Are atheists being more illogical than agnostics?

@The Anointed,

No....because as I have already said it is a FAR better theory....in my opinion..and it dove tails nicely with other theories....

All sciences are interconnected after all....

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

In your Opinion? Funny how no scientist will support your opinion.

1 Reply

@The Anointed,

Well it is just my opinion after all.....

What? are you referring to the the same scientist who are struggling to solve the HARD problem of CONSCIOUSNESS?

In what way are they the authority when they have no definitive answers.

All they have is their theories and opinions as well....come on...

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

Quote:

In what way are they the authority when they have no definitive answers.

And neither do you.

1 Reply

@The Anointed,

Yeah but my theory isn't a HALF theory is it...it's a FULL theory and is therefore more credible and could be explained with established science due to the attraction/repulsion nature of magnetism.

As I say I don't do BS science.

1 Reply

@Jasper10,

Publish a paper and get it peer reviewed.

That’s what people who don’t do bs science do.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Because what a bunch of people sitting in chairs think makes it scientific.

If something is true, it ought to be true regardless of what anyone thinks.

The proper way to science:
1. Publish a paper stating a hypothesis (gravity doesn't exist, it's just buoyancy and propulsion based on objects being light or heavier than the air pressure)
2. Okay, prove it. Make an experiment with these peers watching (a gigantic fish tank with artificially pressured water and air, and wild caught fish and birds. If the fish are unable to swim below a point this is buoyancy. Likewise if birds are unable to fly where the air is thinner than them, then you have basically your theory. If gravity exists, then something will interfere despite the careful pressure control which costs billions in taxpayer money)
3. At least on of the peers tests this in a different location to see if there was any sort of climate interference, if you faked anything, stuff like that.
4. If for some reason, you can't show an experiment proving your theory (like being poor and not a scientist), then the real scientists get to sneer at you, and ignore your theory.

Hawking says there is no God? Let him come forth and prove it with an experiment. In fact, if Stephen Hawking gets on his feet and claims there isn't a God, alot of us would believe it (since isn't he dead, bur also crippled?) but I'd still demand he make an experiment.

I dislike scientific theorists. It's fun to write books about crackpot theories you have, not so east to make a convincing experiment.

1 Reply

@bulmabriefs144,

nobody will ever confuse you and your views of science. Hows it working out for you? make any inroads in theory ?

3 Replies

@farmerman,

I don’t waste time talking to that party.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

See the poor and not being a professional scientist part. How ever will I build my giant aquarium?

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

I'm a person, not a party. A party is a group of people (often a group of people having shots of beer, playing music, and having great sex).

Btw, actual people ripping apart Hawking's theories.

http://www.doxa.ws/cosmological/Hawking2.html
(I'm having trouble finding the Hawking1 article to read at the beginning)

He has to use imaginary time to avoid the problem of singularity. In real time, in the real world, his mathematical construct falls apart. In other words, even a non-scientist like myself can see that he has to change the actual state of the world tomake his theories work.

2 Replies

@bulmabriefs144,

I don’t waste time on you because you’re a bigot, you’re unintelligent and now you’ve just demonstrated you don’t understand how words work.

There’s no point, communication is a two way street and you have nothing to offer.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

https://www.lexico.com/definition/party
(paraphrased)
1. A social gathering of invited guests.
2. A political group involved in elections.
2.1. A group of people taking part in an activity or trip
(All of these definitions is
3. A person or group that holds a certain viewpoint.
(By definition three, they concede that it might refer to a single person. But this is wrong. The phrase "you and what army" comes to mind. If only I believe in something, I am not a party (listed in all previous definitions as a group of people), but an individual)

That you call me a party means you don't understand words either.

Also, just because you call me a bigot doesn't make it so. I'll call you a slaver. Because you have shown repeatedly that you don't mind Hispanics getting exploited as long as they make it to your house to do your lawncare, childraising, etc while they've been abused, treated as a sex worker, and worse during their immigration. They are imported only to provide cheap work because we can't afford our current minimum wage (and create alot of time-spacing schemes to avoid paying the promised hours) and to vote a certain way in elections. In other words, those people are not illegal because I am bigoted against them (on the contrary, I have worked alongside many of them) but because they are used to undercut jobs of legal workers (including legal Hispanic workers), but because they themselves are horribly exploited.
https://www.bu.edu/writingprogram/journal/past-issues/issue-4/farooq/
https://www.fairus.org/issue/illegal-immigration/human-trafficking-exploitation-illegal-aliens
But hey, as long as you don't have to pay them legal wages for being a legal immigrant, you can call me bigoted for wanting them to have the same $15/hr workers in this country (supposedly) get.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

I picked up the Punch almanac for 1946 at a car boot over the weekend. As with the practice of issuing annuals a year ahead, the almanac was actually published in October 1945 just months after the war ended.

There are adverts for things you can’t buy, but will be in the shops soon. Toy manufacturers chief among them saying their factories will soon be reverting to peace time production.

There was one article about a ship needing a cat, and that this particular ship was currently on its 17th cat, others having wandered off as cats do.

One of the seamen tells the captain of a party he is familiar with that could lay their hands on a cat. Now when I read that I assumed that party was being used as it is today, to indicate another individual, but no, it implies a Romantic relationship or attachment as the following indicates.

“His party it seemed, was technically his party no longer, having recently got hitched up with a pongo.”

I know, I had no idea what was meant by pongo either, but fortunately there was another article in the periodical entitled Das Pongo. It turns out pongo is a term for soldiers used by the Royal Navy. I don’t know if the Americans ever used it.

0 Replies

@bulmabriefs144,

How dare you shred hawkins approach to einsteiniun propaganda! He's a media sensation. How else can you convince people that their reality is a measurable forecast, based on preconscribed ideologies? Are you sane?

Have a lovely Day

1 Reply

@mark noble,

I am not as You People call sane, but I am sane enough to realize it.

Hawkins is insane but fancies himself brilliant.

Which is more dangerous to humanity, someone who realizes they are insane, and mostly stays within chat rooms, or someone who decides to write novels called The God Delusion that people actually read?

As for the latter, I don't care how big a media sensation someone is.

We need to stop worshiping people as though their stupid musings are infallible.

1 Reply

@bulmabriefs144,

bulmabriefs144 wrote:

I am not as You People call sane, but I am sane enough to realize it.

Hawkins is insane but fancies himself brilliant.

Which is more dangerous to humanity, someone who realizes they are insane, and mostly stays within chat rooms, or someone who decides to write novels called The God Delusion that people actually read?

As for the latter, I don't care how big a media sensation someone is.

We need to stop worshiping people as though their stupid musings are infallible.

Some people worship themselves (or more exactly, their guesses about REALITY)...and think their guesses are correct, with no chance for error.

You seem to be someone like that.

Maybe it is time to stop.

Is there a GOD?

I do not know. You?

Is there an "afterlife?"

I do not know. You?

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

Yes, I do know.

Quote:

Is there a GOD?

Yes. Pretty simple. I want you to think something into existence.

What, you can't? Then there must be someone (or something) outside of yourself who made you, me, Miss Kitty, Captain Falcon, unicorns, rainbows, and many other things of variable levels of reality.

I call whatever that is God. I suppose you call that "nothing." Okay, "nothing" created Miss Kitty. Fine, then how did she come to exist? Oh yes, you say, "Pffft, you idiot, she had a mother and father." Uhhhh yeah, and let's think backwards. Cats became domesticated around 3100 BC, according to wiki. Then we trace back to the first felines. And back to precursor species. And back to bacteria or whatever that became cats eventually. Clearly something did in fact create the first bacteria, and set it on the motion of evolution. "Nonsense," you say, "bacteria came from meteors." Nice, when you can't figure out the origin, simply import life from elsewhere! That'll stump 'em! No it won't. Where did that bacteria come from? We can keep going all day until you say those three words. "It was created." Ancient aliens? Cthulhu-types? An old guy with a beard? Do we know that much? No. But we do know it was created, and this demands a creator.

If I say that nothing created something, I am being illogical, and Maria from Sound of Music scolds me.

Quote:

Is there an "afterlife"?

Yes, thousands of near-death experiences, and a few people being revived from clinical death appear to demonstrate this. We have some recurrent themes (bright lights, speaking to dead folks, stuff like that), but having been close to death on no less than four different occasions, it seems to vary based on mental state. If I'm pretty much ready to die, what I see tends to be kinda vivid and bright, while if I'm covered in gloominess, all I see is black everywhere. Conclusion? Afterlife is subjective.

So besides stock images of the Afterlife?
https://www.bustle.com/p/11-things-people-have-said-after-coming-back-from-near-death-experiences-81001
1. One person said they saw an off-duty EMT who told them to keep their legs elevated (not there)
2. Another person saw field of flowers.
3. Apparently one of them were on the operating room and asked "Do we know the next of kin?" and he sits up and says, "I can tell you," freaking out the nurse.
4. Another lady was struck by lightning while driving (yes, seriously) and went into a tunnel with a sign saying "Welcome to Hell."
5. That Jesus came and said to him, "You have 45 years."
6. A medic who saw two people resuscitated heard both of them say, "Why'd they do that?" Basically whatever was going on there was really peaceful.

You say that is impossible to know things. But actually, you have never tried. You're afraid to question, and that is why you'll never know anything for real. You need more curiosity, man. Go out and search for things.

1 Reply

@bulmabriefs144,

bulmabriefs144 wrote:

Yes, I do know.

Quote:
Is there a GOD?

Yes. Pretty simple. I want you to think something into existence.

What, you can't? Then there must be someone (or something) outside of yourself who made you, me, Miss Kitty, Captain Falcon, unicorns, rainbows, and many other things of variable levels of reality.

I call whatever that is God. I suppose you call that "nothing." Okay, "nothing" created Miss Kitty. Fine, then how did she come to exist? Oh yes, you say, "Pffft, you idiot, she had a mother and father." Uhhhh yeah, and let's think backwards. Cats became domesticated around 3100 BC, according to wiki. Then we trace back to the first felines. And back to precursor species. And back to bacteria or whatever that became cats eventually. Clearly something did in fact create the first bacteria, and set it on the motion of evolution. "Nonsense," you say, "bacteria came from meteors." Nice, when you can't figure out the origin, simply import life from elsewhere! That'll stump 'em! No it won't. Where did that bacteria come from? We can keep going all day until you say those three words. "It was created." Ancient aliens? Cthulhu-types? An old guy with a beard? Do we know that much? No. But we do know it was created, and this demands a creator.

If I say that nothing created something, I am being illogical, and Maria from Sound of Music scolds me.

Quote:
Is there an "afterlife"?

Yes, thousands of near-death experiences, and a few people being revived from clinical death appear to demonstrate this. We have some recurrent themes (bright lights, speaking to dead folks, stuff like that), but having been close to death on no less than four different occasions, it seems to vary based on mental state. If I'm pretty much ready to die, what I see tends to be kinda vivid and bright, while if I'm covered in gloominess, all I see is black everywhere. Conclusion? Afterlife is subjective.

So besides stock images of the Afterlife?
https://www.bustle.com/p/11-things-people-have-said-after-coming-back-from-near-death-experiences-81001
1. One person said they saw an off-duty EMT who told them to keep their legs elevated (not there)
2. Another person saw field of flowers.
3. Apparently one of them were on the operating room and asked "Do we know the next of kin?" and he sits up and says, "I can tell you," freaking out the nurse.
4. Another lady was struck by lightning while driving (yes, seriously) and went into a tunnel with a sign saying "Welcome to Hell."
5. That Jesus came and said to him, "You have 45 years."
6. A medic who saw two people resuscitated heard both of them say, "Why'd they do that?" Basically whatever was going on there was really peaceful.

You say that is impossible to know things. But actually, you have never tried. You're afraid to question, and that is why you'll never know anything for real. You need more curiosity, man. Go out and search for things.

Your reasoning is that of a grade schooler...your logic is not quite that advanced.

But, continue to kid yourself. Obviously you need it to get through life right now. Maybe some day you will grow up.

1 Reply

@Frank Apisa,

People who don't have a real argument resort to ad hominem.

In college we learn how to make a thesis, to prove points and support our arguments.

In grade school, we learn to say "You're stupid" to people we don't wanna listen to.

Nice persuasive argument though.

1 Reply

Are atheists being more illogical than agnostics?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know