Conquer Club

^^^

Right. Since science is msot often labeled as what scientists do, and 99.9% of scientists do evolution, what is an old s tale doing in our schools, poinoning minds? What do pastors know of science?

Generally I tend to accept my scientific arguments from people who don't believe in fucking fairies.

No offence my god-bothering friends

AlgyTaylor wrote:Generally I tend to accept my scientific arguments from people who don't believe in fucking fairies.

No offence my god-bothering friends

Heheheh, putting no offense at the end of an insult usually doesn't work.

Backglass wrote:You call this selfish (a typical theists jab) as you assume that without magical gods a person can't give or help his fellow man. Next you will claim that I am deeply unhappy. Been there...heard that.

comic boy wrote:What you people dont seem to be able to grasp is that we dont care a jot about your beliefs,worship God,hamburgers or pixies and we couldnt care less. What we do object to is trying to promote an article of your faith in opposition to a sound scientific theory. If evolution poses difficult questions then that is for you to resolve, dogma has no right to limit human knowledge and progress.

unriggable wrote:Right. Since science is msot often labeled as what scientists do, and 99.9% of scientists do evolution, what is an old s tale doing in our schools, poinoning minds? What do pastors know of science?

I think you guys missed the point. The difference between me and you is that I am willing to accept that there are things beyond human control, which humans cannot understand. Your theory that there is no God is just that- a theory. It is not absolute truth, yet you see it as truth. My faith in God is just that- faith. I don't think that there is any way to scientifically prove that God exists, so of course it has to be faith.

The purpose of giving and helping fellow man has nothing to do with God. I think people should do it because they realize that all humans are equal. Helping the less fortunate is simply helping humanity.

As for comic boy and unriggable, I have to say this: creationism and evolution NEED NOT oppose each other. I won't bother explaining all the theories, (they are all just theories anyway,) but it's not jut a black or white issue.

Backglass wrote:Such as? I am open to any and all ideas presented with proof and common sense. Got any?

It's the need for proof that limits your mind. And common sense would indicate that some being had to create the universe- after all, you can't make something out of nothing. Common sense, right?

AlgyTaylor wrote:Generally I tend to accept my scientific arguments from people who don't believe in fucking fairies.

No offence my god-bothering friends

That's stereotyping, as you well know. There are plenty of theists out there who can construct arguments more effectively than you can. Me, for instance.

john9blue wrote:The difference between me and you is that I am willing to accept that there are things beyond human control, which humans cannot understand.

I agree with you there. You just throw up your hands and say "ain't it wonderful what god does". I say we just haven't figured it out yet.

john9blue wrote:Your theory that there is no God is just that- a theory. It is not absolute truth, yet you see it as truth. My faith in God is just that- faith. I don't think that there is any way to scientifically prove that God exists, so of course it has to be faith.

Then you believe in Leprechauns? Loch Ness Monsters? The Yeti? Chupacabra? After all you can't prove they don't exist and the circumstances in which they appear are not explainable. Correct?

All the wishing & hoping in the world won't make magical gods real.

john9blue wrote:The purpose of giving and helping fellow man has nothing to do with God. I think people should do it because they realize that all humans are equal. Helping the less fortunate is simply helping humanity.

Agreed. No religion required.

john9blue wrote:It's the need for proof that limits your mind. And common sense would indicate that some being had to create the universe- after all, you can't make something out of nothing. Common sense, right?

Just because we do not understand the mechanism of the universe, does not mean that magical gods roam the heavens. You do not win by default simply because science has not yet figured things out. My personal belief is that the universe is infinite and has always been here. No creation or creator needed.

"Its the need for proof that limits your mind?" That has to be one of the most back-assward excuses I have ever heard. It's your belief in legend, lore & stories of old that has already limited yours, my friend.

john9blue wrote:I think you guys missed the point. The difference between me and you is that I am willing to accept that there are things beyond human control, which humans cannot understand. Your theory that there is no God is just that- a theory. It is not absolute truth, yet you see it as truth. My faith in God is just that- faith. I don't think that there is any way to scientifically prove that God exists, so of course it has to be faith.

No I think you might've missed the point. It doesn't matter whether god exists, what matters is that evolution is true.
What we're saying is that you have every right to believe in god and creationism, just don't ever try to teach it as some sort of fact.

As for comic boy and unriggable, I have to say this: creationism and evolution NEED NOT oppose each other. I won't bother explaining all the theories, (they are all just theories anyway,) but it's not jut a black or white issue.

Evolution does not oppose a God that was involved. It most certainly does oppose creationism in the literalist sense.

It's the need for proof that limits your mind. And common sense would indicate that some being had to create the universe- after all, you can't make something out of nothing. Common sense, right?

Sure. What created that being?

If I were to believe in all controling invisible guinea pigs then not only my mind but probably my liberty would be limited, yet those people take just as big a leap of imagination with an arrogant swagger. Yes theres nothing wrong with a degree of imagination, bloody silly though to let a hunch rule your life

Here, let's end this argument. Here's everyones main point.

As a (thiest/athiest/agnostic), it seems pretty freaking clear to me that there is (a god/no god/no way we can figure this shit out). I am 100% positive about this. Because I have determined this as absolute fact after (searching my soul/turning this over in my head/turning this over in my head until I have such a terrible headache that I just give up) people that feel something else is true are (narrow-minded/extremely superstitious/claiming to know what they can't), and are pretty much a lost cause. Therefore, we should just mind our own business until someone else tries to force their beliefs on us.

Hooray!

Disclaimer: Scientology is, in fact, the only correct belief.

Frigidus wrote:Here, let's end this argument. Here's everyones main point.

As a (thiest/athiest/agnostic), it seems pretty freaking clear to me that there is (a god/no god/no way we can figure this shit out). I am 100% positive about this. Because I have determined this as absolute fact after (searching my soul/turning this over in my head/turning this over in my head until I have such a terrible headache that I just give up) people that feel something else is true are (narrow-minded/extremely superstitious/claiming to know what they can't), and are pretty much a lost cause. Therefore, we should just mind our own business until someone else tries to force their beliefs on us.

Hooray!

As a scientologist i find this discriminatory and defmatory. I suggest you find yourself a lawyer.

heavycola wrote:

Frigidus wrote:Here, let's end this argument. Here's everyones main point.

As a (thiest/athiest/agnostic), it seems pretty freaking clear to me that there is (a god/no god/no way we can figure this shit out). I am 100% positive about this. Because I have determined this as absolute fact after (searching my soul/turning this over in my head/turning this over in my head until I have such a terrible headache that I just give up) people that feel something else is true are (narrow-minded/extremely superstitious/claiming to know what they can't), and are pretty much a lost cause. Therefore, we should just mind our own business until someone else tries to force their beliefs on us.

Hooray!

As a scientologist i find this discriminatory and defmatory. I suggest you find yourself a lawyer.

Oh, crap! I'm sorry, I added a disclaimer.

Frigidus wrote:

heavycola wrote:

Frigidus wrote:Here, let's end this argument. Here's everyones main point.

As a (thiest/athiest/agnostic), it seems pretty freaking clear to me that there is (a god/no god/no way we can figure this shit out). I am 100% positive about this. Because I have determined this as absolute fact after (searching my soul/turning this over in my head/turning this over in my head until I have such a terrible headache that I just give up) people that feel something else is true are (narrow-minded/extremely superstitious/claiming to know what they can't), and are pretty much a lost cause. Therefore, we should just mind our own business until someone else tries to force their beliefs on us.

Hooray!

As a scientologist i find this discriminatory and defmatory. I suggest you find yourself a lawyer.

Oh, crap! I'm sorry, I added a disclaimer.

A good idea. Tom is watching you, remember.

Lol @ Frigidus.

Anyway, let's face facts. Theists cannot prove that there is a God. Atheists cannot prove otherwise. If this wasn't true, nobody would be having this argument.

One thing I have noticed, though: the atheists tend to use a great deal of emotional appeal, rather than logical appeal. For instance:

Backglass wrote:The truth that there is a magical man in the sky who nobody has ever seen, watching over us?

you assume that without magical gods a person can't give or help his fellow man. Next you will claim that I am deeply unhappy.

Then you believe in Leprechauns? Loch Ness Monsters? The Yeti? Chupacabra?

won't make magical gods real.

does not mean that magical gods roam the heavens.

That has to be one of the most back-assward excuses I have ever heard. It's your belief in legend, lore & stories of old that has already limited yours, my friend.

comic boy wrote:we dont care a jot about your beliefs,worship God,hamburgers or pixies and we couldnt care less.

If I were to believe in all controling invisible guinea pigs

yet those people take just as big a leap of imagination with an arrogant swagger.

bloody silly though to let a hunch rule your life

unriggable wrote:what is an old s tale doing in our schools, poinoning minds? What do pastors know of science?

AlgyTaylor wrote:people who don't believe in fucking fairies.

Not a fact can be found in this pile of bullshit. Backglass' excessive use of the word 'magic' is proof of his inability to argue properly.

You can't compare God to things like guinea pigs and the Yeti. Those are finite beings which we already have preconceived notions about.

I'm willing to have a discussion, but I find it hard to argue with people who take science as their 'god'. They get on an intellectual high horse when dealing with people they consider to be 'lowly Christians', and start talking about magical creatures as if they were 6 years old. I know I'm drawing conclusions here, but your attitude is all too obvious. I regret that there aren't very many believers like myself who have both the ability and desire to argue at such great length, but you guys are turning this into a mud-slinging fest.

God is equivalent to a magical creature. If he's not very magical, then he's a bit crap, isnt he?

it seems rather questionable to chide the atheist group for arguing the issue with an emotive slant when seemingly the primary function of faith for a majority of believers is edification, a process which is inherently emotive.

Though you may be planning to argue on behalf of God using logic or reason, as many have done in part or tried to do, to make that claim going into things without having supported yourself as standing in opposition to it at the outset....is no more a trick than the tactics your opposition uses.

Pot meet kettle.

suggs wrote:God is equivalent to a magical creature. If he's not very magical, then he's a bit crap, isnt he?

You could call it magic, but that word has a strong connotation of "this isn't real, it's just make believe." That's why I dislike its usage in an argument.

got tonkaed wrote:Though you may be planning to argue on behalf of God using logic or reason, as many have done in part or tried to do, to make that claim going into things without having supported yourself as standing in opposition to it at the outset....is no more a trick than the tactics your opposition uses.

I'm certainly not trying to prove God using logic and reason!

john9blue wrote:Theists cannot prove that there is a God.

There is a difference between faith and emotion. Faith is acceptance, emotion is feeling. Both have no logic involved, but that doesn't make them the same.

john9blue wrote:I'm certainly not trying to prove God using logic and reason!

Then... what's left?

john9blue wrote:Not a fact can be found in this pile of bullshit. Backglass' excessive use of the word 'magic' is proof of his inability to argue properly.

Nah, he's just a bit tired of all the bullshit fundies say.

You can't compare God to things like guinea pigs and the Yeti. Those are finite beings which we already have preconceived notions about.

Uhm......they are as reasonable as god. The invisible guinea pig (or unicorn) is a metaphor to show your position is illogical at best.

I'm willing to have a discussion, but I find it hard to argue with people who take science as their 'god'.

We don't actually listen to some abritary laws science invented though. Besides, that silly little thing called "proof" always helps.

They get on an intellectual high horse when dealing with people they consider to be 'lowly Christians', and start talking about magical creatures as if they were 6 years old. I know I'm drawing conclusions here, but your attitude is all too obvious. I regret that there aren't very many believers like myself who have both the ability and desire to argue at such great length, but you guys are turning this into a mud-slinging fest.

Join the Jesus Freaks.

fair enough, i just wanted to make sure you werent out to try and reinvent the wheel, or at least if you were out to do such a thing, that you didnt irrevocably flaw yourself right off the go...which has happened at least once or a hundred times around here.

I suppose ill agree in part to your definition of faith tangentially...i personally side with the verse somewheres in the bible that claims its more related to hope...but acceptance works well enough i suppose.

Out of curiousity...is the particular notion of God you hold an anthromorphized one?

john9blue wrote:Not a fact can be found in this pile of bullshit. Backglass' excessive use of the word 'magic' is proof of his inability to argue properly.

Well excuse me for not "arguing properly". Your gods arent magic? What do you call all powerful, all knowing creatures in the sky then?

john9blue wrote:You can't compare God to things like guinea pigs and the Yeti. Those are finite beings which we already have preconceived notions about.

At least we have all seen guinea pigs and know that they exist.

john9blue wrote:I'm willing to have a discussion, but I find it hard to argue with people who take science as their 'god'.

No gods exist..scientific or otherwise.

john9blue wrote:They get on an intellectual high horse when dealing with people they consider to be 'lowly Christians', and start talking about magical creatures as if they were 6 years old.

Sorry pal, but what else do you call it? You believe that a supernatural THING (being/creature/man/plant) lives OUT THERE (space/time/heaven) and can do ANYTHING it wants...all powerful et all. Sounds like a magical creature to me.

As for six year olds, it certainly does sound like a six year old comic book doesn't it. But hey...If that helps you get through life, go for it. But that doesn't make it real.

john9blue wrote:I know I'm drawing conclusions here, but your attitude is all too obvious. I regret that there aren't very many believers like myself who have both the ability and desire to argue at such great length, but you guys are turning this into a mud-slinging fest.

As is yours. I am ready and willing to view your evidence and proof. Please present it.

john9blue wrote:You could call it [God] magic, but that word has a strong connotation of "this isn't real, it's just make believe." That's why I dislike its usage in an argument.

Dislike it all you want, that doesn't change the fact that it's entirely appropriate...

The point is that your desire to cling to a God is as irrational as any other human clinging to any other unprovable belief, regardless of how noble you feel your own particular irrational belief is (yes, those beliefs would include leprechauns, fairies, boogeymen, and thetans).

The point is that, despite you and your fellow theist's best efforts, you can't prove that God is real, you can't make him seem like the most likely possibility, you can't even make his existance look reasonably likely... hence he's still very much in the realm of speculation and fiction... otherwise known as: make-believe. Or alternatively: Not Real.

I really do fail to see why theists get so upset when people refuse to treat their arguments with the hushed reverence they're used to giving it themselves.

Tell me, If you rocked up and started telling me that vampires existed and that you had a really old book which agreed with you, would you expect me to treat your argument seriously? You wouldn't? Well then why do you think the situation is different when you replace the word 'vampires' with 'magic invisible omnipotent astral kings'?

Sometimes I feel bad for the theists...seems like they get ganged up on a lot. Why is there such a large proportion of athiests on CC anyways?

Frigidus wrote:Sometimes I feel bad for the theists...seems like they get ganged up on a lot. Why is there such a large proportion of athiests on CC anyways?

There isn't, it's just that there's a large number of athiest who feel the need to impose their beliefs on others.

Grooveman2007 wrote:

Frigidus wrote:Sometimes I feel bad for the theists...seems like they get ganged up on a lot. Why is there such a large proportion of athiests on CC anyways?

There isn't, it's just that there's a large number of athiest who feel the need to impose their beliefs on others.

It's retaliation from having to deal with theist shit everywhere else.

Neoteny wrote:

Grooveman2007 wrote:

Frigidus wrote:Sometimes I feel bad for the theists...seems like they get ganged up on a lot. Why is there such a large proportion of athiests on CC anyways?

There isn't, it's just that there's a large number of athiest who feel the need to impose their beliefs on others.

It's retaliation from having to deal with theist shit everywhere else.

Give me three examples of rampant "theist shit" in public domain.
Also, why is someone's beliefs considered shit if you don't agree with it?

Grooveman2007 wrote:

Neoteny wrote:

Grooveman2007 wrote:

Frigidus wrote:Sometimes I feel bad for the theists...seems like they get ganged up on a lot. Why is there such a large proportion of athiests on CC anyways?

There isn't, it's just that there's a large number of athiest who feel the need to impose their beliefs on others.

It's retaliation from having to deal with theist shit everywhere else.

Give me three examples of rampant "theist shit" in public domain.
Also, why is someone's beliefs considered shit if you don't agree with it?

Uh oh, take offense much?

I count churches as a past-time on car trips. Wanna guess my highest tally? It's mildly ridiculous.

What kind of music do I have to listen to between Thanksgiving and New Years if I want to leave my house?

Why is the governor of my state wasting his salary (tax money) by praying for rain? He can do that at home and actually work during the day to solve problems. I know it's a lot to ask for in an elected official, but it's a new concept I think they should try.

Those are just the less than obvious ones.

Theism is shit because it proposes a lot of unnecessary, messy conjecture.