Zero respect
- Thread starter Someacdude
- Start date
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
Thank you, gentlemen, for correcting me on this issue! I've done some research and see that I have jumped the gun on believing this one. Although there are some similarities, it is by no means a blow by blow retelling as I stated. That's what I get for believing everything I saw in ReligulousI apparently took Gerald Massey's view without proper research, and no experts seemed to take this guy seriously. I am a little relieved to learn this, and has restored a little of my faith in humanity. For, if Massey were correct about all the similarities, christians would be much bigger fools in my mind. Thanks again for the correction, and carry on with your interesting discussion...
The notion was popularized by the zeitgeist propaganda film. Unfortunately it worked its way into the atheist pop-mentality and is repeated daily, on all social media sites.
http://conspiracies.skepticproject.com/articles/zeitgeist/part-one/
Unfortunately, when it comes to ideologies that Mr Maher agrees with, he tends to turn of his critical faculties. He is a germ theory denier, an anti-vaxxer, GMO truther, and sits on the board of PETA. IOW, he is critical of right-wing pseudoscience, but credulous of left-wing pseudoscience. Sad, considering he has some insightful things to say about religion.
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/07/27/bill-maher-and-anti-science/
midgetaus
Member
Was this mime an influential figure in your education as well...
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
Someacdude
Active Member
That is a fact, except for one thing.
The Bible doesnt say if there is life on other planets, what it does say is this is the only place the issue of universal sovereignty will be questioned.
I still dont have time right now to devote to this, wife is very sick and needs an emergency operation.
Not for nothing, who made all of this? Set the sun the perfect distance away from the earth, caused it perfect rotation and set the moon in its place.
Science wants to blind some to the existence of ANY creator and tries to claim it as their own, not understanding the simplest things. How many times has science been wrong?
If people would look up from their iphone for a few minutes and just look at creation they may develop a sense of awe at what science cant explain, not to mention ,,,,do
The Bible doesnt say if there is life on other planets, what it does say is this is the only place the issue of universal sovereignty will be questioned.
I still dont have time right now to devote to this, wife is very sick and needs an emergency operation.
Not for nothing, who made all of this? Set the sun the perfect distance away from the earth, caused it perfect rotation and set the moon in its place.
Science wants to blind some to the existence of ANY creator and tries to claim it as their own, not understanding the simplest things. How many times has science been wrong?
If people would look up from their iphone for a few minutes and just look at creation they may develop a sense of awe at what science cant explain, not to mention ,,,,do
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
Good luck to you and your wife. I hope this turns out well.
Beefbisquit
Well-Known Member
lol.... woo woo.
I am very sorry to hear that.
That's a loaded question. There doesn't need to be a creator, and assuming there is when there's been no evidence to support the hypothesis is a poor line of reasoning and less likely than one that doesn't make that assumption. (See occam's razor)
More loaded questions. Besides, there are billions if not trillions of planets in the so called 'Goldilocks' zone. We are not unique. You are proposing a 'god of the gaps' argument, and if you want to equate 'god' to 'what science can't explain', then god will just become an ever shrinking idea, that will eventually disappear altogether.
Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus; a logical fallacy.
First off, 'science' is self correcting. Second, 'science' doesn't make assumptions without evidence like religion does, sometimes scientists do make mistakes though (see the first point about being self-correcting). 'Science' is the best known method for determining what is real and what is not. All of this adds up to science being the best tool we have for examining the world, not religion.
How can you possibly prove that the universe was created by a god? lol It's not possible. The best we can know at present time, is that the was a singularity of some kind and then everything was really hot, and started expanding about 14 billion years ago. You just love the 'god of the gaps' argument to fall back onto, don't you? lol
Someacdude
Active Member
Wife is much better, thanks for the thoughts.
As far as there being no creator, whats your explanation?
For many science is their God, it absolves them from any moral or ethical restrictions except those imposed by mans law which we all know is,,,,flawed.
As far as there being no creator, whats your explanation?
For many science is their God, it absolves them from any moral or ethical restrictions except those imposed by mans law which we all know is,,,,flawed.
Padawanbater2
Well-Known Member
I don't think existence requires a creator, if it did, what created that creator?
If someone is good because they believe they'll be punished if they're not, they're not a good person. If a person is good because they know being good is the right thing to do, they are a good person
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
Examples? Who are these nameless many you are referring to? It sounds like you have simply come up with a narrative that fits your worldview. You are using "god" in a different context, unless you think scientists see "science" as some holy entity worthy of worship. Since no scientist has ever suggested a deity is at the heart of science, I guess you switched context without noticing yourself. No matter what scientist think of science, they do not see it as a god in the same sense that Christians have a god, and your suggesting it reveals either disingenuousness or thoughtlessness.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
Did you see that part of Cosmos wherein Tyson describes our connectedness to everything as spiritual? How would you describe his take on that?
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
I have not watched it yet. I'm sure I will eventually, but right now the hype has turned me off.
I think spiritual is a word that means something different to everyone, and indeed no one can seem to offer an objective definition. I think God, especially the one defined by Christianity, is very specific.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
To some, perhaps, the 'Christian' God is very specific.
I'm with you on the hype, I stay away from the swarms of cool people and their ways
I watched some of it because the visuals caught my attention. I have to give it credit for being stunning in that way.
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
robert 14617
Well-Known Member
i know gods in my bedroom , just before i drop a load other wise i wouldn't be yelling out his name over and over
eye exaggerate
Well-Known Member
Information age, yes. This information, not so much
Someacdude
Active Member
Nope just trying to steer the discussion away from things just like this.
So, if there is no God, how did we get here, what holds everything in place, who made the laws of physics , how did all of this get here, short answer please.
See , even scientists cant prove their isnt a creator and more every year are actually saying they cant imagine how life began.
These arent quacks, these are noted leaders in their fields , so where did all this come from, why are we here, cosmic joke? Mistake?
joefoxx
Member
i think it's interesting to note the connection between the origins of science and spirituality. Even at the time of the early catholic church a bulk of scientific pursuit was invested in proving the existence of a "God". Only after the scientific thought began to mature and diverge questioning the authority of the church/kingdom, which was most interested in preservation of power, were they disowned and persecuted as heretics. It wouldn't be a far fetched idea to assume that's where science as an institution sought to actively oppose religion as it is.
Religions that were around long before Christianity believed in spirituality as containing both the seen, and therefore provable, and the unseen nature of consciousness. In truth it seems as if these two, science and religion, were originally one and then separated as the church decided to divorce authority over people's beliefs from any sort of of good sense or reason..
I mention this because i find it most interesting that centuries of scientific discovery and evolution, about a gabillion dollars, and even more Christian jokes than i can count later the top fields and minds in science have discovered that all known material is made of "the Force" and what's more 90% of existence is made of something we know is there but we can't see or touch. I mean, I missing something or did George Lucas figure this out 20 years ago and without an actual particle accelerator. I've read the same thing in ancient gnostic, buddhist etc writings. I try not to subscribe to any particular label, but it seems like science is dangerously close to confirming the very thing it has assured us over and over did not exist.
Religions that were around long before Christianity believed in spirituality as containing both the seen, and therefore provable, and the unseen nature of consciousness. In truth it seems as if these two, science and religion, were originally one and then separated as the church decided to divorce authority over people's beliefs from any sort of of good sense or reason..
I mention this because i find it most interesting that centuries of scientific discovery and evolution, about a gabillion dollars, and even more Christian jokes than i can count later the top fields and minds in science have discovered that all known material is made of "the Force" and what's more 90% of existence is made of something we know is there but we can't see or touch. I mean, I missing something or did George Lucas figure this out 20 years ago and without an actual particle accelerator. I've read the same thing in ancient gnostic, buddhist etc writings. I try not to subscribe to any particular label, but it seems like science is dangerously close to confirming the very thing it has assured us over and over did not exist.
joefoxx
Member
To me science and religion, religion being record of popular spirituality, are two points of the "strange loop" or "tangled hierarchy" of the mind. This would partly explain why neither fully explains things but taken together they can provide a much clearer picture of the history and existence of humanity and even the nature of matter as a whole. Science misses the whole because, by its very nature, it only acknowledges the predictable and therefore provable and mostly ignores the abstract. Thst's why science will never explain the evolution of mind which ironically includes the very thing that makes most scientific advancement possible; imagination.
Religion on the other hand disregards most logical reasoning or provable fact but, taken in context, is an excellent record of the evolution of human psychology.
I could go on and on
Religion on the other hand disregards most logical reasoning or provable fact but, taken in context, is an excellent record of the evolution of human psychology.
I could go on and on
