Regarding the Existence or Absence of God

[aphexcoil]

They observe the evidence and THEN draw conclusions.
They dont start with a conclusion, and search for evidence.

You obviously have no idea about the scientific process, do you?

There is something called a "Hypothesis" that then requires the scientist to seek out evidence through experiments to prove or disprove the hypothesis.

In that case, how am I any more guilty than the thousands of other scientists who come up with a theory and then try to prove it through experiments?

Let me guess -- Now you're going to tell me that religion is different from science, yet you're going to use science to discredit religion.

Sounds to me like you have a bad case of the bull shits!

 

[goldenarm]

Originally posted by murray t turtle
Sounds like some are afraid or perhaps don't understand that nickname''thunderbolt''

RS7 and Goldenarm ;I'll admit I look at 5 days data more than 10 years. Actually do occassionaly look at 10 years + 30 days and more on Gold stocks ,Goldenarm.

If a space ship traveled 85% the speed of light 15 day[uptrend] and 15 days downtrend[back to earth]; you have 30 days time passed in cockpit.

Ten [10] years would have passed on earth[30 days in cockpit] . Source - paraphrase of athiest professor who now believes[repents].

When asked what lay on the other side of crossing the threshold of the speed of light????????????????????????????????
-------------------------------Albert Einstein replied ''I know of no better way to describe it than eternity'' LUV, Murray

what the hell are you smoking?

 

[axeman]

Obviously? How so?

What you fail to understand is the difference between
a hypothesis and a CONCLUSION.

You started with a conclusion and then attempted to
gather evidence to defend your conclusion.

If this is not the case, and you wish to admit that
you have NOT concluded that god exists, please do so.

Scientists observe, form hypothesis, gather evidence
and then draw a conclusion.

This is not what you have done. I have never seen
you pose a hypothesis based on an observation.

No... you started with: god exists.

Then scramble about attempting to support your weak
position.

If you would like to start over. Go for it.

Tell us what your observation is that leads you to believe
there is a god. And dont say , we exist, or the earth exists.
Thats not a hypothesis, thats a joke. I could just as easily
say, LOOK we exist, therefore my big foot created us.

THEN show us what evidence you have gathered.
Remember, saying that so and so doesnt disprove god
is not evidence.

Hows that, fair? It's what all scientists must go through.
THEN you can draw a conclusion, which can be peer reviewed.

Since I have yet to see ANYTHING that would constitute
scientific evidence on this thread to date, it will be very
interesting to see what you have discovered.

"Sounds to me like you have a bad case of the bull shits!"

No, bullshiting is what you did in your previous post where
you attempted to incorrectly use quantum principles on a
macro level to support your conclusion.

peace

axeman

Originally posted by aphexcoil


You obviously have no idea about the scientific process, do you?

There is something called a "Hypothesis" that then requires the scientist to seek out evidence through experiments to prove or disprove the hypothesis.

In that case, how am I any more guilty than the thousands of other scientists who come up with a theory and then try to prove it through experiments?

Let me guess -- Now you're going to tell me that religion is different from science, yet you're going to use science to discredit religion.

Sounds to me like you have a bad case of the bull shits!

 

[aphexcoil]

Axeman,

Let's go get a couple of beers and pick up some honeys and I'll show you there is a god -- and we can even find out her name, too.

 

[rs7]

Originally posted by goldenarm


what the hell are you smoking?

Obviously nothing from this planet. I guess Murray has made the journey on his space ship and joined Thunderbolt in ETERNITY.

Have we hit 300 pages yet with this thread? Is it a record? WOW... it DID HIT 300! I just checked and came back with the "edit" button to add this. Very impressive. All thanks to FASTER!!!! (see page one).

Is Aphie really going to pass Don and Chasinfla like they are standing still? Is Fasterpussycat really losing his mind? And MOST IMPORTANTLY..Did Faster get his ET T-shirt?

This thread:

What a long strange trip it's been!
(Grateful Dead)

 

[MrDinky]

I really don't have anything to add. This thread just dropped off the top five and I'm refusing to let it die - even if it is 300 pages.

 

[thunderbolt]

Quick question for all to reply:

Did a person named Jesus(of the bible) ever exist?

A. Yes, he existed but was just a man
B. Yes, he existed and he is God as he claimed
C. No, he never even existed and is a legend

Please answer either A, B or C

If you aren't certain whether in faith or fact, please don't reply.

Thanks!

 

[Gordon Gekko]

Originally posted by thunderbolt
Quick question for all to reply:

Did a person named Jesus(of the bible) ever exist?

A. Yes, he existed but was just a man
B. Yes, he existed and he is God as he claimed
C. No, he never even existed and is a legend

Please answer either A, B or C

If you aren't certain whether in faith or fact, please don't reply.

Thanks!

D. jesus MAY have existed; i do not know. however, IF he did exist, he was just a MAN like you and i.

 

[daniel_m]

Originally posted by thunderbolt
Quick question for all to reply:

Did a person named Jesus(of the bible) ever exist?

A. Yes, he existed but was just a man
B. Yes, he existed and he is God as he claimed
C. No, he never even existed and is a legend

Please answer either A, B or C

If you aren't certain whether in faith or fact, please don't reply.

Thanks!

C. No, he never even existed and is a legend.

i don't know that i'm certain, in absolute terms, but then how many things are we truly certain of in absolute terms.

certainly all the evidence points to jesus being a jewish version of a resurrecting god-man myth (complete with all the miracles ascribed to jesus) that had already been told in virtually every nation of the ancient mediterranean world at least 500 years before the time attributed to jesus's birth.

furthermore, the patently self-contradictory description of the alleged jesus's life in the gospels themselves , the forged letters attributed to Paul, the lack of ANY extra-biblical evidence for his existance and the political motives behind the invention of christianity all add further strength to the already overwhelmingly powerful argument that the jesus story is myth, pure and simple.

that is, it must be said, the only conclusion a rational man, after examining the available evidence, can reach.

 

[deusman]

Your question will be answered I suppose when your time will come.You won't be able though to tell us
your outcome then.
But that's life(after death. )