Atheists Haven (Not heaven).

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
A yes the 'My God is better than your God' argument! All Hail the God of science.

Yes, my non-existing god is better than your god.

Do you feel like you made sense there, or was it more of a brain fart?

Anyway, had twitehead not beaten me to it, that would also be my reply: Science has proven itself to work. If you must personify it, I'd say it's more of a trusty companion. Sometimes she's in the wrong, but gladly admits it when it's pointed out to her (as we all should, really).

Originally posted by RJHinds
You try to lump the long, long, ago fairy tale evolution story in with real scientific theories when it is nothing more than a religious myth. 😏

Uuuh, no, it's a scientific theory that meets the same standard as the theory of germ disease, the theory of gravity and the theory of your genius.

Well, maybe that last one is setting the bar a little too low.

Originally posted by kevinlee123
[b]gusto?

Is this Ghost of Duke a Filipino?[/b]

They seek him here
they seek him there
that Ghost they seek him everywhere
Is he in the Philippines?
was that guess just a fluke?
that damned elusive Ghost of a Duke.

Originally posted by C Hess
Uuuh, no, it's a scientific theory that meets the same standard as the theory of germ disease, the theory of gravity and the theory of your genius.

Well, maybe that last one is setting the bar a little too low.

One can not set the bar low enough that Evilution can pass as a theory. And by the way there is no haven for atheists. They are all unbelievers and will have their part in the Lake of Fire and Brimstone. 😏

Originally posted by C Hess
Yes, my non-existing god is better than your god.

Do you feel like you made sense there, or was it more of a brain fart?

Anyway, had twitehead not beaten me to it, that would also be my reply: Science has proven itself to work. If you must personify it, I'd say it's more of a trusty companion. Sometimes she's in the wrong, but gladly admits it when it's pointed out to her (as we all should, really).

Something that IS NOT cannot be better, cannot be worse, cannot be anything. Because something that does not exist is not anything. Saying 'my non-existing....xyz.... Is BETTER Than....' is a contradiction.

Originally posted by Flower04
Something that IS NOT cannot be better, cannot be worse, cannot be anything. Because something that does not exist is not anything. Saying 'my non-existing....xyz.... Is BETTER Than....' is a contradiction.

Yes, hence my question for him. 🙂

Originally posted by RJHinds
One can not set the bar low enough that Evilution can pass as a theory. And by the way there is no haven for atheists. They are all unbelievers and will have their part in the Lake of Fire and Brimstone. 😏

In fact, it's hard to find another theory in science as supported by evidence and useful as evolutionary theory.

Lake of fire? Have you gone absolutely bonkers? You do realise there are laws (I believe in your country too) against hate speech, and threats of pain and torture? It is one thing to criticise ideas, and quite another to threaten people with torture to try and scare them in line. This is one way that I can know that your god is man-made fiction. An all-powerful, benevolent god would never need to scare people into submission. That's an absolutely ridiculous and laughable idea that just screams of desperation on the part of whomever espouses it. Shame on you. 😠

Originally posted by Flower04
Something that IS NOT cannot be better, cannot be worse, cannot be anything.

Of course it can. My non-existent pet unicorn is way better than your non-existent pet, whatever it may be.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Of course it can. My non-existent pet unicorn is way better than your non-existent pet, whatever it may be.

How so?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Of course it can. My non-existent pet unicorn is way better than your non-existent pet, whatever it may be.

Nonsense.

My non-existent pet dragon is obviously superior.

How dare you importune it's awesome majesty by comparing it unfavourably to a mule with a spike on it's head!

Originally posted by C Hess
Yes, my non-existing god is better than your god.

Do you feel like you made sense there, or was it more of a brain fart?

Anyway, had twitehead not beaten me to it, that would also be my reply: Science has proven itself to work. If you must personify it, I'd say it's more of a trusty companion. Sometimes she's in the wrong, but gladly admits it when it's pointed out to her (as we all should, really).

I dont think you really understand the term God. Perhaps if you refrained from assuming so much it might come to you. Has it ever occurred to you that the term God may have a broader meaning than the narrow perspective that atheists often seek to associate it with? Perhaps this narrow perspective is the result of having limited their search for truth to unintelligent agencies? After all an initiate often reflects the values of the 'Gods', they worship.

If science has proven itself to work lets ask it, 'why the universe', and strangely enough its absolutely silent. So contrary to the claim that 'science works', it seems that in matters of metaphysics its practically useless. Again i suspect that this tendency to limit ones search for truth to unintelligent agencies has led many to make a God of science. How limiting. How disappointing.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
I dont think you really understand the term God.

Obviously, when talking about belief in deities, we're talking about supernatural, conscious beings with the power to interact with and influence the natural world. Science doesn't fit that description. If you wish to use the word god in a different sense, to make it appear that your faith in such a deity and my trust in the scientific method are essentially the same thing, that's called the fallacy of equivocation. You're trying to compare an apple with an orange by painting the apple in orange.

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
If science has proven itself to work lets ask it, 'why the universe', and strangely enough its absolutely silent. So contrary to the claim that 'science works', it seems that in matters of metaphysics its practically useless.

Well, yeah, science specifically deals with questions about the natural world, and more to the side of how than why. Who says otherwise?

Originally posted by robbie carrobie
Again i suspect that this tendency to limit ones search for truth to unintelligent agencies has led many to make a God of science. How limiting. How disappointing.

On the other hand, the tendency to attribute intelligent agency to anything you don't understand has led many to invent God.
It remains the case that science works - as advertised. Nobody claimed that it answers all questions. If it did, we would be pointing out that we know everything. That you are not claiming to know everything suggests that whatever alternative methods you might be proposing don't have answers to everything either.

Originally posted by C Hess
Obviously, when talking about belief in deities, we're talking about supernatural, conscious beings with the power to interact with and influence the natural world. Science doesn't fit that description. If you wish to use the word god in a different sense, to make it appear that your faith in such a deity and my trust in the scientific method are essentially ...[text shortened]... equivocation. You're trying to compare an apple with an orange by painting the apple in orange.

No its far from obvious. In fact i would go as far as to term it dogmatic to state that its obvious. Again this reductionist thinking and narrowing of perspective seems endemic to our atheist friends who assume too much at times. What I have actually stated is that to many science has become for them like a God. Even you yourself are treating it as an omnipotent all powerful megolith which we must gaze upon in wonderment and awe.