Global warming could ultimately lead to the extinction of the human race. Of course, "God" has nothing to do with this.
well think how big russia is, all that water cant cover all that up, can it? if your thinking about your area i mean the human race, not english or astralians of americans
This is totally on a whim, but if ice, being less dense than water, thereby taking up more volume than water, melted then wouldn't the level of water in the ocean result in a net loss?
That's very true. The arctic freezes and thaws with the seasons and we don't see a lot of drastic sea level rise. Why not? Well, I really don't know how much or how little the sea rises and falls between winter and summer but I do know that Antarctica and Greenland have ice sheets on top of land meaning that if the ice melted additional water would be added to the system as the group is support the sheets now. Just a thought. Edit: Diablo or Rusty, do you intend on responding to the prior points made against your arguments? Just curious. Thanks.
Okay after a week I'm good to respond. Please note, while the initial hiatus was entirely genuine and I did indeed have a lot of homework the past few days have been in silent dread. I know I would have to respond to this in order for you to ever take me seriously in this thread, not because your response was stronger than mine but because my lack of a response would make you feel that you won and that one victory should produce more. That's not the case and I certainly don't want any steeper involvement in this thread. If you do respond, understand that I have no intentions of continuing this line of thought. One, it is too long winded for me to continue and two, you are going to have to back up your arguments. Saying, "BUT I EXPERIENCED IT NANANANANA" isn't going to cut it but yet here I am responding to just that. We were talking about probability. I'm sure anecdotes mean a great many things to you but they're worthless. This is just a way to skew the argument. Probabilistically god never increases or decreases because probabilities require strict conditions and a large amount of physical data. God cannot be known, in his entirety, because the bible says he can't. God can't have strict conditions placed on him. It is for these reasons probabilities DO NOT exist for god. It's not a matter of worldview. For instance: I believe Unicorns exist and it is probabilistic. >I assume you have presentable physical evidence then? No, in my worldview faith is all you need. Unicorns reveal themselves personally. >That's great but in order for it to be probabilistic you must have physical evidence and strict conditions. No we just have different worldviews. >... Then you can't call me hypocritical! If I get mad because you don't provide sound basis for your arguments you can't just read half of my post and call me a hypocrite and then say, "well I would have edited it but it was a big post." That's bullshit! It's stupid as hell too. I take time with my arguments don't trash me because you don't take the time to read them. Okay. You need to be shown in order to make it? But you just said, "You can't just watch someone making a cake then expect yourself to...replicate it." So in one instance you are being shown. And in the second instance you are demanding that you be shown how to make a cake. I learned how to make mac and cheese by watching my mom. I didn't take notes. She didn't "show" me either. I just made it one day. My sister learned to make ramen noodles in the microwave by watching me. She didn't have notes and she didn't ask to be shown how. She just mimicked what I did. No its not as I demonstrated. You're saying that you must be shown something, that it cannot be learned from afar. You're saying that you have been shown the light and that I am only watching and need to be shown. I have news for you. I've done the Christian scene. I've read the bible and I've believed those damn pastors with conviction. Not just a belief but a belief so strong I was willing to die for it, in some instances in my life (namely the summers after church camp). How do they repay me? Weak answers to my questions and bullshit excuses. Not anymore I say. Personal experience may be fine and dandy when it comes to dealing with ESTABLISHED and WELL BACKED UP phenomena or things. But when it comes to the unproven, it requires more than personal experience. Let's say someone who accepted the big bang came up to you and said "I've had a personal revelation and you must believe me." Would you? Would you give him the same patience I am giving you or would you laugh and walk away like I should? This is a joke Erico and I'm not laughing. No its not. (1) It's not my definition and (2) that's the only definition because (3) any other definition is just an attempt to undermine probability. Personal revelation and observation are two entirely different things. One deals with the physical, the other deals with properties of the mind. As in, personal revelation is often associated as an out-of-body experience or an hallucinogenic experience. "Personal" observation (lol) is what you physically observe, report, and submit for others to confirm. That's a shame then. You're more arrogant than I am. Its going to be hard to knock you off that pedestal. What makes you think truth exists and what makes you think you are among the privileged few to have it? Do you agree that logical things maintain the possibility of existence whereas illogical things maintain nonexistence? If not, show one illogical example that exists. A square-circle in nature or a conceptual being that violates at least one rule of logic but still can exist. Delightful. Is that hypocritical? To say I'm not listening yet you STILL maintain that bullshit formula. Let it go! Read my response to it... Then explain why. I'm tired of just the statements. I want explanations and you aren't providing anything. Let go of the equation...reread my very first response to you. ... ... ...I'm sure. Because you know, scientific evidence requires...you know; evidence. That's creepy. Dude thats just my worldview. You just don't know, bro. You...just...don't...know. My view isn't being based off of your posts. I'm basing my view of what you view off of you posts. Great. Make me something then. That's another reason why "scientific" evidence is so good.. because it is so much more understandable. YES! So you admit that probabilities are impossible to assign to god?! Edison didn't have faith in the light bulb. He tinkered until he got it right. Even if it was faith it is vastly different from blind faith. Blind faith is gullibility and until you provide evidence thats exactly what you have. While that may be your position do you really think its in your best interests to not question what you believe? I'm not saying you are wrong but what if? Wouldn't you like to know? If you never question your own beliefs you can never grow as a person. Probably not but that's not the reason any of us are here. Atheists are here because we have no other medium to communicate through and this is the best way for us to feel self assured. Christians are here because of their lack of confidence in their religion and they want to strengthen that. Why? Because when the entire population believes as you do it doesn't leave much room for questioning. But hey, I could be wrong. I certainly don't know any of you well enough to say that with any conviction. Just remember, no one is here to help, we're all here for ourselves. In some areas maybe. But we're communicating and it is still possible because I've had this argument several times. Don't give up so easily. Well then I can't describe the mechanism that would satisfy you. I can satisfy the textbook definition but you'll push the goal posts back. You should try answering my questions.
It's a thread about GOD! Oh joy -I am personally all for Creationism, more precisely that of Christians. Now I know no one is perfect, but some people (a certain 6th grader) have no basis besides faith for their religion. Now that's all well for the religion, but for a thread on a forum, you need physical evidence. -Please don't stereotype me, and I won't stereotype you. I say this because some people keep saying how Christianity is wrong because of the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, and some certain Popes that brought about the Reformation. I am not that person, so do not speak to me as if I am. People make mistakes, but some can really mess up. However, Christianity is not the only religion dealing with a bad past, present, and most likely future. Look at Hinduism, for example. That explains itself. And if all people who don't believe in God/Gods are classified as atheists, then I suppose that religion (or rather, lack of religion) can be blamed for quite a lot as well. -Look closely, and Christianity is really not such an impossible to believe thing. I can argue with myself all day about how Evolution is fact and Creationism is not, and vice versa. The point is, both have some very believable points, and some unbelievable ones as well ---Evolution: We have all adapted and evolved to conform to our environment, but come from about 4 billion years ago (I am most likely wrong about the time) an enormous explosion, the Big Bang. However, Stephen Hawking has acknowledged that the possibility of an Intelligent Designer is not so far-fetched, due to the extremely slim chance of such an explosion occurring. ---Creationism: A creator, a God, the ultimate scientist/chemist, has created everything that is in the universe. And due to the fact we've been conditioned to believe in life and death, it is an absurd thought to imagine a God that's been around forever without dying, or a creator of this such God. He also supernaturally heals people who follow the lifestyle He has laid down for us, and literally says anything is possible through him, which blatantly disregards many of the theories that have been stated by scientists. Note: I am indeed veering towards the Christian god in my words about Creationism; I have more I could go on with, just attempting to sum it up from memory. Please, remember I a only using one example, but for time's sake I am not writing out everything The reason I wrote this escapes me, and my time is now up. :\ I may edit tomorrow...
I just see an irony in this debate. For instance, to a non-christian, Christians are bigoted and so non-christians persecute them for it. To a christian they are being persecuted for their beliefs like it says in the Bible, which reaffirms their faith. Things like that, they're ironic to me.
It's very true. Persecution is a very good prediction to make because everyone goes through it. It would seem the writer of that particular passage had a very good choice in words.