298 Million Yr Old Forest Found

Off Topic
741

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
You aren’t seen as “smarter” or more grounded because you made a choice to not believe in God.

You simply made a choice…and we just don’t see all of the “genius” atheism has granted[/quote]

You keep writing dumb shit like this as if most people in this thread are operating under this impression. But then, perhaps YOU will be interviewed for the next YEC book to use your credentials in dentistry as a soapbox to preach, “well, thing is we just don’t KNOW either way… therefore, either option is pretty much equally valid under the existing evidence[/u].”

Either address, specifically, the people to whom you are referring or STFU. Better yet, use that big tooth pullin’ brain of yours to discuss the evidence you disagree with.

I, for one, already wrote that I am an agnostic.

Besides, I’ve read people mention that there really is no “choice” to believing once you “see” the light of God. The evidence to support his existence then becomes so overwhelming and the solution so obvious that there really can’t be any other explanation to be had. MOST people who don’t believe in him have never had such a moment in their lives. I can “choose” to believe in him about as well as I can “choose” to believe in Zeus and Poseidon; that’s not a dick statement, but a FACT based on my life experiences and the way my brain is currently wired… I could go through the motions of worship and try to shoehorn such beliefs into my thought processes, but neither would truly be meaningful beliefs on the level of MOST who LEGITIMATELY believe in a higher power.

Try to argue otherwise is fucking batshit… but I like your assumption that it’s essentially analogous to Captain Crunch or Fruit Loops in the morning.[/quote]

To further what you said - There is scientific evidence that suggests belief is a brain state.

742

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]anonym wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
You aren’t seen as “smarter” or more grounded because you made a choice to not believe in God.

You simply made a choice…and we just don’t see all of the “genius” atheism has granted[/quote]

You keep writing dumb shit like this as if most people in this thread are operating under this impression. But then, perhaps YOU will be interviewed for the next YEC book to use your credentials in dentistry as a soapbox to preach, “well, thing is we just don’t KNOW either way… therefore, either option is pretty much equally valid under the existing evidence[/u].”

Either address, specifically, the people to whom you are referring or STFU. Better yet, use that big tooth pullin’ brain of yours to discuss the evidence you disagree with.

I, for one, already wrote that I am an agnostic.

Besides, I’ve read people mention that there really is no “choice” to believing once you “see” the light of God. The evidence to support his existence then becomes so overwhelming and the solution so obvious that there really can’t be any other explanation to be had. MOST people who don’t believe in him have never had such a moment in their lives. I can “choose” to believe in him about as well as I can “choose” to believe in Zeus and Poseidon; that’s not a dick statement, but a FACT based on my life experiences and the way my brain is currently wired… I could go through the motions of worship and try to shoehorn such beliefs into my thought processes, but neither would truly be meaningful beliefs on the level of MOST who LEGITIMATELY believe in a higher power.

Try to argue otherwise is fucking batshit… but I like your assumption that it’s essentially analogous to Captain Crunch or Fruit Loops in the morning.[/quote]

To further what you said - There is scientific evidence that suggests belief is a brain state.[/quote]

Or possibly a disorder, depending on how far it is taken.

743

500×706 14.5 KB

One last point, FTR, is I don’t think I am more intelligent than push. He is an extremely bright guy who has very insightful commentary that I DO NOT disagree with on most other topics.

That’s why it is so interesting to see him approach this issue the way he does. Were he to say, “I understand where the evidence points but I just can’t reconcile that with my belief in a literal interpretation of the Bible – hence my position… I just feel that there is more to it than what currently meets our eyes”, then that’s cool and fine. We would obviously disagree, but it is at least an intellectually honest position from which we could shake hands and agree to each, their own.

BUT, he, like most all other YECs, are guilty of both butchering and misrepresenting scientific information and motivations to champion their cause. They are guilty of not only an extreme bias (though they don’t hesitate to project it onto the pro-E crowd) but also having blinders on that makes them refuse to even acknowledge it is an elephant in the room every time the discussion is broached. They knowingly sidestep contradictory evidence, play games of semantics and dance around statements that inarguably dismantle their various assertions.

You can certainly see the selective quoting and sidestepping between me and him in this very thread. You can see the rest in past threads. If anyone debated push the way he is debating me right now, he would be treating them with no less condescension than you apparently perceive in my posts, even though I am not frothing from the mouth to any extent as I type this. If I didn’t feel he genuinely believed in YEC, I would’ve assumed he was trolling for lulz a long ago.

The evidence currently DOES NOT leave it open to a “vase or face?” interpretation, despite the fact that they claim it very, very much is… but, I certainly don’t look down on anyone simply because they believe in god. If you’re looking for someone like that, tune in to Bill Maher.

744

[quote]pushharder wrote:

No one, if they are being honest, should be “convinced” about anything that happened in the distant unobservable past.[/quote]

And this is the reason that some people give as to why they are agnostic.

745

[quote]pushharder wrote:

No one, if they are being honest, should be “convinced” about anything that happened in the distant unobservable past.[/quote]

No one claims to absolutely know. If that’s what you mean then sure.

746


But, yeah, thanks for assuming that most non-believers out there wouldn’t cream their pants with excitement and joy with the revelation that there is more meaning and purpose to their existence in this universe than a random assortment of funky biochemical reactions.

We’re choosing not to believe just to be hipster socio-theological contrarians.

We’re willing to risk burning in hell for aaaallllll eternity just to wear skinny jeans; ironic, pseudo-intellectual non-prescription glasses; and vintage, tight sweater vests.

Cool story, bro.

747

[quote]Professor X wrote:
On the issue of deceit, this is why I liked The Matrix movies. They talked about all of this.

It has always been a choice whether you believe in God or have faith in one. If there was definitive proof in either direction, there would be no more choice. You can argue all you want about “deceit”, but there is nothing deceitful about creating something…along with the RULES by which that something functions.

That is why questioning photon beams makes little sense…because he would have created those too.

I think it was already made clear I don’t necessarily believe in a “6,000 year old” Earth…and one doesn’t have to in order to believe in a high power.

Why would God hate science when the idea is he created the rules by which our reality works at all?

God would BE science, and Math. He would be why our number systems even work the way they do.[/quote]

I don’t think not believing in god is a choice. Believing may be a choice but I wouldn’t know.

748

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

And MAYBE, just as X alluded, in 200 years we will laugh at the devices and methods available today. Maybe God is allowing us to continue to explore His universe and we aint got it all pegged just yet. Maybe God will have the last word on all of this. Maybe we finite little dust particles that we are aint quite as awesomely intelligent as we think we are. Maybe, huh?

[/quote]

This is the main issue…and why I brought up the way people will perceive us 200 years from now if humans are still here. Just like we would see someone from 200 years ago as being “uneducated”, the same will eventually be said of all of the “accomplishments” we currently think are so awesome.

They won’t be “awesome” even 5 years from now. That brand new computer will be pure garbage in less than 10 years even though it is nice, shiny and full of possibilities now.

We aren’t mature enough to have the attitudes I see in this thread…as if science has figured out enough to explain away the idea of God.

Mind you, that’s coming from someone who went to school past the level of most of the people laughing at Push.

You aren’t seen as “smarter” or more grounded because you made a choice to not believe in God.

You simply made a choice…and we just don’t see all of the “genius” atheism has granted.[/quote]

Somebody should sticky this post at the top of PWI. It wouldn’t actually make any difference, but at least we could point to it every 3rd post or so.

749

[quote]Professor X wrote:

You aren’t seen as “smarter” or more grounded because you made a choice to not believe in God.
[/quote]

No you definitely are more grounded thats for sure.

750

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

And MAYBE, just as X alluded, in 200 years we will laugh at the devices and methods available today. Maybe God is allowing us to continue to explore His universe and we aint got it all pegged just yet. Maybe God will have the last word on all of this. Maybe we finite little dust particles that we are aint quite as awesomely intelligent as we think we are. Maybe, huh?

[/quote]

This is the main issue…and why I brought up the way people will perceive us 200 years from now if humans are still here. Just like we would see someone from 200 years ago as being “uneducated”, the same will eventually be said of all of the “accomplishments” we currently think are so awesome.

They won’t be “awesome” even 5 years from now. That brand new computer will be pure garbage in less than 10 years even though it is nice, shiny and full of possibilities now.

We aren’t mature enough to have the attitudes I see in this thread…as if science has figured out enough to explain away the idea of God.

Mind you, that’s coming from someone who went to school past the level of most of the people laughing at Push.

You aren’t seen as “smarter” or more grounded because you made a choice to not believe in God.

You simply made a choice…and we just don’t see all of the “genius” atheism has granted.[/quote]

And in 400 years, the people will think the people that still believe on stuff 200 years from now are idiots.

Just because people will look down on us in the future, doesn’t mean we should cling to stuff that’s even further in the past, especially something as idiotic as YEC.

751

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

And MAYBE, just as X alluded, in 200 years we will laugh at the devices and methods available today. Maybe God is allowing us to continue to explore His universe and we aint got it all pegged just yet. Maybe God will have the last word on all of this. Maybe we finite little dust particles that we are aint quite as awesomely intelligent as we think we are. Maybe, huh?

[/quote]

This is the main issue…and why I brought up the way people will perceive us 200 years from now if humans are still here. Just like we would see someone from 200 years ago as being “uneducated”, the same will eventually be said of all of the “accomplishments” we currently think are so awesome.

They won’t be “awesome” even 5 years from now. That brand new computer will be pure garbage in less than 10 years even though it is nice, shiny and full of possibilities now.

We aren’t mature enough to have the attitudes I see in this thread…as if science has figured out enough to explain away the idea of God.

Mind you, that’s coming from someone who went to school past the level of most of the people laughing at Push.

You aren’t seen as “smarter” or more grounded because you made a choice to not believe in God.

You simply made a choice…and we just don’t see all of the “genius” atheism has granted.[/quote]

And in 400 years, the people will think the people that still believe on stuff 200 years from now are idiots.

Just because people will look down on us in the future, doesn’t mean we should cling to stuff that’s even further in the past, especially something as idiotic as YEC.[/quote]

And the theory that refutes YEC, evolution is 159 years old. So maybe everything we know now won’t be laughed at 200 years from now huh?

752

[quote]optheta wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

You aren’t seen as “smarter” or more grounded because you made a choice to not believe in God.
[/quote]

No you definitely are more grounded thats for sure.[/quote]

What an odd statement.

Are you saying you believe you have a firmer grasp on reality than someone even more educated than you SIMPLY because that person believes in God?

Mind you, I am not talking about myself.

Why would someone think a well educated Christian is somehow “less grounded” in reality than themselves for no other reason than belief in God?

Please explain that.

753

[quote]Makavali wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

And MAYBE, just as X alluded, in 200 years we will laugh at the devices and methods available today. Maybe God is allowing us to continue to explore His universe and we aint got it all pegged just yet. Maybe God will have the last word on all of this. Maybe we finite little dust particles that we are aint quite as awesomely intelligent as we think we are. Maybe, huh?

[/quote]

This is the main issue…and why I brought up the way people will perceive us 200 years from now if humans are still here. Just like we would see someone from 200 years ago as being “uneducated”, the same will eventually be said of all of the “accomplishments” we currently think are so awesome.

They won’t be “awesome” even 5 years from now. That brand new computer will be pure garbage in less than 10 years even though it is nice, shiny and full of possibilities now.

We aren’t mature enough to have the attitudes I see in this thread…as if science has figured out enough to explain away the idea of God.

Mind you, that’s coming from someone who went to school past the level of most of the people laughing at Push.

You aren’t seen as “smarter” or more grounded because you made a choice to not believe in God.

You simply made a choice…and we just don’t see all of the “genius” atheism has granted.[/quote]

And in 400 years, the people will think the people that still believe on stuff 200 years from now are idiots.

Just because people will look down on us in the future, doesn’t mean we should cling to stuff that’s even further in the past, especially something as idiotic as YEC.[/quote]

This would be missing my point…because I am not arguing for YEC.

754

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
On the issue of deceit, this is why I liked The Matrix movies. They talked about all of this.

It has always been a choice whether you believe in God or have faith in one. If there was definitive proof in either direction, there would be no more choice. You can argue all you want about “deceit”, but there is nothing deceitful about creating something…along with the RULES by which that something functions.

That is why questioning photon beams makes little sense…because he would have created those too.

I think it was already made clear I don’t necessarily believe in a “6,000 year old” Earth…and one doesn’t have to in order to believe in a high power.

Why would God hate science when the idea is he created the rules by which our reality works at all?

God would BE science, and Math. He would be why our number systems even work the way they do.[/quote]

I don’t think not believing in god is a choice. Believing may be a choice but I wouldn’t know.[/quote]

Sorry, guy. You are making a choice right now.

I have seen more than one of you claim this though as if being an atheist is natural and theism is the only thing that requires any intent or decision.

No, you make a choice to not believe in God just like anyone who makes the choice to do so.

To think otherwise is that same elitism bullshit I spoke of before…as if your non-belief in itself somehow made you superior, more grounded, or more intelligent than someone who believes in God.

755

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
On the issue of deceit, this is why I liked The Matrix movies. They talked about all of this.

It has always been a choice whether you believe in God or have faith in one. If there was definitive proof in either direction, there would be no more choice. You can argue all you want about “deceit”, but there is nothing deceitful about creating something…along with the RULES by which that something functions.

That is why questioning photon beams makes little sense…because he would have created those too.

I think it was already made clear I don’t necessarily believe in a “6,000 year old” Earth…and one doesn’t have to in order to believe in a high power.

Why would God hate science when the idea is he created the rules by which our reality works at all?

God would BE science, and Math. He would be why our number systems even work the way they do.[/quote]

I don’t think not believing in god is a choice. Believing may be a choice but I wouldn’t know.[/quote]

Sorry, guy. You are making a choice right now.

I have seen more than one of you claim this though as if being an atheist is natural and theism is the only thing that requires any intent or decision.

No, you make a choice to not believe in God just like anyone who makes the choice to do so.

To think otherwise is that same elitism bullshit I spoke of before…as if your non-belief in itself somehow made you superior, more grounded, or more intelligent than someone who believes in God.[/quote]

I think the word to describe that ‘elitism’ is “hubris”

756

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I am a person who is open to possibilities and never stops looking for answers.

I believe God could be BOTH the very reality we live along with more personal relationships.

Why would an omnipotent being be limited by the logic of some random college kids?[/quote]

Are you open to the possibility no god exists or that an unintelligent being was responsible for the first cause?[/quote]

Please answer this.

757

[quote]SteelyD wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
On the issue of deceit, this is why I liked The Matrix movies. They talked about all of this.

It has always been a choice whether you believe in God or have faith in one. If there was definitive proof in either direction, there would be no more choice. You can argue all you want about “deceit”, but there is nothing deceitful about creating something…along with the RULES by which that something functions.

That is why questioning photon beams makes little sense…because he would have created those too.

I think it was already made clear I don’t necessarily believe in a “6,000 year old” Earth…and one doesn’t have to in order to believe in a high power.

Why would God hate science when the idea is he created the rules by which our reality works at all?

God would BE science, and Math. He would be why our number systems even work the way they do.[/quote]

I don’t think not believing in god is a choice. Believing may be a choice but I wouldn’t know.[/quote]

Sorry, guy. You are making a choice right now.

I have seen more than one of you claim this though as if being an atheist is natural and theism is the only thing that requires any intent or decision.

No, you make a choice to not believe in God just like anyone who makes the choice to do so.

To think otherwise is that same elitism bullshit I spoke of before…as if your non-belief in itself somehow made you superior, more grounded, or more intelligent than someone who believes in God.[/quote]

I think the word is “hubris”
[/quote]

He’s been presented with evidence to the contrary and hasn’t changed his position. That is the definition of a delusion, a very mild delusion, but a delusion nonetheless. I could present further evidence as to why belief is not a choice and it wouldn’t make any bit of difference.

I can see why he won’t change his mind though.

Admitting belief is not a choice would by extension mean admitting that Christianity is built upon a false dichotomy of accepting or rejecting Christ/god.

758

[quote]Professor X wrote:

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:
On the issue of deceit, this is why I liked The Matrix movies. They talked about all of this.

It has always been a choice whether you believe in God or have faith in one. If there was definitive proof in either direction, there would be no more choice. You can argue all you want about “deceit”, but there is nothing deceitful about creating something…along with the RULES by which that something functions.

That is why questioning photon beams makes little sense…because he would have created those too.

I think it was already made clear I don’t necessarily believe in a “6,000 year old” Earth…and one doesn’t have to in order to believe in a high power.

Why would God hate science when the idea is he created the rules by which our reality works at all?

God would BE science, and Math. He would be why our number systems even work the way they do.[/quote]

I don’t think not believing in god is a choice. Believing may be a choice but I wouldn’t know.[/quote]

Sorry, guy. You are making a choice right now.

I have seen more than one of you claim this though as if being an atheist is natural and theism is the only thing that requires any intent or decision.

No, you make a choice to not believe in God just like anyone who makes the choice to do so.

To think otherwise is that same elitism bullshit I spoke of before…as if your non-belief in itself somehow made you superior, more grounded, or more intelligent than someone who believes in God.[/quote]

Can you choose to believe in the easter bunny, right now? And I mean really truly believe that the easter bunny exists. Not just think it does to prove me wrong when you know deep down it does not.

759

[quote]sufiandy wrote:

Can you choose to believe in the easter bunny, right now? [/quote]

Dude, YES, you can. You do it every time you think of the subject. If 100 years from now they find a giant bunny trapped in ice carrying a basket filled with chocolate, then people would have to choose to believe something different.

As far as you know now, that bunny is just a marketing ploy dreamed up to make kids buy more Easter crap. You have made the choice to believe that bunny has no basis in reality at all based on what we know about it RIGHT NOW.

That is about as basic as I can put that.

You make a constant choice everyday to believe that your feet will hit the ground when you get out of bed. You base that choice on past experiences and what you currently know about gravity and where you went to sleep the night previous. If gravity somehow changed tomorrow or someone moved your bed, you would have to revise what you believe.

Your belief or lack of belief is a choice based on what you have perceived or understand about the world around you…perceptions influenced by peers, guardians and environment.

The simple fact that you compare what I speak of as God to “the Easter Bunny” shows you haven’t taken the time to even grasp what I believe.

Like I asked earlier, how do some of you justify turning your noses up at people more educated than you simply because that person believes in God?

760

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:

[quote]Professor X wrote:

I am a person who is open to possibilities and never stops looking for answers.

I believe God could be BOTH the very reality we live along with more personal relationships.

Why would an omnipotent being be limited by the logic of some random college kids?[/quote]

Are you open to the possibility no god exists or that an unintelligent being was responsible for the first cause?[/quote]

Please answer this.[/quote]

Anything is possible, everything is not probable. Philosophically speaking, if you want to believe the Earth is simply a floating turd in some giant alien’s toilet bowl, that is your choice.

I mean, seriously dude, do you think you are debating this shit any better than “you believe in the Tooth Fairy”? You aren’t. Please come at me better with next reply.