Religion

[GarvinTheGreat]

I love how Garvin is trying to act like a badass.

Never heard that one before. Thx

BOT for a second after some research agnostic sounds pretty good to me.

But Garvin seriously it's 1:57 A.M. and I'm really beyond caring what I say to you

Where do you live? Wait... What are you doing up at 1:57?  Anyway later. My shows on.

[Noodle]

Never heard that one before. Thx

Well it wasn't exactly a compliment.

[Skiitzzox220]

I love how Garvin is trying to act like a badass.

Never heard that one before. Thx

BOT for a second after some research agnostic sounds pretty good to me.

But Garvin seriously it's 1:57 A.M. and I'm really beyond caring what I say to you

Where do you live? Wait... What are you doing up at 1:57?  Anyway later. My shows on.

UK mate, I swear you're just on this forum to annoy the hell outta everyone and you really are the only person I know who would be proud to be the lowest repped person on the forum

[NFX]

Garvin, in all seriousness, shut up and stop trying to act tough, because it's not working at all. Skiitz, don't do something that you'll regret later. It's 2am, and I don't want to bother with anything like this.

[Skiitzzox220]

Garvin, in all seriousness, shut up and stop trying to act tough, because it's not working at all. Skiitz, don't do something that you'll regret later. It's 2am, and I don't want to bother with anything like this.

I guess you're right.....

[frezal]

Can ordinary human jump down from the sky?  Yeah I thought so.  There's nothing ordinary or rational about that.

How can I be sure he jumped down from the sky? How can I be sure the guy doesn't have technology I don't know about? How can I be sure what I saw actually happened?

[Meganerdbomb]

Can ordinary human jump down from the sky?  Yeah I thought so.  There's nothing ordinary or rational about that.

How can I be sure he jumped down from the sky? How can I be sure the guy doesn't have technology I don't know about? How can I be sure what I saw actually happened?

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

[123savethewhales]

Can ordinary human jump down from the sky?  Yeah I thought so.  There's nothing ordinary or rational about that.

How can I be sure he jumped down from the sky? How can I be sure the guy doesn't have technology I don't know about? How can I be sure what I saw actually happened?

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Worst part is that somehow he can holds strong faith in Atheism.

These kind of logic only ends in epistemological solipsism.  If you cannot be sure what you see ever happen, you cannot know the external world exist with certainty.

Some people like to compare God with spaghetti monster.  If I saw a spaghetti monster jump down from the sky and kick Frezal in the balls, I will believe it exists.  And I think Frezal will have much less problem accepting a spaghetti monster exist then Jesus.

[Hydro]

Oh hey, looks like a flame war is brewing up.

*observes from a safe distance*

[Enigm@]

Oh hey, looks like a flame war is brewing up.

*observes from a safe distance*

We could be bunker-buddies. :D

[Hydro]

Oh hey, looks like a flame war is brewing up.

*observes from a safe distance*

We could be bunker-buddies. :D

k

[frezal]

Worst part is that somehow he can holds strong faith in Atheism.

It isn't faith. I don't have an active belief in no gods; I have been given no reason to assume one or more gods exist. The same could be said about Sasquatch.

These kind of logic only ends in epistemological solipsism.  If you cannot be sure what you see ever happen, you cannot know the external world exist with certainty.

Whether or not reality is real doesn't matter. Thus far, nothing has happened that cannot be adequately explained by science (even if it takes a while to find an answer that works). Not once has magic been the sole explanation, or the most logical.

Some people like to compare God with spaghetti monster.  If I saw a spaghetti monster jump down from the sky and kick Frezal in the balls, I will believe it exists.

Even though it's far more likely to be a hoax or a hallucination? When you see a strange light in the sky, do you also assume aliens without considering explanations that we know to exist?

And I think Frezal will have much less problem accepting a spaghetti monster exist then Jesus.

I can make stupid statements as well: I think 123savethewhales will have much less of a problem licking his mother's cunt than accurately describing my beliefs.

Spaghetti monsters have the same inherent problems as Bronze Age zombies. Considering my stances whenever a supernatural subject is approached, why would you assume I would have different standards for different kinds of crazy?

[Enigm@]

Hmm...ignorance isn't bliss in 123's case.

[Meganerdbomb]

Even though it's far more likely to be a hoax or a hallucination? When you see a strange light in the sky, do you also assume aliens without considering explanations that we know to exist?

But assuming you're perfectly sane and not under the influence of any drugs, the chances of it being a hallucination aren't all that high. There's a pretty big difference between seeing a light in the sky and being kicked in the balls. The latter is not so easy to hallucinate.

[Hydro]

When you see a strange light in the sky, do you also assume aliens without considering explanations that we know to exist?

More often I comment to myself about how shiny it is.

[123savethewhales]

Worst part is that somehow he can holds strong faith in Atheism.

It isn't faith. I don't have an active belief in no gods; I have been given no reason to assume one or more gods exist. The same could be said about Sasquatch.

Right because something floating down from the sky and kicking you in the balls is not a reason.

If I have an experience like that, I will need pretty good evidence to disprove what I see.

These kind of logic only ends in epistemological solipsism.  If you cannot be sure what you see ever happen, you cannot know the external world exist with certainty.

Whether or not reality is real doesn't matter. Thus far, nothing has happened that cannot be adequately explained by science (even if it takes a while to find an answer that works). Not once has magic been the sole explanation, or the most logical.

Try dark matter, dark energy, superposition, entanglement, Schrodinger's Cat, emergence of consciousness, complex systems, economics, etc.  Yes we know so much that none of us can learn them all in one lifetime, but that does not mean science explain "everything".

Also, how is gravity is qualitatively different from mysticism?  Yes this is a serious question.  Your dogma might immediately reject this because gravity is "so science" today, but when Newton first announce this many scientist attack it as mysticism because it is just some attractive force that exists.  Yes we can put equations on it, we know how strong it is, but even now nobody has a clue why gravity, or mass, exist.  Nor can we alter/manipulate it in any way.  The LHC has yet to find the Higgs Bozon.  So it's just some force, that's just how it is, and you just have to live with it.

So if you live in Harry Potters world and you discover magical forces that you can quantify, calculate, put into books, and systematically channel, how is that differ from the 4 fundamental forces of gravity/electromagnetism/strong/weak?  We explain off the 4 forces as "property of space", as well as random particles popping in and out of existence in the quantum scale.  So why can't we have a 5th force, or 6th force, if by adding them in can quantitatively explain a bunch of unexplainable phenomenon?

Things we cannot yet explain, such as dark energy, =/= supernatural.  Even things that are fundamentally unexplainable, such as the world smaller then Planck size, or the universe beyond the Hubble sphere,  also =/= supernatural.

Fortunately some scientists are more open minded.  They are willing to accept new forces so long as they can be observed/quantified.  They fight powerful social dogmas that used the "we can explain most things" argument to discredit their finding, and through their victory we have stuff like cellphones and GPS.

Some people like to compare God with spaghetti monster.  If I saw a spaghetti monster jump down from the sky and kick Frezal in the balls, I will believe it exists.

Even though it's far more likely to be a hoax or a hallucination? When you see a strange light in the sky, do you also assume aliens without considering explanations that we know to exist?

And how many seconds does it take for you to come to this conclusion?  Have you any similar experiences in the past in which to draw reliable conclusions on?  Given that you don't, what scientific law do you use to calculate the likelihood of hoax, hallucination, or a living monster?  Why is an unidentified living organism unlikely given we find new organisms in caves, rivers, and deep sea everyday?  Please don't throw probabilities around.  Probability testing is a pain staking process that takes time to calculating/plug into excel all those things, follow by statistical analysis.  Your gut feeling does not equal logic.

Seeing some flashing light and literally seeing a spaghetti monster kicking you in the balls are 2 very different things.  When I see flashing light, I assume I see flashing light.  Any further assumptions are mere fantasies that can neither be verified by or hold relevant to me.  As such I do not care.

Try having an alien mother ship beaming down green dudes shooting lasers at me.  Yes, I will assume they are aliens without considering other explanations.  Hey it might be a hoax too, but I think whoever just stands there and hope the laser is fake are retarded.  I believe my eyes enough to not take that kind of chances.

I will not respond to the other 2 because you resort to personal attacks, which is a clear sign that you ran out of intelligent things to say.

[Scourge of teh Galaxy]

I was going to bang Skiit and Garvy's  heads together, but it looks like they've simmered down now

[123savethewhales]

Hmm...ignorance isn't bliss in 123's case.

Well the context isn't "rather you are an Atheist now", but "rather you will remain an Atheist after you saw Jesus float down from the sky, kick you in the balls, and float back up into the sky".

I think that is enough experience for a serious investigation.  And rather that is a hoax/hallucination/alien/military testing/God/etc remains to be observed, not assumed.  Outright rejecting the experience because of Atheism is blind faith by any definition.

Edit:  Yes this topic has always bothered me, so I am going to rant.  People nowadays seem to just spam words like logic, chances, rational, real, really, truth, and all that other junk to reinforce their existing beliefs.  They don't realize the the rational process takes

1.  Time to process
2.  Observation/test to confirm

You can't claim to use logic when you spend half a second and without any observations/test.

Believe it or not I spend a lot of time investigating the process of thinking and the use/limitations of logic.  Logic isn't everything, it is a pattern recognition process that mixes facts with believe systems to predicts the future.  It works only because the world we live in is relatively stable and functions under stable laws.  If tomorrow the world suddenly changed a lot your logic will be useless unless it can also adopt.  This is why people who use their pre-existing logic in gaming stays n00b and fail so hard, because game mechanics can deviates a lot from real life.

The worst is still the term "Common Sense": how much I hate that term and anyone who claims to rely on it.

I am just wondering, am I making sense to ANYONE here?

[Squirrel_Monkey]

Yeah, for the 20% that I read. Then I realise that it's not particularly worth my time. (Sorry, but it isn't)

[G.K.]

I am just wondering, am I making sense to ANYONE here?

I think so.