It existed before we evolved. We just made names.
Emotions and experiences existed before we evolved is what I meant.
Bro, you’re not reading man. I keep saying I believe man. I BELIVE.
Like Mulder from X-Files. Have you seen that poster?
Ok so circling back now all the way to may original statements.
If you don’t like my kind of thinking for believing then why don’t you like it? Your way of thinking doesn’t bother me for example. We’re both happy, having a beer and all’s good.
It’s like asking me Why do you like the color Blue man, why? It makes no sense to me.
So this is where I’d like to alert you to a new fact that belief is personal and we’re all different or wired differently on how we process faith.
Yes currently you have no reason or proof to deny God either.
It’s simply a matter of belief.
Who said anything about denying anything. I asked you to describe what this god thing was and you made up a story about a first cause thing. Of course I have a good reason to deny 'That God," it’s a made up story with no facts or evidence backing it up. Are you stupid? Of course I have a reason. It’s like you have told me, “You have no reasong not to believe in Santa Clause.” Frankly, good ole Santa is much more believable than your version of God.
You can believe whatever you want to believe. It’s not my fault you don’t give a shit about sounding like an idiot.
1 Like
Not believing in something until you have proof it’s true is not the same as believing in something until you have proof it isn’t. I guess it only matters if you care what you believe is true. I’m not even sure which god or gods you believe in since you’re willing to believe things without proof it could be any of them. Your icon and name do imply the christian god, but you seem reluctant to say. You saying you’d change your mind if there was proof otherwise is something I’ve never heard from a devout christian though.
1 Like
…(bursting open door… stumbling into room… gasping for breath)… Hey… every… body… (deeeep breath)… Made it… here… as quick as… I could… (bent at waist… head down… hands on knees)… Hold on a sec… (catching breath… slowly recovering)… Okay… I think I’m good now. So, what have I missed? Heard we had a theist visiting. Dammit, I hope Cog hasn’t chased him away already! Let’s see…
Hey there, Eli! You still with us? Hope so. Don’t take any shit off Cog, man. He can’t help being a caustic ass. Just his nature. And it has nothing to do with him HAVING a caustic ass. Two different things entirely. Anyway, welcome to the AR. Buckle up and enjoy the ride. That being said, I have a quick question before I dive in here, if you don’t mind.
In which god do you believe? There are so many from which to choose, I don’t want to make any assumptions.
Hey! You got a problem with folks made in factories?
And there we have it. " I cant stand not knowing, curiosity is frightening so I will choose this god that I heard (from the herd) about and make like I believe in it."
Not a good basis for reality. A good basis for creating the most horrible crimes and claiming it was the will of “godofchoice”. The abrogation of responsibility is the hallmark of this brand of theist.
2 Likes
C’mon… Let’s be fair, Old Man. Without some imaginary SkyDaddy to tell them what is right and wrong, how else are they gonna be good people?
1 Like
Oh, you just had to resurrect this piece of repeatedly destroyed bullshit, didn’t you?
Strap yourself in, Looby Loo, because you’re in for a hard ride.
First of all, the people who think the universe “came from nothing”, are mythology fanboys like you, who think that their cartoon magic man waved its magic todger about and poofed a universe into existence from nothing. Or did you fail to pay attention when you were taught in the relevant classes, that creation ex nihilo is actually a central Christian doctrine?
So, having got that out of the way, it’s time for …
Second, alternative postulates about the origin of the universe are not the remit of “atheism”, regardless of how many scurrilous lies to this effect are peddled by mythology fanboys. Atheism, in its rigorous formulation, concerns itself with one topic, and one topic only, namely suspicion of unsupported mtyhology fanboy assertions. That is IT. Equivalently, atheism consists of “YOU assert that your magic man exists, YOU support your assertions”, preferably with something other than the utterly lame “my mythology says so, therefore it’s true” nonsense we see all the time from your ilk. The only thing your mythology is “evidence” for, is the propensity of the authors to make shit up.
This brings me on to …
Third, the real source of alternative postulates about the origin of the universe is scientists, in particular, cosmological physicists. Who, if you bother to read their peer reviewed scientific papers (a task mythology fanboys tend never to undertake), do NOT postulate that the universe came from “nothing”. Instead, if you read the relevant papers, what cosmological physicists actually postulate, is that testable natural processes, involving well-defined entities and interactions, were responsible for the observable universe and its contents.
This leads me on to …
Fourth, once again, if you had ever bothered to pay attention in the relevant science classes, you would have learned that evolutionary theory doesn’t postulate that we are an “accident”, but once again, that we are the product of testable natural processes in action. Processes which exhibit well-defined behaviours, and which indeed have not only been modelled in relevant simulations, but pressed into service to perform tasks such as designing spacecraft communcations antennae - I have a particularly nice scientific paper describing this very application in my collection.
Which leads me on to …
Fifth, when scientists use the word “random”, they do NOT mean “happened by accident for no reason”, this is a duplicitous caricature peddled by mythology fanboys. Once again, if you had paid attention in the relevant classes, you would have learned that what scientists mean by a random variable, is a variable whose values conform to a probability distribution. The fun part being that probability distributions can arise from well-defined sets of interactions.
Indeed, one of the reasons that scientists resort to random variables, is because they know that a multiplicity of well-defined processes could have produced a given result, but they lack the audit trail of data informing them which of those options actually took place. So, they treat the outcome as having arisen from a random variable governed by a probability distribution, and modelled by a Markov chain process. The fun part being that the individual components of a Markov chain process are themselves deterministic. What is undetermined in a Markov chain process, is which of the deterministic options was selected in a given instance. Consequently, probabilities are assigned to each of the processes in the chain, in such a manner that the Markov chain process delivers outcomes matching relevant real world data.
This of course, neglects a key element in evolutionary processes, namely selection, which acts as a high pass filter removing the obvious dead ends.
I therefore move on to …
Sixth … now, it so happens that scientists, courtesy of several million peer reviewed scientific papers, have provided a vast mountain of evidence, to the effect that testable natural processes are sufficient to explain vast classes of entities and interactions, including classes thereof that the authors of your goat herder mythology were incapable of even fantasising about. Indeed, the authors of your favourite mythology demonstrated their parlous standards of knowledge, by scribbling within the pages thereof the ridiculous assertion that genetics is purportedly controlled by coloured sticks. Except that oops, this assertion was found to be a risible lie by a 19th century monk, whose landmark scientific research not only taught us how genetics actually operates, but also laid the foundations of modern genetics as a properly constituted scientific discipline.
Apparently your cartoon magic man, if it ever existed, was not only too stupid to present basic biological facts correctly, but was also insufficiently “omniscient” to foresee the emergence of said 19th century monk and his diligent scientific experiments.
Meanwhile, before you posture as being in a position to lecture us on what we purportedly think, without bothering with the inconvenience of actually asking us about this first, be advised that you’re heading at speed toward a world of discoursive hurt if you pursue this foolhardy path.
3 Likes
Yeah! What he said! …
There’s no Proof Ra doesn’t exist, you believe in him? There’s no proof Lolth doesn’t exist, you believe in her? There’s no proof Santa doesn’t exist, you believe in him?
1 Like
Okay this is also something that I accept because I believe animals are God’s creatures too and are able to show emotion. In fact one Gorrila was able to communicate using sign language with Robin Williams (video is online) and expressed sadness at the notion of death.
Looks like there’s a limit here of 21 messages per day on new users so I gotta make my posts count.
Not good because I like fluid conversations and not writing essays. Anyways …
Hahah, and you think you’re somehow smart?
You’re so dumb that you’re in conflict with your own position saying “I deny God” but I provide no proof for this statement. Your statement is a statement of faith you moron. A true atheist is allowed to say only “I don’t know”.
You’re like a child who doesn’t know what he doesn’t know.
You’re essentially having an issue with people liking the color Blue because you like the color Red.
You’re so immature that you’re not even grasping the existential questions and human reasoning which lead one person on a certain path and another person on another path.
Again, I see existence and say “this is the work of a creator”. You see existence and you’re either supposed to have NO Opinion or provide proof that God doesn’t exist.
Idiot ! Lol
I don’t think so. As I mentioned above , if you deny something you’re in a belief system without proof and if you’re a true atheist your only good and honest position is “I don’t know’. You’re supposed to have no opinion and be Switzerland.
Also as far as what god do I believe, I didn’t want to mention it first because I don’t want to start tired old debates from a Christian perspective. But I am a Christian and believe in Jesus Christ.
I’d like to discuss the human thought process first why it leads us on certain paths before discussing details about Gods. Also my choice of Gods should be irrelevant to you as an atheist so I don’t know why you’re asking or care.
Hey what’s up buddy?
Nah I like you guys, that’s why I’m here :).
As I mentioned above I’m a Christian. Good to be here and I’ll try to be as frequent as I can.
I’m also hoping that these 21 posts per day restrictions would lift but if they stay … I don’t care.
Yeah cos there’s no thinking involved, it’s like you guys are reading from a script. Lol
Oh so you have a good basis for reality? You know Why this universe exist? Also what’s your problem with people believing in something? Are you a ray-cist?
I don’t have a problem with you believing in nothing and throwing yourself off a Cliff when you’re sick because you’re simply a bad config of cells with no hope.
Omg I can’t wait !
User Calilaseia has all the existential human questions.
[quote]
First of all, the people who think the universe “came from nothing”, are mythology fanboys like you, who think that their cartoon magic man waved its magic todger about and poofed a universe into existence from nothing. Or did you fail to pay attention when you were taught in the relevant classes, that creation ex nihilo is actually a central Christian doctrine? [/quote]
Umm hi. Did you read so far? I’m guessing no. Do you know what existential questions are? I’m guessing no.
Let’s try again.
Why does the universe exist? How did the big bag happen and why?
Hahah. Do you know why you’re an atheist? Do you even know what you do and follow and WHY?
Atheism is lack of belief in Gods.
So if you want to counter someone who believes in Gods you need to provide Proof for the Lack Of Gods. Because if YOU have that proof then I would STOP believing in Gods.
Otherwise your position is “I don’t know”. That’s your only position. Because you lack belief and have no proof. Those are the conditions of your position.
Umm I don’t think you understand. A true scientist or atheist should say “I don’t know” why the universe exists and HOW it came into being.
Anything else such as “matrix” or “multiverse” theories are philosophy and you’re into agnostic realm.
But you’re not reading again and you’re explaining the How to me. I’m asking Why.
Sigh. Why? Why? Why?
Again I’m asking existential questions NOT a process. Do you know WHY this happened? Why did the Big Bang happen and then evolution as a consequence of it?
WHY?
Yeah what you’re describing here is the fine-tuned theory which further supports my belief in God, but I’m not even there yet. I’m at the WHY. Focus! I’m asking existential questions while trying to explain the human thought process.
Focus!
Thank you for again describing HOW but not WHY. Lol
Lol I think that you’re a bit full of air and need to sit down and try to focus on some basic fundamental thought processes instead of being a pre-programmed robot coming from an atheist school. Just sit down, have a drink and do some pure thinking on your own.
Hurr durr I AM A BAG OF CELLS.
BOOP BEEP BOP
Do you consider yourself to be be mud figurine?
I don’t understand this statement and DONT WASTE MY POST COUNT !
lol
I think that post count thing will be over soon.
You say we are bags of cells, I can also say that you are mud figurine, with breath of life blown to it’s nostrils.
Ahhh I gotcha you now.
You know … I got nothing to say to that except that we’re different sides to the same coin.
Also why are my quotes automatically removed now? 