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: SuperFrog
originally posted by: uncommitted
It just dawned on me you were referring to my comment that was saying our biggest failure was to eat and scratch wasn't it? You are obviously unfamiliar with the work of the more sadly departed and in my opinion much more interesting Douglas Adams who made a comment along those lines in one of the 'Hitchhiker guide to the Galaxy' set of books. It was a joke, although only partly as apart from human intervention it seems to have worked for most of the other sentient species on earth.
So, joke or not, couldn't your comment be regarded as not-progressive??
originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: uncommitted
You've lost track of the train of thought. You insinuated he couldn't find "another job". He had many. Anyways.
His thoughts on whether god exists or not is a very small percentage of what he talked about. He was an antitheist and identified as such. He spoke against religion, and yes I would say he had expertise there. That's what knowledge brings a person. Now is it up to him, or any other non-believer, to prove god doesn't exist? No it's not. The burden of proof is on the one positing the claim. This is true about anything someone claims to be objectively truthful.
originally posted by: SuperFrog
If you think you can help that discussion, feel free... use friend Google to find that Church actually killed progress for over 1K years... Do you ever wonder why in middle age biggest progress was in Islam world?!
originally posted by: Lucid Lunacy
a reply to: uncommitted
As if you read any of his books
I don't need to show any evidence there is no god. You really don't get this whole burden of proof thing do you. I lack belief in god because there is a lack of evidence in support of it. Same reason I lack belief in other things. Same reason you do outside of god context.
Please familiarize yourself with this
P.S. I'm saying he had expertise in being an anti-theist. This has to do with religion.
originally posted by: windword
a reply to: nullafides
The medieval Church inserted itself in all aspects of life, and continues do try to do so even today. From marriage, death and birth (property) rights, to what musical notes could be played, what history could be taught, what science was was acceptable, what medicine was acceptable, even what thoughts you could have, were all aspects of life that the Church sought to control, many times through the edge of a sword.
I am saying that those who studied various arts of science and humanities were actually able to do so in spite of the Catholic Church by mingling amongst the Churches very own.
originally posted by: nullafides
a reply to: windword
Listen....you can either read up on history, or not.
Everyone makes their own choices in life. Feel free to make your own.
I don't have to prove existence, that's what the word faith means. There's no burden of proof attached to it.
The difference is that a faith requires no proof
Tricky to get your head round, I don't blame you if you find it too much effort.