Who knows?

[John D. Brey]

Yes electromechanical action makes you work.

I like to think I return the favor now and again.



John

 

[ChristineM]

I like to think I return the favor now and again.



John

If that's what you think...

 

[John D. Brey]

As it is understood by science "you" are a result of your electrochemicals doing their thing.

Wouldn't that imply that electrochemicals are in the driver's seat? That all the skyscrappers, supercomputers, and Mars probes, are just what comes out of mindless thoughtless evolution of selfish replicators that egg on mindless thoughtless electrochemical reactions?

The electrochemical reactions in your brain seem to be resulting in your pulling my leg?

That would mean that you extend effort to understand why you are religious, and work to manage these impuses and temptations. the dilemma is that religion is generally habituated thinking, and often tied to the reward system of the brain. In other words when the religious think religious thoughts they can get a little hormone boost in their blood (more chemicals) and the euphoria becomes like an addiction, and the behavior a habit of belief.

Right. That's the strange interrelationship between spirit and flesh. My "new man" born of my faith in Christ doesn't have a body of its own. It's piggybacking the fleshly tool that though it's not utterly enslaved by selfish replicators and the hormones and electrical/chemical reactions you note, is no less always wrestling with them.


John

 

[John D. Brey]

If that's what you think...

If I don't, aren't I just giving up and letting the electrochemical reactions have all the fun?



John

 

[ChristineM]

If I don't, aren't I just giving up and letting the electrochemical reactions have all the fun?



John

That's how it works, sit back and enjoy it

 

[F1fan]

Wouldn't that imply that electrochemicals are in the driver's seat?

No, you seem to be trying to find one part of a multi-part system where the function occurs. The function occurs because there are many parts working together.

That all the skyscrappers, supercomputers, and Mars probes, are just what comes out of mindless thoughtless evolution of selfish replicators that egg on mindless thoughtless electrochemical reactions?

You're thinking of religion.

No, intelectual pursuits come from knowledge and the application of what is known true about the universe.

Many years ago there was a creationist engineer who set out to discover the type of wood that the Ark was made from. He set up tests of all the types known to exist. The wood had to be strong enough to build a ship some 8-900 feet long. What he discovered was that there was nothing that was strong enough. His conclusion: was that gopher wood went extinct due to the global flood. That is how faith works to bad conclusions.

The electrochemical reactions in your brain seem to be resulting in your pulling my leg?

It's probably your God and you are having a religious experience.

Right. That's the strange interrelationship between spirit and flesh.

Spirit is an obsolete idea that doesn't correspond to anything that is determined real. At best it is a symbolic reference for the state of being alive, much the way other animals and plants are alive.

My "new man" born of my faith in Christ doesn't have a body of its own. It's piggybacking the fleshly tool that though it's not utterly enslaved by selfish replicators and the hormones and electrical/chemical reactions you note, is no less always wrestling with them at all times.

There's a head full of mumbo jumbo. See how religion distorts understanding?

 

[John D. Brey]

Spirit is an obsolete idea that doesn't correspond to anything that is determined real. At best it is a symbolic reference for the state of being alive, much the way other animals and plants are alive.

I appreciate your scientific stance and don't consider it faulty. It's the "state of being alive" that's central to your statement since in Einstein's concept of a block universe "the distinction between past, present, and future is only a stubbornly persistent illusion."

This concept of a block universe where the distinction between past, present, and future, is illusory, requires conscious "living" organisms to be the ones blinded by, if not the sole creators of, the illusion that there's a variable relationship between past and future that can be manipulated by "living" organisms in the present. Only sentient living organisms believe the future is dependent on actions taking place in the present. Only sentient living organisms believe the future is open such that the freewill of living organisms gets to determine the future.

The reason I say I appreciate your scientific stance is because I realize that philosophically and logically speaking the universe has to be a part of some "absolute" state of being of which the universe, and it's life, though it might be anomalous, never the less can't, technically, be outside of the "absolute."

Since an absolute circumscribes all reality within itself, there can be no such thing as freewill capable of changing the future since that would mean the future isn't circumscribed by the "absolute" nature of the ontological state of being (the block universe where the future is as certain as the past).

I don't doubt you or Einstein. But I have something you should both consider.




John

 

[Bird123]

I notice you completely abandonded your desert analogy, but you're not confused?


And yet you post a lot of religious ideas. I'm an atheist, so how has religion corrupted my thinking?


This is a religious claim. No scientists claim this.

'This is something else religious people claim. Tell me what purpose is there for birth defects? How about the cancer a young mother develops due to her genes?


Survival of the fittest is a natural phenomenon that selects certain traits under environmental stress.

If you are referring to how humans in poor health are kept alive that is a different issue.


More religious belief. Let's note you are being overly vague here as well by not expanding on why you think any of these indicates intelligence, and that is a religious tactic as well.


How are gods possible? And again, you accuse my thinking of being corrupted by religion abut it is you making one religious statement after another.

How does a rational mind seek a god? Explain the process, step by step.


You didn't show us any such evidence, just claims. Did you forget?


LOL. Why would anyone get that impression.


Nothing they can articulate. It seems they hear other believers claim they see things that critical thinkers can't, and this behavior is mimicked.


But do they really? I would expect people who sense some other plane of existence to be elevated to some sort of grand spiritual awareness. They aren't. They are often arrogant, insulting, confused, dogmatic, and unable to articulate any details of what they experienced. It all sounds like fraud. Your posts are no different. You offer sno indication that you have had any authentic spiritual experiences. Your posts are the same bland religious nonsese that you likely learned from other religious people.


Religious people inform critical thinkers how faith works, and how it is a liability to understandin g what is true about reality.


This is a mischaracterization. You make it sound like I disagree with smoking. No, with religious claims they tend to have no basis in fact or reality, so are dismissed by logical default. Religious peolpe, like you, want their beliefs accepted by critical thinkers, but you can never offer enough evidence nor a coherent explanation that earns a positive judgment. It's your fault for making bad claims.

This accusing thinkers of having some fault is another bad habit theists do. It is rude and passive aggressive behavior. It's much like what abusive people do to their victims, shaming them and making them feel guilty for doing things they aren't doing, also called gaslighting. I don;t think believers are aware of this habit. I think it stems from the frustration believer experience in these discussions for their own failures.


Once a believer decides what he is looking for they tend to find it. There is no standards of fact or reason. That's why theists find a "truth" that is highly inconsistent with other believers.


No gods are known to exist, so you could be imagining all this. How would you know if your ego really wants to believe?


Religious people oen the door to being judged. They are eager to express what they believe, but can't explain why they believe it.

And you haven't asked me any questions about my meaning in life, so your judgment is nothing more than a guess, is it? More rude gestures. Is this what your journey has taught you?

And being correct correlates to following facts and using reason. Your comments suggest you avoid both.


No Gods are known to exist. Notice you just make this extraordinary claim but completely fail to demonstrate it's true with extraordinary evidence. This is why I'm not impressed by your claim of having had a journey.


No Gods are known to exist, still. You mentioning God over and over again means those comments are invalid UNTIL you can demonstrate a God exists. You haven't even tried. You might assume a God exists in your thinking, but that is irrelevant in debate. We don;t care what you believe, it's irrelevant. Facts are relevant.


Been there, done that. But you wouldn't know since you didn't ask.

Critical thinking is not critical thinking if it is bias.

God is known to exist.

All the secrets about God and the universe are staring you in the face.

Just like religion, you deal in beliefs. You want me to convince you to believe rather than what I have been doing. I'm pointing you where you can find God and the truth.

It's all just like the water in the desert. God and truth is not what you seek.

Everybody wants to rule the world. You are no different. You are closing your eyes to everything but what you want to see.

Birth defects and cancer: You are blind to so many sides of things. Adversity breeds invention. Mankind learns genetics and medicine through these adversities. Maybe leeches and bleeding bad humors out is the level of intelligence you want to remain.

Birth defects and cancer are actions of God. Maybe you have started on your journey. To question is the start on the journey to Discovery. God hides nothing. The answers stare you in the face.

God is working on multiple levels with multiple views. Just a few moments of conversation might take an intelligent person a week to realize what all was said. Who knows went right over one's head.

Names are never used. Everyone already knows who everyone is. This might sound funny but it's communication at it's best. It's not about language. It's about what is. God did confirm much of what I had discovered. God and what I have discovered is no longer a belief. God is a fact.

The first thing God pointed out to me is that mankind carries such a narrow view. How much are you missing by limiting your view to only what you want to see? Clearly, birth defects and cancer has escaped you.

God gave everyone a different view to guaranty mankind a larger view than any one person could have. That theist is giving you a view you are blind to see. Likewise theists are blind to see the atheist view. By closing one's mind to only what one wants to see instead of what is, leads one way from the real truth in favor of those bias beliefs.

Am I trying to convince you? I am merely placing truth in your lap. What you choose to do with truth is entirely up to you. Choosing to be blind will not get one to the truth. On the other hand, Truth is not what you really seek. If it was, your journey would never have ended with you accepting your belief that God does not exist.

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

 

[F1fan]

Critical thinking is not critical thinking if it is bias.

God is known to exist.

This is a claim, so prove it.

All the secrets about God and the universe are staring you in the face.

Science explains how the universe works. No gods are anywhere.

Just like religion, you deal in beliefs. You want me to convince you to believe rather than what I have been doing. I'm pointing you where you can find God and the truth.

You've done no such thing. All you do is make vague claims.

It's all just like the water in the desert. God and truth is not what you seek.

Water is a necessity. Religious dogma isn't.

Everybody wants to rule the world. You are no different. You are closing your eyes to everything but what you want to see.

Notice you can't exlpain what I'm missing. It's almost as if you are bluffing.

Birth defects and cancer: You are blind to so many sides of things. Adversity breeds invention. Mankind learns genetics and medicine through these adversities. Maybe leeches and bleeding bad humors out is the level of intelligence you want to remain.

Birth defects and cancer are actions of God.

I haven't seen you condemn God for these immoral acts, why is that?

Maybe you have started on your journey. To question is the start on the journey to Discovery. God hides nothing. The answers stare you in the face.

God is working on multiple levels with multiple views. Just a few moments of conversation might take an intelligent person a week to realize what all was said. Who knows went right over one's head.

Names are never used. Everyone already knows who everyone is. This might sound funny but it's communication at it's best. It's not about language. It's about what is. God did confirm much of what I had discovered. God and what I have discovered is no longer a belief. God is a fact.

The first thing God pointed out to me is that mankind carries such a narrow view. How much are you missing by limiting your view to only what you want to see? Clearly, birth defects and cancer has escaped you.

God gave everyone a different view to guaranty mankind a larger view than any one person could have. That theist is giving you a view you are blind to see. Likewise theists are blind to see the atheist view. By closing one's mind to only what one wants to see instead of what is, leads one way from the real truth in favor of those bias beliefs.

None of this religious rambling is factual or coherent.

Am I trying to convince you? I am merely placing truth in your lap. What you choose to do with truth is entirely up to you. Choosing to be blind will not get one to the truth. On the other hand, Truth is not what you really seek. If it was, your journey would never have ended with you accepting your belief that God does not exist.

What makes you think you have absolute truth, and that it is for anyone other than you? Is there any possibility you could be mistaken?

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

You end all your posts with this as if you have to convince yourself it's true.

 

[Ponder This]

My reasons are very good the idea of this thread was to learn other peoples reasons. And their rejection of anything they don't believe

1/ no it is not a fallasy, facts are not fallacies.

2/ View attachment 71501

3/ yes, and, falsifiable evidence would be nice

5/ eh?

6/ nope, whats it like to be wrong?

I've given some good reasons for you to consider.

1. Not sure what "facts" you are referring to. Feel free to look up Evidence of Absence and Absence of Evidence if you are still confused.
2. And now you can add False Dichotomy to your fallacies as the presence of prayers is not the absence of donations, nor is the presence of donations the absence of prayers or vice versa in either case.
3. Your agreement is noted.
4. 
5. Exactly.

Good Luck with your researches.

 

[ChristineM]

I've given some good reasons for you to consider.

1. Not sure what "facts" you are referring to. Feel free to look up Evidence of Absence and Absence of Evidence if you are still confused.
2. And now you can add False Dichotomy to your fallacies as the presence of prayers is not the absence of donations, nor is the presence of donations the absence of prayers or vice versa in either case.
3. Your agreement is noted.
4. 
5. Exactly.

Good Luck with your researches.

1/ No falsifiable evidence... Fact

2/ Bull, you can pray for disaster relief all you want, ir doesn't help. Donationsnare what helps

3/ So you still have no falsifiable evidence l thanks for letting me know.

4/ Exactly

5/ Exactly

6/ Exactly

 

[Bird123]

This is a claim, so prove it.


Science explains how the universe works. No gods are anywhere.


You've done no such thing. All you do is make vague claims.


Water is a necessity. Religious dogma isn't.


Notice you can't exlpain what I'm missing. It's almost as if you are bluffing.


I haven't seen you condemn God for these immoral acts, why is that?


None of this religious rambling is factual or coherent.


What makes you think you have absolute truth, and that it is for anyone other than you? Is there any possibility you could be mistaken?


You end all your posts with this as if you have to convince yourself it's true.

Burden of proof rests on the one who seeks the knowledge. I have pointed you in a direction by which you can Discover the Real Truth for yourself. It comes down to what you seek because I am not going to generate or feed any belief system. You know where the water is now.

You assume I'm dealing in a belief. That is what you want to be true. You assume that since God hasn't come to you that God does not exist.

Believing in God has never ever been what it's all about. God isn't going to intimidate your choices in any way. Further, with your lack of understanding at this current time, you would just be confused by any experience.

There is no time limit on learning; muddle through. There will come a time when truth will become more important than what you now choose to do. When one understands all sides, Intelligence will make the best choices. There is much to learn.

That's what I see. It's very clear!! When one Discovers what is, no convincing is needed because it has never ever been about Believing. On the other hand, some still believe the Earth is flat. Yes, there is a very long way to go.

Science too will Discover God, in time. Science will Discover God before religion will. Won't everyone be surprised. There is a long way to go with such narrow visions and bias methods of wanting to control what is. In time, one will see that what is will be better than what one is trying so hard to control. Control is a petty thing mankind holds so dear.

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

 

[F1fan]

Burden of proof rests on the one who seeks the knowledge.

This is a misuse of this of "burden of proof". It appolies to those making claims, and who assert truth, as you are. Notice you Make claim after claim aout truth and god existing yet offer no facts that demonstrate you are corrct,. that means we reject your claims by default. We can't take you seriously.

I have pointed you in a direction by which you can Discover the Real Truth for yourself. It comes down to what you seek because I am not going to generate or feed any belief system. You know where the water is now.

You are assuming two things, 1. that you have absolute truth that others need to find, and 2. you re being coherent in what this truth is.

You assume I'm dealing in a belief. That is what you want to be true. You assume that since God hasn't come to you that God does not exist.

I'm assuming no such thing. You are stating religious concepts and fail to demonstrate they are factual and true. True statements are what establish truth, not beliefs.

Believing in God has never ever been what it's all about. God isn't going to intimidate your choices in any way. Further, with your lack of understanding at this current time, you would just be confused by any experience.

A God would have to exist to perform any actions. No gods are known to exist. You haven't demonstrated what you think God is is true. So we reject your referrences of God as belief, not knowledge.

There is no time limit on learning; muddle through. There will come a time when truth will become more important than what you now choose to do. When one understands all sides, Intelligence will make the best choices. There is much to learn.

You need to learn about religious belief and critical thinking so you can make better choices about your conclusions. Thus far what you preent is just superficial religious beliefs, and naive accusations. You don't even attempt to debate.

That's what I see. It's very clear!! [/qiote]
You are talented at seeing illusions clearly.

When one Discovers what is, no convincing is needed because it has never ever been about Believing. On the other hand, some still believe the Earth is flat. Yes, there is a very long way to go.

Facts are what are independent of judgment, because they are objectively verifiable. No religious concepts can be shown to be factual, so they are rejected by logical default. Do you want to be taken seriously? If so, use facts and create coherent arguments.

Science too will Discover God, in time.

Good for you adding clarvoyance to your list of special abilities. You can pat yourself on the back.

Science will Discover God before religion will. Won't everyone be surprised.

OK, so you admit science and even religion can't know and refer to a real God existing, yet you as an ordinary mortal KNOWS God exists? There's a reason Dawkins called his book The God Delusion.

There is a long way to go with such narrow visions and bias methods of wanting to control what is. In time, one will see that what is will be better than what one is trying so hard to control. Control is a petty thing mankind holds so dear.

What murky thinking, and I take it you don't think this applies to yourself, but all others who don't "see" things like you do, as if you are God yourself.

 

[SDavis]

If you study any of the 4-5000 god concepts notice they are based on humans or animals. There are over 200 creator gods, and these personalities were the best primitive people could do to explain what exists. Look up the gods that created the Hawaiian Islands, pretty interesting lore. Many primitive cucltures needed order as they grew and being largely feral and uneducated the leaders needed to demand obediance to the rules. One way was to exploit dear and superstition, and this was powerful gods who would punish those who misbehaved. Look at all the old Hebrew laws int he Bible. Many laws would be unconstitutional or crimes today, but the leaders needed to be extreme and harsh.


Feelings are unreliable.


All quite dubious thinking. I won't get into this murky belief, but feel free to start a dedicated topic.


So in other words, God is imaginary. No facts, no data, just obsolete lore. That's not good enough to study what is true about reality.

I have studied ____ feelings are reliable ____ because it can't be seen are proven does it mean it doesn't exist - is the scientific reason.

Reality
Talk to these people and their reviews on reality
Illusion Vs. Reality: Age-related Differences In Expectations For Future Happiness

Reality is an illusion: The scientific proof everything is energy and reality isn't real

 

[F1fan]

I have studied ____ feelings are reliable ____ because it can't be seen are proven does it mean it doesn't exist - is the scientific reason.

Reality
Talk to these people and their reviews on reality
Illusion Vs. Reality: Age-related Differences In Expectations For Future Happiness

Reality is an illusion: The scientific proof everything is energy and reality isn't real

So you are relying on an objective process as a defense that your fantastic beliefs could be real?

If your feelings and religious beliefs were truthful, you would just show us. Instead you are falling back on science, and that's because it uses facts and data, not emotions. Science is reliable, beliefs are not.

 

[Bird123]

This is a misuse of this of "burden of proof". It appolies to those making claims, and who assert truth, as you are. Notice you Make claim after claim aout truth and god existing yet offer no facts that demonstrate you are corrct,. that means we reject your claims by default. We can't take you seriously.


You are assuming two things, 1. that you have absolute truth that others need to find, and 2. you re being coherent in what this truth is.


I'm assuming no such thing. You are stating religious concepts and fail to demonstrate they are factual and true. True statements are what establish truth, not beliefs.


A God would have to exist to perform any actions. No gods are known to exist. You haven't demonstrated what you think God is is true. So we reject your referrences of God as belief, not knowledge.


You need to learn about religious belief and critical thinking so you can make better choices about your conclusions. Thus far what you preent is just superficial religious beliefs, and naive accusations. You don't even attempt to debate.

Who is this WE??? Are there really more than one of you?

Burden of proof always falls upon the one who seeks. You might want someone to convince you to believe, however wanting to be convinced is not the road discover the real truth. Truth is not always an agreeable thing. Example: what freezes quicker Hot or Cold water. Both sides supply convincing arguments. Since I sought to know the answer, I had the burden of proof to discover that truth.

I placed hot and cold water in trays of a commercial ice maker. The cold froze quicker but not by much. I placed the cold water in the tray the hot was in and the hot in the tray the cold was in, then repeated the experiment. This would rule out any possible differences in the trays. Once again the cold froze quicker. I no longer have to deal in beliefs and accepting. I know the real truth.

A process can also be done to discover the real truth about God as I have pointed you the way. Granted the journey is much more complicated, however it can be done.

It always comes down to the same thing. What do you seek? Beliefs? What makes you different than any religious person? I do not see any.

A scientist who searches for knowledge has to be open to all possibilities. To be bias limits one to what one wants to be true. As I said before, truth will not always be an agreeable thing.

I started my journey to discover the real truth without bias. Since religion did not add up, I didn't care whether God existed or not. All I looked for was the truth. Figure out how things work. Put the pieces together so that everything fits.

You might just be surprised where it leads. Even the people factor adds up perfectly. There are many more variables which means more complexities and more work to figure out.

I think you are unable or unwilling to take such a journey. You are too comfortable in that box of beliefs you have created for yourself. Ask any scientist, Discover takes lots of work. Accepting and believing is so much easier, however the results are not the same. I have always been one who had to know, thus I have always been one to take the effort.

Choices are a big part of this world. Choices define who we are and show God and the world what we know and what we need to learn. Choices are too important to allow others to choose for us. Be who you must. It's a part of the plan!! I merely point for those who truly seek and want to know. It was much harder for myself. I had no one to point my way. On the other hand, that might have worked out better.

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

 

[Heyo]

Who is this WE??? Are there really more than one of you?

Burden of proof always falls upon the one who seeks.

You seem to be confused about this simple principle in philosophy. In a debate the burden of proof is on the claimant. See Burden of proof (philosophy) - Wikipedia.

A process can also be done to discover the real truth about God as I have pointed you the way. Granted the journey is much more complicated, however it can be done.

I question your claim. Can you prove it? In a debate you have the burden of proof, if not met, your claim will be dismissed.

A scientist who searches for knowledge has to be open to all possibilities. To be bias limits one to what one wants to be true. As I said before, truth will not always be an agreeable thing.

Nope. You also seem to be confused about the scientific method. Scientists wilfully limit themselves to the study of the real world. I.e. they only have to be open to real phenomena. They can confidently ignore unreal possibilities as that would be to step outside the providence of science. See Scientific method - Wikipedia

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

It seems to be for you, but you start with wrong premises.

 

[F1fan]

Who is this WE??? Are there really more than one of you?

I'm referring to critical thinkers who follow a set of rules known as logic.

Burden of proof always falls upon the one who seeks.

False, burden of proof relates to those making claims, as they have to demonstrate they are correct in what they claim. You claim to know a God exists but fail to show us you are correct, so we dismiss it by logical default.

You might want someone to convince you to believe, however wanting to be convinced is not the road discover the real truth. Truth is not always an agreeable thing. Example: what freezes quicker Hot or Cold water. Both sides supply convincing arguments. Since I sought to know the answer, I had the burden of proof to discover that truth.

This can be tested and an objective answer demonstrated. You can't do the same with your belief in a God.

A process can also be done to discover the real truth about God as I have pointed you the way. Granted the journey is much more complicated, however it can be done.

You offered more detail about freezing water than you do about proving a God. Water is known to exiust unlike any of the many gods.

It always comes down to the same thing. What do you seek? Beliefs? What makes you different than any religious person? I do not see any.

You want to believe in God and you do. I have no such desire to believe in ideas that lack evidence.

A scientist who searches for knowledge has to be open to all possibilities. To be bias limits one to what one wants to be true. As I said before, truth will not always be an agreeable thing.

Scientists have to follow facts and data, not the imaginary. No angels, no demons, no fairies, no gods, no creators, etc. ONLY facts and data.

I started my journey to discover the real truth without bias. Since religion did not add up, I didn't care whether God existed or not. All I looked for was the truth. Figure out how things work. Put the pieces together so that everything fits.

I think you underestimate your bias.

You might just be surprised where it leads. Even the people factor adds up perfectly. There are many more variables which means more complexities and more work to figure out.

If I let my imagination run wild, and suspended my skilled thinking and search for truth, yes I would be surprised. But I don't want illusions as "truth" as you desxribe for yourself. You have no discipline or skill applied to what you believe is true, and I find that unsatisfactoiry for myself.

I think you are unable or unwilling to take such a journey. You are too comfortable in that box of beliefs you have created for yourself. Ask any scientist, Discover takes lots of work. Accepting and believing is so much easier, however the results are not the same. I have always been one who had to know, thus I have always been one to take the effort.

You are correct that I have no need or desire to build an illusory set of beliefs as you have. I prefer being rooted in what is demonstrably true.

And you still assume my journey and experiences have to be like yours. You haven't asked me any questions about what I have searched and found.

Choices are a big part of this world. Choices define who we are and show God and the world what we know and what we need to learn. Choices are too important to allow others to choose for us. Be who you must. It's a part of the plan!! I merely point for those who truly seek and want to know. It was much harder for myself. I had no one to point my way. On the other hand, that might have worked out better.

Your choices are biased and not fact-based. You make no effort to show I'm incorrect here.[/QUOTE]

 

[Bird123]

You seem to be confused about this simple principle in philosophy. In a debate the burden of proof is on the claimant. See Burden of proof (philosophy) - Wikipedia.


I question your claim. Can you prove it? In a debate you have the burden of proof, if not met, your claim will be dismissed.

Nope. You also seem to be confused about the scientific method. Scientists wilfully limit themselves to the study of the real world. I.e. they only have to be open to real phenomena. They can confidently ignore unreal possibilities as that would be to step outside the providence of science. See Scientific method - Wikipedia

It seems to be for you, but you start with wrong premises.

Am I really debating or pointing? I already have proof and the answer. I merely point for those who search for the truth and the proof. I am not working on beliefs as you are.

Want to dismiss? Be my guest. That still doesn't discount the truth. Each chooses what they seek. Perhaps you should decide what it is that you do seek.

You assume I am not talking about the Real World. I understand religion has given you so many beliefs that don't add up that you discount any possibility God exists. A good scientist is open to all possibilities including something not physical in nature. Look how quantum physics alone has broadened the thinking. Scientist, like I ,hate missing pieces of the puzzle. Bias narrowing the view limits one from the entire picture.

Your choices and thinking do matter on your ability to discover anything.

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

 

[Bird123]

I'm referring to critical thinkers who follow a set of rules known as logic.


False, burden of proof relates to those making claims, as they have to demonstrate they are correct in what they claim. You claim to know a God exists but fail to show us you are correct, so we dismiss it by logical default.


This can be tested and an objective answer demonstrated. You can't do the same with your belief in a God.


You offered more detail about freezing water than you do about proving a God. Water is known to exiust unlike any of the many gods.


You want to believe in God and you do. I have no such desire to believe in ideas that lack evidence.


Scientists have to follow facts and data, not the imaginary. No angels, no demons, no fairies, no gods, no creators, etc. ONLY facts and data.


I think you underestimate your bias.


If I let my imagination run wild, and suspended my skilled thinking and search for truth, yes I would be surprised. But I don't want illusions as "truth" as you desxribe for yourself. You have no discipline or skill applied to what you believe is true, and I find that unsatisfactoiry for myself.


You are correct that I have no need or desire to build an illusory set of beliefs as you have. I prefer being rooted in what is demonstrably true.

And you still assume my journey and experiences have to be like yours. You haven't asked me any questions about what I have searched and found.


Your choices are biased and not fact-based. You make no effort to show I'm incorrect here.

[/QUOTE]


It is you dealing in beliefs. I do not want people living on beliefs. I point to where one can Discover the truth. Your logic and advanced thinking will be crucial in the journey to Discover the truth.

You say I want to believe in God but you have not read what I said. My journey was to Discover the truth regardless of whether God existed or not. Put the pieces together. See how things do add up perfectly and it will lead to God. If you are very good at this, you might get a visit from God. If you do, believing will not exist anymore. You will know.

Decide what you seek. Life isn't about Discovering God. You are going to see God between physical lives anyway. You already know God.

Why your quest to fight so hard to discount others who know there is more than this physical world? Granted much of their beliefs are wrong, however they do not shut their eyes to what does exist.

You want logic?? If God exists, then God can be found!! How many are really looking??? You?? I find very very few people religious or otherwise that actually want to find God.

Me? I have always been one who had to know about all kinds of things. God was just one of them. The more I discover; the more possibilities for new knowledge exists all around waiting to be Discovered. It stares us all in the face.

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