Y
Yorda_7
Guest
water said:
Yes.
geeser said:
i doubt it (sarcasm)
I would
why?
Challenge from the Learner
- Thread starter JeffTheLearner
- Start date
Yes.
i doubt it (sarcasm)
I would
why?
yorda:you dont count your in fantasyland.
yorda: supply a unscientific, but objective way of proving or disproving god.
even water has said he cant supply another way, he's only " objecting the argumentum ad ignorantiam, from the scientific perspective."
yorda: supply a unscientific, but objective way of proving or disproving god.
even water has said he cant supply another way, he's only " objecting the argumentum ad ignorantiam, from the scientific perspective."
Y
Yorda_7
Guest
geeser said:
stupid0. i've already proved the existence of "God". just consider: do you exist? therefore "god" exists. you are god. what else could he be, if not the self?
what does it matter?
No not really. To each his own - so long as they act as civilly toward me as I try to do toward them. If someone wants to believe in a diety, that's their business.superluminal said:
I think my wife and I are good examples. She knows I'm an atheist, and I know she's sincere as a born-again Christian. December will see our 26th anniversary and we haven't killed each other yet.
Horseman42
Registered Senior Member
Why might science not be able to adequately describe reality? It seams to do quite a great job of doing exactly that. I'm willing to admit there may be another way, but until that time I'll continue using what works so far.
Yes, but you offer no other alternative, so how can it be an argument from ignorantiam? If I said the the earth was round would you argue that it may be flat, simply because we may not be able to use science to prove that it's round? This is just being plain silly!
And that's just peachy. The problem arises when those cute, warm-and-fuzzy, unproven, beliefs of yours become entrenched in society and are used to restrict the freedom of individuals if they don't conform. Stay out of my government, my public schools, and the world of the testable and provable. It's easy.
Do you realize that most people have no clue how many atheists there are? And they still think atheist = satan spawn. Why is that? Because we don't have an agenda and we generally keep our mouths shut. Not until theists (christians) started this assault on the constitution (in the US) and the public education system, did we start to become activist. Take a lesson. Shut up and keep your religion private. That's the way Jesus would have wanted it.
Sheesh! I wasn't talking to you directly dalahar. It was more of a rant directed at those theists that think we should have a theocracy. I suppose I should be more clear when I use the collective "you". Sorry for any misunderstanding.
Yes, it's ok. Let it out. It's ok to cry you know. Breathe... There now. Feel better?
JeffTheLearner
Registered Senior Member
Oh'-Kay... Anyway I guess I'll open by quoting a weary Astronomer, and agnostic Dr. Robert Jastrow;
"For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."
=Reading the post here I guess I'll start by pointing out an illusion of bias on part of Creationist presented by a couple of comments by Mr.Superluminal:
(Job 12:7-10); 7"But now ask the beasts, and let them teach you; And the birds of the heavens, and let them tell you. 8"Or speak to the earth, and let it teach you; And let the fish of the sea declare to you. 9"Who among all these does not know That the hand of the LORD has done this, 10In whose hand is the life of every living thing, And the breath of all mankind?"
-So I pointed out the bias among Creationist so lets now see if there is bias on the other side. Lets start with an article in "Humanist magazine (an atheistic publication)" written by Professor J. Dunphy entitled -A Religion for a New Age-;
"I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level, preschool day care or large state university. The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old, and the new, the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism. It will undoubtedly be a long, arduous, painful struggle replete with much sorrow and many tears, but humanism will emerge triumphant, It must if the family of humankind is to survive."
…Some are a little less conspiracy, and more unchaste like in -Confession of a Professed Atheist- in it Aldous Huxley quoted;
"I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption ...For myself, as no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneous liberation from a certain political and economic system, and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom."
It's quite ironic to me that shortly before Darwin's "theory" took hold, the invention of the printing press was wide spread enough for everyone to have there own personal copy of God's Word, such as Romans 1:21-25 which states;"21…For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkend.22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four footed animals and crawling creatures. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen"
=================================================
-Now as for population:
All right, so it seems if you refuse to notice the evidence found in statistics coinciding with todays population, then you must obviously believe in a different scenario. So lets reveal how ridiculous this other scenario is by simple statistics:
-The population growth over a million years would produce 23,256 generations. We calculate the expected population by beginning with one couple one million years ago, and use the same assumptions of a forty-three year generation and 2.5 children per family. The calculations reveal that we should have a total population on earth today of 10^2700 people. The evolutionary theory of a million years of growth would produce trillions * trillions * trillions * trillions of people that should be alive today on our planet. To put this in perspective, this number is greater that the total number of atoms in the vast universe. As for "missing links" being hard to find, all I got to say to this theory is "BONE- Voyage"
Well that’s all I have time to type today I kind of ranted a bit too much, I will be back with a bombardment of information.There is a Creator and much visible proof all around and proof of a Designer, from the exact placement of earth, and the universe to sustain human life, and much more.
Yeshua said in (John 3:19-21):"19"This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. 20"For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21"But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God."
P.S. I wont go strawman on you like some think.
"For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries."
=Reading the post here I guess I'll start by pointing out an illusion of bias on part of Creationist presented by a couple of comments by Mr.Superluminal:
-So are Creationist bias, all I have to say is 'Dugh!'. But would they lie in order to present proof that God exist, most Christians believe that it is a sin to lie, so I highly doubt it. Is it wrong for a Creationist to use scripture as a guide into his/ or her research? No! as a matter of fact it is encouraged in scripture to do so:
(Job 12:7-10); 7"But now ask the beasts, and let them teach you; And the birds of the heavens, and let them tell you. 8"Or speak to the earth, and let it teach you; And let the fish of the sea declare to you. 9"Who among all these does not know That the hand of the LORD has done this, 10In whose hand is the life of every living thing, And the breath of all mankind?"
-So I pointed out the bias among Creationist so lets now see if there is bias on the other side. Lets start with an article in "Humanist magazine (an atheistic publication)" written by Professor J. Dunphy entitled -A Religion for a New Age-;
"I am convinced that the battle for humankind's future must be waged and won in the public school classroom by teachers who correctly perceive their role as the proselytizers of a new faith: a religion of humanity that recognizes and respects the spark of what theologians call divinity in every human being. These teachers must embody the same selfless dedication as the most rabid fundamentalist preachers, for they will be ministers of another sort, utilizing a classroom instead of a pulpit to convey humanist values in whatever subject they teach, regardless of the educational level, preschool day care or large state university. The classroom must and will become an arena of conflict between the old, and the new, the rotting corpse of Christianity, together with all its adjacent evils and misery, and the new faith of humanism. It will undoubtedly be a long, arduous, painful struggle replete with much sorrow and many tears, but humanism will emerge triumphant, It must if the family of humankind is to survive."
…Some are a little less conspiracy, and more unchaste like in -Confession of a Professed Atheist- in it Aldous Huxley quoted;
"I had motives for not wanting the world to have meaning; consequently assumed that it had none, and was able without any difficulty to find satisfying reasons for this assumption ...For myself, as no doubt, for most of my contemporaries, the philosophy of meaninglessness was essentially an instrument of liberation. The liberation we desired was simultaneous liberation from a certain political and economic system, and liberation from a certain system of morality. We objected to the morality because it interfered with our sexual freedom."
It's quite ironic to me that shortly before Darwin's "theory" took hold, the invention of the printing press was wide spread enough for everyone to have there own personal copy of God's Word, such as Romans 1:21-25 which states;"21…For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkend.22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four footed animals and crawling creatures. 24 Therefore God gave them over in the lusts of their hearts to impurity, so that their bodies would be dishonored among them. 25 For they exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen"
=================================================
-Now as for population:
All right, so it seems if you refuse to notice the evidence found in statistics coinciding with todays population, then you must obviously believe in a different scenario. So lets reveal how ridiculous this other scenario is by simple statistics:
-The population growth over a million years would produce 23,256 generations. We calculate the expected population by beginning with one couple one million years ago, and use the same assumptions of a forty-three year generation and 2.5 children per family. The calculations reveal that we should have a total population on earth today of 10^2700 people. The evolutionary theory of a million years of growth would produce trillions * trillions * trillions * trillions of people that should be alive today on our planet. To put this in perspective, this number is greater that the total number of atoms in the vast universe. As for "missing links" being hard to find, all I got to say to this theory is "BONE- Voyage"
Well that’s all I have time to type today I kind of ranted a bit too much, I will be back with a bombardment of information.There is a Creator and much visible proof all around and proof of a Designer, from the exact placement of earth, and the universe to sustain human life, and much more.
Yeshua said in (John 3:19-21):"19"This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. 20"For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed. 21"But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God."
P.S. I wont go strawman on you like some think.
If you want to discuss how stupid, naive, and ignorant this is, feel free to ask. We'll talk.
Of course there is bias on both sides, that is to be expected. This is why we examine the evidence and the arguments themselves and not simply the opinions of others.JeffTheLearner said:
A rabbit can have 6 litters per year of 5-8 kits. Using your method for calculating the human population on rabbits (let's say 6 kits per litter, 5 litters per year) that means any two rabbits would have over 590 TRILLION descendants in ten years. (Actually more, I just averaged one generation reproducing each year). Something is glaringly wrong with your methodology. The fact is that populations do not grow geometrically beyond the constraints of their environment; if they did we would be up to our elbows in rabbits. You are purely and simply incorrect.
Historical and archaeological evidence demonstrate that the human population remained under 200million until technological advances (specifically in agriculture and medicine) made it possible to support a much larger population.
http://www.biology.iupui.edu/biocourses/N100/2k4ch39pop.html
"Missing links" abound. The only problem exists in the comprehension of creationists who somehow seem to expect a complete record of every generation of living creature in the fossil record. So that whenever a "missing link" fossil is found creationists reply, "Well what about that gap?"
We'll be waiting.
You already have but we expect it from creationists and forgive you. Hopefully we can help cure you of some of your ignorance.
~Raithere
Horseman42
Registered Senior Member
First off your logic here is faulty. Just because there was a creator does not make it automatically God. It could have been Zeus, Mishra, Vishnu, or even interglactic space aliens. That's your first biggest problem.
Secondly you shouldn't try to pedal design theory, it's been debunked for hundreds of years now. Honestly I believe it's one of the most poor arguments for a god around next to the ontological proof of god. I could go on to explain why, but I think I'll let you flesh out your argument a little better here, before we debate further.
most Christians believe that it is a sin to kill, but they still do it, so doubt all you like. and who's dugh, is it short for douglas.JeffTheLearner said:
have you took in to consideration that men and women did'nt live as long, and many more children were still born, woman died at giving birth, and the average children per family was more likely 0.0125 ( one child being born to ever forty families) given that disasters, wars, famine and pestilence, and many other outside influences had an effect. also the figure 2.5 children does not take into account spinsters and bachelors, and lastly that there is always a equal ratio between woman and men.JeffTheLearner said:
really I should not even give this credence as super said "it's stupid, naive, and ignorant.
JeffTheLearner
Registered Senior Member
Well, Mr. Superluminal, why would I want to talk to you, your rude, hard headed, and a bit irritable. Your aviator of a rabid wolf suits you well.
As to Raithere even if the math is flawed ’though its not specific enough to be so’ …but your statistics showing that human population stayed under 200million as a constant is highly ridiculous, So then there should be an ample amount of proof for a specific “theory” contained in all the bones of those that died before our wonderful world of technology, sarcastically speaking. I would also like to add that even if this wonderful world of technology keeps us from working less, which it doesn’t, or if it helps us to eat better, which it doesn’t, or if it keeps us from dieing by disease, which it does in small variations among specific afflictions surely not to the extent of a 50% life increase in population, I find it quite odd that it just so happens today we have this great increase yet before the discovery of antibiotics an apparent population increase was quite obvious. As for trillions * trillions * trillions * trillions, go ahead and scratch off three of those trillions and forget multiplying it and give me just a trillion, No, give me 75 billion, how about 50 billion, ...25 billion? Anyway as I was reading that web site you gave me, all I could do is picture that rear end character from the Pink Floyd video speaking.
Now to Horseman42, actually there is more proof that many of your great minds through out history believed there is a Creator. There was an article by professors E. J. Larson and L. William in “Nature” a well known science journal April 3, 1997 issue. The survey asked a thousand TOP scientists very specific questions about their religious beliefs regarding a personal God. The survey said 40% of physicists, biologist, and mathematicians acknowledged that they now believe in a god. And not just some whacked out philosophy but rather they believed in a God as a Supreme Being who is involved in our earthly affairs and hears our prayers. So you guessed it I’m adding comments from one of the greatest minds in recent times Professor Einstein who through his research, and study we have results.
“to know how God created the world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this of that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details.”
Also
“The scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation... His religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings in an utterly insignificant reflection.”
And when bickering, with others about Quantum Physics Einstein stated,
“God does not just throw dice” ...which I agree, Quantum physics does try to distort the abilities of an Orchestrater, and choice, as well as good and evil.
Second of all out of all gods/idols, Yahweh Eloheem claims that He made the heavens and the earth and I believe Him, and I know that He has left ample proof in His creation, also additional proof is found in His Word, and can be used as a guide to lead one, or just blatantly tell what things are, where they came from, and where proof can be found, In (Numbers 23:10) it says;
”God is not a man that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent has He said, and will not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good.”
When you look at all the prophecies fulfilled in the Word of God and think of the odds, and those dealing with Yeshua (Jesus) alone, most say are 250 prophecies fulfilled I say more, the odds of just 10 of those events being fulfilled at one generation of time is one in 97,500 billion. As for the other prophecies all together ...I wouldn’t put my money on the opposing horse!
As for what is said in the book of Joel and Revelations in this subject, I will give you a scripture from recent findings found in Qumran referred to as Dead Sea Scrolls and you tell me what it may be talking about;
(DSS 1QH +4Q432 Frag.3 Col.11:entitled ‘Thanks to God for protection’)
“...mighty men have camped against me, they have surrounded me with all their weapons of war. Arrows burst forth without ceasing, and the blade of the spear devours trees as fire. Like the roar of mighty waters in the uproar of their voice; a cloudburst and a downpour to destroy many. As catapults, wickedness and fraud burst out when their waves pile up. As for me, when my heart melts like water, my soul becomes strong in Your covenant.”
-if you guessed ...the effects of a nuclear explosion or, from a hydrogen bomb then you did well, and if I could call someone up to give you a cookie, I would.
Anyway since I’ve been lead in the direction of ranting I’ll close for now and come back later and try to take on more. I’ll close with:
(Psalm 100:3)
”Know that the Lord Himself in God, it is He who has made us, and not we ourselves.”
-Chow
As to Raithere even if the math is flawed ’though its not specific enough to be so’ …but your statistics showing that human population stayed under 200million as a constant is highly ridiculous, So then there should be an ample amount of proof for a specific “theory” contained in all the bones of those that died before our wonderful world of technology, sarcastically speaking. I would also like to add that even if this wonderful world of technology keeps us from working less, which it doesn’t, or if it helps us to eat better, which it doesn’t, or if it keeps us from dieing by disease, which it does in small variations among specific afflictions surely not to the extent of a 50% life increase in population, I find it quite odd that it just so happens today we have this great increase yet before the discovery of antibiotics an apparent population increase was quite obvious. As for trillions * trillions * trillions * trillions, go ahead and scratch off three of those trillions and forget multiplying it and give me just a trillion, No, give me 75 billion, how about 50 billion, ...25 billion? Anyway as I was reading that web site you gave me, all I could do is picture that rear end character from the Pink Floyd video speaking.
Now to Horseman42, actually there is more proof that many of your great minds through out history believed there is a Creator. There was an article by professors E. J. Larson and L. William in “Nature” a well known science journal April 3, 1997 issue. The survey asked a thousand TOP scientists very specific questions about their religious beliefs regarding a personal God. The survey said 40% of physicists, biologist, and mathematicians acknowledged that they now believe in a god. And not just some whacked out philosophy but rather they believed in a God as a Supreme Being who is involved in our earthly affairs and hears our prayers. So you guessed it I’m adding comments from one of the greatest minds in recent times Professor Einstein who through his research, and study we have results.
“to know how God created the world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this of that element. I want to know His thoughts, the rest are details.”
Also
“The scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation... His religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement at the harmony of natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings in an utterly insignificant reflection.”
And when bickering, with others about Quantum Physics Einstein stated,
“God does not just throw dice” ...which I agree, Quantum physics does try to distort the abilities of an Orchestrater, and choice, as well as good and evil.
Second of all out of all gods/idols, Yahweh Eloheem claims that He made the heavens and the earth and I believe Him, and I know that He has left ample proof in His creation, also additional proof is found in His Word, and can be used as a guide to lead one, or just blatantly tell what things are, where they came from, and where proof can be found, In (Numbers 23:10) it says;
”God is not a man that He should lie, Nor a son of man, that He should repent has He said, and will not do it? Or has He spoken, and will He not make it good.”
When you look at all the prophecies fulfilled in the Word of God and think of the odds, and those dealing with Yeshua (Jesus) alone, most say are 250 prophecies fulfilled I say more, the odds of just 10 of those events being fulfilled at one generation of time is one in 97,500 billion. As for the other prophecies all together ...I wouldn’t put my money on the opposing horse!
As for what is said in the book of Joel and Revelations in this subject, I will give you a scripture from recent findings found in Qumran referred to as Dead Sea Scrolls and you tell me what it may be talking about;
(DSS 1QH +4Q432 Frag.3 Col.11:entitled ‘Thanks to God for protection’)
“...mighty men have camped against me, they have surrounded me with all their weapons of war. Arrows burst forth without ceasing, and the blade of the spear devours trees as fire. Like the roar of mighty waters in the uproar of their voice; a cloudburst and a downpour to destroy many. As catapults, wickedness and fraud burst out when their waves pile up. As for me, when my heart melts like water, my soul becomes strong in Your covenant.”
-if you guessed ...the effects of a nuclear explosion or, from a hydrogen bomb then you did well, and if I could call someone up to give you a cookie, I would.
Anyway since I’ve been lead in the direction of ranting I’ll close for now and come back later and try to take on more. I’ll close with:
(Psalm 100:3)
”Know that the Lord Himself in God, it is He who has made us, and not we ourselves.”
-Chow
Can I also ask us not to forget the homos? I mean c'mon, there's always plenty of homos to ensure the population doesn't 'bounce' too high. We all also know that back in the early days homosexuality was even more prevalent than it is today, (they've just got more PC and sissy about it).
Maybe it's just an anti god thing, but all that detesting he does and it seems nobody cares and is deciding to be a homo anyway. I suppose some of it has to do with the graven image of a semi-naked man tied up bondage style, just begging for some homo anal plugging.
In truthfulness, I have never seen anything quite as "homosexual" as the image of jesus.. A thin, womanly looking male with arms and legs spread - face turned outward. I think it should have an 18 rating personally.
Maybe it's just an anti god thing, but all that detesting he does and it seems nobody cares and is deciding to be a homo anyway. I suppose some of it has to do with the graven image of a semi-naked man tied up bondage style, just begging for some homo anal plugging.
In truthfulness, I have never seen anything quite as "homosexual" as the image of jesus.. A thin, womanly looking male with arms and legs spread - face turned outward. I think it should have an 18 rating personally.
Sheesh Mr. TheLearner. You do realize that you posted a simple linear population growth with no factors for acidental death, natural disease, resource limitations, environmental variations, affluence of culture, war, etc.? Population dynamics are one of the most complicated things to deal with, next to weather prediction. I mean, come on. Do you know how fast some bacteria reproduce? If projected in the simplistic way you propose, we would be ten feet deep in Staphylococcus epidermidis (armpit bacteria) in a week. If you want to believe the deliberate simplistic lies of creationist assholes, be my guest. You are clearly too lazy to do any real thinking for yourself. Good luck with that.
P.S. My friendly avatar "wolfie" is not rabid. He's just hungry, that's all. And he's not to discriminating about who... I mean, what he eats.
--------------------------
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
-- Albert Einstein
I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms.
-- Albert Einstein
I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it.
-- Albert Einstein
It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere.... Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.
-- Albert Einstein
It was the experience of mystery -- even if mixed with fear -- that engendered religion.
-- Albert Einstein
Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being.
-- Albert Einstein
I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation.
-- Albert Einstein
I am convinced that some political and social activities and practices of the Catholic organizations are detrimental and even dangerous for the community as a whole, here and everywhere. I mention here only the fight against birth control at a time when overpopulation in various countries has become a serious threat to the health of people and a grave obstacle to any attempt to organize peace on this planet.
-- Albert Einstein
The mystical trend of our time, which shows itself particularly in the rampant growth of the so-called Theosophy and Spiritualism, is for me no more than a symptom of weakness and confusion. Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions, and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seem to me to be empty and devoid of meaning.
-- Albert Einstein
P.S. My friendly avatar "wolfie" is not rabid. He's just hungry, that's all. And he's not to discriminating about who... I mean, what he eats.
--------------------------
It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.
-- Albert Einstein
I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after our own -- a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egotisms.
-- Albert Einstein
I do not believe in immortality of the individual, and I consider ethics to be an exclusively human concern with no superhuman authority behind it.
-- Albert Einstein
It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere.... Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death.
-- Albert Einstein
It was the experience of mystery -- even if mixed with fear -- that engendered religion.
-- Albert Einstein
Scientific research is based on the idea that everything that takes place is determined by laws of nature, and therefore this holds for the action of people. For this reason, a research scientist will hardly be inclined to believe that events could be influenced by a prayer, i.e. by a wish addressed to a Supernatural Being.
-- Albert Einstein
I cannot conceive of a personal God who would directly influence the actions of individuals, or would directly sit in judgment on creatures of his own creation.
-- Albert Einstein
I am convinced that some political and social activities and practices of the Catholic organizations are detrimental and even dangerous for the community as a whole, here and everywhere. I mention here only the fight against birth control at a time when overpopulation in various countries has become a serious threat to the health of people and a grave obstacle to any attempt to organize peace on this planet.
-- Albert Einstein
The mystical trend of our time, which shows itself particularly in the rampant growth of the so-called Theosophy and Spiritualism, is for me no more than a symptom of weakness and confusion. Since our inner experiences consist of reproductions, and combinations of sensory impressions, the concept of a soul without a body seem to me to be empty and devoid of meaning.
-- Albert Einstein
Last edited:
JeffTheLearner
Registered Senior Member
Well as to all the comments you recorded, Einstein I I think they are wrong You trust some editors, statements by his wife, and his own works prove otherwise,
http://www.albert-einstein.org/
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21482
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21483
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21488
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21489
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21492
And as for his wife;
http://www.pbs.org/opb/einsteinswife/milevastory/index.htm
http://www.albert-einstein.org/
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21482
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21483
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21488
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21489
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21492
And as for his wife;
http://www.pbs.org/opb/einsteinswife/milevastory/index.htm
I dont have time to search around the site for einsteins beliefs.JeffTheLearner said:
http://www.albert-einstein.org/
No god mentioned here:
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21482
Document does not exist in english
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21483
No god mentioned here. Science and art are talked about
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21488
Einstein does not profess any belief in any god here.
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21489
I havent a clue as to why you posted this link. Einstein is talking about reporters.
http://alberteinstein.info/db/ViewDetails.do?DocumentID=21492
And as for his wife;
There is nothing at all about Einsteins belief system here.
http://www.pbs.org/opb/einsteinswife/milevastory/index.htm
What exactly are you trying to point out with all these links jeff?
Horseman42
Registered Senior Member
I actually was chomping at the bit to respond to your post here. So full of fallacies, and illogical thinking I hardly know where to start...
What we need to do is examine the REASONS why people believe, and not just accept them because most people believe. Any scientist understands this basic priniciple for it's what science is built on. So I don't really care what Einstien believed. What I do care about is examining why he (and theists in general) believed what he did.
So try again. Try to prove god's existance without using a logical fallacy and I may believe. Until that time I have no logical choice but to be an atheist.
First off I would care less if 40%, 30, or even 90% of all scientists thought there was a god. For to believe in god based on this is commiting the fallacy known as the argument from numbers or authority. Just because a large portion of the Earth believes in a god doesn't make it true. At one time most people on the planet believed that the Earth was flat. The fact that 90-99% of all people believed it did not make that fact true. Another good analogy is if what a majority of people believed was true, then why spend all this money on finding a cure for cancer when we could simply believe it could be cured by eating chocolate?
What we need to do is examine the REASONS why people believe, and not just accept them because most people believe. Any scientist understands this basic priniciple for it's what science is built on. So I don't really care what Einstien believed. What I do care about is examining why he (and theists in general) believed what he did.
Many faiths have a creation myth. The Greeks believed that Zeus and a patheon of gods created the universe. Again why do you simply believe "Yahweh did it"? Please explain the "proof" found in his creation, I'm a little uncertain what you mean by this.
Again what you have here is a logical fallacy. First off I think there is ample evidence to support that the prophecies (at least all 250) did not really occur, and some that are very vague that could have meant many different things. Secondly even if they did occur 100% true you could only claim that the people predicting them could predict future event. Any conjecture that "God did it" is a non-sequitor claim, for you do not know this. The prophecies could have come from angles, demons, or pan dimensional aliens you have no way to tell.
So try again. Try to prove god's existance without using a logical fallacy and I may believe. Until that time I have no logical choice but to be an atheist.