The Big Religion/God Debate

[sock]

Quite interesting read Free, thanks for that

But I still just see it as another "theory" that some "humans" have thought up, and if it were true what you say, I wouldn't like that reality... I think it'd suck lol.

I thought swimming would suck intill my dad threw me in the pool

[TheWalrus]

glad i have faith and spirituality.  i dont have to worry about this stuff, i just let God take care of it.  makes things a lot easier.   

[Abnaxus]

I sincerely have a problem with people trying to make their point with "look at what we don't know!". If you can't make your point with things you know/can explain/can reason, then you don't have a point.

We make our conclusions on the things we know, not on the things we don't know. If we're going to make conclusions based on what we don't know, then nobody can function at any job/project/hobby/whatever. It's not a hasty conclusion if all the evidence points to a certain conclusion.

I don't know how to make myself being understood (it's goddamn rare tho)...
It's not a "look at what we don't know", or it is, but also without being.

Let me give you an easy example:
Long time ago, people used to think the earth was flat, why ?
Because when they were looking at the horizon, there were seeing a flat land far as the eyes.
They used your way of thinking: the "look at what we have". But that doesn't mean you're right.
Cause first, you could be missing clues (what I'm hardly pointing on) and second, your clues could be false.

This is a point, weither you can admit it or not.

About using "supernatural" as an argument. Can anyone explain the difference between supernatural and magic? If you can't explain it, then that means you would be using magic as an argument - do you really want to do that?

Yes I do, and that's what I meant, I just used "scientific" word not to bother you.
You read my subject on the "supernatural" things I lived, so if you understood, you would understand my point (even if you don't believe it).

Anyway, I guess you feel like when someone tell me "god exists".
They're saying god exists without having any proofs or even having seen something related to it. So it's stupid to believe in something so abstract (otherwise it has never been prooven that birds couldn't be aliens, so let's all kill the birds !).
BUT, I did (weither it was hallucination or not, I did, you can't deny it). I'm not saying this is true, but since I saw some things incredible, it's not my base, but I can't discard it.

I'm just trying to show you I already took this fact in consideration.
So you can't just call a thing that has already been excluded (I'm sure you won't get me now xD).

EVERYTHING I'M ABOUT TO SAY IS MY OPINION ONLY. I'm not trying to force feed anyone anything.. but I understand these are tender subjects  so I wanted to make sure everyone understands this.

Lol. xD
Dude, my pre-last post wasn't pointing you tho, but another guy calling others "crazy" because he had different thoughs (which wasn't you).
So you don't have to tell such things.  

Anyway, I didn't fully get your post, but I'm highly interested on what you said.
So if you could make me a very short summary (don't want to bother you), I would thank you pretty much.

"Look at what we don't know" in combination with "what if.." Yeah, it's hard to communicate with those ppl.. It's like those astrology guys/chicks.. Hard to explain anyshit and after some time U give up and let them be.

And just for the record, there's three of "what if" in Abnax 1 simple question..  .. .
There's a saying here about those "what if's"... says "If grandma had a dick she would be grandpa!" ;x

Don't take hasty conclusions. Especially cause you're digging yourself into the pit (cause most of the time, you don't understand me and so you start spreading stupid conclusions).
You don't like me, I don't like the way you're argumenting/talking, that's fine. Just shut up together.

Plus, do you really think we would know what we currently know if some physicians & philosophers weren't "looking at what we don't know" and using the "what if" ?
If I remember well, that was one of the basic methods of Einstein. And it led him to the string theory for example.


PS: I heard a scientist found a particle which could go faster than the light (which is supposed to be the fastest, and almost every researches and the physic is based on so: which would lead to a total remake of physic if it was false), and they are making a particle accelerator big enough to proove so (in asia if I remember well).
I heard that on a scientific documentary, so except if I missunderstood some things, you can't tell I dreamed it.  

PSS: D1, I'd like to have your opinion about "magnetisers" ?
Not that I believe it is real and works, I'll give you a funny anecdote.

[Ramone]

.....

"Look at what we don't know" in combination with "what if.." Yeah, it's hard to communicate with those ppl.. It's like those astrology guys/chicks.. Hard to explain anyshit and after some time U give up and let them be.

And just for the record, there's three of "what if" in Abnax 1 simple question..  .. .
There's a saying here about those "what if's"... says "If grandma had a dick she would be grandpa!" ;x

Don't take hasty conclusions. Especially cause you're digging yourself in the pit (cause most of the time, you don't understand me and so you start spreading stupid conclusions).
You don't like me, I don't like the way you're argumenting/talking, that's fine. Just shut up together.

Chill out tough guy, no need to insult me and call my conclusions stupid without even a simple explanation why would you think that. I'm not the one who wanted to ask "simple question" and ended up with three "what if" in that question.

And I won't "shut up together", I'll say what I wanna say whenever I want. If you tell me to shut up I'll tell you to f@#! off or something even worse and that doesn't lead to anywhere, does it? An easiest and stupidest thing to do is to insult like that..
Your reply says a lot about your consciousness, I'm sure you can't even see that..

PS: I heard a scientist found a particle which could go faster than the light (which is supposed to be the fastest, and almost every researches and the physic is based on so: which would lead to a total remake of physic if it was false), and they are making a particle accelerator big enough to proove so (in asia if I remember well).
I heard that on a scientific documentary, so except if I missunderstood some things, you can't tell I dreamed it. 

Again, you don't know what you're talking about, there's a proof right there. You don't have a will to go and spend some time on internet to find out more about that particle, you'd rather just speculate about it and interpret it in a way to suit your own needs*.

[Mablak]

glad i have faith and spirituality.  i dont have to worry about this stuff, i just let God take care of it.  makes things a lot easier.   

Well, God isn't really there, we're the only ones who can worry about this stuff ;0. If you believe in God, then there is an extremely heavy burden of proof on you to show it to the rest of us. I say if you can't prove it to a scientist, then it doesn't exist. And 93% of our National Academy of Sciences' members are atheist, for a good reason.

[sock]

p

[Flori]

Frodo: "It's a pity Bilbo didn't kill him when he had the chance!"

Gandalf: "Pity? It was pity that stayed Bilbo's hand. Many that live deserve death, and some that die deserve life. Can you give it to them, Frodo?
Do not be too eager to deal out death in judgment. Even the very wise can not see all ends. My heart tells me that Gollum has some part to play yet, for good or evil before this is over.
The pity of Bilbo may rule the fate of many."

Frodo: "I wish the Ring had never come to me. I wish none of this had happened."

Gandalf: "So do all who live to see such times, but that is not for them to decide. All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given to us. There are other forces at work in this world, Frodo, besides the will of evil. Bilbo was meant to find the Ring, in which case you also were meant to have it. And that is an encouraging thought."

No God. No miracles. If there would be a God there would be no more war and injustice. He'd kick the ass of motherf@#!ers and help poors and people that deserve it.
Some people deserve a better life but will never have it when some deserve to be locked for ever but live as kings their whole life.

Edit :
Ok seriously this is how i see it. I believe that we can't say that something exist if we don't have the proof of it, and if we don't have the proof then it doesn't exist. Example : Someone :"Vampire exists" Me :"You have a proof ?" The guy :"No" Me :"Then i believe it doesn't exist until someone proofsme it does". This is how i see it for everything.

But As ray said in his 1st post on 1st page, I have no problem with people that believe in God and I respect them, also I think that it is a good thing that people can feel better by praying and trying to be a better person.

Because what is important is how we feel inside. Personally if i have to pray i'd feel stupid and a waste of time, but I don't think people that pray are stupid and lose their time. If they can feel better by praying, that's what is important.

The only bad thing I could say about religion is that it is the cause of many wars and deaths in the past and still is a cause of discrimination and racism nowadays, and that is sad.
I don't say that without religion it would be different, or better, I don't know about it.

[DarkOne]

Let me give you an easy example:
Long time ago, people used to think the earth was flat, why ?
Because when they were looking at the horizon, there were seeing a flat land far as the eyes.
They used your way of thinking: the "look at what we have". But that doesn't mean you're right.
Cause first, you could be missing clues (what I'm hardly pointing on) and second, your clues could be false.

This is a point, weither you can admit it or not.

Did you know that before the middle ages, the ancient greeks knew the earth was round, just like the romans did? They looked at the sea and noticed that they first saw the sails of the ship and only later did they see the bottom part. They also saw that the shadow on the moon was round and concluded that the earth was causing this shadow.
Did you know there was even a greek a coule of hundred years before we started counting who knew the earth revolved around the sun? Look up aristarchus. That man was a badass
They even knew how to calculate the size of the sun and moon in relation to the earth!
Their observations gave them wrong numbers to work with, but their methods were flawless.
I'd like to think our methods of observation have improved over time, though

BUT, I did (weither it was hallucination or not, I did, you can't deny it). I'm not saying this is true, but since I saw some things incredible, it's not my base, but I can't discard it.

I'm just trying to show you I already took this fact in consideration.
So you can't just call a thing that has already been excluded (I'm sure you won't get me now xD).

No, I can't argue against your experiences, but personal experiences are notoriously unreliable, one of the reasons is the one you mentioned already. This is why we need to verify observations to show that someting is true. going by personal experience only is what I would call a hasty conclusion (e.g. The earth looks flat, so, it must be flat)

Plus, do you really think we would know what we currently know if some physicians & philosophers weren't "looking at what we don't know" and using the "what if" ?
If I remember well, that was one of the basic methods of Einstein. And it led him to the string theory for example.

PS: I heard a scientist found a particle which could go faster than the light (which is supposed to be the fastest, and almost every researches and the physic is based on so: which would lead to a total remake of physic if it was false), and they are making a particle accelerator big enough to proove so (in asia if I remember well).
I heard that on a scientific documentary, so except if I missunderstood some things, you can't tell I dreamed it.  

PSS: D1, I'd like to have your opinion about "magnetisers" ?
Not that I believe it is real and works, I'll give you a funny anecdote.

String theory is an active field of research in order to understand the strong nuclear force. The first time string theory was coined was in 1969, which is 14 years after Einstein's death.
Einstein came up with the theory of relativity and the reason he did so, was because we had Newtonian physics that could explain the orbit of all our planets, except for Mercury. It didn't add up, we were off by a few percent. General relativity used corrections because of the difference in time and distance caused by the increased gravity due to Mercury's proximity to the sun.
Einstein picked something that was observed, but not understood. And then he went on to try to understand it. Big difference from what you said!

As for the particle faster than light: did you try a bit of reading on that subject? It was a conclusion based on experiments at CERN in Geneva. The speed mesured was about 30 micrometers per second. This is well within the margin of error of measurements and they actually done the experiment again with different, independant scientists, which showed that it was indeed a measurement error (an accepted concept in the scientific community). Te scientist you were talking about is professor Brian Cox btw.

Magnetisors are hacks. Look up James Randi. An ex-magician, who spends a lot of time exposing frauds, very successfully, I might add.

[Abnaxus]

@Ramone: If you're that dumb, then I'll satisfy myself by ignoring you mate.

Did you know that before the middle ages, the ancient greeks knew the earth was round, just like the romans did? They looked at the sea and noticed that they first saw the sails of the ship and only later did they see the bottom part. They also saw that the shadow on the moon was round and concluded that the earth was causing this shadow.
Did you know there was even a greek a coule of hundred years before we started counting who knew the earth revolved around the sun? Look up aristarchus. That man was a badass
They even knew how to calculate the size of the sun and moon in relation to the earth!
Their observations gave them wrong numbers to work with, but their methods were flawless.
I'd like to think our methods of observation have improved over time, though

All the "new" observations you gave were missing to the one telling the earth was flat.
And so I think we're missing clues to tell another end to physic.
If you don't understand what I mean with that, then I give up, I don't know how to make you realize my point...  

No, I can't argue against your experiences, but personal experiences are notoriously unreliable, one of the reasons is the one you mentioned already. This is why we need to verify observations to show that someting is true. going by personal experience only is what I would call a hasty conclusion (e.g. The earth looks flat, so, it must be flat)

Did you notice I said I don't take it as a basis ?
I saw something not prooven, so I can't, but I also can't ignore it.

Example: During a fight, you think having found the weakness of your opponent, what do you do ?
You rush on it ? Even if it was false and it leads you to death ?
No, you keep it in mind until getting a proof of it (or at least another occasion to analyze it).
That's what I mean about magic: I saw it, but I can't believe in it. BUT, I can't ignore it in case it was true.

As for the particle faster than light: did you try a bit of reading on that subject? It was a conclusion based on experiments at CERN in Geneva. The speed mesured was about 30 micrometers per second. This is well within the margin of error of measurements and they actually done the experiment again with different, independant scientists, which showed that it was indeed a measurement error (an accepted concept in the scientific community). Te scientist you were talking about is professor Brian Cox btw.

Nop, I just watched that documentary and waited for that gigantic particle accelerator (they said about 5 years to construct it).
But ok, you get the point here.  

Magnetisors are hacks. Look up James Randi. An ex-magician, who spends a lot of time exposing frauds, very successfully, I might add.

Then I'll tell you the anecdote (well, I have already told it, but, interesting enough imo):

My father used to have an unkown desease which made him gets tumors (benign or not, we don't know, it was just "balls") randomly appear on his body and then randomly dissapear to go somewhere else, from feet to head. He went to many doctors and no ones found what it was.
He went to a magnetisor, and after some meeting, it totally dissappeared and never came back again.

What do you think of it ?
Imo, it's just psycologic. I mean, he healed the desease on his own: seeing the magnetiser was just the trigger (yeah, you know what I think about human capabilities   ).
As a doctor, do you have anything to tell about it ? Don't you agree it's very strange ? Plus it was not hallucination, otherwise hundreds of person constantly did the same hallucination at a different time.

[Maciej]

lol, so long topic about somthing what doesn't even exist?

[Aerox]

Abnaxus, not fully understanding science is not an argument in favor of magic, it's an argument in favor of human's lack of omniscience.

I was expecting a philosophical debate and yet here we are, talking about skepticism in science and miraculous healing. Really?

Faithful people can use logic to argument the existence of magic, I've seen it done. Sadly, you're doing the complete opposite. You're questioning science and medicine on the basis something strange happened to your father. Let me show you the argument the other way around:

My father had a strange disease. God infected his body with tumors. I went to the archbishop, he said God was getting ready to take him away, that I should be happy for him. Later on, the tumors just went away. Why did the archbishop lie to me? Clearly religion is a hoax. Since he was wrong, science could be right. I'm a scientist!

(it's a theoretical case, in practice, the bishop would claim god forgave his father or whatever and everyone would be yay)

This is clearly flawed as an argument, but only if your expectations include making sense.

[Abnaxus]

I don't use it as an argument.
As said, it's an anecdote, a case.
And I'd like to know what a doctor and/or scientists would say about this.

Here, I just want answers, I'm not arguying on anything.

PS: You're conclusion about your example is "religion is an hoax". But the real conclusion is "the bishop is an hoax".

PSS: All I want is that you realise there is a possibility all this exists.
In string theory, it said we had one chance over 1 Billion (or more) to cross a wall by pushing it.
But what if the real magic is that there is a scientific reason to grow those chances ? These are just presumption tho (I'm not telling it's true).

As you noticed, I don't have the knowledge of all this science, just know some part.
So I have to argue with what I have (lol, so we're coming back to what you said D1 ^^' ), BUT without telling aberrations tho.

[Aerox]

PSS: All I want is that you realise there is a possibility all this exists.

As opposed to me not already knowing?

We cannot prove the nonexistence of anything, therefore, anything could exist. However, here we are, focusing on the figure of God as opposed to more interesting things that could exist, like Elves. The only reason one can get away talking about certain magic (Christian magic) is culture, history and fear for death. Face it, become a free man.

edit: and if you're one of those agnostics of sorts, it's the same thing except culture and history don't play a role, fear for death does, hope or desire for the existence of something greater than you and other very simply explained sociological traits. It only takes a poor kid to desire magic existed for it to become recorded in his brain, he only has to say it and it will retro-aliment for ever and ever thanks to the approval and constant repetition of their dogma by people who share this same desire, and with this sectary procedure, we have people that believe in magic and are not slapped in the face by common sense because democracy enhances it.

But the pattern is clear, either the existence of God is proven in the next 30 years or religion will be seen as fanaticism and be embraced only by minorities (regarding numbers) and freaks. We'll have stronger drugs though, so we'll always have people like Free.

[Ramone]

@Ramone: If you're that dumb, then I'll satisfy myself by ignoring you mate.
...

A guy that doesn't know half about science as I do is telling me I'm dumb because I told him to inform himself before he post speculations about things he don't know..
Same pattern as always..
OK! Cool then, big accelerator in Asia in 5 years, right! What else is new, tell me more, feed my dumb ears with your knowledge! 

pffft..

[Cueshark]

Agree whole heartedly Ropa.

There's no need to resort to calling anyone dumb Abnaxus.

Just put together a strong argument for your case and debate it nicely.

;I