I'm good enough, I'm smart enough and...a... never mind. This sums it up my views nicely. Science has given us truths, facts and answers. Now, to all the people who don't agree with that, show me your proof and warm feelings and personal anecdotes don't count. I want facts if you want me to listen.
Found via Pharyngula.
I just thought this was funny. No idea where I got it from.
Just about done with Storm Front, on the last page! Will be done later today.
It turns out I have tennis/golf elbow, basically a tear in the tendon or muscle near the elbow area. It's a repetitive stress injury from making the dog food! Thanks dogs! No food for you! Luckily it's my non -drawing arm but it sucks not being able to lift things, 2 pounds is even to heavy sometimes. I'm supposed to rest it for 2-3 weeks but I don't have time for that. So it's drugs and arm braces. Sometimes typing hurts, so if there isn't much posting that's why. Not looking for sympathy, just explianing why you might not hear from me, but it's doing OK today:)
Best,
Brett
Brett
Funny stuff, I think it shows how people atheists, believers, idists, evolutionists, etc. all use the same basic thought ordering system. They just know they are right and anything to the contrary bounces off. The believer post could be used just as effectively for materialists (but some of the graphics would have to change.) In general we latch onto a large belief system and then use that as a lense to perceive the rest of the world through.
ReplyDeleteYou do it, I do it and we both believe it to be logical.
-Steve
Ah, you almost got there Steve. Of course we use the same ordering system, that's how we evolved. It makes sense that we do things that way and that chimps and other primates have similar systems. BUT were we differ is in the evidence and the acceptance of it. You think your evidence is good while I find it lacking. You presuppose a purpose while I waited to see the evidence. Claiming that we know the answers ahead if time is wrong and you know it. We come up with a hypothosis that supports what evidence we find, if they are tested and turn out to be correct then it's accepted if it's tested and turns out no to work then it's been falsified and is rejected. I don't see evidence for a creator, but it's still possible however small. I can reject the gods of Earth as they are easily falsified by testing. No global flood, well that takes the Bible, Torah and Koran out. Lightning is easily explainable, there goes Zeus and Thor.
ReplyDeleteYou seem to forget that most Atheists started out like you did, as being religious, so we didn't presuppose anything. We simply questioned and followed the evidence.
I watched this Morgan Freeman thing last night. And apparently a 'brain doctor' (I can't spell the name right now) has located a section of the brain that might explain that God presence the religious seem to have. Turns out it's a throwback to humans feeling alone and afraid. If this is triggered by a simple magnet you feel a presence with you. Interesting stuff.
Best,
Brett
I think we are more similar than you let on. We both reject the other's position for lack of evidence. If the amount of geographical evidence for Noah's flood makes you a Bible skeptic the absence of ANY current plausible theory for the first instance of abiogenesis should have you running for the hills. Life from non-life, still no materialistic answers.
ReplyDeleteI've seen that "God part of the brain" research before. One possibility is it proves we are capable of feeling God's presence. Electric stimulation of various lobes of the brain can make you see, feel, smell, and taste any stored information as if you are experiencing it for real. If you stimulate a certain part of the brain you will feel cold even in TX on a hot day. Because the brain processes something makes it neither true or false. The brain is a receptor, not a transmitter in this capacity. Because it has the ability to be stimulated to "feel" God's presence in no way disproves it. It is sort of like explaining how the ear works and then saying because we know how sound is received it is impossible to audibly hear God speak.
Steve
Fuck! It ate my post!
ReplyDeleteBasically, there is evidence, you just choose to ignore it. It might be circumstantial, but it's there. You're asking for truths from 4 billion years ago, it might take some time to get there. Of course it's been 4 thousand years for you guys, any evidence? Any at all? A wing? A bit of the Tower of Babel?
I fail to see why something from nothing, which isn't true there are things that are close to life, just not there yet. Personally I think a guy who watches you and demands to listen to his rules for a finite time on earth and if you don't toe the line and get punished FOREVER is FAR more scary for me.
Did the actual idea that God is man made EVER occur to you? The brain receives and transmits. Just because you said in this instance it doesn't , doesn't magically make it true. I'm sure some neurosurgeons might disagree with you.
Best,
Brett
Brett,
ReplyDeleteThe Universe has a history. It is a fact that it is not eternal, unless you reject the foundation most scientists use to measure time and universal expansion. That creates even more problems that it solves. The Kalam Cosmological argument addresses the appearance of time and history.
An easy picture for understanding Kalam is if you see someone driving a car, you know at some point the car started its journey, you can also theorize it will eventually get to its final destination. It is insanity to say the car is eternally traveling; if that was the case distance traveled would cease to be possible to measure. All of the evidence we have points to the fact we exist in a rapidly expanding universe. Matter is traveling away from a central point in time and space. The Big Bang. An eternally expanding universe is an improbability. This is the first problem with a closed materialistic view of existence. There is no scientific explanation to start off with anything but a steady state model, but steady state does not work. Can you have ice without first having water? At some point in the universe conditions changed so water would freeze, in steady state conditions do not change unless acted upon. String theory and Quantum physics do not begin to explain it. This is the first major fatal stumbling block with basing a life of faith on only known science. If you admit science does not yet have all the answers, cool. You've just opened the door for possibility of the supernatural, or you reject the supernatural on a philosophical basis. Either way you can not reject my position on solid science, you can only say personally you do not like it.
If you truly believe the line between life and non-life is close to being breached please read either of Michael Behe's peer reviewed books: Darwin's Black Box or The Edge of Evolution. Otherwise you are putting faith in only the opinions of a small minority of scientists.
Steve
Oh and for the purpose of honesty. I have no answers for the lack of evidence for a world wide flood. This is one of the least discussed matters in the apologetic books, magazines, and sites I visit. I'm cool with not understanding now, but I'll be ticked if in another ten years I haven't found a scientific model that makes sense to me and lines up with the geographical data.
ReplyDeleteSteve
Can I still believe in a deity and evolution? IS that still okay?
ReplyDeleteI'm not forcing belief or ethics on anybody.
I'm no Tom Cruise. I'm no Scientologist either, but I would never force anyone to believe.
Pope John Paul II, who made alot, and I mean ALOT of mistakes, wanted all faiths, and none, to work together to bring about a peaceful society.
There are far greater things to worry about, such as the opression of free speech and terrorism.
M.O.R.
ReplyDeleteI don't have a real problem with anyone believing, it's the forcing of those beliefs that bug the crap out of me. The religious don't actually see how religion is forced on the unbelievers. It's every were.
While you might not be forcing it, and there are lots of people like you, the vocal people are, relentlessly. Fox News anyone?
It would be nice if we can all work together peacefully, I just don't think we're ready for it. Besides religion Steve and I get along rather well. If we can leave religion out of it then it might work but the religious refuse to leave it at the door when talking about human rights.
I agree oppression of free speech and terrorism are horrible and do need to be addressed. Just one problem with that, the ones doing the terrorizing and oppression tend to also be the religious.
Best,
Brett
Hi Brett,
ReplyDeleteI agree with that. I think I was made more aware of that when I saw and began researching Scientology, and the Muslim extremists, among other terrorist groups. The Muslim extremists are bad, and I hate them with a passion due to their continued, and successful, attempts to curb free speech. Just look at the South Park furore.
Scientology is worse, they are nothing but extremists. They denouce anyone who criticises their "religion/ Cult/ company", and accuse those who do of being "extortionists/ paedophiles/ wife beaters etc" and videos exist, on youtube, showing many such occassions. They have been known to actually follow people home, and one such journo, Mike Berker(may have his name wrong) experienced them following him, but also putting up pamphlets in his neighbourhood. Scientology encourages such behaviour, yet say they are retaliating against "religious bigotry".
I oppose any religion trying to curb free speech, as well as hindering medical science such as psychiatry and trying to curb our understanding of the human brain. I know we have to make sure that we do not overstep he mark with science, fictional examples such as Frankenstein, Jurassic Park, or The Fly spring to mind, as well as the real life glow in the dark cats, but there are certain government restrictions against such behaviour, which have to be followed.
Obama is a religious man, his mother was an agnostic or atheist, but he still understands the benefits of stem cell research, and the potential for cures for disease like Alzheimers, Parkinson's or paralysis.
He knows that government should be a government, not a spin off from the Churches. I don't want religion everywhere either.
In Europe, an Irish politician, though she no longer has the job, named Dana Rosemary Scanlon, was trying to push forth a law into the EU, or European Union, banning embryonic stem cell research, citing that it 'was against God', using the specific mention of God. To hell with that. Religion should not enter government.
The individual has their own moral governing, and those that are in the judicial and legal system. It is up to the individual to believe, or not, in a religion, and not force it on others, or try and instill it into government. This is the reason we have so much anti-Gay marriage around the world, despite not mention of anti-homosexuality in either the Bible, or the Koran, even when these religions claim it is. Everything in religion is down to misinterpretation, or poor translation. We celebrate Christmas on the wrong day, for a start, among other things people do wrong, and condemn many who are not condemned in a religious text.
If I harp on and on as pro-Gay marriage, it is simply because I was once incredibly homophobic, because I believed it went against God and Nature/ evolution. One day, while coming across a series of images (non-pornographic, I assure you :)) that were pro-Gay marriage, and one comic stip image hit me like a bolt of lightning, and made me realise the absolute dumb @$$ery of my ways. Good thing too, because a cousin of mine came out as a Lesbian a few years back, while in her thirties, and it struck me as how difficult it is for someone to accept what is essentially a private part of their lives. I was born heterosexual, simply down to evolution(and other things I believe but will not mention because they are MY beliefs), though I am a sensitive soul ;), but I cannot imagine the difficulty someone who is gay might face. I mean, it is socially acceptable for me to look at a stunningly beautiful woman, either on TV, in a mag, or the internet, and being stopped in my tracks, and people are like 'That is totally normal', but try being homsexual and doing the same thing. There would be strange looks.
Sorry for my rant, Brett and others reading your blog and comments. Had to get some things off of my chest.
Take care,
MOR
MOR,
ReplyDeleteIf only more of the religious were like you!
Just a few things, Crichton was actually against science and I actually fail to see his point at all. Screw the condors, there are LOTS of other animals that we've killed off, if we can bring them back even a bit at least we're in part TRYING to fix past mistakes;) Building things on the work of others is how we mover FORWARD. To basically have to relearn everything from scratch is just... stupidly wasteful.
If I could be brought back, even as a corpse in the future I might be interested in that, if only to see what humans have done, my curiosity is that great. Also I'd love to be able to go to the past, but that's not really possible... I don't think.
The glowy cats aren't really a problem as it's harmless science, learning how to move genes about, might cure cancer or AIDS at some point as sharks don't get cancer.
Best,
Brett
Hi Brett,
ReplyDeleteThere are alot of religious like me, I know a whole load of them in my personal life. Ireland is alot more open about these things. America seems backward to alot of us. Land of the free? Yeah, right.
I mean how can someone believe in the literal translation of the bible, which is down to the mistranslation of the Aramaic version where the Aramaic word in the bible did not mean 'day' as you or I understand it, but rather a broader term for either a day, a decade, a century, millions of years, billions of years etc?
King James version went for day, maybe because they believed people were smart enough to understand the difference. Big mistake on their part. When a country has nuclear weapons, aaaannnnddd believes in creatonism...well, let's just say alot of us are a little nervous.
If someone is bringing me back in the future, the better merge me with some animal. I want wings and the ability to spit poison. If science has advanced that much, I wanna see it. And yes, I am weird. :)
I want to see alot of species survive, including the condor, due to the food chain. If one species dies, another dies out, or another increases in numbers, becoming vermin. Look at the influence wolves have, for example, they kill old and diseased animals, allowing healthy animals to grow, maintaining the survival of the species, and preventing a disease outbreak.
Would not hold much hope in Shark marrow. It's already an alternative medicine, and has limited use, and only delays cancer, does not cure it.
Where is it written that sharks don't get cancer? Curious to read that.
Oh, and RIP AL Williamson, noted artist.
Take care,
MOR