Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "Evidence and Faith"
nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 26 of 303 (399166)
05-04-2007 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by riVeRraT
05-02-2007 10:49 PM


quote:
I am only asking if there has been any valid evidence of the creation of the world
Sure, and there's a whole field of study called Cosmology devoted to learning how planets are created.
If the supernatural was involved is not something that physical evidence can determine.
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by riVeRraT, posted 05-02-2007 10:49 PM riVeRraT has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Phat, posted 05-04-2007 10:20 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 29 of 303 (399171)
05-04-2007 10:18 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by riVeRraT
05-04-2007 9:45 AM


quote:
When it comes to going to the doctor, we have science. I am sure most people would not approve of the methods that creation scientists use to have them operate on them.
Of course, by your own admission, you "hate" studies, so I don't know why you would have a problem with a doctor who ignores them.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by riVeRraT, posted 05-04-2007 9:45 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by riVeRraT, posted 05-04-2007 10:34 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 41 of 303 (399667)
05-07-2007 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by riVeRraT
05-07-2007 9:25 AM


Re: Why must you diminish and belittle GOD?
quote:
but doesn't many sciences start with a conclusion?
No.
No science starts with the conclusion.
Ascientist wonders about something she sees in nature. Has a "Hmmmm, that's interesting", or "I wonder if X happens becasue of Y" moment, let's say. This is speculation.
They come up with one or several testable explanations for that phenomena. This is hypothesis-forming. This process is most often informed by the science of the past which current research springs from.
Then, the hypothesis is tested against evidence from nature to see how accurately the explanation reflects reality.
It is after all this is done that that any conclusion can be reached about the validity of the initial hypothesis.
Science progresses by letting the evidence lead it to conclusions.
Science never starts with conclusions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by riVeRraT, posted 05-07-2007 9:25 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by riVeRraT, posted 05-07-2007 3:44 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 42 of 303 (399669)
05-07-2007 9:51 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by riVeRraT
05-07-2007 9:44 AM


Re: Why must you diminish and belittle GOD?
quote:
We now live in a society where we can speak out against what is wrong, and the truth can come through.
Except if we speak out even though we know it will offend someone, right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by riVeRraT, posted 05-07-2007 9:44 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by riVeRraT, posted 05-07-2007 3:47 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 59 of 303 (399810)
05-08-2007 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by riVeRraT
05-07-2007 3:44 PM


Re: Why must you diminish and belittle GOD?
A scientist wonders about something she sees in nature.
quote:
Isn't that a conclusion?
No. It is a question, which might be phrased, "Gee, I wonder why X appears as it does?"
quote:
What about forensic science?
What about it?
Starting with a conclusion in forensics might be something like, "Even though we haven't examined any of the physical evidence in this murder scene, we have already decided that Billy Bob did it."
What forensic science actually does is, "A murder took place. We are going to reconstruct what happened based upon the physical evidence at the scene so that we can possibly determine who did what."
quote:
What about a scientist who devotes his whole life to studying the pyramids? He concludes that the pyramids exist, so he studys to find out how.
Egyptologists don't spend their lives trying to determine if the pyramids exist, rat.
They make "retrodictions" about what they are likely to find, and those retrodictions are based upon evicence. Sometimes their retrodictions are shown to be accurate, sometimes not.
quote:
Cancer is a conclusion, then we seek to find a cure.
No, cancer is a disease. It is that above observation that I already mentioned that a scientist would make. Someone a while back looked at a funny growth on a person or animal and said, "Hmm, that's strange. I wonder why those things occur?"
The answer to "Why?" is the conclusion, rat, and that ALWAYS comes AFTER investigation, not before.
quote:
Evolution. We are the conclusion, because we are here, then we seek to find out how.
See cancer explanation above.
quote:
The real problem is the label "creation science". They should have labeled it, the theory of creation.
Except it doesn't meet the criteria for a scientific theory, either.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by riVeRraT, posted 05-07-2007 3:44 PM riVeRraT has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 60 of 303 (399812)
05-08-2007 9:24 AM
Reply to: Message 45 by riVeRraT
05-07-2007 3:47 PM


Re: Why must you diminish and belittle GOD?
quote:
Besides, there is a difference between knowing something will offend someone, and purposely offending someone (with intent to offend).
I can't see any difference between those two things.
If I say something knowing that it will offend someone, then I intended to offend them, didn't I?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by riVeRraT, posted 05-07-2007 3:47 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by riVeRraT, posted 05-08-2007 9:49 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 63 of 303 (399820)
05-08-2007 9:45 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by riVeRraT
05-08-2007 9:36 AM


Re: Why must you diminish and belittle GOD?
They are claiming that they do real science.
They are actually doing pseudoscience.
Pretend science, in other words.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by riVeRraT, posted 05-08-2007 9:36 AM riVeRraT has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 89 of 303 (399924)
05-08-2007 9:34 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by riVeRraT
05-08-2007 1:03 PM


Re: What the hell is a miracle, anyway?
quote:
If science doesn't want to admit to miracles, or if science is unable to prove miracles, then that is fine. That is where we draw the line. But the "cause unknown" will forever be miracles in the minds of those that have faith.
I will not even attempt to take that away from people.
Yeah, it was hard for some of us to realize that Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy don't really exist, but its all part of growing up to realize that there's no such thing as magic.
I know that sounds harsh, but there it truly no difference between belief in Santa and belief in gods.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by riVeRraT, posted 05-08-2007 1:03 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by riVeRraT, posted 05-09-2007 9:31 AM nator has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 161 of 303 (400662)
05-15-2007 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by riVeRraT
05-15-2007 6:19 PM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
If not, what is the measure used to determine belief validity? Come let us reason together.
quote:
Not sure, a good tree bears good fruit?
Then everyone should be Buddhist.
Buddhists don't start wars, practice "live and let live" for the most part, and are the happiest people.
Buddhists seem to bear the best fruit, overall.
And they don't believe in God/gods at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by riVeRraT, posted 05-15-2007 6:19 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by riVeRraT, posted 05-16-2007 10:01 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 167 of 303 (400799)
05-16-2007 6:45 PM
Reply to: Message 162 by riVeRraT
05-16-2007 10:01 AM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
quote:
While buddhism may be the most peaceful religion when it comes to war, it is not war-free.
There is no perfect religion nator.
I never said there was a perfect religion.
You said that we might be able to determine which was the best one by seeing which one "bore the best fruit".
Buddhism produces the most peaceful, happiest societies, so if you consider the most peace and the most happiness to be the best fruit, then Buddhism is the best religion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by riVeRraT, posted 05-16-2007 10:01 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by riVeRraT, posted 05-16-2007 9:11 PM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 169 of 303 (400914)
05-17-2007 10:52 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by riVeRraT
05-16-2007 9:11 PM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
quote:
We may have been talking about churches, or religions, but when asked about belief validity, my answer was about an indiviual stand point, not a religious one.
I don't think I could possibly judge the differences between all religions. Espcially when I am not a fan of religion, evn though I can be described as religious.
Religions have individual adherents. There are something close to 400 million Buddhists worldwide.
There are regions and nations which are predominantly Buddhist, so it is certainly possible to discover something about how Buddhists treat other people, how they feel about life, etc. We can do this for Muslim, Christian, and other regions and coutries, too.
Buddhists are the most happy. They are also the most peaceful.
They bear the best fruit, if you think peace and happiness are good fruits.
quote:
If we love God, and love others, how can we go wrong?
"I hit you because I love you" is something many a battered woman and child has heard.
I bring this up to point out that "loving others" is a wide-open action. Many people have been killed, tortured or imprisoned in the name of the Christian god, and those doing the killing, torturing, and imprisoning truly believed they were doing so out of love and a desire to save souls.
So, to say "love others" isn't saying anything.
Well, Buddhists don't "love God", because they don't believe a personal god exists.
Yet, they report being the most happy and are the most non-violent people on Earth.
Perhaps "loving god" isn't important.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by riVeRraT, posted 05-16-2007 9:11 PM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by riVeRraT, posted 05-17-2007 11:25 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 173 of 303 (401041)
05-18-2007 12:43 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by riVeRraT
05-17-2007 11:25 AM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
There are regions and nations which are predominantly Buddhist, so it is certainly possible to discover something about how Buddhists treat other people, how they feel about life, etc. We can do this for Muslim, Christian, and other regions and coutries, too.
quote:
Yea, but then we get into the "true Christian" discussion.
No, not really.
That is simply a meaningless, silly, useless reductionist argument and the only reason it is brought up is when the debater wants to avoid the debate.
In some places, there are a lot of Buddhist temples, and have been for thousands of years.
Lots and lots of local people are observed praying at those Buddhist temples, and have done for thousands of years.
The majority of the people in those areas, if asked, say that they are Buddhist.
It is not unreasonable to conclude, then, that many, if not most of the people in that area are Buddhist.
[rant]Why the fuck are you making me jump through hoops to get you to accept this, rat, for fuck's sake?[/rant]
Buddhists are the most happy. They are also the most peaceful.
They bear the best fruit, if you think peace and happiness are good fruits.
quote:
I can't really say.
Oh? Suddenly you have no opinion on if peace or happiness qualify as "good fruit"? Gimme a break, rat. Jesus is referred to as the "Prince of Peace", isn't he?
Something tells me you just don't want to admit that another belief system other than your own is better at delivering what it promises.
Tell me, rat, if peace and happiness are not "good fruits", then what are, according to you?
"I hit you because I love you" is something many a battered woman and child has heard.
quote:
Again, we get into the true Christian discussion.
If you want to measure Christianity by what people do, you will never think Christianity is good.
LOL!
How else am I supposed to measure any religion other than by what people do?
That is exactly what "knowing them by their fruit" means, isn't it?
"Their fruit" = "what they do".
[quote]But if there is a devil, he will attack what is most threatening to him.[/qs]
Er, huh? Irrelevant to our discussion.
We were talking about measuring beliefs by the quality of their "fruit".
So, to say "love others" isn't saying anything.
quote:
Nator, forget about the rest of the world, I said to you, because I know you know what love is.
Again, irrelevant.
We were talking about measuring belief systems by their "fruit".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by riVeRraT, posted 05-17-2007 11:25 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by riVeRraT, posted 05-18-2007 11:18 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 181 of 303 (401315)
05-19-2007 6:59 AM
Reply to: Message 174 by riVeRraT
05-18-2007 11:18 AM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
quote:
If you want to measure someone by their fruits, look at Mother Theresa.
Or, look at predominantly Buddhist areas of the world, and look at how much more peaceful and happy they are than people are in other places where a different religion has been practiced.
I mean, the central theme of Buddhism is liberation from suffering.
If it is OK to judge Mother Theresa by her fruits, why is it not OK to judge Buddhists as a group for their fruits?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by riVeRraT, posted 05-18-2007 11:18 AM riVeRraT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by riVeRraT, posted 05-19-2007 7:53 AM nator has replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 187 of 303 (401415)
05-19-2007 7:31 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by riVeRraT
05-19-2007 7:53 AM


Re: Using reason for determining belief validity?
If it is OK to judge Mother Theresa by her fruits, why is it not OK to judge Buddhists as a group for their fruits?
quote:
I never said it wasn't ok.
All you've done in this thread is tell me that we can't judge groups of religious people by their "fruits".
You've just contradicted yourself.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by riVeRraT, posted 05-19-2007 7:53 AM riVeRraT has not replied

nator
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 283 of 303 (403667)
06-04-2007 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 280 by Hyroglyphx
06-04-2007 5:40 PM


Re: The Absolute Moralirty nonsense yet again.
quote:
Obviously not, being that the majority of the country voted for the "evil" man.
They didn't, though.
The majority of voters in that election voted for him.
Only 63 million people out of 300 million, actually.
That's only 20% of the population or perhaps a little more since not everyone living here is able to vote.
Hardly a majority.
Edited by nator, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by Hyroglyphx, posted 06-04-2007 5:40 PM Hyroglyphx 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