Watch this It also includes some parts about 9/11 but it starts of with the truth about god.. i am a strong athiest and this video is not only an eye opening but makes you think about the amount of lies that we live and rely on. Enjoy.. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-594683847743189197 _Super_SambrooK_
From my memory, that movie delves into the truth about religion, not god. I personally enjoyed the movie, even though its pretty heavily peppered with B.S.. The 9-11 piece is entirely clips from 'Loose Change" which are pretty much purely unsubstantiated allegations. As a "Strong Athiest" what proof do you have that God does not exist?
well in my opinion there is no evidence that he/she does exist... and videos like that do make you think a lot even if they are not just focused on "god". The main thing that makes me athiest is that relgion causes more problems than it offers in solutions... there is no evidence of god.. religion causes war, death and always will do. I have no problems with those who are religious and remain harmless and keep to themselves but those who will kill themselves taking others with them for a so called god make me sick... "As a "Strong Athiest" what proof do you have that God does not exist?" Well ive never heard of anyone being assisted by "god" have you? Fact: as humans we cannot deal with loss/death we need something to make us feel better. This is a debate that will remain the same, people have different views and they are supposed to, i respect peoples views/beliefs and always will do - i just have no respect to those who will harm others in the name of a belief.
I'd say on the whole, there is a lot more evidence god exists than there is to say he doesn't exist. I doubt you would look at the internal workings of a Rolex watch and say this just came about by accident, and there certainly is a lot more order to the universe than there is to a Rolex watch. Regarding religion, there will always be people out there trying to take advantage of the masses by claiming to be mediators of something people don't fully understand. Look at the carbon credit market. I'd say that makes you non-religious more than it makes you an atheist. Atheism, in my opinion, is one if the fastest growing religions on the planet. I call it a religion because, sadly, it shares two important things with religion. 1) It is based on a belief system for which there is no solid evidence. 2) Many of its followers feel the need to beat its teachings into others who are not of the same belief system. Many of it's followers are starry eyed zealots which scare me nearly as much as Muslim flying students who aren't concerned about learning how to land. For the record, I think the religion part of Zeitgeist is pretty much on target , though they were definitely over reaching when they tried to deny Christ ever existed. Edit: Happy Easter.. by the way
I do believe in God but I totally disagree with this argument as a basis for Gods existence. You know for sure how the Rolex came about as its full history has been documented in a logical fashion but you really have no idea how the universe and this so-called 'order' came about. I could argue the path of the Nile river is God's 'order of things' or I could explain how earthquakes and man-made digging has set its current path. Both are valid, or invalid, but are more reasonable than comparing the 'order of things' to a Rolex.
Using ad hominid arguments against the social implications of religion seems to be the predominant method of atheists today. Unfortunately for them, it does nothing to refute the claims of the religions.
If I found a rolex on the beach, not knowing what it was, opened it up and saw all the gears and wheels, but had no documentation of its history, would its order be any less apparent? I think you are misunderstanding what I am referring to as order. I am certainly not talking about the course of a river, or some baby dying and calling that all part of "Gods plan". I'm talking about the various complexities of the universe that we will likely not understand after centuries of study. Even the things we do know from science show a tremendous amount of order. The interaction of protons electrons and neutrons, and the part they play in the makeup of molecules. The complex interaction of those molecules in the cells of the human body. The means by which our brains store massive amounts of data in an electro-chemical data bank. The very complex interactions of various life forms and eco systems on this planet. I could go on and on. The universe is likely at once infinitely large and infinitely small, and a detailed examination of any part of it makes a Rolex watch look like a paper clip by comparison. The planet didn't come with any "certified documentation", and I certainly don't trust the bible as such, but like a Rolex found on the beach, its very existence screams loudly in support of some greater intelligence behind it. We can study it, understand how it works, but the answers to the questions of who and why are not so easy to come by.
Yes, but you could ask someone clever what it is and they could provide every fact to show you what, how & where the Rolex began, what its purpose is and more. You can be shown books, taken to the the Rolex factory. Answers to a Rolex question will not be based on imagination or faith. You cannot do that with the universe.
I wholeheartedly agree and as long as we can acknowledge the "Universe Question" still exists, I'm fine with that. It seems that some among academia think they have the answers to those questions and want to kill the discussion, be it based on imagination, speculation, conjecture, faith, or anything else. I find that strange, given that science and academia are normally the ones wanting to continue the discussion when there are unanswered questions like whether the earth is the center of the universe, or whether blood letting cures diseases, or whether global warming is man made and/or preventable. It's like they've started their own little religion in which there is no room for argument with the high priest, and they will definitely be passing around the plate.
They are interesting questions obamanation. But a lack of any conclusive answer is not, in any way, evidence for a god. it is simply evidence that we have a lot left to learn. As for the evidence that atheists have that god doesn't exist, it's the same kind of evidence that you have regarding the nonexistence of fairies. I take it you disbelieve in fairies and would answer "no" if someone asked you if they exist? The problems come when we are expected to give the notion of god special consideration which isn't afforded to equally unsupported claims.
Having a lot left to learn may be the understatement of the century. I believe the human race will be long extinct, our sun supernova, and we will still know less than 2% of what there is to know. To your assertion that lack of answers to where all this order came from does not constitute evidence of a higher intelligence, I would say that God is one possible answer to those questions, with other options being possibilities. However you look at it, its one thing Theism has going for it that Atheism doesn't. Bad example. Fairies are not a possible scientific answer to any question. Better examples would be black holes, infinite space, parallel universes, or the paranormal. Are you telling me you believe that there is no possibility any of those things exist even though we don't have solid evidence for any? If you want to argue that because a book (the bible) which contains stories many believe to be fictitious, that all things it references are, therefore fictitious, perhaps you need to go back to school for some additional study of logic and reasoning.
Probably. some of us still prefer no answer to a made up one though. God is a possible answer, but in the same sense and to the same extent that santa is a possible answer. ie, a ridiculous answer supported by nothing except the fact that you asserted it. They are if someone gives them as the answer. I lost my keys the other day. Does the fact that i don't know how i lost them support the claim that the key fairies took them? There is no evidence for the paranormal, If there was it would be called "the normal". As for black holes and parallel universes, however, there is evidence. string theory and quantum entanglement are evidence for parallel universes and multiple dimensions and the fact that we have photographed, weighed and measured black holes is evidence that they exist. we aren't talking about religion, religion is demonstrably false. We are talking about the existence of a god (which is why i didn't mention religion), and unfortunately, for you and your fallacious argument, A god of the gaps, where god is relegated to explaining any and every gap in current scientific understanding, is no more evidence for god as it is for santa or fairies. Your entire premise equates to "well i don't know how that happened... so god done it".
You seem like someone who knows a little about science. Where do you think we get answers to things for which we have no answer, other than proposing possibilities? I believe the people who alleged the earth was flat made similar allegations regarding those who believed otherwise. What makes you the authority? If you had any other supporting evidence, perhaps you could. Do you have other supporting evidence? Actually there is plenty of evidence, unfortunately it is all subjective. There are houses people have claimed are haunted and had people enter, entirely unaware of the status of the house, who present similar stories of strange occurances. Again, more things without an explanation. Hah. We have photographs of UFOS, which we can measure. Are you saying flying saucers exist? What you are talking about is new and expanding areas of science that are lending credence to existing theories, and disproving others. The problem you have is you want to stare at something you don't understand and swear that no matter what the answer to "How did this come to be?" is, the answer can never be "A higher intelligence". Are you so convinced of your own godhood, and if so why? Aren't you the slightest bit concerned that the earth might not be flat and might not be the center of the universe? Don't you worry about overstepping in a VERY LARGE WAY with atheism?
By testing those possibilities, Not just proposing them. Feel free to devise an experiment to test your proposal... i wont hold my breath. No evidence besides the fact that i can't think of any other explanation, which was the point i was making (well done on missing it). The point was that the lack of an alternative explanation isn't, in its self, evidence for a proposed explanation. The fact that i don't know how i lost my keys isn't evidence of key fairies, the fact that we don't know exactly how the universe formed isn't evidence for a god. Google search "god of gaps", your entire premise rests on this fallacy. So that's no evidence then. I'm saying unidentified flying objects exist, If we can measure them. Or are you going to make the logical leap from UFO to "alien craft"? I have no reason to accept your baseless assertions without evidence. I can understand how this will be frustrating for you, what with you having no evidence and relying entirely on baseless assertions, but that's the way it is.
Actually, outside of our untestable hypothosis(s), you and I have only proposed two different answers to the same question. The only difference between you and I is that I can allow for your groundless explanation of how the universe got here, where as you cant allow for any other than your own, and you shut your eyes to the evidence before you because it is not measurable or testable. Interesting that that is the same argument the Supreme court used to keep intelligent design from being discussed in public schools. I guess the more things change, the more they stay the same. I just find it humorous that so called "Scientists" can be so closed minded.
remind me, what answer did i give? I think youl find i said "we don't know". Explain how that is in any way comparable to the baseless, unsupported claim that a magic man done it. Again, some of us prefer no answer to a made up one. just because no alternative exists it doesn't lend credibility to any other possibility postulated. It seems that this thread has been reduced to me having to explain the same simple concept to you over and over again.
Your answer is not "we dont know". Your answer is "We dont know, but I assure you the magic man didnt do it", which I believe is your nickname for God. We don't need to retrace the thread to get the full context of your answer because you provided it in the quote I just provided. So, once again, if you don't know, how do you know the magic man didn't do it? I also find it humorous that you consider the very idea of a greater intelligence than yours so scoffable as to be demeaned as dreaming of fairies, or the "Magic Man". Some wise man said something about Ego once, but I forget what it was. My advice would be, dont sweat it man. If god exists, there is a good chance your lack of belief in him concerns him not in the slightist. Personally, I like Isaac Asimov's explanation, which would certainly be easier on your ego.
What i actually say is we don't know and there is no evidence that a higher intelligence done it. But i can understand how difficult it must be for you to refute what I'm actually saying and how temping it must be to just start making stuff up, What with the fact that your entire premise rests on the flawed assumption that when no scientific explanation exists it instantly provides evidence for any other proposed explanation. The fact of the matter is, without evidence, your god hypothesis isn't entitled to any more consideration than any other unsupported claim. Insightful stuff...
No, you rail against the idea of a higher intelligence period and you refute what most would consider evidence and you propose no alternative solution other than, the universe just appeared. So look, when you come home one day and find your apartment emptied out and nothing is left except your collection of donkey porn, which is glued to every wall in your house, and the police come and find no DNA evidence, and no evidence of forced entry, by your logic, we will assume you robbed your self and papered your own walls with donkey porn. That... or it happened by accident. Imagine if the police absolutely refuted the idea that it was someone else because there was "no evidence". Welcome to Atheism. Hah, brainfart. I actually had a very obvious quote in mind when I wrote that, and since I failed to put it to print, I can't remember what it was.