NotBlinded Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 notblindedbytheblight: Yes, I guess he could try to seize upon that. With the exception that seeing the original notes is irrelevant, journal articles are frequently reprinted and also frequently require translation. Unlike a faith-based system where one just has to accept or reject a statement, it is possible to get to original notes (or at the very least original citations), if someone wants to, in other words, it can be looked up to see exactly what was noted down initially. Also, repeatability and all that. And yes, I either have the resources at my disposal, or can acquire said resources, or can jury-rig some equivalent equipment. I also half-expect a "climategate" related response (though the outcome that FD will completely ignore mine seems more likely, and convenient). Other likely avenues of attack are accusing me of lying about what I do, accusing me of lying about available resources, or some other variation of fabrication. There is a high probability he will take issue with my tone of voice, and what (s)he will likely view as belittling of mental faculties. Also, an end-run will be attempted due to me stating that I am not an Athiest (well not a full-time one anyway), while it is also clear that I am not a Xtian either. There is an extremely low probability, though nonzero, that FD will attempt to engage in a honest dialogue. Just as they approached with a disingenuous argument, and one apparently made in bad-faith, I see no reason why that behavior will change, if nothing else, so FD can somehow feel vindicated and lie to him or herself that they have indeed achieved victory. That is usually how these sort of posters pan out. And here I was trying to tell you what a person like FD would do. I think you know that very well indeed! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 As has been said before, what makes science science is that it is testable and falsifiable. The point isn't that I haven't performed these experiments myself; it's that I could if I knew each step of the procedures used and had the tools necessary to do it. How, though, would one go about testing the claims made by religion? Please enlighten me if you have any ideas as to how this could be done, because if the claim that there is a god can't be tested, then it has as much (and as little) validity as the untestable claim that the world was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster in a drunken stupor. No you couldn't there are experiments that require vast amounts of money, time and resources the average person doesn't have access to. So does religion, so what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hereticzero Posted December 17, 2009 Share Posted December 17, 2009 How much money did The Family, aka The Fellowship, spend to influence legislation in Uganda? How much resources? Go here for the story: http://www.pensitoreview.com/2009/11/25/the-family-c-street-group-tied-to-uganda-death-penalty-for-gays/ Your religion looks stupid every time it opens its mouth against homosexuals. Christianity spends millions of dollars a year it collects from other charities and churches in an effort to murder homosexuals in Uganda. All that man power and effort just to murder people you never met. You are just as responsible as The Family because you claim to belong to the same faith system that is sponsoring terrorism against a minority of people in a foreign country. You should feel more ashamed of yourself for even acknowledging you are a Christian. You guys would murder homosexuals in this country if you had the opportunity of approval by the law. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
white_raven23 Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 So....FaithDefender.... you have a little baby jesus figurine sitting inside your PC box to sympathetically assist the technology right? If not, you'd best get away from that untrustworthy machine created by science. You'll just have to write us a letter obviously. Or admit to being a hypocrite as you clearly trust that your PC monitor is not going to maliciously explode and send shards into your eyeballs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Realist Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 I've posed this question to atheist on myspace, youtube, allhiphop.com's fourms and usually have gotten the same answer. I can see with good reason why you have gotten the same answer! I can guess the answer! They would have all told you FD you are a "F..ing Dickhead" Cannot you do even SLIGHTLY better than that??! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oddbird1963 Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 I think this entire thread demonstrates that many Christians truly don't understand the nature of faith. For the sake of argument with atheists they define faith as believing something you don't have in front of you. When they are talking about matters of spirituality or religion, they mean believing in something they cannot see and will never see. In effect, they change the meaning of faith to try to convince non-believers that they operate on faith. But then switch to the religious kind of faith under the subject of religion when it comes to answering questions about evil and suffering, the unintelligible nature of the doctrine of the trinity, we are admonished to trust in an unseen, mysterious, hidden god that you can "feel" but will never see. What FD16 is perpetrating on us, like many Christians who visit this site, is a shell game of equivocalness. Hopefully though, he learned a little something about the true scientific method and not his own self-serving, skewed version of scientific knowledge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike D Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 I notice FD has tucked his tail and ran here in the thread he started and is only coming to the theological forum. FaithDefender certainly doesn't seem to be living up to his moniker now does is he? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Antlerman Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 I'm going to suggest that FaithDefender come back here and own up to his mistaken premise of his OP. He has been handily shown the errors of his reasoning and ultimate criticism of those who find science generally trustworthy. It's my suggestion that he in fact does defend his faith by demonstrating that it can produce humility in his life, to be evidenced by admitting error to those whom he engaged in a challenge and was met with defeat. To do otherwise demonstrates not a defense of the merits of his faith, but a mockery of it. What say you FaithDefender? Will you defend the value of your faith by facing your failure in this thread? You will in fact gain my respect if you can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brakeman Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 I feel left out, I wanted to ask him if he's ever tested his bible based pi of 3 against our secular math's 3.1415.. I was looking forward to his math proofs.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chefranden Posted December 18, 2009 Share Posted December 18, 2009 Well I'm almost convinced. If I can't do all the science that has ever been done myself, I ought to believe in God. Nah, still can't do it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts