Do you believe in god?

[yanong_banikanhon]

---

Hangyoon lang pud nato ang both sides (theists ug atheists) nga likayan nato ang mga personal attacks. Naa na ra bay warning ang mod diri (Boss Springy). Dunay nagmonitor aning maong thread, so kalma lang ta.

[tokidoki_v2.0]

All in the mind: Scientists have claimed we are born to believe in God

Humans are programmed to believe in God because it gives them a better chance of survival, researchers claim.

yep, as i had been saying all along that we as human need a purpose to define our existence (resulta sa sobraan ka brayt). This inclines us to believe in the divine.

[Devian]

nalingaw ko sa discussion ni Yanong ug Hitch22.. mora coutroom drama.

yanong: hitch22, did you kill XXX?
hitch22: yes, but he tried to.....
<yanong interrupts hitch22>
yanong: i only need a "yes" or "no" answer. no further questions, your honor!

peace. hehe

[yanong_banikanhon]

^^ Bro, klaro baya gyud kaayo ang title sa thread: Do you believe in god?

[yanong_banikanhon]

Kun manaway ug magbugal2x man galing ta sa mga nituo og mga miracles, siguroon pud nato nga kita mismo dili motuo sa mga butang nga walay scientific evidence.

[cjmagowan]

I believe in my self and I believe in God...

[hitch22]

@hitch22
My questions are very simple.

1. Do you have a verifiable scientific evidence nga gawas sa usa ka conscious mind, there is another thing that exists in nature that is capable of producing a sophisticated language?
   
   
2. Do you have a verifiable scientific evidence that the thing mentioned in point no. 1 is the origin of the genetic language ?

When you say sophisticated language/genetic language, you're of course referring to DNA.

I've already responded to both these questions, if you've just paid attention to my previous post. In the field of science, as far as the origin of DNA is concerned, the RNA hypothesis is the best candidate. Is there evidence that this is so? Mao bitaw hypothesis pa ang status, kay naa pay ubang mga competing hypothesis which may prove to be true. Scientists haven't been able to completely get from RNA to DNA. The best they've done in the laboratory setting is to get RNA fragments to come together as double-stranded structures (click here if you want to read about it). Isn't DNA also a double-stranded structure? I don't know how close you want an experiment to get before you can acknowledge the possibility. Yes, there is reasonably high probability that DNA came from RNA.

It's clear to me that you didn't even extend me the decency to understand that post where I elaborated in as short and simple a manner as possible about the scientific accounts of evolution, DNA, abiogenesis, and various natural phenomena. The point I tried to make was to illustrate how science has been able to account for a lot of seemingly complex phenomena and apparent semblance of complex design...because the bottom line of your line of questioning boils down to this: CAN YOU EXPLAIN THESE COMPLEXITIES FROM THE SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW? The answer is yes. IS THERE EVIDENCE TO EVERYONE OF THESE EXPLANATIONS? The answer is yes to some of them and "pending yes or no" to the rest. Ask a Nobel Prize winning scientist this question: DOES THE ORIGIN OF DNA NEED A SUPERNATURAL EXPLANATION? If you can get one to answer that for me, I'll concede to you on that point.

Kun manaway ug magbugal2x man galing ta sa mga nituo og mga miracles, siguroon pud nato nga kita mismo dili motuo sa mga butang nga walay scientific evidence.

Ana gyud. Kung walay scientific evidence, ayaw ug pagtuo. wala man koy problema kung naay mga tinuohan nga dili parehas akoa. galing lang kay imo man ko gipasanginlan nga nag-una ug bugal-bugal sa uban. dili ra ba ko ingon ana. mao gyud nang kalain sa imo. mopatuyang lang ug yawit.

[yanong_banikanhon]

wala man koy problema kung naay mga tinuohan nga dili parehas akoa. galing lang kay imo man ko gipasanginlan nga nag-una ug bugal-bugal sa uban. dili ra ba ko ingon ana. mao gyud nang kalain sa imo. mopatuyang lang ug yawit.

Nalimot na ka aning imong post, bay?

Last night, I dreamed I saw God. I was quite taken by surprise, but I wouldn't say it was a scary encounter. I was more surprised to find him in a mood for humor. So I said, "Excuse me, God. I thought you didn't exist." He winked at me and whispered, "I thought so, too, until I realized I was in your dream."

Why would you post that in a thread that only ask the posters' if they believe in GOD or not?

[JcBoY]

@hitch22

Ngutana lang ko dili diay ni bugal2 imoha? (in bold letters sentence)

That's what happens when you uphold evidence as the basis for support or refutation of scientific theories. There are lots of scientists who had posited competing theories/hypothesis in the past. We know they can't all be true. Now, what would be the ultimate arbiter of their truth or falsity? It's the scientific method and the weighing of evidence. AND THAT'S THE BEAUTY OF SCIENCE. In the competition of ideas, it's those theories that survive rigorous scrutiny and continuous testing (as new technologies arise) that are assigned the best approximation of the phenomena they attempt to explain. And most importantly, every theory must be FALSIFIABLE...that's why the supernatural is never part of the scientific theories.

Religion has none of these. Even if several things in a holy book are falsified, it's the person reading it who's wrong.

[yanong_banikanhon]

It's clear to me that you didn't even extend me the decency to understand that post where I elaborated in as short and simple a manner as possible about the scientific accounts of evolution, DNA, abiogenesis, and various natural phenomena.

There is no need to elaborate. Nagtuo man gud ka nga ikaw ra ang dunay capacity pagsabot anang mga accounts sa evolution ug abiogenesis. Nagmonitor sad ming mga theists sa mga kalamboan anang mga butanga, bay. Mao ganing straight kaayo ang akong pangutana kay akong gi-assume nga pareha tang duha nakabalo sa current development anang maong mga subject.

because the bottom line of your line of questioning boils down to:CAN YOU EXPLAIN THESE COMPLEXITIES FROM THE SCIENTIFIC POINT OF VIEW?

No, that is not my question. Don't try to divert the topic. My questions are very specific and straight forward.

1. Do you have a verifiable scientific evidence nga gawas sa usa ka conscious mind, there is another thing that exists in nature that is capable of producing a sophisticated language ?
   
   
2. Do you have a verifiable scientific evidence that the thing mentioned in point no. 1 is the origin of the genetic language ?

You still have to answer them in an honest, objective and straight forward manner.