Wiccan_Child said:
Perhaps, but that's hardly an argument for theism, is it? We want to know what is, not what feels good. It's all very well and good pretending to the blind and infirm that there is some magical hereafter where all their dreams come true, but that doesn't tell us whether it actually exists.
Just keep your feet on the ground and don't fly high by making the religion ( the belief in the Creator ) like seeing superman flying with bags he bought from the supermarket. Religion is not the magical supernatural world because we as humans don't have these supernatural powers to recieve a message to guide us how to make salad with a magical stick.
I have no idea what you're trying to say.
Let's discuss what athiesm is:
Sure: atheism is where one lacks belief in the existence of deities. This can be further qualified as Strong atheist (where one also actively affirms the non-existence of deities) and Weak atheism (where one remains neutral to both positions).
Some people get Weak atheism confused with agnosticism, but whatever.
Wiccan_Child said:
You forget that these theories have to be thought up in the first place. Where do you think the Einsteinian model of spacetime came from?
I have never seen Einstein in person and I have never talk to him. Why do you want me to believe in anything he said. He is a human and humans make mistakes the same way they did when they made us believe that
Indeed, but humans also get things right. We made a mistake when we thought that everything orbits the Earth, but scientific advances gave us the correct model: the planets orbit the Sun, etc.
You lament the ability of humans to know anything, but you yourself use the knowledge of humans every single day. Even writing this post required you to use human knowledge. Are you a hypocrite, or simply a Devil's advocate?
Pluto is no longer a planet after decades in deception of trusting the sources of information which we took from humans who always make mistakes.
Scientists: Pluto not a planet - Space.com- msnbc.com
Oh please, no mistake was made. Advances in the detection of planets has lead international bodies to
redefine the word 'planet'. Kept as it was, we would have hundreds of 'planets' orbiting the Sun.
Who do you think proposed the redefinition? Human scientists. Who discovered Pluto and other celestial bodies in the first place? Human scientists. No mistake was made: Pluto still exists.
That's not to say scientists
never make mistakes. Indeed, the strength of science is mercilessly scrutinising its theories to find mistakes and flaws, thereby becoming even more reliable and accurate.
And we also don't forget their talent in writing the wrong prescription for patients and the medical mistakes they do in hospitals that cause us our lives.
Yes, we've established that humans make mistakes. Anyone who says otherwise needs a reality check. But what's your point? Just because humans make mistakes doesn't mean they
always make mistakes.
How do you want me to believe in the unguranteed while you can't creat a new animal or a flower without counting on the original created one.
You blamed us for believing in the beautiful world that you yourselves have no clue about how to create a new Earth for humans. It is not about what you already found but it is about what you create.
Why is it? We may not be able to recreate the event ourselves, but there is more than enough evidence to convince us that it occurred.
Can you create an atom? No? Then how can you believe they exist?
Wiccan_Child said:
I disagree. When I say I believe in something, I'm saying I think it exists, or I think it's true. You say you believe in angels, and God. Why?
Because my logic goes beyond what I see and what I feel. When I found this beautiful Earth works in harmoney without any human interfering to change the harmoney or to write their own notes, I knew that there is One Power to dominate it " The Orchestra has one leader not two".
And why do you think nature is the dominant power while it is the example we take for harmoney. When anything has the ultimate power, it isn't affected by weak powers.
Right, I'll just nod and pretend I know what you're on about.
Why can't you control the universe/ space/ other planets?
Because I'm effectively a bag made of protein filled with water. There's only so much I can do. Isn't that a bit obvious?
Why are planets different?
Because planets aren't formed under exactly the same conditions with exactly the stame constituents, nor are their environments exactly the same. Asteroids could tilt some 90°, but might spin others up, or might miss others altogether.
Why nature didn'r create anything new from the time we knew about it?
It has. We've seen countless new species emerge naturally in the wild, accidentally in man-made environments, and deliberately in the lab.
Why the harmoney still exist although we are more aware of the world around us and have tools to change the world by destroying it?
Why humans can't do anything good to nature unless they use the same harmoney the world is in?
What harmony are you talking about, exactly?
Why when humans create something new they never build but they destroy? But they don't see the results untill the coming generations admit that their ancestors made a mistake.
Because humans are selfish, idiotic, and short-sighted. What's your point?
Wiccan_Child said:
I do not believe the first human was a statue of clay. I don't even believe there was a first human at all.
So, what are you then? For sure not the first nor the last.
And please don't tell me that humans are monkeys.
Because for centuries monkies are still monkies and scientists never record any developments in their nature to become humans.
Oh Lord.
Humans are monkeys (there, I said it). So are Chimps, Gorillas, and all the rest. Evolution
requires that monkeys stay monkeys. If monkeys turned into anything
other than monkeys, then that would
disprove evolution.
The ultimate irony is that, if giraffes turned into walruses, then Creationists would be obliged to believe in evolution, and evolutionists would be obliged to give it up.
