23 Jun 05
Originally posted by dj2beckerFirst, you haven't established that God exists. Even if God exists, you haven't established that God gave me my conscience. Even if God gave me my conscience, you haven't established that the content of my conscience should track God's will. Even if it should track God's will, you haven't established the what the content of God's will is. So, until you cough up some actual arguments, rather than merely vomiting up assertions, please don't expect me to take anything you have to say seriously.
What makes you sure that your conscience has not been blunted by your disregard towards God who gave it to you to be used in conjunction with His will for your life?
There is simply no evidence that my conscience is blunted. It seems to work pretty damn well at allowing me to get along in the world, to make friends, to teach ethics at university, etc. etc. etc.
Out of curiousity, my little one-trick pony, do you ever plan on jettisoning this silly skeptical bent? It is a poor substitute for actual thought.
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by dj2beckerI don't think my belefs are the result of random chance, I think they are the result of evolution. The fact that you equate the two is indicative of your urgent need for an education.
How can you trust your thoughts if you believe that they are simply the product of random chance and a few compounds?
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by bbarrIt's kindda hard to establish something like this over the internet. Would you accept visual evidence?
First, you haven't established that God exists. Even if God exists, you haven't established that God gave me my conscience. Even if God gave me my conscience, you haven't established that the content of my conscience should track God's will. Even if it should track God's will, you haven't established the what the content of God's will is. So, until ...[text shortened]... ever plan on jettisoning this silly skeptical bent? It is a poor substitute for actual thought.
If so then I suggest that the next time you have vacation you should book yourself a ticket to Africa and come and visit me. There is a lot that I can show you here. I could show you the working of God in peoples lives. I could show you the evidences of answered prayers. There is so much more. You could come and experience how God provides food for more than a thousand people a day, three meals a day. You could stay with us and have all your meals free of charge! But I guess that I something that I cannot show you on RHP.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by bbarrDo you not agree that evolution works by random chance?
I don't think my belefs are the result of random chance, I think they are the result of evolution. The fact that you equate the two is indicative of your urgent need for an education.
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by dj2beckerOh, so when I give money every year to UNICEF and Oxfam, that is God intervening in people's lives. Guess what, jackass? That's me and people like me intervening in people's lives! That's me busting my hump every day at work, and then putting a bit aside every month so that some folk I don't know on the other side of the world have something to eat. You're thanking the wrong fellow, dj2becker.
It's kindda hard to establish something like this over the internet. Would you accept visual evidence?
If so then I suggest that the next time you have vacation you should book yourself a ticket to Africa and come and visit me. There is a lot that I can show you here. I could show you the working of God in peoples lives. I could show you the evidences ...[text shortened]... have all your meals free of charge! But I guess that I something that I cannot show you on RHP.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by bbarrYou don't understand. We don't ask for any money from anybody. There is no charity that sponsors us. We receive everything by prayer.
Oh, so when I give money every year to UNICEF and Oxfam, that is God intervening in people's lives. Guess what, jackass? That's me and people like me intervening in people's lives! That's me busting my hump every day at work, and then putting a bit aside every month so that some folk I don't know on the other side of the world have something to eat. You're thanking the wrong fellow, dj2becker.
23 Jun 05
3 edits
Originally posted by dj2beckerYou know, I have never eaten a piece of bread that was produced without somebody planting the seed (which usually they had to work to buy), tending the fields, irrigating, harvesting; without anyone milling the grain to make the flour; without anyone baking the bread—in short, without the labor of human hands, the attention of human minds, the sweat of human brows. Even in hunter-gatherer societies, somebody needs to hunt, somebody needs to gather.
You don't understand. We don't ask for any money from anybody. There is no charity that sponsors us. We receive everything by prayer.
And if people are generous enough to contribute the fruits of their labor to those in need, or some of the income from their labor to organizations that help those in need—you perhaps ought to thank them (even if they are not doing it for the sake of thanks or praise). Now if all you do is pray, and food appears for three meals a day without any human agency at all—I admit, that would be something.
Oh, yeah: we have a cherry tree behind the house, and in the spring I sometimes go back there with my coffee and spend some time with the mockingbirds as we pick "free" cherries from the tree and eat them for breakfast. But the people who lived here 20 years ago planted that tree (and I have planted a few more), and as I munch on the cherries, my thoughts sometimes go to them…
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by dj2beckerSo far you've demonstrated no understanding of probabilities. All you've done is post what one person said. This is insufficient because the assumptions that are implicit in this person's calculations cannot be discerned from the post. That's why I ask you to either provide a link to where he explains how he got his answer or to reproduce the calculation for us here.
[b]How about this; it's possible that it's possible
True. But what I am saying is that the posssibility is so small that it makes it an impossibility. If something had a 0.0000000001% chance of happening you could rightly say that there is a possibility, but you should also be able to figure out that it is more of an impossibility.[/b]
Now you may not understand what I mean when I say how above. I do NOT want a link that says something like, "There are 10,000 such and such in this chain. The probability of a chain that qualifies as living arising is 1 in 10^(whatever)." This is just an answer.
I want something like "There are 10,000 such and such in a chain. Only chains of (some explicit type of nature) can qualify as living. Assuming that possible outcomes for each such and such are jointly distributed (provide name of joint distribution) over some interval, the probability of randomly drawing a chain that qualifies as living is 1 in 10^(whatever) "
You see the difference? The second example explains how the calculation was achieved so that it can be reproduced. It also makes its assumptions explicit so that if we doubt the answer, we can consider the reasonability of the assumptions.
Unless you can provide something like that, your arguments from probability possess no more persuasive power than if I wrote different probabilities on pieces of paper and drew them from a hat.
23 Jun 05
Originally posted by dj2beckerBy the way your statement is totally false. In many cases, events that have a low probablity of occuring may still occur. In fact, in many cases, an event that occurs will have a low ex ante probability of occuring.
[b]How about this; it's possible that it's possible
True. But what I am saying is that the posssibility is so small that it makes it an impossibility. If something had a 0.0000000001% chance of happening you could rightly say that there is a possibility, but you should also be able to figure out that it is more of an impossibility.[/b]
Consider flipping a fair coin 100 times in a row. The event "HTTHTHHHT . . . (out to 100)" is every unlikely to occur ex ante. Nevertheless, if you toss a fair coin 100 times, you will get an outcome that is an exact sequence of H and T.
23 Jun 05
Bbarr: You're only 19 and it is clear already just how much damage this belief system has done to you.
Only 19? You know, I don’t remember how I thought about things when I was 19 (probably a blessing, that), but I do remember that I was working 12-hour days in a cannery to support my family, and try to go to school. Later put myself through school (and grad school) working 7-day swing shifts in a papermill. Nothing noble in any of that, just the way it was.
I’ve worked hard, and I’ve been damn lucky too. Have had some hardships and griefs, and some of them of my own making—and yet I could gladly say, with ole Ludwig, “Tell them I’ve had a wonderful life!”
And now I guess maybe I’m old enough for such silly talk… (Not really. That’s crap. I’m younger than I was 10 years ago….)
But nobody ever prayed me up a meal….
23 Jun 05
2 edits
Originally posted by dj2beckerCant answer the post can you? stick that sham Ph.D. argument.
[b]I've said life from non-life is a certainty, period.
And I have quoted from a sourse written by someone with a PhD. So it is your words against His. You have also failed to invalidate anything that he has said and you have n ...[text shortened]... h ever post. I will ignore posts that are off topic in the future.[/b]
Do you have a clue to how many Ph.D.'s back the TOE?
and it is dead on topic, The original system produced life from non-life and that fact won't change whether or not some chemist makes life in a test tube.
And I rather hope you don't response to me , since whatever you say is a distortion, an outright lie and/or just ignorant.
Btw do you know the title of your thread ?
one more edit:
You have absolutely no intellectual integrity.Since you've shown a lack of understanding of your own religion , do you have to go to such extremes to show your ignorance of science too.