Jesus Camp closes! :)

G

Godless

Objectivist Mind
Registered Senior Member
One of the benefits of having Haggard fired from his own church, is that Jesus camp will now close, do to negative reactions of it's film. :cool:

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003365311_jesuscamp08.html

("Right now we're just not a safe ministry," Becky Fischer, the fiery Pentecostal pastor featured in "Jesus Camp," said Tuesday.)

You got that right Becky, we will never be safe from the likes of nutheads like you! soon enough another idiot will open a camp similar to this, if not one exist already! :eek:
 
actually the thought has crossed my mind more than once that some of the atheists who post here were probably pentecoastal christians before they were atheists
 
lightgigantic said:
actually the thought has crossed my mind more than once that some of the atheists who post here were probably pentecoastal christians before they were atheists
Click to expand...

Hmm, I was never religious. You are only religious if you have the ability to think for yourself. Children taking a teacher or a parents word for it doesn't deem them religious. So I've been an atheist for as long as I've had the ability to think for myself. I have never been religious, and I suspect that is the same with most atheist.
 
Lg! You contradict yourself at every turn, or is it that you forget what bs you spout around here?

actually the thought has crossed my mind
Click to expand...

Vs

there is also no evidence (of the empirical reductionist type that you hold as aboslute) that your mind exists.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fire said:
Hmm, I was never religious. You are only religious if you have the ability to think for yourself. Children taking a teacher or a parents word for it doesn't deem them religious.
Click to expand...

If you examine all methods of teaching to children, that's what they do anyway .... the nature of being a child is that you don't have a vast body of experience to draw from, which kind of inhibits the dynamic aspects of self reflection - its not apparent of any successful models of training children that don'trely on this model (even schooling systems that advocate that children are pure and get contaminated by exposure to adults rely on this training method to a greater or lesser extent)
 
Godless said:
Lg! You contradict yourself at every turn, or is it that you forget what bs you spout around here?



Vs
Click to expand...

I take it you equate BS with logic - after all there is no evidence of the neural pathways that dictate a mother crocadile to roll the eggs of her young in her mouth
 
Lg,

after all there is no evidence of the neural pathways that dictate a mother crocadile to roll the eggs of her young in her mouth
Click to expand...
So somehow we should try to understand why this random mantra was introduced in this thread.

………hmmm…………….nope I give up.

So why do you think that the brain is not involved in this action? I assume you have an article reference that has examined this, right?

If there is no evidence are you suggesting that neural networks are not involved at all or that we simply haven’t discovered them yet?

If you are asserting that neural networks are definitely not involved then I assume you can quote a verified reference, which is?

And if they are not involved do you have any evidence for something else? Some type of autonomic function perhaps?
 
Cris

So somehow we should try to understand why this random mantra was introduced in this thread.

………hmmm…………….nope I give up.
Click to expand...

It doesn't require much examination to determine why - Godless is the one who posted this


Lg! You contradict yourself at every turn, or is it that you forget what bs you spout around here?

“
actually the thought has crossed my mind
”
Vs

“
there is also no evidence (of the empirical reductionist type that you hold as aboslute) that your mind exists.
”

Note - the part in bold (a quote from me) never appeared in this thread

:cool:
 
Cris said:
So why do you think that the brain is not involved in this action? I assume you have an article reference that has examined this, right?

If there is no evidence are you suggesting that neural networks are not involved at all or that we simply haven’t discovered them yet?

If you are asserting that neural networks are definitely not involved then I assume you can quote a verified reference, which is?

And if they are not involved do you have any evidence for something else? Some type of autonomic function perhaps?
Click to expand...

Notice how LG never answers questions that ask him to state his motives. He is sly.
 
Fire said:
Notice how LG never answers questions that ask him to state his motives. He is sly.
Click to expand...

Actually I am a little busy at the moment - perhaps I will get back to these things later - anyway there is hardly any grounds for presenting anything I haven't mentioned before - anything I have to say can be found from the links on the wiki entry for consciousness
:cool:

Actually i am questioning whether I should address this topic of reductionist models and the mind because it already currently touched on in several threads ... but anyway I will oblige you if you want ....
:D
 
Last edited:
LightGigantic is actually pretty upfront about himself. He's a Hindu. He supports Hindu things. There is not much hidden.
 
So why does he continually bring up conciousness and abiogenesis and then refuse to answer questions RE his motives?

I want to ask what he is emplying by his vague queries. Conciousness and abiogenesis are a mystery (to an extent), but what does he think he is achieving by taking advantage of these mysteries? This is something I don't know despite the fact I have listened to his coniving implications for weeks now.

I would understand what the hell he is trying to talk about if I understood his motives. The worst type of theist IMO are not the fundamentalists, but the ones who conceal their beliefs because they know that if they reveal them they will be ridiculed. LG may be wise to avoid this, but for the purposes of an honest debate it would nevertheless be useful for the otherside of the argument to know the emotions that propel LG to make certain statements without explaining any reasons behind it.

I don't care if he is a hindu, or whatever other bullshit, I want to know his reasons for the way he discusses certain subjects. LG himself knows that he has less validity (if he has any right now) if he reveals his reasons.
 
Note - the part in bold (a quote from me) never appeared in this thread
Click to expand...

A quote from you questioning one's mind which directly contradicts,
thought has crossed my mind
Click to expand...

Which if you are having problems with the identity of your own mind, it gives reason to believe that perhaps you consider yourself "midless" ;)

So a thought can't possibly cross your "mind" wich is that very thing you question to possess!
 
Fire
So why does he continually bring up conciousness and abiogenesis and then refuse to answer questions RE his motives?
Click to expand...
well it is a science forum - if you want I could talk about the 64 different translations of the atma rama verse instead
;)

I want to ask what he is emplying by his vague queries. Conciousness and abiogenesis are a mystery (to an extent), but what does he think he is achieving by taking advantage of these mysteries? This is something I don't know despite the fact I have listened to his coniving implications for weeks now.
Click to expand...
just illustrating the limits of empirical knowledge, since it seems to be the platform most posters here use for declaring religion to be fantasy/false etc etc
I would understand what the hell he is trying to talk about if I understood his motives. The worst type of theist IMO are not the fundamentalists, but the ones who conceal their beliefs because they know that if they reveal them they will be ridiculed.
Click to expand...
Its understandable why you detest theists who use logic and existing bodies of knowledge to support their ideas - they are more difficult to defeat in debate
;)
LG may be wise to avoid this, but for the purposes of an honest debate it would nevertheless be useful for the otherside of the argument to know the emotions that propel LG to make certain statements without explaining any reasons behind it.
Click to expand...
You are an atheist. I am a theist.
What else do you need to know?

I don't care if he is a hindu, or whatever other bullshit, I want to know his reasons for the way he discusses certain subjects. LG himself knows that he has less validity (if he has any right now) if he reveals his reasons.
Click to expand...
I just present the essence of my ideas so there is less of a perch for people to ad hom on
;)
 
Godless
A quote from you questioning one's mind which directly contradicts,

“
thought has crossed my mind
”
Click to expand...

I guess you just fell victim to your over active imagination because it wasn't my intention
;)
 
prince,

LightGigantic is actually pretty upfront about himself. He's a Hindu. He supports Hindu things. There is not much hidden.
Click to expand...
Yet he has never attempted to honestly answer any of my key questions. They are either answered with a question, or are criticisms of science, or are religious gibberish-speak, or repeats of previously refuted arguments, or any number of other tactics of misdirection and avoidance.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top