Hey Athiests: How About Some Objectivity?

I'm not. That's why I prefer the scientific method.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

that hasn't produced a right answer.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Depends, what's the question?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

does god exist? would have to be first i think. followed by, what is god?

 

You would have to reverse those. You can't ask if something exists until you know what you're looking for?

The question, "Do crimples exist?" means nothing if you don't first define what a crimple is.

 

hm. i know god exists, but i can't define god. i can describe it somewhat, based on our interactions, but i can't define it.

 

Why can't it be all in your head?

 

Do aliens from another planet or galaxy exist? There is no proof for this, yet many of the athiest have faith in this. Atheism will discusss the basis for the aliens, with faith in the mental analysis of probability. But there is still no smoking gun to get beyond the faith. Is this a religion in the sense of faith in something not seen and not proven?

Ancient mythology has their own aliens from between cosmic planes. But since their view of the universe was different, they defined their aliens differently. Are modern aliens just an example of modern mythology with as much reality as Zeus and Hercules? I have read atheist accounts of aliens building the pyramids. But one needs to have faith.

The parts of the brain being used by religion as well as alien mythology are the same, since both lack direct sensory reinforcement. This should be the way to scientifically classify both as religion or not. Instead atheism will use a subjective philosophy standard to stack the deck. I don't fall for this trick by the irrational atheists in rational clothing.

 

The idea that there are most likely aliens on other planets is not a faith position. It's based on the vast number of stars that exist, and by extrapolation the vast numbers of planets that could harbor life.

The scientific standard is not "direct sensory reinforcement". Science can accept evidence that is indirect, such as evidence gathered through instruments like thermometers and scanning electron microscopes.

 

I remain agnostic in regards to ET.

 

By my definition, God is the universe. I know the universe exists.

However, as to other people's definitions...

 

my head's not that big.

 

Our minds are infinite because they are virtual.

 

even virtually, it's not that big.

 

You haven't unlocked it yet.

 

According to modern cosmological principles, the universe is believed to be infinite in size and has an infinite number of galaxies, stars and planets, i.e. there is no evidence the universe has a "centre" or any sort of preferred reference frame. So based on those principles, it would be supernatural for there not to be infinitely many extra-terrestrial lifeforms out there somewhere.

 

Note: this thread should be moved to SFOG.

 

Why atheists feel so strongly against the events on the NT? Even the miracles and supernatural stuff... Cant atheists enjoy a little poetry? You dont hear many people arguing against Rabindranath Tagore, or Jack Johnson; it is usefull to argue against prose, but it is absolutely useless to argue against poetry.

 

Poetry is not meant to be believed or argued against; poetry is a creative manifestation of human beings, and it is meant to be enjoyed, drinked. Thats why Jesus said "eat me, drink me", he never said "believe me".

 

http://ncse.com/news/2009/04/setback-science-education-texas-004710