Poll: Dr. Ross is clearly unhinged
This poll is closed.
Insane 33.33% 1 33.33%
Moron 66.67% 2 66.67%
Total 3 votes 100%
* You voted for this item. [Show Results]

Fellow Atheists scientific helped needed
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
14-09-2016, 05:15 AM
RE: Fellow Atheists scientific helped needed
I like Hugh Ross. He's an intelligent man and very well-spoken. I think his intelligence is the precise reason why he is able to compartmentalize his religious beliefs with his scientific training to avoid cognitive dissonance in his mind.



[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-09-2016, 05:21 AM
RE: Fellow Atheists scientific helped needed
(14-09-2016 04:56 AM)ScientificTruth321 Wrote:  
(13-09-2016 07:51 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  A debate on religion, no, since most of the claims of religion are supernatural and thus by definition neither testable nor reproducible... and of course, in my view, completely bogus.

On the other hand, as soon as religion makes claims about the testable, natural world, as it so often does, then the scientific method of evaluating claims is indeed applicable.

If you'd like to learn about the basic rules of logic and of applying scientific rigor to your thought processes (something I think all people should be required to learn in school), I recommend Carl Sagan's "The Fine Art of Baloney Detection", excerpted from his book The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark. (Link below.)

http://www.inf.fu-berlin.de/lehre/pmo/en...aloney.pdf

So basically comrade. This is what I have to go on. One scientist telling me the claims are valid and you saying they are not? This is basically all we stand on?

Hello Troll Smile

No. Science is a method of searching for objective truth. It starts with experimentation and hypotheses, the data, methodology and conclusions are then subjected to peer review. Consensus of expert opinion is what allows us to evaluate a claim without necessarily being experts in the field ourselves. I doubt you're actually interested in that, because it seems clear that you're here to present your view that science is just another set of beliefs.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like morondog's post
14-09-2016, 05:24 AM
RE: Fellow Atheists scientific helped needed
(14-09-2016 04:56 AM)ScientificTruth321 Wrote:  So basically comrade. This is what I have to go on. One scientist telling me the claims are valid and you saying they are not? This is basically all we stand on?

Comrade? WTF?!

The fact that he is a scientist is irrelevant. It is the strength or weakness of the argument that matters. I pointed out to you that there is a method of rationally evaluating the claims, which is why I linked you to the layperson's article on that method, contained in the book The Demon-Haunted World. That book's entire premise is how to spot pseudoscientific nonsense, and to demonstrate whether the ideas you're being presented with are solid, from mystical "woo-woo" to alien abduction claims to the millions of religious claims.

I gave good reasons why "one scientist" has no ability to speak on areas in which he is not an expert, and why we know he is speaking outside of his area of expertise. All you are doing is saying "well he's a really smart guy and he thinks ______", which is the Argument from Authority, and is a bogus argument... as is explained (among other things) in the article to which I linked you.

I pointed out to you that even though I am a scientist in the field of biology, I would not presume to lecture people on the truth or falsehood of a major theory in physics, as I am unqualified to do so, just as that guy is unqualified to speak about biology. He proves quite thoroughly that he has only a very weak grasp on the subject. Instead of listening to a person because he's some sort of authority on some other subject, I'm encouraging you to arm yourself with the tools of rational thought and to think for yourself-- SEE why this guy's claims don't hold water (or do).

So why that makes you have to take a cheap shot by suggesting I'm some sort of communist or group-minded thinker, when I'm encouraging you to do the opposite of that, I cannot fathom.

My only conclusion is that you are either a troll or a religious fanatic who thinks it's okay to pretend to be an atheist in order to slander those who actually are. You may think you're being original, but what you appear to be doing is so common that it has an informal internet "rule" to describe the phenomenon: Poe's Law, in which it is impossible to tell if a person is a genuine religious fanatic or just being a troll (pulling everyone's leg). You, sir, seem to be a Poe. Shame on you.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law

"Theology made no provision for evolution. The biblical authors had missed the most important revelation of all! Could it be that they were not really privy to the thoughts of God?" - E. O. Wilson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like RocketSurgeon76's post
14-09-2016, 05:53 AM
RE: Fellow Atheists scientific helped needed
Which scientist is the expert on religion?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-09-2016, 05:58 AM
RE: Fellow Atheists scientific helped needed
[Image: jzlzgn5.jpg]

“I am quite sure now that often, very often, in matters concerning religion and politics a man’s reasoning powers are not above the monkey’s.”~Mark Twain
“Ocean: A body of water occupying about two-thirds of a world made for man - who has no gills.”~ Ambrose Bierce
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like Full Circle's post
14-09-2016, 07:15 AM
RE: Fellow Atheists scientific helped needed
I'm ignoring the troll, so for the sake of anyone reading this thread I offer the following:

Dr. Hugh Ross makes the assertion that the sun existed before plants and trees were created, he does this to avoid the blatant error of creating these things before the sun existed.

Let's review Genesis-

Genesis 1:11- And God said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Genesis 1:12- And the earth brought forth grass, and herb yielding seed after his kind, and the tree yielding fruit, whose seed was in itself, after his kind: and God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:13- And the evening and the morning were the third day.
Genesis 1:14- And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years:
Genesis 1:15- And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so.
Genesis 1:16- And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also.
Genesis 1:17- And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth,
Genesis 1:18- And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good.
Genesis 1:19- And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.


In verse 14 god creates the lights in the firmament (I suppose we'll ignore the blatant falsehood of this fictional firmament for now)
In verse 16 god MADE TWO GREAT LIGHTS! That would be the sun and moon. The sun and moon were made on the 4th day!

Grass and trees were made on the 3rd day. It's as plain as the nose on your face, you cannot stretch these day-age interpretations to make it fit, this is intellectually dishonest.

There are a lot of errors Genesis makes, so many that it has been disregarded for quite some time, even in Christian circles, as a literal account of creation. This is the world of Genesis:

[Image: ancient-hebrew-view-of-universe.png?w=676]

Gods derive their power from post-hoc rationalizations. -The Inquisition

Using the supernatural to explain events in your life is a failure of the intellect to comprehend the world around you. -The Inquisition
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes TheInquisition's post
14-09-2016, 02:23 PM
RE: Fellow Atheists scientific helped needed
(14-09-2016 05:58 AM)Full Circle Wrote:  [Image: jzlzgn5.jpg]

What if I told you I am taking the pee pee out of atheists but they are too brainwashed to ever know it?

But I am not, I am actually a real new atheist here to make friends. Drinking Beverage
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-09-2016, 02:49 PM
RE: Fellow Atheists scientific helped needed
(13-09-2016 05:25 PM)ScientificTruth321 Wrote:  
(13-09-2016 04:38 PM)RocketSurgeon76 Wrote:  Appeal to your own authority is just as wrong as appealing to that of someone else. All facts must be demonstrably true, and all theoretical models must be testable and reproducible by anyone, or they are utterly worthless. The argument from authority is the opposite of science-- it's essentially a con-job: "Believe me, I really know what I'm talking about, because reasons!"

In the words of a minor hero of mine...

[Image: 0f0af6c5b5f5646b0098aa62cae546db.jpg]

Works great for science not so much for a debate on religion perhaps.

It would if you presented experimental evidence for the tenets of whatever religion you want to test.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-09-2016, 02:51 PM
RE: Fellow Atheists scientific helped needed
(14-09-2016 02:23 PM)ScientificTruth321 Wrote:  What if I told you I am taking the pee pee out of atheists but they are too brainwashed to ever know it?

But I am not, I am actually a real new atheist here to make friends. Drinking Beverage

Two sentences and two falsehoods. Well done. Drinking Beverage

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Chas's post
14-09-2016, 02:58 PM (This post was last modified: 14-09-2016 03:02 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Fellow Atheists scientific helped needed
(14-09-2016 02:23 PM)ScientificTruth321 Wrote:  What if I told you I am taking the pee pee out of atheists but they are too brainwashed to ever know it?

What are you doing with my pee pee? Are you saving it up and storing it in those old metal fire extinguishers to drive around the block spraying hookers and hos? 'Cause in my experience no good can come of that.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: