Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Do most aspies like offending people with religious talk?

Page 10 of 13 [ 201 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 7:33 am

Stannis wrote:
appletheclown wrote:

Just to humor you, prove the Big Bang Theory, or String Theory is true, and not just theories. I doubt a moving speck seen through telescope is any more factual than the special effects in the movie AVATAR. Suppose an epic arse is just flying a space kite, making that speck? Or space dust traveling outside of a galaxy? Seeing is believing, not knowing.


The big bang theory, and string theory are not tenets of atheism. The only tenet of atheism is a disbelief in god. Different atheists come to this conclusion by different means. I come to it by observing that theists don't provide convincing proof of god's existence. Were they to provide such proofs, then I would incorporate god into my worldview. The burden of proof should always be on the claimant.




http://www.atheist-experience.com/


No scientific creation theory for the universe has ever proven in any way, a single way the universe was formed.

No theory at all. Prove one of them, prove them, and we will have any reason to do the same.


_________________
comedic burp


appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 7:51 am

FYI, I am a geologist. I am well aware the earth is about 4 billion years old. I am not going to sit around believe backwater science because Stephen Hawking does.


I'll just give you proof of the Big Bang instead, but I am not going to believe the big bang happened because the mass was infinite.
It happened because the black hole at the end of the previous universe collided with the white hole that was there also. These two forms were the only thing left after all the black holes had coalesced. The white holes, in retrospect would do the same thing.

After the white hole collides with the black hole, the worm hole collapses, and all you have left is a mass the size of a universe
in the form of a white hole which has lost it's 'vacuum' (black hole) on the other side. What does the white hole then do, big bang.

Happy? I proposed something you wouldn't. What I'm not going to do is believe in under developed theories with nothing more than celeb back up.

I believe in God too. I am perfectly ok with believing in two creations. If God wants his human to evolve from a monkey, that is fine with me.
I know all about theory. And I am a scientist.


_________________
comedic burp


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,942

15 Feb 2014, 11:51 am

simon_says wrote:
No problem. Sorry for the confusion. I don't agree with all of the specific details of your stance but I do agree with the underlying sentiment.


Ahh..details are just shells of seeds of truth...

The underlying sentiment..

IS ALL THAT TRULY COUNTS..

in my best estimation...:)

TRUTH
is AN ESSENCE..
not a detail...
or necessarily vehicle ..vessel..that carries it..
or myth
that
houses IT...
and TH@


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Stannis
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jan 2014
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,631

15 Feb 2014, 12:02 pm

appletheclown wrote:

No scientific creation theory for the universe has ever proven in any way, a single way the universe was formed.

No theory at all. Prove one of them, prove them, and we will have any reason to do the same.

Why do you argue these points as if they had any bearing on the issue at hand? I already told you that these are not tenets of atheism. :shameonyou: .

Anyhow, I think you are confusing the scientific meaning, with the non scientific meaning of theory. Scientific theories are not intended to prove things. Scientific theories are intended to summarise, and explain sets of empirical data. Empirical data is the proof of theories. The proper way to phrase your statement in scientific terms would be something like, "No empirical data has been found to support the big bang hypothesis." This would make your statement demonstrably false, instead of not making sense as it stands now. You should also jettison the term, "creation," from your description of the big bang theory, because creation requires a creator, and this misrepresents what the big bang theory means :alien:.



http://www.atheist-experience.com/ :sunny:



Last edited by Stannis on 15 Feb 2014, 3:01 pm, edited 8 times in total.

Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,660
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

15 Feb 2014, 12:06 pm

appletheclown wrote:

Just to humor you, prove the Big Bang Theory, or String Theory is true, and not just theories. I doubt a moving speck seen through telescope is any more factual than the special effects in the movie AVATAR. Suppose an epic arse is just flying a space kite, making that speck? Or space dust traveling outside of a galaxy? Seeing is believing, not knowing.


The Big Bang Theory has already been proven. String theory is still an unproven hypothesis but neither have anything to do with atheism.



appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 4:06 pm

Jono wrote:
appletheclown wrote:

Just to humor you, prove the Big Bang Theory, or String Theory is true, and not just theories. I doubt a moving speck seen through telescope is any more factual than the special effects in the movie AVATAR. Suppose an epic arse is just flying a space kite, making that speck? Or space dust traveling outside of a galaxy? Seeing is believing, not knowing.


The Big Bang Theory has already been proven. String theory is still an unproven hypothesis but neither have anything to do with atheism.


Christianity is the disbelief the Big Bang is the force the created the universe. If atheists supposedly know it has been proven, show this empirical data that you supposedly have, your 'Maker', your 'God'. You know what I meant by both creation, and proof anyways. Show this empirical data that proves the Big Bang Theory, and I will show empirical evidence, that proves God exists.

We will never empirically prove much of anything beyond the fact black holes exist.

Show it. That was the challenge. I'm not going to waste my time with you shifting the burden of proof just because I didn't word my post correctly like some student in your Writing 234 class at MIT.


_________________
comedic burp


appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 4:14 pm

Stannis wrote:
Scientific theories are not intended to prove things. Scientific theories are intended to summarise, and explain sets of empirical data. Empirical data is the proof of theories.


I know that. I asked you to prove the theory. This would then explain the scientific explanation for the universe.

Yet you can't do that and keep avoiding each time I ask you to.

Prove the Big Bang Theory with empirical data you can show me, and I will show you empirical evidence that proves God is real.


_________________
comedic burp


appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 4:17 pm

Jono wrote:
appletheclown wrote:

Just to humor you, prove the Big Bang Theory, or String Theory is true, and not just theories. I doubt a moving speck seen through telescope is any more factual than the special effects in the movie AVATAR. Suppose an epic arse is just flying a space kite, making that speck? Or space dust traveling outside of a galaxy? Seeing is believing, not knowing.


The Big Bang Theory has already been proven. String theory is still an unproven hypothesis but neither have anything to do with atheism.


If hypothesis never had anything to do with atheism, then atheists would never have to believe anything anyone ever said.


_________________
comedic burp


simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

15 Feb 2014, 4:48 pm

appletheclown wrote:
Jono wrote:
appletheclown wrote:

Just to humor you, prove the Big Bang Theory, or String Theory is true, and not just theories. I doubt a moving speck seen through telescope is any more factual than the special effects in the movie AVATAR. Suppose an epic arse is just flying a space kite, making that speck? Or space dust traveling outside of a galaxy? Seeing is believing, not knowing.


The Big Bang Theory has already been proven. String theory is still an unproven hypothesis but neither have anything to do with atheism.


Christianity is the disbelief the Big Bang is the force the created the universe. If atheists supposedly know it has been proven, show this empirical data that you supposedly have, your 'Maker', your 'God'. You know what I meant by both creation, and proof anyways. Show this empirical data that proves the Big Bang Theory, and I will show empirical evidence, that proves God exists.

We will never empirically prove much of anything beyond the fact black holes exist.

Show it. That was the challenge. I'm not going to waste my time with you shifting the burden of proof just because I didn't word my post correctly like some student in your Writing 234 class at MIT.


The Big Bang addresses the evolution of the universe after it began. The Theory of Evolution addresses the evolution of life after it began. Neither deal with the ultimate causes or origins. There are separate hypotheses that deal with those questions and there is no established solution for either question yet. The evidence for the big bang is that everything is moving away from us (and everything else) and that scientists found the predicted cosmic microwave background radiation.

It's ironic that you are setting Christians up in opposition to the Big Bang when at one time they were excited about it. It confirmed a cosmic beginning. That was before the fundamentalists started waging their jihad against knowledge.



appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 5:10 pm

simon_says wrote:
appletheclown wrote:
Jono wrote:
appletheclown wrote:

Just to humor you, prove the Big Bang Theory, or String Theory is true, and not just theories. I doubt a moving speck seen through telescope is any more factual than the special effects in the movie AVATAR. Suppose an epic arse is just flying a space kite, making that speck? Or space dust traveling outside of a galaxy? Seeing is believing, not knowing.


The Big Bang Theory has already been proven. String theory is still an unproven hypothesis but neither have anything to do with atheism.


Christianity is the disbelief the Big Bang is the force the created the universe. If atheists supposedly know it has been proven, show this empirical data that you supposedly have, your 'Maker', your 'God'. You know what I meant by both creation, and proof anyways. Show this empirical data that proves the Big Bang Theory, and I will show empirical evidence, that proves God exists.

We will never empirically prove much of anything beyond the fact black holes exist.

Show it. That was the challenge. I'm not going to waste my time with you shifting the burden of proof just because I didn't word my post correctly like some student in your Writing 234 class at MIT.


The Big Bang addresses the evolution of the universe after it began. The Theory of Evolution addresses the evolution of life after it began. Neither deal with the ultimate causes or origins. There are separate hypotheses that deal with those questions and there is no established solution for either question yet. The evidence for the big bang is that everything is moving away from us (and everything else) and that scientists found the predicted cosmic microwave background radiation.

It's ironic that you are setting Christians up in opposition to the Big Bang when at one time they were excited about it. It confirmed a cosmic beginning. That was before the fundamentalists started waging their jihad against knowledge.

Then I can assume all of scientific fact is of God's creation without fear of ever being proven wrong.
So I can assume God exists, and still believe everything atheists do? Yay! God exists!


_________________
comedic burp


simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

15 Feb 2014, 5:16 pm

Quote:
Then I can assume all of scientific fact is of God's creation without fear of ever being proven wrong.
So I can assume God exists, and still believe everything atheists do? Yay! God exists!


As far as science goes, pretty much.

The real problems of a non-fundamentalist biblical god come from the bible itself, not science.



appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 5:30 pm

simon_says wrote:
Quote:
Then I can assume all of scientific fact is of God's creation without fear of ever being proven wrong.
So I can assume God exists, and still believe everything atheists do? Yay! God exists!


As far as science goes, pretty much.

The real problems of a non-fundamentalist biblical god come from the bible itself, not science.


Well I don't believe any of that dumb stuff Paul wrote about women being subjugated at all anyways.
Women rule me, you are my master! :lol:


_________________
comedic burp


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

15 Feb 2014, 5:39 pm

appletheclown wrote:
No scientific creation theory for the universe has ever proven in any way, a single way the universe was formed.

No theory at all. Prove one of them, prove them, and we will have any reason to do the same.

appletheclown wrote:
FYI, I am a geologist. I am well aware the earth is about 4 billion years old.


If you're a geologist with any significant scientific training, then you should know that science, unlike religion (or math) does not make claims to ultimate truth. We accept that the big bang is the best model we have for the origin of the universe from a fraction of a second after the initial event onward, because it is the model that best fits the data that we currently have. If you're a scientist, you shouldn't have needed that to be explained to you - especially given that your own field underwent a major revolution just a few decades ago, with the theory of plate tectonics and continental drift.

edit: I'm not attacking you. I'm responding the same way I would (and most of the scientists I know would) to anyone making truth-claims on a scientific forum while simultaneously misunderstanding the very nature of science.



appletheclown
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Apr 2013
Age: 31
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,378
Location: Soul Society

15 Feb 2014, 5:49 pm

LKL wrote:
appletheclown wrote:
No scientific creation theory for the universe has ever proven in any way, a single way the universe was formed.

No theory at all. Prove one of them, prove them, and we will have any reason to do the same.

appletheclown wrote:
FYI, I am a geologist. I am well aware the earth is about 4 billion years old.


If you're a geologist with any significant scientific training, then you should know that science, unlike religion (or math) does not make claims to ultimate truth. We accept that the big bang is the best model we have for the origin of the universe from a fraction of a second after the initial event onward, because it is the model that best fits the data that we currently have. If you're a scientist, you shouldn't have needed that to be explained to you - especially given that your own field underwent a major revolution just a few decades ago, with the theory of plate tectonics and continental drift.

edit: I'm not attacking you. I'm responding the same way I would (and most of the scientists I know would) to anyone making truth-claims on a scientific forum while simultaneously misunderstanding the very nature of science.

I don't misunderstand the nature of science. The whole point of the question was to get you to think.
By you confirming it, that science can't, only something like God could.
I am a mad scientist. I am a rule breaker. The kind of person who would love zombies to happen. I don't adhere to scientific frufru and decadance.
I love God, and other than Jesus, science is his child.


_________________
comedic burp


LKL
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jul 2007
Age: 48
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,402

15 Feb 2014, 6:02 pm

appletheclown wrote:
Christianity is the disbelief the Big Bang is the force the created the universe. If atheists supposedly know it has been proven, show this empirical data that you supposedly have, your 'Maker', your 'God'.

*snort*
and here I thought that it had to do with this Middle-Eastern guy named Jesus...

as for what supports the big bang theory:
http://www.wisegeek.org/what-is-the-big-bang-theory.htm



simon_says
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,075

15 Feb 2014, 6:06 pm

Quote:
By you confirming it, that science can't, only something like God could.


That's something a child would say. There is no thought behind it at all.