|
|
antipaladin
Promising
Legendary Hero
of Ooohs and Aaahs
|
posted September 13, 2007 03:38 PM |
|
|
or god.
____________
types in obscure english
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted September 13, 2007 05:02 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
I prefer something non written by man with all his flaws. I prefer something not pushed down my throat by man.
I assume that you're a man. So tell me... what absolute truth do you push down your own throat? What can you possibly know that doesn't either come from your own thoughts or from the thoughts of other men?
If you have some time my awnser is here 
____________
What are you up to
|
|
MightyMage
Honorable
Legendary Hero
of INSANITY and DELICIOUSNESS
|
|
posted September 18, 2007 05:45 AM |
|
|
Question no more for I have found all the answers, and oddly enough they were on the Internet. Go figure.
In the Beginning
The Fall of Man...and Woman
Cain and Abel
____________
Though I must still bow
in awe for the awesomeness that is
MightyMage. For he is all I could ever
want to be! - OhforfSake
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 18, 2007 07:26 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 19:26, 18 Sep 2007.
|
Quote:
Not spiritual belief perhaps, but belief like believing in gravity, or such. I also believe that most scientific experiments are biased by a few factors. Especially newer ones. They take things for granted that were 'proven' by other experiments. So science also relies on faith, as much as they hate to admit it.
Didn't we already hash this out over at the RT, before you bailed on the discussion? Are you just trying to see if you have a more receptive audience to this incorrect conception of scientific bias over here?
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted September 19, 2007 01:01 AM |
|
Edited by Celfious at 01:03, 19 Sep 2007.
|
Actualy, I agree that science is based on faith. Faith in things that seem obvious. Faith in things that are deceptive but so true to the eye.
Gravity? HA I have a scientific explanation why things come down. Could be true or false, but scientists have faith in gravity.
Think: What is not in space that is in both earths atmosphere and water. Now, what is heavier than it?
If you need help I'll go more into the "theory" tommorow. Gravity is not proven though.. Dont forget 
____________
What are you up to
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 19, 2007 03:53 PM |
|
|
I accept the idea that science is based on faith to some extent, but certainly not in the same way that religion is based on faith. And, science is NOT religion. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive.
However, your notions about the role of bias in science are completely incorrect, as I - and others - have tried to make totally clear to you.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted September 19, 2007 05:13 PM |
|
|
Mytical, can you explain the role of bias in science? Or something?
____________
What are you up to
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 19, 2007 05:36 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 17:38, 19 Sep 2007.
|
You can read the whole thread here: http://www.celestialheavens.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=6957
The bias discussion is on around pp 4-5 I believe.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted September 19, 2007 06:01 PM |
|
Edited by Celfious at 18:08, 19 Sep 2007.
|
I've been in similar arguments but none where I cared enough to explain to the people the complexities of my findings.
Back on God
God (if there is one) -probably- Communicates in a way not based on words, but feelings. The human languages leave out soooo many things it is quite impossible for REAL things to communicate with Humans - well, atleast at a level where they could say what they wanted to. If they used our language we would get perhaps only half of what they wanted to say. I should really revise new word factory thread to show people how much we dont communicate. Our language is efficiant, not fluent.
What do we call all men created.. Buildings, language, government, ect.. Nothing. We call what matters most to our survival, nothing. No word for everything man created.
My point is (and I do believe there is a God without evidence) if there is a God he is definately beyond our level of being. We can learn and aspire but for now humans are so weak minded.
____________
What are you up to
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted September 19, 2007 07:27 PM |
|
Edited by Celfious at 19:33, 19 Sep 2007.
|
Is bias the right word? Maybe it is. I feel more comfortable reaplacing it with predjudice however. As mytical said we are entitled to our own beliefes.
I know bias and prejudice are similar though.
I will think of the many things that science validates where facts are unknown. I remember one article where a great deal of information involving the calculations of space movement were changed after the "world" accepted the first invalid scientific conclusion that only seemed to be right on with calculations.
____________
What are you up to
|
|
violent_flower
Promising
Supreme Hero
Almost there.
|
|
posted September 19, 2007 07:33 PM |
|
|
Here is an idea, no one can prove anything in regards to God it is all based on faith and a book. So with that being said you either have faith, get some faith, or you choose not to believe until shown otherwise.
So what the hell is the argument? This subject is thousands of years old and won't be answered until we die. So for those of you that will burn in hell for eternity better luck next time, for those that will eat turkey with Jesus wearing wings good for you, and finally for those that just want to be good people and wish for the best well I'm there with you.
____________
Learn how to duck and weave because I will throw truth at you all day!
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted September 19, 2007 08:05 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 20:08, 19 Sep 2007.
|
Quote:
It is my basic contention that scientific experiments are biased by two major things, no matter the precautions taken. 1) the people conducting the experiments own personal bias. 2) the device's used limited scope. Not that this is a bad thing, and not that the experiments can not come up with correct answers, but that regardless how you do it there is some bias.
I've already demonstrated how bias relating to (1) can be easily eliminated with proper instrumental design. (2) has nothing to do with bias, again as I've already explained. Limitations in knowledge do not constitute bias.
Quote:
The people conducting the research have preconscieved notions, even if they do not wish to acknowledge it, and even if it is in the subconscious. Their set up, monitoring, and final results are colored by these notions.
A properly designed experiment is testing for something, and so the experimental designer DOES usually have a preconceived notion about what he/she expects will happen, or what will not happen. If he/she does not, it's not a very good experiment, btw. That in itself is NOT bias. If he/she designs an experiment in such a way that that result is more likely to happen, then that IS a biased experiment. However, it is very easy to design an experiment in such a way that that will not happen. Such experiments are usually referred to as "blind".
Quote:
Wheather it is something simple as "We have to factor in gravity for this." or "well this wet sponge will conduct electricity so we have to do this." Again, I am not saying the experiments are wrong or pointless, just stating a fact.
You're not stating a fact, because that's not what bias is.
Quote:
Then there are the instruments, built by a person (who yes already had a preconcieved bias). They are designed for what that person knows, for nobody can build a machine to dectect what they can not concieve. I will give the same example I did on the other board. A simple experiment to count the ammount of protons in the air. A machine built to dectect protons is made, used, and the protons are counted. Simpe, right? Except if there is types of protons in the air that the machine does not recognize as protons, because it was not calibrated to pick them up. Nobody knows they exsist, therefore they are ignored. Or two different types, or 102. Then the machine would only be 1/102 effective and correct. Not because of willing bias, but simply because the other types were not accounted for.
Dear Mytical, it's like you have not read anything I have written to you. Take it from someone who deals with issues of real scientific bias on a daily basis: THIS IS NOT BIAS. Lack of knowledge is NOT BIAS. If an instrument is designed that willingly rejects certain types of data in order to give a preconceived result, then it could be said that the instrument is biased. Well, that's not really true - the instrument itself only does what it is designed to do, it is still the instrument-designer that would be biased and not the instrument itself. But an instrument that is designed to measure something, and misses something else that it was not designed to test, is not a biased instrument, and nor is an experiment that uses that instrument necessarily a biased experiment. The experimental result using a "flawed instrument" may indeed be incorrect - or, more likely, incomplete - but incorrect and biased are two very different things. Forget making up silly examples of 102 types of protons. Use a simple scale that measures your weight in increments of pounds. If you weigh yourself every month for a year and find that each time, your reported weight is 100 pounds, you might conclude that your weight is not changing. But your instrument may be incapable of measuring fractions of pounds, and so you may actually be gaining weight - 100.0, 100.1, 100.2, etc - in franctions that the instrument cannot detect, and therefore your original hypothesis/conclusion would be flawed, because a hypothesis/experiment/conclusion is only as good as the instrument is designed. But that does not mean the experiment is BIASED. It COULD BE, if you purposely used the incorrect instrument in order to show you had not gained weight, but if it's the best scale that was available, or you didn't realize the instrument's limitations, the experimental result, though incorrect and the result of poor experimental design, is not biased. BIAS really has everything to do with intention.
Perhaps you are just using bias when you mean something else, but believe me, you are wrong here when you use the word bias.
Quote:
My philosophy has always been, and will always be, that people should be able to think the way they wish as long as it does not harm another.
Oh, I agree. You can believe whatever you want. If you want to believe that bias means something it doesn't, that's fine by me, but I would think that you would want to learn something about the way science works, and to understand where your notions about science are incorrect, so that you can form a proper opinion on its relation to reality and religion. And by the way, proclaiming incorrect things about science DOES cause harm to people who might think you know what you're talking about, and so I feel perfectly justified in pointing out why you are incorrect. This is not my belief. This is the way science is.
And anyway, this has nothing whatsoever to do with this thread, and I'm not sure why you felt the need to bring your "biased science" rhetoric into the discussion. But one thing that annoys me beyond all others is when nonscientists start spreading incorrect information about scientific information or scientific methodology, so you'll forgive me if I interject and set the record straight.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted September 19, 2007 10:00 PM |
|
Edited by Celfious at 22:01, 19 Sep 2007.
|
Lyrics about god from man
Put your faith in me
I sure wouldnt want to be - praying to the wrong piece of wood
You should get where you belong
Everything you know is wrong
And he gives us sight
and we see the light
and it burns so bright
now we know we're right
I would never tell you anything that wasnt absolutely true that hadnt come from his mouth that he wants me to tell you.
____________
What are you up to
|
|
violent_flower
Promising
Supreme Hero
Almost there.
|
|
posted September 20, 2007 02:25 AM |
|
|
|
Really, he talks to you? Hum, interesting, maybe you can tell me some more of his famous poems so I can write a book and sell it to make some damn money. Are you serious when you say that you would not say anything that he does not tell you to say? Or is this a case where the Bible is your bathroom reading material and you just crap and read a lot? I feel like I just got invaded by the worst of the door knockers with this psycho babble.
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted September 20, 2007 02:27 AM |
|
Edited by Celfious at 02:32, 20 Sep 2007.
|
those are lyrics from a song. lol
And for the record evidence against the bible is overwhelming.
____________
What are you up to
|
|
roy-algriffin
Supreme Hero
Chocolate ice cream zealot
|
|
posted September 20, 2007 09:15 PM |
|
|
Well a lot of evidence is against it as such, but its evidence from today. if it was from thousands of years ago id look at it at a different light
For the record im religous but not very seriously, i believe theres a god out there but hes not doing a very good job recently.
To be truthful just saying your religous makes life a whole lot simpler..
____________
"Am i a demon? No im a priest of the light! THE BLOODY RED LIGHT"
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted September 20, 2007 10:45 PM |
|
|
The evidence against the bible that made me turn away is within it's very own text. The first 4 chapters of the new testament all vary. If you read the distinct part before jesus was arrested to be crucified, each apostle has a different script, and not just by text but by actions.
I'm not trying to bash anyones beliefes, but I am challenging the bibles validicity.
Secondly, I know if I shook hands with the president (or Jesus) My families after me would know about it for generations. "Celfious did this" Then there would be people alive who say their great great x4 grand father shook hands with jesus.
Nowhere I know of are there people claiming their family witnessed the miricles and catastrophies like Moses and the red sea, the great plauges, the crucifiction ect.
____________
What are you up to
|
|
roy-algriffin
Supreme Hero
Chocolate ice cream zealot
|
|
posted September 21, 2007 01:12 AM |
|
|
Well im jewish personally. I believe that jesus was just a mortal man trying to make everyone be nice to each other,and i guess it just ended in people killing and arguing.
 the road to hell is paved with good intentions as they say..
My real wonder is if the rest of the bible can be real,theres some bits i certainly think were or are misinterpreations, but on the whole it had a few things that are "true" that modern science just proved by fact later
____________
"Am i a demon? No im a priest of the light! THE BLOODY RED LIGHT"
|
|
Doomforge
Admirable
Undefeatable Hero
Retired Hero
|
|
posted September 21, 2007 11:12 AM |
|
|
Quote:
the road to hell is paved with good intentions as they say..
My real wonder is if the rest of the bible can be real,theres some bits i certainly think were or are misinterpreations, but on the whole it had a few things that are "true" that modern science just proved by fact later
The Bible has been re-edited thousand times, with entire chapters added centuries after the very first ones, and even, after Jesus. It's soaked with strong influence of old Pagan customs (like teh roman catholic church, btw). Hard to say which parts can be considered "real" (for those who want to consider Bible something more than just an old dusty fairy tale, that is), and which can not. The interesting part is that Bible was indeed used by science a couple of times. Still, it's too clouded and mixed with things that shouldn't be tehre, in other words, it's hard to understand it and it seems alogical every 10 words. That's why Christians believe in Jesus, who came to straighten up and clarify what once was clear.
Quote:
Nowhere I know of are there people claiming their family witnessed the miricles and catastrophies like Moses and the red sea, the great plauges, the crucifiction ect.
Actually they are mentioned in a couple of historical documents (not all, but a few). As for the miracles, well, Jesus moved in poor people circles, and they were illiterate. I don't know happened to my family 100 years ago (it all faded to oblivion), and you want ppl to remember things that happened to their distinctive ancestors 2k years ago? uhhh.
Quote:
The evidence against the bible that made me turn away is within it's very own text. The first 4 chapters of the new testament all vary. If you read the distinct part before jesus was arrested to be crucified, each apostle has a different script, and not just by text but by actions.
As for people who lived in different time and different place, they are quite accurate, actually  I don't mind the minor differences, personally. Don't mix apostles with evangelists, btw. None of the apostles wrote gospels.
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted September 21, 2007 03:58 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Here is an idea, no one can prove anything in regards to God it is all based on faith and a book. So with that being said you either have faith, get some faith, or you choose not to believe until shown otherwise.
So what the hell is the argument? This subject is thousands of years old and won't be answered until we die. So for those of you that will burn in hell for eternity better luck next time, for those that will eat turkey with Jesus wearing wings good for you, and finally for those that just want to be good people and wish for the best well I'm there with you.
A man without religion is like a fish without a bicycle.
Quote:
That's why Christians believe in Jesus, who came to straighten up and clarify what once was clear.
Great in theory. Again, the problem with Christianity is that no one has tried it.
And another great one from the Chasers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-qVKMn2nDQM
'Should American Muslims carry a special ID card?'
____________
John says to live above hell.
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
