A better question that: "Does god exist"

Yes indeed I said that.

But you stretched that to imply that I had suggested a 'scientific' study or experiment.

I didn't, for the reasons stated.

I encourage you to experiment. Go for it.

You do realize that your experience doesn't have to be 'scientific' , in order to be valid, don't you?

Most events of everyday life are not verifiable 'scientifically'. It doesn't mean that they didn't occur, nor does it mean that your experience is an 'opinion'.

0 Replies

Ah, but if it is not verifiable scientifically, then it is, as you so eloquently put it "simply your opinion" and does not qualify as evidence for anything, much less a god.

Also, experiments [/I]have been carried out that addressed all of the concerns you mentioned earlier with performing experiments on prayer.

http://www.templeton.org/newsroom/press_releases/060407step.html
http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/avalos_17_3.html

Notice a trend?

0 Replies

fungotheclown wrote:

Ah, but if it is not verifiable scientifically, then it is, as you so eloquently put it "simply your opinion" and does not qualify as evidence for anything, much less a god.

Also, experiments [/I]have been carried out that addressed all of the concerns you mentioned earlier with performing experiments on prayer.

http://www.templeton.org/newsroom/press_releases/060407step.html
http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/avalos_17_3.html

Notice a trend?

I am eating a sandwich for lunch.

You cannot verify that scientifically, but that doesn't mean that 'it's just my opinion that I'm eating a sandwich.'

btw you should read links before you post them. The second link carries the theme

Quote:

The problem with this and any so-called controlled experiment regarding prayer is that there can be no such thing as a controlled experiment concerning prayer

and cites some of the same reasons I did. Did you notice that?

0 Replies

It then goes on to discuss how, even in the fields of philosophy and theology, prayer doesn't make any sense. I included that particular article to show you that no matter where you turn, your beliefs don't make sense.

As far as the sandwich argument, I think we've gone over this with you four or five times already. I can provide empirical evidence that you are eating a sandwich. You cannot provide empirical evidence of any kind that supports your hypothesis of a god.

Finally, I'm still waiting on where to find the prayer criteria. Experimental procedure or not, if you legitimately want us to try prayer, you should be fronting that info.

0 Replies

fungotheclown wrote:

As far as the sandwich argument, I think we've gone over this with you four or five times already. I can provide empirical evidence that you are eating a sandwich.

Do so.

0 Replies

Quote:

I am eating a sandwich for lunch.

Well, for one, I have your claim that you did. But, given your history with the truth on this forum, I guess that doesn't carry much weight.

There are many ways to determine what your diet is. Analysis of stool samples, evaluation of your spending habits, rooting through your garbage, etc.

Still waiting on the prayer criteria, or empirical evidence for ID.

0 Replies

I think my wife would say "I shop, therefore I am"!

0 Replies

Wilso wrote:

I think my wife would say "I shop, therefore I am"!

0 Replies

fungotheclown wrote:

real life wrote:
fungotheclown wrote:
real life wrote:
fungotheclown wrote:
Ah, but if it is not verifiable scientifically, then it is, as you so eloquently put it "simply your opinion"

I am eating a sandwich for lunch.

You cannot verify that scientifically, but that doesn't mean that 'it's just my opinion that I'm eating a sandwich.'

I can provide empirical evidence that you are eating a sandwich.

Do so.

There are many ways to determine what your diet is. Analysis of stool samples, evaluation of your spending habits, rooting through your garbage, etc.

Ok, so what kind of sandwich was it?

You see, my point is that I[/u][/b] may have been able to provide empirical evidence of my sandwich, but you[/u][/b] could not. The evidence, even though it existed for a short time, was not available to you.

So it is with most events of everyday life. They cannot be independently verified to meet a 'scientific' standard of proof.

But that doesn't mean these events didn't occur.

0 Replies

There is a big difference between being able to, and being willing to. The simple truth is that I am simply unwilling to track down who you are, root through your garbage, collect a stool sample, or investigate you finances. None of this is impossible, and if I were to do it, would provide evidence as to your diet as of late.

But, we're still digressing. Where in the bible are the prayer criteria, and for empirical evidence for ID.

0 Replies

fungotheclown wrote:

Where (is) empirical evidence for ID.

When have I ever said there is 'natural' evidence for the 'supernatural'?

What I have consistently said is that natural evidence does not adequately support abiogenesis/evolution.

0 Replies

RL - You're telling the truth. You certainly have not (to my memory never said there is natural evidence for the supernatural.

You have failed to however provide any evidence be it natural or super natural to support any of your claims.

As for your skeptisism about evolution from the current evidence, I don't believe that you want to entertain the notion that your beliefs are wrong, so I think you'll reject any amount of evidence.

T
K
O

0 Replies

Where do I find prayer guidelines in the bible? If you legitimately want us to try prayer, if you truly believed in god and wanted us to find him/her, you would provide this information assuming it exists. You claim that it does. Where is it?

0 Replies

fungotheclown wrote:

There is a big difference between being able to, and being willing to. The simple truth is that I am simply unwilling to track down who you are, root through your garbage, collect a stool sample, or investigate you finances. None of this is impossible, and if I were to do it, would provide evidence as to your diet as of late.

But, we're still digressing.

Actually we're not digressing.

We are discussing individual experience, and whether it is independently verifiable to meet a 'scientific' standard of proof.

Just because an event is not independently verifiable, doesn't mean it didn't occur, or that it's just 'opinion'.

The scientific method was designed to address a relatively narrow range.

Most events of everyday life, and events in the history of the human race cannot now be 'scientifically proven'. But it doesn't mean they didn't occur.

It is doubtful that you could provide any 'scientific' documentation of your ancestors that lived 50 generations ago.

But none of us doubt that they existed. At least, I don't.

fungotheclown wrote:

Where do I find prayer guidelines in the bible?

Guidelines for prayer are in many places in the Bible. They are not just listed in a neat little corner.

Have you read it?

0 Replies

Actually I have. Five times, in fact. Don't remember any guidelines concerning how you have to pray for god to hear you and respond.

Personal experience is entirely subjective, and thus does not constitute evidence for anything. Your experience of a god carries as much weight in this argument as that nutball at the bus stop who thinks goblins are eating his underwear.

0 Replies

~~~~~O~~~~~ we apaulajize so sincerly for killing us oh so nearly! since ~ Thee beginning of time until forever,,, for we have been Etcetra Holes,,, btw ThY will be done ~ forever,,,, please thank you AmeN.

you know who's~its' ThE MunchkinS o.k. "yes",,~O~.
amen.

0 Replies

"YouR Welcome" amen.

0 Replies

fungotheclown wrote:

Personal experience is entirely subjective

What nonsense, fungo.

I am wearing a white sweater and blue jeans.

This is not a subjective statement, nor is it 'opinion'.

It is a fact.

No one can independently verify it at the moment, but that does not make it 'subjective' or 'opinion' either.

fungotheclown wrote:

and thus does not constitute evidence for anything.

Not having evidence that is independently verifiable or meeting a 'scientific' standard does not mean that an event did not occur.

You are aware that 'scientific evidence' is not the only type of evidence, aren't you?

0 Replies

There is the a huge difference between the personal experience of a sandwich or clothing and the personal experience of a god. The existence of sandwiches and the fact that humans eat them is objectively and externally verifiable. Therefore, it is not unreasonable to accept that you are eating a sandwich or are clothed. The existence of a god is not objectively or externally verifiable, therefore it is not reasonable to accept that you can communicate with one. That's why we don't believe people when they say they talk to leprechauns, and that's why I don't believe you when you say you talk to god. Regardless of what you believe you are experiencing, until you objectively show that a god exists, your experiences are useless in logical argumentation.

0 Replies

Diest TKO wrote:

As for your skeptisism about evolution from the current evidence, I don't believe that you want to entertain the notion that your beliefs are wrong, so I think you'll reject any amount of evidence.

Then you don't know me. I look at all sides.

I don't care whether you believe that to be true or not.

The fact that I am a doubter when it comes to evolution disturbs you because you think that everyone should believe as you do.

The evidence that you think of as substantial, I recognize to be circumstantial and the conclusions inferential.

For new species to constantly be introduced , members of one species must frequently give birth to offspring which are not of their species. It should be commonplace.

But it's not.

There should be so many intermediate variations between existing species that it's hard to tell where one stops and the other begins.

But it's not.

0 Replies

A better question that: "Does god exist"

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know