So you believe that magicians REALLY DO cut women in half??? You saw it with your own eyes right? This clearly points out the problem with your flawed thinking processes. peace axeman
So you would test God, and expect Him to meet your tests just because you lacked proof of His existence? How funny! You can form a concept of God who would have created man, yet expect Him to prove Himself to man through their methods and criteria of proof. Imagine the Creator of the Universe needing to jump through your hoops to prove Himself to you. The ego.......the ego......
And here ART runs and hides behind his bullshit unfalsifiable meaningless fabricated position Just for the record "The ego...the ego" does not constitute a rational rebuttal Do you even know for a FACT that god wishes to explicitly try soooo hard to ***HIDE*** from science? Oh great personal knower of god... please let us in on this little secret. Why does this all powerful being seem to **FEAR*** us tiny little itty bitty scientists??!?! LMAO He does such a damn good job of making sure he is NEVER discovered This next bullshit excuse should be a doozy peace axeman
>You can form a concept of God who would have created man, >yet expect Him to prove Himself to man through their >methods and criteria of proof. >Imagine the Creator of the Universe needing to jump >through your hoops to prove Himself to you. >The ego.......the ego...... The Creator that I would respect would wish for me use the powers of reason that he gave me to determine who was real and who was false. Since he created man he would obviously know that he would need to use methods and criteria accessable to man. He would not call this ego, he would call it uncommon sense. He would not be put off...he would be proud. Or as Shoe might say..."this is exactly what one would expect of a creator". JB
Excellent questions. 1) Can't help you on#1, as that require his input, and he is gone sadly. 2 & 3) Intuitively, yes. But I don't know. I'll consult an evolutionary scientist with a keen understanding of genetics, statistics and probabilty, and get back to you.
So any time a bearded man walks up to you claiming to be Jesus, you unquestioningly accept it? If so, there's this bridge I'd like to sell you...
Thx. Yeah, I knew he passed away - I remember reading about it. I had actually gone back and changed my post to past tense... I respect him for his intellectual courage. I always admire the scientist that challenges the slowly toppling elite...
Once again you confuse AGNIOSCTISM and ATHEISM. ATHEISM is not based on ANYTHING than the BELIEF OF FREE WILL. AGNIOSCTISM is the BELIEF that there MAY BE A SUPERIOR CONSCIOUSNESS or INTELLIGENCE that DESIGNED or to be more explicit FINE TUNED the CONTANTS OF UNIVERSE so that galaxies, stars and accessorily life can appear. Instead of talking in general there is today the so called fine structure constant in Universe which is equal roughly to 1/137 (137 is coïncidently the Golden angle but Cosmologist don't refer to it by this name only by the "alpha constant" name) it is known that if this constant was different by only a slight billionth stars couldn't even exist SO the hypothesis that "HE" whatever or whoever "HE" is has FINE TUNED this constant because if "HE" didn't do so by his WILLINGNESS the Universe wouldn't just exist as it exists today: it would be emptiness. That you call "HE" God or Nature doesn't change the Essence of "HE" or the existence of a possible VOLONTARY DESIGN. The belief in a possible existence of a Designer is indeed an AGNOSTIC BELIEF which is founded on DETERMINISM in Scientific laws and more precisely the existence of apparently FINE TUNED CONSTANTS. There is another BELIEF which is that the existence of the FINE TUNED CONSTANTS by some SUPERIOR BEING or THING or CONCIOUSNESS may be an appearance if the Universe has been selected among many other POSSIBLE RANDOM UNIVERSES: this is called the "Multiverse" hypothesis which is indeed an ATHEIST hypothesis. But this "Multiverse" hypothesis is very recent and not yet widespread among the scientific community so at the moment of History in Science, the balance is more in favor of a DESIGNER if you don't like the term GOD but this DESIGNER has FINE TUNED the CONSTANTS OF UNIVERSE than in favor of a creation of our current Universe by several RANDOM ATTEMPTS so that our universe is just a happy ACCIDENT - but let's even suppose then someone may logically ask but who/what throw the dice then . As you can see the debate can be reduced as in Stock Market around the conflict between Determinism and Randomness. This problematic of FINE TUNED Constants of Universe and God can be illustrated by Richard Feynman's own words : â[1/137] is one of the greatest damn mysteries of physics: a magic number that comes to use with no understanding by man. <font color=red>You might say the âhand of <b>God</b>â wrote that number, and âwe donât know how He pushed His pencil.</font>â'