Religious and educated?

[ippy]

Dear ippy,

Not evidence for God, concept of god, do try and keep up old chap.

Gonnagle.

Making excuses for holding a pointless belief in an obviously man made idea and just calling it a concept doesn't really alter anything.

Accepting something like a belief a god whatever you wish to call it; if you've held this rather strange idea for a number of years I can see it would be difficult to admit  to yourself you've been into some pretty strange stuff, but if you were to dump it you really wouldn't be dumping your concept/idea of a god, because it'so unlikely it was there in the first place, so what would you be giving the elbow to?

ippy

[Gonnagle]

Dear ippy,

Yes Dear.

Today I will be wearing mostly cabbages.

Gonnagle.

[ippy]

Dear ippy,

Yes Dear.

Today I will be wearing mostly cabbages.

Gonnagle.
[/quodte]

Well Goners wear your cabbages with pride, you're not on your own there's plenty of others that believe the equivilant of Elvis is still here.

ippy

[Outrider]

Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.

Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops?

science doesn't do God.

Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.

[Rhiannon]

Fairies are more believable than a god of love who doesn't like people falling in live with each other if they have matching front bottoms.

[jeremyp]

Science has a lack a belief in Gods so Jeremy calls it atheist.

Science does not have beliefs.  It is a process.  What the hell are you talking about?  Science is atheistic in the sense that the assumption of the existence of God has no place in it.  People who do science have to temporarily set aside any theistic beliefs they have.

[OH MY WORLD!]

ippy,
The reality is that you hold the strange idea, more people in the world do believe in a god. A mere 1.8 of the world population go for your strange atheist idea and that number is in decline.

[ippy]

ippy,
The reality is that you hold the strange idea, more people in the world do believe in a god. A mere 1.8 of the world population go for your strange atheist idea and that number is in decline.

You'quite right Woody, remember the same type of people thought thought the sun went around planet earth, the point being if an idea is wrong it doesn't matter how many believe it, it'still wrong.

ippy

[ippy]

Dear ippy,

The Prof is basically saying the same thing as you, and it seems he accepts the same story as you.

Man just thought up the concept of God, earlyman thought godidit, a very convenient story.

Gonnagle.

The Proff and I are saying more or less the same thing but it's not a story in the way your indoctrinated mind is telling you, your god idea/concept is only a man made story all based on how social animals methods of survival naturaly develop/evolve, but then again it'seems to me as though the Proff'and my idea is just that bit much too credible for you and you really don't want to reconise it and admit to yourself we've more than likely got it right.

Have a good day Gonners

ippy

[OH MY WORLD!]

Well Woody aka Chopper aka ippy, you claim it is wrong, big deal. That's just an opinion and a small minority one at that. Now get busy and convince us.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.

Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops?

science doesn't do God.

Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.

Well it does do unicorns, ogres, honey monsters, and flying horses since they are all falsifiable.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Fairies are more believable than a god of love who doesn't like people falling in live with each other if they have matching front bottoms.

LOL with a huge portion of ROFL

[Outrider]

Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.

Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops?

science doesn't do God.

Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.

Well it does do unicorns, ogres, honey monsters, and flying horses since they are all falsifiable.

Please explain how I falsify the claim 'There were once unicorns'...

O.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.

Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops?

science doesn't do God.

Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.

Well it does do unicorns, ogres, honey monsters, and flying horses since they are all falsifiable.

Please explain how I falsify the claim 'There were once unicorns'...

O.

Paleontology dear boy.

[Shaker]

Paleontology dear boy.

You must consider the science of paleontology to be finished then, since the clear implication from your comment is that all the species which have ever lived have already been found in the fossil record, i.e. are already known as of September 2015.

Is that really what you meant to say, Vlad?

[Outrider]

Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.

Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops?

science doesn't do God.

Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.

Well it does do unicorns, ogres, honey monsters, and flying horses since they are all falsifiable.

Please explain how I falsify the claim 'There were once unicorns'...

O.

Paleontology dear boy.

So because we've not found archaeological evidence we have disproven the theory of unicorns. Logically, then, the fact we've not found any evidence of gods means....

O.

[jeremyp]

Paleontology dear boy.

A unicorn would never do anything so vulgar as to die and rot away. We wouldn't expect to see unicorn fossils.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Paleontology dear boy.

You must consider the science of paleontology to be finished then, since the clear implication from your comment is that all the species which have ever lived have already been found in the fossil record, i.e. are already known as of September 2015.

Is that really what you meant to say, Vlad?

No. What we mean is the past existence of unicorns can be verified or falsified by paleontology.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Jeremy, science does not support any of your ideas about religion. Suck it up.

Do you think science supports any of yours, Vladdypops?

science doesn't do God.

Nor fairies, unicorns, honey monsters, ogres or flying horses that carry the prophet away...

O.

Well it does do unicorns, ogres, honey monsters, and flying horses since they are all falsifiable.

Please explain how I falsify the claim 'There were once unicorns'...

O.

Paleontology dear boy.

So because we've not found archaeological evidence we have disproven the theory of unicorns. Logically, then, the fact we've not found any evidence of gods means....

O.

No, what we mean is paleontology can verify or falsify unicorns.

[Nearly Sane]

Except it cannot, induction doesn't work that way as you nearly understand Vlad but you do not apply it consistently because you want to avoid the problem of the relativism that you inadvertently adore but fight punily against the implications like a gerbil being crushed by a tank.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Except it cannot, induction doesn't work that way as you nearly understand Vlad but you do not apply it consistently because you want to avoid the problem of the relativism that you inadvertently adore but fight punily against the implications like a gerbil being crushed by a tank.

What?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Except it cannot, induction doesn't work that way as you nearly understand Vlad but you do not apply it consistently because you want to avoid the problem of the relativism that you inadvertently adore but fight punily against the implications like a gerbil being crushed by a tank.

Do you not understand that a unicorn is a horse with a horn.........or that the evolution of the horse is perhaps one of the most trumpeted triumphs of paleontology?......what is the matter with you?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Paleontology dear boy.

A unicorn would never do anything so vulgar as to die and rot away. We wouldn't expect to see unicorn fossils.

So there we have it.............. verification by unicorn sense of decorum.

[Shaker]

No. What we

We?

mean is the past existence of unicorns can be verified or falsified by paleontology.

Correct, but then, with no fossil evidence as yet, there always remains the possibility that such evidence could be found tomorrow, yes?

[Nearly Sane]

Except it cannot, induction doesn't work that way as you nearly understand Vlad but you do not apply it consistently because you want to avoid the problem of the relativism that you inadvertently adore but fight punily against the implications like a gerbil being crushed by a tank.

Do you not understand that a unicorn is a horse with a horn.........or that the evolution of the horse is perhaps one of the most trumpeted triumphs of paleontology?......what is the matter with you?

No, I have no idea that a unicorn is a horse with a horn. How did you get that?