dilemmaby paul camposwhy is stanley fish so much smarter than richard dawkins?

  that question occurred to me last week, while attending a lecture at which fish, the well-known literary and legal theorist, did the thing he always does, which is to make the following point over and over again:.

  "no believer will find his faith shaken by evidence that is evidence only in the light of assumptions he does not share and considers flatly wrong.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gladring

  Yup, number 1 of course. Scientists aren't totally stupid, they've done the research and whilst there are big gaps the evidence is consistent with their theories. Otherwise, why would they be saying there's not a smidgen of evidence for little green men?

  Are you ready to answer the question now?

  Yes I'm ready. If my scenario 1 is what you have in mind, then no this is not evidence for ET.

  I must say that, if you believe that your moon scenario has any resemblence to life on earth, you are labouring under many misconceptions. May I ask your view of evolution? Do you accept the idea of common descent? Have you looked into the genetic/DNA evidence for common descent?

  In your replies to Caedes you (and he) speak of a human-engineered living thing made of organic molecules. You claim that if you looked at such a thing that one would not be able to distinguish the humanly created from the naturally evolved. I must say here that you are flat wrong about this. When looking at biological organisms which have evolved, we can see the history of changes in the anatomy and genetic make up (genetic drift, vestigial organs ...). If a human created a living biological thing, we could not help but leave our fingerprints all over it. Even if you care to imagine some distant future where we have the resources at hand to create a biological organism with its own fake backstory to make it look like it evolved, this will not help your case. Does the God you imagine create life in such a way as to remove any trace of his hand in his handiwork? Does he then abandon his handiwork to the whims of time and forget all about it? Why bother with a God like that.

  I've had some family stuff to sort out, so I've been away from home for a couple of days. It's nice to be missed tho'.
• 
  150

  Article: The Atheist's Dilemma

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  campos: the atheist's dilemmaby paul camposwhy is stanley fish so much smarter than richard dawkins?

  that question occurred to me last week, while attending a lecture at which fish, the well-known literary and legal theorist, did the thing he always does, which is to make the following point over and over again:.

  "no believer will find his faith shaken by evidence that is evidence only in the light of assumptions he does not share and considers flatly wrong.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gladring

  Barefoot said:

  So, given that there is an alternative explanation for our nanobots (Darwinian evolution), would you consider the discovery of advanced nanotechnology on the moon to be admissable evidence for alien intelligence?

  and:

  Again, no, the nanobots never were created and therefore are not artificial.

  and again:

  Yes, they found a wealth of evidence that the nanobots evolved - didn't I mention that?

  I think you are answering your own question here. If they evolved, were not designed and were not created, then I'd have to say that that is not evidence for alien intelligence.

  I think that you need to redefine your scenario. Could you tell me whether it fits my scenario 1 or 2 in my previous post:

  1- We dig down through the layers of moon rock and find more and more simple "nanobots" and also differing, distinct living and fossilised machines that fit in to a tree of life. Further examination shows that the nanobots are related to all other machines on the planet. It looks like these evolved. The more we study, the more we find out.

  2- We search the moon and find that the nanobots arrived suddenly, more or less as we find them now - complex, fully functioning. Then we may conclude that they were left behind by some intelligent beings or try to find some explanation for them.
• 
  150

  Article: The Atheist's Dilemma

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  campos: the atheist's dilemmaby paul camposwhy is stanley fish so much smarter than richard dawkins?

  that question occurred to me last week, while attending a lecture at which fish, the well-known literary and legal theorist, did the thing he always does, which is to make the following point over and over again:.

  "no believer will find his faith shaken by evidence that is evidence only in the light of assumptions he does not share and considers flatly wrong.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gladring

  Nanobots - let me take a stab at this.

  If we were studying the moon and found some complex, self-replicating "nanobots" , I would think we would face one of two scenarios:

  1- We dig down through the layers of moon rock and find more and more simple "nanobots" and also differing, distinct living and fossilised machines that fit in to a tree of life. Further examination shows that the nanobots are related to all other machines on the planet. It looks like these evolved. The more we study, the more we find out.

  2- We search the moon and find that the nanobots arrived suddenly, more or less as we find them now - complex, fully functioning. Then we may conclude that they were left behind by some intelligent beings or try to find some explanation for them.

  Like one of the other posters, I'd like to see a credible anti-atheist argument - I really would. The more time that passes and the more evidence that is uncovered, the fewer gaps there are for gods to hide in.
• 
  150

  Article: The Atheist's Dilemma

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  campos: the atheist's dilemmaby paul camposwhy is stanley fish so much smarter than richard dawkins?

  that question occurred to me last week, while attending a lecture at which fish, the well-known literary and legal theorist, did the thing he always does, which is to make the following point over and over again:.

  "no believer will find his faith shaken by evidence that is evidence only in the light of assumptions he does not share and considers flatly wrong.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gladring

  Why does he [Dawkins] feel it necessary to place adverts on London buses saying God doesn't exist...?

  Dawkins did not place those adverts, but he did lend his public support to them and donated generously to the charity that did. Also those adverts do not say that God does not exist, they say "There's probably no god, now stop worrying and enjoy your life."

  I suspect Dawkins only claims he is a 6 because he knows that 7 is scientifically untenable.

  Exactly!

  In addition to PrimateDave's comments about the moon nano-bots: - the scientist would probably go, well who made the Aliens then? Not to go into great detail right now, but a designed object would look very different to an evolved object.
• 
  150

  Article: The Atheist's Dilemma

  by BurnTheShips in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  campos: the atheist's dilemmaby paul camposwhy is stanley fish so much smarter than richard dawkins?

  that question occurred to me last week, while attending a lecture at which fish, the well-known literary and legal theorist, did the thing he always does, which is to make the following point over and over again:.

  "no believer will find his faith shaken by evidence that is evidence only in the light of assumptions he does not share and considers flatly wrong.".

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gladring

  Different magesteria.

  I don't agree. Religious believers like to think their beliefs are based on evidence - until that evidence is shown to be false or unreliable. At that point they fall back to the non-overlapping magesteria argument.

  If a tomb was found in Jerusalem containing bones of a 33 year old male who had been crucified some 2000 years ago, and that DNA from the bone marrow showed that he had no biological father - you can be pretty sure that beliefs would soon become evidence based!
• 
  8

  UN: Anti-Blasphemy Resolution

  by Gladring in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  anyone heard of this:.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ji-qdc5zyd4.

  this could affect our right to criticise the wtbts or any other pseudo-religious bs.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Gladring

  Anyone heard of this:

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ji-qdC5zYd4

  This could affect our right to criticise the WTBTS or any other pseudo-religious BS