What happens after we die.

[cixOclock]

I am not a troll. I displayed my beliefs and you lashed out at em. Its not my fault you took offense at what I said. And yes, I did read the article. And it was a waste of time.
Macro-evolution. And yes Silver Sky you should have read the article too.

But it was all based on conjecture over real time facts. If they had solid evidence that man has evolved within the past 6 thousand years, I would most undoubtly look at it as plausible.
Until then. No.

[N.T.M.]

lol This place is full of such dissension, that just reading through the posts is entertaining.

[Mousethecat]

Great discussion folks. Another real "Religious people are refusing to agree with people using science and logic" debate. I didn't read every word everyone posted, but I skimmed enough to get the general idea. This debate has been done to death everywhere, and most of the time, nobody's opinion will change. Some people are just ignorant but think they aren't.

I'm going to start by saying this post is going to get a very strong reaction from the people on the religious side of the fence. I'm not going to hold back.

Most of what I say will have already been said by others. I'm never going to claim that anything I say is original, but it is written in my own words. Just adding another supporting wall of text to the correct side of the argument.

I'm extremely against religion. That doesn't mean I hate people who believe in it, I just know that religion is wrong, and supporters almost always refuse to accept it.

Just like Mr. Rubix and everyone else on that side of the argument, I base everything I think and say off of facts and truths. We don't attack any valid points, we don't directly attack any person (well, seriously). We don't try to argue with anything we know we can't disprove. We use logic and nothing else.

To the people trying to use the bible as a credible source for this argument. The bible was written before just about all of the scientific knowledge we know today. Plenty of the events written in the bible have been proven to be impossible. But that doesn't matter, because what is impossible doesn't matter because God can do anything. To me, God is nothing more than an excuse to fill the holes in the logic of the bible. Much like Shenron in Dragon ball Z. He's there so that the things that wouldn't make sense, are able to make sense.

If anyone tries to use that DBZ reference against me, I would find it very humorous.

To the people trying to use the marvels of nature against scientific understanding. No duh we can't replicate a bird or cheetah or create life. No one said we could. There's too much that exists in nature we don't understand, can't reproduce, and can't logically find a reason for. Bringing in the many current holes in science doesn't do anything for the argument. It's not relevant. Stop trying.

Do the people trying to argue against science even know what science is?

Science has been constantly updated and improved over hundreds of years. What makes the bible more accurate than that.

I'll leave that there and pick up later.

[Silver Sky]

I'm done here too. Words of thought for the day: If evolution is real then i have one question. Okay we would come from one single organism that would reproduce and all and keep evolving more and more. So my question is where does that single organism come from? Who came before that? Or the other one? Or the other one? It started off as one but SOMEBODY had to create it. It wouldn't just BANG here is an organism. As what post # 75. You believe in your BIG BANG theory. It saddens me. And is sometimes humorous.But oh well. BANG Wow my house just exploded and it turned into a Ferrari. Awesome.

[MrRubix]

Originally Posted by Silver Sky

Wow you sounded really smart. Have you read the bible? Didn't think so. Therefore your stuck on your evolution. Let me ask you a question. You believe in the micro evolution and all that. So everything comes from one atom then correct?

I have read the Bible.

Why don't you actually address the points I raised to combat yours instead of just assuming I haven't read the Bible?

[Ryn2075]

First off, let me say that you're completely entitled to your opinion mousethecat. If you "know" religion is wrong, good for you. More power to you, but we're not ignorant. We just don't believe in evolution. Feel free to feel sorry for us or hope that we come to the truth of things or something like that, ok? It won't bother us.

Originally Posted by Mousethecat

Just like Mr. Rubix and everyone else on that side of the argument, I base everything I think and say off of facts and truths. We don't attack any valid points, we don't directly attack any person (well, seriously). We don't try to argue with anything we know we can't disprove. We use logic and nothing else.

Again, if you agree with Rubix and them, then you agree that evolution is 100% fact. That is ignorance in a way, as evolution, as I already stated, cannot be proven as 100% fact. I WILL say that you guys have been very logical, and I thank you for that. Few things piss me off more than illogical comments that only attack people and have no real basis (i.e. saying someone doesn't have a life based on what is really nothing factual).

[MrRubix]

Originally Posted by Silver Sky

I'm done here too. Words of thought for the day: If evolution is real then i have one question. Okay we would come from one single organism that would reproduce and all and keep evolving more and more. So my question is where does that single organism come from? Who came before that? Or the other one? Or the other one? It started off as one but SOMEBODY had to create it. It wouldn't just BANG here is an organism. As what post # 75. You believe in your BIG BANG theory. It saddens me. And is sometimes humorous.But oh well. BANG Wow my house just exploded and it turned into a Ferrari. Awesome.

If you want to know more about this, I recommend looking into concepts like abiogenesis.

[MrRubix]

Originally Posted by cixOclock

I am not a troll. I displayed my beliefs and you lashed out at em. Its not my fault you took offense at what I said. And yes, I did read the article. And it was a waste of time.
Macro-evolution. And yes Silver Sky you should have read the article too.

But it was all based on conjecture over real time facts. If they had solid evidence that man has evolved within the past 6 thousand years, I would most undoubtly look at it as plausible.
Until then. No.

Why are you ignoring the counterpoints? Human evolution, again does not happen overnight. It's not like you can look 6000 years ago and say "We didn't look hugely different. Evolution is false." It takes a lot longer than that for us.

If you're going to say something is implausible, understand it first.

[Mousethecat]

Originally Posted by Ryn2075

Again, if you agree with Rubix and them, then you agree that evolution is 100% fact.

No one is saying anything is 100% fact. One of my major rules is that very few things are 100% fact.

More like 99% fact. Anyone with enough reason will accept something as wrong if proven 100% wrong.

So far, evolution is more correct than anything else. That is all that is being said.

[Izzy]

Stop arguing with people who have been trained their whole life to only see things the way they were told. They are never going to change their opinion despite any amount of evidence or explanation. They will never address anything that is evidence against what they believe and they will only take things into consideration if it reinforces what they already believe. The whole idea of someone like this starting a thread about what happens after we die is only so they can hear other people agree with them.

Please lock this bs. It is not a debate.

[MrRubix]

Originally Posted by Ryn2075

First off, let me say that you're completely entitled to your opinion mousethecat. If you "know" religion is wrong, good for you. More power to you, but we're not ignorant. We just don't believe in evolution. Feel free to feel sorry for us or hope that we come to the truth of things or something like that, ok? It won't bother us.



Again, if you agree with Rubix and them, then you agree that evolution is 100% fact. That is ignorance in a way, as evolution, as I already stated, cannot be proven as 100% fact. I WILL say that you guys have been very logical, and I thank you for that. Few things piss me off more than illogical comments that only attack people and have no real basis (i.e. saying someone doesn't have a life based on what is really nothing factual).

Ignorance means precisely that. An ignorant person ignores counterclaims or may not even be aware of them in the first place. Again, you have yet to describe why you don't believe in evolution, and have yet to provide an example that shows major disagreement about the concept among scientists. You also have yet to bring up a serious counterclaim that isn't technically a misunderstanding of the process.

Evolution IS both a fact and a theory. It is factual to the extent that we know changes occur through mutations over time in a population. The question of HOW evolution carries itself through time specifically is what is debated and theorized. Much like gravity, it is the LAW of gravity because we know that mass bodies attract each other. But we have different THEORIES to explain HOW this is done. Please understand the difference.

[Silver Sky]

Okay..... One more post. How can you say that man prophesied things happening on the earth is simply assuming? That's crazy. If you read the bible then you must of read all the prophesies and how none contradict one another. And how they even from old testaments coincide with the New testament. Yeah man saying something is going to occur 1000s of years ago all of a sudden happen out of no where. But oh well.... I'm done. Ah and you believe in Darwin's Theory if I'm not mistaken. Your scientific method is of course: Observe what happens; based on those observations, form a new theory by further observations and by experiments; and a watch to see if the predictions based on THEORY are fulfilled. Hmm... let's see what the centennial edition of Darwin's Origin of Species (London. 1956) says: As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but even about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution". -By W.R Thompson, then director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada.

[Mousethecat]

Originally Posted by Izzy

Please lock this bs. It is not a debate.

It is now, no need to ruin the fun :P

Some people consider this fun, I happen to be one.

[Silver Sky]

And this is just one scientist. If you want more I will be happy to post them

[MrRubix]

Originally Posted by Silver Sky

Okay..... One more post. How can you say that man prophesied things happening on the earth is simply assuming? That's crazy. If you read the bible then you must of read all the prophesies and how none contradict one another. And how they even from old testaments coincide with the New testament. Yeah man saying something is going to occur 1000s of years ago all of a sudden happen out of no where. But oh well.... I'm done. Ah and you believe in Darwin's Theory if I'm not mistaken. Your scientific method is of course: Observe what happens; based on those observations, form a new theory by further observations and by experiments; and a watch to see if the predictions based on THEORY are fulfilled. Hmm... let's see what the centennial edition of Darwin's Origin of Species (London. 1956) says: As we know, there is a great divergence of opinion among biologists, not only about the causes of evolution but even about the actual process. This divergence exists because the evidence is unsatisfactory and does not permit any certain conclusion. It is therefore right and proper to draw the attention of non-scientific public to the disagreements about evolution". -By W.R Thompson, then director of the Commonwealth Institute of Biological Control, Ottawa, Canada.

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/proph/long.html

http://www.goatstar.org/failed-prophecies/

Any questions?

[Ryn2075]

@Izzy

You're right. I've been taught something since birth, and I believe it wholeheartedly. However, being one of Jehovah's Witnesses, there is one difference between us and every other religion: We base our beliefs completely on the bible, and our beliefs are more logical than any other religions. That doesn't change the fact that people don't like religion, and there's nothing we can do about it, but at least we make sense compared to other religions.

@Mousethecat

My response to Izzy puts me in the group of people that need 100% proof to be swayed on my belief about something I have been taught as truth since birth, not 99%. It isn't ignorance, because I fully understand the evidence you guys are supporting, but I just don't think it's enough to change my mind. If I'm wrong, then I'll find out in my own due time.

@Mr. Rubix

You said I haven't said why I don't believe in evolution. Well, here then. I don't believe in evolution because I believe in creation. Simple as that. You made a comment way earlier in this thread about some people needing faith alone as a basis, and some needing factual evidence to support what they believe. In my case, I need 100% factual evidence that what I believe is absolutely wrong for me to change my viewpoint, and when I say 100% factual evidence, I mean evidence that has absolutely zero room for being debated. When I get that, then I will change my mind. Until then, I'm done with the topic. I've already stated numerous times that everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and this case couldn't be more true. If you guys can't understand that and move on to another topic, then maybe the thread should be closed like Izzy said, because as it stands, this discussion is doing nothing but wasting everyone's time.

~Ryan

[Silver Sky]

I will just have to say this. I read that link. You guys take the bible way to literally. You don't understand at all the meanings in there. If I explained it would take a very long time. But I'm done here.

[MrRubix]

Ryn:

Surely, then, you are aware of the logical fallacies and contradictions inherent in the Bible? What do you say to all that? How much of the Bible do you believe and why? Do you understand that much of it is demonstratively false? Do you see the issues regarding the fact that there is ambiguity between the allegorical claims and real-world claims and why this is a problem? Why, then, do you choose to believe in this?

Again, don't say you understand the evidence when you show that you do not.

Regarding your belief, why do you hold onto your religious beliefs when there is 0% factual evidence for it, and yet you say you demand 100% proof against it to switch from something that has no proof to begin with? You do understand that God isn't a disprovable concept, right? You're basically saying "I will never change my views no matter what flies my way," which is, by definition, ignorant.

[Izzy]

Originally Posted by Ryn2075

We base our beliefs completely on the bible, and our beliefs are more logical than any other religions.

Every religion thinks the same thing. If you need 100% proof to change your mind then why didn't you need any proof at all to believe what you do now?

You aren't ever going to get 100% proof for anything because that isn't how science works. Any theory that has a single bit of counter evidence has to be reworked until all known methods of testing against it don't show any signs of counter evidence.

If you only want to base your entire life on faith that what your parents have told you all your life, then be my guest. Just give your children a chance to decide what they believe in. I think you would at least owe them that opportunity that you never had.

[Silver Sky]

And sorry if I offended anyone. It is opinion and FACTS also. But don't want to argue. Thanks