We don't need to take materialist atheism as a whole seriously.

[1137]

You think those in government are the only ones in power?

Are we moving from from denial of science to conspiracy theories now?

This seems to be one of many examples of speculative theories championed by one or two scientists that proved wrong and went nowhere and has been rejected a long time back in the biological sciences.

Why do you think this old discarded theory is correct?

Because it was never proven wrong and is still used today?

 

[1137]

Oh, the irony of a science denier worrying about... someone who actually USES science properly!

I'm the one using scientific studies to support my position. See #7 of the op!

 

[sayak83]

Are we moving from from denial of science to conspiracy theories now?



Because it was never proven wrong and is still used today?

I have taken many biology courses and have many fellow scientists working in the labs in biology. Whatever you described does not figure anywhere in biological sciences taught or researched or discussed anywhere. This I can guarantee.

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

I'm the one using scientific studies to support my position. See #7 of the op!

No. You are ignoring the science part, and tacking on supernatural woo-- which was summarily debunked by several others.

Your "argument" such as it was, consisted of "god of the gaps" pseudo-argument.

What happens to your god, when the gaps are filled with knowledge?

 

[Polymath257]

Are we moving from from denial of science to conspiracy theories now?

No. But to deny that religions have an extreme amount of power is a form of denial.

Because it was never proven wrong and is still used today?

Not used by anyone other than the one person who is going *way* beyond what his own results show.

 

[1137]

I have taken many biology courses and have many fellow scientists working in the labs in biology. Whatever you described does not figure anywhere in biological sciences taught or researched or discussed anywhere. This I can guarantee.

"Also as in religion, scientific/academic-community “heresies” - individual or group SU concepts inconsistent with the orthodoxy of the moment - are ignored, and if necessary actively suppressed and denounced [the condescending term is “debunked”]. Centuries ago religious heretics were tortured and executed. Modern academic/scientific heretics will merely find themselves Orwell’s “unpersons”: unpublished, unemployed, and professionally exiled."

- Dr. Michael A. Aquino

No. You are ignoring the science part, and tacking on supernatural woo-- which was summarily debunked by several others.

Your "argument" such as it was, consisted of "god of the gaps" pseudo-argument.

What happens to your god, when the gaps are filled with knowledge?

Where exactly is the "supernatural woo" in my point? Perhaps more importantly, why are we arguing my point in a thread about a totally different position? Oh yes that's right, no defense for the latter.

 

[1137]

No. But to deny that religions have an extreme amount of power is a form of denial.

Interesting, please describe this overwhelming power Setianism holds in our culture.

Not used by anyone other than the one person who is going *way* beyond what his own results show.

Except that's a blatant lie, but it's not like truth matters to you

 

[sayak83]

"Also as in religion, scientific/academic-community “heresies” - individual or group SU concepts inconsistent with the orthodoxy of the moment - are ignored, and if necessary actively suppressed and denounced [the condescending term is “debunked”]. Centuries ago religious heretics were tortured and executed. Modern academic/scientific heretics will merely find themselves Orwell’s “unpersons”: unpublished, unemployed, and professionally exiled."

- Dr. Michael A. Aquino



.

Standard rhetoric of nutty science denier. But thanks for conceding that this "theory" of yours has nothing to do with the hard biological science as is known and practiced by thousands of scientists throughout labs and universities.

Regarding Mr Aquino
Temple of Set - Wikipedia


Aquino provided what has been described as a "foundation myth" for his Setian religion.[22] Having departed the Church, Aquino embarked on a ritual intent on asking Satan for advice on what to do next.[23] According to his account, at Midsummer 1975, Satan appeared and revealed that he wanted to be known by his true name, Set, which had been the name used by his worshippers in ancient Egypt.[24] Aquino produced a religious text, The Book of Coming Forth by Night, which he alleged had been revealed to him by Set through a process of automatic writing.[25] According to Aquino, "there was nothing overtly sensational, supernatural, or melodramatic about The Book of Coming Forth By Night working. I simply sat down and wrote it."[26] The book proclaimed Aquino to be the Magus of the new Aeon of Set and the heir to LaVey's "infernal mandate".[27] Aquino later stated that the revelation that Satan was Set necessitated his own exploration of Egyptology, a subject about which he had previously known comparatively little.[28] In this account, the direct word of Set was appealed to as a source of legitimation.[29] Moreover, by drawing connections between itself and ancient Egypt, this young religion adopted a legitimisation strategy that tried to antedate both Judaism and Christianity.[30]


I believe it's perfectly appropriate for science not to take Setianism and what it's founder or followers have to say as a whole seriously.

 

[1137]

Standard rhetoric of nutty science denier. But thanks for conceding that this "theory" of yours has nothing to do with the hard biological science as is known and practiced by thousands of scientists throughout labs and universities.

Regarding Mr Aquino
Temple of Set - Wikipedia


Aquino provided what has been described as a "foundation myth" for his Setian religion.[22] Having departed the Church, Aquino embarked on a ritual intent on asking Satan for advice on what to do next.[23] According to his account, at Midsummer 1975, Satan appeared and revealed that he wanted to be known by his true name, Set, which had been the name used by his worshippers in ancient Egypt.[24] Aquino produced a religious text, The Book of Coming Forth by Night, which he alleged had been revealed to him by Set through a process of automatic writing.[25] According to Aquino, "there was nothing overtly sensational, supernatural, or melodramatic about The Book of Coming Forth By Night working. I simply sat down and wrote it."[26] The book proclaimed Aquino to be the Magus of the new Aeon of Set and the heir to LaVey's "infernal mandate".[27] Aquino later stated that the revelation that Satan was Set necessitated his own exploration of Egyptology, a subject about which he had previously known comparatively little.[28] In this account, the direct word of Set was appealed to as a source of legitimation.[29] Moreover, by drawing connections between itself and ancient Egypt, this young religion adopted a legitimisation strategy that tried to antedate both Judaism and Christianity.[30]


I believe it's perfectly appropriate for science not to take Setianism and what it's founder or followers have to say as a whole seriously.

So I should trust you, with your inability to reject Burr's ideas and their modern usage, over scientific data by PhDs, and discard the words of a respected Lt. Colonel and PhD who worked in psyops because his religion isn't scientism? God, see number 7!

 

[sayak83]

So I should trust you, with your inability to reject Burr's ideas and their modern usage, over scientific data by PhDs, and discard the words of a respected Lt. Colonel and PhD who worked in psyops because his religion isn't scientism? God, see number 7!

Who cares what you believe or not.
All I wanted to establish is the simple fact that this Life field in not used or accepted in the field of biological sciences as practiced in the universities and labs and research institutions in the world. I am sure such ideas are rife in the pseudoscientific practices of energy medicine. All that you have got is a few dubious voltage measurements from the 1930 S that led nowhere and that have been dressed up to support a quack healing system. Whatever.

 

[1137]

Who cares what you believe or not.
All I wanted to establish is the simple fact that this Life field in not used or accepted in the field of biological sciences as practiced in the universities and labs and research institutions in the world. I am sure such ideas are rife in the pseudoscientific practices of energy medicine. All that you have got is a few dubious voltage measurements from the 1930 S that led nowhere and that have been dressed up to support a quack healing system. Whatever.

Yes, as it doesn't fit with materialism life fields remain mostly ignored and unknown, as is common with a dominating cultural ideology. And it's very sad, because the work could be so extremely helpful in medicine and mental health.

 

[Polymath257]

Yes, as it doesn't fit with materialism life fields remain mostly ignored and unknown, as is common with a dominating cultural ideology. And it's very sad, because the work could be so extremely helpful in medicine and mental health.

No, it is ignored because it isn't helpful. Quite a bit has been learned about biology since the 1930's. Your views haven't kept up.

 

[Polymath257]

Interesting, please describe this overwhelming power Setianism holds in our culture.

It's just another form of mystical mumbo-jumbo. And, unfortunately, such superstitious crud has a lot of influence on the ignorant.

Except that's a blatant lie, but it's not like truth matters to you

It means a great deal to me. That is why I consider your ideas irrelevant.

 

[1137]

Sorry champ, you just keep throwing out your personal claims without a single scientific support for them. I'll follow the evidence thanks!

 

[Bob the Unbeliever]

Where exactly is the "supernatural woo" in my point? Perhaps more importantly, why are we arguing my point in a thread about a totally different position? Oh yes that's right, no defense for the latter.

Anything that is not concrete science? Is automatically supernatural woo. 100% of your silly "conclusion" that EM fields are Magically Significant certainly qualifies as supernatural woo.

You are guilty of God Of The Gaps Fallacy.


"If you don't understand something, and the community of physicists don't understand it, that means God did it? Is that how you want to play this game? If that's how you want ot invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ingorance that's gettting smaller and smaller as time moves on."

~ Dr Neil deGrasse Tyson.™

 

[blü 2]

1137

Dear oh dear!

You've skipped over my #225 without addressing the questions again!

What's the problem? Is it something I said?

 

[Thief]

I hve educated myself as to what the data shows. Your links don't show what you seem to think they do.

YOU are the one that is denying science by introducing metaphysical BS into the discussion when it is simply not needed or even helpful.

religious forum

 

[Thief]

About the same odds as wanting to keep YOU.

You think that stroking the ego of the Ultimate Creator is actually going to work? How narcissistic do you need to be, here?

I don't count myself worthy
so.....if I walk among the angelic later on....

it is by their grace

not yours

 

[Thief]

Anything that is not concrete science? Is automatically supernatural woo. 100% of your silly "conclusion" that EM fields are Magically Significant certainly qualifies as supernatural woo.

You are guilty of God Of The Gaps Fallacy.


"If you don't understand something, and the community of physicists don't understand it, that means God did it? Is that how you want to play this game? If that's how you want ot invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ingorance that's gettting smaller and smaller as time moves on."

~ Dr Neil deGrasse Tyson.™

so......nothing created everything else.....including life....

with NO thought
with NO SELF volition

and the response you are are about to make required no thought
because......dead substance has beget the living

 

[1137]

1137

atheists have nothing but straw men.​

You say gods exist outside imagination. That is, you say they have objective existence.

So they're real and you know that, implying you have a way of ascertaining that they're gods.

Why then are you unable to tell us how you ascertain that they're gods?

Why are you unable to show us a god, something you say has objective existence?

No straw in those questions ─ they go to the heart of the debate.

Quote, reply, or tag me and I am a lot less likely to miss your posts

I am not unable to share why I believe, in fact I'm very open about it: Reasons I Believe In Setianism • r/EsotericOccult

My issue is that this was an argument against materialism, with points against materialism, and the entire idea of having to defend gods in this thread is a red herring. Because you cannot address the seven point, you ignore them and flip the question around, something extremely common. Hell, you can be an atheist and not a materialist.