[Kazan]

Kasperl: how many times do you need to be shown that's IRRELEVANT - "WE" as in the most educated people on the planet, with the highest IQs and the best working knowledges of physics in existance

WE WHO ARE TRAINED IN FORMAL LOGIC


You don't have to repsect someone's beliefs - only their right to have them

Respecting irrational beliefs is DANGEROUS to the individual and potentially FATAL to the entire species




-------------------------

Before you try to keep arguing with us with various irrelevances go take a class in formal logic - logic is on my side of the argument - don't try to defend irrational morons it's foolish

[kasperl]

Originally posted by Kazan
---------------------

God can be disputed _VERY_ _EASILY_ pathetically easily

If you believe in something you have no evidence for you are being irrational - you instead have faith (in particular definition 2, 2 thourhg 5 are appropraite)


You cannot support the existance of a god, any god - therefore it is irrational for someone to believe in one.   I've argued this more times than there are days in a decade - not once has a theist been able to present an argument without logical fallacy - and that inlcudes a man with two PHd's in various religious studies fields

Oh? If any experiment fails, you only have to say "God didn't want to show himself to none-believers". There, no dispute God's excistence.

now, please note, i do not believe in God myself, i believe in science, but more importantly, i believe in tolerace.

[an0n]

Originally posted by kasperl
Oh? If any experiment fails, you only have to say "God didn't want to show himself to none-believers". There, no dispute God's excistence.

I've got an experiment that'd prove God doesn't exist.

[kasperl]

Originally posted by Kazan
Kasperl: how many times do you need to be shown that's IRRELEVANT - "WE" as in the most educated people on the planet, with the highest IQs and the best working knowledges of physics in existance

WE WHO ARE TRAINED IN FORMAL LOGIC


You don't have to repsect someone's beliefs - only their right to have them

Respecting irrational beliefs is DANGEROUS to the individual and potentially FATAL to the entire species




-------------------------

Before you try to keep arguing with us with various irrelevances go take a class in formal logic - logic is on my side of the argument - don't try to defend irrational morons it's foolish

uhm, let's just say I am trained in the great teachings of the lord of an0n who created the universe out of nothing. I know all of the infidels have less training in the fields of what I find the truth.  Therefore, I am right and you are stupid to argue your moronic views on whatever you call "science"

Now, take a step from that little plateau of arrogance and try to truly disprove God. Please take that little line about him taking a day of and not playing for the infidels in mind.

[kasperl]

Originally posted by an0n
I've got an experiment that'd prove God doesn't exist.

suicide?

please conduct that experiment and come back with a full report ready for peer-review in an easily recreated and reportable envirement.

[an0n]

Originally posted by kasperl
uhm, let's just say I am trained in the great teachings of the lord of an0n who created the universe out of nothing. I know all of the infidels have less training in the fields of what I find the truth.  Therefore, I am right and you are stupid to argue your moronic views on whatever you call "science".

As your God, I'm telling you: You're wrong.

[Rictor]

Originally posted by aldo_14


Letting people decide themselves is best of all

it sure is.

Kaz: yeah, science works within the laws of physics, chemistry, math etc etc. that is to say, science works if you accept those laws as fundamental and true. You see where I'm going with this? its proves itself, and that is a definate no-no to any "rational" person analyzing a system.

the fundamental rules of the universe (action-reaction, inertia etc) are all taken as true. Why? cause we've observed them. but they are nevertheless just an arbirtrary set of rules.

Without axioms, you can have no science. And axioms themselves are illogical, since everything that is to be taken as true needs to be proven as such. And one can't prove axioms, unless you work within the arbitrary rules dictated by them.

right, well that just my view. You can have your own, but let me remind you that imposing your views on others, regardless of whether they are right or wrong, is doing exactly what these mormons are doing. they're also convinced they're right.

[Jiggyhound]

Originally posted by an0n
I've got an experiment that'd prove God doesn't exist.

*taps his fingers...*

[an0n]

Originally posted by kasperl
suicide?

please conduct that experiment and come back with a full report ready for peer-review in an easily recreated and reportable envirement.

There's another thing, religion is set up so that the only way to conclusively prove God doesn't exist is to destroy the Earth.

And as for my experiment:

Gather the heads of every religion in the world. Put them in a huge glass box together, live on TV, and have them tell their followers to pray for them.

Then I take a nice repeater gun with the same number of bullets as there are religious leaders and I start shooting.

Whichever one survives (if any) is the leader of the one true religion.

Simple.

[kasperl]

one might say God does exist and created the man, but has no influence about someone possesed by the Devil.

[kasperl]

an0n, also, one might argue that your incapability to aim properly is no proof of any deity.

[Jiggyhound]

Originally posted by Rictor


it sure is.

Kaz: yeah, science works within the laws of physics, chemistry, math etc etc. that is to say, science works if you accept those laws as fundamental and true. You see where I'm going with this? its proves itself, and that is a definate no-no to any "rational" person analyzing a system.

the fundamental rules of the universe (action-reaction, inertia etc) are all taken as true. Why? cause we've observed them. but they are nevertheless just an arbirtrary set of rules.

Without axioms, you can have no science. And axioms themselves are illogical, since everything that is to be taken as true needs to be proven as such. And one can't prove axioms, unless you work within the arbitrary rules dictated by them.

right, well that just my view. You can have your own, but let me remind you that imposing your views on others, regardless of whether they are right or wrong, is doing exactly what these mormons are doing. they're also convinced they're right.

ive always beleived that most of what we think is either false , a hash of, or part of a greater truth, since we are human, and cannot comprehend the universe in its entirety

To quote, um, that guy:

"I think, therefore Iam"

the only "truth" is that we exist, in whatever "reality" this is. Then again...

bump:

oh yeah, some say death will bring the answers. HAH! even if there is another level of existence, it will probably raise even more questions. Maybe there are sentient forms of consciousness out there we cannot begin the understand or conceive, with the same deliberations and questions we have

[kasperl]

Descartes, IIRC. Cogito ergo sum.  I love wikipedia

[Jiggyhound]

thanks

[an0n]

Originally posted by kasperl
an0n, also, one might argue that your incapability to aim properly is no proof of any deity.

Who said anything about aiming?

I meant I'd have people hold them down while I put the gun to their head and killed them.

If the bullet doesn't go off, they're safe.

And regardless of wether the 'Devil has taken me', at some point, some religious person would had to have touched that bullet during its manufacture. An all-seeing, all-knowing God would **** it up during that period, or even while it was about my person, or even intercede directly and supress the chemical reaction.

[Jiggyhound]

it just boggles the mind, dont it I see religion as a kind of easy way out of answering the questions life raises.

*collapses and listens to the vines*

[kasperl]

Originally posted by an0n
Who said anything about aiming?

I meant I'd have people hold them down while I put the gun to their head and killed them.

If the bullet doesn't go off, they're safe.

And regardless of wether the 'Devil has taken me', at some point, some religious person would had to have touched that bullet during its manufacture. An all-seeing, all-knowing God would **** it up during that period, or even while it was about my person, or even intercede directly and supress the chemical reaction.

who said that God could see into the future? and who said God could do anything more then steer peoples thoughts or act in carefully prepared actions? And perhaps he just doesn't like that particular religious leader (pretty damn likely in some cases )

[an0n]

Originally posted by kasperl
who said that God could see into the future? and who said God could do anything more then steer peoples thoughts or act in carefully prepared actions? And perhaps he just doesn't like that particular religious leader (pretty damn likely in some cases )

So either a cult is right, or God doesn't care, or he's not all-powerful, or all-knowing.

So, regardless of which reason it is, the religious ****-ups would still be wrong.

[Jiggyhound]

Originally posted by an0n
Who said anything about aiming?

I meant I'd have people hold them down while I put the gun to their head and killed them.

If the bullet doesn't go off, they're safe.

And regardless of wether the 'Devil has taken me', at some point, some religious person would had to have touched that bullet during its manufacture. An all-seeing, all-knowing God would **** it up during that period, or even while it was about my person, or even intercede directly and supress the chemical reaction.

Some would say God planned it all along, knew it was going to happen anyway, or it doesnt effect much in the grand sceme of things.

heres another one for ya to debate. Maybe God isnt all knowing and all powerful afterall. Could it have been exaggerating slightly when these things were written by those it "inspired". A God with character flaws?

[Jiggyhound]

God seeing into the future? isnt it supposed to exist outside of time, therefore sees all existence in its entirety ( the effect of standing above a parade, or right beside it )