Does 'Goddidit' constitute an explanation?

[Wiccan_Child]

Are there REALLY any Christians in the foxholes?

If so do they Shout with Joy when the see the tanks coming because they believe they are about to receive eternal life? or do they get scared like they dont actually believe it.

Even Christians feel pain and fear death, eternal life or no eternal life.

 

[Hespera]

Even Christians feel pain and fear death, eternal life or no eternal life.

i wonder what the 9-11 guys really thought seconds before impact

 

[Split Rock]

Are you kidding me?

I think half the time you are kidding us all here.

Do you think for one minute that stuff is real?

You tell me. You brought up the dogs not me.

Why would scientists use dogs, when they can get money to build machines?

And throw Christians in asylums and steal candy from babies, etc.

It's the same concept as writing a prescription instead of having a person eat fruit and vegetables.

I guess then that you have never taken a prescription drug... instead you ate spinach. Remeber, that nice cool cave on the deserted island is still waiting for you, AVET.

What is that show? An hour long? A dog will cut it down to 10 minutes.

Nah, they would need to get the dog to stop chasing birds and squirrels first, then chase after the ghost.

I can just see it now:And there sits the dog, looking bored.

Only if he is reading the posts in this thread...

 

[Split Rock]

Which once again begs the question: what is the 'physical world'? What is 'physical evidence'? What other kinds worlds and evidences are there?

The world we can sense or detect. I used the term "physical evidence" to distinguish evidence we can put numbers to from "feelings" "beliefs" etc. You can just call it "evidence" if you like.

As can ghosts, if they exist. So why are ghosts considered supernatural?

Probably because they don't? Show me the evidence and I will believe in them.

And until you've shown it to be impossible, it must be acknowledged as a possible (albeit improbable) option.

If ghosts are spiritual only, that means by definition they cannot be detected. If they can be detected, then they would be part of the physcial. I will believe it, when you provide the evidence. Otherwise, they are just as likely to exist as the invisible pink unicorn under my bed.

 

[The Penitent Man]

That is not a foxhole, and those men do not appear to be facing death.

 

[Split Rock]

i wonder what the 9-11 guys really thought seconds before impact

"I can't wait to get my hands on those 72 virgins!"

 

[Wiccan_Child]

i wonder what the 9-11 guys really thought seconds before impact

"Did I leave the kettle on?"

The world we can sense or detect. I used the term "physical evidence" to distinguish evidence we can put numbers to from "feelings" "beliefs" etc. You can just call it "evidence" if you like.

Are feelings not 'physical'?

Probably because they don't? Show me the evidence and I will believe in them.

I'm not arguing for their existence. I'm pointing out an apparent inconsistency with your terminology: if ghosts exists, then you would call them 'natural', but that seems to be like redefining the words out of all meaning. If anything is supernatural, I would've thought that a ghost would be.

If ghosts are spiritual only, that means by definition they cannot be detected. If they can be detected, then they would be part of the physcial.

And the physical is a synonym for the natural, so ghosts would be natural, right?

I will believe it, when you provide the evidence. Otherwise, they are just as likely to exist as the invisible pink unicorn under my bed.

Actually, an invisible pink unicorn is a logical impossibility, while ghosts are merely improbable.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

That is not a foxhole, and those men do not appear to be facing death.

Not right at that moment, but I daresay they've been in their fair share of foxholes. The point, of course, is that there are atheists in foxholes, despite what the adage claims.

 

[AV1611VET]

Not right at that moment, but I daresay they've been in their fair share of foxholes. The point, of course, is that there are atheists in foxholes, despite what the adage claims.

I have to admit, the Bible never calls them "atheists."

It has a much better descriptive term for them, of which that picture is indicative.

 

[Hespera]

That is not a foxhole, and those men do not appear to be facing death.

When people are in extreme pain or danger they will someitmes call for their mothers too. so............what conclusion is drawn about the nature of life, death, the origin of the universe and the existence of god?

the whole atheist in foxhole stuff is only about human psychology, kind of like the rest of religion.

And of course, we have pointed out that there are no believers in foxholes either, or they'd be happy that they are about to receive eternal life. But something below all the indoctrination tells them they are not.

 

[Skaloop]

I have to admit, the Bible never calls them "atheists."

It has a much better descriptive term for them, of which that picture is indicative.

The Bible calls them brave men and women serving their country with honor?

 

[sandwiches]

The Bible calls them brave men and women serving their country with honor?

If you ask AV, it's probably only honorable if you do it in the name of his imaginary guy in the sky.

 

[Split Rock]

Are feelings not 'physical'?

They are nothing we can put a descriptor to, like a number.

I'm not arguing for their existence. I'm pointing out an apparent inconsistency with your terminology: if ghosts exists, then you would call them 'natural', but that seems to be like redefining the words out of all meaning. If anything is supernatural, I would've thought that a ghost would be.

That's the contradiction that Ghost Hunters don't seem to get. If you can detect a ghost, then they are not supernatural at all, but part of the natural world. The fuzzy area is can the supernatural have an effect on the physical world, which we can then detect?

And the physical is a synonym for the natural, so ghosts would be natural, right?

I would say that if you could directly detect the presence of a ghost, then that would mean they are part of the physical world, yes. But what if you could indirectly detect the presence of a ghost?

Actually, an invisible pink unicorn is a logical impossibility, while ghosts are merely improbable.

Why? You can render a pink creature invisible to the naked eye, but wouldn't it still be pink? Stealth fighters are painted black, but they are invisible to radar. James Bond's car was silver (I think) but he could turn it invisible. Does that mean it stops being silver?

 

[sandwiches]

Why? You can render a pink creature invisible to the naked eye, but wouldn't it still be pink? Stealth fighters are painted black, but they are invisible to radar. James Bond's car was silver (I think) but he could turn it invisible. Does that mean it stops being silver?

On this point, color is entirely dependent on visibility and wave-length of reflected light. If something is invisible or is rendered invisible, it reflects no light and therefore has not color, even if it's just temporarily.

 

[Split Rock]

On this point, color is entirely dependent on visibility and wave-length of reflected light. If something is invisible or is rendered invisible, it reflects not light and therefore has not color, even if it's just temporarily.

Well, the whole idea of the Invisible Pink Unicorn, is that it is a contradiction, but believed because of faith anyway. Nevertheless, I do think it is an interesting question... does something that is made pink stop being pink if you bend light around it so our eyes cannot see it as pink?

 

[Wiccan_Child]

They are nothing we can put a descriptor to, like a number.

So numbers are physical?

That's the contradiction that Ghost Hunters don't seem to get. If you can detect a ghost, then they are not supernatural at all, but part of the natural world. The fuzzy area is can the supernatural have an effect on the physical world, which we can then detect?

I daresay Ghost Hunters would say that can .

I would say that if you could directly detect the presence of a ghost, then that would mean they are part of the physical world, yes. But what if you could indirectly detect the presence of a ghost?

All detection is ultimately indirect, even if you look at it with your own eyes.

Why? You can render a pink creature invisible to the naked eye, but wouldn't it still be pink? Stealth fighters are painted black, but they are invisible to radar. James Bond's car was silver (I think) but he could turn it invisible. Does that mean it stops being silver?

Yep. What is silver if not a colour? And how can a car be silver if it doesn't have a colour?

 

[Naraoia]

You're going round in circles. If 'natural' is that which exists in nature, then what is 'nature'? If it's that which follows natural laws, what laws are 'natural', and why?

Why would scientists use dogs, when they can get money to build machines?

Because dogs can do the same job for less money and effort?

Believe it or not, scientists aren't all megalomaniacs. They also don't have all the money in the world...

It's the same concept as writing a prescription instead of having a person eat fruit and vegetables.

Yes, because it's a well known fact that fruit and vegetables cure all health problems.

I dare you to catch TB and get rid of it with apples.

 

[AV1611VET]

Yes, because it's a well known fact that fruit and vegetables cure all health problems.

I dare you to catch TB and get rid of it with apples.

Now that was real cute.

I was citing a fact, you're citing an exception to that fact.

I was recently written a prescription for Potassium and didn't get it filled, choosing to eat bananas instead.

 

[Skaloop]

Now that was real cute.

I was citing a fact, you're citing an exception to that fact.

I was recently written a prescription for Potassium and didn't get it filled, choosing to eat bananas instead.

You needed a prescription for Potassium?

Anyway, Potassium is a mineral, not a drug. I think it's great that you chose to get it from a natural source rather than a man-made source to fill your needs. But supplementing one's diet to address a mineral deficiency is a far cry from taking something to fight a disease (or the symptoms thereof).

 

[sandwiches]

Now that was real cute.

I was citing a fact, you're citing an exception to that fact.

I was recently written a prescription for Potassium and didn't get it filled, choosing to eat bananas instead.

Pray tell, what fruits or vegetables should one eat to cure AIDS, cancer, hepatitis, tuberculosis, or malaria?

Or are those more exceptions to your "fact?"