God vs. Science

Congratulations - you're an optimist.But if you really think "everything works out for the best," you're sorely mistaken, unless you truly regard starving infants in droughts, people drowned in tsunamis, or any other natural disaster or simple consequence of being born into poverty somehow "work out for the best."Once again, any time you get your way with a prayer, you exclaim that "God did it!" and use this as proof of the divine. When faced with similar (or worse) circumstances where such prayers were not answered, or even the prayers you make that are unanswered, you respond "I don't understand god, but I'm sure he has a plan."Your premise is unfalsifiable - there is no evidence that will dissuade you, despite the lack of any objective evidence for what you do believe. You choose to believe because it makes you more comfortable, and because of the human tendency to look for patterns where none exist - the same reasons for all other superstitions.

---

When you know you're going to wake up in three days, dying is not a sacrifice. It's a painful inconvenience.

I hope you realize that if you go back to the same spot and pour dye into the eddy, it will start to permeate downstream. Unless of course this is the worlds first watery black hole.

Either you are very young or have led a sheltered life. Do you even know about people outside your little circle?

Hello Ichthus,
I think you are mixing up NOT investigating with not being able to investigate. That simply isn't how it works. You are correct that most students never see their teacher's diploma. Most take it on faith that he/she has one. They have evidence to support this, after all, the school would have to see the teacher's qualifications, before hiring. This is much the same as assuming on faith that when you fill up your gas tank, you will get fuel from the pump and not raspberry jam. You could empirically examine the pump before filling up, but it wouldn't be practical or sensible.
The essential difference between your example and science is that the students in your example CAN look at the diploma. It is real. They can look at it if they want to. They don't bother to look because they don't have the time to investigate every situation in an empirical way, the same as you and your gas tank.
Science on the other hand, does go to these lengths. A scientific investigation of whether your teacher had a diploma or not, would most certainly involve someone looking at that diploma. Assuming good faith would not be sufficient. It might be expedient to simply trust the school to have hired the right person, but that would only be done where the hiring process had been independently checked and verified (a process comparable to the peer review process).
Scientists take nothing on faith. Wherever there is a claim in science, it can be traced back to the original data.
With religion, thee is no way to trace back to the original data. There is no evidence behind the claim. There is only the appeal to faith. If you decided to investigate your teacher's diploma, you could. If you decided to empirically investigate God (or any other article of faith) you will find nothing beyond faith.
This discussion touches on the issues raised here by Subbie Message 1. I particularly recommend Modulous' summation of the reasons why science does not appeal to authority in this post.

---

Mutate and Survive

Hi Granny, What good would looking at a diploma do?
A piece of paper means nothing.It tells you nothing about the qualifications of a person, only that they have completed the requirements to obtain the diploma.God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

quote:

---

If the current really trapped objects as you describe, the same location would have been filled with normal river debris. If there was no debris already trapped, the current must occasionally sweep objects back out into the river.

---

I spent five days on the river. That's 120 hours, and the only thing I saw floating on the water (or under it) was our boats.

quote:

---

there is no evidence that will dissuade you

---

Yes, you're right. That's because God has done so much for me.Think about this:Is there any evidence that would dissuade you?

quote:

---

I hope you realize that if you go back to the same spot and pour dye into the eddy, it will start to permeate downstream

---

You do realize that there's a differace between a possibly 800-pound boat and dye. Yes, the dye would start to go downstream, but for the boat to do the same, it would be as if all the dye would suddenly move out of the stream. Also, there was quite a bit of wind, and the dye wouldn't be pushed back upstream by the wind like the ore rig. (we had to tie the bucket to a rope and use it as a current sail to actually go downstream sometimes).

Which of course means nothing ever comes down the river, right?Come on. Debris eventually floats down all rivers, particularly after storms or strong wind upstream. If the eddy you describe truly traps objects inescapable barring outside intervention, at least some of that debris should have still been swirling around where you were trapped. If not, then the debris was obviously carried away - by the very same current that eventually forced you back into the river.5 days is not a long period of time.

---

When you know you're going to wake up in three days, dying is not a sacrifice. It's a painful inconvenience.

The current you describe should have no problem pushing an 800 pound boat. But you are missing the point. The fact is you wouldn't be trapped. So you can't get out of the current but the wind is so strong it pushes you upstream. Now I'm confused.

Correction: everything good that's happened to you, you attribute to god. You ignore everything else, however, or dismiss it with the "god has a plan" nonsense. You see literally everything as evidence for god, when it's nothing of the sort.You're just insisting the fairies are flying away when we look. I don't need to be dissuaded, I would need to be persuaded into believing in a deity. An argument not based on incredulity, appeals to authority, false dilemmas, special pleading, or containing some sort of actual evidence would go a long way.

---

When you know you're going to wake up in three days, dying is not a sacrifice. It's a painful inconvenience.

That would probably never be forthcoming. Since their concept is based on faith not evidence. To further complicate matters, they cannot understand why we can't see where they are coming from and why we need positive evidence.

---

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other

At no point did I suggest it was likely .There is a reason I'm no longer a Christian, after all.

---

When you know you're going to wake up in three days, dying is not a sacrifice. It's a painful inconvenience.

quote:

---

Technically, you are asking them to take them on faith. A student may not always see his teacher's diploma. The student therefore has to have faith that either the school did a good, thorough search on their teachers or the teacher actually did pass his/her collage classes.

---

No, that's trust, not faith.The difference being, anyone could actually check to see if the school did a thorough search for teachers and that the teacher passed their college exams.Religious faith can't be checked like that.Edited by nator, : No reason given.

quote:

---

I know that God did this for me (along with other things). I know that God exists. Whether you believe what He did for me is your choice.

---

No, you don't know these things.You believe them.There's a difference.