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.

 

‘Variability’ % proves God is the SPECIAL CAUSE, skeptics, why are you ignoring?

page: 9
16
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


Just look at OldThinker's post and thread history and realise that you'll never get what you're looking for. His threads always begin with an idea that has zero proof and never answers skeptics directly, but rather speaks to himself with unremarkable rhetoric while in third person and concurrently denying proven science or facts of reality.




posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:18 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 


I'm sorry you feel that way, but the fact of the matter is that I cooked spaghetti and meatballs with the Master Himself, therefore I have as much proof for my claims as you do yours.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by signoregregorio
You can never convince a religious zealot that his beliefs are inadequate because the very nature of faith is to hold on to beliefs with little validity


Personally this is not my goal. Rather, in this case the religious zealot claims to have a form of proof and invites skeptics to examine his case. It's actually the converse: that he's trying to assert that his beliefs are not only adequate but proven.


Are you listening to yourself? You're not reading what I said, you're just taking it the way you take all counter-arguments. You assume that God exists already without evidence, non-evidence is not evidence just because you have faith that something is a certain way, it's still non-evidence. Look the universe is very complex, and I doubt little fairy tales made up by intelligent men far more superior in knowledge to our primitive "peasant" ancestry, juxtaposed to the tiny gap comparable today where the majority of people in the world can read, write, participate in philosophy and mathematics with ease. People aren't stupid anymore, this # no longer is valid. And if you continue to believe in god, you yourself are an invalid.

Your only hope of salvation is not in your made up story, your messiah or your pulpit, but convincing the rest of the world that your point of view of creation is sufficient. And this is done through war, genocide, ethnic cleansing and segregation. Religious devout followers of any creed all have shared the scorn of warfare and ideology. Except for eastern thought like Hinduism, Taoism or Buddhism. Which were only called religions after the Westerners came and did their thing. Actually eastern religion is more based on psychology than theology. Simply, it's scientific. Monotheists however, believe in only war and Apocalypse and that if they do what society (their rulers, who are empowered by God) tells them that if they die before or during this alleged apocalypse they'll go to a place where everything is perfect.

Christians often scoff at Islamic fundamentalists who are suicide bombers because they believe fervently that they'll get to see a cacophony of virgins to have sex with. So they abstain in this life. How is this different than the christian point of view of going to the big pearly gates, streets paved in gold and your own private mansion? More false promises, promised to primitive people who had no former education in our ancestry. You've all been duped.

When was the last time a Christian went to a synagogue or a Rabbi held a blade of Eucharist ? They're all MAD, MAD MAD. And our generation, and the next two to follow will determine the extreme fate of religion in the zeitgeist. I have a supreme suspicion that it will be squelched entirely, or propagated as a new facade. Either way humanity is far too immature in opposition to the awesomeness of the cosmos to make such brave assumptions as God hypothesis and intelligent designings.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by DisappearCompletely
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


Just look at OldThinker's post and thread history and realise that you'll never get what you're looking for. His threads always begin with an idea that has zero proof and never answers skeptics directly, but rather speaks to himself with unremarkable rhetoric while in third person and concurrently denying proven science or facts of reality.


Indeed. I recently had or am having an exchange with him in another thread in which he insists that atheists owe christians some thanks over their freedom to not believe.


Like here, I can't get a cogent response from him. I'm beginning to suspect he's mentally disconnected or at very least just way out of his league in terms of the arguments he tends to present.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by operation mindcrime
reply to post by OldThinker
 



“You see if RANDOMNESS created intelligent life here, it should create it 94% of the time EVERYWHERE.”


Shouldn't we, for mathematical sake, at least have to known the exact size of our universe and the number of stars within it??

I mean, our closest neighbor could be 100 light years away and it could still count as "pretty close by" depending on your point of reference, right?

Peace


Hey OP!!!

Why was I not granted an answer to my question?

And why has this discussion gone on as long as it did??

Am I being stupid here?? (if so, use the sig.
)

Peace

[edit on 12-8-2010 by operation mindcrime]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by signoregregorio

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer

Originally posted by signoregregorio
You can never convince a religious zealot that his beliefs are inadequate because the very nature of faith is to hold on to beliefs with little validity


Personally this is not my goal. Rather, in this case the religious zealot claims to have a form of proof and invites skeptics to examine his case. It's actually the converse: that he's trying to assert that his beliefs are not only adequate but proven.


Are you listening to yourself? You're not reading what I said, you're just taking it the way you take all counter-arguments. You assume that God exists already without evidence, non-evidence is not evidence just because you have faith that something is a certain way, it's still non-evidence.


I assume you have mistaken my post for the original poster.
I'm an atheist.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by DisappearCompletely
 




Is there a possibility that we all end up on personalized pizzas for giant robotic aliens that have eating disorders when we die? Of course. Is there a possibility that any mothership is just a manifestation of the flying spaghetti monster's meatballs hovering in orbit? Most assuredly

Nope no possibility of that one for sure . Sorry no.


Hey, we now have a final arbiter for what is possible and impossible.

That is AWESOME.

There is a non-zero probability of ANYTHING. Which means that saying something is possible isn't saying much.

I believe that was the point that DC was making. If not, it should have been.


There's a possibility that there is a far-off planet full of intelligent beings, and via some weird temporal warp I was visible to their ancestors for afew moments, like Arthur Dent to the planet Brontitall. Therefore, I'm their God and they worship me.

It's also possible that I literally AM their god, and when I kill someone in a video game I'm literally killing someone on that planet.

Prove that those things aren't possible.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker
nophun and keepureye2thesky,
Here it is....

this will blow you away


It did me, atleast....

here: www.youtube.com...


Thanks for the vids. While I wasn't blown away on his presentation, I must
say that I am blown away by the size of these arenas he fills. While the
universe in which I am aware is rather large and there are some interesting
ways to demonstrate its gargantuan and infinite potential. I couldn't help
trying to put into perspective what he makes at one of these gigs. What do
you suppose it is? Lets say it's 25 bucks a ticket and the arena is good for
15,000 people.

These figures are more astounding and have more astronomical potential
in my book. But hey, that's just me. I make minimum wage.

All the best!



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by DisappearCompletely
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 


Just look at OldThinker's post and thread history and realise that you'll never get what you're looking for. His threads always begin with an idea that has zero proof and never answers skeptics directly, but rather speaks to himself with unremarkable rhetoric while in third person and concurrently denying proven science or facts of reality.


May I suggest...



It works wonders.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by Disappear Completely
 





I'm sorry you feel that way, but the fact of the matter is that I cooked spaghetti and meatballs with the Master Himself, therefore I have as much proof for my claims as you do yours.


You go ahead and float your boat in merky waters if you like. I ski on glass.

[edit on 12-8-2010 by randyvs]



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by traditionaldrummer
 





And if I seem rude, perhaps it's frustration because I was invited to the thread as a skeptic and have had to struggle repeatedly to get a simple question answered, something that still hasn't happened.

Ok then I can understand that.
My assesment of that arguement is still the same though. You can ask all you want you'll never get an answer.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by OldThinker


This little story of origin is the only mathematically possible solution…

You see, 94% of ALL data and the outcome of variability has at its root a statistical thing called…you ready?

Called COMMON CAUSE.

“Wow OT. Ru saying only 6% of all outcome of data is from SPECIAL CAUSE?”

“Yep, that’s exactly what I’m saying!”

“So, ok then, I’ve got a question for you”

“shoot…”

“If 94% of all data is common cause, and only 6% special cause, shouldn’t there be “EARTHS” every where? I mean Earth’s with intelligent life on it? At least in 94 out of 100 areas?”

“Great question!!!! Yep, you got it…

“You see if RANDOMNESS created intelligent life here, it should create it 94% of the time EVERYWHERE.”

“Wow OT, I never thought about it that way…so are you saying the Bible is true?”

“Yep it is the only mathematical probability.”



Hello OldThinker-

I agree that life is everywhere.

To me there are 2 things positive and negative which we are both.
1 x 1 = 1
1 x -1 = -1
-1 x -1= 1

If you do the math that is 66.6666 (infinite) and 33.3333 (infinite)

I don't think any religion is 100% correct and in fact if you would use your own numbers it would seem that 6% would not be correct using your math.

If you do the negative and positive you can look at many things in a new light. I would say though that all religions have truth but none are 100% correct and infact they tend to pull us from our true mission in life because they all want to say they are 100% true and they end up fighting over it.

I'm not a bible reader but I think it says that 666 is the mark of the beast if i'm correct? If so then why does the positive math equal 66.6666 (infinite)? To me that tells me that the bible is not 100% true.

However if you look at the "Devil" who turned Eve then it was 1 X -1 = -1
Then Eve being now -1 went to Adam 1 and turned him because
-1 x 1 = -1. Now if they were to have kids then it would be -1 x -1 = 1. Over time this would then mix up the positive and negative around the world however we have both positive and negative in us because of the "Devil" therefore we are both.

We eat and drink which are both positive things but we poop and pee which are both a negative so we are actually both. However in concerns to our "souls" we make the choice as to which we want to be (more positive or negative) more of, rather than our own bodies which are half and half. We only take our "souls" with us not our bodies and each day we are flooded with positive and negative people (most seem to be negative these days).

There was however one thing before positive and negative and that was zero. First came 0 and then 1 X -1 right after (a blink of an eye). If you times any number by 0 you get 0 no matter how big it is. So I guess I would have to say that 0 is the real "Creator" and it made positive and negative.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
Ok then I can understand that.
My assesment of that arguement is still the same though. You can ask all you want you'll never get an answer.


Of course. There is no answer and that's the point. Invoking a creator is inherently fallacious. A special cause argument (that I'm beginning to suspect the OP doesn't really understand) cannot overcome any of the problems with the creationist viewpoint.



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 02:58 PM
link   
reply to post by randyvs
 



Hey I thought I'd turn the laptop on before the flight in 20 minutes and check-in....thank you for engaging with these fine skeptics...



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
..... I'm beginning to suspect he's mentally disconnected or at very least just way out of his league in terms of the arguments he tends to present.


TD I had a vision of Rocky saying, "hey Paulie, don't be mentally irregular!"

My hope is to carve out some time tomorrow between my bride's list of chores to answer some of your questions....would you want me to review the last few pages or would you prefer to summarize the top 3 for me? Your Call...



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:05 PM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 


OT I hope I havn't overstepped my bounds. They are a tough bunch arn't
they?



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:06 PM
link   
reply to post by Trudge
 


T, Very interesting teory, thank you for your time...

OT



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by randyvs
reply to post by OldThinker
 


OT I hope I havn't overstepped my bounds. They are a tough bunch arn't
they?


I'm not sure....

I haven't read the last few pages yet....it'll have to wait to tomorrow...

Discussion and interest are afoot....that's a good thing. Please remember what Peter said, "But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect," ...and you are



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by mothershipzeta
 


Regarding your mental health post, you will never see me be that disrespectful to you bro like that...it's a JC thang...

And no I'm not on anything, but maybe a lil lager would be good....I'll check the airline coupns I have left



posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by OldThinker
 


Why thank you OT I relish the compliment.

Drummer



Of course. There is no answer and that's the point. Invoking a creator is inherently fallacious. A special cause argument (that I'm beginning to suspect the OP doesn't really understand) cannot overcome any of the problems with the creationist viewpoint.

Of course but isn't everything, in this thread , even on this site, an attempt at understanding, even the fallacious?

Fallaciousness being a matter of perspective?

[edit on 12-8-2010 by randyvs]




top topics



 
16
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join