/thread
Explaining Religious Psychosis
- Thread starter syadasti
- Start date
/thread
Haters gonna hate.
Why would a scientist want to "dismiss" the possibility of the "divine"?
Why would a scientist want to "dismiss" the possibility of the "divine"?
Yeah why not wizards, fairies, and other magic too!
This is fun..............
best.
lorem ipsum.
ever.
what tool has been used to verify the scientific method?
professional courtesy?
Because there is absolutely no evidence to support "the divine"?
Oh for the love of Myself. How often do I have to post in here to prove that I exist? How many grilled cheeses do I have to appear on to convince you assholes?
ahhh yes, "confirms faith", that little notion that has no actual basis or backing in reality but more the I have a feel kinda affirmation.
My position is that for us its probably the first time around, yes.
It might not be the first time around for this universe though.
There are more then one theory on this matter.
One for example predicts that our universe will eventually freeze to a stop cause we will run out of energy to expand. This doesnt take into account the undiscovered properties of exotic or dark matter.
On the other hand, ekpyrotic cosmology professes a cyclic universe.
We know how old the universe is and how fast it is expanding/growing. And some more recent evidence points in the direction of an ever expanding universe.
However, nobody knows exactly how this works so these are just theories for now.
I have never questioned infinity btw, so I dont know where youre getting that?
The membranes, according to M Theory and string cosmology, can exist in static dimensions, and if true it might work and "look" a little bit like this.
Your questions are definitly not a form of infinite regress. I think they are simply the result of the fact that you probably never even read a Brain Greene book.
A lot of peoples scepticism against science comes from not knowing much about it.
I wanted to know what I was talking about when I was talking about religion.
So except for being raised christian and having gone to a christian school, I did my research about the subject when I thought something was say, a bit off...
Unfortunatly religious people usually dont do that because they think they think they have a monopoly on truth.
A court of law is a place where people have to swear to tell the truth and not telling the truth is punishable by law.
I suppose this has something to do why probably the majority of people tell the truth in court.
And I say the majority because lots of people dont.
The bible is based (and I say based because it has changed greately since the "original" versions") on 66 seperate books covering a thousand years, with stories written long after they would have supposedly, actually happend. The authenticity of these stories is in many cases very questionable to say the least. Other "facts" of the bible have simply been disproven and I think something is very wrong with people who actually believe in the story of Noahs Ark or the fact that the earth is only 6000 years old.
Its not even that long ago that the church finally accepted the helio centric theory, even though science had this figured out 4 centuries ago.
In my opinion it wont take long before the vast majority of people laugh at religious people the same way as you do now at someone who worships Zeus or Wodan.
The only reason you believe in the Christian God is because you were raised in a Christian family in the US.
Think youd still believing in the Abrahamic God if you were born in Pakistan?
Religious atheists? I didnt know they existed?
And yes atheists have killed people. Stalin was an atheist and he killed more people then Hitler.
Did he kill people because he was an atheist or did he kill them because he was a psychopath megalomaniac?
I dont think anyone has ever killed someone in the name of atheisme. The math on deaths in the name of religion however would be impossible.
Last edited:
Exactly.
Any id how many people are trying to disprove Einstein, Bohr or any other established psycisist?
You would be instantly world famous if you could ever disprove special or general relativity, the Heisenberg principle or the Copenhagen interpretation.
Ofcourse there will allways be physicists that support a certain theory, especially if its their own. But there will be thousands of people trying to disprove that theory with all they got untill they come up with a better one.
Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse-là.
Do you mean to imply Ronald Reagan is god or did you just have some kind of major conservative Freudian slip?
Let me rephrase the question.
Why would an individual practicing the discipline of science want to dismiss the possibility of an intelligent creator?
Why would an individual practicing the discipline of science want to dismiss the possibility of an intelligent creator?
dogma
Let me repeat the answer: Its not being dismissed. There is no evidence to support the existence of one. Show me peer-reviewed, repeatable proof of some version of an all seeig eye-in-the-sky, and then we'll talk. If Jesus or His Noodliness shows up on my front porch any time soon, ill be happy to say I was wrong. But since that's not going to happen, ill continue to wait for proof that's not some vague theocratic, anecdotal bullsh!t.
i was once in a bar in rochester. dude asked me if i knew how to work the jukebox. said yea of course. he asked i could show him because he couldn't find crosby stills nash young and jesus. dude was clearly out of his gourd on acid.
OKee dokee.
Please explain how something came into 'being' from nothing.
Please explain how something came into 'being' from nothing.
You need to answer that yourself. A supreme being can't come from nothing either. Same problem regardless of whether the sky fairy exists or not.
I'd be glad to answer that for you, but give me your 'positive' rather than a negative that is science based.
How can something come from nothing? First cause my friend.
I say science based for your sake. I celebrate true science as it is the observation of what is.
Last edited:
Nonsense. It is you that are dodging. Have you no faith in the science community answer to this very old question.
Finally! This guy gets it! Boy I sure fvcked up with the rest of you. Sure, I'm all powerful and infallible, but gotta keep the game interesting. Thor said it can't be done but I told him "bullsh!t" and I aim to collect.
Listen pal, you wanna job? All the tax exempt cash you can handle, underage nookie till your dick goes limp, and you can keep spouting this inane crap until you lose your voice or finally realize its all crap. We've got good health and dental too. Think about it. When you decide just shoot me a prayer and we'll be good, though I already know what you're going to say. I just wanna here you say it. Cheers!
Last edited:
No. Only one side is making a claim here. This latest incarnation of Amazon.com is the one issuing unverifiable BS. The onus is on him/her/it to prove his claim.
"Extrodinary claims require extrodinary evidence" - Carl Sagan.
I am very familiar with these lines of thought having spent a life time examining it.
This stuff has been worked out by many very bright minds over the centuries.
There is very little of substance that is new. There is a great deal of supposition regarding cosmology, matter and energy, but there are no definitive evidence of 'being' and it's origin.
You and others speak of magic and such. Most particle physics and explanations for a cohesive construct of space and time and organization from its opposite considering entropy and thermodynamics requires magic or faith. I find it very interesting to watch folks jump through hoops.
I find it far more rational to believe that a being that has 'being' in and of itself to have shared that being by creating a universe and complex life...to reproduce in a very real sense--rather than believe that such wondrous complexity and balance came from nothing. The concept of eternity is mind boggling and particularly when considering an infinite series going backward in linear fashion.
Physicists attempts at explaining something from nothing requires a great deal of faith...or a need to conjure any alternative to a creator. Talk about metaphysics! And wishful thinking.
This stuff has been worked out by many very bright minds over the centuries.
There is very little of substance that is new. There is a great deal of supposition regarding cosmology, matter and energy, but there are no definitive evidence of 'being' and it's origin.
You and others speak of magic and such. Most particle physics and explanations for a cohesive construct of space and time and organization from its opposite considering entropy and thermodynamics requires magic or faith. I find it very interesting to watch folks jump through hoops.
I find it far more rational to believe that a being that has 'being' in and of itself to have shared that being by creating a universe and complex life...to reproduce in a very real sense--rather than believe that such wondrous complexity and balance came from nothing. The concept of eternity is mind boggling and particularly when considering an infinite series going backward in linear fashion.
Physicists attempts at explaining something from nothing requires a great deal of faith...or a need to conjure any alternative to a creator. Talk about metaphysics! And wishful thinking.
It's your personal view, but that doesn't make it rational. Your viewpoint doesn't get more weight simply because less people can understand high-level scientific research. That's called education and your are ignorant just as the Church use to claim the Earth was the center of the universe.
Go join the flat earth society.
Last edited:
Where did all of this come from? Science doesn't know. Nobody knows. That's the fvcking point here. Nobody on earth, now or ever, knows. Anyone who claims to know, or claims to have faith in a being or beings or entity that is responsible for it all, is full of sh1t.
Science is, in essence, observation. There is, as yet, no observable explanation why all of the matter in the universe (at least all the matter that has been observed so far) came to be. This is something science hopes to one day have an answer for. Not a definitive answer, but an answer. A way of explaining and modeling the observable universe in a way the human mind can comprehend.
The more we observe, the more questions come up. That's just fine. That's the way it works. You make observations, and modify your conclusions as you gain more information and evidence to support the observations.
Much more challenging and satisfying than shrugging and saying, "God did it.", right?
It's not very comforting though, is it? Not knowing? Not being sure of where we came from and where we're going. People don't like that. People like to be sure of everything, they like to be comforted (especially when contemplating mortality) and they also like to kiss ass.
Being religious covers many bases in that way. You have a pat answer to all the complicated, uncomfortable questions, you have a promise of seeing all your dead family after you die, (ugh... the thought makes me puke) and you get to brown-nose some bearded dude in the sky. Geez, what's not to love?
Watch yourself hippie. Right now my noodly ass is sending my newest disciple on a coke and meth fueled road trip the likes of which even Hunter S Thompson might not have survived to shove something a lot bigger than a needle up your dick hole. I may be all loving, but I am also petty and angry! Seem like a contradiction? Tough tiddly! I'm the omnipotent creator of All! I do what I want! Just you try to prove that I'm not.
you're a horrible evangelist
same here.
like most families, this could cut either wayH8R said:
Our little brains our geared toward compartmentalizing and cataloging every bit of info we receive. And some topics are so vast that putting them in a neat little box simply is not possible in any rational response. Any attempt to do so requires our old friend "faith".
Being that I live in the Bible Belt (apparently it's a size 52 btw.) I get to hear phrases like,"...well it's God's plan" from locals as their all purpose answer for anything that would require just the smallest spec of consternation. Even the semantic meaning (in the context of their own religion) of the phrase is baffling. How can man, a finite being with obvious limited capabilities, attempt to explain "god", an infinite being ? But that's another rant...
And you guys vote and have children.
Scarey.
Or perhaps you are children. Either way, I wish you the best.
Btw and this is important. There is no thing as a hell of eternal punishment and torture.
That notion was developed by Rome for obvious reasons and taken up as true by the bulk of organized Christianity. A very sad and unfortunate thing, but in the end it doesn't matter and all will be well. All men regardless will find grace.
Whether you believe in accountability or a moral imperative, isn't it better to treat others with respect and not mock beliefs? Even from the comfort of a keyboard.
Just sayin'.
Scarey.
Or perhaps you are children. Either way, I wish you the best.
Btw and this is important. There is no thing as a hell of eternal punishment and torture.
That notion was developed by Rome for obvious reasons and taken up as true by the bulk of organized Christianity. A very sad and unfortunate thing, but in the end it doesn't matter and all will be well. All men regardless will find grace.
Whether you believe in accountability or a moral imperative, isn't it better to treat others with respect and not mock beliefs? Even from the comfort of a keyboard.
Just sayin'.