Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,808 Year: 3,065/9,624 Month: 910/1,588 Week: 93/223 Day: 4/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Belief in God is scientific.
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


(3)
Message 11 of 262 (695133)
04-03-2013 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by divermike1974
04-03-2013 3:57 AM


My brain is a stand alone version of the most complex thing in the known universe.
What does that even mean? What are you considering to be "the most complex thing in the universe"?
Humanity more or less classes the brain as a computer
Ahh, you've taken an analogy literally. The brain (human or otherwise) merely has similar capabilities or qualities to that of a computer. One of these the ability to process information.
and lots of these computers independently and through a myriad of experiences called life come to the conclusion that there is a God. More people - brains - computers come to the answer 'God' than those that come to the answer 'no God'.
Just because there are a lot of people that BELIEVE something doesn't make it so. At one time A LOT of people believed in witchcraft in some form or another (they either believed themselves witches or believed them worthy of burning at the stake). Also alchemy. What say you to those claims?
My question is why isn't the human belief in God classed as scientific?
Define scientific and we can tell you precisely why human beliefs are antithetical to science.
When the most powerful computer network in the known universe comes to the answer 'God'?
The most powerful computer network is not the human brain. Can your brain transfer even a single math problem to someone across the world? I can with an actual computer. I can even relay that information to someone that doesn't speak my language. Can your brain do that? Can your brain perform mathematic algorithms in a split second?
You put far too much stock into the human brain when even a home desktop computer, or even my smart phone, is far more efficient, yet my computer is atheist.
Define some of your terms then this discussion can move along at a better pace.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by divermike1974, posted 04-03-2013 3:57 AM divermike1974 has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


(1)
Message 41 of 262 (695181)
04-03-2013 4:05 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by divermike1974
04-03-2013 4:01 PM


Re: Your brain gets too much wrong
'Science' funny word ain't it.
Would you like to define it? Also,you seem fond of the word complex so it would help if you defined that as well.
:abe:
I make this request as it appears, to me at least, that there is a disconnect between what you think words mean and how you use them with how most of your respondants are using them and how they are actually defined.
Edited by hooah212002, : clarity

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by divermike1974, posted 04-03-2013 4:01 PM divermike1974 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by divermike1974, posted 04-03-2013 4:11 PM hooah212002 has replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


(2)
Message 44 of 262 (695184)
04-03-2013 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by divermike1974
04-03-2013 4:11 PM


Re: Your brain gets too much wrong
Jeez, calm down there partner. Was that really called for? I did not make the accusation that you don't know what they mean but that you seem to be using them in a rather obscure fashion. Take the title and subject of this thread: "Belief in god is scientific". Beliefs by their very nature are UNscientific. Your very first response by Theodoric was that ofd requesting clarification and you've failed so far to do so. I was merely furthering that request.
If, instead, you would like to name call and be a general cunt, I can surely play that game (I am better at that one anyways).

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by divermike1974, posted 04-03-2013 4:11 PM divermike1974 has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 55 of 262 (695195)
04-03-2013 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by Percy
04-03-2013 4:32 PM


First, you claim that whatever has the majority consensus is true.
It's semantics, but it seems like he is saying that since it has majority consensus, that makes it scientific, not true. This is a far mroe egregious claim, but we shouldn't misattribute his wrong notions.

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by Percy, posted 04-03-2013 4:32 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 62 of 262 (695202)
04-03-2013 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by divermike1974
04-03-2013 4:48 PM


Define computer. I assure you I do not house one inside my cranium, but I AM using one to type these messages (further: I would not be able to use this message board with JUST my brain computer thing). If I did, I would think that I would be able to calculate pi further than 4 digits using only my brain computer thing.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by divermike1974, posted 04-03-2013 4:48 PM divermike1974 has not replied

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 801 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 146 of 262 (695472)
04-05-2013 2:20 PM
Reply to: Message 138 by Ossat
04-05-2013 11:02 AM


I don't agree with the idea that something can be considered scientific just because the majority believes in it.
Then shouldn't you be addressing the topic on page 1 instead of arguing against evolution? This topic is not about evolution, the origin of life NOR is evolution even about, let alone require, the origin of life.
Why has no one moderated this thread? We all know that if it were an "evolutionist" going about sullying up a religious thread, the banhammer would strike so furious that it would make the Great and Mighty Thor jealous. I could somewhat understand Mike the Wiz coming in because he was sorta helping OP (in his trollish own little way), but this member is just spouting gibberish that isn't even remotely in the same universe as the OP (not that the topic originator did a good job of that either, but I digress....). Are creationists so rare a commodity that they can literally just come in and say whatever creationist mumbo jumbo in whatever topic they choose? There are at least 3 other topics (when sorting by "all topics") that he could enter/participate in and actually be on topic.
Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

"Science is interesting, and if you don't agree you can fuck off." -Dawkins

This message is a reply to:
 Message 138 by Ossat, posted 04-05-2013 11:02 AM Ossat has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024