> >> On Sunday, November 11, 2012 2:19:36 AM UTC+13, BV BV wrote:
> >> You still don't get it or are you really that thick??? I don't have to prove
> >> anything - theists do!!
> >> ***Actually no.
> >> "Theists" simply believe.
> >> It's the Atheists who are leaping about, gibbering and shaking with fury
> >> because Theists believe.
> >> Is it because YOUR faith might be threatened????
> >I don't a toss what idiots believe in, fairies,Gods or goblins.
> >You still have not grasped the very basic scientific method have you?
> >You must provide evidence if your claim is extraordinary. My claim is
> >for status quo and has no wild beliefs. I do not have to prove anything.
> Except your claim isn't for 'status quo'. You are making a minority
> claim, which therefore makes YOUR claim the extraordinary claim.
Minority Claim - please explain what my "minority claim" is?
I understood I made no claims at all, do tell?
You seem to think if that 90% of a population believe in Santa Clause then that makes it right??!!! (and the remaining 10% must be wrong) Tell me, were you disappointed as a child when you were told there was no Santa?? Or did you argue with your parents? You are mixing up what is known as popular belief and myth with scientific fact. It does not matter that (say) 1 billion Hindus believe in reincarnation, they would still have to prove that this is true and it is an extraordinary claim.
On Friday, November 16, 2012 4:44:20 AM UTC+13, conway caine wrote:
> ****Beliefs are beliefs, Heid.
> You cannot prove your beliefs and I cannot prove mine.
Dunno what your Heid has to do with the argument but you are still quite wrong.
I do not have a belief because you cannot believe a negative, otherwise I could say you believe in the non-fairy at the bottom of your garden!! Now don't be silly and go and annoy some tourists or something you sill redneck.
On Friday, November 16, 2012 4:54:01 AM UTC+13, conway caine wrote:
I don't a toss what idiots believe in, fairies,Gods or goblins.
You still have not grasped the very basic scientific method have you?
You must provide evidence if your claim is extraordinary.
***They claim the existence of dark matter and dark energy.
Can't prove it but they believe it exists.
They hypothesize.
Such an approach is fundamental to the Scientific Method.
So much for your argument then...............
> On Friday, November 16, 2012 4:54:01 AM UTC+13, conway caine wrote:
> I don't a toss what idiots believe in, fairies,Gods or goblins.
> You still have not grasped the very basic scientific method have you?
> You must provide evidence if your claim is extraordinary.
> ***They claim the existence of dark matter and dark energy.
> Can't prove it but they believe it exists.
> They hypothesize.
> Such an approach is fundamental to the Scientific Method.
> So much for your argument then...............
The dark matter thing is only a hypothesis to try and explain the missing mass in the universe. My understanding is that proof of this claim has not been found and that therefore another explanation will probably be sought.
Now here is the big difference - in the Scientific method, without proof or verification ideas are changed. It is not a matter of belief. the dark matter thing is an extraordinary claim and there is no evidence - so it will most likely be dropped. You can discuss it of course but we don't worship it or claim it sends us supernatural healing or the like. This is not religion.
> >> >> On Sunday, November 11, 2012 2:19:36 AM UTC+13, BV BV wrote:
> >> >> You still don't get it or are you really that thick??? I don't have to prove
> >> >> anything - theists do!!
> >> >> ***Actually no.
> >> >> "Theists" simply believe.
> >> >> It's the Atheists who are leaping about, gibbering and shaking with fury
> >> >> because Theists believe.
> >> >> Is it because YOUR faith might be threatened????
> >> >I don't a toss what idiots believe in, fairies,Gods or goblins.
> >> >You still have not grasped the very basic scientific method have you?
> >> >You must provide evidence if your claim is extraordinary. My claim is
> >> >for status quo and has no wild beliefs. I do not have to prove anything.
> >> Except your claim isn't for 'status quo'. You are making a minority
> >> claim, which therefore makes YOUR claim the extraordinary claim.
> >Minority Claim - please explain what my "minority claim" is?
> >I understood I made no claims at all, do tell?
> Your claim is that deities do not exist. The majority say that they
> do.
> >You seem to think if that 90% of a population believe in Santa
> >Clause then that makes it right??!!! (and the remaining 10% must
> >be wrong)
> Fortunately, I don't feel particularly responsible for how things
> 'seem' to you. I'm only responsible for what I say, not for the
> stupid inferences you elect to draw.
> >You are mixing up what is known as popular belief and myth with
> >scientific fact.
> No. You are mixing up science and religion, while not understanding
> science. Science has no such rule as the one you keep trying to cite
> about how "the extraordinary claim requires proof (with inference that
> others do not)".
> >It does not matter that (say) 1 billion Hindus
> >believe in reincarnation, they would still have to prove that
> >this is true
> And so does the person making the counter claim have to prove that
> their claim is true.
> >... and it is an extraordinary claim.
> Nonsense. It is a claim. Exactly like your claim. If they must
> provide proof, so must you. If YOUR rule (not science's) is that
> "only extraordinary claims require proof", then the minority claim is
> obviously the 'extraordinary' one and deists don't need to prove
> anything and you do.
Fred, in case it has escaped you, we no longer live in the dark ages when a person had to prove that he/she was not a witch! Your level of intelligence is hardly high enough to hold a decent discussion. If you believe in rubbish then you must back up your claims to others who don't. not that I care if you do believe in Santa.
> >> >> >> On Sunday, November 11, 2012 2:19:36 AM UTC+13, BV BV wrote:
> >> >> >> You still don't get it or are you really that thick??? I don't have to prove
> >> >> >> anything - theists do!!
> >> >> >> ***Actually no.
> >> >> >> "Theists" simply believe.
> >> >> >> It's the Atheists who are leaping about, gibbering and shaking with fury
> >> >> >> because Theists believe.
> >> >> >> Is it because YOUR faith might be threatened????
> >> >> >I don't a toss what idiots believe in, fairies,Gods or goblins.
> >> >> >You still have not grasped the very basic scientific method have you?
> >> >> >You must provide evidence if your claim is extraordinary. My claim is
> >> >> >for status quo and has no wild beliefs. I do not have to prove anything.
> >> >> Except your claim isn't for 'status quo'. You are making a minority
> >> >> claim, which therefore makes YOUR claim the extraordinary claim.
> >> >Minority Claim - please explain what my "minority claim" is?
> >> >I understood I made no claims at all, do tell?
> >> Your claim is that deities do not exist. The majority say that they
> >> do.
> >> >You seem to think if that 90% of a population believe in Santa
> >> >Clause then that makes it right??!!! (and the remaining 10% must
> >> >be wrong)
> >> Fortunately, I don't feel particularly responsible for how things
> >> 'seem' to you. I'm only responsible for what I say, not for the
> >> stupid inferences you elect to draw.
> >> >You are mixing up what is known as popular belief and myth with
> >> >scientific fact.
> >> No. You are mixing up science and religion, while not understanding
> >> science. Science has no such rule as the one you keep trying to cite
> >> about how "the extraordinary claim requires proof (with inference that
> >> others do not)".
> >> >It does not matter that (say) 1 billion Hindus
> >> >believe in reincarnation, they would still have to prove that
> >> >this is true
> >> And so does the person making the counter claim have to prove that
> >> their claim is true.
> >> >... and it is an extraordinary claim.
> >> Nonsense. It is a claim. Exactly like your claim. If they must
> >> provide proof, so must you. If YOUR rule (not science's) is that
> >> "only extraordinary claims require proof", then the minority claim is
> >> obviously the 'extraordinary' one and deists don't need to prove
> >> anything and you do.
> <
> >Fred, in case it has escaped you, we no longer live in the dark ages
> >when a person had to prove that he/she was not a witch!
> DeadDick, in case it has escaped you, no one ever said we did and you
> are engaging in yet another total non sequitur.
> >Your level of intelligence is hardly high enough to hold a decent
> >discussion.
> Yet you're the one who has to resort to insult because you're too
> bloody stupid to understand what's said to you or to understand how
> the 'science' you're trying to hide behind actually works.
> >If you believe in rubbish then you must back up your claims to
> >others who don't. not that I care if you do believe in Santa.
> Quite right. One man's trash is another man's treasure (and vice
> versa). I'm still waiting for you to present your proof for the
> rubbish YOU have faith in.
You can't handle the truth fred! You don't have the brains!! Why do you think you are known as Brain Dead Fred!! I have explained it again and again and you cannot follow. I have even shown you a video. Now go and do something more at your level like farting in a paper bag.
> >> >> >> On Sunday, November 11, 2012 2:19:36 AM UTC+13, BV BV wrote:
> >> >> >> You still don't get it or are you really that thick??? I don't have to prove
> >> >> >> anything - theists do!!
> >> >> >> ***Actually no.
> >> >> >> "Theists" simply believe.
> >> >> >> It's the Atheists who are leaping about, gibbering and shaking with fury
> >> >> >> because Theists believe.
> >> >> >> Is it because YOUR faith might be threatened????
> >> >> >I don't a toss what idiots believe in, fairies,Gods or goblins.
> >> >> >You still have not grasped the very basic scientific method have you?
> >> >> >You must provide evidence if your claim is extraordinary. My claim is
> >> >> >for status quo and has no wild beliefs. I do not have to prove anything.
> >> >> Except your claim isn't for 'status quo'. You are making a minority
> >> >> claim, which therefore makes YOUR claim the extraordinary claim.
> >> >Minority Claim - please explain what my "minority claim" is?
> >> >I understood I made no claims at all, do tell?
> >> Your claim is that deities do not exist. The majority say that they
> >> do.
> >> >You seem to think if that 90% of a population believe in Santa
> >> >Clause then that makes it right??!!! (and the remaining 10% must
> >> >be wrong)
> >> Fortunately, I don't feel particularly responsible for how things
> >> 'seem' to you. I'm only responsible for what I say, not for the
> >> stupid inferences you elect to draw.
> >> >You are mixing up what is known as popular belief and myth with
> >> >scientific fact.
> >> No. You are mixing up science and religion, while not understanding
> >> science. Science has no such rule as the one you keep trying to cite
> >> about how "the extraordinary claim requires proof (with inference that
> >> others do not)".
> >> >It does not matter that (say) 1 billion Hindus
> >> >believe in reincarnation, they would still have to prove that
> >> >this is true
> >> And so does the person making the counter claim have to prove that
> >> their claim is true.
> >> >... and it is an extraordinary claim.
> >> Nonsense. It is a claim. Exactly like your claim. If they must
> >> provide proof, so must you. If YOUR rule (not science's) is that
> >> "only extraordinary claims require proof", then the minority claim is
> >> obviously the 'extraordinary' one and deists don't need to prove
> >> anything and you do.
> <
> >Fred, in case it has escaped you, we no longer live in the dark ages
> >when a person had to prove that he/she was not a witch!
> DeadDick, in case it has escaped you, no one ever said we did and you
> are engaging in yet another total non sequitur.
> >Your level of intelligence is hardly high enough to hold a decent
> >discussion.
> Yet you're the one who has to resort to insult because you're too
> bloody stupid to understand what's said to you or to understand how
> the 'science' you're trying to hide behind actually works.
> >If you believe in rubbish then you must back up your claims to
> >others who don't. not that I care if you do believe in Santa.
> Quite right. One man's trash is another man's treasure (and vice
> versa). I'm still waiting for you to present your proof for the
> rubbish YOU have faith in.
Perhaps it would also help to examine what a religion is. The Encyclopedia of Philosophy, in its article on Religion, lists some characteristics of religions. The more markers that are present in a belief system, the more "religious like" it is. Because it allows for broader grey areas in the concept of religion, I prefer this over more simplistic definitions we can find in basic dictionaries. Read the list and see how atheism fares :
Belief in supernatural beings (gods).
A distinction between sacred and profane objects.
Ritual acts focused on sacred objects.
A moral code believed to be sanctioned by the gods.
Characteristically religious feelings (awe, sense of mystery, sense of guilt, adoration), which tend to be aroused in the presence of sacred objects and during the practice of ritual, and which are connected in idea with the gods.
Prayer and other forms of communication with gods.
A world view, or a general picture of the world as a whole and the place of the individual therein. This picture contains some specification of an over-all purpose or point of the world and an indication of how the individual fits into it.
A more or less total organization of one's life based on the world view.
A social group bound together by the above.
To try and claim that atheism is a religion requires, it should be pretty obvious from the above, a radical ad hoc redefinition in what it is that "being a religion" is supposed to mean, resulting in a radically equivocal use of the new term-- if atheism is a religion, then just what isn't a religion?
On Saturday, November 17, 2012 9:59:16 PM UTC+13, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> If you don't manage to fix your broken formatting, I'm going to quit
> bothering with you. I'm tired of fixing it for you.
You mentioned Buddism and Atheism. How ignorant can you get!??
You have obviously never been in a Buddist temple (I have) and seen the ritual that they have ringing bells all day and chanting. They also believe in reincarnation, that the soul travels to monkeys and insects etc on the way up.
I expect you will ask me to prove to you that they are wrong which idiots like yourself do. I would say, if you see a complete lunatic in the street who says he wants to kill you because God told him to, would you accept that too? Would you expect the police to prove that he was wrong in court or accept that it was all God! I think that even somebody with your simple intelligence would accept that
the lunatic had got it wrong and the court did not have to prove that it was God who put him up to it.
On Saturday, November 17, 2012 7:11:10 AM UTC+13, conway caine wrote:
> ***They claim the existence of dark matter and dark energy.
> Can't prove it but they believe it exists.
> They hypothesize.
> Such an approach is fundamental to the Scientific Method.
> So much for your argument then...............
The dark matter thing is only a hypothesis to try and explain the missing mass in the universe. My understanding is that proof of this claim has not been found and that therefore another explanation will probably be sought.
Now here is the big difference - in the Scientific method, without proof or verification ideas are changed. It is not a matter of belief. the dark matter thing is an extraordinary claim and there is no evidence - so it will most likely be dropped. You can discuss it of course but we don't worship it or claim it sends us supernatural healing or the like. This is not religion.
***Come now, Heid. Many scientists "believe" in the existence of both Dark Matter and Dark energy.
Even though they cannot prove it.
And there are anomalies out there which tend to support the hypothesis.
You can't handle the truth fred! You don't have the brains!! Why do you think you are known as Brain Dead Fred!! I have explained it again and again and you cannot follow. I have even shown you a video. Now go and do something more at your level like farting in a paper bag.
> On Saturday, November 17, 2012 7:11:10 AM UTC+13, conway caine wrote:
> > ***They claim the existence of dark matter and dark energy.
> > Can't prove it but they believe it exists.
> > They hypothesize.
> > Such an approach is fundamental to the Scientific Method.
> > So much for your argument then...............
> The dark matter thing is only a hypothesis to try and explain the missing
> mass in the universe. My understanding is that proof of this claim has not
> been found and that therefore another explanation will probably be sought.
> Now here is the big difference - in the Scientific method, without proof or
> verification ideas are changed. It is not a matter of belief. the dark
> matter thing is an extraordinary claim and there is no evidence - so it will
> most likely be dropped. You can discuss it of course but we don't worship it
> or claim it sends us supernatural healing or the like. This is not religion.
> ***Come now, Heid. Many scientists "believe" in the existence of both Dark
> Matter and Dark energy.
> Even though they cannot prove it.
> And there are anomalies out there which tend to support the hypothesis.
What is wrong with your Heid? Can it not follow a simple argument?
If you want scientists who believe idiotic things without proof then look no further than global warming caused by man.
I am happy to accept that there are some idiotic Scientists out there that sometime do treat a conjecture like a religion in that they cling to it until death. However, in the vast majority of cases this is not the case. This is more a matter of pride and their career. If you make your life out of saying man made global warming then you are not likely to want to say you are wrong. In that sense they are mimicking religion. A blind faith without proof. They do not worship or pray however and there is the dividing point. Hope yer Heid is better.
On Sunday, November 25, 2012 7:37:25 AM UTC+13, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Well, if God put him up to it then surely he must be innocent!
After all, isn't God the creator and all knowing God - he must have his reasons and clearly led the man to do the deed.
As for atheists having strange rituals, maybe you can enlighten us on those as I am unaware of such rituals - do tell us what these rituals are - would they be getting up and going to work in the morning by any chance you moron?
On Sunday, November 25, 2012 7:37:25 AM UTC+13, Fred J. McCall wrote:
Well, if God put him up to it then surely he must be innocent!
After all, isn't God the creator and all knowing God - he must have his reasons and clearly led the man to do the deed.
As for atheists having strange rituals, maybe you can enlighten us on those as I am unaware of such rituals - do tell us what these rituals are - would they be getting up and going to work in the morning by any chance you moron?
****No, Atheists gather up in small groups and curse the Christians.
>On Saturday, November 17, 2012 7:11:10 AM UTC+13, conway caine wrote:
>> ***They claim the existence of dark matter and dark energy.
>> Can't prove it but they believe it exists.
>> They hypothesize.
>> Such an approach is fundamental to the Scientific Method.
>> So much for your argument then...............
>The dark matter thing is only a hypothesis to try and explain the missing >mass in the universe. My understanding is that proof of this claim has not >been found and that therefore another explanation will probably be sought.
>Now here is the big difference - in the Scientific method, without proof or >verification ideas are changed. It is not a matter of belief. the dark >matter thing is an extraordinary claim and there is no evidence - so it will >most likely be dropped. You can discuss it of course but we don't worship it >or claim it sends us supernatural healing or the like. This is not religion.
>***Come now, Heid. Many scientists "believe" in the existence of both Dark >Matter and Dark energy.
>Even though they cannot prove it.
>And there are anomalies out there which tend to support the hypothesis.
On Sunday, November 25, 2012 8:43:44 PM UTC+13, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> killwhang <gyansor...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On Sunday, November 25, 2012 7:37:25 AM UTC+13, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> >Well, if God put him up to it then surely he must be innocent!
> Oh? Why is that?
> >After all, isn't God the creator and all knowing God - he must have
> >his reasons and clearly led the man to do the deed.
> So what? If I have my reasons and I lead somebody to shoot you, do I
> get the medal or does he?
> >As for atheists having strange rituals, maybe you can enlighten
> >us on those as I am unaware of such rituals - do tell us what
> >these rituals are -
> You display them all, including your own religion-specific 'cant'.
> >would they be getting up and going to work
> >in the morning by any chance you moron?
> I think you'll find most of those folks doing that are deists, you
> dismal dimbulb.
> --
You make statements and are not capable of backing them up. Wild statements that atheists have rituals - yet you do not state what these rituals are.
Dumber and dumber! It's a sorry sight to see. no wonder you delete your posts after a few days, it is rather embarrassing for you.
> >On Sunday, November 25, 2012 7:37:25 AM UTC+13, Fred J. McCall wrote:
You make statements and are not capable of backing them up. Wild statements that atheists have rituals - yet you do not state what these rituals are.
Dumber and dumber! It's a sorry sight to see. no wonder you delete your posts after a few days, it is rather embarrassing for you.
****One of your rituals is attacking anyone who paints your belief system as a religion.
(Can you say "Knee Jerk"?)
;=)
> > >On Sunday, November 25, 2012 7:37:25 AM UTC+13, Fred J. McCall wrote:
> You make statements and are not capable of backing them up. Wild statements
> that atheists have rituals - yet you do not state what these rituals are.
> Dumber and dumber! It's a sorry sight to see. no wonder you delete your
> posts after a few days, it is rather embarrassing for you.
> ****One of your rituals is attacking anyone who paints your belief system as
> a religion.
> (Can you say "Knee Jerk"?)
Were that true then it is not generic of all atheists and therefore not a ritual.
Most of em couldn't give a shit, but being caring I don't like you to be ignorant for all of your life.
On Tuesday, November 27, 2012 5:16:26 AM UTC+13, conway caine wrote:
> ****One of your rituals is attacking anyone who paints your belief system > as
> a religion.
> (Can you say "Knee Jerk"?)
Were that true then it is not generic of all atheists and therefore not a ritual.
Most of em couldn't give a shit, but being caring I don't like you to be ignorant for all of your life.
****The benighted I know spend a good deal of time and energy debunking the beliefs of others.
All of yez are peas in a pod, I say.
> On Tuesday, November 27, 2012 5:16:26 AM UTC+13, conway caine wrote:
> > ****One of your rituals is attacking anyone who paints your belief system
> > as
> > a religion.
> > (Can you say "Knee Jerk"?)
> Were that true then it is not generic of all atheists and therefore not a
> ritual.
> Most of em couldn't give a shit, but being caring I don't like you to be
> ignorant for all of your life.
> ****The benighted I know spend a good deal of time and energy debunking the
> beliefs of others.
> All of yez are peas in a pod, I say.
I am beginning to doubt what little faith I had in the US education system that brought people like yourself and Freddy into the world. To believe and worship in God is one thing and you are quite entitled to do so, but to claim that those who do not are somehow religious quite escapes me and the majority of the free thinking world. Exactly where do athesists go and pray? Who do they pray to?
What rituals do they all share? Cooking breakfast maybe - is that a religion by your yardstick?
On Sunday, November 11, 2012 2:19:36 AM UTC+13, BV BV wrote:
> What is Islam?
> thank you
You show a total lack of understanding of almost everything. I don't know how you manage it. I used to think there was hope for thickies like yourself but I am no longer sure. You may need the frontal lobotomy.
On Thursday, November 29, 2012 5:13:39 AM UTC+13, conway caine wrote:
> All of yez are peas in a pod, I say.d"
I am beginning to doubt what little faith I had in the US education system that brought people like yourself and Freddy into the world. To believe and worship in God is one thing and you are quite entitled to do so, but to claim that those who do not are somehow religious quite escapes me and the majority of the free thinking world. Exactly where do athesists go and pray? Who do they pray to?
What rituals do they all share? Cooking breakfast maybe - is that a religion by your yardstick?
*** "the majority of the free thinking world"?
How would you define "free thinking world?
Would that be limited to those who hold your views?
As to praying Atheists, do they not earnestly pray (read "Beseech") that all Christians would disappear in a puff of smoke?
On Sunday, November 11, 2012 2:19:36 AM UTC+13, BV BV wrote:
You show a total lack of understanding of almost everything. I don't know how you manage it. I used to think there was hope for thickies like yourself but I am no longer sure. You may need the frontal lobotomy.
*****You being an engineer, is this the best you can come up with as a rebuttal to Fred's observations?
