The majority of people on Earth believe in God or some higher power.  Are you saying less than half the world accepts reality?

There are many documented cases of faith having more effect on healing a patient than medicine was able to.  It's a documented FACT that a patient's mental state greatly influences the effectiveness or lack of same in their treatment.  Stress is a well-known factor in many ailments.  "Stress kills."  So, if someone's beliefs create confidence, reduces fear and stress, and gives a person faith they will be healed, and they in fact are, how can anyone discount the positive effects of those beliefs? 
http://viralk.com/doctors-puzzled-babys-miraculous-healing/

Yes they also believe in thousands of different gods, which one is correct?  There is no proof of god.  Self belief  and self confidence does effect health this is part of reality.  The mental state of a patient is very important.   This however does not prove of a man in the sky and it never will.  In fact you proved my point that coincidence does not mean correlation and fact.  The only way any of us will ever truly know if god exists is when we die.  What we have disproven is many religions stories.  The earth is not some 5000 years old.  We were not created in 7 days.  There was no magical arc that saved one of each animal.  There wasn't no intelligent species before us that perished to fire.  We are not some weird aliens from space.

Yes they also believe in thousands of different gods, which one is correct?  There is no proof of god.  Self belief  and self confidence does effect health this is part of reality.  The mental state of a patient is very important.   This however does not prove of a man in the sky and it never will.  In fact you proved my point that coincidence does not mean correlation and fact.  The only way any of us will ever truly know if god exists is when we die.  What we have disproven is many religions stories.  The earth is not some 5000 years old.  We were not created in 7 days.  There was no magical arc that saved one of each animal.  There wasn't no intelligent species before us that perished to fire.  We are not some weird aliens from space.

It's amazing you can talk with such confidence about things you can't possibly prove or observe.

You seem to be able to latch onto any theory you like without question, but you discount anyone who does the same with a different theory.  Why is that?

It's amazing you can talk with such confidence about things you can't possibly prove or observe.

You seem to be abel to latch on any theory you like without question, but you discount anyone who does the same with a different theory.  Why is that?

As for biblical text, I suggest you do some real research instead of using the words literally.  These texts were not only translated by the few educated in society, they were also "tweaked" by certain rulers as evidenced by the various versions available. 

Case in point:  Much of the verbiage is taken from the day it was written, including phrases they knew to mean certain concepts -- not meant to be take literally.  "40 days and 40 nights". for example, appears several times.  That's not a measure of days, but a phrase that means "for a really, really long time".  When the Jews delivered from Egypt wandered the desert for 40 days and nights, they did so for as long as it took for all those generations who'd sinned to be replaced.  That's way more than 40 days!!

The same holds for creating the heavens in 7 days.  That was figurative.  There was no way to know what a day was during the formation of the solar system.  Orbits had not yet been established, and rotation of the Earth had not begun.  The purpose of using that phrase was for story telling -- to make it easy to remember and pass down, and to explain why the Sabbath is a day of rest.

So, stop with slamming religions and their teachings.  You aren't educated well enough to even argue properly.  Your knowledge on the subject is extremely limited, or you wouldn't make such ignorant comments.

It's amazing you can talk with such confidence about things you can't possibly prove or observe.

You seem to be abel to latch on any theory you like without question, but you discount anyone who does the same with a different theory.  Why is that?

It amazes me you believe in stuff with no proof.  Please prove that those stories happen.  So far everything says the earth is billions of years old, it is not possible to have a healthy species off one persons rib.  Or a boat with only 1 male and 1 female of each species (incest doesn't work).  If there were some former intelligent species like the Muslims believe we would have proof like the dinosaurs.  If we were space aliens like Scientologist believe we would have proof of that too.   Please prove your god exists.   If you do I will apologize and accept.  This is why I'm agnostic,  I will find the truth in the end until then there is no proof.

As for biblical text, I suggest you do some real research instead of using the words literally.  These texts were not only translated by the few educated in society, they were also "tweaked" by certain rulers as evidenced by the various versions available. 

Case in point:  Much of the verbiage is taken from the day it was written, including phrases they knew to mean certain concepts -- not meant to be take literally.  "40 days and 40 nights". for example, appears several times.  That's not a measure of days, but a phrase that means "for a really, really long time".  When the Jews delivered from Egypt wandered the desert for 40 days and nights, they did so for as long as it took for all those generations who'd sinned to be replaced.  That's way more than 40 days!!

The same holds for creating the heavens in 7 days.  That was figurative.  There was no way to know what a day was during the formation of the solar system.  Orbits had not yet been established, and rotation of the Earth had not begun.  The purpose of using that phrase was for story telling -- to make it easy to remember and pass down, and to explain why the Sabbath is a day of rest.

So, stop with slamming religions and their teachings.  You aren't educated well enough to even argue properly.  Your knowledge on the subject is extremely limited, or you wouldn't make such ignorant comments.

Sure I don't know all the fancy stories that all the religions have.  What I do have is science facts.  There is no way "7 days" equals billions of years.  There is no way old civilization even knew how planets and everything worked.  They didn't even know how birds fly or how gravity worked. You are proving my point exactly,  religion is just interpretations by select people.  Its just like how cults work.  One crazy dude creates something,  people follow,  people interpenetrate it and bam a religion is formed.  Look at Mormonism or Scientology for a recent example.

This is what I got from a google search.
Day One – Night and Day   
Day Two – Sky and Sea   
Day Three – Land and Vegetation   
Day Four – Stars, Sun and Moon
Day Five – Sea creatures including fish and Birds
Day Six – Animals and Mankind
This is not a possible order of things to be created even over "billions of years"  if you were not to define how long a "day" lasts.

Wow. I can't believe the lack of respect for those here in this forum that believe in God. 

It's ok... he'll be taking to God about it someday.

It amazes me you believe in stuff with no proof.  Please prove that those stories happen.  So far everything says the earth is billions of years old, it is not possible to have a healthy species off one persons rib.  Or a boat with only 1 male and 1 female of each species (incest doesn't work).  If there were some former intelligent species like the Muslims believe we would have proof like the dinosaurs.  If we were space aliens like Scientologist believe we would have proof of that too.   Please prove your god exists.   If you do I will apologize and accept.  This is why I'm agnostic,  I will find the truth in the end until then there is no proof.


Sure I don't know all the fancy stories that all the religions have.  What I do have is science facts.  There is no way "7 days" equals billions of years.  There is no way old civilization even knew how planets and everything worked.  They didn't even know how birds fly or how gravity worked. You are proving my point exactly,  religion is just interpretations by select people.  Its just like how cults work.  One crazy dude creates something,  people follow,  people interpenetrate it and bam a religion is formed.  Look at Mormonism or Scientology for a recent example.

This is what I got from a google search.
Day One – Night and Day   
Day Two – Sky and Sea   
Day Three – Land and Vegetation   
Day Four – Stars, Sun and Moon
Day Five – Sea creatures including fish and Birds
Day Six – Animals and Mankind
This is not a possible order of things to be created even over "billions of years"  if you were not to define how long a "day" lasts.

I don't have to prove God exists.  I can prove religion exists, and it's been around much longer than modern science.  More people know their scriptures than understand the order of the planets or principles of avionics. 

What's hard to believe is how someone professing to know so much about the world doesn't know that disrespecting the beliefs of so many is not making your arguments more convincing.  Whether you believe in any religion or not, you have to accept religion is an important part of more people's lives than the number of agnostics.

There is nothing that says science and religion can't coexist.  There is much more to be taught than "how old is the Earth?"  It's a great trivia question, but how does that answer impact your life?  Hmm?  I'd really like to know,.

Wow. I can't believe the lack of respect for those here in this forum that believe in God. 

I'm just being frank,  You are free to believe what you want to believe. I'm simply providing my opinions and the facts they are based on.

It's ok... he'll be taking to God about it someday.

Maybe I'm agnostic so I do believe there might be a god out there.  I will indeed find out when I die what happens. 

I don't have to prove God exists.  I can prove religion exists, and it's been around much longer than modern science.  More people know their scriptures than understand the order of the planets or principles of avionics. 

What's hard to believe is how someone professing to know so much about the world doesn't know that disrespecting the beliefs of so many is not making your arguments more convincing.  Whether you believe in any religion or not, you have to accept religion is an important part of more people's lives than the number of agnostics.

There is nothing that says science and religion can't coexist.  There is much more to be taught than "how old is the Earth?"  It's a great trivia question, but how does that answer impact your life?  Hmm?  I'd really like to know,.

So what you are saying is because its old its true?  Just cause its popular its a fact?  Am I reading this correctly?  The one who laments me on "facts" and proof?  People can believe whatever they want this is America, but don't try and argue facts and site religion.  I've never said religion serves no purpose it was used in the past as a moral compass.  Even now people use it as a way for morality and to scare those into behaving.  But that fact alone doesn't make any religion a fact or true.   Only science can do that.  I like to think humanity has evolved passed the need to believe in an unknown to act moral.  The answer to "how old is the earth"  impacts my life cause I choose to believe in facts and science and it validates that.  It can be proven.  Its tangible.  Its not something I only have to blindly believe in.

It's ok... he'll be taking to God about it someday.

Your a good man for not getting angry JL. It is too bad he just doesn't see the lack of respect he shows. It is one thing to be "Frank". It is another to not consider other's feelings. 

I'm just being frank,  You are free to believe what you want to believe. I'm simply providing my opinions and the facts they are based on.


Maybe I'm agnostic so I do believe there might be a god out there.  I will indeed find out when I die what happens. 


So what you are saying is because its old its true?  Just cause its popular its a fact?  Am I reading this correctly?  The one who laments me on "facts" and proof?  People can believe whatever they want this is America, but don't try and argue facts and site religion.  I've never said religion serves no purpose it was used in the past as a moral compass.  Even now people use it as a way for morality and to scare those into behaving.  But that fact alone doesn't make any religion a fact or true.   Only science can do that.  I like to think humanity has evolved passed the need to believe in an unknown to act moral.  The answer to "how old is the earth"  impacts my life cause I choose to believe in facts and science and it validates that.  It can be proven.  Its tangible.  Its not something I only have to blindly believe in.

OBTUSE MUCH?

I have to explain what most would just comprehend.  *sigh*

It's not about what's true.  It's about what people believe to be true and/or important/  If you don't acknowledge that aspect, then you're displaying arrogance and a lack of empathy. 

It sounds like science is your religion.  Imagine someone else feeling as strongly about religion.  Your disrespect isn't going to convince anyone to agree with you.

OBTUSE MUCH?

I have to explain what most would just comprehend.  *sigh*

It's not about what's true.  It's about what people believe to be true and/or important/  If you don't acknowledge that aspect, then you're displaying arrogance and a lack of empathy. 

It sounds like science is your religion.  Imagine someone else feeling as strongly about religion.  Your disrespect isn't going to convince anyone to agree with you.

The problem is when you debate me on climate change and other issues, you demand facts and say I'm incorrect.  You are saying my beliefs are wrong based on your "facts" which are now just opinions .  Now you talk about belief being good enough and as a reason why you are correct?  Hypocritical much?  I constantly get flack for what I believe in and what I try and prove. I welcome others debating science as there is a correct answer in the end and science proves it.  I try and think logically, though I'm not perfect.
Just like how others argue for gun control based only on their beliefs not facts.  Its hard to pick and choose and not be hypocritical.  Though in the end we are all guilty of some hypocritical-ness as we are all strongly opinionated.  Its not the lack of empathy per say I just try to argue with facts not feelings. 

The problem is when you debate me on climate change and other issues, you demand facts and say I'm incorrect.  You are saying my beliefs are wrong based on your "facts" which are now just opinions .  Now you talk about belief being good enough and as a reason why you are correct?  Hypocritical much?  I constantly get flack for what I believe in and what I try and prove. I welcome others debating science as there is a correct answer in the end and science proves it.  I try and think logically, though I'm not perfect.
Just like how others argue for gun control based only on their beliefs not facts.  Its hard to pick and choose and not be hypocritical.  Though in the end we are all guilty of some hypocritical-ness as we are all strongly opinionated.  Its not the lack of empathy per say I just try to argue with facts not feelings.

You get flack about your CC beliefs because you argue forever that anyone who disagrees is wrong.

You once said, if Climate Change predictions are wrong, wouldn't we rather be safe than sorry?  Why do you take the exact opposite stance on God?

You get flack about your CC beliefs because you argue forever that anyone who disagrees is wrong.

You once said, if Climate Change predictions are wrong, wouldn't we rather be safe than sorry?  Why do you take the exact opposite stance on God?

I try to best put forward as many facts as I can for what I believe in. There are alot of tangible information out there for that.  I have a open mind as in if you prove me wrong I will agree with you.  So far that hasen't really happened.  I've never said it was "wrong" to believe in God. Comparing that climate change quote that was in the context that with this overwhelming information that the climate is changing and mankind's almost definitely are a large reason its happening, isn't it better to believe in thousands of studies that have factual evidence?  While we don't have the technology to successfully know exactly whats going on we do have some sense.  Unlike god which by definition we will never truly understand. The problem with God is there are too many people believing too many different things all based on opinions.  CC is happening, if by humans or other its changing.  Our two sides of the argument is more of whos/whats causing it and what we should do about it. In the end it will be proven with facts whats correct. 

I think Heavies said it best: "Tunnelvision".

mankind's almost definitely are a large reason its happening

wait, i thought you said it was a "proven fact"?

CC is happening, if by humans or other its changing. 

"or other"?
what happened to "proven fact"?

I try to best put forward as many facts as I can for what I believe in. There are alot of tangible information out there for that.  I have a open mind as in if you prove me wrong I will agree with you.  So far that hasen't really happened.  I've never said it was "wrong" to believe in God. Comparing that climate change quote that was in the context that with this overwhelming information that the climate is changing and mankind's almost definitely are a large reason its happening, isn't it better to believe in thousands of studies that have factual evidence?  While we don't have the technology to successfully know exactly whats going on we do have some sense.  Unlike god which by definition we will never truly understand. The problem with God is there are too many people believing too many different things all based on opinions.  CC is happening, if by humans or other its changing.  Our two sides of the argument is more of whos/whats causing it and what we should do about it. In the end it will be proven with facts whats correct.

Serious question, so answer honestly:  Do you believe there is life in our galaxy other than what's on Earth?

Wow. I can't believe the lack of respect for those here in this forum that believe in God. 

You guys (and me) ream Omni when he fails to provide sufficiently compelling evidence for his anthropogenic global warming future doom forecasts, sometimes even going so far as to use name-calling and other demeaning language and insinuations against him. Yet when he merely challenges you to provide your best evidence for your religious beliefs, or notes that you don't provide anything that he considers substantial evidence for your beliefs, you AGAIN attack him, this time for failing to show respect to people who believe things without compelling evidence that will withstand critical scrutiny. So you guys "respect" those who practice the religion of Satanism, or the ISIS-interpretation of the religion of Islam? If not, why not? They've all got their "holy books" from their "god" and fervently believe that what they do is the highest order of their religious duty. You must believe that all "religions" are thus "equal" and all their practitioners deserve "respect" because they are inspired by their god, and therefore would never criticize some other religion, because, after all, none of you have "proof" that yours is "superior" or "a greater reflection of truth", so you have an ethical obligation to treat all adherents with respect and without criticism, right?

Your a good man for not getting angry JL. It is too bad he just doesn't see the lack of respect he shows. It is one thing to be "Frank". It is another to not consider other's feelings. 

Again, so you don't show any "lack of respect" to any other person practicing any other religion? And if for some reason you do, please explain. You wouldn't criticize or "lack respect", but would "consider his feelings" for an Islamic jihadist, doing god's work, when he engages in his religious activities of eliminating "infidels"?

It's not about what's true.  It's about what people believe to be true and/or important/  If you don't acknowledge that aspect, then you're displaying arrogance and a lack of empathy. 

Imagine someone else feeling as strongly about religion.  Your disrespect isn't going to convince anyone to agree with you.

So it's "arrogance and a lack of empathy" when christians criticize some muslims and their beliefs, practices, and actions?

As an aside I'll raise the question of how much respect (and empathy for his chiristian religion-based arguments) you have for former President George W. Bush (and Bob Dole, and Sarah Palin, and Melania Trump, et al.) speechwriter pro-life christian vegan Matthew Scully (author of Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy), who argues that christians have a moral duty, based upon the most basic teachings of their christian religion to be at least vegetarians, but preferably, and more consistently with christian values, vegans. He's reading the same religious texts as any other christians, though likely far more of them, and yet he comes to a conclusion that very few conservatives and christians come to. Here is a brief excerpt from a lengthy article in National Review.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/359761/pro-life-pro-animal-matthew-scully

It is true, as author Mary Eberstadt writes, that factory farming and similar abuses of the animal world are “simultaneously morally urgent and widely ignored by many people, including and inexplicably by many well-meaning but hitherto under-informed Christians.” There is, she observes, “a practiced desire to remain ignorant of those things about which we wish not to know,” a temptation that pro-lifers should be the first to recognize. But this, too, is changing, among people of all ages, faiths, and backgrounds. A highly regarded thinker in conservative circles, Eberstadt offers these points in the foreword to an excellent new book by Fordham scholar Charles Camosy, For Love of Animals: Christian Ethics, Consistent Action — signs that serious people are starting to address these things in a serious way.

So it's "arrogance and a lack of empathy" when christians criticize some muslims and their beliefs, practices, and actions?

As an aside I'll raise the question of how much respect (and empathy for his chiristian religion-based arguments) you have for former President George W. Bush (and Bob Dole, and Sarah Palin, and Melania Trump, et al.) speechwriter pro-life christian vegan Matthew Scully (author of Dominion: The Power of Man, the Suffering of Animals, and the Call to Mercy), who argues that christians have a moral duty, based upon the most basic teachings of their christian religion to be at least vegetarians, but preferably, and more consistently with christian values, vegans. He's reading the same religious texts as any other christians, though likely far more of them, and yet he comes to a conclusion that very few conservatives and christians come to. Here is a brief excerpt from a lengthy article in National Review.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/359761/pro-life-pro-animal-matthew-scully

It is true, as author Mary Eberstadt writes, that factory farming and similar abuses of the animal world are “simultaneously morally urgent and widely ignored by many people, including and inexplicably by many well-meaning but hitherto under-informed Christians.” There is, she observes, “a practiced desire to remain ignorant of those things about which we wish not to know,” a temptation that pro-lifers should be the first to recognize. But this, too, is changing, among people of all ages, faiths, and backgrounds. A highly regarded thinker in conservative circles, Eberstadt offers these points in the foreword to an excellent new book by Fordham scholar Charles Camosy, For Love of Animals: Christian Ethics, Consistent Action — signs that serious people are starting to address these things in a serious way.

I'm an Atheist. You want to try again?

Which one of you all is mauidog?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk