| Off Topic > Off Topic |
| SATAN WANTS YOUR CHILDREN |
| << < (37/78) > >> |
| Mateo:
--- Quote from: Inv3rted on November 12, 2009, 09:03:02 PM ---I'll incite the point that I have made many times before. We have shown how almost impossibly improbable complexity can be arrived at through gradual stages of selection and random mutation. --- End quote --- Alright. I can agree with this. --- Quote from: Inv3rted on November 12, 2009, 09:03:02 PM ---God, being the creator of all that exists, is undoubtedly more complex than all that exists. This complexity is so improbable that the only rational way that he could exist was if he was the end result of random change influenced by a form of selection and therefore was not in existence since the beginning of everything. This is why I bring up the notion that God is insanely improbable. --- End quote --- It is said God just does exist, he really wasn't ever made. He always will and always has. (At least this is my take on God.) --- Quote from: Inv3rted on November 12, 2009, 09:03:02 PM ---A counterpoint to this argument that I just thought of invokes the anthropic principle. We may be here pondering God's existence only because this insanely improbable occurrence happened. This is a weak argument, though, because the same can be said about why we exist. --- End quote --- You could also take the fact that science exists as a counterpoint to that argument. We are naturally curious, which led to religion. Since we are naturally curious, however, once we found a better way to satisfy our curiosity (science) that way was chosen to be the norm. This would mean that religion is no more than an outdated way to explain the previously unexplainable. |
| Muffinmix:
--- Quote from: Rughugger on November 12, 2009, 08:29:29 PM --- --- End quote --- Yeah I can't argue with all that. After all you didn't even skim through my post from the looks of it, let alone attempt to understand any of it. But this really REALLY did get to me: --- Quote ---Yes, you made a pretty decent argument in the case, but with what I know about sciences, I have also come up with counter arguments that can make sense if people cared to take the time to theorize, philosophize, and keep an open mind about the possibilities instead of immediately dismissing them because it's religious. It's almost like it's a thing people fear. --- End quote --- You know nothing about sciences, you can't even grasp what Open Mindedness is let alone what goes into scientific theories. It isn't the voluntary relinquishing of your mind to ANY idea floating out there, that's not open mindedness that's just being someone's bitch. Saying we fear religion or god is excruciatingly ironic, seeing as we first considered him and then dismissed him as highly improbable, not even considering religious implications. If we feared religion, feared Hell, feared godly omnipotence, we would have no choice but to conform to religion as it would be an active threat to our lives. We would be controlled by fear of the thing we would worship like so many others. Scientists do not fear Science, if they do they are in the wrong loving career path. Scientists embrace discovery and novel ideas with a critical open mind. You fear science, and you are not fit to think critically about the sciences. You fali to dismiss god being an improbability even when rebuked with the very characteristics he is appraised of having, all being shown as irrationalities, therefore you are the one who is close minded. Scientists WILL pour sweat and blood into their search for answers, they can back up their claims with more evidence then you can even fathom ("HUH??!?!?"), the forget do you even do? You can't even be bothered reading a few paragraphs. I'm done, have fun being confused forever, forget if I care anymore. |
| Inv3rted:
The main problem I have with the way believers approach science is that they make an assumption and then seek evidence for it. This breaks the scientific method, and is yet another way religion has taken a toll on society. |
| Unwritten Calender:
--- Quote from: IceBlue on November 12, 2009, 05:13:25 AM ---/faceplant --- End quote --- I'm not the only one saying that :D |
| Muffinmix:
--- Quote from: Inv3rted on November 12, 2009, 09:19:31 PM ---The main problem I have with the way believers approach science is that they make an assumption and then seek evidence for it. This breaks the scientific method, and is yet another way religion has taken a toll on society. --- End quote --- No that's the first steps in a correct approach to solving any problem. The issue arises in that religion assumptions are eternal, while scientific assumptions are subject to change upon the status of the evidence. You could say Religious groups make assumptions and refute evidence. |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |