Nice Letter
-
ict558 wrote:
Which is none. The scientific method can neither disprove nor prove the existence of gods.
Debatable, honestly. It is a matter of opinion and perspective - in either light.
ict558 wrote:
The debate as to the existence of god certainly predates the scientific method.
Agreed. But the point was just that if a concrete proof existed, it wouldn't be a debatable subject.
Andrew Rissing wrote:
Debatable, honestly.
No. It requires an experiment that disproves the hypothesis "Gods Exist", or an experiment that disproves the hypothesis "Gods do not Exist". Had someone come up with either, I would not be keying this.
All that is necessary for Evil to succeed is for Good Folks to keep voting for their Party. - Cornelius Thirp
-
mark merrens wrote:
Please don't: I'm perfectly happy with my non-belief; it is you that I feel sorry for: shackled and enslaved to the cult of religion.
Err...this part of the sub-thread referred to "faith" and not "religion". There is a difference. And you might chose to believe that God (of any sort) doesn't exist but that belief in of itself is no different than a belief that God does exist. And that says little about religion or organized religion as well. I also suspect that you would be hard pressed to prove that many people are "shackled and enslaved" to their religion. Certainly isn't true in the US where the vast majority of people ignore edicts of their organised religion willy-nilly as they see fit both for minor and even major parts of the religion. Divorce rate for Catholics is a primary example of that. Even in countries where religion is strictly enforced people often disobey edicts. If that wasn't the case then there wouldn't need to be enforcement. An example of that is that Saudia Arabia has various laws against different types of activities around alcohol.
Would you mind butting out of my piss taking session? It's hard enough getting a rise out of anybody without you pointing put the bleeding obvious. On the other hand I don't not 'believe' in god: for that statement to have any meaning would imply that I am willing to acknowledge the possibility of a god and I do not. Finally, from my perspective anyone that buys into a religion is shackled and enslaved to a set of beliefs founded on the mythical. No different to being a scientologist or a Jedi, really. And, post-finally, I am only doing what Rombama did last night and answering a completely different question to the one that was asked. And that was funny last night, especially the final question which Romney at least tried to answer and Obama just ognored and delivered a poltical speech and wasn't stopped. One sided bullshit.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
Andrew Rissing wrote:
Debatable, honestly.
No. It requires an experiment that disproves the hypothesis "Gods Exist", or an experiment that disproves the hypothesis "Gods do not Exist". Had someone come up with either, I would not be keying this.
All that is necessary for Evil to succeed is for Good Folks to keep voting for their Party. - Cornelius Thirp
It hasn't stopped people from trying though, that was my point.
-
It hasn't stopped people from trying though, that was my point.
-
Would you mind butting out of my piss taking session? It's hard enough getting a rise out of anybody without you pointing put the bleeding obvious. On the other hand I don't not 'believe' in god: for that statement to have any meaning would imply that I am willing to acknowledge the possibility of a god and I do not. Finally, from my perspective anyone that buys into a religion is shackled and enslaved to a set of beliefs founded on the mythical. No different to being a scientologist or a Jedi, really. And, post-finally, I am only doing what Rombama did last night and answering a completely different question to the one that was asked. And that was funny last night, especially the final question which Romney at least tried to answer and Obama just ognored and delivered a poltical speech and wasn't stopped. One sided bullshit.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
mark merrens wrote:
that I am willing to acknowledge the possibility of a god and I do not.
That is a belief.
mark merrens wrote:
One sided bullsh*t.
I seriously doubt that there is any significant political rhetoric in any managed campaign (all federal offices and probably most state level ones) which are not anything but marketing buzz natterings. All of them are like that.
-
mark merrens wrote:
that I am willing to acknowledge the possibility of a god and I do not.
That is a belief.
mark merrens wrote:
One sided bullsh*t.
I seriously doubt that there is any significant political rhetoric in any managed campaign (all federal offices and probably most state level ones) which are not anything but marketing buzz natterings. All of them are like that.
jschell wrote:
That is a belief.
I don't believe that.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
ict558 wrote:
Which is none. The scientific method can neither disprove nor prove the existence of gods.
Debatable, honestly. It is a matter of opinion and perspective - in either light.
ict558 wrote:
The debate as to the existence of god certainly predates the scientific method.
Agreed. But the point was just that if a concrete proof existed, it wouldn't be a debatable subject.
Andrew Rissing wrote:
Debatable, honestly. It is a matter of opinion and perspective - in either light.
Not so far as I know. Most scientists, mathematicians, philosophers and philosophical theologians accept the premise that there are spiritual aspects that cannot be proven. Matter of fact there are mathematical and scientific principles that directly support that. I would certainly like to see a proof that god doesn't exist.
Andrew Rissing wrote:
But the point was just that if a concrete proof existed, it wouldn't be a debatable subject.
That is obviously false. There are all sorts of subjects for which substantial evidence exists and yet either small or even large groups of people ignore/disregard/refute such evidence.
-
jschell wrote:
That is a belief.
I don't believe that.
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
mark merrens wrote:
I don't believe that.
Then you should do more research/readings in psychology, sociology and philosophy.
Were you born without humor or did you have it removed?
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
Were you born without humor or did you have it removed?
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me
-
Just because you think it should be funny doesn't make it so. Doesn't even necessarily read that way. Of course one could just presume that all of your statements are intended to be funny but I suspect that you would object to that as well.
Yawn. You still here? Why?
"If you think it's expensive to hire a professional to do the job, wait until you hire an amateur." Red Adair. nils illegitimus carborundum me, me, me