It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Science, Meet Your Maker!

page: 11
10
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lasheic
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


You should probably become acquainted with a dictionary.


That doesn't answer my question though does it.

Belief in evolution takes faith, for you believe in something you can not prove. Your definitions were correct, what was wrong is the way you interpreted them.

Typical of you

- Con

[edit on 13-7-2008 by Conspiriology]




posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 04:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by newday

Originally posted by re22666

that it the biggest load of crap i have ever read. saying something, no matter how loudly nor how often, does not make what you say true. spreading it out over lengthy wordy paragraphs also does not make it true. look up the definition of the word "faith" and see if maybe you didnt mean to write that in some other language that may work with what you say. in English, you seem to miss what faith is completely.



Exactly what part of the things I said is crap, the idea of God being real and providing anyone who believes with evidence of His existence, is that the part you have a problem with?

Is it the idea that there is a difference between belief and faith spiritually speaking?

That should be easy even for someone like you to understand, because the word most often translated into ( believe or faith ) in english, in its original language is a homonym, with as many as four known meanings and perhaps more.

Maybe science is your God and you resent me calling it a tool?

Take comfort in the fact that I said the same of religion it is a tool also, merely a means to an ends.

Are you afraid of God?

If there is no such thing as God what is there to fear?

Does the thought that God gives individuals who believe HIm the ability to operate miraculous power greater than that of science, frighten you?





let's just start with the thing about faith needing evidence and then babbling on using the word faith over and over in a manner befitting a lame mad libs article.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 04:32 PM
link   
reply to post by Conspiriology
 


Do I believe we are the product solely of mutation and selection? No. Nor do I accept purely Darwinian explanations for Evolution. I think there's a lot more to it than that, and the modern theory of Evolution is far more elaborate, eloquent, and comprehensive than anything that Darwin or Neo-Darwinists proposed. Darwins theories are merely the basis of Evolution, and play a large part. However they are not the be-all, end-all of evolution.

Science progresses.

Proof of it? Well, I could link you to information about Endrogenous Retroviruses, our Fused Chromosome, or other such DNA/RNA analysis - however I doubt you're read them and would rather just brush them off by calling them BS with no rhyme or reason simply because it's not compatible with your already established concepts.

To me, I've seen enough evidence that evolution has been proven well beyond any reasonable doubt.

Proof: Merriam-Webster

1 a: the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact b: the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning2obsolete : experience3: bb]something that induces certainty or establishes validity4archaic : the quality or state of having been tested or tried; especially : unyielding hardness5: evidence operating to determine the finding or judgment of a tribunal6 aplural proofs or proof : a copy (as of typeset text) made for examination or correction b: a test impression of an engraving, etching, or lithograph c: a coin that is struck from a highly polished die on a polished planchet, is not intended for circulation, and sometimes differs in metallic content from coins of identical design struck for circulation d: a test photographic print made from a negative7: a test applied to articles or substances to determine whether they are of standard or satisfactory quality8 a: the minimum alcoholic strength of proof spirit b: strength with reference to the standard for proof spirit; specifically : alcoholic strength indicated by a number that is twice the percent by volume of alcohol present


[edit on 13-7-2008 by Lasheic]



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by newday

Originally posted by re22666

that it the biggest load of crap i have ever read. saying something, no matter how loudly nor how often, does not make what you say true. spreading it out over lengthy wordy paragraphs also does not make it true. look up the definition of the word "faith" and see if maybe you didnt mean to write that in some other language that may work with what you say. in English, you seem to miss what faith is completely.



Exactly what part of the things I said is crap, the idea of God being real and providing anyone who believes with evidence of His existence, is that the part you have a problem with?

Is it the idea that there is a difference between belief and faith spiritually speaking?

That should be easy even for someone like you to understand, because the word most often translated into ( believe or faith ) in english, in its original language is a homonym, with as many as four known meanings and perhaps more.

Maybe science is your God and you resent me calling it a tool?

Take comfort in the fact that I said the same of religion it is a tool also, merely a means to an ends.

Are you afraid of God?

If there is no such thing as God what is there to fear?

Does the thought that God gives individuals who believe HIm the ability to operate miraculous power greater than that of science, frighten you?





i guess mainly, i am not clear on what you think "faith" is and therefor what you were tryng to state about it, or with it, or whatver that mess was. you say faith is evidence based? since when? what evidence? faith is a horse of every color, but i apparently missed all this "evidence" it is based on.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 05:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lasheic

To me, I've seen enough evidence that evolution has been proven well beyond any reasonable doubt.


Depends on which kind you are talking about.


However they are not the be-all, end-all of evolution


They were never the be all end all of anything, I was just mereley asking a question.


Proof of it? Well, I could link you to information about or other such DNA/RNA analysis - however I doubt you're read them and would rather just brush them off by calling them BS with no rhyme or reason simply because it's not compatible with your already established concepts.


Most of the time, I read that kind of thing and it is equivocations substantiating macro evolution (transmutation to an entirely new species) by proving micro evolution. Seems a regular practice among ever lying illusions of evolutionists.

Ok so looking at your definition of proof, it is understandable then why your belief takes faith because you cannot prove it and must believe what ever it is by faith. This is where you are not accepting the truth. Then again, you always did have a problem in that area.

You always seem to look for the lies in things, the contrived contradictions the discontextualized strings passed off as gross mis-representations.

Even great scholars in the field of Science know the difference between that which they believe is true and that which they believe and can not prove but believe it by Faith.

They just deny it because they asscociate it with religious faith and people like that are afraid of God cooties and being perceived by their peers as having lost logic syndrome. So they do the most illogical thing by rationalizing their way out of a faith based premise using a lot of wordsmith games sort of like you do but haven't quite mastered the art of circular semantics yet but you have the dis-information part down pat.

Whether they believe it or not, it is still faith nevertheless.

People like that are not fooling anyone especially those who have a better understanding of faith than you'll ever know, or, get out of one of your googled link like you think and learn as you go posts.




I believe, but I cannot prove, that all life, all intelligence, all creativity and all 'design' anywhere in the universe, is the direct or indirect product of Darwinian natural selection. -- RICHARD DAWKINS,



I got to hand it to ya lash,, no one impresses me,,

less than you do

- Con











[edit on 13-7-2008 by Conspiriology]



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by re22666

i guess mainly, i am not clear on what you think "faith" is and therefor what you were tryng to state about it, or with it, or whatver that mess was. you say faith is evidence based? since when? what evidence? faith is a horse of every color, but i apparently missed all this "evidence" it is based on.



It is not about what I think faith is, it is about what you think it is.

You are incorrect to say that faith in God is not evidence based.

A person may believe in some religious idea blindly, or in some scientific theory like evolution without evidence, but if a person has genuine faith in God, it is because God has given the person evidence, otherwise it is not faith in God it is belief.

People make the mistake you are making, of thinking God does not manifest Himself in definable measurable ways in the lives of others, simply because they have never seen it in their own life.

You can't have faith in a person until they give you evidence, the most you can do before that time is believe them.

If you believe in me, trust what I am telling you, when I ask you to lend me a hundred dollars and say I will pay you back next Friday, do you have faith in me before I have paid you back, or do you simply believe me if you lend me the money?

Once I pay you back you have the evidence of my word, that is when you will have faith in me, what could you have before then?

God is no different, if you believe Him, trust that He will do as He says He will do, when He has fulfilled His word, and you will have witnessed God manifest in some real way with your own eyes, that is when you can say you have faith in God, before that time all you have at best is a belief.

Faith is the ultimate evidence based reality, a mans faith is his evidence in the unseen things of God.

Once you have witnessed me pay you back the hundred dollars you loaned me the first time, it is easier to believe me the next time I ask to borrow money, because you have faith in me now.

The first time I borrowed money from you, you may have had a few sleepless nights wondering if I was going to pay you back or not.

The first time it is belief, after you wittiness me fulfill my word, then you have faith in me, your faith is the evidence that I paid you back like I said I would, it is your faith, your evidence I gave you, in the unseen things of trust between us.

We cannot give ourselves faith we can only believe.

Belief is what we give God, faith is what God gives us for our belief.

God offers a greater power than science or religion, before the power of the almighty God science and religion are nothing.

Don't make the mistake of convincing yourself that because you have never seen the power of God evidenced in your own life, that it is not real or manifested in the lives of others.



posted on Jul, 13 2008 @ 07:20 PM
link   
yeah yeah yeah you gather evidence that supports your beliefs, it's not really anything conclusive, all ive seen you do in the couple threads ive lurked in is explain the science, and then support it by saying it is an effect of faith followed by saying that the definitions science provides are wrong, not a direct quote, but something id believe youd say, "if the big bang created the universe, what created the big bang? god did" and you follow that by something that you believe to leave the origins of the universe indeterminate, the bottom line is, i really dislike that you keep trying to do this, and im not going to stop you by posting, but at least i get my opinion in, and get to say, WE DONT KNOW, SCIENCE IS JUST THE BEST EXPLANATIONS WE CAN COME UP WITH, WITH THE EVIDENCE PROVIDED, you're ignorant if you think you can think we can know how things work this early in civilization, atleast science admits new evidence and doesnt try to define things for once and for all, # that # n word



posted on Jul, 14 2008 @ 08:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by newday

Originally posted by re22666

i guess mainly, i am not clear on what you think "faith" is and therefor what you were tryng to state about it, or with it, or whatver that mess was. you say faith is evidence based? since when? what evidence? faith is a horse of every color, but i apparently missed all this "evidence" it is based on.



It is not about what I think faith is, it is about what you think it is.

You are incorrect to say that faith in God is not evidence based.

A person may believe in some religious idea blindly, or in some scientific theory like evolution without evidence, but if a person has genuine faith in God, it is because God has given the person evidence, otherwise it is not faith in God it is belief.

People make the mistake you are making, of thinking God does not manifest Himself in definable measurable ways in the lives of others, simply because they have never seen it in their own life.

You can't have faith in a person until they give you evidence, the most you can do before that time is believe them.

If you believe in me, trust what I am telling you, when I ask you to lend me a hundred dollars and say I will pay you back next Friday, do you have faith in me before I have paid you back, or do you simply believe me if you lend me the money?

Once I pay you back you have the evidence of my word, that is when you will have faith in me, what could you have before then?

God is no different, if you believe Him, trust that He will do as He says He will do, when He has fulfilled His word, and you will have witnessed God manifest in some real way with your own eyes, that is when you can say you have faith in God, before that time all you have at best is a belief.

Faith is the ultimate evidence based reality, a mans faith is his evidence in the unseen things of God.

Once you have witnessed me pay you back the hundred dollars you loaned me the first time, it is easier to believe me the next time I ask to borrow money, because you have faith in me now.

The first time I borrowed money from you, you may have had a few sleepless nights wondering if I was going to pay you back or not.

The first time it is belief, after you wittiness me fulfill my word, then you have faith in me, your faith is the evidence that I paid you back like I said I would, it is your faith, your evidence I gave you, in the unseen things of trust between us.

We cannot give ourselves faith we can only believe.

Belief is what we give God, faith is what God gives us for our belief.

God offers a greater power than science or religion, before the power of the almighty God science and religion are nothing.

Don't make the mistake of convincing yourself that because you have never seen the power of God evidenced in your own life, that it is not real or manifested in the lives of others.


ok one last time. get a dictionary, look up faith, then tell me it is evidence based and not really um...say... pretty much the antithesis of evidence based. thats all im saying, you dont know what the word means, in english. you cannot make up your own definitions for words and make that an argument; especially when your definition completely contradicts the actual one.



posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 08:04 PM
link   
so how does this end? where it stands, science wins.



posted on Jul, 15 2008 @ 08:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by re22666
so how does this end? where it stands, science wins.


Well,, That all depends on what your definition of "winning" is.

hehe hehe

- Con



posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 02:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Conspiriology

Originally posted by re22666
so how does this end? where it stands, science wins.


Well,, That all depends on what your definition of "winning" is.

hehe hehe

- Con


at this point my definition would be standing here victoriously no longer challenged.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 07:59 AM
link   
I'd just like to applaud all the hard work done by the rational, reasonable, scientific minds here, who have decided to rise above supersition and the belief in a flying omnipresent fairy-man in the sky. You guys make my life easier by not having to type it all out myself! Well done!



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin
I'd just like to applaud all the hard work done by the rational, reasonable, scientific minds here, who have decided to rise above supersition and the belief in a flying omnipresent fairy-man in the sky. You guys make my life easier by not having to type it all out myself! Well done!


GuFaW!!! LMAO



You guys make my life easier by not having to type it all out myself!


AS IF!



= cON



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 10:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by re22666

at this point my definition would be standing here victoriously no longer challenged.


victorious in what way?

there is a man standing on the train tracks and a man next to the train tracks. the man next to the tracks says to the other man, "hey, you may want to move. train's comin soon."

the man on the track pauses for a second and says in a very strong voice "you have been telling me that for the past hour, WILL YOU JUST SHUT UP! nothing has happened to me, nothing will happen to me. we havent seen a train EVER, and we will NEVER see a train."

the other man says to him "but you standing on the tracks, according to this train track safety manual you really shouldn...."

"I am sick and tired of listening to you quote from that stupid manual!" the other man interrupted "how old is that thing anyway? look the binding is falling apart"

concerned, the man off the tracks says "but im sure the writer knew what he was talking abou...."

"the writer?" the man on the tracks interrupts again. "the whole damn thing was writen by secrataries, what do they know? besides look at this" he said as he snatched the book from the other's hands. "see this? it says standing on the tracks CAN be dangerous, not that it IS. your twisting the book to suit your own means. here, let me show you something. see this grass." he said point to a group of grass that grew over the track. "this would not be he if trains where on this road. the train would cut it as it passed by. does that look cut to you?"

"no, but..."

"have you ever seen a train with your own eyes?"

"no, b..."

"have you ever heard a train, or felt it go by?"

"no..."

"so you are telling me to watch out for something you have never seen, heard, touched, or in anyway measured, based on what? a crusty moldy old book?"

"yea but...."

"you are so ignorant! you superstitious little git! I have won the arguement, you have provided no evidence to convince me otherwise."

as the 2 had this conversation, the man on the tracks failed the see the train rolling down the tracks straight toward him.



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 11:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566

Originally posted by re22666

at this point my definition would be standing here victoriously no longer challenged.


victorious in what way?

there is a man standing on the train tracks and a man next to the train tracks. the man next to the tracks says to the other man, "hey, you may want to move. train's comin soon."

the man on the track pauses for a second and says in a very strong voice "you have been telling me that for the past hour, WILL YOU JUST SHUT UP! nothing has happened to me, nothing will happen to me. we havent seen a train EVER, and we will NEVER see a train."

the other man says to him "but you standing on the tracks, according to this train track safety manual you really shouldn...."

"I am sick and tired of listening to you quote from that stupid manual!" the other man interrupted "how old is that thing anyway? look the binding is falling apart"

concerned, the man off the tracks says "but im sure the writer knew what he was talking abou...."

"the writer?" the man on the tracks interrupts again. "the whole damn thing was writen by secrataries, what do they know? besides look at this" he said as he snatched the book from the other's hands. "see this? it says standing on the tracks CAN be dangerous, not that it IS. your twisting the book to suit your own means. here, let me show you something. see this grass." he said point to a group of grass that grew over the track. "this would not be he if trains where on this road. the train would cut it as it passed by. does that look cut to you?"

"no, but..."

"have you ever seen a train with your own eyes?"

"no, b..."

"have you ever heard a train, or felt it go by?"

"no..."

"so you are telling me to watch out for something you have never seen, heard, touched, or in anyway measured, based on what? a crusty moldy old book?"

"yea but...."

"you are so ignorant! you superstitious little git! I have won the arguement, you have provided no evidence to convince me otherwise."

as the 2 had this conversation, the man on the tracks failed the see the train rolling down the tracks straight toward him.




posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566
as the 2 had this conversation, the man on the tracks failed the see the train rolling down the tracks straight toward him.




hehe who ARE you!

You never cease to amaze me miriam, excellent analogy !

- Con

[edit on 18-7-2008 by Conspiriology]



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 11:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by miriam0566

"yea but...."

"you are so ignorant! you superstitious little git! I have won the arguement, you have provided no evidence to convince me otherwise."

as the 2 had this conversation, the man on the tracks failed the see the train rolling down the tracks straight toward him.



There are so many who will say that is just doom and gloom talk, even though they know and are aware that we all must die.

The only point I would disagree with you on is that the man warning the one standing in the tracks is with what you said here:


Originally posted by miriam0566

"so you are telling me to watch out for something you have never seen, heard, touched, or in anyway measured.



I am telling people to watch out for something I have seen, heard, touched, and can be measured, just as so many before me have done.

The apostle John said:

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

But I understand that in your analogy you had you speak in a parable to your audience, and I only wished to say that I know the spiritual can be measured and experienced.



[edit on 18-7-2008 by newday]



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by newday


The only point I would disagree with you on is that the man warning the one standing in the tracks is with what you said here:


Originally posted by miriam0566

"so you are telling me to watch out for something you have never seen, heard, touched, or in anyway measured.



I am telling people to watch out for something I have seen, heard, touched, and can be measured, just as so many before me have done.

The apostle John said:

That which was from the beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life;

This then is the message which we have heard of him, and declare unto you, that God is light, and in him is no darkness at all.

But I understand that in your analogy you had you speak in a parable to your audience, and I only wished to say that I know the spiritual can be measured and experienced.

[edit on 18-7-2008 by newday]


If it didn't split hairs in some way some how ,,

it wouldn't be a post from you newday

sheesh

- Con



posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by newday

I am telling people to watch out for something I have seen, heard, touched, and can be measured, just as so many before me have done.


yes, but they refuse to acknowledge that. to atheists, god is a fairy tale with no evidence, nevermind asking where the unvierse came from, never mind the complexity of life, nevermind the harmony of the bible or the archeologic evidence to support it. besides all those things there is no evidence to them.

they see what they want and are blind to what they dont want to see.

remember, there were people that heard god's voice itself, and were still not believers.



posted on Jul, 19 2008 @ 02:57 AM
link   


SCIENCE HAS PROVEN GOD TO EXIST

Everything that begins to exist has a cause. The universe began to exist. Therefore the universe has a cause. That cause we call God.


i also find this to be complete bull#, you say that the belief your fighting against proves yours right, yet you do realize that the two beliefs ARE DIFFERENT, so "Everything that begins to exist has a cause." IS VOID, i disagree, anything human created has a cause, there was a motivation behind it, there would only be a cause to the universe if god existed, that's circular logic right there, "The universe began to exist. Therefore the universe has a cause. That cause we call God." and here you imply that the reason god exists is because the universe exists WHICH IS AGAINST THE RELIGIOUS BELIEFS, GOD CREATED THIS MASSIVE UNIVERSE IN YOUR BELIEFESFSADSAG FGUCK



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 8  9  10    12 >>

log in

join