Religions > Bible > Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD)
| Topic: |
Religions > Bible |
| User: |
"H, William Esque" |
| Date: |
16 Sep 2005 10:21:53 AM |
| Object: |
Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1126659696.122004.275650@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Since Disaster Dave put out a call for proof of god - which has been
met - I thought I'd challenge him in return to provide proof of this
god of his, using exactly the same terms he demanded. Here it is:
Hi all,
Each time I RESPOND to a claim by someone that god is a fact and is
true, period, they never seem to provide said proof. Rather...
1) They throw out insults.
2) They claim that I just don't understand religion. I am well
educated in various branches of religion. They however, are not and it
upsets them, that
the standard mantra and rhetoric doesn't work.
3) They repeat the claim that there is a "mountain of evidence" for god
and yet, still fail to provide said proof.
4) They paste in web links and claim, "There is your proof!". Yet, the
link provides no such thing and when I ask them to, in their own words,
discuss in detail how it is proof, the silence is deafening.
5) They begin to insult science and claim that religion has disproved
our scientific method. This is done, after their repeated claim that
religion
has no interest in science, nor in the factual.
6) They try to turn the tables, claiming that when I respond to their
positive claim that god is a fact and is true, that it is up to me to
disprove their claim. In other words, they get to say whatever they
want we have to disprove it.
7) They seem to think that the lack of proof is proof.
It's a shame that the people don't know, that this sort of nonsensical
behavior would not be tolerated in science. You claim god is science
and seem to think that providing zero proof, along with insults, is
proof.
God is not science and associating with science in a text book, or by
speech, does not make it science, any more than beer is athletic,
simply because it is sold at football games.
The fact is people, in no branch of science, is a request for evidence
met with insults and silence regarding said proof. Only in god, do we
see this and that should tell us all we need to know.
If it were a genuine god, the proof would have been displayed for all
to see and the opposition would have been silenced, once and for all.
And while they try to blame science for ignorance of "real religion",
the fact is, that the inventor of the religious method was anonymous!
No one knows who it was or what their motives or agenda were, yet
everyone swallows this as gospel!
The fact is, that ignorance was found in religious societies, who
always tend to be far behind in scientific advancement. It is the
scientific nations
that brought knowledge of our universe to where it is today, not
religion and
the great learning institutions, such as Yale, Harvard, etc., were
established to pursue this knowledge, nto wallow in mythology. It is
now, that they have become so assaulted by fundamentlaists, that
education in the USA has gone down in quality. Coincidence?
Absolutely not.
And btw, don't ask me to prove any of this. By YOUR OWN LOGIC, the
burden of proof is on YOU.
So now I make a call to the theists.
"Show me the money!"
Where is the proof of god?
And don't ask me about whether or not theists are lying, or to disprove
it, or paste in web links, etc., etc..
PROVE GOD, OR HAVE THE INTEGRITY TO ADMIT THAT YOU CAN'T!!!
And be ready to discuss, IN YOUR OWN WORDS, HOW AND WHY what you
provide proves what you claim it does. Saying, "scriptures prove it",
is not proof, unless you can show which exact texts and why and how
they prove what you claim and be able to respond to a rebuttal.
If you can't do that, then IT IS YOU who "DOESN'T understand science".
Even paul knew that the scientific evidence wasn't there, to support a
resurrection and so, he revived mythology and repackaged it in
a non-Jewish version, called, "Christianity".
You have one camp of theists who know that Judaism did not change and
another camp that knows that sudden religious changes do occur. They
both disprove each other and yet, it never occurs to them, that maybe
they're both wrong. Maybe neither happened.
So stop with the "what stops it from happening" garbage and show the
proof of god.
And don't bother me with the "religion doesn't work that way" garbage
either. I know that, but you don't, or you wouldn't be making the
claims you do. Thus, your approach is anti-science, from go.
You claim it's true, without a doubt. This is something that is not to
be doubted and only a fool would and so, it requires ABSOLUTE PROOF
THAT LEAVES ABSOLUTELY ZERO ROOM FOR DOUBT!!!
So cough up the proof for god and shut us all up. If you can, then I
will throw my "Ancestor's Tale" away and renounce my science.
And don't tell me it has nothing to do with me renouncing my science,
when we all know that you spend your time trashing Christianity and
claiming that "the dead hand of science" has hampered religion.
So where is it? We're all waiting. And as I said, make sure that you
can back it up, with references that you can defend, in detail, in your
own words.
I will not entertain any sidetracking, nor any questions. This is
about answers. YOUR answers, as evolutionists, PROVING BEYOND ANY
DOUBT that god is reality.
I am ready. Are you?
Budikka
This one will be fun......
Doug
.
|
|
| User: "Zadok" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 11:45:17 AM |
|
|
"H, William Esque" <> wrote in message ...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing
proof, so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Exactly. Now all we ask it that all religionists admit the same thing.
RELIGION IS BASED ON FAITH NOT PROOF.
But they won't!!
But keep in mind, that any religion that makes great claims, should be able
to offer some kind of proof.
For example, a virgin birth!! I saw my two children born, and sorry, virgin
birth does not happen!!
Therefore when you make that kind of claim, you should either provide proof,
or admit that it is an allegory!! Just because The bible says so, is not
proof. The simply took the story of the birth of pagan gods by virgin
mothers, and adapted it to Jesus.
Just admit that!! It makes no difference if Mary was a virgin or not!!
Mary being a virgin in no way reflects on Jesus!!
But they had to compete with the pagans!!
And that is sad!! An allegory that was twisted into fact!!
.
|
|
|
| User: "H, William Esque" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 02:53:31 PM |
|
|
"Zadok" <nobler@accesswave.ca> wrote in message
news:xECWe.252551$tt5.73347@edtnps90...
"H, William Esque" <> wrote in message ...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing
proof, so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Exactly. Now all we ask it that all religionists admit the same thing.
RELIGION IS BASED ON FAITH NOT PROOF.
Exactly!
But they won't!!
True.
But keep in mind, that any religion that makes great claims, should be
able
to offer some kind of proof.
For example, a virgin birth!! I saw my two children born, and sorry,
virgin
birth does not happen!!
In reality this is faith based, no one can _prove_ this is true.
Therefore when you make that kind of claim, you should either provide
proof,
or admit that it is an allegory!! Just because The bible says so, is not
proof. The simply took the story of the birth of pagan gods by virgin
mothers, and adapted it to Jesus.
Just admit that!! It makes no difference if Mary was a virgin or not!!
Mary being a virgin in no way reflects on Jesus!!
But they had to compete with the pagans!!
And that is sad!! An allegory that was twisted into fact!!
Again religion is faith fased, even trust in the Bible is faith, it is
beyond
proof.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Zadok" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 05:43:53 PM |
|
|
"H, William Esque" <> wrote in message ...
Again religion is faith fased, even trust in the Bible is faith, it is
beyond
proof.
No, it is not beyond proof. Faith does away with the need for proof.
If the bible was true, then the writings of Homer would be true. The Illiad
tells the story of the Battle for Troy. People used to think that was made
up, until the ruins of Troy were found. Thus suddenly the whole story would
have to become true, and Zeus would be real.
There are Summerian clay tablets that tell the stories of all the Summerian
Gods. Adapha is invited up to heaven to have a meal of food and water,
which will give him eternal life. But he is advised by the Gods on earth to
refuse the meal (Trying to poison him). So he refuses the eucharist meal and
is returned to earth, and thus misses his chance at immortality.
Inanna dies and is in the underworld for three days. She is then hung up,
and treated with the water of life and the food of life, and arises.
Go to Google and just put in the words Inanna Arose.
But she has to provide two people to take her place in the underworld.
They each take six months.
Wasn't Jesus crucified with two thieves?? Smile.
Are those stories any less proveable than the bible stories??
It is only what one wants to believe!!
The Summerian tablets tell how the Gods make mankind, to work in the gold
mines for them. Hey makes as much sense as the God of the bible, making a
play thing. Worship me or go to hell!!
Again, I repeat, if you make fantastic claims for God, then one should be
able to provide fantastic proof.
Then just admit that it is a belief. That is what you are supposed to do.
Admit it is a belief, and then you are forced to have tolerance.
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
17 Sep 2005 08:32:47 AM |
|
|
Zadok wrote:
Are those stories any less proveable than the bible stories??
It is only what one wants to believe!!
The Summerian tablets tell how the Gods make mankind, to work
in the gold mines for them. Hey makes as much sense as the God
of the bible, making a play thing. Worship me or go to hell!!
Read Genesis 2:17 God creates man as the gardner,
nothing more. To be kept ignorant and mortal.
See Genesis 3:22
In both myths, men are created as stoop laborers.
--
The official spokesman of the Foxes said
today that investigation into what happened
to the henhouse may be needed.
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "navi-gater" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 07:21:56 PM |
|
|
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net:
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially inane considering that religion is based on faith not
proof.
I'm afraid you are very badly mistaken there.
Science has developed proofs for many things, provided well tested
theories for many other things.
If you truly think science never proved anything, I recommend you do not
fly - after all, maybe we've just been lucky so far and tomorrow
aircraft will plummet from the sky. I also recommend you use no
electricity - how do we know our household electricity won't suddenly
become unstable and explode.
Perhaps also you should check your school failed you for mathematics,
after allthe area of a circle and pythagoras' law are clearly wrong by
your definition.
As for religion - religion is based on faith, by its very definition
then, religions and the gods who inhabit them do not have proof. They're
fantasies.
gater.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas W. Thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 07:49:12 PM |
|
|
"navi-gater" <gater@the-gate.net> wrote in message
news:Xns96D3CF32B7A39thegatenet@207.69.189.191...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net:
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially inane considering that religion is based on faith not
proof.
I'm afraid you are very badly mistaken there.
Science has developed proofs for many things, provided well tested
theories for many other things.
If you truly think science never proved anything, I recommend you do not
fly - after all, maybe we've just been lucky so far and tomorrow
aircraft will plummet from the sky. I also recommend you use no
electricity - how do we know our household electricity won't suddenly
become unstable and explode.
Perhaps also you should check your school failed you for mathematics,
after allthe area of a circle and pythagoras' law are clearly wrong by
your definition.
As for religion - religion is based on faith, by its very definition
then, religions and the gods who inhabit them do not have proof. They're
fantasies.
gater.
Some bible-thumpers like to interchange in thought "absolution" for "proof"
and vice-versa (although the former is most likely). They also mis-interpert
the scientific meaning of "proofs" and assume that to mean absolution.
Doug
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jude" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 10:25:13 AM |
|
|
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof, otherwise it is
called a scientific theory. A scientific theory is just that, a theory
but based on many observable facts but not enough facts to call it
scientific fact.
.
|
|
|
| User: "H, William Esque" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 02:50:04 PM |
|
|
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:7rBWe.1675$mw5.1287@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof,
This is a misconception that many people have. In none of the
professional literature does any scientist claim to prove anything.
otherwise it is
called a scientific theory. A scientific theory is just that, a theory
but based on many observable facts but not enough facts to call it
scientific fact.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jude" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 03:31:47 PM |
|
|
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:ZjFWe.85$g32.15@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:7rBWe.1675$mw5.1287@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote
in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of
providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof,
This is a misconception that many people have. In none of the
professional literature does any scientist claim to prove anything.
That is simple not true. There are viritually unending scientific
facts that are put forth such the boiling point of water on the earth.
A scientific theory is just that, a theory based on many observable
facts but not enough to call it a scientific fact.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas W. Thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 05:42:07 PM |
|
|
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:wWFWe.340$Ew4.79@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:ZjFWe.85$g32.15@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:7rBWe.1675$mw5.1287@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote
in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of
providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof,
This is a misconception that many people have. In none of the
professional literature does any scientist claim to prove anything.
That is simple not true. There are viritually unending scientific
facts that are put forth such the boiling point of water on the earth.
A scientific theory is just that, a theory based on many observable
facts but not enough to call it a scientific fact.
By definition, a theory can neither be proven or disproven.
Doug
.
|
|
|
| User: "P.J. Gann" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
17 Sep 2005 10:30:39 AM |
|
|
"Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:lM2dnX4AVura17beRVn-iQ@comcast.com...
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:wWFWe.340$Ew4.79@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:ZjFWe.85$g32.15@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:7rBWe.1675$mw5.1287@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote
in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of
providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof,
This is a misconception that many people have. In none of the
professional literature does any scientist claim to prove anything.
That is simple not true. There are viritually unending scientific
facts that are put forth such the boiling point of water on the earth.
A scientific theory is just that, a theory based on many observable
facts but not enough to call it a scientific fact.
By definition, a theory can neither be proven or disproven.
Doug
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
17 Sep 2005 08:34:31 AM |
|
|
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:wWFWe.340$Ew4.79@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:ZjFWe.85$g32.15@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:7rBWe.1675$mw5.1287@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net>
wrote
in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business
of
providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This
is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not
proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof,
This is a misconception that many people have. In none of the
professional literature does any scientist claim to prove
anything.
That is simple not true. There are viritually unending
scientific facts that are put forth such the boiling point of
water on the earth.
A scientific theory is just that, a theory based on many
observable facts but not enough to call it a scientific fact.
By definition, a theory can neither be proven or disproven.
Doug
By whose definition!?
Bosh! Theories are proven and disproven every day!
--
The official spokesman of the Foxes said
today that investigation into what happened
to the henhouse may be needed.
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "cactus" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOFOF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 07:38:17 PM |
|
|
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:wWFWe.340$Ew4.79@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:ZjFWe.85$g32.15@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:7rBWe.1675$mw5.1287@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote
in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of
providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof,
This is a misconception that many people have. In none of the
professional literature does any scientist claim to prove anything.
That is simple not true. There are viritually unending scientific
facts that are put forth such the boiling point of water on the earth.
A scientific theory is just that, a theory based on many observable
facts but not enough to call it a scientific fact.
By definition, a theory can neither be proven or disproven.
Scientific theories can be disproven. For example the luminiferous
aether was a theoretical substance that served as a medium for light to
move in vacuo. Michaelson and Morley disproved it with an elegant
experiment.
A scientific theory is only as good as its predictive and explanatory
power. Newton's theory of gravity worked well enough, even after being
supplanted by Relativity theory.
And so it goes
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Budikka666" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 07:07:52 PM |
|
|
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
By definition, a theory can neither be proven or disproven.
I disagree with that.
While a theory cannot be absolutely proven (for all we know next time
an apple falls, it may float upwards, or water may not boil next time
at 100 celsius at sea level), it can have such a weight of evidence
that it is both foolish and futile to gainsay it.
However, a theory can be disproven. For example, as Haldane supposedly
famously said, a fossil rabbit in the Precambrian would disprove the
modern synthesis of Theory of Evolution.
Budikka
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas W. Thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 07:43:57 PM |
|
|
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1126915672.596145.278650@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
By definition, a theory can neither be proven or disproven.
I disagree with that.
While a theory cannot be absolutely proven (for all we know next time
an apple falls, it may float upwards, or water may not boil next time
at 100 celsius at sea level), it can have such a weight of evidence
that it is both foolish and futile to gainsay it.
However, a theory can be disproven. For example, as Haldane supposedly
famously said, a fossil rabbit in the Precambrian would disprove the
modern synthesis of Theory of Evolution.
Budikka
If a theory is disproven (it certainly has happened) it is no longer
considered a theory.
Doug
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
17 Sep 2005 08:36:27 AM |
|
|
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1126915672.596145.278650@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
By definition, a theory can neither be proven or disproven.
I disagree with that.
While a theory cannot be absolutely proven (for all we know
next time an apple falls, it may float upwards, or water may
not boil next time at 100 celsius at sea level), it can have
such a weight of evidence that it is both foolish and futile
to gainsay it.
However, a theory can be disproven. For example, as Haldane
supposedly famously said, a fossil rabbit in the Precambrian
would disprove the modern synthesis of Theory of Evolution.
Budikka
If a theory is disproven (it certainly has happened) it is no
longer considered a theory.
Doug
No, it is considered a disproven theory. For examply
the theory of phlogiston combustion is a disproven theory.
--
The official spokesman of the Foxes said
today that investigation into what happened
to the henhouse may be needed.
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Olrik" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOFOF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 11:27:46 PM |
|
|
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1126915672.596145.278650@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
By definition, a theory can neither be proven or disproven.
I disagree with that.
While a theory cannot be absolutely proven (for all we know next time
an apple falls, it may float upwards, or water may not boil next time
at 100 celsius at sea level), it can have such a weight of evidence
that it is both foolish and futile to gainsay it.
However, a theory can be disproven. For example, as Haldane supposedly
famously said, a fossil rabbit in the Precambrian would disprove the
modern synthesis of Theory of Evolution.
Budikka
If a theory is disproven (it certainly has happened) it is no longer
considered a theory.
A theory is not a proof, so by definition it cannot be "disproven"
(semantics asides). However, when a theory cannot integrate a new fact
or a discrepancy, the theory is revised. It's called science. Look into it.
Doug
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas W. Thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
17 Sep 2005 02:26:18 AM |
|
|
"Olrik" <olrik666@yahoo_BACON!_.com> wrote in message
news:7XMWe.2253$sq2.73981@wagner.videotron.net...
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1126915672.596145.278650@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
By definition, a theory can neither be proven or disproven.
I disagree with that.
While a theory cannot be absolutely proven (for all we know next time
an apple falls, it may float upwards, or water may not boil next time
at 100 celsius at sea level), it can have such a weight of evidence
that it is both foolish and futile to gainsay it.
However, a theory can be disproven. For example, as Haldane supposedly
famously said, a fossil rabbit in the Precambrian would disprove the
modern synthesis of Theory of Evolution.
Budikka
If a theory is disproven (it certainly has happened) it is no longer
considered a theory.
A theory is not a proof, so by definition it cannot be "disproven"
(semantics asides). However, when a theory cannot integrate a new fact or
a discrepancy, the theory is revised. It's called science. Look into it.
Doug
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
Or the theory is discarded...
Doug
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
17 Sep 2005 04:03:00 PM |
|
|
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
"Olrik" <olrik666@yahoo_BACON!_.com> wrote in message
news:7XMWe.2253$sq2.73981@wagner.videotron.net...
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1126915672.596145.278650@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
By definition, a theory can neither be proven or disproven.
I disagree with that.
While a theory cannot be absolutely proven (for all we know next time
an apple falls, it may float upwards, or water may not boil next time
at 100 celsius at sea level), it can have such a weight of evidence
that it is both foolish and futile to gainsay it.
However, a theory can be disproven. For example, as Haldane supposedly
famously said, a fossil rabbit in the Precambrian would disprove the
modern synthesis of Theory of Evolution.
Budikka
If a theory is disproven (it certainly has happened) it is no longer
considered a theory.
A theory is not a proof, so by definition it cannot be "disproven"
(semantics asides). However, when a theory cannot integrate a new fact or
a discrepancy, the theory is revised. It's called science. Look into it.
Doug
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
Or the theory is discarded...
It's quite rare that the entire body of a theory is discarded. And when
that happens, it means the new theory is on much more solid scientific
ground.
Olrik
Doug
.
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas W. Thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
17 Sep 2005 04:15:10 PM |
|
|
<olrik666@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1126990980.574967.23860@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
"Olrik" <olrik666@yahoo_BACON!_.com> wrote in message
news:7XMWe.2253$sq2.73981@wagner.videotron.net...
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1126915672.596145.278650@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
Douglas W. Thomas wrote:
By definition, a theory can neither be proven or disproven.
I disagree with that.
While a theory cannot be absolutely proven (for all we know next time
an apple falls, it may float upwards, or water may not boil next time
at 100 celsius at sea level), it can have such a weight of evidence
that it is both foolish and futile to gainsay it.
However, a theory can be disproven. For example, as Haldane
supposedly
famously said, a fossil rabbit in the Precambrian would disprove the
modern synthesis of Theory of Evolution.
Budikka
If a theory is disproven (it certainly has happened) it is no longer
considered a theory.
A theory is not a proof, so by definition it cannot be "disproven"
(semantics asides). However, when a theory cannot integrate a new fact
or
a discrepancy, the theory is revised. It's called science. Look into
it.
Doug
--
Olrik
aa #1981
Qualified SMASH member
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
Or the theory is discarded...
It's quite rare that the entire body of a theory is discarded. And when
that happens, it means the new theory is on much more solid scientific
ground.
Olrik
Doug
I would agree ....
Doug
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "H, William Esque" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 06:39:29 PM |
|
|
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:wWFWe.340$Ew4.79@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:ZjFWe.85$g32.15@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:7rBWe.1675$mw5.1287@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote
in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of
providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof,
This is a misconception that many people have. In none of the
professional literature does any scientist claim to prove anything.
That is simple not true. There are viritually unending scientific
facts that are put forth such the boiling point of water on the earth.
A scientific theory is just that, a theory based on many observable
facts but not enough to call it a scientific fact.
It's pointless to debate this issue. Go to _any_ search engine and
check *Proof in Science* and see what you find. There is a good
little search engine called *dogpile* try that. If you find something
stating that proof exist in science, let me know.
http://www.dogpile.com/info.dogpl/
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jude" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 06:44:32 PM |
|
|
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:3HIWe.5145$ha1.710@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:wWFWe.340$Ew4.79@bignews5.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:ZjFWe.85$g32.15@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:7rBWe.1675$mw5.1287@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net>
wrote
in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of
providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof,
This is a misconception that many people have. In none of the
professional literature does any scientist claim to prove
anything.
That is simple not true. There are viritually unending scientific
facts that are put forth such the boiling point of water on the
earth.
A scientific theory is just that, a theory based on many
observable
facts but not enough to call it a scientific fact.
It's pointless to debate this issue. Go to _any_ search engine and
check *Proof in Science* and see what you find. There is a good
little search engine called *dogpile* try that. If you find
something
stating that proof exist in science, let me know.
I know of dogpile, google and many more. There are probably 100 or
more search engines across the globe.
I don't have to research. I already KNOW that there is scientific
facts such as the boiling point of water on a given elevation on earth
is always the same.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Tim K." |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 09:12:49 PM |
|
|
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:3HIWe.5145$ha1.710@bignews6.bellsouth.net...
It's pointless to debate this issue.
Actually it's not. But I would first require you to define "proof".
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas W. Thomas" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 05:40:53 PM |
|
|
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:ZjFWe.85$g32.15@bignews1.bellsouth.net...
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:7rBWe.1675$mw5.1287@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof,
This is a misconception that many people have. In none of the
professional literature does any scientist claim to prove anything.
otherwise it is
called a scientific theory. A scientific theory is just that, a theory
but based on many observable facts but not enough facts to call it
scientific fact.
For proof in science, the measure stick is the "degree of signifance" as
defined and judged by the applicable scientific community. Not to be
confused with "absolution".
Doug
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
16 Sep 2005 05:29:11 PM |
|
|
H, William Esque wrote:
"Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou> wrote in message
news:7rBWe.1675$mw5.1287@bignews3.bellsouth.net...
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net>
wrote in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of
providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof,
This is a misconception that many people have. In none of the
professional literature does any scientist claim to prove
anything.
When science tests claims, when science looks to see if evidence
of a test supports or does not support a theory, that is EXACTLY
hat science is doing. It is done every day. Some things are so
well supported by evidence that they are considered proven
truths, and I have read more than a few essays from scientists
over the last decade overtly pointing out that very fact.
Relativity, quantum physics, evolution, these things are true and
are not going to be overturned by new findings tomorrow and ever
worthwhile scientsit worth the name knows that.
This bizarre notion science never proves anything is *****.
otherwise it is
called a scientific theory. A scientific theory is just that,
a theory but based on many observable facts but not enough
facts to call it scientific fact.
--
The official spokesman of the Foxes said
today that investigation into what happened
to the henhouse may be needed.
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
17 Sep 2005 02:24:36 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 16 Sep 2005 10:25:13 -0500, "Jude" <Jude@petitechenier.bayou>
wrote:
"H, William Esque" <hwe@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:yoBWe.2255$874.1185@bignews4.bellsouth.net...
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in
message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing
proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Actually, science IS in the business of providing proof, otherwise it is
called a scientific theory. A scientific theory is just that, a theory
but based on many observable facts but not enough facts to call it
scientific fact.
No theory will ever be fact. The fact is what's observed. The theory
is the set of proposals that explains the fact.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "bob young" |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OFGOD) |
16 Sep 2005 11:01:03 PM |
|
|
--------------FBE6ED63C73F25EF8D030FBB
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-7; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
"H, William Esque" wrote:
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
"Faith is not a justification, but an admission that
there is no justification. If there are rational
reasons to believe something, then "faith" is
superfluous. If there are no rational reasons to
believe something, then continued belief is, by
definition, irrational."
[Acknowledgements to Godfrey]
What is there in Christianity that does not ultimately boil down to putting
one's belief and faith in men? The Bible? Written by men. Inspired by God?
So men say. Which books are Scripture? The ones chosen by men. What do they
mean? What men (including oneself) say they mean. Illumined by the Spirit?
So men say. What is the Spirit telling you? Whatever you (an ordinary human)
think He is telling you.
Since the Christian God does not show up in person to give us anything to
believe in, the only option available to us is to put our trust in what men say
and think and feel *about* God. To put one's faith in the stories,
superstitions, and subjective thoughts and feelings of men is not faith *in*
God, but faith *about* God, and specifically faith in what *men* believe about
God. Ultimately, it is faith in Man.
[With acknowledgements to Mark Nutter]
The only person who is a worse liar than a faith healer is his patient.
[Abraham Lincoln]
"I refuse to prove I exist", says god. "Because proof denies faith and
without faith, I am nothing"
[Douglas Adams].
Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to
evade the need to think and evaluate evidence.
Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of,
the lack of evidence.
[Richard Dawkins]
"Faith is to the human what sand is to the ostrich"
It was the schoolboy who said: "Faith is believing what you know ain't so."
[Mark Twain (1835-1910)
We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence.
[Bertrand Russell]
Bob
Humanist Brit.
Hong Kong
"Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
news:1126659696.122004.275650@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Since Disaster Dave put out a call for proof of god - which has been
met - I thought I'd challenge him in return to provide proof of this
god of his, using exactly the same terms he demanded. Here it is:
Hi all,
Each time I RESPOND to a claim by someone that god is a fact and is
true, period, they never seem to provide said proof. Rather...
1) They throw out insults.
2) They claim that I just don't understand religion. I am well
educated in various branches of religion. They however, are not and it
upsets them, that
the standard mantra and rhetoric doesn't work.
3) They repeat the claim that there is a "mountain of evidence" for god
and yet, still fail to provide said proof.
4) They paste in web links and claim, "There is your proof!". Yet, the
link provides no such thing and when I ask them to, in their own words,
discuss in detail how it is proof, the silence is deafening.
5) They begin to insult science and claim that religion has disproved
our scientific method. This is done, after their repeated claim that
religion
has no interest in science, nor in the factual.
6) They try to turn the tables, claiming that when I respond to their
positive claim that god is a fact and is true, that it is up to me to
disprove their claim. In other words, they get to say whatever they
want we have to disprove it.
7) They seem to think that the lack of proof is proof.
It's a shame that the people don't know, that this sort of nonsensical
behavior would not be tolerated in science. You claim god is science
and seem to think that providing zero proof, along with insults, is
proof.
God is not science and associating with science in a text book, or by
speech, does not make it science, any more than beer is athletic,
simply because it is sold at football games.
The fact is people, in no branch of science, is a request for evidence
met with insults and silence regarding said proof. Only in god, do we
see this and that should tell us all we need to know.
If it were a genuine god, the proof would have been displayed for all
to see and the opposition would have been silenced, once and for all.
And while they try to blame science for ignorance of "real religion",
the fact is, that the inventor of the religious method was anonymous!
No one knows who it was or what their motives or agenda were, yet
everyone swallows this as gospel!
The fact is, that ignorance was found in religious societies, who
always tend to be far behind in scientific advancement. It is the
scientific nations
that brought knowledge of our universe to where it is today, not
religion and
the great learning institutions, such as Yale, Harvard, etc., were
established to pursue this knowledge, nto wallow in mythology. It is
now, that they have become so assaulted by fundamentlaists, that
education in the USA has gone down in quality. Coincidence?
Absolutely not.
And btw, don't ask me to prove any of this. By YOUR OWN LOGIC, the
burden of proof is on YOU.
So now I make a call to the theists.
"Show me the money!"
Where is the proof of god?
And don't ask me about whether or not theists are lying, or to disprove
it, or paste in web links, etc., etc..
PROVE GOD, OR HAVE THE INTEGRITY TO ADMIT THAT YOU CAN'T!!!
And be ready to discuss, IN YOUR OWN WORDS, HOW AND WHY what you
provide proves what you claim it does. Saying, "scriptures prove it",
is not proof, unless you can show which exact texts and why and how
they prove what you claim and be able to respond to a rebuttal.
If you can't do that, then IT IS YOU who "DOESN'T understand science".
Even paul knew that the scientific evidence wasn't there, to support a
resurrection and so, he revived mythology and repackaged it in
a non-Jewish version, called, "Christianity".
You have one camp of theists who know that Judaism did not change and
another camp that knows that sudden religious changes do occur. They
both disprove each other and yet, it never occurs to them, that maybe
they're both wrong. Maybe neither happened.
So stop with the "what stops it from happening" garbage and show the
proof of god.
And don't bother me with the "religion doesn't work that way" garbage
either. I know that, but you don't, or you wouldn't be making the
claims you do. Thus, your approach is anti-science, from go.
You claim it's true, without a doubt. This is something that is not to
be doubted and only a fool would and so, it requires ABSOLUTE PROOF
THAT LEAVES ABSOLUTELY ZERO ROOM FOR DOUBT!!!
So cough up the proof for god and shut us all up. If you can, then I
will throw my "Ancestor's Tale" away and renounce my science.
And don't tell me it has nothing to do with me renouncing my science,
when we all know that you spend your time trashing Christianity and
claiming that "the dead hand of science" has hampered religion.
So where is it? We're all waiting. And as I said, make sure that you
can back it up, with references that you can defend, in detail, in your
own words.
I will not entertain any sidetracking, nor any questions. This is
about answers. YOUR answers, as evolutionists, PROVING BEYOND ANY
DOUBT that god is reality.
I am ready. Are you?
Budikka
This one will be fun......
Doug
--------------FBE6ED63C73F25EF8D030FBB
Content-Type: text/html; charset=iso-8859-7
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
<!doctype html public "-//w3c//dtd html 4.0 transitional//en">
<html>
<p>"H, William Esque" wrote:
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net>
wrote in message
<br>><a href="news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com">news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com</a>...
<p> Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing
proof,
<br>so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is especially
<br>inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.</blockquote>
"Faith is not a justification, but an admission that
<br> there is no justification. If there are rational
<br> reasons to believe something, then "faith" is
<br> superfluous. If there are no rational reasons to
<br> believe something, then continued belief is, by
<br> definition, irrational."
<p>[Acknowledgements to Godfrey]
<p>What is there in Christianity that does not ultimately boil down to
putting one's belief and faith in men? The Bible? Written by
men. Inspired by God? So men say. Which books are Scripture?
The ones chosen by men. What do they mean? What men (including
oneself) say they mean. Illumined by the Spirit? So men say.
What is the Spirit telling you? Whatever you (an ordinary human)
think He is telling you.
<p>Since the Christian God does not show up in person to give us anything
to believe in, the only option available to us is to put our trust in what
men say and think and feel *about* God. To put one's faith in the
stories, superstitions, and subjective thoughts and feelings of men is
not faith *in* God, but faith *about* God, and specifically faith in what
*men* believe about God. Ultimately, it is faith in Man.
<br>[With acknowledgements to Mark Nutter]
<p>The only person who is a worse liar than a faith healer is his patient.
<br>[Abraham Lincoln]
<p>"I refuse to prove I exist", says god. "Because proof denies faith and
<br>without faith, I am nothing"
<br>[Douglas Adams].
<p>Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to
<br>evade the need to think and evaluate evidence.
<br>Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of,
<br>the lack of evidence.
<br>[Richard Dawkins]
<p>"Faith is to the human what sand is to the ostrich"
<p>It was the schoolboy who said: "Faith is believing what you know ain't
so."
<br>[Mark Twain (1835-1910)
<p>We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence. <br>
[Bertrand Russell]
<p>Bob
<br>Humanist Brit.
<br>Hong Kong
<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<pre></pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote TYPE=CITE>
<p>>
<br>> "Budikka666" <budikka1@netscape.net> wrote in message
<br>> <a href="news:1126659696.122004.275650@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com">news:1126659696.122004.275650@g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com</a>...
<br>>> Since Disaster Dave put out a call for proof of god - which has
been
<br>>> met - I thought I'd challenge him in return to provide proof of
this
<br>>> god of his, using exactly the same terms he demanded. Here
it is:
<br>>>
<br>>> Hi all,
<br>>>
<br>>> Each time I RESPOND to a claim by someone that god is a fact and
is
<br>>> true, period, they never seem to provide said proof. Rather...
<br>>>
<br>>> 1) They throw out insults.
<br>>>
<br>>> 2) They claim that I just don't understand religion. I am
well
<br>>> educated in various branches of religion. They however, are
not and it
<br>>> upsets them, that
<br>>> the standard mantra and rhetoric doesn't work.
<br>>>
<br>>> 3) They repeat the claim that there is a "mountain of evidence"
for god
<br>>> and yet, still fail to provide said proof.
<br>>>
<br>>> 4) They paste in web links and claim, "There is your proof!".
Yet, the
<br>>> link provides no such thing and when I ask them to, in their own
words,
<br>>> discuss in detail how it is proof, the silence is deafening.
<br>>>
<br>>> 5) They begin to insult science and claim that religion has disproved
<br>>> our scientific method. This is done, after their repeated
claim that
<br>>> religion
<br>>> has no interest in science, nor in the factual.
<br>>>
<br>>> 6) They try to turn the tables, claiming that when I respond to
their
<br>>> positive claim that god is a fact and is true, that it is up to
me to
<br>>> disprove their claim. In other words, they get to say whatever
they
<br>>> want we have to disprove it.
<br>>>
<br>>> 7) They seem to think that the lack of proof is proof.
<br>>>
<br>>> It's a shame that the people don't know, that this sort of nonsensical
<br>>> behavior would not be tolerated in science. You claim god
is science
<br>>> and seem to think that providing zero proof, along with insults,
is
<br>>> proof.
<br>>>
<br>>> God is not science and associating with science in a text book,
or by
<br>>> speech, does not make it science, any more than beer is athletic,
<br>>> simply because it is sold at football games.
<br>>>
<br>>> The fact is people, in no branch of science, is a request for evidence
<br>>> met with insults and silence regarding said proof. Only in
god, do we
<br>>> see this and that should tell us all we need to know.
<br>>>
<br>>> If it were a genuine god, the proof would have been displayed for
all
<br>>> to see and the opposition would have been silenced, once and for
all.
<br>>>
<br>>> And while they try to blame science for ignorance of "real religion",
<br>>>> the fact is, that the inventor of the religious method was anonymous!
<br>>> No one knows who it was or what their motives or agenda were, yet
<br>>> everyone swallows this as gospel!
<br>>>
<br>>> The fact is, that ignorance was found in religious societies, who
<br>>> always tend to be far behind in scientific advancement. It
is the
<br>>> scientific nations
<br>>> that brought knowledge of our universe to where it is today, not
<br>>> religion and
<br>>> the great learning institutions, such as Yale, Harvard, etc., were
<br>>> established to pursue this knowledge, nto wallow in mythology.
It is
<br>>> now, that they have become so assaulted by fundamentlaists, that
<br>>> education in the USA has gone down in quality. Coincidence?
<br>>> Absolutely not.
<br>>>
<br>>> And btw, don't ask me to prove any of this. By YOUR OWN LOGIC,
the
<br>>> burden of proof is on YOU.
<br>>>
<br>>> So now I make a call to the theists.
<br>>>
<br>>> "Show me the money!"
<br>>>
<br>>> Where is the proof of god?
<br>>>
<br>>> And don't ask me about whether or not theists are lying, or to disprove
<br>>> it, or paste in web links, etc., etc..
<br>>>
<br>>> PROVE GOD, OR HAVE THE INTEGRITY TO ADMIT THAT YOU CAN'T!!!
<br>>>
<br>>> And be ready to discuss, IN YOUR OWN WORDS, HOW AND WHY what you
<br>>>> provide proves what you claim it does. Saying, "scriptures
prove it",
<br>>> is not proof, unless you can show which exact texts and why and
how
<br>>> they prove what you claim and be able to respond to a rebuttal.
<br>>>
<br>>> If you can't do that, then IT IS YOU who "DOESN'T understand science".
<br>>>
<br>>> Even paul knew that the scientific evidence wasn't there, to support
a
<br>>> resurrection and so, he revived mythology and repackaged it in
<br>>> a non-Jewish version, called, "Christianity".
<br>>>
<br>>> You have one camp of theists who know that Judaism did not change
and
<br>>> another camp that knows that sudden religious changes do occur.
They
<br>>> both disprove each other and yet, it never occurs to them, that
maybe
<br>>> they're both wrong. Maybe neither happened.
<br>>>
<br>>> So stop with the "what stops it from happening" garbage and show
the
<br>>> proof of god.
<br>>>
<br>>> And don't bother me with the "religion doesn't work that way" garbage
<br>>> either. I know that, but you don't, or you wouldn't be making
the
<br>>> claims you do. Thus, your approach is anti-science, from go.
<br>>>
<br>>> You claim it's true, without a doubt. This is something that
is not to
<br>>> be doubted and only a fool would and so, it requires ABSOLUTE PROOF
<br>>> THAT LEAVES ABSOLUTELY ZERO ROOM FOR DOUBT!!!
<br>>>
<br>>> So cough up the proof for god and shut us all up. If you can,
then I
<br>>> will throw my "Ancestor's Tale" away and renounce my science.
<br>>>
<br>>> And don't tell me it has nothing to do with me renouncing my science,
<br>>> when we all know that you spend your time trashing Christianity
and
<br>>> claiming that "the dead hand of science" has hampered religion.
<br>>>
<br>>> So where is it? We're all waiting. And as I said, make
sure that you
<br>>> can back it up, with references that you can defend, in detail,
in your
<br>>> own words.
<br>>>
<br>>> I will not entertain any sidetracking, nor any questions.
This is
<br>>> about answers. YOUR answers, as evolutionists, PROVING BEYOND
ANY
<br>>> DOUBT that god is reality.
<br>>>
<br>>> I am ready. Are you?
<br>>>
<br>>> Budikka
<br>>>
<br>>
<br>> This one will be fun......
<br>>
<br>> Doug
<br>>
<br>></blockquote>
</html>
--------------FBE6ED63C73F25EF8D030FBB--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tim K." |
|
| Title: Re: Why the Double Standard(A CALL FOR PASTOR DAVE TO PROVIDE PROOF OF GOD) |
17 Sep 2005 05:48:27 AM |
|
|
"bob young" <alaspectrum@netvigator.com> wrote in message
<snip>
Fine set of quotes there!
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Day" |
|
| Title: Evidence vs. Proof |
16 Sep 2005 10:33:20 PM |
|
|
H, William Esque wrote:
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net> wrote in message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of providing proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Science is in the business of providing evidence, not proof.
It is true that scientific evidence does not attain the certainty of
logical proof, but this does not justify the claim that belief in
science is mere faith. There are degrees of justification, and a goal of
scientific inquiry is to find ways of justifying (or disjustifying) claims.
<snip>
Colin Day aa #1500
.
|
|
|
| User: "wbarwell" |
|
| Title: Re: Evidence vs. Proof |
17 Sep 2005 04:12:28 AM |
|
|
Colin Day wrote:
H, William Esque wrote:
"> Douglas W. Thomas" <douglas.w.thomas@NOSPAMcomcast.net>
wrote in message
news:AemdnZyUZuXh47renZ2dnUVZ_smdnZ2d@comcast.com...
Why the double standard? Science is not in the business of
providing proof,
so why does anyone expect Religion to provide proof? This is
especially
inane considering that religion is based on faith not proof.
Science is in the business of providing evidence, not proof.
Evidence = proof, small p.
What is it about science that causes so many many people to get
loopy about it?
People seem to forget that words like proof have general
nontechnical meanings.
To provide supporting evidence for theory, to test a
theory, is to prove a theory is truth.
You can prove a theory is true, false, or fail to
prove anything one way or the other.
When cosmologists developed a theory on the nature
of the Big Boom's expansion that suggested that there
would be tell-tale-traces of non-uniformity to be
found in te backround radiation of the Universe,to
test that theory, they sent up telescopes mounted
on balloons in the antarctic. The evidence was
found exactly as expected and was later confirmed
by Hubble space telescope observations and others.
Thus, they proved indeed that the expected observations
one would find if their theory was true were there.
Thus proving their theory was correct, that the expansion's
tell tale traces were there as they must be.
The evidence supported the theory when tested for that evidence.
They proved their case.
What is it about the word proof that drives people loopy?
Its like the word trinitarian or Jesus.
It is true that scientific evidence does not attain the
certainty of logical proof, but this does not justify the claim
that belief in science is mere faith. There are degrees of
justification, and a goal of scientific inquiry is to find ways
of justifying (or disjustifying) claims.
<snip>
Colin Day aa #1500
--
The official spokesman of the Foxes said
today that investigation into what happened
to the henhouse may be needed.
Cheerful Charlie
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
