Do you believe in God?

Do you believe in God?

  • Yes

    Votes: 71 34.6%

  • No

    Votes: 122 59.5%

  • Maybe

    Votes: 12 5.9%
  • Total voters
    205
eye exaggerate

eye exaggerate

Well-Known Member
GreenLogician said:
"do not project your attitude."
--- See, you are still doing it. Every message you are trying to project your flaws onto me, as I've been describing.
Now you are doing it again, trying to say that's what I'm doing too, as a distraction to ignore how you've been doing it.
You've done nothing else.

I've said, and done, much more. No distraction other than the truth; again, a simple copy and paste will show that you are pointing a finger at a mirror, so-to-speak.

"to say that science continues where god did it left off sounds like special pleading to me (call it what you will)."
--- Who said that? Not me.

Do I have to quote you verbatim to get the point across? That's a *tactic of yours to dismiss on technicalities. *enter C&P here* *expect more of the same in return*

'I don't know' is what should continue beyond where scientific evidence stops.
'God did it' is often fallaciously inserted there instead. It should never be invoked until the evidence suggests it; an unsolved mystery is not evidence a god did it, nor is it a miracle.

I do not look to the unsolved problems with the thought that there's a god in there somewhere. I believe in a *god, but not one that makes up for my lack of knowledge.

"The the word "miracle" in the quote is not meant to be taken so literally, that's on you."
--- Where does McKenna say what he means?

Exactly. He doesn't. But, from that quote you started this exchange based on what he didn't say.

How about that science says the universe must have come from nothing, is that meant to be taken literally?
Is anything in the quote meant to be taken at face value, or should we just imagine it says what you'd prefer it says?

I agree that it shouldn't be taken literally, that's the point of most of our exchange. I'm not looking for anyone to agree with my perception. I appreciate all things unique.

What interpretation of the quote do you want to defend?

None, really. The overarching point here is that neither *side knows exactly what *was/is pre big bang.
Click to expand...
 
GreenLogician

GreenLogician

Well-Known Member
"Do I have to quote you verbatim to get the point across?"
--- If you are going to claim I've said something that I haven't said, and have been challenged on if I said that, yes.
I granted you the same right to see what was being paraphrased. Don't just claim I say science continues 'where god did it left off', when I'd never say anything like that.
God did it simply has no place, we aren't 'left off' at the end of the 'god did it' evidence for science to pick up the reigns - there's no god did it evidence.

"from that quote you started this exchange based on what he didn't say."
--- That's absolutely backwards again, I went with precisely what he DID say, you are the one saying he didn't literally mean what he said.

You1: "The the word "miracle" in the quote is not meant to be taken so literally"
Me: "Where does McKenna say what he means?"
You2: "He doesn't."

You2 = you admitting that in You1 you were just making it up, based on what he didn't say.

And now you are accusing me of doing that. When that's exactly what you did, and exactly what I never did. I read what was written.
At this point your pattern is so consistent, I'd put money on every message from here on including it.

"The overarching point here is that neither *side knows exactly what *was/is pre big bang."
--- Sure, neither side has discovered evidence for what was pre big bang. But not everyone is honest about that.

The secular science is honest about it being a speculative, unknown area.
Many religious people are asserting for bad reasons what the answer is. None have good reasons.

Many are even running around lying to the masses about science.
I spend so much of my time working to counter misinformation about science that well funded religious preachers and organizations successfully spread to millions of people, stunting science education.
 
eye exaggerate

eye exaggerate

Well-Known Member
GreenLogician said:
"Do I have to quote you verbatim to get the point across?"
--- If you are going to claim I've said something that I haven't said, and have been challenged on if I said that, yes.
I granted you the same right to see what was being paraphrased. Don't just claim I say science continues 'where god did it left off', when I'd never say anything like that.
God did it simply has no place, we aren't 'left off' at the end of the 'god did it' evidence for science to pick up the reigns - there's no god did it evidence.

"from that quote you started this exchange based on what he didn't say."
--- That's absolutely backwards again, I went with precisely what he DID say, you are the one saying he didn't literally mean what he said.

You1: "The the word "miracle" in the quote is not meant to be taken so literally"
Me: "Where does McKenna say what he means?"
You2: "He doesn't."

You2 = you admitting that in You1 you were just making it up, based on what he didn't say.

And now you are accusing me of doing that. When that's exactly what you did, and exactly what I never did. I read what was written.
At this point your pattern is so consistent, I'd put money on every message from here on including it.

"The overarching point here is that neither *side knows exactly what *was/is pre big bang."
--- Sure, neither side has discovered evidence for what was pre big bang. But not everyone is honest about that.

The secular science is honest about it being a speculative, unknown area.
Many religious people are asserting for bad reasons what the answer is. None have good reasons.

Many are even running around lying to the masses about science.
I spend so much of my time working to counter misinformation about science that well funded religious preachers and organizations successfully spread to millions of people, stunting science education.
Click to expand...
^ do you have a Facebook page dedicated to debunking pseudoscience by chance?

-

Let's go back to the beginning (yuk yuk)...

Pada’s quote: The big bang theory describes the origin of the universe and it has evidence that backs it up


Me: Please provide, eh? The math breaks down at singularity. "Science requests, "Give us one free miracle and we'll explain the rest." And the one free miracle is the appearance of all the matter and energy in the universe and all the laws that govern it from nothing at a single instant."


You: It's actually only religious apologists who insist that if God didn't do it, it had to be a miracle of the universe coming from nothing. (Now, if I was into tactics I'd question your use of the word "nothing" right here... But that would add another unnecessary ellipse into this system, therefore, nonsensical - perhaps even unbalanced.)

It's just a plain lie to mislead people about the science, to build a straw man of the science and drive people away from it.

There are many speculative hypotheses about where everything came from beyond the extent of our knowledge about the big bang.

They are all far more rigorously checked for consistency with known physics, than 'god did it'.

A few of them have found ways that the universe could have come from a nothing-like state, no miracles required.

Don't believe that those are the only alternatives to goddidit. It's a lie.

Don't believe they require a miracle either - they are constructed out of physics as we currently understand it, extended in speculation beyond the current limits of the evidence.

Goddidit is not constructed out of any of the principles of physics, and it specifically violates many of them.

Going from 'I don't know', i.e. 'the math breaks down at the singularity' to 'it must have been magic' is classic theist fallacy town - projected onto science and scientists as a straw man.

^

It's your mistake claiming there's a miracle where the math of General Relativity breaks down, not the science's.

Did I say that it is a miracle? Please quote were I wrote that, specifically, verbatim, also showing the intent that you've projected to the quote. Metaphor, period.

Science doesn't say 'beyond that there's a miracle', it says 'we need to figure out how gravity fits in with quantum physics to investigate further back in time; we currently don't know the answer'.
 
chillok

chillok

Well-Known Member
Just found, this will be a good read. I vote yes. Be it Karma or God, I've had really lucky outcomes so many times in life. Too many to be random. I do good, I try, and it comes back to me. I want to believe it's someone or something tugging the strings..
 
Drowning-Man

Drowning-Man

Well-Known Member
chillok said:
Just found, this will be a good read. I vote yes. Be it Karma or God, I've had really lucky outcomes so many times in life. Too many to be random. I do good, I try, and it comes back to me. I want to believe it's someone or something tugging the strings..
Click to expand...
Yeah can you hear the voice?
 
iHearAll

iHearAll

Well-Known Member
I'm sure it's an extraterrestrial. Have you met Satan yet? Awful chum but explains God quite well.
 
T

ThaiBaby1

Well-Known Member
chillok said:
Just found, this will be a good read. I vote yes. Be it Karma or God, I've had really lucky outcomes so many times in life. Too many to be random. I do good, I try, and it comes back to me. I want to believe it's someone or something tugging the strings..
Click to expand...
Thats nice, I want to believe that I'm gonna win the lottery and screw all the Victoria's secret models.
 
Sir Napsalot

Sir Napsalot

Well-Known Member
Do I believe in God... that's a helluva question. I believe I have a "soul" or "spirit", so I'm open to supernatural possibilities, but I don't believe the bible gets it right.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top