Creationists: How do you test for "truth"?

[David T]

Creationists have the historical memory of a gnat. They project a gnats understanding because a gnat only understands the intellect. the gnat starts with the intellect, it's the measuring stick of reality it's the only reality a gnat knows.

Now a gnat can say" I have this book", another gnat will have another book, and all the gnats agree intellect determines and argue like gnats to what is objective. Now that's funny stuff a gnat arguing with a gnat cute. Both gnats hold nature is DEAD. NOW THAT'S really FUNNY!!!!don't ya think!

 

[Hawkins]

So why the incorrect claims of "faith" when it comes to accepting the work of scientists?

Why don't you just read my post. I already explained clearly why faith is needed to accept a science. It's because an individual like you doesn't have the evidence.

Do you have the evidence of black holes because you deem them as a truth? 99.99% humans don't, and all they have is faith!

 

[Hawkins]

Creationists have the historical memory of a gnat. They project a gnats understanding because a gnat only understands the intellect. the gnat starts with the intellect, it's the measuring stick of reality it's the only reality a gnat knows.

Now a gnat can say" I have this book", another gnat will have another book, and all the gnats agree intellect determines and argue like gnats to what is objective. Now that's funny stuff a gnat arguing with a gnat cute. Both gnats hold nature is DEAD. NOW THAT'S really FUNNY!!!!don't ya think!

That's because you are clueless about what human witnessing is!

 

[David T]

That's because you are clueless about what human witnessing is!

Really and please explain "human witnessing" this should be fun.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Why don't you just read my post. I already explained clearly why faith is needed to accept a science. It's because an individual like you doesn't have the evidence.

Do you have the evidence of black holes because you deem them as a truth? 99.99% humans don't, and all they have is faith!

Nope, they don't. Why don't you just read my post explaining your error? An earned trust and respect is not "faith". People know that the evidence is out there if they care to dig it up. That is not "faith". In the case of the beliefs of theists there is no reliable evidence. That is "faith".

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's because you are clueless about what human witnessing is!

When you make up your own bogus terms you shouldn't complain when people ask for a proper definition. One should add "scientific truth" to the list.

 

[Hawkins]

Nope, they don't. Why don't you just read my post explaining your error? An earned trust and respect is not "faith". People know that the evidence is out there if they care to dig it up. That is not "faith". In the case of the beliefs of theists there is no reliable evidence. That is "faith".

As long as you don't have the evidence, it remains your belief. Simple as that! What else can it be?

 

[Subduction Zone]

As long as you don't have the evidence, it remains your belief. Simple as that!

Belief and faith are not one and the same. Your errors are rather obvious.

 

[Hawkins]

When you make up your own bogus terms you shouldn't complain when people ask for a proper definition. One should add "scientific truth" to the list.

It remains your equivocation instead. I already explained clearly the relationship between truth, faith and credibility. Your equivocation here is to try to sound as if something lack the support the evidence is not a belief.

 

[Hawkins]

Belief and faith are not one and the same. Your errors are rather obvious.

That's exactly your equivocation! A belief is by faith.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It remains your equivocation instead. I already explained clearly the relationship between truth, faith and credibility. Your equivocation here is to try to sound as if something lack the support the evidence is not a belief.

No, you made a rather long rambling post where you used bogus terminology. And you do not appear to understand the meaning of the word "equivocation" either.

Slow down, think your posts through, and perhaps you won't make so many obvious errors.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That's exactly your equivocation! A belief is by faith.

Wrong again. If anyone is making an equivocation it is you. Faith is belief without evidence. We know the evidence is out there for the claims of science even if we do not personally "have" it. There is no reliable evidence for your beliefs. And thanks for confirming that you do not understand what the word equivocation means.

 

[Hawkins]

No, you made a rather long rambling post where you used bogus terminology. And you do not appear to understand the meaning of the word "equivocation" either.

Slow down, think your posts through, and perhaps you won't make so many obvious errors.

All you can present here is completely hollow. All you can argue is the equivocation that belief is not faith. What else can it be then? If something is evidenced, literally it no longer be qualified as a belief. Christianity on the other hand, is a belief and a faith simply because it's not evidence based!

Science cannot be called a belief, nor can it be called a faith. It's because it can be evidenced! Individuals however need faith to believe simply because a science is not made to be evidenced to them.

There's nothing ambiguous except your equivocal intention.

 

[Jose Fly]

You need to first understand what humans can do and can't. Humans are basically blocked from the direct access of both the past and future. It is a kind of delusion (as a result of being brainwashed by education) to think that evidence can lead us to the past efficiently while it's not.

Then I suppose we have to release all those in prison who were convicted of crimes for which there were no witnesses.

 

[Hawkins]

Then I suppose we have to release all those in prison who were convicted of crimes for which there were no witnesses.

Or you can jail whoever without a jury! You need a jury to vote for a majority judgment simply because evidence is almost exclusively subject to human interpretation.

 

[Subduction Zone]

All you can present here is completely hollow. All you can argue is the equivocation that belief is not faith. What else can it be then? If something is evidenced, literally it no longer be qualified as a belief. Christianity on the other hand, is a belief and a faith simply because it's not evidence based!

Science cannot be called a belief, nor can it be called a faith. It's because it can be evidenced!

Now you are merely projecting your flaws upon others.

And no, you are the one that is making an equivocation error. Faith and belief are not synonyms. Most beliefs are rational beliefs. They are not based on just faith. Faith is an irrational belief.

No matter how hard I try I can't believe that I can fly by flapping my arms. I could believe that by faith. I would be wrong, but I could still believe that if I was an irrational thinker. I try to keep my beliefs evidence based. You are simply trying to redefine "belief" and I am sorry but you can't do that.

 

[Hawkins]

Now you are merely projecting your flaws upon others.

And no, you are the one that is making an equivocation error. Faith and belief are not synonyms. Most beliefs are rational beliefs. They are not based on just faith. Faith is an irrational belief.

No matter how hard I try I can't believe that I can fly by flapping my arms. I could believe that by faith. I would be wrong, but I could still believe that if I was an irrational thinker. I try to keep my beliefs evidence based. You are simply trying to redefine "belief" and I am sorry but you can't do that.

Faith is an irrational belief? That remains your own definition. Show me a dictionary saying that faith is always irrational, a belief is always rational!

It's your BS here, which even goes beyond an equivocation!

 

[Jose Fly]

Or you can jail whoever without a jury!

??????????

You need a jury to vote for a majority judgment simply because evidence is almost exclusively subject to human interpretation.

Yup. And it shows that we can draw solid conclusions about past events.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Faith is an irrational belief? That remains your own definition. Show me a dictionary saying that faith is always irrational, a belief is always rational!

It's your BS here, which even goes beyond an equivocation!

No, that is the definition from the context of our discussion. Since this is a religious forum we are obviously talking about "faith" as used in the Bible.


But if you can show that your beliefs are not irrational go right ahead. And you really should not use terms that you do not understand. I suggest that you drop the word "equivocation" from your vocabulary for some time. Your inability to understand that the proper definition is context based indicates that you still do not understand what an equivocation error is.

 

[David T]

The reality testable, verifiable and falsifiable by scientific methods. The same reality that makes your computer work.

The problem is with that it's totally subjective. I mean I have shown the Monty python "burn the witch" scene from in search of the Holy Grail. Camaflauge is a fascinating topic. What is death what is camaflauge? Death is the great blind spot of the intellect that the intellect can't penetrate nor will it ever penetrate because it is its blind spot. The intellect inverts reality into deconstruction reconstruction.

A bird in a tree, only understands order. It will starve to death and become extinct otherwise. It's existence depends on seeing as it does. As it scans the branches, everything is in perfect order. What it is looking for us anything out of place out of order. The moment it sees random/chaos in scientific terms, or miracle in religious terms, it pouches and eats. It kills that which steps out from order. A stick bugs existence is totally dependent on being aligned to never separate from the order around it or it dies. If all the stick bugs suddenly started to fall out of alignment with its surroundings they would all become extinct as a species. So alignment with nature is critical for the survival of the species. That's a way way deeper thing than science and independent of science today itself. For science if itself was reality truth would be saying today nature alive, or extinction absolute. It's really all the noatic story really is from the ancient ancient times!!! Historical memory and I remember and I say nature alive or extinction to the intellect. The intellect has declared war on nature and guess who is going to lose that war? The intellect..

I love music. Good for breaking up the nonsense. You play? I suck but have returned one guitar open e learning American root music. May make a diddly bow and git me a cigar box geatar as well. I actually have a nice traveler guitar, and an electric blonde maple archtop Gibson knock off of chuck berry's. Very cool. Music is a great way of con etching to historical memory we used to play music communally we now consume music communally. I say play,!!!! Nice thing about music no believers, no agnostics no non believers allowed while playing!!! Only when the music stops does that creep creep in l!!!!! Like some slinking devil the shadows. Ha. Nice bit on very ancient Irish music. What's your aboriginalists history? Mine is Irish, native American with the defective English gene in there somewhere. Mostly Irish though. As oldsters we are given the responsibility to say nature alive let's play some music and do art kiddies. That I think is wisdom. As best as I know it. Not tv culture blah de blah blah.