The burden of proof...

I'm absolutely sick of this "burden of proof lies on the believer" shit. You ask me or someone else ot prove the existance of God or some or ridiculously childish question. Think about it, if it could be proven to exist or not(<< real semantics) it would be all over the world, your little cousin would be able to tell you.

And for some reason you think that because God can not be PROVEN (in YOUR mind) to exist, then, by some fucked up logic, it obviously doesn't.

And for another reason you act like we're supposed to give a fuck about your DISbelief in God.

Random "cool" atheist(not the majority):

Question: If blah blah blah, I'm an atheist, and blah blah blah, I hate religion, blah blah, SO blah blah and blah,

Now prove to me God's existance(no reason given).

Me or any realistic person who believes in God:

Answer: No. If you don't believe me then I'll see you in hell.

[Kikey_Kikeowitz]

Hell?

I smell jewberries.

[Dark_Magneto]

I like pie.

Doofnoil, you're basically saying you're sick of science, because that's all it is. The people you're so fed up with are simply holding the hypothesis of God to the same standards as any other hypothesis: it must be proven to be considered to be true.

There's no way around it, if you want to be considered scientifically valid.

If you like what blind faith does for your emotions, go for it... but don't expect others to think it's true.

[Kikey_Kikeowitz]

quote:Originally posted by Doofnoil2:

I smell jewberries.

I suppose I'll see you in hell.

"I'M THE OG, BEE-YOTCH! YOUSE JUST DA SPIN-AWFF!!"

[Craftian]

quote:Originally posted by Doofnoil2:

And for some reason you think that because God can not be PROVEN (in YOUR mind) to exist, then, by some fucked up logic, it obviously doesn't.

What? God can be proven, which, by my fucked up logic, means he obviously doesn't.

Because he hasn't.

quote:Now prove to me God's existance(no reason given).

The reason being: the religious of the world make barbaric laws and kill people in the name of the unevidenced.

quote:Answer: No. If you don't believe me then I'll see you in hell.

Ooh, your lake of fire really terrifies me.

Science is also a faith.

Religion is also science.

OK, fine, it's a mixture of science and philosophy. Just a version that's hundreds or thousands of years old that some people still believe. Some people prefer to focus on the philosophy (which can be timeless) and rely on the lastest advances in science. Some still believe in the scientific value of those books.

quote:Originally posted by Jadedfool:

Science is also a faith.

No, actually it's not. In fact, it's the polar opposite.

Faith is belief despite absence of evidence.

Science, on the other hand, is lack of belief, and reliance solely on empirical evidence.

Some people may have faith in scientific theories, but that is different than science itself being a faith.

[This message has been edited by zorro420 (edited 09-16-2003).]

quote:Originally posted by Doofnoil2:

And for some reason you think that because God can not be PROVEN (in YOUR mind) to exist, then, by some fucked up logic, it obviously doesn't.

No... because God cannot be proven/supported (in any mind adhering to the scientific method) to exist, then, by standard logic and scientific method, it isn't considered to exist (though not specifically considered to not exist).

There's just no disputing this.

[This message has been edited by zorro420 (edited 09-16-2003).]

I am god. I exist. Happy?

theories are just theories, plain and simple. onec they're proven true the=y become scientific fact.

And I AMM whining about it, not like a bitch though, that title is reserved for people who for whatever reason feel the need to "empirically" define God's existance without defining God with respect to whatever religion they want. Or using any religion's doctrine which actually has quite a few historical facts to determine that defined god's existance. Instead the observations of historians,whether influenced by religion or not, are thrown out as not being proof or even relevant, which is stupid.

And the MAJORITY (not including A$A) or proclaimed athiests haven't a fucking clue about how to begin defining God, and yet they quote rediculous accusations based on 10th grade conjectures and hear-say. Sometimes a random astrophysical theory will be spouted forth as further proof of this person's high pedigree of intelligence.

I'm not trying to bash athiests, or other affiliations regarding religion

Who I am trying to bash are the lamers that have clouded and fucked up a perfectly good conversation/debate with ignorance of common knowledge(aka the shit you find in books).

All this does is serve to enrage somebody involved in the conversation and the thread goes straight to shit.

In the immortal and everpressent words of A&A, "READ A FUCKING BOOK". and I mean ANY book, including something by Danielle Steele, it doesn't matter...Christ...

This argument will never end. However heres something to ponder, how could we even apply the scientific method to something like G-d? Honestly, its not like we can create a control group, and all evidence can just be given the simple G-d did it treatment. What it boils down to is, It's unprovable, so take your own beliefs and leave them at that, your own. People bitch about the christians convert by the sword philosophy. Yet i see much more zeal in the modern atheist's conversion methods.

[Craftian]

quote:Originally posted by Doofnoil2:

theories are just theories, plain and simple. onec they're proven true the=y become scientific fact.

There is no such thing as scientific fact. It is impossible for a theory to be "proven".

quote:Originally posted by Fascistsmasher:

Yet i see much more zeal in the modern atheist's conversion methods.

Having some random guy rant at you on a BBS is worse than having your family slaughtered (or being slaughtered yourself)?

[This message has been edited by Craftian (edited 09-17-2003).]

[Fuck]

Science can prove many things.

Science should never be used as a tool to DISPROVE something.

[Dark_Magneto]

Science can disprove things by finding evidence contrary to the claim. Like for instance ERV's proving common ancestry beyond any reasonable level of doubt whatsoever and effectively falsifying independent insertion.