This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
1-25 of 29
TBIman · 41-45, M
@ArishMell If you are not braindead then you are good. Please enlighten me, what's the difference between being agnostic and being an atheist? I know that they are different, but I do not know how. I do not know you at all, but you seem to be an intelligent human being. Have you taken the poison injection?
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@TBIman Thank you for the compliment!
An atheist flatly denies the existence of any deity.
An agnostic doubts its existence but is more open-minded, accepting it might; seeing that whilst both believers and deniers can be vehement in their claims, neither has any real proof. Only belief.
"poison injection"? No! I am still alive. :-) I have been vaccinated against a goodly number of different diseases, and having reached 70 still reasonably fit in body and mind, I can only assume they work and none was toxic.
An atheist flatly denies the existence of any deity.
An agnostic doubts its existence but is more open-minded, accepting it might; seeing that whilst both believers and deniers can be vehement in their claims, neither has any real proof. Only belief.
"poison injection"? No! I am still alive. :-) I have been vaccinated against a goodly number of different diseases, and having reached 70 still reasonably fit in body and mind, I can only assume they work and none was toxic.
TBIman · 41-45, M
@ArishMell Well, good on you for being an open-minded agnostic, and thank you for the definition. There is proof of creation here. It's in every seed, and in your eye. Not to mention that all of us are living within a creation now. It's extremely hard to convince anyone that they have been lied to for their whole lives about where they live, so I have quit trying to awaken people to the evil in this world. I too was vaccinated against all of the childhood diseases. The COVAIDS vaccination is different though. It's an mRNA vaccine. It changes you on a cellular level.
70 wow! There's no doubt that you have lots of knowledge.
I rarely meet people of any intelligence here on Similar Worlds. It may be selfish of me but I don't want to let you go. So I'm going to try my best to send you a friend request. Feel free to deny it if you want.
70 wow! There's no doubt that you have lots of knowledge.
I rarely meet people of any intelligence here on Similar Worlds. It may be selfish of me but I don't want to let you go. So I'm going to try my best to send you a friend request. Feel free to deny it if you want.
JimboSaturn · 51-55, M
@ArishMell Poison injection? Are you hippyjoe?
TBIman · 41-45, M
@JimboSaturn No I am not hippyjoe, but if hippyjoe believes that this most recent vaccination is poison, I wholeheartedly agree.
JimboSaturn · 51-55, M
@ArishMell That comment was meant for TBIman, my bad
ninalanyon · 61-69, T
@JimboSaturn I think you directed that at the wrong person.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@TBIman I should point out I am not religious - but agnostic (doubter) not atheist (denier).
Perhaps more to the point I see no intrinsic problem why anyone cannot both believe in a Creative deity, be it "God" or any other god[dess] [i]and [/i]appreciate what science discovers about the world and the universe.
The reason is simple:
Religion believes the Universe was created by God / a god (depending on the specific faith), for his/her/its own reasons presumably, but does not try to explain [i]how[/i].
Science attempts to understand [i]how[/i], not why or by whom. It has to be theologically neutral for practical reasons too, because it works across all nations, cultures and religions.
The result for the believer in God is that the more we learn of the Universe and its contents, the greater, the more majestic and beautiful God's creation becomes. Hence if anything enhancing, not demeaning, God.
While for the non-believer, those largely-aesthetic qualities still hold but don't need a supernatural being in charge of it all.
Perhaps more to the point I see no intrinsic problem why anyone cannot both believe in a Creative deity, be it "God" or any other god[dess] [i]and [/i]appreciate what science discovers about the world and the universe.
The reason is simple:
Religion believes the Universe was created by God / a god (depending on the specific faith), for his/her/its own reasons presumably, but does not try to explain [i]how[/i].
Science attempts to understand [i]how[/i], not why or by whom. It has to be theologically neutral for practical reasons too, because it works across all nations, cultures and religions.
The result for the believer in God is that the more we learn of the Universe and its contents, the greater, the more majestic and beautiful God's creation becomes. Hence if anything enhancing, not demeaning, God.
While for the non-believer, those largely-aesthetic qualities still hold but don't need a supernatural being in charge of it all.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@TBIman I am, too.
I spent my working life at shop-floor level in trades related to science and engineering, and I have a broad lay interest in these disciplines; the science, particularly but not only Geology.
Allied to that interest in science, what does interest me is why so many people believe in pseudoscientific, or just plain wrong, ideas - but stick to them even more firmly, even aggressively, when confronted by simple logic or overwhelming evidence that shows they are mistaken.
Some might genuinely have never been taught even simple general science at school - or were taught but did not learn it. Others seem afraid of science, perhaps not only by not understanding the specific field, but also scientific method and the significance of uncertainty and probability. Some might be terrified of uncertainty.
Many people who are otherwise logically-minded and [i]do [/i]accept genuine knowledge, nevertheless do not know the nature of probability, the power of % and exponents, the difference between 'risk' and 'hazard'. They do not know the meanings of technical terms like "epicentre", "trajectory" and "exponential" used glibly and wrongly by politicians and journalists. They rely too unquestioningly or uncomprehendingly on poorly-reported or wilfully mis-represented statistics - even from genuine technical studies - in newspapers or blogs; etc.
So it's easy to see why many become easy prey for the promulgators of pseudoscience, snake-oil and plain twaddle.
'
Perhaps it is similar to beliefs in ghosts, where we cannot dismiss people reporting eerie real experiences they cannot explain so credit to "supernatural" beings. Instead we need ask what they felt, and try to establish its cause. (I have sometimes had such experiences but now know, at a very simple level, what they were.)
Or to conspiracy-fantasies, in which the less the logic, the more mundane the real explanation or the nearer to personal prejudices, the greater appeal to the febrile imagination. And the greater the commercial appeal to those cashing on on their believers!
I spent my working life at shop-floor level in trades related to science and engineering, and I have a broad lay interest in these disciplines; the science, particularly but not only Geology.
Allied to that interest in science, what does interest me is why so many people believe in pseudoscientific, or just plain wrong, ideas - but stick to them even more firmly, even aggressively, when confronted by simple logic or overwhelming evidence that shows they are mistaken.
Some might genuinely have never been taught even simple general science at school - or were taught but did not learn it. Others seem afraid of science, perhaps not only by not understanding the specific field, but also scientific method and the significance of uncertainty and probability. Some might be terrified of uncertainty.
Many people who are otherwise logically-minded and [i]do [/i]accept genuine knowledge, nevertheless do not know the nature of probability, the power of % and exponents, the difference between 'risk' and 'hazard'. They do not know the meanings of technical terms like "epicentre", "trajectory" and "exponential" used glibly and wrongly by politicians and journalists. They rely too unquestioningly or uncomprehendingly on poorly-reported or wilfully mis-represented statistics - even from genuine technical studies - in newspapers or blogs; etc.
So it's easy to see why many become easy prey for the promulgators of pseudoscience, snake-oil and plain twaddle.
'
Perhaps it is similar to beliefs in ghosts, where we cannot dismiss people reporting eerie real experiences they cannot explain so credit to "supernatural" beings. Instead we need ask what they felt, and try to establish its cause. (I have sometimes had such experiences but now know, at a very simple level, what they were.)
Or to conspiracy-fantasies, in which the less the logic, the more mundane the real explanation or the nearer to personal prejudices, the greater appeal to the febrile imagination. And the greater the commercial appeal to those cashing on on their believers!
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@TBIman I believe that I was "created" but don't need a god for that.
I do not believe anyone's IQ came from any explosion, but I [i]do[/i] accept what I [i]think[/i] you are attacking, the cosmological concepts of how the chemical elements are made.
[i]What would I believe if I were religious?[/i]
Then of course I would believe I am a work of God.
A work comprising borrowing from Nature for my mere few score and ten years, elements God had caused to be made in massive supernovae explosions thousands of millions of years ago - in a Universe made and run by God. And whatever they do with my body, I would believe God would be "recycling" those elements for new life, rocks or other natural phenomena.
All natural, God-given mechanisms, but breathtaking in scale and beauty. Amen.
(Remember: elements can only be made or destroyed by nuclear reactions. The oxygen atoms you breath in, you respire bonded with carbon atoms, but they are still oxygen and carbon inside the CO2 molecule, even though that has its own characteristics. )
Perhaps though, you might care to tell us all why you are so unpleasantly rude about anyone holding beliefs not yours.
I do not believe anyone's IQ came from any explosion, but I [i]do[/i] accept what I [i]think[/i] you are attacking, the cosmological concepts of how the chemical elements are made.
[i]What would I believe if I were religious?[/i]
Then of course I would believe I am a work of God.
A work comprising borrowing from Nature for my mere few score and ten years, elements God had caused to be made in massive supernovae explosions thousands of millions of years ago - in a Universe made and run by God. And whatever they do with my body, I would believe God would be "recycling" those elements for new life, rocks or other natural phenomena.
All natural, God-given mechanisms, but breathtaking in scale and beauty. Amen.
(Remember: elements can only be made or destroyed by nuclear reactions. The oxygen atoms you breath in, you respire bonded with carbon atoms, but they are still oxygen and carbon inside the CO2 molecule, even though that has its own characteristics. )
Perhaps though, you might care to tell us all why you are so unpleasantly rude about anyone holding beliefs not yours.
DocSavage · M
@TBIman
[quote] I am all for science. That is real science, not pseudoscience.[/quote]
No you’re not. You have no respect for science if you unwilling provide or accept evidence for your claims. You have no objectivity. You steadfastly refuse to consider any information that would show you that you’re wrong.
[quote] I am all for science. That is real science, not pseudoscience.[/quote]
No you’re not. You have no respect for science if you unwilling provide or accept evidence for your claims. You have no objectivity. You steadfastly refuse to consider any information that would show you that you’re wrong.
TBIman · 41-45, M
@DocSavage Life seems kinda pointless without design or intent, don't ya think? Dude it is logical to believe that you were created. That is why most people still believe in some sort of Creator. You need to think about everything before you dismiss a creator. Like the complex emotions that us, as human beings have.
DocSavage · M
@TBIman
No one ever said there has to be a higher purpose in life. That’s a human concept. Wishful thinking. Makes us feel more important than the simple byproduct of a cold and indifferent universe. Remember, we only are aware of a tiny , microscopic part of a n infinite universe. We can’t even interact with the rest of it.
No one ever said there has to be a higher purpose in life. That’s a human concept. Wishful thinking. Makes us feel more important than the simple byproduct of a cold and indifferent universe. Remember, we only are aware of a tiny , microscopic part of a n infinite universe. We can’t even interact with the rest of it.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@TBIman In a physical sense, of course. Just as much as any other living organism.
"Created" means only "made", or "brought into being".
If you mean in any sort of spiritual sense, no I don't believe that; but I [i]do[/i] accept that religious people believe their deity created the mechanisms for life to come about and continue.
"Created" means only "made", or "brought into being".
If you mean in any sort of spiritual sense, no I don't believe that; but I [i]do[/i] accept that religious people believe their deity created the mechanisms for life to come about and continue.
1-25 of 29