Beware the beast Man, for he is the Devil's pawn

[Alleya]

a bunch of stuff

Wait...how long have you been on this forum?

[Galkaeater]

us smart people

dohohoho

[Gunitsoldier]

By us I don't mean myself. I mean the world in general is smart.
@Alleya: I know it's been repeated many times before but I had to say it.

[Effluo]

This will be the beginning of the end.. Mark your calendars for Dec 22, 2012, and blame the monkey...

The whole thing is coming full circle, why else would they have waited so long with a find like this.

/tinfoilhat

[Jensken]

us smart people

excistence. x4

>_>

[Neosutra]

>_>

Just goes to show that even dumb people know it is silly to believe in gods.

Not that I am the master of verbosity or anything, without spellcheck my world would end.

Also, I would hope by now that most of the planet understands that we did evolve, and those denying evolution are limited to the minorities and extremist of creationist fanatics.. I really find it hard to believe the polls that say 45% of americans dont believe in evolution...

[Bikpik]

Yes I do. If there was a God us smart people would've found atleast ONE piece of evidence of his excistence. And if he DOES excist why doesn't he show himself or one thing that proves his excistence for one freaking time to solve the debates on this world?
If God excists - which he doesn't - he's a fucking pussy.

You smart people are only as good as the science you use to "prove" something. Just because "you" can't prove God doesn't exsist doesn't mean that he doesn't.

A couple hundred years ago, you smart people thought the earth was flat and everything revolved around the earth.

ps. I'm not religious, I'm just annoyed at people who think that the science we use today, is the end all be all.

[quannum]

God cannot be sensed.

how do you know?

He doesn't exist in our world, that's by whatever canon we are following here.

your above premise is wrong, and the conclusion is a non-sequitir.

To suggest he doesn't exist is no different than to suggest he does. It's all nonsense.

how do you know?

And humans are incapable of proving anything, let alone the existence of Gods.

how do you know?

EDIT: So shut the fuck up.

nou

[Neosutra]

You smart people are only as good as the science you use to "prove" something. Just because "you" can't prove God doesn't exsist doesn't mean that he doesn't.

A couple hundred years ago, you smart people thought the earth was flat and everything revolved around the earth.

ps. I'm not religious, I'm just annoyed at people who think that the science we use today, is the end all be all.

No one said it was.

I believe gun was just stating that the basic tenants that religion once stood on are easily explained with what we currently know today. I wouldnt argue that our current understanding of the universe wont change in the future and that our current explanations are 100% correct, but it is naive to assume that ignorance in the past translates to ignorance today.

"Science" didnt tell us the earth was flat, people just assumed it was due to observation. It was the application of the scientific method that dispelled this false belief. Similar to the application of the scientific method that dispels the tenants of religion (note I stated it disproves the tenants of religion, not "god" itself). "god" only gets away with not being thrown out as bullshit with the common people because they change their definition of it to suite the situation and you need to define a premis before you can test it. "god is everywhere and nowhere, he is everything and nothing"... It isnt our burden to prove god doesnt exist, it is yours to give a definition for your premis and defend it.

[Bikpik]

No one said it was.

I believe gun was just stating that the basic tenants that religion once stood on are easily explained with what we currently know today. I wouldnt argue that our current understanding of the universe wont change in the future and that our current explanations are 100% correct, but it is naive to assume that ignorance in the past translates to ignorance today.

"Science" didnt tell us the earth was flat, people just assumed it was due to observation. It was the application of the scientific method that dispelled this false belief. Similar to the application of the scientific method that dispels the tenants of religion (note I stated it disproves the tenants of religion, not "god" itself). "god" only gets away with not being thrown out as bullshit with the common people because they change their definition of it to suite the situation and you need to define a premis before you can test it. "god is everywhere and nowhere, he is everything and nothing"... It isnt our burden to prove god doesnt exist, it is yours to give a definition for your premis and defend it.

Yes I agree that it is naive to assume that, it was just an example of what "science" proved at the time. It wasn't until the "science" got better that they could prove that the earth was round.

And yes I also agree that the burden of proof is on the churches to prove that God does exsist, but who's to say in another 2000 years they won't have the "science" to prove he does?

But today, with what we know, there's no way to prove that God does or doesn't exsist, so it's safe to assume that he doesn't.

[Zilong]

What was that saying over the evolutionary critics won't believe you are your father's son unless there is some sort of mediator between them?

[Sol-Blackguy]

/facepalm

Also, in b4 GOP cover up...

[BRP]

how do you know?
your above premise is wrong, and the conclusion is a non-sequitir.
how do you know?
how do you know?
nou

You must be trolling. What the fuck do you mean how do I know? Because I am smart. How else can I answer?

God's very premise is that he doesn't exist in our world. He is supernatural(do you really need a source on this?). So how he exist could never be expressed in the words we use in this world without turning to nonsense. Asking "Is God Real/Not Real?" doesn't make any sense because you are already referring to words without meaning.

Most importantly God has absolutely fuck all to do with evolution. Or ANYTHING we can see, hear, feel, or discuss sensibly. Stop bringing God up.

EDIT: There is no "burden" of proving God exists. This is where most aggressive atheists fall short. Our science doesn't exist where God would be.

EDIT:

"Science" didnt tell us the earth was flat, people just assumed it was due to observation.

Hurrr derpa durrr?

[Zalius]

if god doesnt exist how do you explain all the fine bitches

[Dimmauk]

Yes I agree that it is naive to assume that, it was just an example of what "science" proved at the time. It wasn't until the "science" got better that they could prove that the earth was round.

And yes I also agree that the burden of proof is on the churches to prove that God does exsist, but who's to say in another 2000 years they won't have the "science" to prove he does?

But today, with what we know, there's no way to prove that God does or doesn't exsist, so it's safe to assume that he doesn't.

Wow....

I bet God, Bigfoot, and the Loch Ness monster all hang out and play poker together.

[quannum]

You must be trolling. What the fuck do you mean how do I know? Because I am smart. How else can I answer?

no ....
the point is that you are making positive statements (this car is blue) about things that you freely admit to not knowing a thing about. you're whole post falls apart because you have no basis for it.

God's very premise is that he doesn't exist in our world. He is supernatural(do you really need a source on this?).

see? this is more of the same, you have no clue what you're talking about (no human possibly could). the supernatural, all-powerful, non-existing god is a very abraham-monotheistic concept, and in no way applies to all human-made concepts of what this unknowable, unsensable "thing" might be. So yes, these statements must be sourced to the old/new bible, because you're trying to act like these are universal truths and they are not.

So how he exists he could never be expressed in the words we use in this world without turning to nonsense. Asking "Is God Real/Not Real?" doesn't make any sense because you are already referring to words without meaning.

you don't see that you are doing this very thing? PLUS giving it attributes, which is even more nonsensical.

[kareface]

No on can say that god unequivocally doesn't exist. However, that doesn't mean that belief in his existence is rational or the chance of his existence probable.

Unless we're talking about the magic water buffalo, then it's a different story.

[Diamicles]

By us I don't mean myself. I mean the world in general is smart.

I had a good chuckle at this comment.

[BRP]

Which attributes besides Supernatural/Mystical/Otherwordly have I given God? That's all there needs to be said. Did I give him a bowtie by accident? Do you want to argue about God's bowtie? It doesn't matter which God(s) it is.

As for basis... Did I just waste the effort of trying to explain the foundation of my reasoning to you? Time for some babytalk, but I won't repeat myself again.

There is a world. Everything exists there. Everything we know, everything we don't know. God isn't there. If God isn't there(and even if he somehow contacts/reaches us) we can never explain him correctly because no words fit God's meaning, not even the word God.

What I refer to when I say God right now is not God, but the nonsense people call God. There is nothing to be said about God because it is all nonsense. (Which leads to mindfuck statements when trying to explain this)

EDIT: When you say basis do you expect a scientific explanation? Don't you realize how stupid that is? Science is a reflection.

that doesn't mean that belief in his existence is rational

Not believing in him is equally irrational.

[Jefe]

No on can say that god unequivocally doesn't exist. However, that doesn't mean that belief in his existence is rational or the chance of his existence probable.

Unless we're talking about the magic water buffalo, then it's a different story.

"If religious folks are irrational, does that mean non-religious folk are rational?"~ velocyraphilospher.png