Evidence, please.

Louis_Cypher
BloggerSuperfan
Louis_Cypher's picture
Posts: 529
Joined: 2008-03-22
User is offlineOffline
Evidence, please.

Quote:
Evidence should be:

 

  • Consistent
  • Parsimonious (sparing in its proposed entities or explanations)
  • Useful (describes and explains observed phenomena, and can be used predicatively)
  • Empirically testable and falsifiable
  • Based on multiple observations, often in the form of controlled, repeated experiments
  • Correctable and dynamic (modified in the light of observations that do not support it)
  • Progressive (refines previous theories)
  • Provisional or tentative (is open to experimental checking, and does not assert certainty)

For any theory, hypothesis or conjecture to be considered scientific, it must meet most, and ideally all, of these criteria. The fewer criteria are met, the less scientific it is; and if it meets only a few or none at all, then it cannot be treated as scientific in any meaningful sense of the word.

Wikipedia

 Your personal opinions, revelations, visions and warm fuzzy feelings are not evidence. They meet none of the basic criteria.

LC >;-}>

 

Christianity: A disgusting middle eastern blood cult, based in human sacrifice, with sacraments of cannibalism and vampirism, whose highest icon is of a near naked man hanging in torment from a device of torture.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 768
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Our 3 head guys say

BobSpence wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

We find it hard to understand how an intelligent one can be without any belief. It seems that belief is formed automatically.

Which shows a lack of understanding of modern science.

What is formed 'automatically' are intuitions, which encode what seem to be useful interpretations and reactions to frequently encountered situations, so that we can react more quickly and directly without having to think about it every time. It is really an aspect of learning. 'Beliefs' are more consciously formed and held.

All an intelligent person needs is a set of 'working assumptions' which should be open to adjustment and augmentation as life experience grows.

Science is not 'material', which is a term way past its 'use-by' date in this context, rather it is 'natural', as distinct from the 'supernatural'. The only restriction is that whatever we study must have some reasonably consistent detectable effect on what can be perceived by our senses or our minds, preferably backed up by use of some kind of instrumentation, so as to get past the flaws in our unaided mental and physical perceptions.

Science studies all that can be consistently studied. The rest, such as truly 'one-off' phenomena, can only be largely the subject of speculation.

We only have access to natural means, but that includes the application of physical, psychological, sociological, and more abstract techniques of analysis such as complex systems theory, information theory. We study both matter and energy and their interrelationships, the forces acting on matter particles, the patterns of interactions, from both the simplest systems up to the most complex, such as Life.

What is restrictively 'material' about Mathematics and Logic? Or Information and Communication Theory?

What is 'material' about studying the way people interact and behave, from the individual level to the broadest collective, social level? What do you think is missing that is not addressed by observing and recording what people do and say, both in normal life and in test situations, and analysing the information so gathered for significant patterns and correlations? What 'immaterial' information do you think is being missed, that would help us understand better our "relations with others"?

 

One can choose to believe something , but belief can form automatically without intending to consciously believe. Kids are an example. Kids believe because it forms, not because they choose it to.

 

 

 

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 768
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Do you consider

Louis_Cypher wrote:

Quote:
Evidence should be:

 

  • Consistent
  • Parsimonious (sparing in its proposed entities or explanations)
  • Useful (describes and explains observed phenomena, and can be used predicatively)
  • Empirically testable and falsifiable
  • Based on multiple observations, often in the form of controlled, repeated experiments
  • Correctable and dynamic (modified in the light of observations that do not support it)
  • Progressive (refines previous theories)
  • Provisional or tentative (is open to experimental checking, and does not assert certainty)

For any theory, hypothesis or conjecture to be considered scientific, it must meet most, and ideally all, of these criteria. The fewer criteria are met, the less scientific it is; and if it meets only a few or none at all, then it cannot be treated as scientific in any meaningful sense of the word.

Wikipedia

 Your personal opinions, revelations, visions and warm fuzzy feelings are not evidence. They meet none of the basic criteria.

LC >;-}>

 

[/quote/

Psychiatry a science. Or, studies of the mind a science. Would Freud be a scientist, as you understand it.

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 768
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
We kjnow what Christianity is

Brian37 wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

my other posts on this site. I am not an Theist, Deist, or Atheist.  I'm not on either side. Christianity is nothing more then your human side, verses your animal side. a few years ago I was in a discussion (argument on his side) with a Humanist. I pointed out that what they had was a proposal of "proper Christianity. He would not accept that idea. BUT, what they are about "is" what proper Christianity "is" about. Your blaming JC for the actions and mentality of others. There are no Christians on this planet. It is an unknown (except by my group). It became extinct about 50 to 75AD. Once again it has become known. It is your Human side, not the animal side/mentality. I am not a Christian, as I haven't perfected it to it's appropriate point, and no one will be able to as long as the world doesn't understand that ---it operates on the animal mentality under which all man's troubles with one another emanate from. Everyone has Christianity---it's your human side/mentality. Put away the animal and you have a different world. Now, you know what it is also. Turn to and make do--or go the other. You can now relate to others by "human" only, or animal only--it's your choice. But the world as it is will continuously interfere. You can no longer relate to others by both as you have been. You now know yourself. If you wish to continue to use both--you will know. One cannot help fix the world until he fixes himself first. You cannot be free until you set all others free from yourself first. Now that you know, let's see hopw you do. I "will" know.

Quote:
. Your blaming JC for the actions and mentality of others.

Do not defend the Jesus character and then claim that you are not a Christian.

Secondly. I do NOT blame the character JC for anything, anymore than I can blame Obe Wan for the actions of Darth Vadar.

Christianity is not my human side or my animal side. It is the invention of humans, nothing more. It came from the Hebrews who stole their characters from the Canaanites.

Humans are not outside nature. No myth, no religion, no superstition serves to explain what we are or how we evolved.

Basically what you are stupidly arguing is that if we are not fans of Jesus we will give into our base evolution and start going on killing sprees. BULL SHIT. Most, if not all the atheists who post  here,  are free from any sort of violent crime conviction. Nor would this website owner advocate physical harm to Christians or other believers. So to say belief in your magic baby theory is needed "be human" and avoid our "animal side"  to not fling poo at others is patently absurd.

I do not need belief in Jesus or Allah or Thor or Luke Skywalker to be a decent human. Neither do you, you just think you do.

But I will say this, if you feel you need to "know" the words of Jesus to keep yourself from physically hurting others, by all means, keep doing so, we don't need more violent people in the world. But you do not speak for me or the rest of humanity in claiming I need your superstition to be good and avoid doing harm to others.

 

 

 

 

 

But one can't accomplish it until free to do so. Until then one cannot be a Christian. The world as it is demands to deal with the world as it is. Being most of our  group is retired we find it easier to accomplish more of it, but to have to deal with the world as it is holds one out. One can know what proper Christianity is but the world interferes. The world operates on the animal premise, but Christianity exists on the human premise. As long as the animal rules the roost becoming a Christian is next to impossible. One still has to deal with the world the way it is. We understand your human animal idea but say you got it wrong. All have human and animal traits. If one identifies the differences of the traits he can then choose. One can willfully be one or the other. We (us) know from experience that we can be animal or human at will. There-for we know that there is no such thing as a human animal. 

On your last sentence--- we (us guys) know that we all do evil upon one another without realizing it. The world we live in is a deliberate construction to do evil to bring about good/reward. Instead of encountering evils naturally we now invent it to bring rewards. I think you will dispute that but you may be well unaware of how the world works in these matters. One does more evil to others then he realizes.

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13490
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Quote:  The world we live

Quote:
  The world we live in is a deliberate construction to do evil to bring about good/reward.

So when Polly Klaas got rapped and butchered and murdered by a pedophile that was "deliberate construction to do evil to bring about good/reward"?

I guess since Polly ended up in heaven the rape was good? If God doesn't allow anything to happen he doesn't want to then like Isiah 45:7 says "I do good, I do evil, I the Lord do all these things".  Is consistent with with your bullshit in that it takes a prick to be a prick to make lemmings to suck up to the barbarity this dead beat watches and does not stop.

I am sure while Polly Klaas was rapped and murdered she was thinking "God thank you for all the evil you allow, because of such I get to suck up to you for eternity"

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37