Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-18-2010, 12:13 PM
 
Location: Somewhere out there
9,496 posts, read 12,963,596 times
Reputation: 3767

Advertisements

ovcatto said, profoundly:

Quote:
"Au contraire, a theory can not rise from the lowly level of hypothesis without proof that it is indeed a fact. A theory is observable, and predictive, however theory leaves room for the fact that every minute aspect of a theory may remain unknown, which is why a theory is repeatedly the basis for further exploration."
Exactly, precisely, huzzah and congratulations!

But then, if the Christians cleave to this as "proof" that we can't ever accept Evolution, for example, then we must, being the unbiased objectivists we all claim to be, apply it equally to any proof of Godly existence. That it's "written in the bible" is not good enough for precisely the reasons I provide in the next paragraph. Given that He is supposedly all-knowing and omnipresent and doing of great miracles even to this day, and regularly answering some folks' prayers, where's all the obvious proofs?

Example: L. Ron Hubbard has a well written book (he WAS, after all, previously an accomplished science-fiction writer..) that "documents" all his various beliefs. Why is it so roundly dismissed by Christians as fake? After all, "It Is Written", and it doesn't contradict itself as the bible does so often (too many authors, too many translations, written back when they had no reliable means to test anything, or any concept! That always spells TROUBLE!).

I recall Dawkin's excellent conceptualization that statistically we can neither disclaim god nor a non-god. It's just that there's no statistical equality in those two options. The mass (and ongoing growth) of irrefutible evidence continuously shifts the fulcrum in this believability see-saw well towards the non-godly option, all while the Christians frantically cling to the argument that "if it's just an hypothesis, then we have to give God equal weight! It's 50:50!"

Nope. Not true. The evidence has forever changed that. And who wants to be on the wrong end of the intellectual see-saw when the rest of the world willingly steps off the other end?

Ouch! That hurts! Remember?

Last edited by rifleman; 02-18-2010 at 12:18 PM.. Reason: typogenations!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Religion and Spirituality
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top