Is atheism a threat to humanity?

[ratiocinator]

As stated, you are confused.

I've provided you with actual evidence that I'm not. Once again you're just stamping your little foot and asserting things.

And no wonder, when you choose to believe lies

What lies? Evidence?

instead of investigating on your own.

Wow - you've got a whole new theory of matter and energy - where are you published? Looking forward to your Nobel?

 

[Satans_Serrated_Edge]

Yes, caused by, but can't be reduced to for all aspects of the human condition and experience.
If we agree to that, it is over. If not we will continue.

Your language is too ambiguous to tell if I agree with that or not, but again, I don't see what that has to do with anything.

If you are saying there are aspects of the 'mind' that do not have a cause rooted in brainstates then I probably would not agree, and before that case could even be made a second possible cause would need to be introduced and examined.

If you are saying there are aspects of mind that are yet to be understood, then I would agree.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Your language is too ambiguous to tell if I agree with that or not, but again, I don't see what that has to do with anything.

If you are saying there are aspects of the 'mind' that do not have a cause rooted in brainstates then I probably would not agree, and before that case could even be made a second possible cause would need to be introduced and examined.

If you are saying there are aspects of mind that are yet to be understood, then I would agree.

No, I am saying that all words can't be understood only objectively. That is where it ends.
All experiences can't be reduced down to only eternal sensations of that which comes from the outside to the brain. I.e. science has a limit. You can't understand everything by just seeing it and making models of observations and instrument measurements. That is what I am saying. And you can't see this. You can understand it as I or understand it differently, but both cases are subjective and not science.

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

I've provided you with actual evidence that I'm not. Once again you're just stamping your little foot and asserting things.



What lies? Evidence?



Wow - you've got a whole new theory of matter and energy - where are you published? Looking forward to your Nobel?

ANY major discovery in this world, if it cannot be "merchandised", so that a few can stay wealthy at the expense of the poor,
never sees the light of day...….witness Nikola Tesla.

But you just keep on keeping on..

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

Yes, caused by, but can't be reduced to for all aspects of the human condition and experience.
If we agree to that, it is over. If not we will continue.

I must say, I had to break out the popcorn for this one...
two atheist debating the difference between the physical organ of the brain,
and the spiritual aspect of the brain, that is the "mind"...

only both, by admission, do not believe in "spirit" (mind)….
VERY entertaining......thank you.

 

[ratiocinator]

ANY major discovery in this world, if it cannot be "merchandised", so that a few can stay wealthy at the expense of the poor...

And this is relevant to your ignorance of science, how exactly?

And, other that affected superiority (amusing as it is), baseless assertions, and basic misunderstandings, what exactly do you have to contribute?

Do you actually have any reasoning or evidence to offer?

Anything?

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

And this is relevant to your ignorance of science, how exactly?

And, other that affected superiority (amusing as it is), baseless assertions, and basic misunderstandings, what exactly do you have to contribute?

Do you actually have any reasoning or evidence to offer?

Anything?

I'm simply telling you that you cannot believe what the scientific community makes public knowledge,
because it is a government controlled institution ( like ALL are ).
The Government has technology NOW that the public will not know about for another 100 years or so,
and any person who has worked in the military or as a civilian employee in any number of their "black ops" programs
will tell you this for a FACT.

But, you just go back to "sleep"...….sorry I woke you ( or tried to ).

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

WORDS……. are what created the "creature" .

Evidence for this wild a*s bold fantastical claim?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

This is almost hilarious....."WORDS" , when spoken are nothing but SOUND VIBRATIONS..
ANY physicist worth his salt will tell you that "VIBRATION" is what forms this reality, as it (vibration)
is the basic building block of physical matter and ENERGY.

So, you "atheist" ( so called ) ADMIT and acknowledge the very things you try so desperately to tear down ?????
And you wonder WHY you can't understand .

LOL!

Go ahead. Cite a paper.

 

[ratiocinator]

I'm simply telling you that you cannot believe what the scientific community makes public knowledge,
because it is a government controlled institution ( like ALL are ).
The Government has technology NOW that the public will not know about for another 100 years or so,
and any person who has worked in the military or as a civilian employee in any number of their "black ops" programs
will tell you this for a FACT.

And off we go into conspiracy theories...

I'm guessing that, just like before, you except people to accept this "FACT" just because you assert it...?

But, you just go back to "sleep"...….sorry I woke you ( or tried to ).

Not making basic mistakes about science, and at least attempting to back up what you say with some sort of reasoning or evidence, would be a whole lot more effective than just trying to act all superior - which is just funny, given the total lack of content....

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I "know" because I was told by the "MIND" that is..
I gained this knowledge by going out of my physical body and seeking it...

This knowledge can be tested and reproduced by doing said exercise..
if one (you) cannot do this, then you need to learn how first..

if you are unwilling to DO anything but sit and criticize those who KNOW MORE than you
then you are without excuse for lacking this knowledge.

So far, you've only been claiming that you know more then others.
You haven't even begun to demonstrate it.

Piling on even more claims, isn't going to exempt any claim from its burden of proof.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I'm still waiting for you to define "mind" …..TRUTHFULLY,
if you cannot, then I have to assume that you don't have one.

Why does it matter how someone else defines "mind", when the claim in question about "minds" is yours?
Your claim should be able to stand on its own merrit.

For the sake of argument, and just to move this nonsense along, let's just say that we don't know how to define it.

You claim that you know.
Now demonstrate your knowledge.

Or do you expect people to simply believe you, no questions asked?

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Please, don't take my word for it. Find out for yourself.
then you may understand WHY this world is full of "animals", of every sort imaginable.

even the "human" one (animal).

Absolutely not every sort imaginable. In fact, there are FAR LESS animals alive then I can imagine.

There are no 6-legged mammals, for starters.
There are no centaurs. There are no unicorns.
There are no flying pigs.
There are no winged monkeys.
There are no reptiles with hair.
There are no amphibians with mammary glands.
There are no mammals with the ability to grow back severed limbs.

Compared to the amount of animals I can imagine, dissapointedly little types of species exist.

What that, btw, has to do with coming up with some evidence in support of the claim that a "mind" can exist absent a brain, is quite a mystery.

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

And off we go into conspiracy theories...

I'm guessing that, just like before, you except people to accept this "FACT" just because you assert it...?



Not making basic mistakes about science, and at least attempting to back up what you say with some sort of reasoning or evidence, would be a whole lot more effective than just trying to act all superior - which is just funny, given the total lack of content....

Well, eye witnesses can make such claims......
then it's up to you to prove them wrong.

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

Absolutely not every sort imaginable. In fact, there are FAR LESS animals alive then I can imagine.

There are no 6-legged mammals, for starters.
There are no centaurs. There are no unicorns.
There are no flying pigs.
There are no winged monkeys.
There are no reptiles with hair.
There are no amphibians with mammary glands.
There are no mammals with the ability to grow back severed limbs.

Compared to the amount of animals I can imagine, dissapointedly little types of species exist.

What that, btw, has to do with coming up with some evidence in support of the claim that a "mind" can exist absent a brain, is quite a mystery.

"animals" = any flesh and blood "creature".....( OH, they must be called "creatures" because they were "created" )
yes, I know.....not the "scientific definition", oh hell, oh well....

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Whats the evidence? Please quote.

There are hundreds, if not thousands, of religions.
Most of them come with moral frameworks / imperatives / duties / whatever you wish to call it.

At best, only one of them is what it claims to be (ie: coming from gods and/or accurate descriptions of gods/the supernatural). All others then must be human inventions.

We know for absolute fact that humans invent religions. We've literally observed it happening.

So we actually have demonstrable and observed precedents of humans doing this.
But we have no such demonstrable precedents of gods or angeles or whatnot doing this.

Since all religions tend to make the same type of claims, the most likely outcome is that all are human inventions.

I could invoke Occam's razor as well here.
There's no need to assume supernatural entities as the source of any religion, because we already have a perfectly decent candidate which has already been observed to invent religions: humans.


I could go on for quite a while in more detail. But imho, the above is already more then enough to support my statement that religions (and therefor also the moral values contained therein) are of human origin.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Please stop bringing your ill-thought through stuff about subjective and objective into absolutely every conversation. My comments were about physics (which the poster I was responding to brought up).

My sincere advice to you: think more, post less, and post only when your response is relevant.

Annoying, isn't it?

@mikkel_the_dane you see, I'm not the only one noticing this. As soon as you see a reference to science, no matter what the actual conversation is about, you jump in there like a hawk and muddy the waters into irrelevancy for absolutely no reason at all.

 

[WhyIsThatSo]

So far, you've only been claiming that you know more then others.
You haven't even begun to demonstrate it.

Piling on even more claims, isn't going to exempt any claim from its burden of proof.

Oh, hey Tag.....you must have missed the part about how
"words" are really sound vibrations,
and how "vibration" is the basic building block of energy and matter.

Which means "sound vibration" ( words ), when used properly,
can be used to manifest a solid object ( matter ) out of thin air.

But you won't find that in "science class".....naturally

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Well, eye witnesses can make such claims......
then it's up to you prove them wrong.

Ever heared of the burden of proof?

No, eyewitness claims aren't considered true "until proven wrong".
Claims that are made without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

"animals" = any flesh and blood "creature".....( OH, they must be called "creatures" because they were "created" )
yes, I know.....not the "scientific definition", oh hell, oh well....

Another reply completely irrelevant in context of the post you are replying to.