Truth: either God exists or He don't.

[Pilgrim Soldier]

A belief based on ignorance and prehudice.

Please add "in my opinion' to your comment to legitimise it

 

[ratiocinator]

What proof do you have that there's no rock solid proof for the Christian God?

That's back to front. If you claim there is rock solid proof of "the Christian God" (which isn't exactly a precise description of anything) then it's up to you to produce it. Burden of proof (philosophy) - Wikipedia

Otherwise it just gets silly: What proof do you have that there is no rock solid proof that there is no rock solid proof for the Christian God?

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

So it *is* possible for something to 'cause itself'? Why could it not be the universe that is self-caused?



Nice hypothesis. Got any evidence for this? In particular, that anything in the universe requires a supernatural to uphold it?



Nice hypothesis. Any evidence?

All the evidence is available, for those who are equipped to examine it.

 

[Audie]

Please add "in my opinion' to your comment to legitimise it

No.

 

[ratiocinator]

All the evidence is available, for those who are equipped to examine it.

Baseless assertion. Where is this evidence? Anybody can just say that there is evidence...

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

Simply false.

If you have different methods, depending on very different physical processes that *still* give consistent results repeatedly in different contexts, it is simply perverse to deny their accuracy.

And this is precisely what happens.

I'm not sure what you consider to be the common 'prop' for all the different dating methods, but it would be fascinating to learn.

And if you bring up carbon dating, we know you are simply uneducated about radioactive dating. Just saying.

all of the above-mentioned methods were invented for the same purpose, and that is in my opinion to deny true science and install pseudo science as it's replacement

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

Then it simply isn't science.



Is this a joke? You're writing this on a product of modern science that 'the ancients' couldn't have dreamt of. What did structure that defy physics?

They had much better technology than computers, and they were able to pick 1,200 ton rocks and place them neatly to construct things. It was like playing legos to them but today's scientists can't work out how it was done so I give them no credibility at all

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

Baseless assertion. Where is this evidence? Anybody can just say that there is evidence...

That;s exactly what I say about modern science "where is the evidence'

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

Real science is fairly recent: it's about 400 years old.

Your claims about 'Christian science' simply show that you don't understand how to go about learning about the real world.

There simply was no such thing as 'ancient science'. There was philosophical investigation, but it was ALL speculative. And to say that Ptolemy's astronomy is better *in any way* than the modern understanding is simply ignorant.

Yes, we do know how the ancients did things: trial and error and stumbling on something that works. There was no actual science involved.

Considering that 'christian science' cannot correct its many errors, it has been left in the dust once actual, honest investigations started being done.

Remember, it was 'christian science' that claimed for centuries that heavy things fall faster than lighter things and that the Earth was the center of the universe.

Not to mention that the Biblical description is of a flat Earth, a 'firmament' above it (spread out like a tent) with water surrounding it (the deep). It had 'pillars' and a 'foundation'. None of these are even remotely accurate.

OK, so you've been in space and you travelled back in time as well to see what they knew and how they applied it. I hate to burst your bubble but you have no evidence for any of your claims, you have put your faith in pseudo science and I put mine in God and there in lies the difference

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

Once again, this is simply a version of last Thursdayism, also known as the Omphalos argument.

Denying the evidence in this way is simply a type of intellectual dishonesty.

But you have produced a big fat ZERO amount of evidence. All you have done is ask me to join you on your magical mystery tour and I decline because I stick with facts only. No mysterious stuff for me thanks

 

[Subduction Zone]

You said that evidence and proof must be examined using the scientific method. That's like asking the Mafia to investigate themselves and report their findings to the FBI and CIA

No, I said scientific claims must be examined using the scientific method. And there is nothing criminal about that method. You could not find anything wrong with it so you only attacked it. Your religions views still need to be supported by evidence to be taken seriously. By studying the concept of scientific evidence you can have a better understanding of what is and what is not evidence.

By the way, you might want to watch your false claims about others. If you even if you still believe a false claim (in other words even if you are not lying) you are breaking the Ninth Commandment when you say something that turns out to be false about others. It is called "bearing false witness". The Ninth Commandment is much more than a simple ban on lying.

 

[Subduction Zone]

OK, so you've been in space and you travelled back in time as well to see what they knew and how they applied it. I hate to burst your bubble but you have no evidence for any of your claims, you have put your faith in pseudo science and I put mine in God and there in lies the difference

You really need to learn what is and what is not evidence.


By the way, you just broke the Ninth Commandment in this post of yours. You did not lie since you probably believe that nonsense, but since he not only has evidence, he can demonstrate the evidence, you have clearly born false witness against your neighbor.

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

Baseless assertion.



Firstly this makes your god a liar. Secondly, it is you who are using circular reasoning. You've decided on the answer to begin with and then make up (unfalsifiable) claims about what god did (and dismiss the actual evidence), in order to 'confirm' your initial belief. It's the epitome of circular reasoning.

That sounds really funny coming from someone who is absolutely unable to provide one shred of evidence to justify your faith in what you believe

 

[Subduction Zone]

None of the above methods can determine the age of the earth, with any accuracy. All of these are inventions which can't be tested for accuracy, they all rely on a theory to float and they sink very quickly if you remove their prop

Not true at all. By the way, scientists knew and could demonstrate that the Earth is many millions of years old long before radiometric dating came along. Before radiometric dating they had only rough estimates. Radiometric dating allowed a hard date to be given to those ages.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That sounds really funny coming from someone who is absolutely unable to provide one shred of evidence to justify your faith in what you believe

Once again you break the Ninth Commandment. When you make a claim you must be ready to defend it when you make it against another person. Seriously dude if there is a God you need to be worried. You are breaking his Commandments and continually calling him a liar.

 

[Samael_Khan]

I have been knocking, but haven't received.

The guy hasn't produced any evidence.

Pretty delusional.

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

No, I said scientific claims must be examined using the scientific method. And there is nothing criminal about that method. You could not find anything wrong with it so you only attacked it. Your religions views still need to be supported by evidence to be taken seriously. By studying the concept of scientific evidence you can have a better understanding of what is and what is not evidence.

By the way, you might want to watch your false claims about others. If you even if you still believe a false claim (in other words even if you are not lying) you are breaking the Ninth Commandment when you say something that turns out to be false about others. It is called "bearing false witness". The Ninth Commandment is much more than a simple ban on lying.

Billions of us don't believe that the scientific method has any credibility whatsoever. We believe it was hashed up by people with an agenda to replace true science with pseudo science.
Now why would I use the enemies method of testing to determine anything

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

Once again you break the Ninth Commandment. When you make a claim you must be ready to defend it when you make it against another person. Seriously dude if there is a God you need to be worried. You are breaking his Commandments and continually calling him a liar.

I'm not calling anyone a liar, I'm just stating exactly what you're stating about me. you think I'm deceived and deluded and I think you guys are, now where's the truth judge to determine who's right.

 

[Pilgrim Soldier]

No.

OK,granted. You must have the Monopoly on facts, my apologies

 

[Samael_Khan]

What proof do you have that there's no rock solid proof for the Christian God? let me guess you heard someone with a PHD in front of their name make that claim and you just latched onto it to keep afloat

The burden of proof is on YOU since YOU are making the claim. I come to conclusions based on proof. There is absence of proof for the claim of the Christian God.

And you of all people shouldn't be upset with the guys with the PHD's. At least they honestly investigate stuff which is more than can be said of you. All you do is believe without any investigation whatsoever.

Why are you so dishonest with yourself and others?