-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
80% in America believe in God
- Thread starter Amiga
- Start date
- Status
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
FunkMiller
Member
You big, big weirdo.
Last edited:
FunkMiller
Member
strange headache
Banned
You took one out-of-context sentence about computation and applied that to simulation... and then you go on to do the exact same thing with Brian Cox.
Are you just scanning these videos for fragments that validate your crazy?
And you wonder why you religious types aren't taken seriously.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
That’s the premise of this thread tbh…
Vick
Member
Out-of-context? I reported the entire quote.
Maybe reread that sentence more than once and you'll see the relevance.
I absolutely didn't though. Isn't that what he said?
Simply find me a quote from Brian Cox stating there's proof of absence of a superior being of any kind, which is what you guys are so easily proclaiming. Just like i was when fourteen and thought i had it all figured out.
You'll find none.
Just like you'll find no reasonable explanation for that particular portion of the population i was hinting at before, considering their genetic common trait it's one of the very few which cannot be subject to natural alteration/mutation.
But that's it for me anyway, feel free to keep calling names and mocking. God bless you all.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
This is the problem with your reasoning. You cannot find proof of absence of any number of insane theories or claims. You can’t disprove Russell’s teapot or the Flying Spaghetti Monster either, but want some kind of privileged status for your belief in the sky daddy who made us just like him and fun fact, he hates all the things you don’t like too! UHHMAZIN!
There’s more evidence for Santa who put a Super Nintendo under my Christmas tree in 1991 than God.
Last edited by a moderator:
Vick
Member
It's not my reasoning though, i just reported what's the most common position from "real scientists" on the matter, and in response got claims of misinterpreting things.
Well, we had different experiences. I don't remember ever believing in Santa in the first place for instance, and for sure used to mock Christians along with religious and spiritual people of all kind for a good 20 years.
Sometimes things change though, all it takes is a little piece of information.
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
Do you agree with it and are you putting it in here or not? Nobody has time for people throwing things into a discussion then walking away from it. If it’s not your reasoning or reasoning you agree with, why bring it up? Don’t be a coward, own your position.
Cool, I figured out Santa wasn’t real that year, I was 6. And that’s my point: it’s obvious that Santa isn’t real, but I sure got presents from someone that wrote from Santa on them, and that’s far more compelling than anything Christianity has ever put forward as proof it’s real
RJMacready73
Banned
I have a proper man crush on Brian Cox, if I was a gay teenager nowadays my room would be plastered with that loveable cunts face
FunkMiller
Member
He’s getting it all from conspiracy theory, neckbeard forums and social media groups, where one loon with more time on his hands scans everything he can to cherry pick out of context comments that he can post for the fellow loons to lap up, and use as 'evidence' of their opinion.
Vick
Member
Is it my fault to assume people i'm interacting with have basic reading comprehension? Or perhaps my english is not as functional as i hoped.
My current position and belief is stated in this post:
https://www.neogaf.com/threads/80-in-america-believe-in-god.1638090/page-9#post-266319513
Which is technically a sort of agnostic point of view as i don't know what God is, and for sure don't practice any religion.
The reasoning you are arguing about was "put there" because to claim i have misinterpreted Brian Cox position would mean having proof and even evidence of any kind to the fact he does not hold this view. Which is not the case.
That's bullshit though. Even putting aside the supernatural aspects of the belief, Christianity is filled with hard, unquestionable truths. Might be a clichè, but listen to more Jordan Peterson.
Sure, whatever helps your simple mind feeling better.
Last edited:
FunkMiller
Member
Brian Cox is a dyed in the wool, one hundred percent, absolutely for certain, no doubt about it, make no mistakes atheist. He prefers to use the term 'humanist' because atheist has been labelled with negative connotations by the religious (a deliberate and very transparent strategy on their part).
But the point he is trying to make is that he readily admits that science has not answered all the questions we have as yet, and due to this he cannot for certain rule out the existence of a god (and needless to say he does not at all think the Judeo Christian god of the Bible is possible).
He celebrates and recognises the uncertainty as a scientist. But, he also does not believe god exists himself, because he has seen no evidence of his existence. The same goes for every other scientist working in the field of astrophysics, cosmology and quantum mechanics.
Brian is also a very gentle and affable guy, who isn't one for confrontation. He recognises the need to find common ground, and bring people along with him, instead of belittling their ideology, no matter how wrong it is.
Sadly, you religious types all take this celebration of uncertainty and affability as some kind of proof that you're right. Which always baffles me. There is no proof of the existence of god. That's why people much smarter than any of us don't believe in him.
Last edited:
funkygunther
Banned
"don't know what God is" is not an agnostic point of view, agnostic point of view is "I don't know if there is or isn't a God", the first is a deist position and a fundamental belief in God
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
I don’t even know where to start with a post that states someone “hacked reality” and another has an “unquantifiable IQ according to Jordan Peterson.”
Jordan Peterson is a dope who preaches cleaning your room while he downs benzos and eats a red meat diet.
I’d like you to cite some examples of these hard, unquestionable truths then. Please. It’s the weekend I got the time. But if your starting point is Jordan Peterson said so…bud you got a big hill to climb.
Vick
Member
That's simply preposterous. The smartest people i ever personally knew or read about believed in God.
I stand corrected then. I'm sort of new to this as i always saw myself as an hardcore atheist.
Said @Thaedolus from NeoGAF, gaming forum.
I think it's fair to say it's pointless to continue. Ironic to see you mention red meat diet as a kind of negative though as it's directly related to the other subject i've been referring from the start of this discussion.
Last edited:
Amiga
Member
1- the mirrored position is a design for the purpose of collecting information that combines into a balanced awareness.
2- the awareness and will is external, that is the point.
So no answer her, just a misinterpretation of arguments and shifting. You are responding to your ideas not mine. I keep correcting your presentation of my comments over and over. this is why I didn't bother elaborating in the 1st place. And I wasn't trying to convince you, just explaining why the majority of mankind belief in God, because they base it on logic. Atheism is more based on illogical belief.
funkygunther
Banned
mirrored position is not "sync", not my fault you have trouble getting your ideas across...but regardless you are starting at the idea of "design" and working backwards, which is a flawed position
us having two ears allows for a greater perception of sound distance, direction and volume...evolution argues that our ability to have stereo hearing helped us to survive, which is one of the myriad reasons we (and the other beings with stereo hearing) have lived long enough to reproduce
on atheism and mankind belief in God, you are not explaining anything no matter how many times you want to use the word "logic"
poppabk
Cheeks Spread for Digital Only Future
That is not a position. That's some weird personal belief system that only you would understand sandwiched between two cherry picked quotes from two people who had very complex personal belief systems that didn't necessarily include a belief in an actual real God.
Amiga
Member
If people don't want to genuinely understand each other then no amount of words in any language will work. Not trying to convince you of anything, just trying to get you to understand people who have believe. For hardcore arguments about religion you can find an endless supply elsewhere in the internet.
funkygunther
Banned
I've been trying to understand you all the way through this whole ear nonsense and I still have no idea what, in anything you've said, is supposed to help me understand people who have belief. Maybe you can restate, or I might help you out and ask if you're just taking a detour around god of the gaps without saying it? Because if it's just god of the gaps then of course I understand why people have beliefs, nothing to do with evolution, atheism or ears...
Amiga
Member
OK, one more shot. the hearing mechanism. can you understand why people would see more logic to it that it was developed by will and purpose to the point of function it has now. are the majority of people missing the more logical explanation? are they not grasping that more logical explanation because they are too simple minded to understand sophisticated concepts?
Last edited:
Specialized, advanced organs aren't necessary to detect vibrations in the air (or other mediums) and utilize that information for survival--at the most basic, moving toward food sources and away from danger. Simple membranes and hairs will accomplish that. It’s basic sensory information constantly colliding with organisms.
funkygunther
Banned
I can understand that if people didn't know about the biology of the hearing mechanism, they might think it exists and works for any other reason. They most likely though, like animals, wouldn't even be thinking about it and would take it alongside all their bodily functions for granted.
But if I was told something or made up something based on experience, and didn't have the ability, access, or will to question that something then I would stay thinking that. Is that what you think is logic? If my only education and experience was one thing, then that's the only thing I know and subsequently believe.
If I were a perfect deity and wanted to design some organs like eyes, I would have equipped them to see things like ionizing radiation. Hell, I’d settle for infrared. That’d be a pretty rad trait to have. Or maybe had some built in amplifiers and/or attenuators for the ears, if we want to stick with audio. Why are there numerous useful frequencies outside of our hearing range?
Why the hell is the same pipe used for both eating AND breathing. That’s some design, isn’t it?
But hey.
Vick
Member
It's probably the weakest in the Trilogy of Life BBC series, but for understanding in a very condensed and appealing way how sense organs developed i always find myself recommending Walking with Monsters.
Amiga
Member
Even membranes and hairs are are complex. life is multiple levels of complexity and reliance built upon one another and at the same time acting on autonomy, and that autonomy itself is part of the progression of the ecosystem. It's hard for me conceive it is random and without deliberate design.
FunkMiller
Member
That’s because you’re not conceiving of the amount of time evolution takes to develop organs like the human ear. We’re talking millions of years.
But I assume you think the Earth is much younger than that.
Last edited:
Amiga
Member
You assume wrong.
FunkMiller
Member
Then you have your answer. The complexity of the human ear came about due to millions upon millions of years of constant, slow evolution, adaptation and improvement. This is the case for all complex organisms. No creator necessary.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
It’s hard to conceive of what has transpired in the last thousand years, much less a thousand times that and a thousand times that yet again. Then multiply that by about 4 and you get the age of the earth.
Yes, it’s difficult for us, with our lifespans which are but a blink on the cosmic scale, to conceive of these things. But if we throw our hands up and say god must’ve done it, then there’s no point in discovery or inquiry at all.
Vicetrailia
Banned
No god. no devil. No one to look to for blame other than human beings.
Religion is certainly to blame. It’s a long-standing cultural phenomenon that is used to control people. The people in control, what they say to fear “satan”, is what they are, the devil itself. Whether it exists or not doesn’t matter, because the reality of it is real. It’s the peak slavery inducement tool.
Last edited:
RJMacready73
Banned
Was this defining proof of an existence of a magical sky daddy the fecking Ear? Do these people not understand how evolution works or the timescales involved perfecting said organs? Sure we know for an absolute fact that whales have leftover parts from when they where land dwelling mammals for crying out loud, just because you can't wrap your head around it doesn't mean it was God.
funkygunther
Banned
It's hard for me to conceive certain aspects of human behaviour and I am one (honest). Let alone the behaviour of countless cells across billions of lifeforms all reacting to internal and external biological, chemical and physical stimuli every second of every minute.
These concepts are hard to even imagine, let alone formulate scientific theories on, yet we have them. That we have learned so much and have still to learn even more actually brings more wonder to my view of our world and our place in it. A wonder that would be greatly diminished by leaving it simply to.God did it and ran away.
93xfan
Banned
It seems both sides want to convince the other. Pretending your side isn't engaged in this seems a little dishonest.
funkygunther
Banned
Still waiting for your evidence
93xfan
Banned
There is no proof of God that anyone can show you. There's plenty of evidence that points to it. Stuff that as a collective can be very hard to dismiss as coincidence.But where’s your proof of this theory?
(PM me for details)
The moment I post it here, people will strip away context and make it into the most dishonest version of itself for the sake of a joke and putting down people of faith.
strange headache
Banned
Tell me how many atheist threads have we opened? How many atheist community topics are there?
How many private DMs have we sent to spread the gospel of atheism?
Your belief is like your sexual fetish, just keep that sh*t private.
Last edited:
funkygunther
Banned
Now who's being dishonest? It will be scrutinised and if it's solid evidence argued well it will stand up to the scrutiny.
strange headache
Banned
If you're a hammer everything looks like a nail.
93xfan
Banned
I reject that ____ + time is a suitable explanation for anything. Sure, things take time, but why are the rules of the universe stacked to make anything new/functional develop over time?
FunkMiller
Member
You can reject it all you like, but it’s still the truth. The empirical, thoroughly studied, peer reviewed, 100% factual, repeatedly examined truth.
If you and others have trouble accepting the truth, and refuse it, there’s really nothing any of us can do to change that.
Last edited:
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
I won’t put you down or make jokes at your expense. If the things you bring up are flawed and deserving of ridicule, I’ll keep it to just those things.
I was brought up believing in Mormonism, I certainly try not to hold that against myself or anyone else. Same goes for any other religion. I get it, and I know and respect a lot of people I interact with daily who believe differently.
93xfan
Banned
So then why are the rules of the universe stacked to make anything new/functional develop over time?
Do you believe it's been proven that no guidance is needed? (not trying to shift the burden of proof, but if not, then my prior comment still stands)
D
Deleted member 1159
Unconfirmed Member
Is this true? As far as we can tell the universe is bound to dissolve into cold entropy.
FunkMiller
Member
Yes, of course. That's what evolution through the process of natural selection is. It explains the way in which organisms develop without the need for any guiding hand (or 'rules') whatsoever. It's a fundamentally brilliant and beautiful scientific principal, with endless amounts of evidence to prove its accuracy.
Last edited:
Amiga
Member
Agree on this.
The way I learned religion is to be inquisitive and logical because that protects from corruption and control. even the term "science" can be exploited to create a control system with people wearing lab coats instead of turbans and collars.
like several examples posted in this thread many brilliant minds inclined to believe in God, in many cases their work was actually an influence into that inclination. I consider it a complement to be considered as dumb as they are.
funkygunther
Banned
where there are humans there is corruption and control, but also knowledge and strength and curiosity
whether there is any correlation between these "brilliant minds", their beliefs at the time and their findings is speculative without strong causal evidence...for example, if one was vegetarian or pescatarian would that have had any effect on their studies? it's irrelevant as the work stands there, as a bedrock for further studies by further brilliant minds...it also ignores those believed in God that weren't brilliant minds, who are left to the side in your equation
that their work can transcend their belief to further explore the mysteries of creation and biology is a testament to our evolution as a clever little mammal, an accomplishment that puts power in us as individuals and doesn't leave it all to an unknown deity
Last edited:
Rentahamster
Rodent Whores
This is one of the main sources of misunderstanding. You think "that's what you guys are so easily proclaiming", but that is incorrect. The default position of most atheists is not proclaiming "God does not exist" (active claim). The default position of most atheists is "I was told that a God exists, but I don't believe it because I don't think that claim was proven to a sufficient degree" (not an active claim. Merely a response to an active claim).
Therefore, there is no burden of proof on the atheist side to prove that there is no God. The burden of proof is on those people who claim that there is a God. Until the theists provide enough strong evidence to prove that God is real, then there is no good reason for anyone else to believe in that God.
This is why there have been many requests for strong evidence of God, but so far none has been presented. Only rhetorical questions about the mystery of life. Definitely NOT evidence of God.
Did that make sense?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked