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.
Originally posted by Credenceskynyrd
Originally posted by jiggerj
better because they were given a magic rock.
I know of people cured by taking fake medicine (placebo effect).
sorry what- you were extolling the virtues of science, I gave you an example of religion, it was specifically faith that saved this fella- believe in science then believe in Jesus according to your logic-
But, I don't know of anyone that re-grew a lost arm through his faith in Jesus.
What an odd thing to say, whoever suggested such a thing?
Jesus = Magic rock. Believe in both. Don't believe in either. But, don't believe in one and not the other.
how very odd you are- and I will be able to believe in what I want thank you, same way as you believe what science will be able to achieve in the future- you are a bit of a proto- nostradamus?
Originally posted by MamaJ
There is a knowing from the nature of things.
I KNOW there will be Earthquakes.
I KNOW there will be volcanic eruptions.
I KNOW there will be changes to the Earth.
I KNOW the Universe is into the green thing cause it recycles.
I KNOW my mom loves me.
I KNOW there is a creator ... a force... that enables me to breathe without me being aware of such breath.
There are things I just KNOW without having "faith" because the nature of things that surrounds me is evident there need not be faith, but a knowing. Its proof that brings about a knowing.
But that's just it. how can you know without evidence
its neutral by nature
how its used can be interpreted
I would never, ever bother to try and make them question their faith..because even if they are thinking rainbows is god winking at them, the effect of their faith being a net positive for society outweighs "truth". But many use their faith as some sort of weapon to use either literally or more intellectually..and that is when their "knowing" needs to be smacked down.
Originally posted by Siberbat
An Atheist has no basis to condem the criminal for their actions, as morals are relative.
Originally posted by NorEaster
reply to post by grainofsand
If it can be proven that the existence of a creature that fully fits the traditional description of God, completely and irreconcilably clashes with the fundamental structural tenets of physical reality - making what is obvious and provable about reality incompatible with what would have to be obvious and provable about reality for such a God to exist in the way that it is traditionally depicted - then it's not a faith-based assertion to deny that such a God exists as traditionally depicted.
The overwhelming evidence that no such being exists is the lack of direct impact that such a being would have to have on the rest of reality. Not on the established structure, as is the case of the wind moving leaves on a tree, while being invisible, but on the very nature of the established structure itself, as a direct ramification of its existence and the impact on the basic existential "recipe" (for lack of a more descriptive analogy). Too many tenets (causation, ramification, precedence, quantization, emergence) that have been concretely identified and repeatedly proven to be systemic to what exists as real, would have to be completely vacated on behalf of this God's ability to be what it's been described as being.
And not just it's omnipotence, omniscience and omnipresence - which would be impossible enough. The very claim of its infinite existence violates the basis of physical reality, and this means that even if it could ever exist - which it can't, but due to a host of logical conundrums that I haven't got the room for here - its extreme incompatibility with the basic structure of the reality that we exist within would completely deny it access to us in any manner possible. In short, if such a thing does exist, then it has never reached in a imposed its will on us, and it sure as hell never became flesh and dealt among us. The very nature of what it is would permanently isolate it from us, and us from it.
For me, this is proof enough that God doesn't exist. And I'm not relying on an faith here. This was just a skeletal overview of the reality issues involved. There's a lot more that fleshes these bones out to a degree that ends up being pretty damn impressive when all's said and done.
Faith is what's required to embrace a belief in something that can be debunked to the extent that the existence of a being that fits the traditional depiction of God can be debunked. It doesn't require faith to connect the myriad of dots that are available to be connected in pursuit of establishing the Atheist's claim of there being no such God. All it takes is honesty, discipline, and the effort required.
Oh....and Happy Easter.
edit on 3/31/2013 by NorEaster because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Snsoc
And,colloquially speaking, anything you turn to in your hour of need for strength and support, whatever you are devoted to above all other things, that is your religion. We've chosen the invisible dude in the sky. You've chosen a non-provable theory based on currently limited evidence. To each their own.
reply to post by MamaJ
What came before Science?
In many different threads I have been accused of having a similar religious blind faith during my considerations of peer reviewed science matters
faith in the research of others, while being able to test their claims, is very different to faith in old scriptures which are unable to be verified in any way.
Originally posted by DestroyDestroyDestroy
reply to post by slowisfast
All that is knowable in this universe is the existence of the self, the rest is entirely based on faith/belief.
With that being said, just because the scientific method can't explain everything doesn't mean we should bury our heads in a book full of fairy tales. We know now that lightning isn't god displaying his anger, the earth isn't the center of the universe, and that our planet is older than 6000 years, all thanks to science.
Now, please explain to me how lack of belief in god is akin to religion?
Originally posted by UncleBingo
The funny thing about denying a belief in something. You have to first recognize that there is belief in it in order to deny it.
SO those whom do not believe in God, have to acknowledge it as an existing possibility before they can hold their belief against it.
I like contradiction, and this from a certain point of view is just that.edit on 31-3-2013 by UncleBingo because: (no reason given)
reply to post by Credenceskynyrd
there is nothing significant about it just water coming from their eyes and the love they think they feel is nothing more than the products of physical jiggery pokery within their bodies
Originally posted by slowisfast
reply to post by grainofsand
Drop the word prove, then, if it's hanging you up. My question is straight forward. Do you choose to answer?
Do you believe the scientific method should be able to be applied to all that is(hypothetically) knowable in this Universe?edit on 30-3-2013 by slowisfast because: (no reason given)