Discussion in 'Religion & Philosophy' started by ChemEngineer, Jul 27, 2019.
You can't do both. 99% of women are believers, compared to just 90% of men.
Easy. No unicorn poop, no dead unicorn skeletons. Dinosaurs left behind both. Perhaps now you can tell us how you'd go about proving or disproving the existence of a spiritual being rather than trying to change the subject.
Breeding oneself out of existence is not a birth strategy that can be found in the animal kingdom. Historically speaking, wars, disease, and accidents took a greater toll on the stupid people than the smart people, so smart people could have fewer children and still account for a significant part of the population. Now that we've ended most of the wars, diseases, and accidents, the stupid people are outbreeding the smart people by something like three or four to one, while the smart people are reproducing at less than replacement rates. This is a disastrous state of affairs and can only end in a new dark ages unless the trend is reversed.
As part of that, Dawkins also talks about memes.
The meme of atheism is expanding rapidly.
So, atheism is kicking butt.
No wonder you're here weeping openly. You see an end to the special privileges you've always gotten. You can't imagine working on a level playing field.
Disproving the Christian god is trivial, as it falls apart due to logical contradictions.
That's the problem with trying to define a god. Once you define it, it's easy to disprove it. That's why religions have to work so hard to not define their gods.
You did no such thing. Please stop making such absurd representations. Deceive yourself, fine. But don't think you can deceive everyone else as you do yourself.
It's time to awaken the sleeping philosophy of Eugenics before it is too late!.........eh, no
Your ethnocentrism enables you to assume the people from poor countries are less intelligent because they have more children. There is no evidence of that. They have a different birth strategy because their progeny will have poorer odds of reaching adulthood than those from rich nations.
They are generally more religious too, because it is a survival mechanism in an unstable dangerous environment. What religion gives is community, a social structure with rules, the possibility of help from a higher power and increases altruistic behavior among non-kin.
Muslims and Christians believe in very different gods. And the person of Isa of the Muslims is a very different person from the Jesus of Christians, starting with the fact that they deny that Jesus was the son of God, or that he rose from the dead, or that he can save men from their sins.
You are satisfied there are no unicorns because of a lack of evidence of there existence and I am satisfied there are no gods because of a lack of evidence of there existence.
So what is the premise of the argument here?
Guy says, “ the only reason we are here is to reproduce”. = mean statement = therefore god must be real. ?
Is that right?
I did. I'll be happy to send it to you as a PDF if you'd like. Most people trip over the free will part of the argument, but I'm still convinced I'm right.
There are reams of data showing people from poor countries are less intelligent. That they have more children is a statistical fact, not a proof of anything.
Captain Not So Obvious, IF Darwinism is so wonderful and its followers are all so brilliant, then WHY do they fail to live up to their Darwinian Imperative, hmmmm? You brought up "god," not I. So, no, your pretend gotcha was simply more wordplay at which you people truly excel.
*shrugs* I don't care what you believe, what I care about is what you promulgate publicly. If you go around saying there's no God, I want to see on what basis you believe that, and if you say a lack of evidence, I will say a lack of evidence is not evidence of lack. God being a spiritual being and one who only reveals himself in miraculous occurrences and not natural ones means there will never be "proof" as such. Any such proof would then be reducible to natural causes and not supernatural ones. If you want to dismiss supernatural occurrences as fiction, that's your right, but don't think it's conclusive of anything. Your dismissal proves nothing.
I could turn that around on you and say that if God exists, then reproducing is not the most important thing, so why do theists need to do so much of it?
That’s a pretty crooked line to connect. One could easily draw a straighter line connecting divorce rates among Christians.
An argument such as.
Christians divorce as often as non Christians- therefore there is no god.
Agreed. This is a ridiculous premise poised to formulate an argument using unrelated facts.
let me know when you find god poop or god skeletons. Nice try though.
not fighting just trying to educate. Words and terms have meanings and correct usage and understanding is the basis for communication. You are right in one respect. Trying to educate the uneducable is a waste of time.
no there is no data showing they are less intelligent. You are confusing intelligence with education.
I was unaware of the "reams". Could you provide just a sliver of proof you know what you are talking about?
"Your dismissal proves nothing"....to you. Your belief is obviously necessary.
Spiritual being. Nice try at deflection, but you're still tilting at strawmen.
And I bet you believe that those people in the bottom 30 countries are actually retarded. It seems ignorance is without borders.
It's not as if I'm the first person to put two and two together.
"[Nobel Prize winning] Dr [James] Watson told The Sunday Times that he was "inherently gloomy about the prospect of Africa" because "all our social policies are based on the fact that their intelligence is the same as ours – whereas all the testing says not really"."
Separate names with a comma.