Double-blind Prayer Efficacy Test -- Really?

[Wildswanderer]

We see entropy increasing, but that is not a degradation.

Direct contradiction.

 

[Subduction Zone]

By looking at the definition.

"One who denies the existence of God, or of a supreme intelligent being."

That doesn't leave room for maybes.

You cherry picked. And you did not even include a link. That is a terrible fail on your part:

Frist source that I come to:

Atheism - Wikipedia

Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities.

The second source that I came across:

What is Atheism?

Atheism is one thing: A lack of belief in gods.
Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.


Third source:


Atheism and Agnosticism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)


1. Definitions of “Atheism”
The word “atheism” is polysemous—it has multiple related meanings. In the psychological sense of the word, atheism is a psychological state, specifically the state of being an atheist, where an atheist is defined as someone who is not a theist and a theist is defined as someone who believes that God exists (or that there are gods). This generates the following definition: atheism is the psychological state of lacking the belief that God exists.


Once again, if you want to know what atheism is ask an atheist. Do not ask a Christian. If you want to know what Christianity is ask a Christian (but not just one since there are roughly 40,000 sects!) Do not ask a Muslim.

Tell me are you okay with a Muslim's definition of Christianity?


You failed and failed terribly even after being warned. Why did you think that I could not easily refute your incorrect definition?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Direct contradiction.

Nope. You simply do not understand entropy. Your growth from single celled egg to an adult was the result of constantly increasing entropy. Are you the product of "degradation"?

 

[ppp]

Not so.

Very much so. The world is full of people ascribing their good fortune to objects and rituals.
. Four leaf clovers. Horse shoes. Saging ones house. Tokens from parents or lovers. Etc. By your reasoning the fact that they have similar experiences means that all of those tokens are actually lucky.

 

[Sheldon]

And neither seem to actually work since there is no energy involved.

Indeed, one could pour energy into cursing the rain, then when it inevitably stops you can bet your life the person invoking the curse, would rejoice at their success, and ignore the next downpour.

 

[Sheldon]

I disagree. In my experience with both, the evidence seems to point otherwise.

Some people's experience is that mermaids are real, I don't believe them either, and for precisely the same reason, because when subjected to objective critical scrutiny the results do not support the claims.

 

[Sheldon]

Sheldon said: ↑
Nope, atheism is a lack or absence of belief.

No, that agnostic.

Nope, read a dictionary.

Atheism
noun

1. disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Agnostic
noun

1. a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God.

 

[Sheldon]

Wildswanderer said: ↑
No, that agnostic.

Dude!! How much credibility would a Muslim have in claiming that you were not a Christian?

Not much, but his stock would fall much farther, if as @Wildswanderer did, he directly contradicted the dictionary.

 

[Sheldon]

I’m using my own experiences.

I can imagine no surer way of confirming a subjective belief, it's efficacy and it's promotion by apologists as the same, is hardly accidental of course.

 

[Sheldon]

You’re right. But when similar results happen with different people in different situations, those results are compelling.

Selection bias always is.

 

[Sheldon]

And you are guessing that matter could somehow be eternal even though we see everything degrading on the earth.

So what, you seem to keep repeating these god of the gaps polemic as if they couldn't just as effectively be used to argue for omnipotent omniscient pixies.

 

[Sheldon]

Nope, atheism is a lack or absence of belief.

No, that agnostic.

Dude! Words have meanings! You can't just change the meanings to fit your whims.

If you choose to change the clear meaning of words, no one can take you seriously.

I have seldom seen such obvious own goals.

Atheism
noun

1. disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods.

Agnostic
noun

1. a person who believes that nothing is known or can be known of the existence or nature of God.

 

[Sheldon]

That is what you are doing. What do you think "atheism" means? The best way to find out would be to ask an atheist. If you cherry pick a definition I can pick a correct one.

Or he could go to a dictionary, since these reflect common usage and understanding. His stubborn denial of the definitions reflected in major dictionaries here, make his assertions something an own goal. Especially that post about no one taking someone seriously if they change the meaning of words.

 

[Sheldon]

Policy said: ↑
By that argument four leaf clovers are lucky.

Not so.

How can you proclaim subjective personal experience as valid, then deny that of others, and fail to see the selection bias at work?

 

[Sheldon]

By looking at the definition.

"One who denies the existence of God, or of a supreme intelligent being."

That doesn't leave room for maybes.

That isn't the definition, you haven't offered a link to any citation, which speaks volumes.

Atheism
noun

1. lack of belief in the existence of God or gods

Oxford English online linked above, and the previous citations are for Google. A lot of apologists use obscure religious encyclopaedias and try to pretend they represent common usage and understanding.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Atheism, in the broadest sense, is an absence of belief in the existence of deities.

I don't see a difference. An absence of belief in deities doesn't leave room for God being a possibility.

 

[Wildswanderer]

Nope. You simply do not understand entropy. Your growth from single celled egg to an adult was the result of constantly increasing entropy.

This just confirms the obvious truth of Life from life. Nothing creates itself.
Matter can't create life.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't see a difference. An absence of belief in deities doesn't leave room for God being a possibility.

Don't give me that nonsense.. If there is no difference in why did you resist earlier corrections?

 

[Subduction Zone]

N

This just confirms the obvious truth of Life from life. Nothing creates itself.
Matter can't create life.

Nope, there is plenty of evidence for abiogenesis.

You don't even seem to understand what evidence is. How are you ever going to support anything that you claim in a debate?

 

[PruePhillip]

Of course I can, don't be silly, your claims about its nature are risible, since you have claimed it cannot be comprehended. .

So space and time are part of what we call our 'universe'.
That is, the sum of all physical entities - even any multiverses.

And at some point this universe began.
But what made it begin, gave it properties and importantly, for what reason?

Whatever entity-being-alien physics created this world of space and time operated on different principles.
And if this thing created time then can we assume it doesn't have time itself? How does a realm operate without time?
So how can we be asking how some alien entity 'began' when beginning only concerns states with time in it?