Why do theists come to this forum?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
11-02-2016, 11:33 AM (This post was last modified: 11-02-2016 11:41 AM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Why do theists come to this forum?
(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I can think of things and fields and ways that people here can teach me, but due to ego, I'm certain most here feel as if I have nothing to offer them, as if I am infantile in all aspects of life and experience.

Girly don't feel that way pops. I am not sure whether you are a monotheist, a Christian, a deist, a pantheist (everything is God), or a panentheist (everything is within God), or an atheist for that matter. I find your ideas fascinating, particularly your struggle to properly convey them. I can relate to that.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like GirlyMan's post
11-02-2016, 11:36 AM
RE: Why do theists come to this forum?
(11-02-2016 12:00 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  
(10-02-2016 09:17 PM)Fireball Wrote:  Find out what christ-puncher site he frequents and visit him there! Yes
What is a Christ puncher?

A person who goes around pushing christ onto other people. When it becomes overly annoying, I call it punching instead of pushing. I didn't make that term up, though, I just saw it elsewhere and liked it.

As for your other post, I did not say that "nails came about through science". I'll stop posting to response to your absurdity when you stop posting here, or if I get bored with said absurdity. Truthfully, I feel sorry for you. Your extreme ignorance of science and unwillingness to learn about it, coupled with disparagement, is pretty sad...but typical of a lot of xtians who post in atheist forums.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2016, 11:48 AM
RE: Why do theists come to this forum?
(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I thought a law was verified or made up of mathematical equations.

I thought the theories were derived from those equations and other testable hypothesis.

If I'm wrong then fine. I'm not saying I couldn't be wrong.

You are wrong. You've been told repeatedly that you're wrong. You have not listened.

(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I don't get how a law isn't more concrete than a theory as the law is probable through mathematics, but the theory is speculation of sorts past that verifiable mathematical equation.

I'm open to learn, and learn daily. Even here.

Laws are descriptive. They are a statement or set of statements (whether expressed mathematically or not) that describe the behaviour of a system under certain conditions. They are derived from observation but are limited to the contexts of their derivation.

Theories are predictive. They are a statement or set of statements (whether expressed mathematically or not) that describe the origin of behaviour. Theories are generalisations of behaviour.

In other words, theories account for laws. For most purposes neither term is strictly relevant in actual scientific discourse. This kind of semantic obsession is almost invariably the mark of the layman.

(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I assure you that ego has little to nothing to do with it. I don't deny that many here have a better grasp on the scientific method than I do. But then people say things like nails came about through science, and while no doubt there was trial and error involved, "science" as it is known today isn't exactly a correct description. If it is then I have and do use science myself to distinguish my own inner workings. But, of course, people here claim that is not true either.

I have no idea what you're saying here.

(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  In short; I am eager to learn truth, regardless of it's origins, and am very open to new data that can change my perspective. And others should be to.

Your behaviour clearly belies that claim.

(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I can think of things and fields and ways that people here can teach me, but due to ego, I'm certain most here feel as if I have nothing to offer them, as if I am infantile in all aspects of life and experience.

People have merely formed theories as to your probable response based on the pool of data constituted by your previous responses.

(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  What I am saying is that we can learn from one another in an ideal scenario, but ego indeed seems to impede that process.

I am slow to admit when I am wrong. But I do eventually admit it. It was overly simplifying scientific theory calling it simply a guess, and a low blow to the scientific community. I knew this to begin with but felt it was needed to convey a point.

So yes perhaps some sort of pride was involved.

The difference is that on retrospect and with careful explanation by others and my own minimal research I am capable of admitting when I was wrong...and I was.

Peace

Your tone always takes a complete rollercoaster ride between posts. It's odd, to say the least.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like cjlr's post
11-02-2016, 11:56 AM
RE: Why do theists come to this forum?
(11-02-2016 11:48 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Your tone always takes a complete rollercoaster ride between posts. It's odd, to say the least.

Not that odd. It just depends on the period of his manic depression cycle.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
11-02-2016, 11:58 AM
RE: Why do theists come to this forum?
(11-02-2016 11:56 AM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(11-02-2016 11:48 AM)cjlr Wrote:  Your tone always takes a complete rollercoaster ride between posts. It's odd, to say the least.

Not that odd. It just depends on the period of his manic depression cycle.

I find your ideas intriguing and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
11-02-2016, 12:46 PM
RE: Why do theists come to this forum?
(11-02-2016 11:48 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I thought a law was verified or made up of mathematical equations.

I thought the theories were derived from those equations and other testable hypothesis.

If I'm wrong then fine. I'm not saying I couldn't be wrong.

You are wrong. You've been told repeatedly that you're wrong. You have not listened.

(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I don't get how a law isn't more concrete than a theory as the law is probable through mathematics, but the theory is speculation of sorts past that verifiable mathematical equation.

I'm open to learn, and learn daily. Even here.

Laws are descriptive. They are a statement or set of statements (whether expressed mathematically or not) that describe the behaviour of a system under certain conditions. They are derived from observation but are limited to the contexts of their derivation.

Theories are predictive. They are a statement or set of statements (whether expressed mathematically or not) that describe the origin of behaviour. Theories are generalisations of behaviour.

In other words, theories account for laws. For most purposes neither term is strictly relevant in actual scientific discourse. This kind of semantic obsession is almost invariably the mark of the layman.

(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I assure you that ego has little to nothing to do with it. I don't deny that many here have a better grasp on the scientific method than I do. But then people say things like nails came about through science, and while no doubt there was trial and error involved, "science" as it is known today isn't exactly a correct description. If it is then I have and do use science myself to distinguish my own inner workings. But, of course, people here claim that is not true either.

I have no idea what you're saying here.

(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  In short; I am eager to learn truth, regardless of it's origins, and am very open to new data that can change my perspective. And others should be to.

Your behaviour clearly belies that claim.

(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  I can think of things and fields and ways that people here can teach me, but due to ego, I'm certain most here feel as if I have nothing to offer them, as if I am infantile in all aspects of life and experience.

People have merely formed theories as to your probable response based on the pool of data constituted by your previous responses.

(11-02-2016 07:20 AM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  What I am saying is that we can learn from one another in an ideal scenario, but ego indeed seems to impede that process.

I am slow to admit when I am wrong. But I do eventually admit it. It was overly simplifying scientific theory calling it simply a guess, and a low blow to the scientific community. I knew this to begin with but felt it was needed to convey a point.

So yes perhaps some sort of pride was involved.

The difference is that on retrospect and with careful explanation by others and my own minimal research I am capable of admitting when I was wrong...and I was.

Peace

Your tone always takes a complete rollercoaster ride between posts. It's odd, to say the least.
That was a lot of words that pretty much repeated what I said while saying I'm wrong.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2016, 12:53 PM
RE: Why do theists come to this forum?
(11-02-2016 12:46 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  That was a lot of words that pretty much repeated what I said while saying I'm wrong.

No, he corrected your mistakes, if you bothered to read the "lot of words". You could learn shit, if you bothered to read. Dodgy

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
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
11-02-2016, 01:18 PM
RE: Why do theists come to this forum?
(11-02-2016 06:19 AM)Chas Wrote:  
(10-02-2016 11:58 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  Because that is the theory of gravity. I brought it up because I was told to jump out of a window because gravity was just a theory. However, it isn't just a theory, it is also a law.

You still don't understand what a scientific law is. It is a man-made description of an observed regular pattern.

You still don't understand what a scientific theory is. It is a larger construct that explains those observations and predicts effects.

Correct, inductive observation leads to scientific law. So is the law of conservation of matter and energy inviolate? This is a rhetorical question because mainstream science rejects steady state theory and overwhelmingly accepts big bang cosmology instead. Matter and energy were created in the Big Bang OR existed in a pre-incarnate (pun intended) form inside the singularity of the Big Bang.

The logical deductive conclusion: Matter and energy are eternal or an outside catalyst created them in the early moments of the universe. Which would you postulate is the correct choice and why?

I'm told atheists on forums like TTA are bitter and angry. If you are not, your posts to me will be respectful, insightful and thoughtful. Prove me wrong by your adherence to decent behavior.
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
11-02-2016, 01:31 PM
RE: Why do theists come to this forum?
(11-02-2016 01:18 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  
(11-02-2016 06:19 AM)Chas Wrote:  You still don't understand what a scientific law is. It is a man-made description of an observed regular pattern.

You still don't understand what a scientific theory is. It is a larger construct that explains those observations and predicts effects.

Correct, inductive observation leads to scientific law. So is the law of conservation of matter and energy inviolate? This is a rhetorical question because mainstream science rejects steady state theory and overwhelmingly accepts big bang cosmology instead.

That is irrelevant. Mass-energy conservation is a principle derived under observable conditions. The big bang is the limit of observation. No scientific theory makes any statements about anything beyond observable conditions. Only your special pleading can do that.

(11-02-2016 01:18 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  Matter and energy were created in the Big Bang OR existed in a pre-incarnate (pun intended) form inside the singularity of the Big Bang.

Hey, just like that special pleading right there!

(11-02-2016 01:18 PM)The Q Continuum Wrote:  The logical deductive conclusion: Matter and energy are eternal or an outside catalyst created them in the early moments of the universe. Which would you postulate is the correct choice and why?

And that is a transparently false choice, either borne of your ignorance or tailored to fit your presuppositions - or both, I guess.
(but nice job contradicting yourself from literally two sentences ago: "in the big bang" and "in the early moments of the universe" are completely different statements)

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
11-02-2016, 01:34 PM
RE: Why do theists come to this forum?
(11-02-2016 12:46 PM)popsthebuilder Wrote:  That was a lot of words that pretty much repeated what I said while saying I'm wrong.

I can give you a trivial counter-example to the false "hierarchy" you keep insisting on, if that makes things easier.

Coulomb's Law is a descriptive statement characterising a type of macroscopic electromagnetic behaviour - that is, the forces between electrostatic charges.
Quantum Field Theory (in this case, quantum electrodynamics) is the framework which accounts for the interaction that causes the above 'law' in its limiting case. Contrast classical electromagnetic theory, wherein coulombic interaction is taken as axiomatic (nb: in the mathematical sense). Quantum electrodynamics gives a rigorous derivation of Coulomb's law.

Now: which is more true?

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: