Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 158 (8147 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-20-2014 1:58 PM
78 online now:
Chatting now:  Jon, Phat
Newest Member: MikeManea
Post Volume:
Total: 738,132 Year: 23,973/28,606 Month: 1,274/1,786 Week: 136/423 Day: 46/90 Hour: 15/11


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
45
6
78
...
32NextFF
Author Topic:   Subjective Evidence of Gods
Straggler
Member
Posts: 9963
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 76 of 468 (624883)
07-20-2011 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by GDR
07-19-2011 7:15 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
Firstly - The idea that anyone scientific, especially Einstein himself, would describe his imaginings as "evidence" is preposterous. As much as anything Einstein's insight was to fore-go subjective notions of common sense and follow the math to wherever it led. This approach, based on the objectivity of mathematics, has yielded numerous subsequent results. From the discovery of anti-matter as predicted by Dirac to black holes and Hawking radiation. The idea that conclusions of God's existence based on subjective "evidence" are are remotely equivalent to mathematical extrapolations of known results is completely unfounded.

GDR writes:

On the basis that neither of us can prove whether we are right or not.

But proof doesn't come into it.

That humans are deeply prone to invoking supernatural entities to explain various phenomenon is empirically and reliably evidenced. That god(s) actually exist is entirely un-evidenced. Or poorly evidenced at best

GDR writes:

The evidence remains the same. It is our subjective views on how to interpret the evidence which is at odds.

No. The subjective evidence you cite in favour of gods is demonstrably unreliable as compared to the evidence that suggests that humans can and will invoke supernatural answers to seemingly inexplicable questions.

Not all forms of evidence are equally valid and thus not all conclusions are equally valid.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by GDR, posted 07-19-2011 7:15 PM GDR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by GDR, posted 07-20-2011 5:06 PM Straggler has responded

Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1053 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


Message 77 of 468 (624909)
07-20-2011 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Chuck77
07-20-2011 7:06 AM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
Prayer is subjective evidence for God no matter if it's answered or not.

I agree with you Chuck77. Prayer answering or not is not in itself proof for or against a God. However there are appears to be research based evidence related to benefits resulting from prayer as well as spirituality. It is therefore subjective evidence for a God.

There is research to suggest there are benefits in relation to prayer as the links below speak to.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2007/03/070314195638.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2010/12/101214085328.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/...ases/2008/12/081217124156.htm

I see atheists as being believers in incredible luck rather than a creator. I believe there is much more than subjective evidence for a God.

Earth is the lucky planet. So far, in this universe filled with the so called seeds of life, water flying about in comets everywhere, not so much as a bacteria or algae has been found anywhere in the universe. The earth was as inhospitable as any other planet in our solar system, yet earth had to have many hundreds of lucky events fit together in just the right way and timing to result in a habitable planet. Even with these requirements present still researchers suggest life arose only once and has never arisin a second time. How fortunate are we???

The magnetic field, an iron core, seasons, just the right address in the solar system, the water system, oxygenation and atmosphere, Jupiter as a protector, etc. If just one link, one event, one feature, were missing we would not be here to debate and earth would be as dead as Mars.

Then one can look to abiogenesis and the fact that with all the scientific advances todate, life cannot be made from non life and the spark of life instilled by the creator into the creation alludes todays researchers and remains a Holy grail.

The requirements needed to support life on a planet, including intelligent life, and reproduction are not subjective and are universally accepted.

Mars supposedly had water but no life evolved. These icey comets full of water do not display the same molecular structure of earths water. Now scientists are looking to asteroids and hoping these will answer the question of how water fortunately managed to come to earth at just the right time and in sufficient quantity, to form oceans.

http://www.universetoday.com/...e-the-source-of-earths-water

Hence the requirements for life have only been realised on planet earth. The extrapolation of life arising on earth to support the arising of life on other planets is subjective.

What is not subjective is the host of lucky events that resulted in planet Earth, the only viable planet known at this time to support life. That is a fact.

On which God is the true God.....
There is the scientific accuracy of the bible that spoke to hygiene rules as commandments at a time where germs were unknown, staged creation supported by research, a universe devoid of life at its creation supported by research, the earth not being held up by stuctures of other organisms supported by research, the circle of the earth, the stars numbering grains of sand, the watery deep of a molten planet, the knitting of life in the womb as a descriptor of DNA at work, a book written by persons that took no glory for themselves as prophets of God unlike many prophets that took glory for themselves and generally did not lead a life in line with their teaching eg the accumulation of riches and living in shameless luxury, etc, This is what suggests the biblical Creator, the God of the bible, has some substance in light of other spiritual writings on the creation. There is much information in the bible that supports an intelligent author or some very lucky guesses by persons that went against the common thinking of the day.

So atheists believe in extraordinary luck and good fortune as opposed to theists that believe there must have been more than luck involved in the long line of fortuitous events that led to the arsing of life and then intelligent life on earth.

I therefore assert that the evidence for a creator is not subjective but is there to be seen and discerned by all that are seriously looking for answers.

Luck or good management, is the question at hand. Is good management and design a sign of a creator or great luck? I'd say the evidence demonstrates good management and design by a creator as opposed to a plethora of lucky events perfectly timed that fortuitously resulted in life on earth.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Chuck77, posted 07-20-2011 7:06 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Panda, posted 07-20-2011 4:57 PM Mazzy has responded
 Message 80 by hooah212002, posted 07-20-2011 5:53 PM Mazzy has not yet responded
 Message 84 by Coragyps, posted 07-20-2011 8:21 PM Mazzy has responded
 Message 86 by bluegenes, posted 07-21-2011 12:53 AM Mazzy has responded
 Message 95 by purpledawn, posted 07-21-2011 9:10 PM Mazzy has not yet responded
 Message 96 by DBlevins, posted 07-22-2011 12:01 AM Mazzy has not yet responded

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 175 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 78 of 468 (624915)
07-20-2011 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Mazzy
07-20-2011 4:45 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
Mazzy writes:

Earth is the lucky planet. So far, in this universe filled with the so called seeds of life, water flying about in comets everywhere, not so much as a bacteria or algae has been found anywhere in the universe.


As a percentage: how much of the universe have we searched?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Mazzy, posted 07-20-2011 4:45 PM Mazzy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by AZPaul3, posted 07-20-2011 6:09 PM Panda has responded
 Message 87 by Mazzy, posted 07-21-2011 4:33 PM Panda has responded

GDR
Member
Posts: 3751
From: Sidney, BC, Canada
Joined: 05-22-2005
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 79 of 468 (624918)
07-20-2011 5:06 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Straggler
07-20-2011 2:44 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
Straggler writes:

Firstly - The idea that anyone scientific, especially Einstein himself, would describe his imaginings as "evidence" is preposterous. As much as anything Einstein's insight was to fore-go subjective notions of common sense and follow the math to wherever it led. This approach, based on the objectivity of mathematics, has yielded numerous subsequent results. From the discovery of anti-matter as predicted by Dirac to black holes and Hawking radiation. The idea that conclusions of God's existence based on subjective "evidence" are are remotely equivalent to mathematical extrapolations of known results is completely unfounded.

I obviously didn't put it well. My only point is that the idea of relativity first occurred in Einstein's imagination which prompted him to prove the theory empirically/mathematically.

I am not citing that as evidence. My only point is that human imagination can provide useful information, and I further suggest that human imagination might be a way that a god(s) could connect with us. As Robert Wright points out our concept of god(s) is evolving which could be construed as subjective evidence that a god(s) working through human imagination is over time refining our understanding of him and his desires for us.

Strggler writes:

That humans are deeply prone to invoking supernatural entities to explain various phenomenon is empirically and reliably evidenced. That god(s) actually exist is entirely un-evidenced. Or poorly evidenced at best.

I still contend that it is strongly evidenced as I pointed out earlier in my comments on intelligence, altruism and complexity. I continue to maintain that the idea that our existence is due to a pre-existent intelligence is more reasonable than any other proposal. However, again that is just my subjective POV.

Straggler writes:

No. The subjective evidence you cite in favour of gods is demonstrably unreliable as compared to the evidence that suggests that humans can and will invoke supernatural answers to seemingly inexplicable questions.

I don't see the two positions as being at odds. I agree that people very frequently erroneously invoke supernatural answers to inexplicable questions, but so what. That doesn't do anything to refute the idea that there is a prime mover responsible for our existence.

Straggler writes:

Not all forms of evidence are equally valid and thus not all conclusions are equally valid.

Who could possibly disagree with that, and that being true then you will have obviously come around to my POV.


Everybody is entitled to my opinion. :)
This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Straggler, posted 07-20-2011 2:44 PM Straggler has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Straggler, posted 07-22-2011 12:54 PM GDR has responded

  
hooah212002
Member
Posts: 3179
Joined: 08-12-2009
Member Rating: 1.8


(1)
Message 80 of 468 (624941)
07-20-2011 5:53 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Mazzy
07-20-2011 4:45 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
I agree with you Chuck77. Prayer answering or not is not in itself proof for or against a God.

When i was a christian, I prayed. None of my prayers were answered. I guess we can end the debate now? We just proved the non-existence of god? Oh, wait. you'll probably say that I didn't truly believe or didn't truly have jeebus in my heart.


"Why don't you call upon your God to strike me? Oh, I forgot it's because he's fake like Thor, so bite me" -Greydon Square
This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Mazzy, posted 07-20-2011 4:45 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 2356
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006


Message 81 of 468 (624944)
07-20-2011 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Panda
07-20-2011 4:57 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
As a percentage: how much of the universe have we searched?

Well, lets see.

100 billion galaxies x 400 billion stars each x 2 billion planets, moons, asteroids, comets each ...

about .000000000000000000000000000000007% give or take a couple orders of magnitude.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Panda, posted 07-20-2011 4:57 PM Panda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by Panda, posted 07-20-2011 7:32 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

purpledawn
Member
Posts: 4453
From: Indiana
Joined: 04-25-2004


Message 82 of 468 (624946)
07-20-2011 6:48 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Chuck77
07-20-2011 7:06 AM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
quote:
dawn, it's simple, because the truth shall set you free. THEE truth.

dawn, it would be easier for me to respond to you if I knew what you believed. I dont, but it seems you are a polytheist? Or universalist? Or a born again Christian playing devils advocate?


I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't call me Dawn. If you need something short, use PD or Purple.

As far as the topic, you making a claim that is beyond the scope of this thread to address. Yes, I know it is easier to find the right excuse for why I "don't get it" if you knew what I believe. Quite frankly you still on milk. My beliefs are irrelvant to your position.

quote:
Well, dawn, once you do what the subjective evidenced Bible says to do, you'll know. That's how. It's really quite simple. DO what it SAYS and see the results
But when it came to the healing prayer, you didn't do what the Bible said. As I said, the letter had nothing to do with healing and neither did the sentence you supposedly spoke. In reality, you are saying that what you say is true, not the Bible.

quote:
You think it's logical to say answered prayer is subjective evidence therefore unanswered prayed is subjective evidence against God?
You said answered prayer is subjective evidence of God's existence. So I can say that unanswered prayers would be evidence against a gods existence.

As noted by others, the case for your God works just as well for other gods, but you would say that it doesn't. You still haven't explained why the subjective evidebce only applies to your god, other than your say so.

quote:
Prayer is subjective evidence for God no matter if it's answered or not.
You need to provide support for that statment. Just because you say it doesn't make it so. As others have noted, that leave the door open to supporting the existence of anything that doesn't answer. That even supports false gods.

quote:
Unanswered prayer is as good for evidence as answered prayer. Your thinking is that God is a genie that hands out wishes and if they all don't come true that's evidence against God. That's silly.
You mistake is assuming you know what I think. I don't consider God a genie or someone who is there to help me get a house. That's your schtick.

Please address the issue. The prayer you said was not a prayer and had nothing to do with healing. How is that subjective evidence of anything?

Edited by purpledawn, : Wrong ID


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Chuck77, posted 07-20-2011 7:06 AM Chuck77 has not yet responded

Panda
Member (Idle past 175 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 83 of 468 (624949)
07-20-2011 7:32 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by AZPaul3
07-20-2011 6:09 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
AZPaul3 writes:

about .000000000000000000000000000000007% give or take a couple orders of magnitude.


*nods*
I suspect that Mazzy will not understand that the little we know about the universe's contents means that it is impossible to discern if "Earth is the lucky planet" or not.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by AZPaul3, posted 07-20-2011 6:09 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

Coragyps
Member
Posts: 5143
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002
Member Rating: 1.6


Message 84 of 468 (624955)
07-20-2011 8:21 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Mazzy
07-20-2011 4:45 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
These icey comets full of water do not display the same molecular structure of earths water.

Really! That is fascinating, Mazzy! I've been a professional chemist and an amateur astronomer for a good long while now, and I didn't know that!

Got a reference? Oh, I didn't figure you did.


"The Christian church, in its attitude toward science, shows the mind of a more or less enlightened man of the Thirteenth Century. It no longer believes that the earth is flat, but it is still convinced that prayer can cure after medicine fails." H L Mencken
This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Mazzy, posted 07-20-2011 4:45 PM Mazzy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by AZPaul3, posted 07-20-2011 9:54 PM Coragyps has not yet responded
 Message 88 by Mazzy, posted 07-21-2011 4:41 PM Coragyps has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 2356
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006


(1)
Message 85 of 468 (624959)
07-20-2011 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Coragyps
07-20-2011 8:21 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
I've been a professional chemist and an amateur astronomer for a good long while now, and I didn't know that!

You didn't know about this? I am surprised.

While the majority of what they are finding in the comets is good old H2O they are finding large amounts of dihydrogen monoxide and some dihydrogen oxide. The scary part is that they are also finding significant amounts of hydrogen hydroxide, the stuff that kills so many people on this planet every day.

Edited by AZPaul3, :


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Coragyps, posted 07-20-2011 8:21 PM Coragyps has not yet responded

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 49 days)
Posts: 2812
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


(1)
Message 86 of 468 (624974)
07-21-2011 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by Mazzy
07-20-2011 4:45 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
Mazzie writes:

Earth is the lucky planet.

Every planet in the universe is in exactly the right circumstances to be itself. This is inevitable.

The coastline of Australia is exactly right to fit the continent. This is inevitable.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Mazzy, posted 07-20-2011 4:45 PM Mazzy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Mazzy, posted 07-21-2011 4:47 PM bluegenes has responded

Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1053 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


Message 87 of 468 (625161)
07-21-2011 4:33 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Panda
07-20-2011 4:57 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
Panda says

As a percentage: how much of the universe have we searched?

The answer is irrelevant. Right here in our solar system there are 4 terrestrail planets that were equally as inhospitable.

Now you can either argue that we have the perfect address, which agrees with my assertion, or you can refute same. If we do not have the perfect addy then there is no reason why life should not have evolved on another terestrial planet in this solar system.

Every single step in the earths formation up untill the appearance of life was necessary right down to our iron core, stratosphere, magnetic field, season, hydro cycles amongst the many cycles that pertain to the earth.

The perfect addy by chance or good management and design?. Atheists believe in volumes of luck. I do not.

Your comment has not taken the luck out of atheist assertions for no Creator.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Panda, posted 07-20-2011 4:57 PM Panda has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Panda, posted 07-21-2011 5:03 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

  
Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1053 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


Message 88 of 468 (625164)
07-21-2011 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 84 by Coragyps
07-20-2011 8:21 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
Coragyps says

Really! That is fascinating, Mazzy! I've been a professional chemist and an amateur astronomer for a good long while now, and I didn't know that!

Got a reference? Oh, I didn't figure you did.

I am also an amateur astronomer although I have done some work for Siding Springs on a voluntary basis.

Here is the info and link. I thought I had posted another article on it but here is another anyway.

"Comet LINEAR had plenty of water, but was it the same type of water found here on Earth?
Comets and Earth's oceans both contain a small amount of so-called "heavy water" composed of equal parts hydrogen, oxygen, and deuterium. (Deuterium is an isotope of hydrogen with one extra neutron in its nucleus.) The chemical formula of heavy water is HDO; normal water is H2O.

There is growing evidence that comets born in the outer solar system (near Neptune's orbit, for example) contain ices relatively rich in heavy water -- too rich, in fact. They don't match the isotopic composition of water in Earth's oceans."
http://science.nasa.gov/...s/science-at-nasa/2001/ast18may_1

Being a smart donkey will get you nowhere with me.

Now that I have destroyed your credibility you may apologise to me for your ignorance.

Edited by Mazzy, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by Coragyps, posted 07-20-2011 8:21 PM Coragyps has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Theodoric, posted 07-21-2011 5:18 PM Mazzy has not yet responded
 Message 94 by Coragyps, posted 07-21-2011 6:30 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

  
Mazzy 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1053 days)
Posts: 212
From: Rural NSW, Australia
Joined: 06-09-2011


Message 89 of 468 (625167)
07-21-2011 4:47 PM
Reply to: Message 86 by bluegenes
07-21-2011 12:53 AM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
Bluegenes says

Every planet in the universe is in exactly the right circumstances to be itself. This is inevitable.

The coastline of Australia is exactly right to fit the continent. This is inevitable.

Mazzie writes:

Earth is the lucky planet.

Every planet in the universe is in exactly the right circumstances to be itself. This is inevitable.
The coastline of Australia is exactly right to fit the continent. This is inevitable.

What a ridiculous reply!

Every planet in the universe is in the right circumstance to be itself and they are lifeless, so far, and all had equal opportunity to evolve life eg Mars, given that these researchers have spent huge resources in demonstrating how life can survive in lava, in sunless environments, in ice, etc.

All this research is aimed at demomnstrating how the universe is seeded with the requirements of life and not so much as a confirmed bacteria to wave back at us. These are the facts. The rest is speculation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 86 by bluegenes, posted 07-21-2011 12:53 AM bluegenes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by bluegenes, posted 07-21-2011 5:33 PM Mazzy has not yet responded
 Message 93 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-21-2011 6:18 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 175 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 90 of 468 (625176)
07-21-2011 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Mazzy
07-21-2011 4:33 PM


Re: Subjective Evidence of Gods
Mazzy writes:

The answer is irrelevant. Right here in our solar system there are 4 terrestrail planets that were equally as inhospitable.


It is not irrelevant - and there is only one terrestrial planet.

If every single solar system has a habitable planet populated with life-forms, then what would make Earth so lucky?
Millions and millions of planets, all teeming with life.
Earth would not be special or lucky - just one of many.

So - how many habitable planets are in this galaxy?
If you can't answer this, then how can you say how lucky the earth is.

Also, do you know the odds of life existing on this planet...?

Edited by Panda, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Mazzy, posted 07-21-2011 4:33 PM Mazzy has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Chuck77, posted 07-22-2011 1:10 AM Panda has responded

Prev1
...
45
6
78
...
32NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2014 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2014