We Remember The Magic Café We Remember
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Black Hole » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (2 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 [Next]
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16009 Posts

Profile of tommy
Sorry, I was thinking of “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” etcetera, which is from the Declaration of Independence.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3469 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, tommy wrote:
Sorry, I was thinking of “all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness,” etcetera, which is from the Declaration of Independence.

Same thing.
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16009 Posts

Profile of tommy
"Unlike the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution contains no reference to God."

https://allthingsliberty.com/2016/02/why......itution/
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
197 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
There is a common bumper sticker that I’ve seen that says “God said it, I believe it, that settles it.” That proves my point.

Only if your point is that some people have stupid bumper stickers.



No, it proves my point that It frees some believers from having to engage in intellectually honest conversations by declaring the matter settled.

Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
197 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
The answer to everything becomes “God did it that way”.

Are you suggesting that believers never investigate how God did anything?



Are you suggesting that “God did it that way” counts as an investigation?

Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
197 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 14, 2019, magicfish wrote:
Oh that's just a tiny list. It wouldn't matter how extensive it was. Atheists are different than agnostics or deists or theists. They say, there is no God.

No, not all atheists say there is no God.

Now you're simply quibbling about the proper definition of "atheist".

Interesting that someone who’s such a quibbler himself on definitions would accuse me of being a quibbler! Smile

I simply find it interesting that you spend so much time trying to pry out of people their definitions of words of all sorts, but when it suits you you simply impose your definition on the conversation.


No – not “words of all sorts”. Just the ones that are problematic if the usage is not clearly conveyed by the user. For example; “faith”, “spiritual”, “God”, and even sometimes “belief”.

And wasn’t I absolutely clear that I was asking for definitions because I didn’t want to put words in mouths??? That’s the OPPOSITE of imposing my definition on the conversation. But despite those attempts, I was still met with resistance. It seems magicfish certainly wanted to impose HIS definitions on the entire world.

Quote:


Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Anyway, it’s a distinction worth making. Some atheists do indeed claim there is no God. Others simply have not been convinced by the claims of theists.

Some people who call themselves atheists simply aren't convinced. That doesn't mean that that's a proper definition of "atheist". And it most certainly doesn't mean that that's what magicfish means by the term.


Depends what you mean by “proper definition”. We’ve been through this before. A web search on the usage of the term will probably not yield 100% agreement by everyone. That’s why labels can be difficult. And that’s why I prefer that people just state their beliefs/claims outright rather than to expect that everyone will glean the same meaning from a label.


Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
197 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 14, 2019, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 14, 2019, landmark wrote:
And there have been just as many if not more, who do not deduce God from such lists. And many who might make lists of the vast senseless suffering, cruel deaths, and moral depravity that can always be countered with why, if there is a God. Of course believers have the greatest out of all--"God works in mysterious ways." I suppose if one believes in more than one God that gives you multiple outs.

My view of using God as the be all and end all of explanations of all natural phenomena is that it is a terribly uninteresting answer if it doesn't invite further discussion that's not about God. It's much more interesting to assume that there is no God and then ask, well now, how might that have come about. If I ask why the sky is blue, you can tell me a) Shut up b) Because c) God d) It has to do with the way light waves refract. To me the latter is by far the more interesting answer.

Not that interesting necessarily means correct, of course.

And not that the reason that light waves refract the way that they do isn't ultimately, the way that God designed them to refract, of course.

Is there anything - any phenomenon anywhere - that one wouldn't be able to ascribe to a God?

Nope.


Thanks.

My pleasure.

Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, R.S. wrote:
If not, isn't that the ultimate "get out of jail free" card for believers?

Yup.

So what?

Magicfish disagrees with you here.

This is starting to become repetitive: so what?

Are you suggesting that, as believers, magicfish and I are not allowed to disagree?


Nope. Just pointing it out, that’s all.


Quote:

Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Anyway, see my response to magicfish for the "so what" part.

I did.

Your response doesn't remotely explain why this is a problem, which you appear to believe it is.


Are you referring to this? (just want to make sure):

“It is because it frees many believers from having to engage in intellectually honest conversations. There is a common bumper sticker that I’ve seen that says “God said it, I believe it, that settles it.” That proves my point.”

Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
197 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, landmark wrote:
And often those believers have institutional power.

I'm not sure how many there are, and I'm not sure what the threshold is for "often", so I'll leave that one to your judgment.


Virtually all our higher elected officials. Of the current 535 members of congress, I don’t think there is even ONE openly atheist member! Historically, our Presidents, Senators, Congressmen (and women), Governors, etc. have pretty much all extolled the virtues of their religious faith. But I’ll be extremely generous and say that 10% of our elected officials have been atheists. That’s still a huge imbalance.

Sounds like evidence that the atheists don't care.


How is that evidence that atheists “don’t care”? If anything, it’s evidence that the deck is stacked against them in the general electorate.

Quote:

Because, of course, if they did care they'd have mounted a campaign to get many more atheists elected.


You're presuming that a) atheists don't care, and b) there have not been campaigns to support atheists.

Quote:

Out of curiosity, what percentage of the US population is atheist? (Feel free to use any definition of "atheist" here that suits you.)


That’s a good question and the polls do vary on that. I think a reasonable estimate is anywhere from 3-9%.

Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
197 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, magicfish wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, magicfish wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 14, 2019, magicfish wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 14, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 14, 2019, magicfish wrote:
R.S. wrote,
"science does NOT confirm his god,..."
How do you know? Maybe it does.



Don’t you think that science confirming God would be THE BIGGEST news story ever?? Don’t you think every TV and radio channel and news outlet everywhere around the world would be running that story pretty much non-stop?? The news would be ubiquitous and unavoidable. “SCIENCE DEFINITEVELY PROVES GOD!!! But I don’t ever recall that happening. Do you? Better yet, do you have any links of newsclips with the BREAKING NEWS? Or are scientists everywhere conspiring to keep it a secret??


Quote:
Nature and Science confirms my God every day.


How? And what are the characteristics, attributes, and proclivities of your God?

Ron

News story? So the journalists would care but the scientists wouldn't? Please.


This makes no sense. Not sure what you think the scientists wouldn’t care about in my hypothetical scenario where they confirm God.

Again, how do you think the general public would be informed of this fantastic scientific discovery? Don’t you think it would be MAJOR headline news everywhere??

Ron

Of course it would be. Why?


Well then why haven’t we seen that news if science confirms God?

Ron

Careful. Are you asking if science confirms God or if Scientist confirm God.
There is a massive difference.


Well, no one scientist can proclaim anything to the world without it being sufficiently corroborated. Well, he/she can, but at the risk of eventually being humiliated as was Pons and Fleischmann, Blondlot, and perhaps others. But either way (science or scientist), can you point me to that major 9/11 Breaking-News-type-story that announced the discovery of God?


Quote:


For me, Science confirms God every day. But have Scientists confirmed God? I doubt it. I don't really care what they say about much.
Did someone here declare that Scientist have confirmed God?


How does science confirm God? And you still haven’t given a full description of your God. Why is that?

It’s interesting that for someone who said “My belief in God doesn't stifle my quest for scientific answers or quell my insatiable appetite for knowledge of the natural world”, you don’t care what scientists have to say. How do you reconcile your apparent disdain for what scientists say with the scientific answers they provide?

Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
197 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, magicfish wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, magicfish wrote:
"So what, in your view, would a totally naturalistic universe without a God look like?"
There wouldn't be one. You can't get something from nothing.



How do you know there wouldn’t be one? Who said anything about getting something from nothing?

Ron

You did. You asked what a natural world would look like without a God. I said there wouldn't be one. Because there would be no universe.

Why would there be no universe? Because nothing would have created it. Hence, you cant get something from nothing.


No, I did NOT say you could get something from nothing. Stop putting words in my mouth.

Again, “created” may not be the appropriate word. The universe may have “formed” from something else through as yet unknown natural processes (maybe quantum effects?). Or maybe it just always existed (in a primordial state before inflating to the present observable universe). How do you rule those things out?

Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
197 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, magicfish wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, magicfish wrote:
I believe in God because I choose to. Faith is a choice, you see.



So again, which particular brand of belief/faith is the correct one? And how would you know? Does it matter to you whether or not you’re ultimately correct?

Ron

It doesn't matter which one is correct. What does correct mean?


If you don’t know what it means, then why did you use it in your first sentence?

And what do you mean it doesn’t matter which one is correct? You don’t care if you’re wrong about your ultimate fate??


Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
R.S.
View Profile
Regular user
CT one day I'll have
197 Posts

Profile of R.S.
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, magicfish wrote:
R.S. wrote, "Can you think of a better empirical method for eliminating bias and being subject to replicability and peer review?"
For proof of a Creator? Yes. Observation, life experience, and Faith.



For proof of anything.

What if someone’s observation, life experience, and faith brings them to a conclusion that conflicts with yours. How do we determine who is right?


Ron
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
TomBoleware
View Profile
Inner circle
Hattiesburg, Ms
2749 Posts

Profile of TomBoleware
Quote:
On Apr 17, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, magicfish wrote:
R.S. wrote, "Can you think of a better empirical method for eliminating bias and being subject to replicability and peer review?"
For proof of a Creator? Yes. Observation, life experience, and Faith.



For proof of anything.

What if someone’s observation, life experience, and faith brings them to a conclusion that conflicts with yours. How do we determine who is right?


Ron


Ron, Why do WE have to decide someone else’s faith? Why would I need YOU to approve my faith? Faith comes in many shapes and sizes, and until
you understand that one size doesn’t fit all I’m afraid you will remain confused.

Tom
"Entrepreneurs are willing to work 80 hours a week to avoid working 40 hours a week"--Lori Greiner

www.tomboleware.com
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16009 Posts

Profile of tommy
"No, it proves my point that It frees some believers from having to engage in intellectually honest conversations by declaring the matter settled." That sounds like something I would say about the global warming belief. That is no coincidence.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
landmark
View Profile
Inner circle
within a triangle
4900 Posts

Profile of landmark
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, tommy wrote:
"Unlike the Declaration of Independence, the United States Constitution contains no reference to God."

https://allthingsliberty.com/2016/02/why......itution/


Yes, that is why I added in my comment, "[the absence of God in the US Constitution is] I like to think by design." A rallying cry is different from a legal framework.
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16009 Posts

Profile of tommy
The unalienable right to life relates to abortion where science and religion conflict in when life starts. That is the sort of thing I was thinking of above.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
magicfish
View Profile
Inner circle
6588 Posts

Profile of magicfish
Quote:
On Apr 17, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, magicfish wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, magicfish wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 14, 2019, magicfish wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 14, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 14, 2019, magicfish wrote:
R.S. wrote,
"science does NOT confirm his god,..."
How do you know? Maybe it does.



Don’t you think that science confirming God would be THE BIGGEST news story ever?? Don’t you think every TV and radio channel and news outlet everywhere around the world would be running that story pretty much non-stop?? The news would be ubiquitous and unavoidable. “SCIENCE DEFINITEVELY PROVES GOD!!! But I don’t ever recall that happening. Do you? Better yet, do you have any links of newsclips with the BREAKING NEWS? Or are scientists everywhere conspiring to keep it a secret??


Quote:
Nature and Science confirms my God every day.


How? And what are the characteristics, attributes, and proclivities of your God?

Ron

News story? So the journalists would care but the scientists wouldn't? Please.


This makes no sense. Not sure what you think the scientists wouldn’t care about in my hypothetical scenario where they confirm God.

Again, how do you think the general public would be informed of this fantastic scientific discovery? Don’t you think it would be MAJOR headline news everywhere??

Ron

Of course it would be. Why?


Well then why haven’t we seen that news if science confirms God?

Ron

Careful. Are you asking if science confirms God or if Scientist confirm God.
There is a massive difference.


Well, no one scientist can proclaim anything to the world without it being sufficiently corroborated. Well, he/she can, but at the risk of eventually being humiliated as was Pons and Fleischmann, Blondlot, and perhaps others. But either way (science or scientist), can you point me to that major 9/11 Breaking-News-type-story that announced the discovery of God?


Quote:


For me, Science confirms God every day. But have Scientists confirmed God? I doubt it. I don't really care what they say about


How does science confirm God? And you still haven’t given a full description of your God. Why is that?

It’s interesting that for someone who said “My belief in God doesn't stifle my quest for scientific answers or quell my insatiable appetite for knowledge of the natural world”, you don’t care what scientists have to say. How do you reconcile your apparent disdain for what scientists say with the scientific answers they provide?

Ron


1. "can you point me to that major 9/11 Breaking-News-type-story that announced the discovery of God?"

No. Why would I be able to? Did somebody claim scientists have discovered God?

2. I never said I didn't care what they have to say, I said I didn't care what they had to say 'much'. Big difference.

3. Please show us my 'apparent disdain for scientists'.

Ron, I enjoy conversing with you, but let's not say we said things that we didn't.
magicfish
View Profile
Inner circle
6588 Posts

Profile of magicfish
Quote:
On Apr 17, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, magicfish wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, magicfish wrote:
"So what, in your view, would a totally naturalistic universe without a God look like?"
There wouldn't be one. You can't get something from nothing.



How do you know there wouldn’t be one? Who said anything about getting something from nothing?

Ron

You did. You asked what a natural world would look like without a God. I said there wouldn't be one. Because there would be no universe.

Why would there be no universe? Because nothing would have created it. Hence, you cant get something from nothing.


No, I did NOT say you could get something from nothing. Stop putting words in my mouth.

Again, “created” may not be the appropriate word. The universe may have “formed” from something else through as yet unknown natural processes (maybe quantum effects?). Or maybe it just always existed (in a primordial state before inflating to the present observable universe). How do you rule those things out?

Ron

Always existed? So you believe it's possible that time and "space" (ooze) of some sort had no beginning? Interesting. Infinity fascinates me.
magicfish
View Profile
Inner circle
6588 Posts

Profile of magicfish
Quote:
On Apr 17, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, magicfish wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, magicfish wrote:
I believe in God because I choose to. Faith is a choice, you see.



So again, which particular brand of belief/faith is the correct one? And how would you know? Does it matter to you whether or not you’re ultimately correct?

Ron

It doesn't matter which one is correct. What does correct mean?


If you don’t know what it means, then why did you use it in your first sentence?

And what do you mean it doesn’t matter which one is correct? You don’t care if you’re wrong about your ultimate fate??


Ron

Answer this.
1. What is a "correct" religion?
2. How could I be wrong about my ultimate fate? My ultimate fate is death.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20338 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On Apr 16, 2019, R.S. wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, Dannydoyle wrote:
Quote:
On Apr 15, 2019, landmark wrote:
It's a good question that has been addressed by evolutionists. The basic argument runs along these lines:

"Biologists use the range of less complex light sensitive structures that exist in living species today to hypothesize the various evolutionary stages eyes may have gone through.

Here's how some scientists think some eyes may have evolved: The simple light-sensitive spot on the skin of some ancestral creature gave it some tiny survival advantage, perhaps allowing it to evade a predator. Random changes then created a depression in the light-sensitive patch, a deepening pit that made "vision" a little sharper. At the same time, the pit's opening gradually narrowed, so light entered through a small aperture, like a pinhole camera.

Every change had to confer a survival advantage, no matter how slight. Eventually, the light-sensitive spot evolved into a retina, the layer of cells and pigment at the back of the human eye. Over time a lens formed at the front of the eye. It could have arisen as a double-layered transparent tissue containing increasing amounts of liquid that gave it the convex curvature of the human eye.

In fact, eyes corresponding to every stage in this sequence have been found in existing living species. The existence of this range of less complex light-sensitive structures supports scientists' hypotheses about how complex eyes like ours could evolve. The first animals with anything resembling an eye lived about 550 million years ago. And, according to one scientist's calculations, only 364,000 years would have been needed for a camera-like eye to evolve from a light-sensitive patch."


https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/libra......_01.html


Wow that is sure a lot of "might" and "may" and "could have been" going on. At some point it seems easier to believe in a creator than all this coincidence.


Ease of belief in something has absolutely no bearing on it’s truthfulness. It would also be easier to believe that magical pixies are responsible for all the functionality of my cell phone than to grasp the technical minutiae of modern electronics. But that doesn’t then give credence to the “magical pixie hypothesis”.


Quote:

The problem is that what you put forth doesn't even come close to explaining the complexity of the human eye.

It in no way proves anything other than nobody knows. But it is a ridiculous failure in an attempt to explain.


Actually, it’s quite plausible. Anyway, do you deny that Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is the explanation for the diversity of life on the planet?

Ron


I have told you time and again I sint be interrogated by you.

So let's go about it the other way. Does evolution disprove a creator? Yes or no?
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Black Hole » » TOPIC IS LOCKED (2 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.27 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL