Trump the Man

[smitty55]

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

[trimmer21]

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.

[mosquito]

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.

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

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

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

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.

[fishermccann]

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.

[Species8472]

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.

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.

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.

[fishermccann]

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 .

[Deer Wrastler]

If someone says there is a god the onus is on them prove it. No proof exists.

If you dont believe in God, can you prove he doesnt exist?

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!

[Deer Wrastler]

Science adjusts its views based on what is observed. Faith is the denial of observation, so that belief can be preserved. T. Minchin

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]

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.

[Species8472]

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 .

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.

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.

[fishermccann]

'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.