Finally! More Young Americans Accept Evolution than Believe in Creationism...

[gnostic]

But this is the talk of an atheist....naturally because you believe God is a man made myth, you are programmed to reject the mystical reality beyond the 5% physical part of the universe that atheists are concerned with....happy as pigs in mud...

No, Ben. Not atheist in me that would ask for the existence of God. It is the science in me that would ask for evidences.

Any good scientist, whether they be atheist, theist or agnostic, would ALWAYS question or challenge their own view or stance, NO MATTER WHAT THEY MAY BELIEVE IN!

You would understand this, if you have ever honestly study any field in science.

A good scientist, even if he is a believer, would not use his belief tainted his data or his finding in favour of his religion, because otherwise he would have allow his belief and preconceptions to cause bias in his experiment. The scientific results should be dictated by the evidences, not by one's faith.

Until there are evidences to support the existence of the unknowable, then I would acknowledge the existence of God. I would actually cease to be agnostic, if I know that god's existence were true.

But there are no evidences to support it, so he would stay in the FALSE tray, until in such a time, real tangible and verifiable evidences present themselves.

To me, a good scientist WOULD NEVER assume that any hypothesis he had formulated to being TRUE. The default position for any and all new hypothesis that it is FALSE. The only way to change hypothesis' status from FALSE to TRUE, would have to be verified through rigorous and repeated testings or finding empirical evidences that support hypothesis' explanation and prediction(s).

Only bad scientists would assume that any hypothesis is true, without even bothering to begin to test it or verify it.

That's why Michael Behe is a terrible biochemist, because he assume his intelligent design paper, Irreducible Complexity (IC), make a lot of points that favour a Designer, without providing a single testable format that can test his prediction for the existence of Intelligent Designer. His IC is nothing more than pseudoscience.

(Sorry, I had prematurely and accidentally hit the SAVE button).

I am what what you would call a weak agnostic. Only conclusive evidences would change my stance on the existence of God. Look up weak agnostic. I am not an atheist.

 

[gnostic]

That's was his only goal.


I keep him on ignore for such

Believe me, I have been seriously contemplating that for months now, of putting him there. If I did, he would be 2nd person to make it my list of Ignore.

 

[gnostic]

Stop obfuscating and admit you are an atheist...do you actually..

a) Accept that God exists as a reality..
b) Do not accept God as a reality...
c) Are not yet sure if God is or is not a reality..

You will feel better when you have made up your mind and have come out of the closet...

Why in the flicking 7 hells should I submit your definition of atheist?!

Read my 2nd last post before this, would explain why I am not an atheist.

The last line, conclude with that I am a "weak agnostic", but much of it, is my stance of what is a good scientific practice or unbiased approach to good science.

Here is a wiki definition to "weak agnostic" from the article AGNOSTICISM:

Weak agnosticism (also called "soft", "open", "empirical", or "temporal agnosticism")
The view that the existence or nonexistence of any deities is currently unknown but is not necessarily unknowable; therefore, one will withhold judgment until evidence, if any, becomes available. A weak agnostic would say, "I don't know whether any deities exist or not, but maybe one day, if there is evidence, we can find something out."

I have sandwiched my "weak" agnosticism with my approach to empirical science, that all thought, position or stance to existence are false, until they have been verified to being true (through evidences or tests).

Meaning, my agnosticism is in many way on how approach science, using falsifiability and scientific method together, that everything is false until proven otherwise.

And how I view myself is really none of your damn business. I won't be bullied by the likes of you.

 

[gnostic]

First, you are trying to bully me into changing my avatar's name from gnostic to agnostic.

Now, you are trying to bullying me into being atheist instead of agnostic.

I have never like bullies in schools, and I don't like it now.

Quit it, or I am going to report you.

I am giving you fair warning, ben_q.

 

[prometheus11]

First, you are trying to bully me into changing my avatar's name from gnostic to agnostic.

Now, you are trying to bullying me into being atheist instead of agnostic.

I have like bullies in schools, and I don't like it now.

Quit it, or I am going to report you.

I am giving you fair warning, ben_q.

Atheists lack belief in any gods. Do you have a solid belief position on any gods? If you're answer is "no," then you're an atheist whether or not you want to be one.

You're an atheist OR you have a strong belief in a god. You either believe in Santa or you don't.

 

[gnostic]

Atheists lack belief in any gods. Do you have a solid belief position on any gods? If you're answer is "no," then you're an atheist whether or not you want to be one.

You're an atheist OR you have a strong belief in a god. You either believe in Santa or you don't.

So there's no middle ground, in your world?

And Santa is a poor example.

What happen if you believe in gods/goddesses of another religion, but you don't believe in the God of Abrahamic faiths?

There are more than one God in the world, and a person could say I believe in Zeus or Ra, but don't believe in Yahweh or Allah. That's a different position to that of monotheism.

And then there are deist and other non-theistic religions, like Buddhism for example. It is a religion, but it is not exactly a theism.

 

[prometheus11]

I'm

So there's no middle ground, in your world?

And Santa is a poor example.

What happen if you believe in gods/goddesses of another religion, but you don't believe in the God of Abrahamic faiths?

There are more than one God in the world, and a person could say I believe in Zeus or Ra, but don't believe in Yahweh or Allah. That's a different position to that of monotheism.

And then there are deist and other non-theistic religions, like Buddhism for example. It is a religion, but it is not exactly a theism.

I'm saying that you either believe in a god or you don't. If you lack belief in unicorns, you're an aunicornist. If you lack belief in any particular God, you're an atheist. Do you believe in a particular God?

 

[prometheus11]

Dei

So there's no middle ground, in your world?

And Santa is a poor example.

What happen if you believe in gods/goddesses of another religion, but you don't believe in the God of Abrahamic faiths?

There are more than one God in the world, and a person could say I believe in Zeus or Ra, but don't believe in Yahweh or Allah. That's a different position to that of monotheism.

And then there are deist and other non-theistic religions, like Buddhism for example. It is a religion, but it is not exactly a theism.

Deists believe in a god. It just isn't a personal one.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

What's the problem with a person being "undeclared?" Plenty of people consider multiple philosophies without selecting a particular stance. No problems except for the one looking to pigeon hole the other by expansion of a particular label's definition.

As to dark matter and dark energy: they do what they do. Because we don't understand the mechanism by which they work does not imply Odin, unicorns, or any other invisible and undetectable object of mythology. Duh.

This goes beyond the label, but by their fruits ye shall know them...an atheist posing as a gnostic or an agnostic is dishonest....a wolf in sheep's clothing... There is no problem being undeclared...that's an agnostic..

Haha....but dark energy and dark matter are also undetectable and invisible....I can see from your post that you are an atheist..you can throw no light on the subject of God other than the fact you do not accept the reality that the concept represents.... got it...thanks...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No, Ben. Not atheist in me that would ask for the existence of God. It is the science in me that would ask for evidences.

Any good scientist, whether they be atheist, theist or agnostic, would ALWAYS question or challenge their own view or stance, NO MATTER WHAT THEY MAY BELIEVE IN!

You would understand this, if you have ever honestly study any field in science.

A good scientist, even if he is a believer, would not use his belief tainted his data or his finding in favour of his religion, because otherwise he would have allow his belief and preconceptions to cause bias in his experiment. The scientific results should be dictated by the evidences, not by one's faith.

Until there are evidences to support the existence of the unknowable, then I would acknowledge the existence of God. I would actually cease to be agnostic, if I know that god's existence were true.

But there are no evidences to support it, so he would stay in the FALSE tray, until in such a time, real tangible and verifiable evidences present themselves.

To me, a good scientist WOULD NEVER assume that any hypothesis he had formulated to being TRUE. The default position for any and all new hypothesis that it is FALSE. The only way to change hypothesis' status from FALSE to TRUE, would have to be verified through rigorous and repeated testings or finding empirical evidences that support hypothesis' explanation and prediction(s).

Only bad scientists would assume that any hypothesis is true, without even bothering to begin to test it or verify it.

That's why Michael Behe is a terrible biochemist, because he assume his intelligent design paper, Irreducible Complexity (IC), make a lot of points that favour a Designer, without providing a single testable format that can test his prediction for the existence of Intelligent Designer. His IC is nothing more than pseudoscience.

(Sorry, I had prematurely and accidentally hit the SAVE button).

I am what what you would call a weak agnostic. Only conclusive evidences would change my stance on the existence of God. Look up weak agnostic. I am not an atheist.

Stop obfuscating....do you believe God is a superstition or a reality, or are you yet unsure?

 

[McBell]

You're an atheist OR you have a strong belief in a god.

False dichotomy.
I know several theists who lack a "strong belief" in god.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

First, you are trying to bully me into changing my avatar's name from gnostic to agnostic.

Now, you are trying to bullying me into being atheist instead of agnostic.

I have never like bullies in schools, and I don't like it now.

Quit it, or I am going to report you.

I am giving you fair warning, ben_q.

I could not care less about your user name.....what I am trying to determine is your position wrt religion...are you a believer in God, a non-believer in God, or presently undecided?

 

[Revoltingest]

....to reject the mystical reality beyond the 5% physical part of the universe that atheists are concerned with....happy as pigs in mud...

There are worse fates.

 

[prometheus11]

This goes beyond the label, but by their fruits ye shall know them...an atheist posing as a gnostic or an agnostic is dishonest....a wolf in sheep's clothing... There is no problem being undeclared...that's an agnostic..

Haha....but dark energy and dark matter are also undetectable and invisible....I can see from your post that you are an atheist..you can throw no light on the subject of God other than the fact you do not accept the reality that the concept represents.... got it...thanks...

No. The terms "dark energy" and "dark matter" were coined BECAUSE there was a testable, visible, provable effect that needed accounting for. We gave the effects names. Your God is invisible and undetectable. If he was detectable, he'd be part of science.

You can use any label you want for me. Not my problem. Label away, label obsessed label-maker.

 

[prometheus11]

False dichotomy.
I know several theists who lack a "strong belief" in god.

They believe in a god. That they self identify as such, according to their beliefs about their chosen god settles their stance.

 

[gnostic]

This goes beyond the label, but by their fruits ye shall know them...an atheist posing as a gnostic or an agnostic is dishonest....a wolf in sheep's clothing... There is no problem being undeclared...that's an agnostic..

Have you been to my website, Timeless Myths, Ben?

I have read and research on Greek, Norse and Celtic myths, it doesn't mean I have to believe in the stories that I've enjoyed reading and researching.

So bloody what that I had enjoy reading the gnostic Apocryphon of John, and called my avatar, gnostic.

What I read, especially what I enjoy reading, doesn't mean that I have to believe what I read.

My all-time favourite books are The Iliad and The Odyssey. Does that mean I believe in Greek religion and worship Zeus, Poseidon or Athena?

And I have enjoyed reading The Hobbit and The Lord Of The Rings, does that mean that I believe in the existence of Sauron, Gandalf, hobbits, elves and orcs?

You have been ignorantly narrow-minded about this.

My avatar is just a fricking bloody name, Ben, so stop harassing me about this. I don't judge the name you have given to yourself, whether it is really or not your name. Stop b1tching about the name.

This is your last warning, Ben. I'll report you if you continue to harass me over the name I used.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No. The terms "dark energy" and "dark matter" were coined BECAUSE there was a testable, visible, provable effect that needed accounting for. We gave the effects names. Your God is invisible and undetectable. If he was detectable, he'd be part of science.

You can use any label you want for me. Not my problem. Label away, label obsessed label-maker.

Wrong....dark energy and matter is not yet detectable or visible ..if you think otherwise, please provide your evidence... As I said, you are a self declared atheist and therefore have nothing to say about the reality of God other than close your mind to the reality....so please stop talking about the God whom you do not believe in...

 

[Revoltingest]

Jumping in here......
Dark matter is not only detectable (hinted at by its discovery), but detection (by
motion of stars & by gravitational lensing) is precise enuf to create maps of it....

Dark energy is detectable by measuring the velocity of stars.
This is indirect observation, but observation nonetheless.

Amazing stuff, eh?

 

[prometheus11]

Wrong....dark energy and matter is not yet detectable or visible ..if you think otherwise, please provide your evidence... As I said, you are a self declared atheist and therefore have nothing to say about the reality of God other than close your mind to the reality....so please stop talking about the God whom you do not believe in...

Oh, I'll talk about whatever I want to. I'll talk about your god all day long.

I am a theist. I believe in Zeus. By faith. No evidence or proof required. Nothing you can say against my perfect faith in Zeus.

Yes, dark matter and dark energy are KNOWN by our detection of their presence. If we hadn't detected them, we wouldn't have named them. You're simply misinformed. Educate yourself.

 

[Thief]

Jumping in here......
Dark matter is not only detectable (hinted at by its discovery), but detection (by
motion of stars & by gravitational lensing) is precise enuf to create maps of it....

Dark energy is detectable by measuring the velocity of stars.
This is indirect observation, but observation nonetheless.

Amazing stuff, eh?

indirect observation as a means of making a firm acknowledgment........?
I believe in God.
too much complex stuff to say there is none.....