Creationism Update [11/5/2014]

[Mangled*]

May 11th, 2014

• God still doesn't exist.
• Majority vote decides afterlife doesn't exist.

Also, in other news:

• demoniac93 has still not found the house in Frankfurt where the second coming of christ lives so that he can complete his quest of saving the lord Jesus Christ from time travelling Romans.

This non-automated topic post was sponsored by Soldat Enhanced - The definitive Soldat mod.

Go Team-Reality!

[DarkCrusade]

You are back. <3

[Mangled*]

I'm in the area. Wanted to see if Graham is an atheist yet, in all honesty.

[Fawkzy]

Welcome back you intellectually gifted überglorious motherfucker.

[Mittsu]

ughh this is unbearable

[15th_account]

I myself was hoping you'd have turned to agnosticism by now, Mangled. We have Carl Sagan and Neil deGrasse Tyson on our side.

[Mangled*]

Welcome back you intellectually gifted überglorious motherfucker.

*Raises hand in acknowledgement.*

ughh this is unbearable

What is, sweetie pie?

I myself was hoping you'd have turned to agnosticism by now, Mangled. We have Carl Sagan and Neil deGrasse Tyson on our side.

As much as I like them both, Agnosticism is too pissweak for my tastes. It's a form of exceptionalism that I fundamentally disagree with, and if it isn't exceptionalism it makes you a whispy asshole that people can't stand to be around.

In the question of whether ghosts or unicorns or any other supernatural entity (except for God) exists or not, you would not so willingly side with being Agnostic as to their existence. Apparently if a fictional being creates the universe that makes all the difference for some people.

If something isn't knowable then the default logical assumption that has to be made is 0. I can make up some imaginary creature in my head that you can't be sure doesn't exist somewhere in the universe. Gonna be agnostic about that too? How about if someone is being tried for murder and there's absolutely no indication or evidence that they did it? Gonna sit there all day saying you can't be sure they're guilty or not so court remains in session for all eternity?

[Akinaro]

I'm a Spiderologist, I believe in Spiderman :] and Lolicon... and sometimes Aliens...

[Mittsu]

all this "intellectual" jerking off, reminds me of that special group of "intellectuals" on this forum, how was it called again?

Fawkzy's comment made me vomit

[Fawkzy]

Fawkzy's comment made me vomit

Your post has majorly motivated me to write more verbally creative things like these.

[15th_account]

I myself was hoping you'd have turned to agnosticism by now, Mangled. We have Carl Sagan and Neil deGrasse Tyson on our side.

As much as I like them both, Agnosticism is too pissweak for my tastes. It's a form of exceptionalism that I fundamentally disagree with, and if it isn't exceptionalism it makes you a whispy asshole that people can't stand to be around.

In the question of whether ghosts or unicorns or any other supernatural entity (except for God) exists or not, you would not so willingly side with being Agnostic as to their existence. Apparently if a fictional being creates the universe that makes all the difference for some people.

If something isn't knowable then the default logical assumption that has to be made is 0. I can make up some imaginary creature in my head that you can't be sure doesn't exist somewhere in the universe. Gonna be agnostic about that too? How about if someone is being tried for murder and there's absolutely no indication or evidence that they did it? Gonna sit there all day saying you can't be sure they're guilty or not so court remains in session for all eternity?

Sure, agnosticism is weak. It's a very broad label. Though I would regard atheism as scientifically dishonest because it's a fixed position. I'm actually just applying the method of scientific skepticism to everything, even religion and your imaginary creatures. Agnosticism is just the stance on religion that seems to closest match the current scientific understanding.

If you want absolute truth and a fast answer then the scientific method isn't for you. It can only give successive approximations of reality.

In my skeptical tool bag I can pull out awesome heuristics such as Occam's razor and a list of logical fallacies. Your accusation of murder, as well as your imaginary creature and the Christian creation myth all make assumptions and lack in evidence and falsifiability, therefore making them likely to be bunk.

[Mangled*]

all this "intellectual" jerking off, reminds me of that special group of "intellectuals" on this forum, how was it called again?

It was Team Reality. Me, ds dude, homerofgods and iDante.

I think this group is called "Veterans users group" xD

I love too people that hide lack of something to say behind ego boosting pseudo intellectual writting

No. That ain't it, son. See above.

Sure, agnosticism is weak. It's a very broad label. Though I would regard atheism as scientifically dishonest because it's a fixed position. I'm actually just applying the method of scientific skepticism to everything, even religion and your imaginary creatures. Agnosticism is just the stance on religion that seems to closest match the current scientific understanding.

If you want absolute truth and a fast answer then the scientific method isn't for you. It can only give successive approximations of reality.

In my skeptical tool bag I can pull out awesome heuristics such as Occam's razor and a list of logical fallacies. Your accusation of murder, as well as your imaginary creature and the Christian creation myth all make assumptions and lack in evidence and falsifiability, therefore making them likely to be bunk.

I don't disagree with your method. The difference is the philosophical position you choose to take when something can't be known.

My position:   No evidence / unknowable = doesn't exist / might as well not exist.
Your position:   No evidence / unknowable = undeterminable / undeterminable.

Scientifically these stances are equal. Philosophically they are different. Your mistake is in interpretting atheism to be deterministic and an absolute position. The majority of atheists are so on the same basis as the majority of agnostics. If evidence emerged we would change our position, therefore it's not an absolute position.

[Mittsu]

i think the easiest and safest way to aproach the subject is:

no evidence / unknowable = you should live and function like it doesn't exist until it's proven to exist

this way you don't deny existance of something in terms of absolutes and don't get yourself stepping into logical traps, but at the same time it clearly makes fairytales/religions non-legitimate

because i don't see a problem in trying to push boundaries and discover, the issue is that people live according to religion like what their scriptures say are facts, which they obviously aren't. Have fun with theology, but leave the reality and life out of it (until it's proven to be true!)


btw,

[Blacksheepboy]

How about this: God created all of us to know, love, and serve us. I firmly believe that God made us to also be like Him: Gods in our own right. Now I guess I can't create the universe, but who gives because my believe is founded in the Big Bang mainly, so I guess God sort of set up all this stuff to happen... I don't know, the theory is full of bullshit and unanswered questions unfortunately.

REGARDLESS, I take my stance to be that reincarnation is the way of the world, and that we have all lived multiple lives, and will continue to do so, until God knows when. This is on the founding that each individual has a mind, body, and soul, and while the body perishes, the soul retains emotional data, and the mind the seat of wisdom. So each time you're reincarnated, you sort of pass on your wisdom to the next body, while retaining your soul and mind.

All in all, I actually have no facts, other that internal revelation, which makes me fuckin' special. Yup.

Nice to see some people.

[Mangled*]

How about this: God created all of us to know, love, and serve us. I firmly believe that God made us to also be like Him: Gods in our own right. Now I guess I can't create the universe, but who gives because my believe is founded in the Big Bang mainly, so I guess God sort of set up all this stuff to happen... I don't know, the theory is full of bullshit and unanswered questions unfortunately.

REGARDLESS, I take my stance to be that reincarnation is the way of the world, and that we have all lived multiple lives, and will continue to do so, until God knows when. This is on the founding that each individual has a mind, body, and soul, and while the body perishes, the soul retains emotional data, and the mind the seat of wisdom. So each time you're reincarnated, you sort of pass on your wisdom to the next body, while retaining your soul and mind.

All in all, I actually have no facts, other that internal revelation, which makes me fuckin' special. Yup.

Nice to see some people.

My memory was you used to have at least some sense. I'm clearly mistaken. Perhaps I was away too long? Anyway, here's what's wrong with you and people like you:

my believe is founded in the Big Bang mainly, so I guess God sort of set up all this stuff to happen... I don't know, the theory is full of bullshit and unanswered questions unfortunately.

You try to legitimize your personal nonsense beliefs by incorporating them into what you recognize as scientific concensus, but you obviously don't understand why Big Bang theory is scientific concensus.

Big Bang theory is founded on a mountain of evidence that has been collected since the invention of the telescope. It is supported by: The theory of gravity, Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, light-wave shifting, mass spectroscopy, gravitational-lensing, the speed of light, microwave background radiation, radiotelescopy, and every accurate an verifyable astronomical observation that has ever been made.

Your belief that God started everything: Based solely on your own personal desire to believe in God, likely because your parents raised you to believe that.

I take my stance to be that reincarnation is the way of the world, and that we have all lived multiple lives, and will continue to do so, until God knows when. This is on the founding that each individual has a mind, body, and soul, and while the body perishes, the soul retains emotional data, and the mind the seat of wisdom. So each time you're reincarnated, you sort of pass on your wisdom to the next body, while retaining your soul and mind.

Reincarnation is a ridiculous notion. Where did all the souls go when extinction events happened on earth? For thousands of years on end where the total population of living creatures on earth was at an extreme low. Oh the souls... they just took a break didn't they. They're this inexplicable thing that just has their own magical will to persist because they're just pure energy and-and-and... Dear christ boy you've a head full of shit. You whispy hippy know-nothing.

The soul retains emotional data? Explain why brain injuries and neurological disorders are associated with physical damage to the brain. Explain stroke victims having paralysis associated on the side of their body where the cells in their brain died? By what mechanism is a soul escaping from a corpse and imbuing new life somewhere else? You are your body, you have one life and when you die that's it, game over. Now get over it and stop fantasizing that you're special and believing in Voodoo.

[Blacksheepboy]

Now I look bad in the eyes of Mangled. I'll post a response sometime soon.


My belief in God is solely founded on, well, absolutely nothing other than ancient religious teachings. They, looking at it now, simply take the concept for granted, as if it's always been a thing. So, in that respect, my opinion is groundless.

My belief in reincarnation is only a personal opinion, again unfounded.

Unfortunately, religion in general is fraught with holes and completed bizarre beliefs. Take the Catholics for instance and their founding of the Eucharist.

So, in that respect, I only go to church because I admire the people that participate. I have only one occasion for any founding in some spiritual existence or whatever: I once had a boxer's fracture, and some missionary healed it. My only founding is that I had a fair amount of pain and discomfort, and the next moment, I was able to take my wrist out of its cast. Um, I normally don't believe in miracles, so whatever happened is dubious at best. It's just my personal experience with the supernatural.

I think the belief in providence or "God's will" supersedes man's ability and action and power to be perfectly independent. I believe that God created us in some bizarre fashion, perhaps being the first man on Earth (which is kind of my interpretation of a God figure), but that he thereafter left us ENTIRELY to our own devices, because if we were to be created in His image, he has perfect freedom... At the very best, my beliefs are not traditional, but still based on pretty much nothing.

I understand you probably wouldn't take the Bible as any valid argument, and my belief is that, when these discussions arise, the Bible is groundless, as it's an article of religion, but men, with beliefs semi-similar to my own wrote it, and then the Catholic Church took the writings and compiled the Bible (in the council of Trent? goodness knows). So, that's the Bible in a nutshell.

Other than that, there is the problem of death, and eternity. Obviously, people would argue that our "souls" (whatever they are) are, like God, eternal. That since God is eternal, we are also eternal--that we didn't have a beginning, because we were always at least an idea in God's mind. Now, how the fuck did God exist before He took it upon Himself (alright, fuck the capitalizing) to live on the world? I don't have any clue. My belief is that God is a man, at least now, but honestly, there arises the problem. My asshat solution is that God existed before the world took form, but only as a soul, maybe the "first soul," or whatever. But again, that leaves the problem, where did man come from and how would God magically take form as a human being. Again, not a fucking clue.

So honestly, with factual evidence, God doesn't exist, and neither do our "souls." But there have been freak show circumstances, such as near-death experiences, that have brought out the evidence for us to have souls. Such as: there was an individual that "died," but was revived, and he knew bizarre facts about the hospital environment around him, like cracks in light lenses in some room or whatever.

/too long to read


OH, my argument for souls "waiting around" is that they exist within their mothers as eggs and so forth--that they still exist within reality. And perhaps they are aborted, and well, FIND ANOTHER BODY WOOHOO ARGUMENTS R LEGIT.

[Mangled*]

have only one occasion for any founding in some spiritual existence or whatever: I once had a boxer's fracture, and some missionary healed it. My only founding is that I had a fair amount of pain and discomfort, and the next moment, I was able to take my wrist out of its cast.

Your hand was already in a cast, therefore you had already recieved treatment. Did this missionary per chance say something like "you've been wearing that cast for 2 weeks, you can probably take it off now"?

Anyway there is no possible way you're for real with all the tosh you're putting up. You just want to see me in action again, I appreciate the gesture. Wait until Graham gets here, we'll have a ball.

[jrgp]

Wait until Graham gets here, we'll have a ball.

I think it's highly unlikely he's ever coming back.

[Blacksheepboy]

Your hand was already in a cast, therefore you had already recieved treatment.

Pshaw, that's no argument, and not really relevant to what I said. But, yeah, although Graham is probably not coming back, I'll wait.

[Mangled*]

Pshaw, that's no argument, and not really relevant to what I said.

I'll be the judge of that. How long did you wear the cast?