Science, Meet Your Maker!, page 11
Pages: <<  8    9    10    11    12  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 10 times


reply posted on 13-7-2008 @ 03:51 PM by Conspiriology
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]


reply posted on 13-7-2008 @ 04:31 PM by re22666
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.


reply posted on 13-7-2008 @ 04:32 PM by Lasheic
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]



reply posted on 13-7-2008 @ 04:37 PM by re22666
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.


reply posted on 13-7-2008 @ 05:57 PM by Conspiriology
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]


reply posted on 13-7-2008 @ 06:30 PM 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.


reply posted on 14-7-2008 @ 08:24 PM by re22666
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.



reply posted on 18-7-2008 @ 10:59 AM 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.


reply posted on 18-7-2008 @ 11:27 AM by newday
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.



Pages: <<  8    9    10    11    12  >>    ^^TOP^^



EVOLUTION - Did YOU Know?
  Posted 18 days ago with 24 member flags
"I was raised an atheist"- Professor František Vyskočil
  Posted 8 days ago with 6 member flags
Evolutionary theory: Gaps and not yet understood phenonemon
  Posted 19 days ago with 3 member flags
The meaning or point of existence or life
  Posted 11 days ago with 2 member flags