You can be a moral person without God...

[digitalsuperman]

Quote: Originally Posted by jamesmusslewhite I now know it was just too many words for you to comprehend all at once. Sorry for your obvious "Brain Freeze." Helping to perpetuate that good old Filipino male work-place stereotype? The typical, screwing around on the internet when you are suppose to be doing actual work while on your employer's time clock? So you are a stellar employee as well as a moral Atheist? Sorry you have such a weak constitution. I did not know you were sensitive to the truth, while at the same time having such a propensity towards false story telling. It was my mistake and was totally unfair of me to put that type of pressure on you. I should have not have just assumed you were more clever than you actually are; sorry I apologize for that, very unfair of me. I should have seen there was no real substantial substance, and were merely driven by your own Atheist value system. Well you did use the right username, I was just too dense to realize you actually meant it to be a warning.

as what you wrote above that i put in bold text. carefull with what you say. if its a joke then its not funny or if its racism your trying to show us, then you should think first what you'd say next.

you were engaging in a healthy discussion here, a nice piece to read. please don't include racist remarks.

[schmuck]

Quote: Originally Posted by jamesmusslewhite I now know it was just too many words for you to comprehend all at once. Sorry for your obvious "Brain Freeze." Helping to perpetuate that good old Filipino male work-place stereotype? The typical, screwing around on the internet when you are suppose to be doing actual work while on your employer's time clock? So you are a stellar employee as well as a moral Atheist? Sorry you have such a weak constitution. I did not know you were sensitive to the truth, while at the same time having such a propensity towards false story telling. It was my mistake and was totally unfair of me to put that type of pressure on you. I should have not have just assumed you were more clever than you actually are; sorry I apologize for that, very unfair of me. I should have seen there was no real substantial substance, and were merely driven by your own Atheist value system. Well you did use the right username, I was just too dense to realize you actually meant it to be a warning.

Sure james. Tell my boss why I always finish work ahead of schedule. Nice ad-hominem btw

anywho,
re: your rhetoric about science "dismissing" the god hypothesis.
Its simple. Its not provable using the scientific method and and the claim is not falsifiable(can not be proven false). Why bother with it when its not scientific.

So why go on such a long "essay" about it when you, as I thought, a "scientist" should know this already.
All the while having thee hubris to say that "skeptics resist the evidence for Intelligent design... because of the implications it raises blah blah blah". What evidence?? Show me the freaking evidence or STFU. Its that simple.

[jamesmusslewhite]

Quote: Originally Posted by schmuck Sure james. Tell my boss why I always finish work ahead of schedule. Nice ad-hominem btw anywho, re: your rhetoric about science "dismissing" the god hypothesis. Its simple. Its not provable using the scientific method and and the claim is not falsifiable(can not be proven false). Why bother with it when its not scientific. So why go on such a long "essay" about it when you, as I thought, a "scientist" should know this already. All the while having thee hubris to say that "skeptics resist the evidence for Intelligent design... because of the implications it raises blah blah blah". What evidence?? Show me the freaking evidence or STFU. Its that simple.

It explains the process of how evidence is collected annualized and accepted. and why Scientists dismiss hypothesis that require negative proof. It often is proven not to be incorrect, just unaccepted by members of the science of the time. Or the inability of the sciences of the time a proper way to adequately analyze and compare gathered evidence or without physical specimens. Examples Physic phenomena, paranormal, UFO, USO, Dark mater, Dark energy, divining.

Each have strong believers and some even science in limited capacity support the possibility. But science still must dismiss each hypothesis do to negative proof. Does not mean they do not exist, the possibility is they may exist. Science just not understand or refuses to deal with the evidence at hand. You want me to pull non disputable proof of God out of my back pocket and hand it to you. So my inability to do so, or Sciences inability to disprove God as the evidence that there is no God? You want me to accept those parameters as your evidence that I should turn my back to God. Yet you equally have the burden of proof to substantiate your position, and refuse to do so.

Intellectual checkmate due to inaction.

[schmuck]

Quote: Originally Posted by jamesmusslewhite It explains the process of how evidence is collected annualized and accepted. and why Scientists dismiss hypothesis that require negative proof. It often is proven not to be incorrect, just unaccepted by members of the science of the time. Or the inability of the sciences of the time a proper way to adequately analyze and compare gathered evidence or without physical specimens. Examples Physic phenomena, paranormal, UFO, USO, Dark mater, Dark energy, divining. Each have strong believers and some even science in limited capacity support the possibility. But science still must dismiss each hypothesis do to negative proof. Does not mean they do not exist, the possibility is they may exist. Science just not understand or refuses to deal with the evidence at hand. You want me to pull non disputable proof of God out of my back pocket and hand it to you. So my inability to do so, or Sciences inability to disprove God as the evidence that there is no God? You want me to accept those parameters as your evidence that I should turn my back to God. Yet you equally have the burden of proof to substantiate your position, and refuse to do so. Intellectual checkmate due to inaction.

Sure, you are right. Anyone can come up with his/her own hypothesis. In fact, I could make one about the feasibility that a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe.
Surely, you also know that EVERY hypothesis should NOT be considered. How does science weed them out?

Simple.

Occam's Razor. The god hypothesis does not pass Occam's Razor.(google that if you dont know)

Oh and please, attempting to shift the burden of proof again? lolz, didn't you get the point of my comic?

[jamesmusslewhite]

Quote: Originally Posted by digitalsuperman as what you wrote above that i put in bold text. carefull with what you say. if its a joke then its not funny or if its racism your trying to show us, then you should think first what you'd say next. you were engaging in a healthy discussion here, a nice piece to read. please don't include racist remarks.

It was a joke, But was not raciest. Nor was it meant to be racest. Sorry if you did not get it, or if you were not amused, but it was not written towards you.
My wife and my son both have their Philippine citizenship as well as their American citizenship. My wife is Carlo P. Garcia's grand niece, and my son is his Great-Grand Nephew. I am proud enough of my son's Pinoy heritage that I move to Surigao City so my son could attend Caraga Regional Science High School. This is so he can learn his heritage, language, and culture. Why would I want to slam his heritage?

Fact: The Philippine reputation is that they are hard working diligent workers. That is due to the work ethic of the older generations of the past. But goof offs can change that worldly view, and that was the meaning of my remark. If you read the body of the text you will see that I was teasing him of being too lazy to read and respond to a post I wrote trying to answer his comments and questions. Smuck understood my joke, and we have had exchanges before but nothing ever raciest, I have no raciest concepts about the Pinoy culture. I still can disagree or not like something and not be raciest. Smuck insults me often but I know he is not being a raciest.

Sorry that you did not understand the wording of my sentence, that you have no sense of humor, or if you yourself were practicing a form of racism towards the Kano on this forum? Some members on this forum can say whatever about Americans, or America. But I have to walk a real tight rope. I can not see anything wrong with the economy, culture, crime, corruption, pollution, or any other topic which effects me every day living here. I might offend somebody so Kano must be a deaf-mute zombie even though I live here and have been coming to this country since 1985. Members have offended me but I just accepted they are bone-heads not raciest.

Thanks for the warning but who is being raciest? Sorry for the misunderstanding.

[jamesmusslewhite]

Quote: Originally Posted by schmuck Sure, you are right. Anyone can come up with his/her own hypothesis. In fact, I could make one about the feasibility that a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe. Surely, you also know that EVERY hypothesis should NOT be considered. How does science weed them out? Simple. Occam's Razor. The god hypothesis does not pass Occam's Razor.(google that if you dont know) As logical principle, Occam's razor would demand that scientists accept the simplest possible theoretical explanation for existing data. Science often shows that future data will support more complex theories than those of the existing data. Science tends to desire to have the simplest explanation that corresponds to available data of that given time, but often the simplest explanation can lead to contradictions or more complex theories as newer data becomes available to the scientist. Science must be always be open to the possibility that future experiments might support later more complex theories than those required by the current data available. It is the duty of scientist in those sciences be open to the mindset that designing experiments to discriminate between competing theories, Scientist can not and should not favor one theory over another based merely on philosophical principle. Occarn's Razor is only a rule of thumb and can not be accepted as a defining law. Sometimes there is no easy answers, or science has simply not developed to adequately diagnose the current evidence. True science must be expandable, flexible, and self examining. Oh and please, attempting to shift the burden of proof again? lolz, didn't you get the point of my comic? Science is not developed to the point to be able to prove or disprove the question of God. I have the scripture. The text is something solid, tangible, you can touch it, weigh it, measure it, smell it. Science studies that 1,800 book like no other work on Earth. Over a hundred fields of study and science, and army of scientist, billions of dollars of equipment and the jury is still out. Simple put, science is not mature enough, too much is still unknown, misunderstood, beyond our science to know how to tackle the problem. More time is needed.

I began to accept the Hebrew text source while studying the subject of Biblical Numerology and Bible Codes. You realize the uniqueness and the complexity of the text body. It may have been written by man, but it was inspired by something much higher than man. Is is the most amazing text written by man. For a person to just disregard and not research the text when exposed to the concept of the Bible Codes is anything but enlightenment.

[schmuck]

woah! numerology? Bible codes? seriously? Do you believe in horoscopes and magic crystal balls too?

Wait, was this the "evidence" you were talking about? HAHA Excuse me while I break out laughing!

re: bible codes
People find what they want to find. There is no code. This was debunked years ago, come on. I sincerely think that people who still believe in this stuff are loonies. No offense.

[AmorsoloX]

uhh.. nosebleed..

ok.. so murag wala na jud sa topic dah.. arguments balik2x nalang pud, boring nah..

you can be moral person without God.. both sides naa good point..

lets define God. define the big guy who makes "the rules" that would make discussion of morality a lot easier..

[CaseyR.]

unsa nmn ni? pgserious ba.. hehehe

[kebotDiNaMute]

Quote: Originally Posted by schmuck --- read again... eyes on the board smak... EPIC FAIL. hai nako kebot, dili jd ka abtik og sarcasm sa? pity. notice the /s dodong --- keep reading you will understand his point, and yes.. dr. ross is trying to link evolution and creation... not unless you dont understand... then there is nothing more i can help you... KEEP READING. -- dr ross said billions of years. HAHAHAHA galalis ang mga creationist oi. Dili kuno biblical iyang mga gipangyawyaw. Asa man jd ka nga side? The flood did NOT happen. -- well giant clams does not do very well in climbing.... hundreds of terrified clams has been found on MT. EVEREST. maybe billions of years ago clams fly... what du think? tectonic plate movement. elementary science man ni. wala ni sa inyo?

notice the /s dodong
--- haha, /s tungaw ngwa ngaw.... ingon ka personal ma apply sa tanan... hay kinsa kahay titser ka paludhon og asin...

HAHAHAHA galalis ang mga creationist oi. Dili kuno biblical iyang mga gipangyawyaw. Asa man jd ka nga side?
--- choosing a side makes you arrogant smak... obvious kaau example... but anyways... yes they both have a point... but someone is leing... WHO KNOWS? dba? relax...

tectonic plate movement. elementary science man ni. wala ni sa inyo?
--- bogoon man pod diay ka smak... do you know what petrified clams means? hahay!
--- mamatay ang clams... mo open na cya smak... if mamatay ang clams na close ang shell meaning defensive mode na cya smak... and its called petrified clams...
--- about sa tectonic plate movement... a clam will not live that long.... ang clam sa mount everest petrified clams og namatay mga clams less than 500 years. tectonic plates will not support it... if hinayon sa klasi smak... aw bsin d ka hingaon og clams.. kulang sa iodine... jok

[kebotDiNaMute]

Quote: Originally Posted by AmorsoloX uhh.. nosebleed.. ok.. so murag wala na jud sa topic dah.. arguments balik2x nalang pud, boring nah.. you can be moral person without God.. both sides naa good point.. lets define God. define the big guy who makes "the rules" that would make discussion of morality a lot easier..

gi define og gi describe naman brad...nus a diay ka na tawo? hmmm....

[jamesmusslewhite]

Quote: Originally Posted by schmuck woah! numerology? Bible codes? seriously? Do you believe in horoscopes and magic crystal balls too? Wait, was this the "evidence" you were talking about? HAHA Excuse me while I break out laughing! re: bible codes People find what they want to find. There is no code. This was debunked years ago, come on. I sincerely think that people who still believe in this stuff are loonies. No offense.

I believe man through out history Kings, Leaders, and learned men have believed in horoscopes, astrology, witchcraft, occultism, crystal balls, Atheism and many others unproven concepts; which are yet unproven by science. Prophets are unscientific yet most peoples in the world believe in them to be true. You can not see the forces which is used in divining rods, but I have first hand see it to be true and accurate finding water 240 feet in the earth, found within 2 feet of the divining rod predictions. You chose to believe Atheism even without any real verifiable scientific proof.

No there are numerical placements throughout the letter placements, which spell out words in the Hebrew text, which far exceeds those found in any other written works of man. It shows the complexity and planning used in placement of the individual letters of the written text. If there are truly actual hidden predictions I can not say. I have not conducted searches looking for predictions of world events hidden in the text. The numerical sequenced words and names are never the less still there.

Bible Codes Debunked? That maybe for the search for predictions, but not the word sequencing. This assumption of your's is based on one article which is in itself suspect, repeated over and over on various sites, which all fail to post this written article. That is your proof? Those who have not actually read or know what is written in this article? What were the parameters of the control variables used by this "international team of statisticians." Who were they? Who paid them? We must employ Occam's Razor remember, I do not want to be accused of being a poor scientist again. I therefor must be skeptical of any new facts which are yet unverifiable, due to those who may be driven by their own personal hidden agendas.

All your life you will encounter that you will not believe or understand, this does not mean these things are not real and do not exist. Science encounters them all the time, example: Dark Matter, Dark Energy, String Theory, Time Travel, Near death Experience or Parallel Dimensions. Each have believers and skeptics but no real proof either way.

[schmuck]

Quote: Originally Posted by kebotDiNaMute notice the /s dodong --- haha, /s tungaw ngwa ngaw.... ingon ka personal ma apply sa tanan... hay kinsa kahay titser ka paludhon og asin... HAHAHAHA galalis ang mga creationist oi. Dili kuno biblical iyang mga gipangyawyaw. Asa man jd ka nga side? --- choosing a side makes you arrogant smak... obvious kaau example... but anyways... yes they both have a point... but someone is leing... WHO KNOWS? dba? relax... tectonic plate movement. elementary science man ni. wala ni sa inyo? --- bogoon man pod diay ka smak... do you know what petrified clams means? hahay! --- mamatay ang clams... mo open na cya smak... if mamatay ang clams na close ang shell meaning defensive mode na cya smak... and its called petrified clams... --- about sa tectonic plate movement... a clam will not live that long.... ang clam sa mount everest petrified clams og namatay mga clams less than 500 years. tectonic plates will not support it... if hinayon sa klasi smak... aw bsin d ka hingaon og clams.. kulang sa iodine... jok

--- haha, /s tungaw ngwa ngaw.... ingon ka personal ma apply sa tanan... hay kinsa kahay titser ka paludhon og asin...
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA seriously wala ka katubay dong kebot?
kapoyan man pd tag explain nimo oi

ang kani nga reply kebot

Quote: Originally Posted by schmuck yep. because your personal experience is the measuring stick that everyone else can use. /s

sarcasm ang sulod ana. kasabot ba kag sarcasm kebot?


--- bogoon man pod diay ka smak... do you know what petrified clams means? hahay!
--- mamatay ang clams... mo open na cya smak... if mamatay ang clams na close ang shell meaning defensive mode na cya smak... and its called petrified clams...
--- about sa tectonic plate movement... a clam will not live that long.... ang clam sa mount everest petrified clams og namatay mga clams less than 500 years. tectonic plates will not support it... if hinayon sa klasi smak... aw bsin d ka hingaon og clams.. kulang sa iodine... jok
kai sure man ka nga 500 years ang age sa clam fossils nga naa sa everest no?
diin kaha ka nangahoy ana nga data? *looks at kebots avatar again*

[Jacobus]

In my opinion It is a basic human trait to Do good and avoid Doing Evil... So basically, the norms of society covers this trait...

A person maybe be a moral person without having to answer to a God...

[kebotDiNaMute]

Quote: Originally Posted by schmuck --- haha, /s tungaw ngwa ngaw.... ingon ka personal ma apply sa tanan... hay kinsa kahay titser ka paludhon og asin... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA seriously wala ka katubay dong kebot? kapoyan man pd tag explain nimo oi ang kani nga reply kebot sarcasm ang sulod ana. kasabot ba kag sarcasm kebot? --- bogoon man pod diay ka smak... do you know what petrified clams means? hahay! --- mamatay ang clams... mo open na cya smak... if mamatay ang clams na close ang shell meaning defensive mode na cya smak... and its called petrified clams... --- about sa tectonic plate movement... a clam will not live that long.... ang clam sa mount everest petrified clams og namatay mga clams less than 500 years. tectonic plates will not support it... if hinayon sa klasi smak... aw bsin d ka hingaon og clams.. kulang sa iodine... jok kai sure man ka nga 500 years ang age sa clam fossils nga naa sa everest no? diin kaha ka nangahoy ana nga data? *looks at kebots avatar again*

sarcasm ang sulod ana. kasabot ba kag sarcasm kebot?
--- hahay! mao na resulta brad bsta mag imbento imbento way klaro... hahaha! slash S... wtf, would i care about sarcasm.. hahah! how can a slash S become sarcasm... hahaha! idiotness ni...
/si (kasabot ka unsa ni?) lols.. hahaha

kai sure man ka nga 500 years ang age sa clam fossils nga naa sa everest no?
diin kaha ka nangahoy ana nga data? *looks at kebots avatar again*
--- nope because we havent observe a new mountain grows in just 500 years... naa ba? hahaha! sorry smak... its all planned out... if hinayon aw kulang cguro iodine... hehehe! tsk tsk tsk...