Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kevinb

  1. Religion has been the excuse to commit all kinds of horrendous things. Hitler believed in Jesus ergo saved I guess based on doctrine. He talked about jesus in mein kampf right? The Nazis belts had God with us embossed on them. Let us not forget the inquisition too. Those involved in US slave trade preached bible verses to slaves to justify their position. God told moses to wipe out the madianities . numbers 31.1 instruction to kill all but the virgin girls which you can keep for yourselves?! The true literal fundemantalist could say stone to death those that leave the religion... gay people. This literalist view is what isis are doing. The bible says stone unruly kids.. those who work on the Sabbath. Anyone want to cite some apologetics to live with the cognitive dissonance or moral relativism here?
  2. As a non believer I don't believe in an afterlife. I was interested in what people perceive of what remains of them in heaven..all current memories? As they are at the end or were at some prior time? Does a god change you in any way? If so how.. when... how do you know?
  3. The 1st sentence sounds like we've no evidence. If we can't see God doing something how can we be rationally justified to say he does.
  4. Our environment is precious.. It's where we live. An atheist friend and I went to the beach today to pick up plastic. Big thing in the news here how we're polluting our oceans. Caught the news today on the British made satellite that's going to start mopping up our space debris. Not sure who Steven is... maybe pray for him☺
  5. Well i don't see how God will do anything. This is a calculation based on the laws of physics and speed and trajectory. Didn't the chinese do this before and let a satellite/craft break up in orbit? Now we've debris spread about our planet in high orbit. Even a fleck of paint doin 20k ish mph will cause damage up there. We're polluting our planet... now our orbit putting other craft at risk. Makes me sad... when will we learn to take care of the environment we inhabit
  6. Untrue. It's very accurate... only good for 50k ish years though. Carbon dating encounters problems in circumstances like mussels ingesting "old" carbon 14 that's decayed and locked into limestone for example. This then manifests in the result of said creature. This is very rare and well very understood in the radiometric dating. However YEC use these results to say yep... carbon 14 dating is nonsense... unreliable. It's either ignorant or dishonest.
  7. carbon dating is only good for 50k ish years and deals with half lives of carbon 14. There are dozens of radiometric dating techniques independent of each other that go into the millions and billions of years. They can be tested against each other in overlap and even give a margin of error. There are several non radiometric dating techniques also. As to those who think radiometric isotopes vary in decay rates... this is patently ridiculous... please demonstrate this and falsify our understanding and win a noble prize. Let's not forget this is based upon those who 1st presuppose the age being accurate by adding up the ages of people living to 100s of years old in a particular religious book....erm...
  8. But the Bible is clear there were no civilizations before Adam. Okay and indeed the bible may indicate this hmbld. So how do you prove the bible claim? Or are you happy to go with the bible claims are true coz they're in the bible? Kinda circular don't you think. The quran claims are true coz they're in the quran. This applies to all religious texts surely. What needs to be demonstrated is any theistic claims are true in reality. In this case Adam... so what's the evidence for Adam to corroborate the bible claim?
  9. Ah resorting to ad hominem fallacy so soon. If I've repeated myself it's because your faith assertions carry no weight if you care about truth. Stop asserting claims and demonstrate them.. if you've evidence and care about truth. Unfortunately constant faith based assertions are going to be met with the same kind of responses until you give better reasoned arguements. I'm certain there are things I don't yet know... scientific understanding hasn't ceased at a final peak. Ah so you're anti science... or just the bits up until your faith presuppositions? Science is based on evidence.. what can be demonstrated..predicted and tested. What's falsifiable... theories are built this way. You liken this to religion is an equivocation fallacy. Religions don't operate this way. A map of the world's culturals shows pockets of many religions... thousands... where people happen to be born dictates what they accept on faith.. they're all different... they all contradict... this is brainwashing and indoctrination. Science operating as described above is why there isn't an Indian physics... a British physics..American chemistry...and north Korean chemistry. This applies to quantum mechanics .. biology.. evolution.. General relativity as so forth. Yes as have others from all religions....What experiences? The Jesus notions aren't original... other religions had stories of sons of gods... saviour gods.. Osiris...Romulus to name a few that predate Christianity. Dying and rising gods.. this stuff isn't new and existed before. Correct... and God claims are largely unfalsifiable... that's a problem. Do you understand why? Again all religions have had people that say this stuff. Okay your God is the right one assertion again. Special pleading fallacy. So as an atheist what methodologies can I use to falsify all other gods and prove yours? I notice you still can't give a good reason here as you avoided it previously. Btw a satan type and hell notion in Christianity isn't original and is predated. For instance read anything about the Zoroastrian religion that the Persians brought to judea when they invaded? The early origins of your religion changed markedly after this absorption of some of their beliefs. Btw evidence of Satan and hell.. Adam and eve? I don't believe in your satan or any other versions obviously... the concept remains just as ludicrous to an atheist until there is evidence. I also don't believe in fairies... however people use to and thought they were evil people abducting replacers before they became the little winged cuties that live at the bottom of our gardens. Selfish agenda huh. You sound very open minded to other views I must say. This part of the site is for believers... seekers and non nonbelievers incidently. I didn't say ever there is no god..i say I don't believe in one of the poor evidence provided. Until there is something better I've no rational justification believing there is one... and then one over another. Happenstance of where and when i was born isn't justification. Another problem for a non believer is.. in a christian mostly country although my country is heading to almost 50% nonbeliever is..okay.. there are precedents for saviour gods.. hells etc etc. It all looks like cultural bleeding of ideas..religions changed culturally. If there was a Christian God...a Jesus and so forth. Then God used models of false gods as you put it to announce himself and has done an awful job of showing himself to all of humanity. Same said for any other God or gods from other religions if it was true.
  10. That's assertion and not evidence. Give evidence a god did it then your one. Faith is what you need when you don't have evidence. All religions observe the natural then just say I'll believe in faith it was my god or gods. Where's the evidence of causality to one God on faith over another? All of 1000s of gods and religions in human history have had faith. Faith isn't a reliable path to truth therefore. Your particular faith or anyone's is dependant on place of birth in the world and when in history. So beyond an honest assessment of religions and all gods. ( although one is accepted on geography and time in history born). What methodologies have you used to falsify other gods and prove yours?
  11. Interesting. My position is we can choose what to do with our lives.. to a reasonable degree. What we believe in a sense of whats true about reality ie is there a god... then which God or are there no gods. This isn't a choice...i don't choose to not believe in any of a thousand gods. We don't all have our own truths on reality. We should be compelled to believe and follow the evidence. If we care about what's actually true then demonstrable levels of evidence must dictate our beliefs. Else it's picking what we like and want... what our particular local religion just so happens to be.. what religion we're grown up believing by our parents or indoctrinated into. The only default should be to not accept any claims until there's evidential warrant. Evidence should form beliefs not beliefs form our evidence.
  12. I'd want the things you outlined also. As a non believer I'd disagree with the only thing that makes life worth living is we'd be used by god to achieve this. We... society need to pull together... influence our governments to make the world a better place. I see no involvement by any God getting us there . Unless you've some evidence this has ever happened?
  13. 1st sentences... correct because there's no evidence or reason to take it into account. Presupposing this or accepting supernatural claims have added nothing in 500 years of science. Where has the supernatural added to our understanding of the universe above and beyond the testing of the natural?
  14. That may very well be true, but there is plenty of evidence from secular writers to accept that Jesus was a historical figure. You and I agree that majority opinion among experts is meaningful and it is true that most historians accept it. Claims that go beyond Jesus as historical figure are debated with more fervor, and there probably are threads already discussing them. I’ll see what I can find. The majority "experts" are Christians.. they've already accepted the proposition and base work on other Christians who've already accepted it. An issue for me is there are religions pre Christian that have sons of god...saviour gods..resurrections after 3 days even. Osiris of Egypt...Romulus of Roman tradition who even on top of this underwent a passion. More modern notions of Christianity were taken from pre-existing Persian after they invaded Judea... the Persian Zoroastrianism stuff added Good God vs evil...heaven and hell were adopted from the persians. I'd have to buy the Jesus stuff in christiantity is true... after the analogous pre dates it. Makes it look like God based the Jesus "truth" on pre existing fables and stories of other civilisations. OR has just been adopted from other cults with a saviour swapped for another.. this has happened often...pre Christian.
  15. Maybe start a thread for the evidence for Jesus if it starts there? Regarding fringe... most who write on this are Christians who start with the presupposition of accepting prior to writing. I know of little outside the bible to give evidence for the bible.
  16. There is no evidence life can't come from non life. Where are the peer reviewed tests of ALL variables and conditions of the early solar system that proves it's impossible? This is so far from having been done. This is the burden of proof you have when say this. Else it's an appeal to our ignorance. It's also a logical fallacy called an argument from ignorance to say when we don't know how thus far ergo God. Some of the building blocks and even some complicated chemistry has been discovered naturally... even in asteroids that have fallen to earth. We know prior to this stars make atoms as well. Let's not forget in 400 years of science so far we've only discovered natural laws without the requirement for any supernatural tinkering. So God involvement is now shifted back here? God of the gaps? Look at everything that was attributed to gods pre science... it just appeals to our ignorance unless you can prove God did it and one God over a 1000 others did it? Besides in the absence of evidence and causality of any problem or question the answer rationally is don't know.... not don't know therefore this... this or any other this must be demonstrated to avoid fallacious arguements.
  17. Agreed Faith is the link all denominations of theism use to link obsevations to any number of Gods humanity has invented. Faith is needed when evidence and causality cant be linked to the claim... therefore it's not wise to add faith in the equation... it's demonstrably not reliable..ie 1000s of gods and religions.
  18. What religion and God or gods couldn't we believe on faith? Faith is the justification all theists give to accept their view. How is faith a reliable path to truth when it gets people to any of 1000 gods and religions. This is what happens when humanity doesn't have any good evidence of god or gods. All theists in the course of our history have believed their religious view to be correct... as an non believer it seems A God has done an awful job of announcing himself to the planet...it appears religious beliefs seem to be of local cultural notions based upon our lack of understanding of the world back then. God notions have evolved over time... now we're outside of the universe but that didn't use to be the case. Cultures have borrowed ideas off each other..tweaked and made it more personal to them. Resurrection and saviour gods... floods.. this isn't unique to christiantity and predates it.
  19. Do you see how you've put the conclusion into the initial premise? An impartial way to ask about the question of the origin of the universe is to say it had a cause.. now we need find evidence of what that is. The world of quantum mechanics is bizarre and not intuitive as we would like it to be. It's often a case of do the maths and then perform the experiment to validate it. We have evidence of a single particle being in 2 places at once to cause reaction to itself... see the two slit experiment. I've already said which I guess you didnt read evidence of virtual particles that come in and out of existence from no matter no energy no radiation. The fundamentals of reality and quantum mechanics seem bizarre and not intuitive but the universe doesn't care about our ability or inability to understand it. It's been a remarkable achievement to come as far as we have
  20. I've no doubt some scientists are this way... thankfully we've a plethora of scientists in all fields to peer review and hold them to account.. that's how it works right. Something doesn't become true because one scientist says it is... that needs to then be validated and falisified by his or her peers. This case from a singular authority without corroberative evidence and peer review isn't reliable... that's why we need peer review. The argument from authority stuff seems to be that of religions. It doesn't make sense to me when those who readily question authority when it occurs in the scientific but don't apply the same scepticism and reason when they look at religious books.
  21. Hi one. Been a while... hope you're well and having a good 2018 You and I agree on Darwinian evolution if I recall. How long did it take for humanity to come to understand evolution as explanation for diversity of life? We've certainly evidence of building blocks but a definitive actual answer as to how chemistry became life I'm not so sure. Some here say it's impossible... that would require knowledge and testing of all possible variables and conditions of the early solar system and maybe beyond. Clearly that's not been done. Not been done and therefore God is an argument from ignorance fallacy. The God and then a particular God needs to be demonstrated. Same as those who think aliens did it or we live in a matrix or anything else. The question itself is an immensely tough one to answer. Maybe we'll come up with a model or models of how it could happen.. maybe we'll be able to show it did happen a certain way. Say it takes 10 years or 100 years... does that not make it valid? Essentially don't know on any subject in our history remains don't know.
  22. I understand that whatever denomination of theist someone happens be they feel theirs is special and the right one or they wouldn't be in it. They all vary to degrees of course.. some more than others and mono theistic and polytheistic but many have sons of gods...saviour and resurrection gods... flood myths...predating Christianity too..i see no reason to accept one over another other than buy into religions of whatever culture people happen to be born into whether they are the ones that are more dominant now or others that were in the past. Please provide the methodologies you've used to disprove other unfalsifiable gods and accept yours? It all looks get indoctrinated into your cultural religion on faith and now go read the world through that lense. All theists believe in gods. All atheists don't commit atrocities. I could name rekigiiys people involved in religious wars. This is a bizarre equivocation and not relevant or analogous. But that is not what we're saying. The evidence is right in front of you. It's not something I have to go find. That's exactly what I'm saying that's why I said it. The observations of reality are infront of me. In order to believe a god hypothesis is true that needs demonstration not assertion. As does 1 or many gods over another. To say it's the best yet you have not demonstrated odds of alternatives to show that. No one knows what it was... you say... that's correct for now. To then say no one knows and go to God coz it's the best is a logical fallacy called an argument from ignorance. An impersonal force such as evolution? So you can demonstrably show evolution couldn't? Equality and freedom... tell that to those enslaved in exodus. Or verses such as kill the men... boys.. women who've known a man but keep the virgin girls for yourselves as the spoils of war. Numbers 31. Moral or are you going go for some cognitive dissonance and moral relativism? That's more assertion and not evidence. You don't need to demonstrate coz things like that qualify as evidence? That's faith. Well virtual particles come in and out of existence from no matter... no energy... no radiation. This has been demonstrated in labs. All that we've discovered thus far are natural laws...these function in their own causational way following laws ie they aren't requiring supernatural on going tinkering. Now you can say the cause of the laws is not further laws yet to be discovered but a god did it but that's what needs to be demonstrated. As you said earlier we don't know... and that led to the arguement from ignorance fallacy...therefore God... with some special pleading... therefore the christian one.. Which only further demonstrates why you're not intellectually fit for this discussion. You don't know enough about other religions to compare them with Christianity. You make broad, sweeping generalizations about something you have no real knowledge about. More personal attacks.. on top of liken to a 12 year old and onion thing earlier. I'll report this latest "I'm not intellectually fit" ad hominem and leave our discussion there. It's a shame you resort to this line in discussion...it doesn't reflect well on you. I'll not lower myself to reciprocate. The worthy site welcomes believers... seekers... non believers let's remember. Anyway thanks for your time... all the best.
  23. This is the bias presupposition when you say creator. There would have been a cause. God hypothesis for this cause should be demonstrated. Then one good notion over 1000s of others. Logic... reason.. science doesn't come from the heart. I guess added with you saying what you choose to believe and heart you're adding emotion.. want.. hope.. and like. That's nothing to do with what's true. I don't choose my beliefs on this subject... I'm forced to believe evidence of reality.
  24. A Christian isn't a theist? You are a theist as you believe in a higher being deity and christiantity is one of 1000s of religions that fall under that. As a non believer I lump them all in together. What you've just engaged in is a special pleading logical fallacy. All religions think they're correct. All need faith as evidence and causation. You don't buy into the rest as I don't...i just add one more. So what? That doesn't rule out the existenceof God Correct. As a non believer it's not my job to disprove the unfalsifiable otherwise it's true. I just see no good reason to accept the claim from a point of accept no claims now look for evidence. Theists start with there is a god... my god is the right one now I'll go look and try and find evidence. All the things you've mentioned... the God or gods of any other religion can be swapped in there and the faith based evidence remark is asserted with equal validity. None. It simply is the best explanation since the only other alternative is that everything simply came into existence through an unknown, impersonal "cause." So you've no assessment of probalistic yet it's more probable. The second part of that is an arguement from ignorance fallacy. Unknown therefore God did it and my god did it. I don't need to. Don't need too but if you care about what's true you do. We can say we've evidence of songs and songwriters..if we hear another song it's reasonable to think this is another created song coz we've precedent. This thinking doesn't then equate to a universe being created by a magical supernatural being. How many other universes do we have proof some being did it for this comparison. The Designer designed it that way. The universe is logical and it is rational and you need that to do science. You need an intelligently, logically created universe to do science, to make predictions. Math is ordered, uniform, and logical and everything about math is intellectual. And everything in the universe can be broken down to a mathematical equation. The universe is wholly mathematical. That speaks to intelligence. This isn't demonstration of God this is demonstration of natural laws we understand and continue to build on. If we had no natural laws and things randomly happened without cause that might point to God. Natural laws don't require god involvement else scientific progress would be hopeless. Now maybe a God initiated natural laws but how do we demonstrate that. Assertion and analogy isn't enough and isn't scientific.
  25. Awesome on building your house. Again this is an equivocation fallacy and analogy it's not god evidence. No doubt others observed your house construction.. family...friends...suppliers. we could sit at talk you give on house building...ask you questions.. we'd all witness this and corroberate. We have evidence of other houses being built. You can't do anything like this for god. House building isn't faith.
  • Create New...