It was nice chating with stephenw, we only discussed what the thread is about, only gave my response to the original question and when we began to discuss about the validity of his believes I told him I didn't want to do it since it works for him and that I was only responding to the threads...
Taken out of context
The data I'm asking is part of this discussion, and is what Willamena supposedly read and didn't like, is quite fair.
What you ask for comes from a book I read some years ago.
Your last quote is from self analysis of discussions with my fiancée.
What are you trying...
Read the link I posted, and then read the books.
He is a great man, but is over hyped, and is in part thanks to his own ego and how badly humanity needs someone to explain things.
I backed what I said two times, with the quote "What place, then, for a creator?" and with the link I posted...
I just noticed that even when arguing my approach is in its nature much more scientific than your "you are incorrect" one. I try to reply to what people say, because is the data I have, and when someone tells me I'm incorrect I feel like is nonsense until you provide the necessary data to back...
My whole idea is that theories have to have data supporting it, is all I have been saying, maybe the use of this word wasn't the best, but is an honest mistake.
I don't feel like quoting myself, but I kindly invite you to do it and show where I'm frankly incorrect, because as far as your small...
I don't work for you, You know? I don't feature a super memory to quote a random person when asked to, but you can start by reading this; and then do your own homework and read the books.
English isn't my native language, so please don't start a discussion about the correctness of using one word for the other, I have been using the word "data" extensively, you take one word I may have misused and discredit all I have said without actually addressing it, and worst of all claim I'm...
Why? You haven't heard my reasons... Quite quickly to underwhelm you are.
He is a celebrity and cultural phenomena, and one of the reasons for this is how he self promotes, how he speaks about himself as the successor of Einstein and, the worst one, how he speaks too much about god in his...
The scientific thought is based on empirical data and the scientific method, you have to peer-review a theory to confirm it, any other belief do not conform to this principles.
As I'm a scientist, if I can't get data and the evidence necessary to know scientifically what happened before the...
No, you are not getting it. Some scientists believe in the theory of dark energy, some in the theory of the electric universe; some believe a zero-point energy system can be constructed, some believe that it can't since it jeopardize the conservation of energy.
Yet most of them will agree in...
And he is somewhat right! Science also has evolved over the history, from the magical/scientific alchemists to our modern science.
Science was actually under heavy risk of becoming another religion, this were the times when scientists claimed to discover "laws" and those who challenged them...
I really don't want to discuss your beliefs, as I'm quite sure I'm not going to convince you on believing something else, but what you are describing still is a subjective experience that is dependent on your education and surroundings; somebody else could have read the same books you did and...
For me it does, that's why I'm a scientist. And in my defense it is, historically, the best tool we have to explain and understand the universe.
Is about the free evolution of knowledge, was and is a revolutionary idea, and is called scientific thought.
You may believe in whatever you want, but that doesn't change the fact that there is no data supporting it, your beliefs are the result of your subjective perception; your birth place, what your parents believed, what the priests told you. There is nothing other than that, if you eliminate the...
Is not about which data proves it wrong, is about the chance of proving it wrong, the god theory doesn't leave a chance to do it and so it can't conform to the scientific principles, that's why there is no data that can prove it wrong, it isn't leaving a chance to do it. (Other than common...
I require empirical evidence to believe something, or at least a theory with enough data supporting it to believe that the theory may be true. But after thousand of years of knowledge evolution I refuse to keep blindly believing in ancient theories like that of the sky being an ocean above our...
We were all doomed before Christ came to the world; he gave us the chance to be saved if we live according to his father and himself.
Note that I am not Christian, but know their beliefs; basically he gave us a chance to be forgiven. (By the way, it sounds like nonsense to me).
I know I have criticized you in the past, but after reading more comments by you I have come to the conclusion that maybe I was too harsh. Unjustifiably harsh. You seem to have a well informed opinion and your comments are quite insightful even if sometimes I don't agree with your point of view...
I studied in a catholic private school for many years, and was in a catholic misionary group (an awasome social experience), so I know enough about it to give my humble opinion: I think its evil.
It promotes to not question your beliefs, blindly following the leader and useless and outdated...