Question for Atheists...

[nPeace]

Yes, I am confirming there is knowledge beyond that box of Beliefs you have chosen for yourself. By not being open to all possibilities,you have walled yourself from the Real Truth. Why and what is it about that box of beliefs you are living in that you like so well that you choose to be blind to anything else?

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

Winner!

 

[Bird123]

No, it leads to God *for you* because you want to find God everywhere. You start with the God assumption and force everything to fit it. That is a perfect example of confirmation bias.

Does it really? I don't find God when I look. I find physical properties acting by physical laws. People are biological beings--great apes with language and abstract thinking.


Oh, I have had delusions that could be interpreted that way. But I realized them as my mind playing tricks on me.

Once again, you start with the God assumption and don't seem to try to show it is wrong. Instead, you seek God in everything and find God in everything because you twist things to say God.

Yes, humans have a narrow view. We are accustomed to small velocities, mild gravitational fields. We only see a small part of the spectrum of light or hear a small part of the possible sounds. We don't detect a LOT of what is going on around us.

But the funny thing? God never told anyone about those things before science found them. Nobody suspected infrared light until some scientist found it by mistake. No theist predicted radioactivity before some scientist found it. No theist predicted DNA, but a scientist did. Theists like to talk about things we don't see. Science actually finds them and learns about them.

Yes, the universe is a joy to be in. No deities required for that.

I agree. But I also see *all* beliefs in a supernatural to be delusional, especially beliefs in deities.

Science is also about what is. It is about what we can detect, study, and verify. It is about being skeptical and not taking answers on faith. It is about questioning ALL assumptions.

And once again, I see it clearly as well. We simply disagree.

Now, is there a way to resolve that disagreement given our differing experiences? You find God everywhere. I find God nowhere except in imaginations.

You are reading but you see only Religions not where I point.

Remember, I said at the start on my journey I was open to all possibilities regardless of what they might be. Simply because the journey ended up Discovering God, does not make that bias.

Next when I speak of God, I am talking about actual experience. No one is capable of this experience even delusional.

No one told science things before science discovered them? Did I not say that an action of God is that God does not give out knowledge? Knowledge must be Discovered. Wisdom is acquired on the journey to Discover knowledge. Why would God tell all when that would defeat the purpose?

Some religions say God told them things like how to live and what to do. That only proves that they do not come from God!!! Once again, that would defeat the purpose of the system God has in place.

Can't see God in things around you? Great!! Do like I did. Study those things anyway. They are creations of God. There are things you can learn about studying them.

Don't you understand? God doesn't make demands. God doesn't intimidate or coerce. Mankind values those petty things. Mankind wants to control and manipulate.

God isn't teaching people to do these things. People choose these things because they do not Understand all those petty things will never lead to the Best choices.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Bird123]

I don't start with the God assumption. I ask for evidence of the existence of God and find nothing that is convincing, or even particularly intriguing.

When do you give up a search when nothing is found?

I did not start with a God assumption either.

It's simple. One gives up the search when one no longer seeks. One must also ask did one seek to begin with? Analyze. What is it you seek and why? It is so easy yet so hard for many to do.

Let's be frank. You do not seek God. That's OK! Analyze yourself. What do you seek and why? Why do you feel what you do about theists? Have you mocked them?

I am pointing the direction by which you can Discover God. Perhaps, one needs to Discover oneself first.

That too stares one in the face.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[lukethethird]

Yes, I am confirming there is knowledge beyond that box of Beliefs you have chosen for yourself. By not being open to all possibilities,you have walled yourself from the Real Truth. Why and what is it about that box of beliefs you are living in that you like so well that you choose to be blind to anything else?

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

The Real Truth? Dude, you're serious?

 

[Bird123]

And I agree. The universe is complex and immense.

Oh, I see a lot going on. I see gravity, and electromagnetism. I see chemistry and physics, and geology, and biology.

I just don't see a supernatural nor a deity.

Yes, and they could *see* that it was there. And, I might point out, it wasn't the theists that figured out how to fly. God didn't speak to them and reveal any secrets. Instead, someone figured it out.

Of course. And, like I have said, I have conducted the experiments theists have suggested and I didn't find what they predicted. Instead, I found a lot of self-delusion on the part of theists.

The evidence is that no God is required to understand the universe around us. No 'God assumption' leads to better predictions or deeper understanding (as revealed by actual observations).

I don't assume things have a purpose unless there is a conscious being involved. So, no, I don't assume eternity has a purpose.

Do you have actual evidence that there is?

Same here.

Look again. There is purpose in Everything. Put the pieces together and there you will find God. Actions of God can not be manipulated like all those beliefs and religious writings. Everything will add up.

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

 

[Bird123]

Winner!

Thanks!! Your Love and Kindness has been noted!!

 

[Bird123]

The Real Truth? Dude, you're serious?

Yes, I'm serious.

Thanks for asking!!

 

[Audie]

Winner!

Nah

 

[F1fan]

I am not talking about concepts. God is actually Someone not a concept. Widen that view.

OK, explain what you mean when you refer to God. Then demonstrate that this thing you define exists outside of human imagination, and exists as detectable phenomenon in reality.

And when we refer to others by their name when they aren't present they are being referred to conceptually even though they exist. So a real thing, like your cat, can be both real and conceptual.

Do you feel wider now?

That's what I see. It's very clear!!

I think you cut and paste this by habit, because this statement does not reflect reality given your posts.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Proving how imagination occurs is not easy
Researchers have long suggested that human imagination exists thanks to a widespread neural network in the brain.
However, clearly demonstrating that such a “mental workspace” exists has been extremely difficult with available techniques that only managed to examine brain activity in isolation.

What exactly consciousness is and why it does what it does is another question. For now we may only speculate that consciousness is imagination acting as a link between our observable universe and the underlying quantum field: imagination extracting reality out of possibilities.

I do not differ with the first line.
"Schlegal and colleagues had expected the visual cortex – the part of the brain that processes imagery – to be actively involved in driving mental manipulation. Their study confirmed this, but they also discovered that several other regions appeared to be involved in manipulating imaginary shapes."
I have no problem with this too. White matter or Grey matter, all that is in the box above our neck, works as a unit. Sure, it will be difficult to pick out each and every neuron among the 8 0 b i l l i o n that we have, which may be involved in creating a thought.

Your second link is a blog, so I completely disregard it.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Look again. There is purpose in Everything. Put the pieces together and there you will find God. Actions of God can not be manipulated like all those beliefs and religious writings. Everything will add up.

Oh, atheist have looked into it again and again and they nowhere find any God or Goddess. Give us the evidence for the supposed actions of your God. Theism adds up to a big ZERO.

 

[nPeace]

Nah

 

[F1fan]

Look again. There is purpose in Everything. Put the pieces together and there you will find God.

I brought up cancer and deadly bacteria and asked you to explain the purpose and what it says about a God. You had no answers.

Actions of God can not be manipulated like all those beliefs and religious writings. Everything will add up.

But you can’t do the math so we have no reason to believe you. We can’t just take your word for these outrageous claims, so you need to offer evidence.

 

[Heyo]

It must be a necessity, in order to be both scientist and believer, to not be a biblical literalist. I knew someone years ago, a Lutheran minister and yet still fully invested in the modern scientific theories in biology, geology, astronomy, etc.

It is necessary for a scientist to not believe in magic - or at least to not believe in magic in one's own field of study.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

This is, hands down, the strangest Straw Man argument that I've ever seen.

Yeah, I should have worded that differently.

 

[1213]

Such melting would be clear because it would look different. Mixing would also be clear.
So, while theoretically possible, in practice it didn't happen.

And now I just would have to believe what you said. Sorry, I have great difficulties to believe you.

Um, by measuring it?

And it is impossible to really measure it from over 1000's years ago.

Except that they are in vastly different places and so very different environments. Take an ice core from the north pole and ask why it agrees with one from the south pole. What do they both agree with tree rings and lake varves? Why do all of these agree with radioactive dates?

Maybe they agree, because they are "calibrated" to match atheistic world view?

But, for example influence of volcano can affect globally, that is why it could be seen globally in glaciers.

Now I should go to measure and count those by myself, I don't believe the claims otherwise.

 

[1213]

Because they can be observed forming,

How could they be observed thousands of years ago? If we see how they are formed now, it doesn't necessary mean that everything has gone the same way all the time.

That is plain false. Glaciers are formed from
snow.
It never ever rains in Antarctica.

Sorry, I don't believe that. But, I also meant with rain, water coming in any form, show, rain or sleet. Sorry that I was not more accurate. In my defense I want to say, in Finnish, rain can mean water in any form.

Every single layer in the ice has a different concentration
of acid. All the way down through the years.

And you think it changes exactly when the year ends 31.12?

Is it not possible that every time it snows or rains, it can have slightly different acid concentration?

 

[Audie]

And now I just would have to believe what you said. Sorry, I have great difficulties to believe you.

And it is impossible to really measure it from over 1000's years ago.

Maybe they agree, because they are "calibrated" to match atheistic world view?

But, for example influence of volcano can affect globally, that is why it could be seen globally in glaciers.

Now I should go to measure and count those by myself, I don't believe the claims otherwise.

So stop giving these. "reasons" ,
that include such as accusing everyone in research
of being atheists involved in a huge international
fraud, and honestly say your chosen religious views
don't permit you to think you could be mistaken.

 

[Audie]

How could they be observed thousands of years ago? If we see how they are formed now, it doesn't necessary mean that everything has gone the same way all the time.

Sorry, I don't believe that. But, I also meant with rain, water coming in any form, show, rain or sleet. Sorry that I was not more accurate. In my defense I want to say, in Finnish, rain can mean water in any form.

And you think it changes exactly when the year ends 31.12?

Is it not possible that every time it snows or rains, it can have slightly different acid concentration?

What is not possible in your estimation,
is that you or your " bible" could have any error.
IOW you are ( claiming to be) infallible.

 

[Heyo]

n Finnish, rain can mean water in any form.

You're from Finland? That would be news that makes me question science. Scientists have told me that Finland has a good education system.