can you do this....

Originally posted by jaywill
Scherzo,

[b]====================================

You've still no offered no proof for this preposterous statement. You're living in the past, jaywill. It's time for you to sit back and let science take over. Radio signals were found in the 1960s from the Big Bang, the universe is expanding, the fossil record trumps Creationism and ID, etc. etc. et ...[text shortened]... gazine.

Computer Science was my bachalor's degree. Hugh Ross's book is a good read.[/b]

Still no proof.

I can call myself whatever I want. But, yet again, actions speak louder than words.

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]==============================

the fossil record trumps Creationism and ID, etc. etc. etc.

==================================

Why didn't somebody TELL me ???

Piltdown Man rules ![/b]

I thought you liked science? Or is it that you're terrified of it.

Originally posted by jaywill
First of all would our "intellect" and "technology" be insignificant? Just those two matters alone draw a huge difference between human being and cock roach.

First I would not quickly dismiss these differences as minor ones.


Secondly, there is the spiritual. As far as we know we among all the creatures have a reaching out towards God or towards ...[text shortened]... f modern nihilism which would throw up hands and say "We're no better than cock roaches!"

…First of all would our "intellect" and "technology" be insignificant?…

Of course not. I am merely suggesting we are not particularly “unique” as a species.

Chimpanzees and certain other animals use tools albeit much less sophisticated than what we typically use. For example, chimpanzees often fashion sticks to probe for termites and grabs in crevices etc. So, we are not unique simply because we make tools. I suppose you could call such tools fashioned by animals as a very rudimentary kind of "technology".

A whale has a much larger brain than that of a human although it is hard to tell if it has a ‘greater’ intellect than us and its intellect must be of a different kind to us and I doubt that it could deduce relativity but, never a less, it must have some sort of ‘intellect’. So, we are not unique simply because we have an ‘intellect‘.

It is only the general degree of our intellect and our technology that sets us far apart from other animals.

…As far as we know we among all the creatures have a reaching out towards God or towards the eternal and transcendent meanings of our existence. …

Yes. You are right. We are unique among the species in having the ability to form delusional beliefs based on no reason nor evidence such as the belief of the existence of a “god” or the suspicious belief that our existence has “purpose” (I assume that is what you mean by “meaning of our existence”?) other than any “purpose” we arbitrarily assign to our lives (I am not implying here that there is something wrong with arbitrarily assigning purpose to our own lives -I think there is nothing wrong with that). In this way, even the intellect of the chimpanzees are superior to us -although this is probably the only way their intellect is superior to ours. I see this as yet another example of one of “evolution’s blunders” -evolution gave us a big brain with a big intellect but did a rather botched job with the wiring of the brain as it allowed at least some of us the mental defect of tending to “choosing” whatever we want to be true by being completely oblivious to reason and evidence. This is one bit of human uniqueness that I wish the human race didn’t have.

Originally posted by scherzo
I thought you liked science? Or is it that you're terrified of it.

Why should I be terrified of science ?

And tell me what it is you desire proof of from me.

Andrew,

===================================
Of course not. I am merely suggesting we are not particularly “unique” as a species.
======================================

There is no other creature on the earth quite as unique as a human being.

It intrigues me that alleged evolution gave rise to no other creature like mankind. I mean dolphins and chimps are pretty unique. But don't you think that we humans are in a class alone?

If you reply is that there is no other creature quite like the cock roach either, I will be dissapointed.


====================================
Chimpanzees and certain other animals use tools albeit much less sophisticated than what we typically use.
===================================

But no language.

And it is rather difficult to prove that language is something that evolved. Linguists wrestle with this problem. I have a good website on the problem of who taught man how to speak if you're interested.


=======================================
For example, chimpanzees often fashion sticks to probe for termites and grabs in crevices etc. So, we are not unique simply because we make tools. I suppose you could call such tools fashioned by animals as a very rudimentary kind of "technology".
=====================================

Okay. But there are still light years between a chimp and a human, even a human baby.


=========================================
A whale has a much larger brain than that of a human although it is hard to tell if it has a ‘greater’ intellect than us and its intellect must be of a different kind to us and I doubt that it could deduce relativity but, never a less, it must have some sort of ‘intellect’. So, we are not unique simply because we have an ‘intellect‘.
======================================

Still, an unbridgable gulf between a whale and a human. Don't you think so?

To say humans are very unique is not to devalue other species. It is just recognition of the fact that there is nothing else on the earth like a human being.

You cannot really say that about chimps or whales.

Be back latter. Right now some human being here is whiping my head at chess !

Talk latter.

Andrew,

======================================

Yes. You are right. We are unique among the species in having the ability to form delusional beliefs based on no reason nor evidence such as the belief of the existence of a “god” or the suspicious belief that our existence has “purpose” (I assume that is what you mean by “meaning of our existence”?)

===========================================

Do you mean a delusional idea like, say, the abstract thinking mind is the product of "natural selection" accidents working upon purely physical matter ?

And to say worshipping man has some delusional ideas is fine.

There is still the problem of why man should have this need to create them in the first place.

Originally posted by jaywill
Why should I be terrified of science ?

And tell me what it is you desire proof of from me.

Prove that God exists.

The truth is that science and God cannot coexist. The Catholic Church realized that during the Dark Ages (what we call the one time that religion ruled the West), and started killing people who made scientific advancements for fear that the advancements would cause heresy. That is true. Science trumps religion.

Here's what would happen:

An accused atheist (whether atheist or not) would be reported to the Church. The Church would dispatch a priest or monk to go to the house of the "atheist" and attempt to hastily convert him. If the "atheist" was unmoving, then (s)he would be burned at the stake soon after. Countless numbers were killed this way.

During the Inquisition it was even worse. People who made scientific advancements were simply tortured and killed, no second chances.

Similar things happened during the "Red Scare" and the horrifying crimes of the McCarthy era, albeit no deaths happened.

That is why a die-hard Christian like yourself would be scared of science.

Originally posted by scherzo
I thought you liked science? Or is it that you're terrified of it.

Proof of what ?

Do you want evidence for the resurrection of Christ ?

I do not claim to be able to "prove" what is a matter of faith. I can supply what my evidence is that makes me think we are on the right track to believe that Christ rose.


What kind of proof are you looking for? Did I promise to prove something in some mathematical sense of certainty?

Do you have "proof" that there is no God ? Do you have a formula demonstrating the rigorous "proof" that Christ is not the Son of God ?

Originally posted by jaywill
Do you have "proof" that there is no God ? Do you have a formula demonstrating the rigorous "proof" that Christ is not the Son of God ?

The problem is, the onus to prove god is on those that claim he exists.

It's not evidence of absence of god that leads me to disbelieve - it's absence of evidence.

================================

Prove that God exists.

=================================

Where's your rigorous "proof" that God does not exist ?


====================================

The truth is that science and God cannot coexist.

========================================

Tell that to Galaleo or Pasteur.

====================================
The Catholic Church realized that during the Dark Ages (what we call the one time that religion ruled the West), and started killing people who made scientific advancements for fear that the advancements would cause heresy.
==========================================

So what ?

So we then say God cannot exist if science does ?

Your as bigoted as they were then.

Some armies marched to martial music during the war. Does that mean that music and peace cannot co-exist.

Some people who belong to the KKK ate fried chicken. Does that mean that Southern Fried Chicken and social harmony cannot co-exist.


======================================
That is true. Science trumps religion.
====================================

Define trump in this case.

Do you know that this statement is scientifically proved incorrect?

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth."

Prove scientifically that that cannot be so.


==============================
Here's what would happen:

An accused atheist (whether atheist or not) would be reported to the Church. The Church would dispatch a priest or monk to go to the house of the "atheist" and attempt to hastily convert him. If the "atheist" was unmoving, then (s)he would be burned at the stake soon after. Countless numbers were killed this way.

=========================================

I can hardly bring my self to read your baloney seriously.

Ramond Chaio is a physicist who did faster than light expriements with lasers at Berkley. He is an evangelical Christian with whom I have worshipped.


Science has its realm of discipline. Faith and spirituality have a realm.

Science will change and change and change. What you hold as science truth today may one day be proved to be incorrect.

Do you know that Ptolemy's proof for the earth being the center of the solar system was actually wuite mathematically sophisticated. It was not superstitious. It was the science of the day until Galaleo came up with better mathematical models.

=======================
During the Inquisition it was even worse. People who made scientific advancements were simply tortured and killed, no second chances.
=====================================


The Inwuisition was really bad.

Can't blame every thing on the Inquisition or your just AS bad.

People tend to become like what they hate sometimes.

You display a kind of blind zeal which is very reminiscent of those crazed fanatical priests.

By the way, during the Dark Ages the Bible was locked away so that only the clergy could read it. The Dark Ages ended simultaneously with the RELEASE of the Bible into the hands of the common people from its Catholic prison.


There were actually LESS people with access to the Holy Bible during the Dark Ages and not more.

The Printing Press invention was first used to print guess what? Bibles.

Your history is really biased and kinf og bigoted.

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]================================

Prove that God exists.

=================================

Where's your rigorous "proof" that God does not exist ?


====================================

The truth is that science and God cannot coexist.

========================================

Tell that to Galaleo or Pasteur.
...[text shortened]... o print guess what? Bibles.

Your history is really biased and kinf og bigoted.[/b]

====================================

The truth is that science and God cannot coexist.

========================================

Tell that to Galaleo or Pasteur.

While I don't agree that god and science cannot coexist, galileo is not the best example for your point. He was punished for the church for his ideas - something that more supports the idea that religion and science can't coexist.

Originally posted by jaywill
Andrew,

[b]===================================
Of course not. I am merely suggesting we are not particularly “unique” as a species.
======================================

There is no other creature on the earth quite as unique as a human being.

It intrigues me that alleged evolution gave rise to no other creature like mankind. I me ...[text shortened]... ack latter. Right now some human being here is whiping my head at chess !

Talk latter.[/b]

…It intrigues me that alleged evolution gave rise to no other creature like mankind. I mean dolphins and chimps are pretty unique. But don't you think that we humans are in a class alone? …

Not quite. We are still primates. Although our intellect is no-doubt vastly more advanced.

…====================================
Chimpanzees and certain other animals use tools albeit much less sophisticated than what we typically use.
===================================

But no language…

And yet chimpanzees can be taught sign language in captivity.
Dolphins and certain other animals in the wild have language albeit much less sophisticated but, never a less, we are not quite unique in that respect.

…And it is rather difficult to prove that language is something that evolved.…

-and yet we still have language. And certain other animals have language albeit much less sophisticated. Proof or no proof, there is no better alternative hypotheses of how we came to have language other than we evolved to have brains that give us the potential for learning complex language and a cultural of learning and using language developed and evolved side-by-side genetic evolution. Cultural evolution evolved side-by-side genetic evolution. There are areas of the human brain that are specific for language and there are genes for the development for those language areas of the brain. We gained those genes through evolution.

Originally posted by jaywill
Andrew,

======================================

Yes. You are right. We are unique among the species in having the ability to form delusional beliefs based on no reason nor evidence such as the belief of the existence of a “god” or the suspicious belief that our existence has “purpose” (I assume that is what you mean by “meaning of our existence” here is still the problem of why man should have this need to create them in the first place.

…And to say worshipping man has some delusional ideas is fine.

There is still the problem of why man should have this need to create them in the first place….

Why would you think there could be a “need” to create delusional ideas? In what way do we “need” to create delusional ideas? I have no such “need“.

Originally posted by jaywill
[b]================================

Prove that God exists.

=================================

Where's your rigorous "proof" that God does not exist ?


====================================

The truth is that science and God cannot coexist.

========================================

Tell that to Galaleo or Pasteur.
...[text shortened]... o print guess what? Bibles.

Your history is really biased and kinf og bigoted.[/b]

…================================

Prove that God exists.

=================================

Where's your rigorous "proof" that God does not exist ? …

I have said this in another post but:

The burden of proof is NOT on the person that refutes the claim of the existence of something X (such as the claim of the existence of a “god&ldquo😉, the burden of proof is on the person that supports the claim of the existence of something X. If it is you that is claiming X exists then it is you that has to provide evidence to rationally justify your claim that X exists. All the person that refutes X exists (for example, an atheist that refutes that there exists a “god&ldquo😉 has to do to justify his claim that the probability of that X existing is vanishing small is to point out that, according to all known science and/or observations (excluding observations that can be demonstrated to be hallucinations, mirages etc) there is no evidence to support that claim that X exists -that is all!

If that wasn’t the case then how would you argue against somebody that claims Santa exists and correctly asserts “nobody has proven that Santa doesn’t exist!”?

=====================================

Why would you think there could be a “need” to create delusional ideas? In what way do we “need” to create delusional ideas? I have no such “need“.

=========================================

The issue is why man has the need to worship or meditate on the transcendent origins of his existence and such things.

A hungry person may mistakenly eat something that is bad for them. This is akin to concocting a delusion. However, the hunger is there for some reason. That is what I am getting at.

You may say "I have no need". But you certainly display a need to come here and debunk all those who speak of God. That in itself pertrays a preoccupation with the subject.

The most effective atheists are the ones who totally ignore the subject. Thou protestest too much.


OK, seriously, the animals do no display this need to reach out after God. I don't think it is a purely intellectual matter. I think there is a spiritual need.

Except for the "Praying Mantise" (pun intended) we noticed that the rest of the animal kingdom could care less about a Transcendent Creator as far as we can detect.

However, incredible other human like social skills are manifested - ie. ants, bees.

Continue latter.