Atheists believe in miracles more than believers

[Subduction Zone]

Although evolutionists do not mention it much, apes have 24 pairs of chromosomes and humans only have 23. You might think that it is not much, but a difference of a single pair affects hundreds of genomic characteristics that make both species completely different from the beginning from the physical to the ability to think.

If it were true that humans came from apes, this difference of -2 chromosomes would have constituted a serious anomaly that would have destined the supposed new specimen(s) to non-survival, as proven by all known examples of chromosomal anomalies.

Down syndrome (trisomy 21), Patau syndrome (trisomy 13), Edwards syndrome (trisomy 18), Klinefelter syndrome (47, XXY), Turner syndrome (45, X), are some examples of chromosomal abnormalities in humans. Imagine that a pair of chromosomes ceases to exist or "change configuration", as evolutionists say happened to apes to become humans.

This problem has been solved. You really have to be confused to think that you would know something about evolution that others do not know.

Too bad that I am on ignore. I could provide articles and explain how this turned into evidence for evolution.

 

[ChristineM]

Too bad that I am on ignore. I could provide articles and explain how this turned into evidence for evolution.

It's ok, he puts people on ignore then peeks to see what they are saying.

 

[shunyadragon]

How do you know that other humans are wrong?

A difficult question as worded. Wrongness in others often reflects a biased cultural and religious view toward others who believe differently. Relying on subjective beliefs and differences increase the conflict of wrongness.

I realize we have differences on the human knowledge of the nature of our relationship to our physical existence concerning what is the objective and subjective, but I believe a more objective view of understanding of the nature of our physical existence is part of the foundation of a universal human relationship to nature. Many ancient tribal beliefs reject science and increase the conflict between humanity and nature.

 

[shunyadragon]

paarsurrey said:
Earlier one was talking about the Universal Laws, now one has left that idea, right, please?

One means " universal", right?

Regards

I could easily accept you One as would everyone else, but each may define the One as their belief in the One. One is just a number unless you put it in a universal context beyond what one of the many conflicting beliefs claim. Not clear, and avoiding the problems of the rejecting of science claiming exclusive claims by many conflicting subjective religious beliefs.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It's ok, he puts people on ignore then peeks to see what they are saying.

I may have been the first person to realize that. Luckily I am on ignore so he will never see this post.

 

[ChristineM]

I may have been the first person to realize that. Luckily I am on ignore so he will never see this post.

I don't know about first, he put me on ignore months ago but still replies so some of my posts

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't know about first, he put me on ignore months ago but still replies so some of my posts

I think that he put me on ignore the first day that he was here. It was rather obvious that he was "cheating".

 

[Pogo]

Although evolutionists do not mention it much, apes have 24 pairs of chromosomes and humans only have 23. You might think that it is not much, but a difference of a single pair affects hundreds of genomic characteristics that make both species completely different from the beginning from the physical to the ability to think.

If it were true that humans came from apes, this difference of -2 chromosomes would have constituted a serious anomaly that would have destined the supposed new specimen(s) to non-survival, as proven by all known examples of chromosomal anomalies.

Down syndrome (trisomy 21), Patau syndrome (trisomy 13), Edwards syndrome (trisomy 18), Klinefelter syndrome (47, XXY), Turner syndrome (45, X), are some examples of chromosomal abnormalities in humans. Imagine that a pair of chromosomes ceases to exist or "change configuration", as evolutionists say happened to apes to become humans.

Trisomy is very different than fusion which occurs in 1 in a thousand live births and does not automatically cause sterility. Somebody lied to you and you parroted it. ;(

 

[Subduction Zone]

Trisomy is very different than fusion which occurs in 1 in a thousand live births and does not automatically cause sterility. Somebody lied to you and you parroted it. ;(

He knows that he is wrong. He is just afraid. That is why he has to pretend to put people on ignore so that when people go into detail as to how he is wrong he can pretend to have never seen it.

 

[Pogo]

He knows that he is wrong. He is just afraid. That is why he has to pretend to put people on ignore so that when people go into detail as to how he is wrong he can pretend to have never seen it.

"While both ignore and ignorant have similar etymologies, their meaning has diverged throughout their development. While 'ignore' refers to not paying attention to something, 'ignorance' refers to lack of knowledge of something."
While not always causally related, sometimes it is.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes, monkeys remain monkeys. And by cladistics humans are monkeys. Thank you for confirming evolution is a fact again.

"Cladistics" do not necessarily reveal the truth about how life from the start came about, I.e., as purported in the theory of evolution. But if you want to believe that humans are monkeys as well as fish -- you go for it.

 

[joelr]

They get furious because I dedicated a topic to them where I make them wake up to their own reality: they believe in miracles more than believers themselves.

Believing that life came from things is more miraculous than believing that God shared his life with others.

PS: The automated response manual is falling short... You should stop hiring automated handlers on this forum and start putting some real humanity into the debates. It's something like "adding value to the forum"... because you are losing a lot of value with these types of answers that are more than boring and repeated ad nauseum.



A lowbrow attempt at gaslighting people who bother to educate themself on a subject. Maybe that works for you in bad relationships. Here it just looks like a high schooler who just discovered emotional manipulation. I'll post what I post, maybe since it's a DEBATE forum you can, y'know, debunk it. With evidence?
Gaslighting isn't debunking. It's a lot of other things. None good.



There is no miracle to evolution and the slow development of conscious beings. Nor is there a miracle in literature. Yahweh is a typical Near Eastern deity who adds on Persian and then Greek features. Later Aquinas and others borrowed Graeco-Roman theology and philosophy to make Yahweh a modern god beyond space and tie, tri-omni. It was a myth when Plato wrote it and it still is when added to Yahweh.

There is much we don't know. We do know religions are extremely likely to be syncretic mythology. We do have massive evidence at every stage of development.
God "shared his life"? Like when he flooded the world, made all women have pain in childbirth, told people to take women and children as plunder of war and kill every living thing in 6 cities. Sends plagues for lame reasons. Those apologetics work if you don't read the book and don't actually care about truth or evidence.
It's all based on a revelation.

So is Islam, Mormonism, Hinduism, Bahai, a dude said a god contacted him. Yeah that's quite a miracle. Even Ron Hubbard can do it it's 'so easy to trick people.


"Things" are real, governed by probabilities which means anything can happen given enough time. That explains everything right there.
"God" is not proven, no evidence, and a made up paradox of nonsense. The idea is in our mind because all babies have god-like beings who seemingly have ultimate power, feed them, care for them, can do anything. Parents. To a 6 month old a parent is a god.
We grow up with the idea still mulling around. So that explains the idea.

Now provide some good evidence that Islam or Mormons cannot.

 

[gnostic]

@Eli G

I will say to again, atheism only deal with the (personal or philosophical) question of the existence of God, meaning an atheist

• either don’t believe any deity
• or lack the belief in any deity.

That’s all. Nothing more, nothing less than just that.

That is entire scope of what

Atheism is not only, not science, it is not study of nature. Being an atheist doesn’t make one a scientist.

At best, it could be called a philosophy, but a philosophy would imply a school of thought, which it isn’t. There are no schools for atheism.

But just as atheism has nothing to do with science, atheism also have nothing to do with politics, nor that of morals.

Anything that you’d attach to atheism, are just excessive baggage of your personal belief, and they are irrelevant to atheism, and those baggage have nothing to do with atheism.

 

[blü 2]

God is not magic.

Magic is the alteration of reality independently of the rules of reality.

That's to say, God, and any other miracle worker, operates by magic.

Oddly, no religion that I'm aware of that believes in miracles, has established a systematic study of the subject with a view to identifying HOW they're done, thus enabling humans to work miracles too.

That's always seemed to me to be a deep-down awareness in those same believers that religion is a game, like being in, say, a Harry Potter novel, where rules that don't work in reality are allowed.

Perhaps you can offer a better explanation for this lack of curiosity, which otherwise might appear to be a deliberate blind eye to the question.

He is a real powerful spirit person who decided to create a universe full of life and to which he dedicated a lot of love when he made it. We have an existence with purpose, starting from a Father who gave us life.

That's like the opening of a novel. Yet in that universe, which is to say, out here in reality, no such being is found ─ never appears, never says, never does, answers prayers at the same rate as chance.

Or a game where you've drawn the card GOD and it tells you what powers you have in the game.

That is not magic, nor a miracle, because the power and knowledge of the Creator exceeds our limited human understanding. He could, and so he did.

What quality does God have that a superscientist who can create universes, raise the dead, travel in time &c lacks? Or is God just a superscientist [him]self?

 

[TLK Valentine]

God is not magic.

He is a real powerful spirit person who decided to create a universe full of life and to which he dedicated a lot of love when he made it. We have an existence with purpose, starting from a Father who gave us life.

That is not magic, nor a miracle, because the power and knowledge of the Creator exceeds our limited human understanding. He could, and so he did.

Good evening to all readers...even those who I ignore.

And what is the purpose of our existence?

 

[cladking]

Oddly, no religion that I'm aware of that believes in miracles, has established a systematic study of the subject with a view to identifying HOW they're done, thus enabling humans to work miracles too.

"Science" is the principle tool that is used to understand how God operates. This has been so for centuries.

Before science everyone had a healthy respect for the complexity and magic of reality. Now many believe we already have every understanding and these are the "Laws of Nature". It's odd that so few are studying why there is a law of gravity or how it works. It sure would be nice to fly or just turn it off so materials can be floated to where they are needed. It seems that the chief law of gravity is that it is immutable and can not be affected by science or man so scientists aren't really studying this at all: MAGIC!

 

[blü 2]

"Science" is the principle tool that is used to understand how God operates. This has been so for centuries.

Yet religion spawned no science within religion, no curiosity that in my view would naturally arise from a belief that miracles are possible.

Before science everyone had a healthy respect for the complexity and magic of reality.

Magic is the alteration of reality independently of the rules of reality, and miracles are that subset of magic that is performed by a deity.

There is not even one authenticated example of magic, let alone of a miracle.

Now many believe we already have every understanding and these are the "Laws of Nature".

Science makes no such claim. Outside of this sentence there are no absolute statements. And as Brian Cox said, a law of physics is a statement about physics that hasn't been falsified yet.

No, the justification for science is not that it makes absolute statements but that it works, and that its methods are productive of useful real results.

It's odd that so few are studying why there is a law of gravity or how it works.

You appear to be unfamiliar with Einstein's theory of gravity, which remains the current standard, and indeed explains how gravity works.

But no need for you to be the shadow of ignorance any longer ─ >here< is a good place to start reading.

 

[cladking]

Yet religion spawned no science within religion, no curiosity that in my view would naturally arise from a belief that miracles are possible.

You are assuming religion and science are distinct things. You are wrong on every possible level.

Magic is the alteration of reality independently of the rules of reality,...

You are assuming that science knows every law, every equation, and can quantify every variable.

Science makes no such claim.

Of course not!

But to those who believe in science (scientism) everything is already explicable.

You appear to be unfamiliar with Einstein's theory of gravity, which remains the current standard, and indeed explains how gravity works.

 

[blü 2]

You are assuming religion and science are distinct things. You are wrong on every possible level.

Science does not find evidence of the reality of the supernatural. Supernatural beings and things are known to exist only as concepts, notions, things imagined in individual brains, and are acquired largely by acculturation rather than observation.

Religion assumes a huge variety of imaginary beings and attributes magical powers to many of them.

Science explores, describes and seeks to explain reality─ including gravity, as you now know having read the information on that link I provided.

Religion has specialized wishes, mostly in the form of prayers. Prayers are successful at the same rate as chance.

That seems to me to be a major difference between science and religion.

They are not necessarily mutually exclusive ─ some believers have been excellent scientists properly so called ─ though there's a noticeable tendency that way.

You are assuming that science knows every law, every equation, and can quantify every variable.

You're not paying attention to what I said eg where I told you science makes no absolute claims, and also referred you to Brian Cox's statement to that effect. Science assumes nothing of the kind.

But to those who believe in science (scientism) everything is already explicable.

Scientism is an ambiguous term, referring both to a genuine confidence in the value of science as a key to understanding reality, and later as a term of abuse to those who have a false belief that science can do anything and express absolute truths in perfect statements.

I suggest you note the distinction and avoid ambiguity.

 

[cladking]

Science does not find evidence of the reality of the supernatural.

Your argument is fairly good but is still largely semantical. It all hinges on the flawed logic quoted here.

Both science and religion study reality but neither can find it. We all grope in the dark like blind men trying to describe an elephant. By stating that science can find no reality in the supernatural you are putting the cart before the horse. Reality exists independently of belief, theory, and belief in theory.

Real scientists don't reach conclusions and would not conclude that the lack of evidence for the supernatural means it doesn't exist.



On a related topic there is magic everywhere from the look in a young girl's eyes to our very existence. Obviously it's possible that consciousness and all the magic might someday be found to have solely natural causations explicable it terms of equations but in the meantime there is far more unknown than known and any belief other than this is scientism. The belief in natural law borders on scientism since there is no known agent to administer or to obey such laws. All we really have is theory which might best be thought of as being correlated to reality that provides some insight into the logic that is reality. Perhaps some of this logic would even seem supernatural to us if we were aware of and understood it.