Do you believe in God and why

[ThaiBunny]

1 minute ago, CMNightRider said:

Well Mr. Bunny, I believe you forgot to hop along with your bag of carrots and silly comments to your burrow. ????

I assume the Bible permits ad hominem remarks

[CMNightRider]

3 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

I assume the Bible permits ad hominem remarks

I think this is projection on your part Mr. Bunny.  Instead of posting a continuous flow of nonsensical comments about how you disbelieve the Bible, why don't you share your infinite wisdom of how you believe the universe was created.  

 

That is a good photo of you at the helm of the boat "Transam" posted.

[Date Masamune]

Where is that explained in the Bible?

 

Your valid question about the previous perfection of the human genetic code has not been addressed, just more pseudoscience drawn from thin air why Incest might have once been ok. Human genetics and DNA were not well understood until the modern period.

 

It has been known for decades that Homo Erectus migrated to the Indonesian landmass about a million years ago, but an EXCITING new discovery of an extinct species of archaic primitive Humans in the Philippines is adding more detail to the history of the genus Homo in Asia. It is more clear now multiple species of extinct homininds existed in Asia.

 

https://relay.nationalgeographic.com/proxy/distribution/public/amp/science/2019/04/new-species-ancient-human-discovered-luzon-philippines-homo-luzonensis

 

 

 

[ThaiBunny]

19 minutes ago, Date Masamune said:

Your valid question about the previous perfection of the human genetic code has not been addressed, just more pseudoscience drawn from thin air why Incest might have once been ok. Human genetics and DNA were not well understood until the modern period.

If you're wondering where CMNightRider has gone, I can quote the Bible - "He has drawn aside and covered his feet"

[CMNightRider]

7 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

If you're wondering where CMNightRider has gone, I can quote the Bible - "He has drawn aside and covered his feet"

I think you were just getting ready to explain to us how you believe the Universe was created, since you don't believe Gods version. 

[ThaiBunny]

2 minutes ago, CMNightRider said:

I think you were just getting ready to explain to us how you believe the Universe was created, since you don't believe Gods version. 

Apart from your instruction to me to do that very thing, why would you assume that that's what I was getting ready to do?

[CMNightRider]

2 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

Apart from your instruction to me to do that very thing, why would you assume that that's what I was getting ready to do?

Why wouldn't you want to share your ideas on how the Universe was created.  You have been so outspoken, there is no reason to get bashful now.  It isn't often a poster with your level of expertise post comments on this site.  You have really peaked my interest on your vast knowledge of the Bible.  

[ThaiBunny]

5 minutes ago, CMNightRider said:

Why wouldn't you want to share your ideas on how the Universe was created.  You have been so outspoken, there is no reason to get bashful now.  It isn't often a poster with your level of expertise post comments on this site.  You have really peaked my interest on your vast knowledge of the Bible.  

If you insist - but the word is actually "piqued" - look it up

 

The human being that is ThaiBunny was formed by the union of a random sperm from my father and a less random but still fairly random egg from my mother. Had a different sperm from the same ejaculate of my father fertilised that egg, I would not exist.  That's as close to a perfectly random act as we're likely to get in a finite existence. I was born. I live. I will die and "I" will cease to exist except in the memories of those who thought they knew me while I was alive. Once they die I will truly cease to exist.

 

While "I" am here I act on the assumption (while knowing it's a belief or a value not a fact or a certainty) that we're all in this together.  One of things science has recently discovered is that physically our bodies incorporate the detritus of the entire universe - as it is written "You are dust, and to dust you shall return". As for "Where did I come from?" I'm inclined to those philosophers who assert "Nobody knows" and go on to say "Since nobody knows, to speculate is pointless". Gautama - a cause of "suffering"; the writer of Ecclesiastes "Vanity of vanities, all is vanity".  As an aside I suspect the decline of belief in God has given rise to an interest in genealogy via such sites as ancestry.com

 

The knowledge of my randomness reinforces my scepticism about anyone who claims they "know" because their mother said so or the Bible says so. I'm just not interested in "belief" apart from the anthropological angle

[Date Masamune]

The union of your pappys random spooge and the monthly ovum dump is not any miracle. Only a continual of life. Fertilization of human ova is a process, having multiple stages, that is well understood only by persons who have taken advanced biology courses

 

“Conception” is a strictly religious concept that has no place and should be banned from secular discourse and certainly rational discussion of human biology. There is no “moment” of conception, and no evidence WHATSOEVER for the existence of any deities responsible.

 

It is a horrible crime to use religious doctrine as a justification to control women’s bodies or reproductive privacy.

 

[ThaiBunny]

5 hours ago, Date Masamune said:

It is a horrible crime to use religious doctrine as a justification to control women’s bodies or reproductive privacy.

Perhaps you're thinking of this - 

 

[notmyself]

7 hours ago, Date Masamune said:

It is a horrible crime to use religious doctrine as a justification to control women’s bodies or reproductive privacy.

 

 

It's the only way for it to propagate 

[thaibeachlovers]

On ‎6‎/‎7‎/‎2019 at 11:20 PM, Date Masamune said:

Oil companies spend billions of dollars every year based on the belief that the earth contains a highly ordered and very predictable fossil record. Each year they test and refine the details of this fossil sequence to locate ancient reefs,

I quote only that to indicate to whom I am responding.

Would it be possible to restrict your post to a few salient points, as no way I'm going to read all of that, and even less chance I'm going to respond to all the interesting statements that I noticed as I skimmed it?

Perhaps you could split it into 10 or more separate postings.

[thaibeachlovers]

15 hours ago, ThaiBunny said:

As for "Where did I come from?" I'm inclined to those philosophers who assert "Nobody knows" and go on to say "Since nobody knows, to speculate is pointless".

To be human is to speculate. Only the dumb beasts do not speculate.

Pray tell me, from whence did life originate that 2 separate individuals existed to give you life?

If you can't, then perhaps you can concede that "something" caused life, the universe and everything to come into existence, or do you prefer to believe that something came from nothing?

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, Date Masamune said:

The union of your pappys random spooge and the monthly ovum dump is not any miracle.

No, but perhaps life itself is a miracle.

[thaibeachlovers]

7 hours ago, Date Masamune said:

no evidence WHATSOEVER for the existence of any deities responsible.

and there is no evidence that a deity does not exist.

Seems to me that either one believes in something greater than ourselves, or one doesn't, and all the debating is just froth.

[notmyself]

2 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

To be human is to speculate. Only the dumb beasts do not speculate.

Pray tell me, from whence did life originate that 2 separate individuals existed to give you life?

If you can't, then perhaps you can concede that "something" caused life, the universe and everything to come into existence, or do you prefer to believe that something came from nothing?

 

Who is claiming something came from nothing?

 

 

[Skeptic7]

1 minute ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I quote only that to indicate to whom I am responding.

Would it be possible to restrict your post to a few salient points, as no way I'm going to read all of that, and even less chance I'm going to respond to all the interesting statements that I noticed as I skimmed it?

Perhaps you could split it into 10 or more separate postings.

And there is the problem. I'm not reading all that...all those facts, figures and all that scientific evidence is just an inconvenience and infringing on my soooo busy calendar! Much easier for Fundies and woo-sayers to avoid and deny, (stick fingers in ears/cover eyes) rather than read, educate and learn. ????

[Skeptic7]

5 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No, but perhaps life itself is a miracle.

Perhaps...not.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 minute ago, notmyself said:

 

Who is claiming something came from nothing?

 

 

Obviously every one that denies the existence of something greater than our comprehension that did create life, the universe and everything from nothing ie "god".

What existed before there was something, or do you believe that something always existed, and if so, how could that be? Nothing comes from nothing.

































 

 

[ThaiBunny]

8 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

To be human is to speculate. Only the dumb beasts do not speculate.

Do let Gautama know. The fact is that most people can't explain the workings of a flush lavatory. That does not mean there was a God who created it

[notmyself]

5 minutes ago, Skeptic7 said:

And there is the problem. I'm not reading all that...all those facts, figures and all that scientific evidence is just an inconvenience and infringing on my soooo busy calendar! Much easier for Fundies and woo-sayers to avoid and deny, (stick fingers in ears/cover eyes) rather than read, educate and learn. ????

 

Aye.… it's called the Gish Gallop.

 

Quote

The Gish gallop is a technique used during debating that focuses on overwhelming an opponent with as many arguments as possible, without regard for accuracy or strength of the arguments. The term was coined by Eugenie Scott and named after the creationist Duane Gish, who used the technique frequently against proponents of evolution.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2019 by notmyself

[notmyself]

During a Gish gallop, a debater confronts an opponent with a rapid series of many specious arguments, half-truths, and misrepresentations in a short space of time, which makes it impossible for the opponent to refute all of them within the format of a formal debate.[3][4] In practice, each point raised by the "Gish galloper" takes considerably more time to refute or fact-check than it did to state in the first place.[5] The technique wastes an opponent's time and may cast doubt on the opponent's debating ability for an audience unfamiliar with the technique, especially if no independent fact-checking is involved[6] or if the audience has limited knowledge of the topics.

Generally, it is more difficult to use the Gish gallop in a structured debate than in a free-form one.[7] If a debater is familiar with an opponent who is known to use the Gish gallop, the technique may be countered by pre-empting and refuting the opponent's commonly used arguments first, before the opponent has an opportunity to launch into a Gish gallop.[8]

[notmyself]

Couldn't edit for some reason.

 

[notmyself]

1 hour ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Obviously every one that denies the existence of something greater than our comprehension that did create life, the universe and everything from nothing ie "god".

What existed before there was something, or do you believe that something always existed, and if so, how could that be? Nothing comes from nothing.

 

I don't deny and we use this same logic up to and including legal matters. What does a 'jury of our peers' do? Is it 'guilty or not guilty' of 'x' or 'guilty or innocent' of 'x'.

 

I must mention nothing comes from nothing but first we have no basis to consider the question of what existed before as valid. It has been proposed that a multiverse may exist but it does nothing to influence the god question, as we only know of one and can only use that as a basis. I've always find it funny as it's pulling **** out of mostly hydrogen gas.

 

My old friend tbl. Before I go looking I'll ask on what possible basis you can make such a claim. The claim is essentially...…. ?

 

 

 

[ThaiBunny]

1 minute ago, notmyself said:

I must mention nothing comes from nothing but first we have no basis to consider the question of what existed before as valid.

You seem completely unaware that our concepts are constrained by the fact that we use an entirely human construct to describe them - language. To illustrate its limitations - describe to us all what is north of the North Pole

[giddyup]

18 hours ago, CMNightRider said:

Why wouldn't you want to share your ideas on how the Universe was created.  You have been so outspoken, there is no reason to get bashful now.  It isn't often a poster with your level of expertise post comments on this site.  You have really peaked my interest on your vast knowledge of the Bible.  

For a seemingly devout christian, you sure have a nasty disposition, but isn't that the way with religious zealots, hypocrites all.

[ThaiBunny]

Just now, giddyup said:

For a seemingly devout christian, you sure have a nasty disposition, but isn't that the way with religious zealots, hypocrites all.

He feels threatened and is lashing out

[notmyself]

9 minutes ago, ThaiBunny said:

You seem completely unaware that our concepts are constrained by the fact that we use an entirely human construct to describe them - language. To illustrate its limitations - describe to us all what is north of the North Pole

 

You seem to be making a rod for your own back my friend. '''non human construct''' It did make me laugh though and this thread has had its laughs along the way. It's only because members are being polite to each other that it's still open. Be nice to get back to the question at hand rather than debate specific verses of a book. 

 

 

[ThaiBunny]

1 minute ago, notmyself said:

 

You seem to be making a rod for your own back my friend. '''non human construct''' It did make me laugh though and this thread has had its laughs along the way. It's only because members are being polite to each other that it's still open. Be nice to get back to the question at hand rather than debate specific verses of a book. 

Still waiting for your explanation of what's north of the North Pole

[notmyself]

1 minute ago, ThaiBunny said:

Still waiting for your explanation of what's north of the North Pole

 

Just a quick question as we are both on-line. Are you British because it will make it easier to explain.