Author Topic: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?  (Read 15346 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Graybeard

  • Global Moderator
  • ******
  • Posts: 6574
  • Darwins +512/-18
  • Gender: Male
  • Is this going somewhere?
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #754 on: December 13, 2013, 09:46:20 AM »
Given what follows, it is clear that your level of education must be in the lowest 10% of the nation. The reason you can manage to believe in a god must be that you simply do not have the brain-power to work anything else out or think critically.

I estimate that you have the intelligence of an average 9 year-old. If you are older than 9, you are either below average or one of the best rolls we have ever had here at WWGHA.

Let us look at the crass stupidity that you have written:
 
This guy really thinks the "laws" of the universe are laws like we have on the books. Well WWGHA, I think this guy is at the lowest starting point of anyone that has ever came to the site. Its a lost cause.

The laws had to be created.
“Laws” are (i) mathematical representations of systems and/or (ii) Empirical rules for a general system. First there has to be the system, then an intelligent human comes along and realises why the system works -> a human creates the law as an explanation that satisfies other humans and can be seen to be true.

Atoms cannot think and therefore do not go around thinking: “Ah, I must obey the law.” Atoms do something and we say, “The atom can be seen to be acting as the law predicted.”

That picture in your link shows math being used.

Quite odd atheists would use math as proof considering it's impossible to empirically observe a number. Numbers are immaterial.

Numbers are
(i) an abstract concept. This is not unusual. “Happiness” is an abstract concept – you can’t carry one pound of ‘happiness’; you can’t photograph ‘a piece of happiness -  and therefore you will tell me that “happiness” cannot exist.

(ii) a form of adjective: “I have red apples.” I have two apples.” See how the words “red” and “two” tell you something about the noun “apples”?

As (ii) is obvious, let us speak about (i) It is true that numbers do not exist on their own[1], just as “happiness” does not exist on its own (i.e. without something to attach to) but practical mathematics does attach things to numbers.

If we say 3^2 + 4^2 = 5^2, then you may say that this is all imagination and must be wrong. (Do you?) but if we add “Inches” to the 3, 4, and 5, then it all becomes clear, doesn’t it?

None of this requires a god.

Can you explain why 2 hydrogen atoms bond with an oxygen atom?
After you explain that, can you explain why it forms water and not something else?

Can you tell me what it is that is in my car that is making a squeaking sound? Would your inability to do this prove, in anyway, that there is a god?


May I request you, in the nicest possible way, to think? Your thinking is important to the people here because, as it is, you are an embarrassment to humankind.


 1. or as philosophers say, "of themselves"
RELIGION, n. A daughter of Hope and Fear, explaining to Ignorance the nature of the Unknowable. Ambrose Bierce

Offline 12 Monkeys

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4587
  • Darwins +104/-11
  • Gender: Male
  • Dii hau dang ijii
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #755 on: December 13, 2013, 10:18:39 AM »
Guys,guys,guys....and Gal one thing I have learned over the last few pages is that you can enlighten the ignorant....but,,, YOU CAN'T FIX STUPID
There's no right there's no wrong,there's just popular opinion (Brad Pitt as Jeffery Goines in 12 monkeys)

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #756 on: December 13, 2013, 10:20:49 AM »
I guess this is all funny until you realise that some children are being taught nonsense as fact.
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/news/richard-dawkins-i-never-meet-people-who-disagree-with-me-2080451.html
The following is a part from the above article-

Quote
Professor Dawkins recently visited an Islamic school in Leicester – "a lovely school, beautifully appointed, a lot of money spent on it, a lovely headmaster" – where no one among the staff and pupils, not even the science teacher, believes in evolution.

There he was informed that the Prophet had said that salt and fresh water do not mix, and therefore it must be true. He wished afterwards that he had had the presence of mind to send for some salt water and fresh water and mix them in front of their unbelieving eyes.

Some kids are going to look really dumb if they start quoting that when they are older.

Living 7 blocks from an Estuary, I find this particularly amusing and sad. But there are no estuaries in the Middle East, further indication that the Koran was written by provincial authors who had no special knowledge.
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1845
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #757 on: December 13, 2013, 11:28:29 AM »
Skeps blindly ignorant notion of "direct science" is 100% hypocrisy. It's hilarious how religious people like him will try anything they can to change the definition of what science is in order to smuggle in THEIR personal theology while trying to push out the rest. I thought about this false distinction he keeps trying to make for quite a while. It went something like this.

Me - Have you ever directly seen an entire building being built?
Skep - No
Me - Aha! Indirect science! Unicorns did it.

During the first philosophy class I ever took (on the first day) our instructor shut off the lights and said "Does the chalkboard still exist?" Under Septic Logic we would have to say no b/c it's "indirect science". Sorry Skep, making up your own version of science (just like you do with religion and theology) is an epic fail.

On another note, I directly observed that the bible contradicts itself. FALSIFIED! How's that for applied "direct science" for you?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6298
  • Darwins +731/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #758 on: December 13, 2013, 11:39:11 AM »
We're talking to a brick wall. That is short a brick or two.

We have taken the time to learn about religions. He hasn't taken a second to learn about science. This is not a discussion. He will never do his part.

He has no understanding of science. Any classes he has ever taken on the subject simply flew over his head. He doesn't understand what a scientific law is, and compares it directly with a legal law. Hey, they're both spelled the same, so I can see that an uneducated individual might make that mistake. But we've told him, and he still hasn't learned. Graybeard called it right.

That makes the discussion we're having somewhat difficult. More accurately, it appears to be impossible. I suggest that all of us find a different hobby. Or theist.


Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Offline jynnan tonnix

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1751
  • Darwins +84/-1
  • Gender: Female
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #759 on: December 13, 2013, 12:00:46 PM »
I've been thinking the same thing. Reading his posts is ceasing to be anything like entertainment, and is, instead making me want to punch things out of sheer frustration. That sort of gross inability/refusal to use anything like common sense and rationality when looking at the world, and instead trying to shoehorn everything into a tiny little box of theism and cutting off anything that doesn't fit with a proclamation of "demons" is literally giving me a headache. There's just no way to even approach anything like a normal conversation.

I'd put him on "ignore", but he has his fingers in so many threads that it's almost impossible.

Offline Quesi

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1986
  • Darwins +371/-4
  • Gender: Female
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #760 on: December 13, 2013, 12:27:18 PM »


I have already explained the difference between direct science and indirect science. I certainly trust direct science because the evidence is there in front of our faces.

But indirect science is a whole different ballgame. It would be like asking, "Why did that football team lose by scoring 6 points? In baseball we scored 6 runs and blew out the other team."

Ok.  I just want to make sure that I get the difference between "direct science" and "indirect science."

So "indirect science" would be like saying "the circumference of the sun is 2,713,406 miles."  I mean, it's not like you can go there with a 2,713,406 mile-long tape measure and check.  Right?

And "direct science" would be like saying "my fist is bigger than the sun."  I mean, I can prove that!  All I have to do is extend my arm, close one eye, and place my fist in front of the sun.   It is bigger!  See?  The evidence is right there.  In front of my face!

Edited to play with font color. 
« Last Edit: December 13, 2013, 12:30:28 PM by Quesi »

Offline skeptic54768

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2478
  • Darwins +45/-416
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #761 on: December 13, 2013, 12:40:42 PM »
“Laws” are (i) mathematical representations of systems and/or (ii) Empirical rules for a general system. First there has to be the system, then an intelligent human comes along and realises why the system works -> a human creates the law as an explanation that satisfies other humans and can be seen to be true.

That's the point, Graybeard!

 A system needs intelligence to create it.
A system is designed for a purpose by intelligent minds.

How can you have a system without a mind creating it?
A system, by definition, denotes intelligence behind it.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline Zankuu

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2089
  • Darwins +127/-2
  • Gender: Male
    • I am a Forum Guide
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #762 on: December 13, 2013, 12:52:40 PM »
A system, by definition, denotes intelligence behind it.
You're making things up again. Give me a link to your definition. What are you using, Merriam-Webster?
Leave nothing to chance. Overlook nothing. Combine contradictory observations. Allow yourself enough time. -Hippocrates of Cos

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4768
  • Darwins +546/-14
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #763 on: December 13, 2013, 12:59:42 PM »
A system needs intelligence to create it.
Incorrect.  We've actually seen examples of systems (for example, insect hives) that work without the slightest bit of input from intelligence.  Indeed, bees and ants (the most prevalent examples of this) are non-intelligent, yet they are among the most successful insects out there.

Quote from: skeptic54768
A system is designed for a purpose by intelligent minds.
Nope.  The only systems you can say this about are human-designed systems.  Other systems, you need to actually find the intelligence behind them, rather than assuming that there must be intelligence involved.

Quote from: skeptic54768
How can you have a system without a mind creating it?
Given the prevalence of systems on Earth that don't receive intelligent input as far as we can tell (and have never been shown to receive any in the first place), a better question is, why would anyone assume that intelligence is necessary to create a system in the first place?  The answer is simple - because human beings are predisposed to assume active agents are the causes of things.  But that predisposition isn't justification to assume that everything in the universe is caused by some active agent (or an intelligent mind).

Quote from: skeptic54768
A system, by definition, denotes intelligence behind it.
Nope.  The real definition of a system is a group of related parts that work together.  Just because you assume that intelligence must be there doesn't make a single bit of difference as to whether it actually is.  That's what evidence is used for.

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1845
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #764 on: December 13, 2013, 12:59:53 PM »
“Laws” are (i) mathematical representations of systems and/or (ii) Empirical rules for a general system. First there has to be the system, then an intelligent human comes along and realises why the system works -> a human creates the law as an explanation that satisfies other humans and can be seen to be true.

That's the point, Graybeard!

 A system needs intelligence to create it.
A system is designed for a purpose by intelligent minds.

How can you have a system without a mind creating it?
A system, by definition, denotes intelligence behind it.

This is called question begging. You haven't defined what 'intelligence' actually is (or a 'system'), and neither have you demonstrated your mere bald assertion that all 'systems' require intelligent minds. Saying it is so doesn't make it so. Could you be any more vague when using terms?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline skeptic54768

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2478
  • Darwins +45/-416
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #765 on: December 13, 2013, 01:00:26 PM »
A system, by definition, denotes intelligence behind it.
You're making things up again. Give me a link to your definition. What are you using, Merriam-Webster?

The onus is on you to describe a system without intelligence. Every job I have ever worked had a system they used ad they taught me the system.

Should I assume the system was created without intelligence?
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline skeptic54768

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2478
  • Darwins +45/-416
  • Gender: Male
  • Christianity is the most beautiful religion.
  • User is on moderator watch listWatched
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #766 on: December 13, 2013, 01:02:17 PM »
A system needs intelligence to create it.
Incorrect.  We've actually seen examples of systems (for example, insect hives) that work without the slightest bit of input from intelligence.  Indeed, bees and ants (the most prevalent examples of this) are non-intelligent, yet they are among the most successful insects out there.

Don't ants create systems that flushes carbon monoxide out of their anthills so they don't die?

Sounds intelligent to me.
Matthew 10:22 "and you will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved." - Jesus (said 2,000 years ago and still true today.)

Offline Zankuu

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2089
  • Darwins +127/-2
  • Gender: Male
    • I am a Forum Guide
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #767 on: December 13, 2013, 01:10:50 PM »
A system, by definition, denotes intelligence behind it.
You're making things up again. Give me a link to your definition. What are you using, Merriam-Webster?
The onus is on you to describe a system without intelligence. Every job I have ever worked had a system they used ad they taught me the system.

You said that a system, by definition, denotes intelligence behind it. I'm asking you to show me the definition, otherwise you're just making it up on your own accord. And you won't be able to do it because you're making it up. So what if every job you've had was designed by human intelligence? That says nothing about systems that aren't designed by humans.

Should I assume the system was created without intelligence?

You shouldn't lump ecosystems and marketing systems and solar systems together. These are different types of systems. You're making the mistake of applying the intelligence required for human systems to systems that don't require self-awareness.

Leave nothing to chance. Overlook nothing. Combine contradictory observations. Allow yourself enough time. -Hippocrates of Cos

Offline median

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 1845
  • Darwins +201/-16
  • Gender: Male
  • Yahweh: Obviously not obvious.
    • Talk Origins
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #768 on: December 13, 2013, 01:11:12 PM »

Don't ants create systems that flushes carbon monoxide out of their anthills so they don't die?

Sounds intelligent to me.

That's b/c you are (once again, and as always) assuming your own definition of what 'intelligence' means and what a 'system' must be. Go back to Occam's Razor! Human minds interpret and build things that we call 'systems'. It does not logically follow from this that every phenomena we come across in our surroundings was 'created' by some 'intelligence'. You need more than just your bald assertion and/or your argument from ignorance to demonstrate that.

EDIT: Your error is called the Fallacy of Composition.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Carl Sagan

Offline RED_ApeTHEIST

  • Student
  • **
  • Posts: 77
  • Darwins +16/-0
  • Gender: Male
  • Hyperintelligent Orangutan
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #769 on: December 13, 2013, 01:12:47 PM »
A system needs intelligence to create it.
Incorrect.  We've actually seen examples of systems (for example, insect hives) that work without the slightest bit of input from intelligence.  Indeed, bees and ants (the most prevalent examples of this) are non-intelligent, yet they are among the most successful insects out there.

Don't ants create systems that flushes carbon monoxide out of their anthills so they don't die?

Sounds intelligent to me.

Define intelligent please.
The relevant equation is: Knowledge = power = energy = matter = mass; a good bookshop is just a genteel Black Hole that knows how to read." - Terry Pratchet

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6401
  • Darwins +826/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #770 on: December 13, 2013, 01:13:24 PM »
(Hereafter, I am not going to write any long posts in response to anything from skeptic, because he does not appreciate the effort.)

Intelligence means that the ants have to know what they are doing-- and can do otherwise. Ants are on autopilot. They don't choose to create systems. So, no, there is no intelligence behind ant behavior. &)

In all of my years of science education, dating back to the 1970's, and at numerous well-regarded institutions, I have never heard of "direct", "indirect" or "historical" science until encountering creationists online. No scientist working in any field uses those terms.

Where the hell are the universities that teach or apply such concepts? 
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Offline Astreja

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2972
  • Darwins +256/-3
  • Gender: Female
  • Agnostic goddess with Clue-by-Four™
    • The Springy Goddess
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #771 on: December 13, 2013, 01:23:31 PM »
Please explain how we can think if atoms can not think.

Please explain how atoms can "obey laws" if they cannot think.   ;D
Reality Checkroom — Not Responsible for Lost Articles

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #772 on: December 13, 2013, 01:32:38 PM »
A system, by definition, denotes intelligence behind it.
You're making things up again. Give me a link to your definition. What are you using, Merriam-Webster?

The onus is on you to describe a system without intelligence. Every job I have ever worked had a system they used ad they taught me the system.

Should I assume the system was created without intelligence?

flipping burden of proof, your argument is invalid
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Hatter23

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 3880
  • Darwins +257/-7
  • Gender: Male
  • Doesn't believe in one more god than you
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #773 on: December 13, 2013, 01:36:44 PM »
A system, by definition, denotes intelligence behind it.
You're making things up again. Give me a link to your definition. What are you using, Merriam-Webster?

The onus is on you to describe a system without intelligence. Every job I have ever worked had a system they used ad they taught me the system.

Should I assume the system was created without intelligence?

Why are you trying so hard to prove the Deist version of god, when that isn't the one you believe in?
An Omnipowerful God needed to sacrifice himself to himself (but only for a long weekend) in order to avert his own wrath against his own creations who he made in a manner knowing that they weren't going to live up to his standards.

And you should feel guilty for this. Give me money.

Offline Aaron123

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 2733
  • Darwins +77/-1
  • Gender: Male
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #774 on: December 13, 2013, 01:46:52 PM »
A system needs intelligence to create it.

What created the intelligence?


Quote
A system is designed for a purpose by intelligent minds.

What created the intelligent minds?


Quote
How can you have a system without a mind creating it?

What created the mind?


Quote
A system, by definition, denotes intelligence behind it.

What created the intelligence?
Being a Christian, I've made my decision. That decision offers no compromise; therefore, I'm closed to anything else.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4768
  • Darwins +546/-14
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #775 on: December 13, 2013, 01:47:47 PM »
Don't ants create systems that flushes carbon monoxide out of their anthills so they don't die?
The human respiratory system flushes carbon dioxide out of the body so we don't die.  What you are arguing here is analogous to saying that we have to think in order to breathe, which is definitely not true - it happens automatically, just the same as ants automatically make their nests so as to keep carbon monoxide from building up and killing them all.

Quote from: skeptic54768
Sounds intelligent to me.
I don't think I could limbo under the bar that you're setting 'intelligence' at.

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6401
  • Darwins +826/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #776 on: December 13, 2013, 03:28:15 PM »
^^^^Exactly. He is trying to argue (again, without any evidence other than his say-so) that atoms, molecules, cells, weather patterns and solar systems are all intelligent.  &) If everything is intelligent, then nothing is intelligent, because you have just defined intelligence into meaninglessness.

Just as skeptic uses the term "random" as if it means that anything could happen, like bricks float up instead of fall to the ground.[1] But then he posits an all-powerful being who could, if it chose, "repeal" the law of gravitation and make bricks float up instead of fall. If there is such a being in charge, who only makes gravity work today because he feels like it, and maybe it will all be different tomorrow if someone does not do the right prayers or sacrifices or something, then that is the very definition of a random universe.

It would be a lot like that Twilight Zone episode about the boy with horrific powers that everyone had to placate. It would be beyond unliveable. You could not go outside for a walk because the side walk might suddenly melt into molten lava and drown you-- and then re-solidify into pavement before anyone could retrieve your body! People would go insane.

A bible universe where the rules are constantly being broken, where supernatural miracles and magic routinely happen would be a place where we could not do science, because we could never make predictions about the future based on the past. You could never build a moon rocket because the moon might disappear, change to a different orbit or turn into liquid green cheese while the astronauts were on their way there. Hey, the rocket might crash into heaven and kill a few angels! :o

But that is not the universe we live in and observe. By admitting that the universe operates in rather spectacularly un-supernatural ways, according to prescribed patterns and observable rules, skeptic is stating that his all-powerful god-being is not needed, non-existent or at the very least, absent and non-participatory. Hardly the kind of buddy-being that saves sick doggies and writes warnings on walls--in English vernacular, yet.  &)
 1. In probability the term random actually depends on the set of possible events, and means any of the possible events is equally likely to occur. Like picking a random number between 1-100 could possibly be "54", but the answer could never be  -478, Mr. Spock, one pint of beer, or Denmark.  Even randomness has rules, but not because "the great designer in the sky" wrote all the rules in his gigantic golden book, but because of how we humans have defined random. 
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6298
  • Darwins +731/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #777 on: December 13, 2013, 03:36:53 PM »
Like I said, Skeptic is way too literal to be in this conversation.

The law of gravity isn't something that we have to obey. In science, a law is something that happens every frickin' time. A law, in science, is a generalized rule.

When you step off a cliff, you aren't required by law to fall. You will fall, and the fact that you will has been observed over and over. So much so that it appears inevitable. And so much so that it can be described via a mathematical statement.

I think we're about to come up with a new law for on thick-headedness in this thread.
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Offline jaimehlers

  • Fellow
  • *******
  • Posts: 4768
  • Darwins +546/-14
  • Gender: Male
  • WWGHA Member
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #778 on: December 13, 2013, 03:45:15 PM »
Yep.  Reality doesn't work like Looney Toons, where someone (like the hapless coyote) runs over the edge of a cliff and doesn't start falling until they realize they're standing on nothing (and thus 'breaking' the law of gravity).  Gravity is always there, pulling us towards the center of the Earth's mass, and it neither knows nor cares whether we're standing on something or in free fall.  It isn't a law that you can choose to obey, or that doesn't take effect until someone 'catches' you at it.

Online ParkingPlaces

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6298
  • Darwins +731/-6
  • Gender: Male
  • Hide and Seek World Champion since 1958!
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #779 on: December 13, 2013, 05:05:23 PM »
I think I have it figured out. Skep's view of science, that is.

If all you want answers and don't care about their quality, religion is for you.
If you want to be able to say "It seems to me" and be "right" every time, religion is for you.
If you want it simple, black and white, so basic it doesn't count and if you want to be able to sound like an expert, religion is for you.
If you want it easy, so you don't have to bother learning anything, religion is for you.
If reality scares you, religion is for you.


If you are even mildly curious, however, that won't work.
Skep clearly is not. His only forays into science involve looking for excuses. He isn't even slightly interested in the actual  findings. All  he wants to eke out are things that he perceives as weak spots.

However, even if science does have a few weaknesses here and there, he doesn't know enough to know where to look.
Not everyone is entitled to their own opinion. They're all entitled to mine though.

Online SevenPatch

  • Postgraduate
  • *****
  • Posts: 702
  • Darwins +108/-4
  • Gender: Male
  • A source will help me understand.
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #780 on: December 13, 2013, 05:25:39 PM »
Wait a second.  Laws are immaterial right?  So the Law of Falling is immaterial, yet falling is material.  How is something both immaterial and material?

Is this Skeptic logic?
"Shut him up! We have a lot invested in this ride - SHUT HIM UP! Look at my furrows of worry! Look at my big bank account, and my family! This just HAS to be real!" - Bill Hicks

Offline Zankuu

  • Reader
  • ******
  • Posts: 2089
  • Darwins +127/-2
  • Gender: Male
    • I am a Forum Guide
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #781 on: December 13, 2013, 05:33:04 PM »
Wait a second.  Laws are immaterial right?  So the Law of Falling is immaterial, yet falling is material.  How is something both immaterial and material?

Is this Skeptic logic?

Yes. He struggles with abstraction.
Leave nothing to chance. Overlook nothing. Combine contradictory observations. Allow yourself enough time. -Hippocrates of Cos

Offline nogodsforme

  • Professor
  • ********
  • Posts: 6401
  • Darwins +826/-6
  • Gender: Female
  • Jehovah's Witness Protection Program
Re: Would You Ever Torture Your Children With Fire In in the Basement?
« Reply #782 on: December 13, 2013, 05:35:27 PM »
But at the same time, they use science, everyday, because they know it works, and works damn well. Do they teach their kids to wash their hands well or just pray over them before they eat? That is the bottom line-- when they want to fly to a distant city, or talk to someone on the other side of town, or kill the germs on their toilet do they rely on religion or use science?

I did ask and got no answer: do you prefer to drink the water in an atheist place like Iceland or Japan where it is scientifically treated, or in a place like Haiti or Afghanistan where people pray to god to make the water safe? Would they rather have their heart transplanted by an atheist surgeon trained in medicine who believes in the theory of evolution,  or a Christian "surgeon" who denies germ theory and uses prayers to Jehovah and Jesus instead of sterile technique? To answer honestly would be admitting that science works and religion doesn't.
Extraordinary claims of the bible don't even have ordinary evidence.

Kids aren't paying attention most of the time in science classes so it seems silly to get worked up over ID being taught in schools.