banner_jpg
Username/Email: Password:
Forums

What would it take for you to believe, or not to believe

Pages (7) [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next
You must be registered to post!
From User
Message Body
Post #466158 - Reply to (#466121) by mattai
Member

11:40 am, May 3 2011
Posts: 184


Quote from mattai
You're using the old "specified complexity" argument. In other words, "it's too complicated to have popped out of thin air, so god made it". To answer your question, a complex DNA pattern didn't form. Something simpler formed and this, step by step, lead to something more complex.

Besides, a few hundred years ago people didn't know how lightning was made, so they assumed it was because a guy was up in the clouds chucking lightning bolts at us...maybe it's better to withhold judgement until science comes up with a decent answer? And then still withhold judgement, because it'll keep looking for alternatives.

Dawkins wrote the same thing. His argument is often referred to "the ultimate boeing 747 gambit", basically calling God the ultimate boeing 747.

Essentially, an argument for simplicity should more likely run counter to intelligent design than for it. Supposedly, the creationist position is that a boeing 747 is too complex to have simply "sprung up" by chance / "evolution" so intelligent design must have been the cause. Dawkin's counter is that a boeing 747, indeed, did not spring into existence randomly. It was engineered by highly intelligent humans, and assembled by a combination of humans and machines, which, put together are many magnitudes more complex than a mere boeing 747. Any "being" that creates a 747 should logically be even more complex than 747 (the concept of conservation of information, which you should know having brought up "specified complexity" ~> Dembski). Thus, "God" having created this 747 out of thin air is more complex than the 747, and God is "the ultimate boeing 747". "Who created God?"

Now, this isn't against you, mattai. This is more of a rant against Dawkins...

I disagree with the "specified complexity" argument, having designed software/simulations/viruses that indeed seem to violate most "laws of conservation of information". I understand how persistent patterns can be interpreted as new information, pulled from chaos.

However, Dawkins went about it the wrong way in his counter and grossly simplifies the specified complexity argument. The complexity of "God" ("Who created God?") is irrelevant, because Dembski's specified complexity argument specifically places "God" outside of this "closed system" (bound by natural sciences).

So while the specified complexity may be flawed, the converse is not necessarily proven. Dawkins proved that supposedly logical arguments made by creationists was wrong. Good for him, but he should not be using that as "evidence" that God doesn't exist (as he did in his The God Delusion). I'm surprised how many people confuse logical contrapositions, conversions, and equivalences.

Last edited by N0x_ at 11:55 am, May 3 2011

Post #466159 - Reply to (#466087) by sarah-eats-cupcakes
user avatar
Mad
Member

11:42 am, May 3 2011
Posts: 225


Quote from sarah-eats-cupcakes
i'm sorry i cant take science as logic....

Quote from sarah-eats-cupcakes
to you my beliefs are illogical and vice versa


Something being logical doesn't mean it making sense, you've misunderstood the concept of logic and how it is used in science, I'd go as far as suspect you not having grasped the whole general idea of critical thinking. Logic and science are frameworks that attempt to objectively describe the world around us, it does not take side; garbage goes in, garbage comes out. You start with faulty assumptions, you'll get faulty or unusable results (note that I did not say 'bad' or 'wrong').

You would also be correct that arguing religion is futile because we each hold our personal beliefs, if we all lived completely autonomously and separated from each other, which we don't... We have to share our living space with each other in societies, societies which are controlled often by the largest constituents of that society. And they make choices based on their philosophies, which might be based on objective reasoning, thousand year old tales, or utopian ideals.

And then it becomes my business; you, who think that we can make up things we don't know, become the herald of pain and suffering as you and your ilk shrug your shoulders, clasp your hands and say we should just hope that things turn for the better, rather than working for its sake. After all, death is but a passage to eternity in paradise as long as you believe, right?

To answer the question of what would make me a believer; god the omnipotent would have to bow down to me and my requests, to twist the very fabric of the universe, make every planet habitable and eject humanity into space, and allow back and forth passage into this so called heaven... And do it now. These should be parlour tricks for a god, but we'd have eternity to explore.

user avatar
his and her sonnet
Member

12:00 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 1127


"And then it becomes my business; you, who think that we can make up things we don't know, become the herald of pain and suffering as you and your ilk shrug your shoulders, clasp your hands and say we should just hope that things turn for the better, rather than working for its sake. After all, death is but a passage to eternity in paradise as long as you believe, right?"
i got a little confused....who are you referring to here? confused



Post #466162 - Reply to (#466152) by daisukidesuyo
user avatar
Diamond Dust
Member

12:01 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 18


Quote from daisukidesuyo
Can someone lock this already? Talking about religion is never good on an online forum, as shown. It allows for too much rage and butthurt.



Post #466169 - Reply to (#466158) by N0x_
user avatar
his and her sonnet
Member

12:20 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 1127


Quote from N0x_
So while the specified complexity may be flawed, the converse is not necessarily proven. Dawkins proved that supposedly logical arguments made by creationists was wrong. Good for him, but he should not be using that as "evidence" that God doesn't exist (as he did in his The God Delusion). I'm surprised how many people confuse logical contrapositions, conversions, and equivalences.


exactly biggrin
the dna pattern is very similar to alphabets and how you combine them to form words or sentences,i think everyone here must have heard of the athiest's riddle,im not referring to that, as the theory is full of flaws
it is highly unlikely that the world as we know it is nothing but a result of coincident reactions or that dna was originally a very simple structure.
and take a look at earth,compare earth to other planets...this is the only planet that contains everything necessary to all living beings...oxygen(and right amount of other gases),water.suitable temperature,ozone layer to protect humans,plants and animals from harmful uv radiations
doesnt this seem too perfect to be a coincidence?doesnt it seem like someone designed all of this?

Post #466170 - Reply to (#466161) by sarah-eats-cupcakes
Member

12:24 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 184


Quote from daisukidesuyo
Can someone lock this already? Talking about religion is never good on an online forum, as shown. It allows for too much rage and butthurt.

No butt hurt here. I'm rather enjoying this. I'm curious as to who is actually offended by this topic. Most of the people here are self-proclaimed weak atheists, and the theists here seem to be pretty chill about the whole discussion.

Quote from sarah-eats-cupcakes
Quote from havoccc
And then it becomes my business; you, who think that we can make up things we don't know, become the herald of pain and suffering as you and your ilk shrug your shoulders, clasp your hands and say we should just hope that things turn for the better, rather than working for its sake. After all, death is but a passage to eternity in paradise as long as you believe, right?

i got a little confused....who are you referring to here? confused


He's probably referring to organized religion of the past. Persecutors, inquisitors, etc. They used religion as the excuse for their imperialistic designs.

I don't see what's the big deal though. If not for religion, humans would conjure up some other reason to battle with each other and subjugate each other.

Neoliberalism and neoconservatism (all global designs) are the new religion. Instead of religious fanatics wanting to save the souls of savages, we now want to save the "freedoms" of savages who obviously can't run their own countries. We pontificate and dictate to others the correct way to go about managing their own people, and we spread propaganda that supposedly proves our point.

We divide and conquer, and promote people who cave in to our own beliefs. Individuals who "stand up" against gov'ts that oppose us are heroes. People who can't appreciate our beliefs are uncivilized savages/communists. Only now, those happen to be political beliefs than religious beliefs. Still, we put "Faith" in our political values, just as we put faith in the values of the church before.

We don't need religion as an excuse to kill and subjugate.

Last edited by N0x_ at 12:30 pm, May 3 2011

user avatar
Member

12:38 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 707


The essence of Religion:

Some things in life are bad
They can really make you mad
Other things just make you swear and curse.
When you're chewing on life's gristle
Don't grumble, give a whistle
And this'll help things turn out for the best...

And...always look on the bright side of life...
Always look on the light side of life...

If life seems jolly rotten
There's something you've forgotten
And that's to laugh and smile and dance and sing.
When you're feeling in the dumps
Don't be silly chumps
Just purse your lips and whistle - that's the thing.

And...always look on the bright side of life...
Always look on the light side of life...

For life is quite absurd
And death's the final word
You must always face the curtain with a bow.
Forget about your sin - give the audience a grin
Enjoy it - it's your last chance anyhow.

So always look on the bright side of death
Just before you draw your terminal breath

Life's a piece of shit
When you look at it
Life's a laugh and death's a joke, it's true.
You'll see it's all a show
Keep 'em laughing as you go
Just remember that the last laugh is on you.

And always look on the bright side of life...
Always look on the right side of life...
(Come on guys, cheer up!)
Always look on the bright side of life...
Always look on the bright side of life...
(Worse things happen at sea, you know.)
Always look on the bright side of life...
(I mean - what have you got to lose?)
(You know, you come from nothing - you're going back to nothing.
What have you lost? Nothing!)
Always look on the right side of life...


Post #466187 - Reply to (#466143) by Domonkazu
user avatar
his and her sonnet
Member

1:47 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 1127


Quote from Domonkazu
For some people their faith toward their God is the main drive why they are able commit such horrible deed, its their blind faith which was abused.

if you're talking about people who use violence to dominate their beliefs,that is ABSOLUTELY wrong ,all religions emphasize approaching people with kindness and peace rather than blood and violence.you talk to the person,explain why u think god exists and thats it,your job ends here.its up to them wether to follow or ignore,u dont have to choke them to death or rip their heads off if they choose to ignore you.
terrorism is,however,the opposite...and most terrorist leaders "claim" that they're doing whatever they're doing out of love of god,but really its nothing more than love of power


"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace."
eyes

Post #466192 - Reply to (#466187) by sarah-eats-cupcakes
user avatar
Member

2:02 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 71


Quote from sarah-eats-cupcakes
Quote from Domonkazu
For some people their faith toward their God is the main drive why they are able commit such horrible deed, its their blind faith which was abused.

if you're talking about people who use violence to dominate their beliefs,that is ABSOLUTELY wrong ,all religions emphasize approaching people with kindness and peace rather than blood and violence.you talk to the person,explain why u think god exists and thats it,your job ends here.its up to them wether to follow or ignore,u dont have to choke them to death or rip their heads off if they choose to ignore you.
terrorism is,however,the opposite...and most terrorist leaders "claim" that they're doing whatever they're doing out of love of god,but really its nothing more than love of power


"When the power of love overcomes the love of power the world will know peace."
eyes

i dont mean to offend anybody but the all books of major religions except the new testament have by todays standard immoral laws. laws that are only enforced but what most people consider extremist and most encourage violence sometimes directly and sometimes indirectly(such as forbidding to deal or socialize with anyone that does not belong to their religion) to spread the "good word"

Post #466199 - Reply to (#466187) by sarah-eats-cupcakes
user avatar
 Member

2:45 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 974


Quote from sarah-eats-cupcakes
terrorism is,however,the opposite...and most terrorist leaders "claim" that they're doing whatever they're doing out of love of god,but really its nothing more than love of power


that is my point, regardless that every religion spread kindness, the religion itself still a dangerous tools which could be misused by certain group to influenced many peoples in a wrong way.



________________
"we are people because of other people"
"I am who I am because of who we all are"
Post #466202 - Reply to (#466199) by Domonkazu
user avatar
his and her sonnet
Member

2:56 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 1127


Quote from Domonkazu
that is my point, regardless that every religion spread kindness, the religion itself still a dangerous tools which could be misused by certain group to influenced many peoples in a wrong way.



i agree about people viewing religion as a tool but im completely against blaming religion for "influencing people in a wrong way" when you should be blaming the people themselves.peace comes from within,we're all born with conscious,but some people choose to submit to things like money and power,its their fault

Post #466204 - Reply to (#466202) by sarah-eats-cupcakes
user avatar
 Member

3:09 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 974


Quote from sarah-eats-cupcakes
but some people choose to submit to things like money and power,its their fault


if you follow history a bit, those kind of people created religion in the past and exactly for that reason.

________________
"we are people because of other people"
"I am who I am because of who we all are"
Post #466220
user avatar
Member

4:36 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 705


I feel like posting this so I will. Not written by me.

Quote
Where have all the people gone?
by Silvio Famularo

According to the now-prevailing view, the first humans lived over a million years ago. If that is really so, where are all the trillions of people who should either be alive, or whose buried remains, potentially fossilized, should be found in vast graveyards scattered around the world?
As a child, I was raised to believe that Adam and Eve were the first two people created and I had no problem believing it. But later people said we evolved from apes and I started to have problems.
A big question arose in my mind, ‘How many millions of years ago could humans have supposedly begun evolving from apes?’
I worked out how many times the world’s population had doubled since the first man and woman. Allowing for past diseases, famines, pestilence, wars and infant mortality, the population would probably have doubled at about the rate of once every couple of hundred years, allowing for it to be much slower than the sixty to seventy years it took to double last time. Multiplying the number of times that the population doubled by a couple of hundred years should give a rough idea, give or take a few thousand years, of when the first two humans were either created or evolved.
Believe it or not, the world’s population has doubled only 31½ times since the first human couple appeared on earth. This gives 6,500 years. You can work it out for yourself on your own calculator.
A lecturer on evolution once told me that there were never just two people because a whole population would have evolved. If that were so, then that would mean that the human population has doubled far less than 31½ times. But, to maximize believability of the evolutionary scenario, let’s say that the population started with only four people a million years ago. This would mean that the average time that the world’s population took to double was about 33,000 years (30.5 doublings). So it would have taken that many years to get to eight people, and another 33,000 years before the world’s population rose to 16. That is rather slow growth—by comparison, a Maori lady died in New Zealand in December 1984 at the age of 112, leaving 450 descendants.
Population growth is increasing currently at a rate of approximately 1.8% per annum (World Book Encyclopaedia), or doubling every 39 years.
Even if the average time that the population doubled in the past was as slow as once every thousand years (that is one twenty-fifth of the present growth rate), this would put the first pair of humans on Earth only 31,500 years ago.
Some people, not willing to believe that mankind was created only a few thousand years ago, claim that the world’s population has been almost wiped out many times. Clearly it has never been wiped out entirely. While some people will assert that the human population has been almost wiped out a number of times, without their providing any evidence to back it up, these same people get very agitated if we suggest that the population was nearly wiped out once by a great Flood in the time of Noah.
The world’s population was approximately 600 million in the year 1650 and increased to about 2,400 million by 1950. This means that it would have doubled twice in 300 years, at an average rate of once every 150 years.
Thanks to the Bible, we can trace the lineages of Jews and Arabs right back to the same patriarch, Abraham, who was born about 2167 BC and had six sons. His first son, Ishmael, was the father of the Arabs, and his second son, Isaac, was the father of Jacob, later called Israel, from whose twelve sons came the 12 tribes of Israel, better known as the Jews.
The World Book of Knowledge says that there are approximately 200 million Arabs in the world and about 18 million Jews.
This means that since Abraham’s time, his descendants through only two sons have doubled roughly 28 times at an average rate of about once every 150 years.
Now the Jewish people have undergone a tremendous amount of persecution and slaughter over the centuries. Hitler murdered over six million in concentration camps alone during the Second World War.
They must have lost many members through disease, infant mortality and starvation over the centuries just as other people groups have. Their history is replete with stories of battles and loss of life because of wars. Yet we find that their numbers have doubled a minimum of 23 times, at an average rate of once every 182 years.
We can calculate the rate of population growth starting from about 4,500 years ago, when, from the historical details found in the Bible, Noah and his family—eight in total—survived the deluge. That population has to double 29½ times to get the current world’s population of six and a half billion, at an average doubling rate of once every 152 years. Interesting, isn’t it? The Bible’s timeframe of history fits the data.


________________
"I'll shut your mouth~~~~~ with mine~~~"

二息歩行
Post #466225
user avatar
Member

5:13 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 186


first i would have to be off drugs for several years then god has to appear right infront of me and explain the history of himself and the entire world and how he even came to be and how many more of him there are(because if there is one god there would have to be more gods unless god can asexually reproduce) then after confirming with just about every scientist in the world that the "entity" is truly god i would need examples of his powers specifically plucking out one of my ribs and turning that into a woman after which i would need to see the garden of eden and both a glimpse of heaven and hell. only then would i admit that god(s) is real and that i have been fooled by science. till then ill stick with logic, the chaotic maelstrom process of evolution, and my moral perspective.(although i hate morality for it is nothing more than the vague concept on how we believe people should act)

________________
Shmoke!!!!!!
Post #466233 - Reply to (#466220) by FormX
user avatar
Local Prig
Member

6:16 pm, May 3 2011
Posts: 1899


Quote from FormX
I feel like posting this so I will. Not written by me.

Quote
Where have all the people gone?
by Silvio Famularo

According to the now-prevailing view, the first humans lived over a million years ago. If that is really so, where are all the trillions of people who should either be alive, or whose buried remains, potentially fossilized, should be found in vast graveyards scattered around the world?
As a child, I was raised to believe that Adam and Eve were the first two people created and I had no problem believing it. But later people said we evolved from apes and I started to have problems.
A big question arose in my mind, ‘How many millions of years ago could humans have supposedly begun evolving from apes?’
I worked out how many times the world’s population had doubled since the first man and woman. Allowing for past diseases, famines, pestilence, wars and infant mortality, the population would probably have doubled at about the rate of once every couple of hundred years, allowing for it to be much slower than the sixty to seventy years it took to double last time. Multiplying the number of times that the population doubled by a couple of hundred years should give a rough idea, give or take a few thousand years, of when the first two humans were either created or evolved.
Believe it or not, the world’s population has doubled only 31½ times since the first human couple appeared on earth. This gives 6,500 years. You can work it out for yourself on your own calculator.
A lecturer on evolution once told me that there were never just two people because a whole population would have evolved. If that were so, then that would mean that the human population has doubled far less than 31½ times. But, to maximize believability of the evolutionary scenario, let’s say that the population started with only four people a million years ago. This would mean that the average time that the world’s population took to double was about 33,000 years (30.5 doublings). So it would have taken that many years to get to eight people, and another 33,000 years before the world’s population rose to 16. That is rather slow growth—by comparison, a Maori lady died in New Zealand in December 1984 at the age of 112, leaving 450 descendants.
Population growth is increasing currently at a rate of approximately 1.8% per annum (World Book Encyclopaedia), or doubling every 39 years.
Even if the average time that the population doubled in the past was as slow as once every thousand years (that is one twenty-fifth of the present growth rate), this would put the first pair of humans on Earth only 31,500 years ago.
Some people, not willing to believe that mankind was created only a few thousand years ago, claim that the world’s population has been almost wiped out many times. Clearly it has never been wiped out entirely. While some people will assert that the human population has been almost wiped out a number of times, without their providing any evidence to back it up, these same people get very agitated if we suggest that the population was nearly wiped out once by a great Flood in the time of Noah.
The world’s population was approximately 600 million in the year 1650 and increased to about 2,400 million by 1950. This means that it would have doubled twice in 300 years, at an average rate of once every 150 years.
Thanks to the Bible, we can trace the lineages of Jews and Arabs right back to the same patriarch, Abraham, who was born about 2167 BC and had six sons. His first son, Ishmael, was the father of the Arabs, and his second son, Isaac, was the father of Jacob, later called Israel, from whose twelve sons came the 12 tribes of Israel, better known as the Jews.
The World Book of Knowledge says that there are approximately 200 million Arabs in the world and about 18 million Jews.
This means that since Abraham’s time, his descendants through only two sons have doubled roughly 28 times at an average rate of about once every 150 years.
Now the Jewish people have undergone a tremendous amount of persecution and slaughter over the centuries. Hitler murdered over six million in concentration camps alone during the Second World War.
They must have lost many members through disease, infant mortality and starvation over the centuries just as other people groups have. Their history is replete with stories of battles and loss of life because of wars. Yet we find that their numbers have doubled a minimum of 23 times, at an average rate of once every 182 years.
We can calculate the rate of population growth starting from about 4,500 years ago, when, from the historical details found in the Bible, Noah and his family—eight in total—survived the deluge. That population has to double 29½ times to get the current world’s population of six and a half billion, at an average doubling rate of once every 152 years. Interesting, isn’t it? The Bible’s timeframe of history fits the data.


This is only logical with a very flawed understanding of genetics (as well as environmental data correlating with mass extinctions, the theory of evolution itself, etcetc). It makes sense from a certain perspective, but that perspective is not really based in fact, and eliminates far too many necessary variables.

Not mention the fact that at the time the bible was written/divined/whatever you want to call it, allegorical myth was the primary mode of espousing moral lessons. The old testament is not meant to be taken literally, from a historical context, so you shouldn't treat it as though it's providing a concrete framework with the dates... there's a reason even other Christians make fun of bible-thumpers.

________________
User Posted Image
Reviews of my Work:
You are kind of boring - Blackorion
Congratulations! Ur an asshole! - tokyo_homi
Your awesome!!! - Cherelle_Ashley
NightSwan also said that she wanted to peg me, once, but I'm not sure whether to take that as a compliment or a threat...
Pages (7) [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ] Next
You must be registered to post!