Printable View
Boy I can't praise our president enough - he is transforming our country into the nation that it once was - the tax cut will recharge America and its affect is going to be something to behold - he just got done telling the United Nations to go pound sand - he has just about wiped out ISIS - he is the man of the year - for sure
Not sure what lens you are looking through but pretty sure you need a new prescription. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
Well - tell me what he is doing that you think is wrong - come on -
I like the guy (or at least I used to)... but he speaks without thinking................................ way too often.
I like Donald cause he speaks like Donald not out a polititicians . In this Israely capital thing . Obama , Bush Jr & Clinton all promised to recognize Jerusalem as the capital if elected . None ever did .The Donald said he would & did & says he's going one step farther in moving . We will see if action carrys on .luck
I'd like to know how other countries think they can tell a sovereign nation where they can put their capitol,in the first place. In the second,where do think they have the authority to tell anyone where they can establish their embassy in that country? Good for Israel and really good for Trump. I'm no fan of the man,either,but,when he's right,he's really right and the UN can KMA.......and Nikki Haley is smokin' hot,too.
I think his tax bill is genious...it will help the USA and its citizens....off shore cash will come back to the country as corporations are now not penalized to repatriate cash, and many companies already talking about increasing wages and bonuses (big companies like AT&T and Wells Fargo)
The trickle down affect will be huge, DOW will hit 30,000 in 2018... he is doing a good job
Talking about raising wages is not doing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by kokes
And this in a country in which state to state minimum wages are all over the board more so than even between the provinces in Canada.
State minimum wages range from no minimum wage in Mississippi and Tennessee plus 3 other states also in the south to $2 in Oklahoma(small employers) on the low end to $13 in New York City (large employers).
Federally it's $7.25.
Any raises in wages and bonuses by big corporations will mostly be at the executive level.
And you know this how ???Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman
Past history, it is what they always do.
It's called an internet search.Quote:
Originally Posted by rick_iles
Here's one of the sites I refferenced.
http://www.ncsl.org/research/labor-a...age-chart.aspx
Come on now , he acts like a 7 year old.
He has been an as s hole all his life and will never change.
He had nothing to do with the rise in the DOW.
He is in it for the publicity and to increase his financial position.
Although it does make for great reality TV he loves his rating , I find him to be the best comedian of all time .
Sorry but he makes the USA a very sad place.
Trump is the best. In the future he will be remembered as a great man.
I must have missed the part about your assertion that raised will be for executive level employees....Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman
Woodsman By "talk" I mean it has been publicly announced these companies have stated they will be raising wages and offering bonuses once the bill is signed... this will become a trend and help the US economy as well as its citizens... I think its a good thing for the USA,but for those that blindly hate trump nothing will change their minds.. its the first big tax break the US sees in decades and they will find something to complain about..all the while our government is taxing is left right and centre...Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman
fishermccann's post (#10) hit the nail on the head.
How many workers for big corporations on the floor get bonuses. This is far more common at the executive level.
Try an internet search about the disparity between workers and CEO's.
Yes the big bosses deserve more but the disparity can be far excessive. In one case over $150,000,000 per year. Walmarts CEO is at over $25,000,000.
For big corporations giving an executive 10 million would be cheaper than giving workers a 10 cent an hour wage increase.
Yey Woodsman - current minimum wages have nothing to do with Trump - as more jobs are created employers will have to pay higher wages if they want workers - and Judge - you sound like a typical liberal - just call someone names without any substance - you need a Trump up there in Canada to make Canada great again
AT&T, Comcast, Wells Fargo promise bonuses or pay hikes once tax cut bill passes
Adam Shell, USA TODAY
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money...ses/971199001/
Companies are rushing to announce special bonuses and pay hikes after the GOP tax plan
http://www.businessinsider.com/trump...2017-12/#att-1
You betcha! The village idiot we have now is a disgrace. He needs to go back to drama teaching.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
kokes what size of raise (general worker on the floor per hour) do you figure would cause a noticable effect in the trickle down effect?
I'm not a Trump basher like so many are - but "He has just about wiped out ISIS" - Not even close - They are not going anywhere.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
Every economics text I've read says there is NO Trickle Down effect. Tax cuts do not float all the boats equally! The poor just got screwed some more.Quote:
Originally Posted by kokes
We need to talk to the Admin about getting a """LIKE""" Button added, Joe I'm not going to waste to much of my breath on this as you didn't answer the last 2 questions I asked you but here is my parting shot for 2017.
You think that is OKAY for the Good Old U S of A Taxpayer to have to pay { after this latest trip to Mar-la-go} $100 Million Dollars on Golf for a man who said he wouldn't have time to golf. and who ed about how much golf Obama Played, and with Millions going straight into his pocket. And because your so full of the koolaid you think that is Okay. he's making the taxpayer look like a complete fool. once again Joe, that # is $ 100 MILLION DOLLARS OF YOUR MONEY. Thank god I will be away from a computer for 10 days.
Ain't that the truth. The best part of Trudeau ran down his mother's leg.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
DanO and Woodsman you guys are too funny....you want what's best for the "worker" yet you bellyache when then company gets a tax break....I don't get it....Quote:
Originally Posted by DanO
Any increase in wage is sure to help woodsman, and yes the rich will get richer, but what you fail to realize is when the stock of a company goes up its not just the ceo who can benefit it's the working folk who's 401k just got bigger as well
The democrats picked the wrong lie to have hysterics over...do u not think millions of people will notice an increase in their take home pay...lol
Hey guys. Sitting in California reading all the anti-trump statements and laughing. Was just having lunch and talking with some of the workers here at the produce warehouse. These are the very same people that have elected Democrats to the house and Senate for years. Now they are talking about how the Democrats all voted to NOT decrease taxes, and tried to stab them in the back. Got a local election coming up ( city council) here, and from the sound of it the Democrats on the council will be lucky to keep their skins let alone their seats.
Democrats in the house and senate are starting to make nice and seem to want the trump Russian connection talk to go away.
All I can say is that the next year is going to get interesting and strange.
Yes I think that there will be a major military conflict as well.
Also he should take a "Public Speaking Course " so he knows what to say when he opens his mouth without interjecting all those ahhs, umms,and so forth.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
I guess he has never heard the saying " Put Mind In Gear, Before Putting Mouth In Motion "
Those figures,alone,should make you raise your eyebrows. Those claims are simply outrageous,ridiculous and patently untrue. More fake news from the leftist media. The reason business is conducted on a golf course is because they never have to be concerned about reporters (or foreign agents) over-hearing confidential information and screaming from the rooftops with their usual "spin" that they've been caught doing so many times they can't be counted since the Eisenhower Presidency. Stop taking every media account as gospel. You seem like an intelligent guy,so,check the stories. You'll soon figure it out. Have a good trip and we'll see you when you get back. Merry Christmas.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG MAC
You forgot to point out that the "Golf Games" are all played on courses that Trump owns.. what he is saying would be like owning a car and paying rental fees to drive it. Not going to happen. Yes there are cost for security but the cost are going to be there for any meeting or movement by trump, his family, and ALL members of the government above a set level.Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
If it doesn't meet the increase in inflation is it really anything to brag about.Quote:
Originally Posted by kokes
After a raise & your buying power is less than the year before doesn't make an increase in the economy.
I hope trump takes Canada.
Anyone who says that Trump is doing what he is doing to make money doesn't know what they are talking about - the guy has more money than he knows what to do with it - he loves this country and that this the only reason he even bothered to run for president - he could have easily just sat back and enjoyed life - personally I don't care how much of the taxpayer's money he spends - every penny is worth it because he is throwing out all the crap that the democrats put into play - if it was up to me I'd make him King
Man, you got a great sense of humor! Your sarcasm is at the highest level!Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
Oh you must of missed when in the past he lost it all to only be bankrolled by the Russians to get it back.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
Or is that fake news also?
That's just about the stupidest thing I've read on here. I guess you've got a few million stashed away in case you need to be hospitalized.Quote:
Originally Posted by glen
Joe: your country needed a shakeup to make it great again. Your people thought Trump was it but I don't agree.
That IS bullshyte. Where do you come up with this stuff?? National Enquirer?Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman
Are you serious???Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Any of these sources look like the National Enquirer?
Do you need more links?
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/panama-tower-carries-trump-s-name-ties-organized-crime-n821706
http://www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/manafort-indictment-reveals-link-to-russia-organized-crime-1087514179985
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2017/11...ia_a_23282200/
Or maybe this USA Today article
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...rime/98321252/
I said it on election day, "Way to go Trump". America needs his help to get back to greatness. Sorry to all the haters, but come on really, what greatness would be achieved with Clinton at the helm? Some great quality that he does have is the guts to stand as a leader and get things done, to do what he says he will do. He also has true respect for the freedoms of the people of the USA.
Qualities our so called leader lacks.
One for his fans...forgive them father for they know not what they do.
A Bible quote coming from an avowed atheist......By God,there's hope for you,yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
I thought mosq would enjoy that passage. ;) Happy Holidays everyone. :santa:Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Wow
CNN’s Smerconish: Trump ‘Could Become the Most Consequential President in the Modern Era
http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/..._medium=social
Trump’s Whirlwind Year
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...017-successful
Those who are still predicting that Donald Trump will be impeached and removed from office are now like exotic and endangered creatures. It is like an absurdly slow dance, in which the steps are so infrequent and tentative that it is hard to remember how far participants have come since the music started. Two years ago, virtually the entire commentariat, and most of its readers and listeners, were splitting their sides at the gigantic impending farce of the Trump candidacy for the Republican nomination. Eighteen months ago, those same people had almost entirely shifted their immense mirth to the mighty Hillary Clinton avalanche that was already starting to rumble down whatever it was that President Obama renamed Mount McKinley. The BBC was asking itself (i.e., its viewers, including any Americans watching its World Service) whether Trump was going to pull out then, to avoid the unprecedented thrashing he was about to receive at the polls (which none of the polls, even the more rabidly anti-Trump polls, then predicted). Wacky leftist filmmaker Michael Moore, with the unshakeable confidence in mind-reading that seems never to desert such people, announced that Trump would quit because he never wanted or expected to be nominated, and it was all a joke that had got out of hand. These were not unrepresentative opinions. Trump was attacking the entire political establishment, the whole Washington sleaze factory, all factions of both parties, all the Bushes, Clintons, and Obama, the national media, the lobbyists, Wall Street, Hollywood, and the limousine Left from the Hamptons to Silicon Valley. Of course the Trump campaign was insane and impossible, and was doomed to be a ludicrous fiasco, a gigantic, comical clown act that misfired horribly. On Election Night, Nobel prize–winning (for economics) New York Times columnist Paul Krugman said the stock market would “never recover” from the Trump victory. (It has set a new all-time high more than 90 times since.) The alarms about effective Russian intervention in the election and the confected creation of the Trump collusion myth were born with indecent haste. The ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, Mark Warner of Virginia, was soon solemnly announcing that there had been a thousand Russian agents actively assisting the Trump campaign in key swing states and that they had delivered Wisconsin, a complete fabrication (if he really believed this whopper, I have some oceanside property in Oklahoma to sell him). UP NEXT UP NEXT Here's How Biased The U.N. Is Against Israel 00:52 00:58 Powered by A year ago, efforts were still underway on recounts, especially in Wisconsin (which resulted in increasing Trump’s margin of victory by 131 votes), and there was national television advertising, costing millions of dollars, directed at the 306 people who had been chosen to cast Electoral College presidential votes for Trump, to break their pledges. (Seven electors did so and voted for third candidates, but five of the defectors were from Mrs. Clinton.) Plans were underway to disrupt the inauguration, and engage in widespread civil disobedience; the new Democratic National Committee chairman pledged “scorched earth” obstruction; Bruce Springsteen, singing to bemused Antipodeans in Perth, Australia, crooned, “We are the Resistance!”; Madonna (who had generated a slight rise in Trump’s poll numbers by promising to fellate wavering male voters who went for Hillary) spoke of wanting to “blow up the White House.” Veteran black-activist congressman John Lewis said Trump was “illegitimate,” and the ancient and unfeasible congresswoman Maxine Waters screamed “Impeach 45,” for causes that would become apparent as the process proceeded. Talk shortly turned to that option. As the president and his wife and party left Washington on May 19 for Saudi Arabia, Israel, the Vatican, and Brussels, ABC political commentator Nate Silver rated the chances of impeachment at 25 to 50 percent, and David Gergen — a former assistant to Presidents Reagan and Clinton, and a very knowledgeable man until he joined CNN and was infected by acute Blitzeritis – said, “We are moving into impeachment country.” A long sequence of crises was fanned by the Trumpophobic media: Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer and the Statue of Liberty were (according to Schumer) weeping over the fate of Yemenis and Libyans not allowed onto aircraft bound for the United States. The president’s expressed thought over the Charlottesville riot — that Antifa and the extreme section of Black Lives Matter that applauded the killing of white policemen might be as odious as the Klan and American neo-Nazis — was proof that Trump was a quasi-genocidal racist and apologist for slavery. Trump virtually dismantled NATO by not specifically mentioning the collective-security clause in his speech there; was signing the death warrant of the planet when he pulled out of the asinine Paris Climate Agreement; was going to blow up the world with Kim Jong Un; and so forth, ad nauseam. And all the while, the Russian-collusion fraud festered and grew, born of Clintonian denial and frenzied finger-pointing, and reinforced by the Steele dossier — a pastiche of scurrilous gossip and malice from the most dubious sources, including in the Kremlin, cited by Mrs. Clinton in her absurd memoir of the election as proof of her opponent’s treason. –– ADVERTISEMENT –– She writes how she was betrayed by the country and most people in it, but not by the husband with whom she has enjoyed a storybook Pleasantville marriage. It only emerged after the publication of her book that Mrs. Clinton’s campaign had commissioned the Steele dossier, and had spent $10 million on it from Democratic campaign funds. (According to former party chair Donna Brazile, Mrs. Clinton had rigged the nomination from her rival Bernie Sanders.) The Clinton campaign desperately shopped the Steele dossier to the American media in the last days of the campaign. This was the all-time dirty trick of U.S. political history, and when the rock was lifted and she was exposed as the sponsor of it, Mrs. Clinton instantly switched gears and called it “campaign information.” This last year, after the year of his nomination and election, has been the second round of Donald Trump’s war to crush and expel the American political establishment. This year he has won over the congressional Republican party, which had almost entirely opposed him, to toil in the enactment of his program. Together they have achieved the greatest tax reform and reduction in over 30 years, largely emasculated Obamacare, put a rod on the backs of those states that elect incompetents like Jerry Brown and the Cuomos and lay the resulting state income taxes off on the whole country, repatriated trillions of dollars of corporate profit, exonerated over half the people from personal income taxes, reduced the return of 80 percent of taxpayers to a postcard, and produced conditions for 4 percent GDP growth next year. The Obama apologetics that a flatlined economy with a shrunken work force and a burgeoning multitude of Medicaid-sedated idleness was the new normal has been debunked; it is the abnormal recent past. Trump was a joke until nominated, unelectable until elected, and incompetent until he succeeded on most fronts. For all of these and many similar reasons, the assertions of even fair-minded and perceptive commentators that Trump has done poorly in holding only 37 to 40 percent popular approval is mistaken. Considering the sustained assault of 90 percent of the media, in which the normal honeymoon for a new president has been replaced by a daily media assassination squad, he has done well. In the post-Watergate era of the criminalization of policy differences, instead of waiting a while before firing the nuclear option as accusers had with Nixon, Reagan, and Clinton, Trump’s enemies fired this blockbuster after a few months. Undismayed, he has ripped open the facade of the Justice Department and the FBI and exposed morally corrupt hacks within, while heaping praise on the FBI rank and file. At year’s end, his enemies, battered and almost unrecognizable from reruns of their gamecock assurance of a year, let alone two years, ago, are reduced to the shabby jobbery of claiming he is about to fire the special counsel. Trump has cooperated entirely with the special counsel, who has illegally seized evidence from the General Services Administration, recruited and tolerated hysterically anti-Trump people on his staff, and relied on the unspeakable Steele dossier, while a senior Justice Department official has been caught red-handed in improper contact with Steele, with whom the official’s wife worked during the election preparing the anti-Trump dossier. Donald Trump was a joke until nominated, unelectable until elected, incompetent until he succeeded on most fronts, and about to be impeached until he debunked the collusion nonsense; he has had a very successful year. His enemies have been weighed in the balance and they have been found wanting. They shall have their reward. Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all readers, especially the president and Mrs. Trump. — Conrad Black is the author of Franklin Delano Roosevelt: Champion of Freedom, Richard M. Nixon: A Life in Full, and Flight of the Eagle: The Grand Strategies That Brought America from Colonial Dependence to World Leadership.
Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...017-successful
I'd sure call the National Review a impartial source.
It's a semi monthly conservative magazine.
Ya but it all true.
S-h-h-h,don't tell truth to the Liberals. Their heads will explode.Quote:
Originally Posted by glen
If you actually opened the link and read it, woodsman, you’d see it was written by Conrad Black. Regardless of whether you’re a Conrad fan, or not, you should expand your horizons and read the words he had to say because there’s no arguing them.
Awfully difficult for average Joes like us to determine what is true and what is not with every media outlet putting its own spin on the news. We are slaves to big media in a sense.
I'd like to believe he's making America great again as Canada will rise with the tide, but I believe Americans are slaves to corporate giants and these corporations are the worst kind of citizens. Money still matters most and is concentrated to a select few; as long as they keep them politicians in their pockets through political donations regular folks will never get ahead.
Uh-huh,about as impartial as The Star,The Globe,CBC,CNN.................Quote:
Originally Posted by Woodsman
Attachment 36395.........Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
fox.....
One way to tell for sure is by how much money is in your pocket. This may increase in the next few years.
That should be important to a few people.
Unfortunately, for some it is all about the money.
I kind of lost respect for Conrad Black once he was convicted and served time. Hardly a credible source unless you're looking for a solid conservative voice.Quote:
Originally Posted by last5oh_302
Agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanO
He was convicted and sent to jail by the very same people/organisations that he is critical of.
Bias in the extreme.
Conrad has no credibility when it comes to being critical of the American Justice system
With the American system,crooks get more time for financial crimes than they do for murder....OK,except for Texas. That shows how much money runs the system down there.. He has the Gold,rules the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
"Poor man wants to be rich, rich man wants to be king, the king ain't satisfied, till he rules everything" . B. Springsteen.
The Boss sure nailed that one,didn't he?Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Aren't we kinda scratching the bottom of the barrel when we need to use quotes from the likes of B. Springsteen - there's one thing I have found in life - that a lot of people think that all other people think the same way that they do - if they lie and cheat they thing everyone else does too - you know there are a lot of people who don't make having a lot of money the primary thing in life - they are happy with a simple life - a lot happier than those with a lot of money - B. Springsteen - come on get me a break
Well it is that time of year again - a lot of people will set some time aside and examine how they are doing and how they might improve themselves in the coming year - that includes how they relate to other people and how they react to different situations - how they manage their resources and improve their health - I must confess that I just got done doing that and no matter how I tired I just couldn't find anyway that I can improve myself - honest - so my resolution for the coming year will be to continue to be my likeable, mild, cheery, honest, peace loving terry bear and continue to help others by passing on the wisdom I have attained over the years to others - so I wish everyone a happy and prosperous new year - and remember if you have any questions I'm always here to help - meanwhile all is almost quiet on the southern front -
Happy Holidays JP. Wisdom comes in many forms and from different poets. Don't always discount what is said, because of where it comes from. I always find your posts 'interesting'. All the best to you and yours.
Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
Always hope ... look at Saul of Tarsus right through to C.S. Lewis, Malcolm Muggridge, Alister McGrath, Peter Hitchens, Josh McDowell etc. In that group we have Oxford prof, writer, PHd molecular biophysics, brother of Christopher Hitchen and Josh that started out writing a book showing why Christianity was wrong.... all ended up Christians when they looked.
Just made myself a cappuccino* and catching up on reading.....a bit late but Merry Christmas, hope you are suffering turkey and stuffing overload.... too. :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
* You can get ALOT cheaper, Italian and Kitchen stores have these and the Espresso for alot less often and I got my 6 cup espresso (makes 1 cups regular coffee in it) and the cap maker for less than $40 at a garage sale.
https://www.amazon.ca/Bialetti-Mukka.../dp/B002AQT7YC
Two words to shut down any theist...prove it.
What would you accept as proof? What would you define as acceptable evidence? You say there is no God so you accept the idea the universe popped out of nothing, the cell (DNA, RNA, proteins, protein synthesis, amino acids, cell membranes etc. etc.) came about by chance so your threshold seams pretty low but what would you consider as evidence then?Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
The Bible described the "big bang" 3,500 years before it was accepted by science...
"If I had no other data than the early chapters of Genesis, some of the Psalms and other passages of Scripture, I would have arrived at essentially the same picture of the origin of the universe, as is indicated by the scientific data." Nobel Prize-winning physicist Arno Penzias (Big Bang Theorist)
There is the evidence of a creator....
The probability for such an event as the origin of DNA molecules to have occurred by sheer chance is just too small to be seriously considered ... ."Ernst Boris Chain - Nobel Prize in medicine
An expert on the Bible, Prof. Daniel B. Wallace (wrote the textbook on ancient Greek & Greek translation) in an interview in the book "The Case for the Real Jesus" says "It's disturbing that when it comes to the Christian faith, people don't really want, or know how, to investigate the evidence" and you do seem to like talking but not looking.
My decision to turn from a christian in name only and start looking deeper came from a book on archaeology (even today an ongoing process, always seems to be another direction or rabbit hole to search)... I don't recall reading the forward until later and which reading the forward it became even more poignant.
"In gathering together and working over the material for this book, which I in no way claim to be complete, it seemed to me that the time had come to share with those who read their Bibles and those who do not, with churchmen and agnostics alike, the exciting discoveries which have resulted from a careful examination of the combined results of scientific investigation along many different lines. In view of the overwhelming mass of authentic and well-atested evidence now available, as I thought of the skeptic criticism which from the eighteenth century onwards would fain have demolish the Bible altogether, there kept hammering on my brain this one sentence: "The Bible is right after all!" Werner Keller (wrote "The Bible as History") .... reminds me to watch for the updated version.
As for learning an example of one item relevant to Christmas is the translation of the word translated to "inn", "kataloma" , I had never looked closer there and it is a poor translation and is probably more appropriately translated as guest room.
http://classic.net.bible.org/verse.p...pter=2&verse=7
http://classic.net.bible.org/strong.php?id=2646
Which coincidentally was covered in a recent Day of Discovery too.
https://dod.org/programs/bethlehem-b...ristmas-story/
The atheist Aldous Huxley’s indictment, “Most of one’s life.. is one prolonged effort to prevent thinking,” and for so many it is true and I doubt anything I would say would be acceptable and Lee Strobel, Josh McDowell, Alister McGrath all describe their search and looking for 2 years .... so why not take on some personal responsibility and do your own search and maybe start by reading any of their books. You seem to have no regard for experts in any field given other comments you have made recently regardless of the evidence too But... you are still breathing so there is hope.
Does it matter what the world thinks would be acceptable, as there is no proof, none, ever . Faces on toast or bleeding statues don't cut it. Are theists so arrogant, as to think out of billions of galaxies with planets, ( yes millions with intelligent life on them), that our little planet and humans are important. LOL.
Yep,faith actually does matter because in the final analyses,it's all we've got.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
" The way to see by faith, is to shut the eye of reason." Benjamin Franklin.
S= KLOGW A scientific Proof of the tendency to move from Order to DISORDER increases as time progresses. In other words for the Universe to have started with disjointed and random particles and assembled it's self into more and more complex forms, is a Juxtaposition to the very rules that same Universe.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
S = KlogW.....Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Boltzmann entropy does not prove the existence of god. No more than Godels incompleteness theorem. What about the Second Law of Thermodynamics. According to Frank Steiger ," the creationist application of the second law of thermodynamics to the development of living things is inconsistent with ANY model of origins. Creationists get around this problem by invoking the supernatural". So you see mosq I do read books, and have been studying religion for over 40 years, that is how I became an atheist, even going to a Richard Dawkins lecture at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland. and now that the religious are becoming more brazen, a militant atheist. Believe what you want to believe, BUT it should have NO affect on my ,or anyone else's life.
I think I see why you are studying but a closed door let's no air in and I think this quote by Alister McGrath who has debated Dawkins sums it up best. "They are good at sowing doubt, anger at God, pride etc. and if you don't look carefully at the integrity of what they are saying you can be lead astray."Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Regarding one of Richard Dawkins books Alister McGrath stated:
“Such is Dawkins’s unruffled scientific impartiality that in a book of almost four hundred pages, he can scarcely bring himself to concede that a single human benefit has flowed from religious faith, a view which is as a priori improbable as it is empirically false.”
"Atheism must indeed be in a sorry state if its leading contemporary defender has to depend so heavily – and so obviously – on the improbable and the false to bolster his case."
In a discussion where Dawkins came up even an atheist such as Science historian Michael Ruse says "Dawkins makes me embarrassed to be an atheist" .
Their view points are summed up by...
"God exist whether or not men may choose to believe in Him. The reason why many people do not believe in God is not so much that it is intellectually impossible to believe in God, but because belief in God forces that thoughtful person to face the fact that he is accountable to such a God." Robert A. Laidlaw
Given some of Dawkins more ... let's say questionable comments ( I would say offensive) ... is it perhaps more in the stream of the atheist Huxley's comments "I want this world not to have meaning because a meaningless world frees me to my own erotic and political pursuits."
Alister McGrath ended up writing a book in rebutal to Richard Dawkin's prideful and angry book and the review of "Dawkins' GOD: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life" Francis Collins, Director of the Human Genome Project say that Alister McGrath
"Wielding evolutionary arguments and carefully chosen metaphors like sharp swords, Richard Dawkins has emerged over three decades as this generation's most aggressive promoter of atheism. In his view, science, and science alone, provides the only rock worth standing on. In this remarkable book, Alister McGrath challenges Dawkins on the very ground he holds most sacred - rational argument - and McGrath disarms the master. It becomes readily apparent that Dawkins has aimed his attack at a naive version of faith that most serious believers would not recognize. After reading this carefully constructed and eloquently written book, Dawkins' choice of atheism emerges as the most irrational of the available choices about God's existence."
You said to prove it so I am just shining a light, don't worry you have made up your mind and won't accept what you don't like so you can keep your eyes closed all you want...
Actually I am more a disciple of Charles Templeton ( pun intended), as I was lucky enough to spend a few years close to that great atheist. He had seen both sides of the equation. There was a man who knew what he was talking about.
Anyway.... may I suggest you get Templeton's book... or Christopher Hitchens .... they are both indistinguishable in the nature and then think about them. and perhaps Peter Hitchen's book too.
Good news, I see Trump is cutting funding to the UN.... an organization where dictators and tyrants group up and get more votes than free countries ... just look at Canada and their vote on Jerusalem .... I see more countries are actually moving their embassies to the city they commute to each day... where the Knesset is.
Trump to hit United Nations with shock budget cut in clear message to western states
https://www.express.co.uk/news/world...jerusalem-vote
US to make at least $285m cut to UN budget after vote on Jerusalem
US is responsible for 22% of the UN’s annual operating budget
Timing sends message after UN rejects Trump’s recognition of Israeli capital
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...e-on-jerusalem
** Any bets Justlied and the Liebrals will send the difference....???
I'm glad someone is finally jerking those UN a**holes to attention. It's about frickin' time. Typically,though,Canada abstained from the vote which I find worse than not voting. Again,we look weak and ineffectual and JT and Minister Freeland wants Canada to be elected to the Security Council? Canada will have one piddlin' little vote against every Communist/Socialist dictatorship that's already there. Talk about the mouse that roared....LOL What a joke!Quote:
Originally Posted by mosquito
This Thread is becoming more and more humorous. People like trimmer, Joepa etc hate the fact that their far right ideologies are no longer accepted and that they are minorities in a progresive country. The reason why Canada is still the toped loved country in the world is because we're better then the US. Yes i'm not a JT fan but he is 100% better then that f*****g m***n in the states. If you hate living in this free country theres nothing holding you back from leaving. May I suggest Poland, US, Russia or North Korea
Thanks mosq but I have signed copies of both, Farewell to God and God Is Not Great. Plus some original, personal notes from Chuck ,(CT) to myself. Just for balance, I have read the bible, (both testaments), 3 times cover to cover, except the 2nd and 3rd times I left out the begats chapters. Huxley also said. 'Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored'. One of my favorites, 'The fact that a human being has to tell you about the existence of god , proves that there is no god'. Anteyetheist.
I hope you got them new since you got them signed, as for me the $1 bin at a used book store often has new looking books. To me they read like an angry teen trying to justify their views. Did you spend any time studying the Bible and the history or just reading with the same interest as in ethics report on Justin Trudeau? Used book stores and abebooks are great sources, I much more preferred the dog eared John Polkinghorne's book I got used, it was on the shelf and almost full price, surprising a book written by a Prof of Quantum Physics would hold it's price so well. Well you have made up your mind what is true .... but then again so HAD C.S. Lewis, Josh McDowell, Lee Strobel, Alister McGrath and then they looked at both sides of the story...Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Trump atleast is showing our idiot in charge what a leader looks like but an ideologue like him will probably never learn. About the only thing he hasn't blamed someone (Harper etc.) else for is his two kids. The realities like the UN votes are pathetic, Israel isn't perfect but is 100X better than it's neighbours and gets attacked for everything, while Saudi Arabia bombs civilians in Yemen, etc. etc. . Ever see this video? Hamas is such an educational group....Quote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=463tkEJJhIs
in the neighbourhood and the kids pulling the fire string .... and then people wonder when kids get killed when Israel finally fires back. :mad:
On that topic, my rabbit chase led me to a French news media and Palestinian rocket launching sites...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABwLwSNwCeU
I mean how stupid is it that a country can't declare what it's capital is ... but Hamas has their minions angry and ready to die all the time for decades .... all so the leaders of Hamas can collect their millions... look at Arafat, born broke and nowhere near there and died a billionaire...
On Hamas and the UN did you happen to see the Mosab Youseff (son of one of the founders of Hamas) talking at the UN.... I love the looks on the guys in front of him, they seem rather uncomfortable at the truth being spoken..... :scream: :thumbup: :shades:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NX-atfFWeq8
He was good on here too.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVzF0V5xt1U
I bet he has a ton of fatwa's and threats for that speech!
With Trump cutting funding to the UN by up to $285 million, makes me wonder if he read the book "The UN Gang " by Pedro Sanjuan, a former high ranking official appointed by H.W. Bush.
He outlines all the incompetence, corruption,anti-Semitisim and outright criminality throughout the UN Secretariate.
This book is very interesting and informative.
Uh-huh! LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by Bonkers
Hey! keep the Poles out of this :angry: , they beat communism through the efforts of Lech Walesa, and uniting in Solidarity.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonkers
[ Lech Wałęsa is a retired Polish politician and labour activist. He co-founded and headed Solidarity, the Soviet bloc's first independent trade union, won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1983, and served as President of Poland from 1990 to 1995.]
Mosq if you judge a books value by it's cost. You can get bibles for free. LOL
I'm kinda puzzled by that one too considering the reality.... Canada on the other hand has gone backward with their access to information, funding of the public propaganda media, M103....Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee
Duh, I know, I have got incredible books for a good price, I once got an early printing of an F.W. Boreham for $6, and as for the Bible, many give them away because salvation is also a gift, it has already been paid for.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
As for the value of the book I should have elaborated more, while Chapters had it in the store in the best seller etc. a used book store had the same book in the $1 bin beside the Windows 3.1 Wordperfect books, buying it seemed more like someones virtue signalling than their interest in arguments written in an angry teen style.
[QUOTE=jaycee;1047498]Hey! keep the Poles out of this :angry: , they beat communism through the efforts of Lech Walesa, and uniting in Solidarity.
The Far Right nationalist movement in Poland and Hungry is extreamly worrying. It's also bringing in other eastern european countries
Worrying but not surprising. Racism in Poland has always been simmering just beneath the surface. Just as we've seen in the U.S., one short-sighted egotist can bring that pot to boil.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bonkers
Sounds like someone has been indoctrinated. Perhaps a graduate of Wilfrid Laurier..lolQuote:
Originally Posted by trimmer21
In other news Roy Moore files suit to block fraudulent election results in Alabama.
The left think he's being a cry baby but I believe there's much more to it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0h_NjmHZNM
[QUOTE=Bonkers;1047539]Looking at the two Communist parties in Canada they got almost 15,000 VOTES in the last election and with the NDP and Liberals moving farther left all the time, I'd be more worried about the lunatics in Canada. With the Liberal's working on emphasizing divisiveness those left on the fringes are probably going to grow.Quote:
Originally Posted by jaycee
In Poland there will be some idiots in that group but many are probably just nationalists and marching for the end of Communism and the leftist media machine are just spinning as much as they can. Anymore if you aren't a Che and Castro lover (stick head in sand and ignoring revolution and tens of thousands of deaths in the process and suffering Cuba has created) the media thinks you are alt-right... all while acting like real fascists themselves in many cases.
Quote:
Originally Posted by last5oh_302
Just look at this moron announcing to the world that they came in and voted....
https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/946462387376340992
and this woman voted illegal for over a decade.
https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/943281148200972289
In Canada we just have foreign gov'ts putting money in to "influence" elections.
http://calgaryherald.com/news/nation...deral-election
and
http://nationalpost.com/news/politic...report-alleges
There are lots to worry about here and even more so, we have Justlied in power an admirer or dictatorships and tyrats ... a Trudeau in power was and is just a disaster in progress.
If Canada is the toped loved country do you know why? - because it doesn't do anything - that's why - when you stand up and fight for justice you are going to get enemies but if you just sit back and don't do anything nobody will be mad at you - and as far as needing a human to tell you about God that isn't true - just look around you - look up into the heavens on a clear star light night or at a small seed that can grow into a giant oak or listening to the song of a lark or examining the human body or the fact that matter can think - the existence of God is all around you if you open your eyes - there isn't any excuse -
...and bone cancer in children or tsunamis that drown a quarter of a million people. Yes, the list is endless.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
How the he** do people from other states get to vote in the Alabama election? I'm fairly certain it's illegal. Good question for JoePa.Quote:
Originally Posted by last5oh_302
They can't unless they are a registered voter in Alabama - not legally anyway - there has been an effort to have voters show some kind of acceptable documentation if they want to vote but the democrats and liberal judges keep stopping this effort so what you have is voter fraud going on - some people end up voting a dozen times - dead people voting and illegal votes helping the demoncrats - there was always some illegal voting going on but it has become so wide spread that you begin to wonder how the average citizen can make a difference in our elections - all voters should have a diver's license or other form with a picture before they are allowed to vote - hopefully that day will come -
WE had the same thing happen up here. The Harper Conservatives enacted legislation to require proof of residency and citizenship before someone could obtain a ballot. Who screamed the loudest? Liberals,NDP,and Communists and they're still whining. Things that make you go...............H-m-m-m-m.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
Hey nine" - God never promised a rose garden on this earth - in fact just the opposite - pick up your cross and follow me - the perfect place comes later if you qualify -
No JP , everything can be explained by science.
That's pretty much what I expected. Play up and celebrate the good stuff and downplay/dismiss the bad stuff. If it was a marriage it would be called battered wife syndrome.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
There is a reason the Boss is incredibly popular, and it's not because he is an especially great muscian. He is popular because his ballads set to song ring true to 100s of millions of people. This does not mean he is correct in his assertions (some of them may be but that is debatable) but it does mean he is worth listening to if for no other reason than gaining insight into the world we live in.Quote:
Originally Posted by JoePa
Same thing can be said for someone like Bono. I don't particularly like his ideology but it is worth listening to.
In the words of an aethist - prove it. Don't worry though when science fails we can always rely on Battle Star Galactica or Star Trek to cover any gaps.:joker:Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Cuts both ways. Prove there is no God. At some point a leap of faith is required regardless of whether you are a theist or an atheist.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Our understanding of science is neglibe when applied to the universe as a whole. Hell we can't even reliably predict the weather past 24 hours on our own little blue ball. Enough uncertainly is present that God could certainly exist in some form that we do not have the scientific knowledge to prove or disprove. It is the height of hubris to think we have enough proof to conclude anything - hence the requirement for faith on both sides.
The side that requires the most faith is however debatable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Species8472
Proving something doesn't exist requires a huge degree of knowledge beyond what man is capable of in reality. The scope, the criteria .... and honestly science is lacking in it's ability to identify the creation of the universe, the fine tuning, the creation of life on earth etc. Anthony Flew in an debate suddenly after 30 years of being an atheist suddenly declared that there was a creator... I've never looked up what he believes other than that though... I am not sure who was more shocked the person his team or those he was debating, both were jaw dropped. Alister McGrath with is PHd in molecular biophysics was an atheist and is now a Christian speaker. An open minded examination of the evidence is rare but it is often fatal to a person's preferences, Nabeel Quereshi describes his leaving Islam, Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel (about 20+ years between them) both started writing books in support of Christianity as part of a challenge by someone ..... that change requires a rethinking of values, priorities and is what many don't want so they choose their outcome and look for any evidence or atleast others that agree.
Years ago I was on a sight .... I don't think it was this one and someone declared that Santa Claus, Flying Dragons and God didn't exist....
I pointed out Santa Claus is a distortion of the dutch for St. Nicholas and Nicholas of Myrna was a 3rd century Bishop and pointed out there is the god man wants (sometimes it is himself) and there is the God that is and how much he is distorted.
I then pointed out the flying dragon lizard from Asia and his declaration was out of a distortion of the reality and an ignorance of the reality.
2 out of 3 wrong because of his misunderstanding of the reality and asked if he was willing to take the time and look at the evidence, I then pointed out Josh McDowell and Lee Strobel.... as to be expected so often he wasn't interested and the thread got locked due to his comments it seems. Peter Hitchen's was an atheist and the brother of Christopher Hitchens and he has said about the book he wrote ...
"I want to explain how I became convinced, by reason and experience, of the necessity and rightness of a form of Christianity that is modest, accommodating, and thoughtful--but ultimately uncompromising about its vital truth,"
There are lots of other books out there written by ex-atheist but most don't want to look. From the ones I mentioned above,
Lee Strobel has written several including "The Case for Faith" ... where he even interviewed Templeton.
Writers of books on the evidence include Josh McDowell, C.S. Lewis, Alister McGrath, Frank Morison, Malcolm Muggridge etc. etc. and in the end we end up with the writer of a hymn, John Newton and God's Amazing Grace.
In science Miller-Urey managed to create a few amino acids in a controlled experiment that in no way simulated the conditions on earth but an amino acid to a protein and then a DNA is like a square stone to Notre Dame cathedral... by accident. BUT to me it seems to take more faith to believe that given the early state of the earth, the entropic principle, cell membranes, RNA, proteins, protein synthesis and DNA etc that accidental life takes more faith. The DNA if unfolded and straightened for ONE cell is about 18" so that's why some like Dawkins have jumped to panspermia and other fanciful ideas.
A step or a leap depends on how far and how deep a person wants to look.... In the end it is a step of faith but who is willing to look, what is their prejudices and presumptions and is there a hypocrisy in the search AND will they accept what they find or ignore it ....
Happy New Year, may 2018 bring Ontario the end of one Liberal insanity in Ontario.
Abraham.....The father of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. Because a person who is willing to murder their child because a voice told them to is someone the whole world should admire and follow. LOL
Ha Ha .....The reversed responsibility response, switching the burden of proof. I claim nothing is there , you claim there is, the burden of proof is on you to prove something is there , I can't prove a negative, that nothing is there. Atheists do not need faith. Science proves itself continuously...... Religion. The practice of training your mind to ignore evidence, logic and reason, while being able to believe in fairy tales based on faith alone.... and being proud of it rather than ashamed.
Faith means not wanting to know what is true....... F. Nietzsche...... Faith is believing what you know ain't so.... M.Twain
Actually I never claimed anything where the existence of God is concerned. Just had a good laugh at the arrogance going around on this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
For someone who claims to be so well read and believes science is the be all and end all you seem to have a rather poor understanding of the scientific method. The scientific method never proves anything regarding the veracity of a hypothesis, perhaps you are confusing it with the related but completely different field of mathematics. All science ever does is provide support for or disprove a hypothesis and/or occassionally a theory. Support is different than proof. The result is the hypothesis/theory is strengthened, amended and/or revised and/or rejected outright. Disproving something exists is far easier to do than to actually prove something exists - proving something exists beyond all doubt is actually impossible from a scientific perspective.
The burden of dis-proof/support always lies with both camps where science is concerned. So in the case of God your hypothesis is that he/she does not exist. The next step becomes conduct an experiment designed to provide evidence that supports your hypothesis. Conduct enough different experiments with repeatable results that support your hypothesis and it becomes a theory and if there is especially strong support it may even become a law but it will never be proven. The other side would do the same but with the hypothesis that God exists. Neither side ever proves anything - they only determine that the experiments conducted to date do not disprove their theory/hypothesis but instead support it (not prove it). A classic example is the theory of spontaneous generation. For a long time it was theorized that maggots spontaneously generated from nothing on rotten meat. Numerous experiments were conducted that supported this. Louis Pasteur did not agree so this required him to prove spontaneous generation did not exist (oh look at that he set out to dis-prove something or as you call it prove a negative). Louis Pasteur proposed a new hypothesis, designed an experiment and provided evidence for his hypothesis that disproved the existence of spontaneous generation and provided the basis for microbiology as we know it.
Your faith that science provides the evidence to conclude anything regarding God is lauhgable. Science proves nothing it just determines likely explanations. After more than 400 years of experimenting we still don't even fully understand gravity nevermind a concept as complicated as God. As far as i am aware there are no repeatable scientific experiments that have been designed and conducted by either side that support or disprove the existence of God. So all people whether they believe in God or not require faith. Hell even gravity requires faith as we have never proved it actually exists. We do however have enough support for the theory of gravity that if you drop a ball the amount of faith required is minimal to believe that it will drop.
So as I said before the debate becomes which side requires the most faith.
I am not a particularly religious man and I believe in the theory of evolution. Here is the problem, if everything evolves from a starting point be it a single cell micro organism whatever. The world around us then is the result of gazzilions of years of evolution. The earth and it's living things like plants and animals are all the result of an evolutionary process right? Most likely more of it out there we aren't advanced enough yet to find. So, if the universe is constantly evolving and changing ( think ice ages and thier effects on living things) there has to be a starting point to begin the process right? Who in this world can pinpoint and define a starting point? Big Bang? Something has to cause a bang. Science would support this. So, until someone can define what the beginning was I'm gonna believe it's unexplainable and some might call that a supreme being. Anybody who feels they can solve it, is full of krappp.
Science adjusts its views based on what is observed. Faith is the denial of observation, so that belief can be preserved. T. Minchin
None of which explains how the universe began.
I hear that one is solved pretty much every Saturday morning by those guys at the corner table in Tim Hortons ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by terrym
I stayed in a Holiday Inn Express last week myself :silly:
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
For someone who esteems science as the be all and end all why so many quotes from arts majors? Anecdotal one line quotes from a bunch of arts majors proves nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
The closest Webster's definition to any of these is:
firm belief in something for which there is no proof
There is a difference between no proof and denial of proof. As there is no scientific proof that God either exists or does not exist it would seem that faith is required for either belief according to Webster. As you seem hung up with science, why not see what scientists actually believe - wait a minute someone already did that. In 2009 Pew Research looked into this and determined that 51% of the polled scientists believed in God or some type of higher power, 41% did not believe and 7% did not know. So it seems the team you are trying to back is fairly evenly split - hardly compelling.
http://www.pewforum.org/2009/11/05/s...ts-and-belief/
The one thing i will grant you is that disbelief in God is much higher among scientists than the general public but still nowhere near high enough to even suggest belief in God is illogical.
I have no problem with anyone believing God either exists or doesn't. Myself I'm in the don't know camp. What does irk me is someone like you who boldly proclaims the issue is settled and looks down on anyone who does not subscribe to your belief as ignorant or illogical. It seems you have placed fully half the scientific community in that category
I don't know why you guys keep responding to him. It just feeds his false ego. Best just to ignore and hope it goes away.
Cheers
I was lost as soon as the thread was hijacked. WTH does this have to do with Trump? Wait a minute..................don't answer that.Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty55
Quote:
Originally Posted by Species8472
He is just trolling again ... and I don't mean fishing. As for real science, I guess Alister McGrath or John Polkinghorne are good... but I do like this guy....
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/questionofgo...s/collins.html
Francis Collins.
No one knows better than Dr. Francis Collins how easy it might be for scientists to play God. As the director of the National Human Genome Research Institute since 1993 — what some call the most prestigious job in science — Collins has led the effort to decode human DNA, along the way developing a revolutionary method of screening genes for disease. Yet according to this widely respected scientist, the newfound power to "read our own instruction book" is no obstacle to faith in the existence of God
Quote:
Originally Posted by smitty55
Yep, FMC is a troll but sometimes it is hard to ignore one when they are making such bombastic and ignorant statements.. Just look at some of his last quotes.... a philosopher that is known for nothing but one quote, a writer of fiction and a comedian responding to comments from Phd in molecular biophysics etc. ....
Back to politics ..... Trump is winning and making changes and only a few more hours to the year we can throw the Ontario Liebral out .... unless she spends enough money to buy the election then we will stay with the leftatics suicidal path.
OK how about this fact. The oldest version of the bible in the world is the Sinai bible housed in the British Museum. Fact. There are over 14,800 differences between this bible and the standard king james version. Fact. Just how much proof do you need that the word of god is nothing but the words of men. You want science majors? How about " Religion is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions", Albert Einstein. Or how about ,"Before we understood science, it was natural to believe that god created the universe, but now science offers a more convincing explanation', He said " I'm an atheist'. Stephen Hawking. Or , "I have never seen the slightest scientific proof of the religious ideas of heaven and hell, of future life for individuals, or of a personal god". Thomas Edson. I realise that if you have faith, facts do not matter, so even if many of the greatest minds the world has ever produced ,call religion bunk, you would not be swayed.
What do differences between translations have to do with proving/disproving the existence of God? All they show/prove is that man has messed with and/or created religion. Proving whether a religion is true or false, although related, does not shed any light on whether God exists or not. As for your two science majors Einstein was not an atheist and in fact described himself as an agnostic and stated many times that he believed in a pantheistic God. Einstein believed the problem of God was and I quote "the most difficult in the world"—a question that could not be answered and I quote "simply with yes or no." He conceded that and I quote, "the problem involved is too vast for our limited minds." Apparently your mind is less limited than his.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Hawking is undoubtably an atheist so you are batting 500 with your science majors where the existence of God is concerned - about the same as Pew Research. Your Hawking quote however does not shed any light on whether God exists or not . All it states is that science explains the creation of the universe. Whether science explains the creation of the universe is irrelevant unless you limit your definition of God so that it requires God to be the one who created the universe.
You seem to be all over the map confusing the concept of religion with the concept of God. I would agree that science can be used to discredit many aspects of religion but it cannot effectively prove or disprove anything regarding the existence of God. Like Einstein said the problem involved is too vast for our limited minds.
Science does not have to disprove anything.If someone says there is a god the onus is on them prove it. No proof exists. Yes the bible is the infallible word of god,with 14000 mistakes .
If you dont believe in God, can you prove he doesnt exist?Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
I see proof God exists evey time I step into nature either hunting fishing hiking etc. If you look over the most epic landscapes and look at all the animals and how they all interact and live off the land in a perfect balance and if you believe it all happened by chance...good on you, but nobody has to prove anything to make our beliefs what they are. Seems like you struggle with the meaning of life, believing in something gives life a purpose to what we do and what makes us human. You must be one of those athiests who believe in nothing and dont understand your purpose in life, sorry for your loss.
Happy New Year!
stop cutting and pasting famous atheists quotes from google already lol [emoji23]thats not forming a valid argument your just plagarizing ideas for lack of own intelligence thought on the matter [emoji23]Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Joepa started another non hunting political thread, Fishermccann gets it spinning like a top...tell me your not the same person I wont believe you hahaha.
Once again showing how little you know about science. Science has never and will never prove anything one way or the other on any subject. Science is simply a tool for testing a hypothesis. Where the existence of God is concerned both sides have a hypothesis. For either side to to claim science is on their side they must design numerous experiments to test their hypothesis as many ways as possible. The results of the experiments must be repeatable to be relevant. After enough experimentation the hypothesis becomes a theory and eventually a law but it is never proven beyond all doubt. It simply becomes the best guess to explain what is observed. From what I have seen neither side has effectively accomplished this.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
As for the bible being the word of God - irrelevant as you are confusing the question of God's existence with the veracity of one specific religion.
'Religious apologists complain bitterly that atheists and secularists are aggressive and hostile in their criticism of them. I always say look, when you guys were in charge, you didn't argue with us, you just burnt us at the stake. Now what we are doing is, we're presenting you with some challenging questions, and you complain." A. Greyling. 'It is a strange myth that atheists have nothing to live for, it's the opposite, we have nothing to die for, we have everything to live for.' or ' It annoys me that the burden of proof is on us. It should be ;You came up with the idea why do you believe it? I could tell you that I've got superpowers. But I can't go up to people saying, Prove I can't fly. They'd go What do you mean prove you can't fly ? Prove you can. R.Gervais. If you propose the existence of something, you must follow the scientific method in your defence of its existence. When someone says science has never proven anything one way or another, I know you are to far gone to reason with.
One more and I am done, as it should be self explanatory..... Water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen. What if someone says, " well that is not how I choose to think about water",? All we can do is appeal to scientific values. And if he does not share those values the conversation is over. If someone doesn't value evidence, what evidence are you going to provide to prove they should value it? If someone does not value logic, what logical argument could you provide to show the importance of logic? Sam Harris........ Happy New Year to all, no matter your beliefs. FMC.
Hooray. I just noticed the ignore list. No more fmc for me. A great way to start the new year. :)
I would encourage others to do the same. Like I said if no one responds to his inane posts hopefully he'll go away.
Cheers to all and Happy New year
Taking things out of context i see. Like I said if you knew anything about science you would understand that statement. Science only ever disproves or supports. Enough support without disproof and and it is a good assumption to believe something is true - but it is never proven. You can apply this to your water analogy.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Comparing the question of God's existence to the nature of water is invalid. The scientific experimentation and evidence is there to support the one side. The other side has no evidence. Where God's existence is concerned there is no evidence on either side. Like i said show me the experiments and the corresponding results - they don't exist for either side. Explain the logic in drawing conclusions when there is no specific evidence for anything? Doing such a thing would actually be as far from logical as possible for either camp.Quote:
Originally Posted by fishermccann
Where onus is concerned if a camp has a hypothesis/theory that is supported by sound experimentation and corresponding results and another camp disputes their belief than the onus is on the camp that disagrees with the supported hypothesis. Where God's existence is concerned both sides have a hypothesis but neither has any evidence. So in fact the onus is actually on everyone as no one can support anything scientifically. Any evidence you have referenced or logic you have applied invariably refers to some religious text or tenet. We are not taking about religion we are questioning the existence of God and your claim that science is on your side. Using errors in a text written by men as evidence that God does not exist is akin to using errors in a microbiology textbook to assert that bacteria do not exist. The text, while related, is irrelevant to the question of actual existence. If fully half the scientific community disagrees with your opinion the science is hardly settled.
I am done as well much to relief of the rest of the forum I am sure. Happy New Year.
Species,
You had me intrigued when you kept the debate elevated and intellectual, but you've let yourself succumb to primal instincts. Your phraseology not longer veils that its sport to you now ;)
A Happy New Year to you and yours.
Helps me fill my tag!Quote:
Originally Posted by ninepointer