Australian (ASX) Stock Market Forum

Religion, Science, Scepticism, Philosophy and things metaphysical

Jump to new
Chris45 said:
... However, I am in awe of their outback skills ...
Click to expand...
Agree!
If my daddy learnt to find water that would be "problem solving".
Agree!
If he taught me and then I found water, that would be the application of learned skills.

How does that make me less intelligent than my daddy?
 
Artist, before you start pointing fingers at people that are giving personal swipes, maybe you should look over a few of these threads and look at the personal swipes directed at myself for my thoughts and opinions in here, and a few of the others that have never come back, sadly, it works both ways, with no contribution in the thread whatsoever.

As I have stated, science and religion are both important in society, and discussing it in a reasonable manner is what we are here for, sadly, some need to get personal to get their views across.
 
Tink said:
Artist, before you start pointing fingers at people that are giving personal swipes, maybe you should look over a few of these threads and look at the personal swipes directed at myself for my thoughts and opinions in here, and a few of the others that have never come back, sadly, it works both ways, with no contribution in the thread whatsoever.

As I have stated, science and religion are both important in society, and discussing it in a reasonable manner is what we are here for, sadly, some need to get personal to get their views across.
Click to expand...

I did look back over a couple of threads and read almost every post and saw no invective to match what I just quoted, but I may have missed some. The insults are not, in my opinion, "discussing it in a reasonable manner" and make me (and others as you point out) less inclined to bother to read, let alone participate in the conversation. As for the points of view you or others express, I made no comment
 
pavilion103 said:
Exactly why I wonder why anyone who is an atheist would bother on here.

It's like me going on a thread about purple unicorns and me getting all fired up that they don't exist. I find it bizarre.
Click to expand...

I don't think there are purple unicorns.
They are mostly white.

But then isn't that what people said about swans.
 
Thanks artist.

When you get a poster having to open their own thread on the beauty of religion because of the constant abuse being dished out to believers, then it makes you wonder, and I did enjoy reading the time and space, theism and different structures to the universe.
Sadly, the naysayers quickly shot it down.

Science and Religion are both doctrines and dogma in the extreme, if people want to be picky.

As said, it works both ways, and peoples comments and feeds should be welcome.
 
Tink said:
Thanks artist. When you get a poster having to open their own thread on the beauty of religion because of the constant abuse being dished out to believers, then it makes you wonder, and I did enjoy reading the time and space, theism and different structures to the universe. Sadly, the naysayers quickly shot it down. Science and Religion are both doctrines and dogma in the extreme, if people want to be picky. As said, it works both ways, and peoples comments and feeds should be welcome.
Click to expand...

A bit annoying isn't it?

Seems like there are two standards too.
I can make a negative comment even about the logic of the atheist ideas (not a personal attack) and I get pointed out as hating someone and being not like Jesus teachings.

Then an atheist can label us as gullible, outdated, indoctrinated, or worse etc and it doesn't even get a mention.

I won't just sit here, smile politely and cop that crap. Either it's the same standard for both or we end this discussion. Needs to be a level playing field in that regard.
 
People can say the Christian views are not worthy of respectful discussion. But I'm not allowed to say that the atheist arguments presented as intellectually dishonest, incoherent and inconsistent.
Give me a break!
 
pavilion103 said:
A bit annoying isn't it?

Seems like there are two standards too.
I can make a negative comment even about the logic of the atheist ideas (not a personal attack) and I get pointed out as hating someone and being not like Jesus teachings.

Then an atheist can label us as gullible, outdated, indoctrinated, or worse etc and it doesn't even get a mention.

I won't just sit here, smile politely and cop that crap. Either it's the same standard for both or we end this discussion. Needs to be a level playing field in that regard.
Click to expand...

No two standards as far as I am concerned. One can make negative comments about the logic of atheists, just as they can about theists of any persuasion, but some of the comments I quoted were, in my estimation, demeaning personal attacks. And, despite actively searching for equivalent examples from the other side I was unable to find any (but as I wrote above, I may have missed some). Had I noted any then my objection would apply to that also. There is obviously going to be some disagreement on occasion as to whether or not a particular phrasing is apt but in I think that in general it is evident when comments are insulting.

I anticipated that you might claim I was accusing you of hating someone but I hoped you would be more discerning than that. I should have written "I am not accusing you of hating, but some of the terms you use cannot be said to show respect".

Accusations by either side of gullibility (although that is a word I would hesitate to use), outdatedness or indoctrination are not personal attacks in my view (hence didn't get a mention - it is the "or worse etc" from either side that I find unnecessary, unjustified, unproductive and undignified), but they are pointless unless substantiated with some evidence. But then if there is evidence, why not present it without the acrimony?

As to "Either it's the same standard for both or we end this discussion." an alternative would be to maintain a high standard of debate and conduct for oneself and to refuse to engage in what one sees as inappropriate behaviour even if in your view others do.
 
Agree.

I apologise for any personal remarks that I may have made.


On another point, this thread is just becoming the same as the other religion thread.

Was there a specific purpose for this one?
If so maybe we should adhere to that?

The reason I started posting in here because I was sick of the other one. But this has become the same. I don't see the point?
 
I'm interested to discuss origins.

It was mentioned that creationists face the same problem as atheists.
This is not the case. An eternal God is able to "create". He is eternal. He needs no creator.
The naturalistic world view and current scientific evidence does not allow for something to come from nothing (from within everything that currently exists). To think that it can is unscientific by definition. It's all well and good to think that this evidence will come along, but until it does (which it won't) we have to follow current scientific evidence that says something in this universe can't come from nothing in this universe.
Atheists have a miracle, but no miracle worker!


I'm curious to know the thoughts of current atheists in this thread about their thoughts on:
1) possible origins
2) the evidence to support these.
 
burglar said:
If my daddy learnt to find water that would be "problem solving".
Agree!
If he taught me and then I found water, that would be the application of learned skills.
How does that make me less intelligent than my daddy?
Click to expand...
The application of a learned skill requires less cognitive ability than the devising of the skill in the first place.

That doesn't necessarily mean that you are less intelligent than your daddy.

If you are capable of devising your own innovative solutions to problems, in addition to being able to apply your learned skills, then you could be more intelligent than your daddy.
 
burglar said:
Correction, if I may: Atheists have a mystery, ... Theists have a miracle, and have made a leap of faith ...
Click to expand...

Atheists believe in what is here in the here and now and no supernatural intervention.

Scientific evidence says that something can't be created from nothing. It also says that the universe is not eternal. That is a huge dilemma! They are snookered.

What are your thoughts on origin Burglar?
 
All this discussion so far and yet no one has mentioned matter and energy:confused:
 
pavilion103 said:
Atheists believe in what is here in the here and now and no supernatural intervention.

Scientific evidence says that something can't be created from nothing. It also says that the universe is not eternal. That is a huge dilemma! They are snookered.

What are your thoughts on origin Burglar?
Click to expand...

"I think I am, therefore I am, I think"

Without origin, I would fry my brain.
Therefore it remains to me, a mystery.
No worse than your dilemma.
 
artist said:
In the meantime however here is a list of epithets used by the pavilion103 and Chris45 when discussing the people and / or the ideas they disagree with:
stupid, insane, delusional, extremely ignorant troll, ridiculous, fool, ignorant/ly (a few times), arrogantly superior and disdainful, narrow-minded fool, lazy, dumbest, "intelligent idiot", pig-headed and unreasonable.
Click to expand...
Artist, here is a list of epithets used by some of the atheists here when discussing the people and / or the ideas they disagree with:
gullible, brainwashed, bigoted, sanctimonious, nonsensical, asinine, thoroughly indoctrinated, ignorant, pious, superstitious, ridiculous and ludicrous, delusion, religious nonsense, blinkered, religious drones, magic book, slave to religious superstition, celestial dictator, arrogant, religious myth and poison.

Perhaps you can appreciate why we theists get a little annoyed and sometimes feel the need to respond in kind.
 
Top