"Agnostics are Nowhere Men"

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

It is? You mean you can't know with absolute 100% certainty that the baloney in the bible is false?

Not if I'm being scrupulously accurate with my application of logic, no. I can say that I think it's as likely to be true as the moon actually being made of green cheese, and that the possibility of it being true isn't worth the slightest consideration without a staggeringly overwhelming amount of evidence appearing which supports it. But that's not quite the same thing.

 

[noreligion]

Not if I'm being scrupulously accurate with my application of logic, no. I can say that I think it's as likely to be true as the moon actually being made of green cheese, and that the possibility of it being true isn't worth the slightest consideration without a staggeringly overwhelming amount of evidence appearing which supports it. But that's not quite the same thing.

Wow...just wow. So it is scientifically possible for the Sun to stand still in the sky, house all species of animals on an ark, turn water to wine, raise the dead, etc. And you call yourself a skeptic? I say the word would be right only if it is defined as deluded.

 

[Squeegee Beckenheim]

Wow...just wow. So it is scientifically possible for the Sun to stand still in the sky, house all species of animals on an ark, turn water to wine, raise the dead, etc.

To the best of our current scientific knowledge, no. I've already explained my position earlier in the thread. I can't be bothered to repeat it. If you have a specific problem with my reasoning, then please quote one of my earlier posts and point out what you consider to be the flaws in my logic.

And you call yourself a skeptic?

Actually, I call myself a sceptic, but that's picking nits.

All sceptics should be open to the possibility that their opinions are wrong, and should be willing to be swayed by new evidence. Whether they think it even remotely credible that such evidence could ever come to light is immaterial. Outright rejecting the possibility, no matter how infinitesimally slight, of being wrong isn't scepticism, it's dogmatism.

I say the word would be right only if it is defined as deluded.

I don't understand what this sentence is supposed to mean.

 

[Darat]

As the majority of posts in this thread prove, many people are unable to accept an individual's perspective if it doesn't fit in with their preconceived labels and generalizations. It's like a person can claim to be agnostic, but eventually someone will ask a leading question to "prove" the person to be an atheist or a theist, or to place them in some other category of the critic's choosing. The people who do that are the same types of people who NEED to know if you're a liberal or conservative, and will quickly label you as such, not based on what YOU say, but what THEY believe.

Belief and faith are things I choose to ignore when it comes to religion. I honestly don't care if there's a God or not. When asked if there is one, the only correct answer is, "I don't know." Anyone who says otherwise is simply wrong. No God = likely, but until it's proven, that answer is incorrect.

Which god or gods do you believe in?

 

[Darat]

Wow...just wow. So it is scientifically possible for the Sun to stand still in the sky, house all species of animals on an ark, turn water to wine, raise the dead, etc. And you call yourself a skeptic? I say the word would be right only if it is defined as deluded.

All of those are certainly possible given our current understanding of the world, they do not contradict any accepted scientific theories. As Clarke put it "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

 

[noreligion]

All of those are certainly possible given our current understanding of the world, they do not contradict any accepted scientific theories. As Clarke put it "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Ok, here is an easy one. Explain how the sun could stand still in the sky as in the biblical account. To even give credence to a fairy tale like that does not belong in the mind of anyone but a brain dead fundagelical.

 

[Darat]

Ok, here is an easy one. Explain how the sun could stand still in the sky as in the biblical account. To even give credence to a fairy tale like that does not belong in the mind of anyone but a brain dead fundagelical.

You mean this I assume?

So the sun stood still, and the moon stopped, till the nation avenged itself on its enemies, as it is written in the Book of Jashar. The sun stopped in the middle of the sky and delayed going down about a full day.

I don't see anything in that could not be done by some bloody advanced science and technology - it "only" requires energy to moved about, removed and added, something that our current understanding of science describes even if we do not have the technology to do it... yet.

 

[noreligion]

You mean this I assume?



I don't see anything in that could not be done by some bloody advanced science and technology - it "only" requires energy to moved about, removed and added, something that our current understanding of science describes even if we do not have the technology to do it... yet.

You don't see? That's not an explanation. What would the effects be of the sun stopping in the sky (or better yet the Earth stopping it's rotation)?

Edited by Professor Yaffle: 

Edited to remove breach of rule 12

 

[Darat]

You don't see? That's not an explanation. What would the effects be of the sun stopping in the sky (or better yet the Earth stopping it's rotation)?

...snip...

The effects would depend on the technology being used of course. Unless you can come up with a reason, given what we know today via science, that in principle* such a thing is impossible then I don't know what your point is?


*Which means it would be in contradiction with what we currently know

 

[Bikewer]

There's a point here, and one that addresses definitions as well. Let's posit a vastly-advanced technological civilization. Maybe one like the bad guys in Greg Bear's Anvil Of Stars. Technology that can remodel planets and move them around. Remodel suns. Cause matter to change it's essential state at a distance.... Whatever.

The characters in the story are nearly awed by this civilization, and began to refer to them as "gods". (they prove all too vulnerable)

So, at what point of being advanced beyond us would we consider classifying other beings as deities? Didn't take much for the Conquistadores... Some fire-sticks and steel armor sufficed.

Which gets back to trying to define "gods". As I pointed out earlier, would an idiot god capable of creating universes but not of interacting with them or even understanding them be worthy of worship?
In what way would it differ from the universe in question being the result of natural causes, whatever those might be?

 

[One Tenth]

You don't see? That's not an explanation. What would the effects be of the sun stopping in the sky (or better yet the Earth stopping it's rotation)?

Are you suggesting that if someone can't explain the precise mechanism under what some event could occur, then that event is completely impossible?

That's pretty much textbook argument from incredulity.

 

[Darat]

We know empirically what does happen from when historically cultures have been contacted by more technologically advanced cultures. Often they have been misidentified as gods or godlike. And in fact most gods that people actually profess a belief in, and that includes the god of the bible, are nothing but versions of humans with great power.

 

[noreligion]

The effects would depend on the technology being used of course. Unless you can come up with a reason, given what we know today via science, that in principle* such a thing is impossible then I don't know what your point is?


*Which means it would be in contradiction with what we currently know

Does this reply mean your not going to answer or rather attempt to sidestep a direct question?

 

[noreligion]

Are you suggesting that if someone can't explain the precise mechanism under what some event could occur, then that event is completely impossible?

That's pretty much textbook argument from incredulity.

No, neither did I say that but you are free to believe whatever your heart desires.

 

[Darat]

Does this reply mean your not going to answer or rather attempt to sidestep a direct question?

If I knew exactly how then I'd be able to build the technology...

However as far as I can see to achieve that effect would require energy in the system to be removed, changed and/or added to the system - none of which contradicts what we know via science today.

 

[noreligion]

If I knew exactly how then I'd be able to build the technology...

However as far as I can see to achieve that effect would require energy in the system to be removed, changed and/or added to the system - none of which contradicts what we know via science today.

Edited by Professor Yaffle: 

Edited for rule 12

you apparently didn't even read my post. I asked you to explain the effects of the sun stopping or rather the Earth's rotation stopping.

 

[Darat]

you apparently didn't even read my post. I asked you to explain the effects of the sun stopping or rather the Earth's rotation stopping.

I did answer you. As I said that would depend on the technology, it could be that for the folks in the story there would only be the effect that they described.

 

[noreligion]

I did answer you. As I said that would depend on the technology, it could be that for the folks in the story there would only be the effect that they described.

You said that but it isn't an answer. Stop evading, it looks childish.

 

[Darat]

You said that but it isn't an answer. Stop evading, it looks childish.

I'm not evading anything - we are talking about "... sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." And you seem to expect me to know what the effects of using such technology would be, beyond what the story describes. It could be that because the technology is so advanced there are no other effects, which does not contradict what we know about the world today via science.

I have to assume from your questions that you believe that somehow the story contradicts what we know today via science about how the universe works? So what does that story contradict?

 

[noreligion]

Let's ask you a specific point so you can stop evading. If the Earth's rotation stopped for a day as the bible says, what happened to the angular momentum? Sorry to tell you but the method of stopping the rotation has no effect on the answer.