This is a mobile optimized page that loads fast, if you want to load the real page, click this text.

Religion IS crazy!

Jump to new
cynic said:
How often do I hear someone insisting that their chosen beliefs are grounded in fact, truth, evidence or dependable practices and that any contrary belief must therefore be assuredly wrong, dangerous and sinful?
Click to expand...
You mean my chosen non-beliefs I presume. That religion is a dangerous mythology is self-evident by observing what's happening in the world around you. Must I spell it out for you with countless examples? Thankfully bellenuit is quite good at highlighting the insanity of people taking religion to seriously and acting on their "chosen" beliefs to the detriment of human society.

However, in this case the historical facts can certainly be an embarrassment to those arrogantly claiming the superiority of science over all other religions!
Click to expand...
Science is clearly not a religion, but I grow weary of refuting such nonsense. Science provides a methodology for discovery and the acquisition of knowledge. Religion provides us with various interpretations of the dogma handed down in iron-age scrolls. Is one superior to the other, I would say clearly so. Scientific conclusions are under constant scrutiny by other scientists but, just as in all human endeavor, vulnerable to corruption. That does not however invalidate the scientific method.

P.S. Thanks for crediting me with the "veil of objectivity". Personally, I do not consider myself sufficiently conceited to claim absence of prejudice.
Click to expand...
I should have said "try" and cloak yourself in a veil of objectivity, clearly you are not objective on the subject at hand and one who revels in semantic arguments. Correction lodged.
 
Unsurprisingly, you've presumed wrongly! Must I reiterate that I do not claim to the infallibility of any religion? Must I counter with the countless examples of mystical contributions to the foundations of your science?
FxTrader said:
Science is clearly not a religion, but I grow weary of refuting such nonsense. Science provides a methodology for discovery and the acquisition of knowledge.
Click to expand...
As do many other religions!
Again you're describing behaviours that are not unique to the religon of science! Also, much of our science was handed down throughout the ages in "scrolls" and "tablets".
FxTrader said:
I should have said "try" and cloak yourself in a veil of objectivity, clearly you are not objective on the subject at hand and one who revels in semantic arguments. Correction lodged.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that. Much appreciated.

Please ensure that you also do yourself the kindness of acting on your own advice.
 
Value Collector said:
.Nope there is no evidence of reincarnation
Click to expand...
You obviously didn't bother to google "reincarnation research". ... I'll spoon feed you.

 
Chris45 said:
You obviously didn't bother to google "reincarnation research". ... I'll spoon feed you.
Click to expand...

Anecdotal reports is not real evidence.

And since it has never been demonstrated that souls exist, i can not see how it can be demonstrated that they get recycled.

What you reading is suedo science, not real scientific evidence, you can find similar claims of people researching big foot, ufo's, Loch Ness monster etc, they all have many anecdotal claims, no real evidence though.
 


I wasn't talking about ur theory, my theory or what might have possible happened. My point was that the population curve ends roughly when Noah was around. Now that curve could have ended anywhere but it ended around the time of Noah.

U said there was a COMPLETE lack of evidence. But here is some in the curve pointing directly at Noah.

Mbey just rephrase to there is evidence but you don't believe it.
 
cynic said:
Unsurprisingly, you've presumed wrongly! Must I reiterate that I do not claim to the infallibility of any religion? Must I counter with the countless examples of mystical contributions to the foundations of your science?
Click to expand...
Since I don't accept your specious and errant argument that science is just another religion and have explained why it seems pointless to continue down this path. You have not invalidated, adequately addressed or challenged any of my arguments against religion at any point in this discussion but instead seek to renew your assault on science as just another religion, a useless diversion typical of religious apologists.

I do not worship science neither do I think it perfect, but I am not going sit here and fulfill your desire to obfuscate the debate about religious myth and its impacts with silly notions that science is no better at discovering truths about the nature of our world than religion. If you can't or won't directly address my challenges to the collective insanity arising out of human invented religion that's fine, but don't pretend that your linguistic diversions here amount to substantive counter argument.
 

It seems that some people are becoming confused about "proof" and "evidence". They are definitely not synonymous!

Whilst the nature of the evidence (whether it be anecdotal records,video footage etc.) may call its strength and reliability into question, it is definitely evidence in the true sense of the word. The choice about whether or not to entertain evidence could be considered to be highly subjective.
 

Oh boo hoo!

That horrible cynic has popped my illusion of superiority over others!
It's not fair! I don't want to play anymore!

The English language doesn't mean what cynic says it means and cynic's dictionary is wrong!
It's not fair! I don't want to play anymore!

Cynic keeps unfairly directing my attention to historical facts and parallels in human behaviours.
It's not fair! I don't want to play anymore!

Cynic keeps saying I'm just like those horrible bullies in the playground and I know I'm not because I know those bullies have gotten it wrong and that entitles me to bully them!
It's not fair! I don't want to play anymore!

I know I'm right but cynic hasn't played fair! It's so unfair! I don't want to play anymore!

Mommee!!!! Protect me from that nasty cynic on the internet!!!!!

(Judge not lest ye be judged!)
 
FxTrader said:
If you can't or won't directly address my challenges to the collective insanity arising out of human invented religion that's fine, but don't pretend that your linguistic diversions here amount to substantive counter argument.
Click to expand...
This discussion has been most interesting to read, essentially because the opinions put forward have for the most part been expressed intelligently and articulately.

It does seem, however, that we're now seeing a disappointing descent into sophistry.
 
Brilliant!!!
 
Value Collector said:
Well he is obviously not taking literal interpretation of the Qur'an, many would disagree with him. Just like many Christians would disagree with pav and CBC that atheists will go to heaven. There are as many opinion as there are religious people.
Click to expand...

The fact of a muslim expressing sagacity mightn't suit your preferred perception of theism. The fact that you've chosen to discount his circumspection from consideration could even be seen to be comparable to the "pruning" of evidence in order to favour a hypothesis. It would seem that only the most questionable beliefs from the sacred texts may be included in the dataset under consideration, as to do otherwise might serve to undermine the foundations of personal opinion!


I believe that gap still exists! Current day scientists are currently speculating about the possible existence of "dark matter" in an effort to account for anomolous planetary behaviours.

Astrology is crazy, so was his passion for alchemy. Hence we accept his discoveries about gravity, calculus, motion and astronomy and telescopes. But we don't accept his ideas about alchemy, astrology or gods
Click to expand...

Do you seriously believe that Newton's passion for astrology and motivation for discovery of a means of accounting the movement of planetary bodies was a pure coincidence?

What do you mean by "alien belief systems"
Click to expand...

Alien: different in nature

Belief: that which is held as true

System: a number of things arranged with a view to some end or purpose.
 
lindsayf said:
Mr cynic is clearly very enarmoured with his own light.
He may be able to gather a following?
Click to expand...
I'm certain that I am not alone in preferring my personal opinions to those of others, however, I definitely do not want to be responsible for a string of zealous drones sanctifying my name, declaring my words infallible and embarking on crusades!

I don't want that for science either!
 
bunyip said:
The sort of people I admire are those who devote their lives, or even a small part of their lives, to helping others while at the same time having regard for their own safety, and consideration for their families.
Click to expand...
According to: http://www.news.com.au/national/aus...lled-upon-by-god/story-fncynjr2-1226832709998
He's doing what his faith has called for him to do. His wife supports him, and I imagine his three children probably do too ... unless they're estranged and don't give a damn. He and his wife have been living in Hong Kong for the last 50 years and he was in the army before that, so we don't know what the story is there. I imagine they're prepared.

You think he's foolish, but I think he's incredibly brave and I'll be hoping his self-sacrifice will have a positive outcome and that the Nth Koreans will be further inspired to rise up against their tyrannical leaders and fight for their freedom.

Do you remember Mohamed Bouazizi, the Tunisian street vendor who set himself on fire on 17 December 2010 and triggered the Arab Spring?

I bet he didn't anticipate the full outcome of his self-sacrifice, but sometimes those who are "foolish and inconsiderate to their families and loved ones" and sacrifice themselves for a higher cause can produce remarkable results.

The world needs both kinds. Anyway, "que sera sera".
 

Its not evidence at all, because you have no way of knowing what the global population was 4000 years ago, and you have no way of knowing the global population growth rate over the last 4000 years.

All the creationists are doing is assuming the population was 8people, and then finding a growth rate that matches it to today's population.
 

It's not up to me to define the beliefs of theists, you made a comment that Isaac Newton would be in heaven, i just gave an example of other theists who would say that he most certainly won't be.


I believe that gap still exists! Current day scientists are currently speculating about the possible existence of "dark matter" in an effort to account for anomolous planetary behaviours
Click to expand...
.

Dark matter is not required in this particular calculation, I am not an expert, but i believe his slight error has been fixed by just taking into consideration the planets gravity on each other, rather than just the suns on them


Do you seriously believe that Newton's passion for astrology and motivation for discovery of a means of accounting the movement of planetary bodies was a pure coincidence
Click to expand...
?

Who knows, which was the chicken and which was they egg, But it doesn't matter. Say someone believed in Loch Ness monster, and while researching it came up with a bunch of other amazing biology discoveries, the fact they had crazy ideas that lead to real breakthroughs doesn't mean the crazy ideas were valid.

And saying this guy made awesome discoveries and he also believed in Loch Ness monster, so maybe you should believe in Loch Ness is false logic.


.
 
Value Collector said:
It's not up to me to define the beliefs of theists,...
Click to expand...
Good to hear! Now will you please stop doing it!
Theists are perfectly capable of formulating their own beliefs and certainly do not require the assistance of those whom seek to only recognise their failings in the hope of debunking an entire religion.
Value Collector said:
... you made a comment that Isaac Newton would be in heaven, i just gave an example of other theists who would say that he most certainly won't be.
Click to expand...
I made no such comment on Isaac Newton!
I provided three questions accompanied by a quote from Isaac. You rightly recognised this as a counter to some of your earlier comments.
Value Collector said:
.

Dark matter is not required in this particular calculation, I am not an expert, but i believe his slight error has been fixed by just taking into consideration the planets gravity on each other, rather than just the suns on them
...
Click to expand...
Earlier in this discourse I was asked to provide some examples of the benefits of religion. I've directed attention to at least two (of the many) historical examples of the foundations of our modern science being pioneered by the mystical pursuits of theists.
It seems that each time I address such arguments, I am simply greeted with newly created excuses. (eg. "it was centuries ago , a lot's changed since then, I'm sure he wouldn't be saying that if he were alive today, his discoveries were coincidental to his beliefs").

Oh! I was forgetting, the dog probably ate his homework also!

P.S. "Coincidence" very closely rivals the popularity of "hoax" within the deck of "trump everything bar contemporary science" cards.

Edit: The "coincidence" card could be used to trump the outcomes of all repeatable experiments! Yikes!!! Please for the sake of all that is true, think very carefully before playing that card!!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more...