I am sceptical of the Skeptics. Is it wrong?

[Shad]

1) they don't mix at that certain area.
2). Adam was created from clay. do you think from where was he created supposedly?

1. All Salt water and Fresh water mix, this is chemistry from grade school. Your pictures range between Ocean upwelling, which is still salt water and salinty gradients in Oceans, which is still a mixing point to the Ghyben-Herzberg model. http://www.emwis-mt.org/documentation/context/physical factors_files/Ghyben-Herzberg.htm None of which stops mixing. Your confuse the point of contact for a barrier that prevents mixing. It doesn't. Also all your pictures are of the surface only so you do not even consider the currents which you can not see. All I see is ignroances of chemistry in order to defend your refuted verse.

2. Adam is a myth so it is irrelevant.

 

[paarsurrey]

They have their own holy books

Do you belong to Scientology? Please
I want to know the source of their scripture, if any.
Regards

 

[Shad]

At least it is what the Apocalypse of Peter narrate.

Nope it doesn't. Go read the text from a reliable site rather than your apologetic websites.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I don't know where the sperm is produced. yes of course the freshwater and the salt water mix.
(Do you want me to also provide evidence to show that Humans are not made from clay?)
good idea, with pleasure.
The God's book is the warning book no matter how the audience understand the scientific things behind the messages. It is the warning book about hell, paradise and the meeting with God.

Did Muslims have eunuchs? By chopping off the testicles, aren't they admitting they know where sperm comes from?

For the record, the burden of evidence rests on your shoulders to prove, not mine to disprove. It is up to you to provide evidence to support your islamic claims, even though I have already pointed out three major errors in your book.

It is incredibly hard (if not impossible) to disprove a negative, to disprove something that isn't there. The invisible Flying Spaghettit Monster is real, don't believe me? Disprove it?

Instead, it would be up to me (the one making the claim of the Flying Spaghetti Monster's existence) to provide sufficient evidence of its existence that can stand up to scrutiny.

Many muslims put forward this "scientific miracles in the Quran" claim to somehow "prove" its legitimacy, and everytime such a thread has been shown on this site, the claims are analyzed and debunked.

I have already shown three of these Quranic claims to be false.

Found proof of the Flying Spaghetti Monster LOL

 

[Jumi]

Do you belong to Scientology? Please

I'm as much of a Scientologist as you are a Zoroastrian.

I want to know the source of their scripture, if any.

Their founder wrote them or had them ghost written.

 

[Aquitaine]

Do you belong to Scientology? Please
Regards

No, I don't.
But just because somebody claims to know about either a God or some "secret of the universe" doesn't make it so. This includes Islam and Christianity with their respective scriptures. use_your_brain has stated he belueves the Quran is the word of God, because the Quran says so.

 

[Aquitaine]

1) yes :"And He it is Who hath given independence to the two seas (Bahraini).. "
"And it is He Who has let free the two seas.."
"And it is He who hath mixed the two seas.."
(from varied translations). It talks about two Bahrain (oceans).
At least there are the occurrences like that exist in this world, right?

2). Yes, Adam was a true mythology.
3). Yes semen consist of water. And we are coming from semen, right?

Our disagreement again merely highlights the error in trying to obtain "truth" from scripture. At the end of the day it all boils down to subjective human interpretation, even the Quran is vulnerable to this. Ergo I don't understand why you seem to believe that the Quran is unique in that it doesn't require Imams, Priests or Rabbis to interpret.

 

[paarsurrey]

No, I don't.
But just because somebody claims to know about either a God or some "secret of the universe" doesn't make it so. This includes Islam and Christianity with their respective scriptures. use_your_brain has stated he belueves the Quran is the word of God, because the Quran says so.

Thanks for the answer coloured in magenta.
The rest does not belong to my question. Please
Regards

 

[Aquitaine]

Thanks for the answer coloured in magenta.
The rest does not belong to my question. Please
Regards

Are you skeptic or the skeptics of Scientology?

 

[paarsurrey]

Are you skeptic or the skeptics of Scientology?

Didn't one read the title of the thread "I am sceptical of the Skeptics. Is it wrong?"
Regards

 

[Corthos]

Didn't one read the title of the thread "I am sceptical of the Skeptics. Is it wrong?"
Regards

Hmmm... Which skeptics are you skeptical of? If you are skeptical of me for having a biased view of them, then yes, I understand that. =)

What about skepticism for ALL of the multitudes of former members (skeptics) with recorded evidences of their duplicitous behavior, though? There's a lot of that...

Example: Mark " Marty" Rathbun was the former second in command for the corporate church.

Here he is in all of his Second in command Scientology glory...

Now, here he is being harassed by the church, which his wife is in the process of suing them over as we speak.

Keep in mind, this is only one recorded event. This is the kind of thing that has been going on for YEARS.

Here's Marty and Mike Rinder (former spokesman for the church who has since left and spoken out about it) explaining to John Sweeny how they were able to manipulate him into making him look bad in duplicitous ways. The other spokesman there, Tommy Davis, has since left the church as well, though he remains silent.

These are just two examples. I highly suggest watching HBO's "Going Clear". It is extremely informative, even if it only scratches the surface. =)

 

[paarsurrey]

Scientology

I am interested as I told earlier also, maybe one skipped it, that for Scientology I would like to talk with one who belongs to Scientology. Please
I don't mind if other friends want to learn otherwise about it.
My posts in this thread are my being sceptical of the Skeptics.
Regards

 

[Corthos]

I am interested as I told earlier also, maybe one skipped it, that for Scientology I would like to talk with one who belongs to Scientology. Please
I don't mind if other friends want to learn otherwise about it.
My posts in this thread are my being sceptical of the Skeptics.
Regards

The problem with that sentiment is that, due to the undeniably massive amount of corroborating evidence that exists, we can deduce that the church lies to make itself look good, and makes it's apostates look bad... Hell, the church issues a suppressive person document when someone criticizes the church in a serious way (which is a way to control people from speaking out). In other words, there's a giant amount of evidence that show that active church members are going to be dishonest and lie. It is what it is, and has been documented time and time again. =/

The only way to get accurate information, is from people who left the church and actively speak out about it. How do we know their information is reliable? Because all of the information they have given coincides with each other, and has done so for years and years. How does one falsify THAT much information? If you deny validity to THAT much evidence, then it makes me suspect that you prefer willful ignorance... I don't mean to be rude, but I really don't know what else to say...

Nothing wrong about being skeptical, but if one doesn't open their mind to the evidence in the first place, then you made up your mind before even asking the question, it seems. =/ Maybe I'm wrong, and I'm missing something, but please correct me if that's the case.

 

[Aquitaine]

Didn't one read the title of the thread "I am sceptical of the Skeptics. Is it wrong?"
Regards

So does that mean you are suspicious of the process of one being skeptical towards something? Do you think people should just accept any supernatural or extra-ordinary claim made?

 

[paarsurrey]

So does that mean you are suspicious of the process of one being skeptical towards something? Do you think people should just accept any supernatural or extra-ordinary claim made?

The process reasonably should start only when one observes an anomaly, otherwise it would be wrong to doubt. One who doubts unreasonably is a cynic.
Regards

 

[Aquitaine]

The process reasonably should start only when one observes an anomaly, otherwise it would be wrong to doubt. One who doubts unreasonably is a cynic.
Regards

The "anomoly" in this case is the supernatural claim being made by someone.

 

[use_your_brain]

1. All Salt water and Fresh water mix, this is chemistry from grade school. Your pictures range between Ocean upwelling, which is still salt water and salinty gradients in Oceans, which is still a mixing point to the Ghyben-Herzberg model. http://www.emwis-mt.org/documentation/context/physical factors_files/Ghyben-Herzberg.htm None of which stops mixing. Your confuse the point of contact for a barrier that prevents mixing. It doesn't. Also all your pictures are of the surface only so you do not even consider the currents which you can not see. All I see is ignroances of chemistry in order to defend your refuted verse.

2. Adam is a myth so it is irrelevant.

1. yes, all salt water and fresh water mix, eventually.
2. Yes Adam is a true myth.

 

[use_your_brain]

Nope it doesn't. Go read the text from a reliable site rather than your apologetic websites.

What do you mean it doesn't?
Peter narrated that Jesus was not crucified.

 

[use_your_brain]

Our disagreement again merely highlights the error in trying to obtain "truth" from scripture. At the end of the day it all boils down to subjective human interpretation, even the Quran is vulnerable to this. Ergo I don't understand why you seem to believe that the Quran is unique in that it doesn't require Imams, Priests or Rabbis to interpret.

which one is error, can show me that?

 

[Aquitaine]

which one is error, can show me that?

All three of them. You're just choosing to ignore and/or twist the meaning of said verses in order to deny any faults in the Quran.