|
Walter1496211
Window Washer



Registered: 09/09/07
Posts: 639
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
|
Re: I want proof.. [Re: Nobodhi]
#7526304 - 10/17/07 12:39 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Nobodhi said: you say that God and Jesus exist. but how are we supposed to know what you mean by those words? they are merely words to me. what is it that exists, your conception of god, the whole of existence, a man in the clouds, what is it?
It was an example go back and read it don't wast my time.
-------------------- you see the world through the window of your experience
|
Nobodhi
aka.onlynow



Registered: 10/15/07
Posts: 50
Last seen: 16 years, 3 months
|
Re: I want proof.. [Re: Nobodhi]
#7526311 - 10/17/07 12:42 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
yes and i am telling you why people ask you for proof, since you clearly stated:
DONT ASK ME FOR PROOF AND I WONT ASK YOU.
|
Walter1496211
Window Washer



Registered: 09/09/07
Posts: 639
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
|
Re: I want proof.. [Re: Nobodhi]
#7526325 - 10/17/07 12:46 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Nobodhi said: yes and i am telling you why people ask you for proof, since you clearly stated:
DONT ASK ME FOR PROOF AND I WONT ASK YOU.
And I am saying consider my words take them in think about them if they move you then so be it if not move on. But don't F-ing ask me to prove it. I don't care if you believe its your choice. Its everyones choice. People will say over and over again I don't want to go to heavean because i don't believe in God good. See if I care.
-------------------- you see the world through the window of your experience
|
Nobodhi
aka.onlynow



Registered: 10/15/07
Posts: 50
Last seen: 16 years, 3 months
|
|
it's a shame because people are always gonna ask you to prove it so you might as well accept it and find a way to move through if it annoys you so much.
|
FocusHawaii
Keeper of theMagic Garden

Registered: 12/27/02
Posts: 1,013
Loc: Canada
Last seen: 12 years, 5 months
|
Re: I want proof.. [Re: Nobodhi]
#7526469 - 10/17/07 02:06 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
|
TheCow
Stranger

Registered: 10/28/02
Posts: 4,790
Last seen: 15 years, 6 months
|
|
Alright lets ignore definitive proof's then. However let's consider evidence one way or the other. Pile up all of your evidence for Jesus and God, and Ill pile up my evidence for atoms existing. Lets compare the size of our piles, hm yours feels kind of slim there. And if what you say is true, that there is a God and Jesus, then that means reality does exist with subjective opinions as in Christian doctrine we are all individuals. So based off your opinions you know as fact that I exist so I do not see your point. And then furthermore because God made everything in the universe and made it knowable and real for me to experience with my senses, and gave me a consciousness I should then be able to determine things about the nature of this universe. Therefore all the experiments that I have done to show atoms are real, are thus valid and have to be accepted by you.
However if you are wrong and there is no God or Jesus then we are back in a world with no definitives and thus the only course of action is to merely gather data. And at that point the side for atoms existing vs. not existing is heavily weighted in the first direction. See even if we are brains in a jar, logic will still hold. And so saying that because we can't definitively prove atoms exist, does not give free reign for anything else to be as real as atoms. You have forgotten logic, and evidence vs. non evidence of something existing. Even if a demon is controlling us, then we are in his world and whatever we see is as real as can be, and is thus defined as real. Therefore even still, any experiments we do, even if he changes the outcomes, are still valid and thus still carry more logical weight then a baseless statement about a book written 2000 years ago.
|
Walter1496211
Window Washer



Registered: 09/09/07
Posts: 639
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
|
Re: I want proof.. [Re: TheCow]
#7526633 - 10/17/07 04:19 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
TheCow said: Alright lets ignore definitive proof's then. However let's consider evidence one way or the other. Pile up all of your evidence for Jesus and God, and Ill pile up my evidence for atoms existing. Lets compare the size of our piles, hm yours feels kind of slim there. And if what you say is true, that there is a God and Jesus, then that means reality does exist with subjective opinions as in Christian doctrine we are all individuals. So based off your opinions you know as fact that I exist so I do not see your point. And then furthermore because God made everything in the universe and made it knowable and real for me to experience with my senses, and gave me a consciousness I should then be able to determine things about the nature of this universe. Therefore all the experiments that I have done to show atoms are real, are thus valid and have to be accepted by you.
However if you are wrong and there is no God or Jesus then we are back in a world with no definitives and thus the only course of action is to merely gather data. And at that point the side for atoms existing vs. not existing is heavily weighted in the first direction. See even if we are brains in a jar, logic will still hold. And so saying that because we can't definitively prove atoms exist, does not give free reign for anything else to be as real as atoms. You have forgotten logic, and evidence vs. non evidence of something existing. Even if a demon is controlling us, then we are in his world and whatever we see is as real as can be, and is thus defined as real. Therefore even still, any experiments we do, even if he changes the outcomes, are still valid and thus still carry more logical weight then a baseless statement about a book written 2000 years ago.
You lost me in your first sentance I don't care about your paragraph drawn from opinion if you can't offer me proof then what you have to say is relative. What you have learned is relative. And by what means you have come to that understanding is relative I want proof.. if you cannot offer it don't try and dance around the subject.
-------------------- you see the world through the window of your experience
|
Walter1496211
Window Washer



Registered: 09/09/07
Posts: 639
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
|
|
Quote:
FocusHawaii said: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geiger-Marsden_experiment
A personal friend of mine spent an entire six hours of his life falsifying information on wikipedia not a very good source IMO.
-------------------- you see the world through the window of your experience
|
TheCow
Stranger

Registered: 10/28/02
Posts: 4,790
Last seen: 15 years, 6 months
|
|
Quote:
Walter1496211 said:
Quote:
TheCow said: Alright lets ignore definitive proof's then. However let's consider evidence one way or the other. Pile up all of your evidence for Jesus and God, and Ill pile up my evidence for atoms existing. Lets compare the size of our piles, hm yours feels kind of slim there. And if what you say is true, that there is a God and Jesus, then that means reality does exist with subjective opinions as in Christian doctrine we are all individuals. So based off your opinions you know as fact that I exist so I do not see your point. And then furthermore because God made everything in the universe and made it knowable and real for me to experience with my senses, and gave me a consciousness I should then be able to determine things about the nature of this universe. Therefore all the experiments that I have done to show atoms are real, are thus valid and have to be accepted by you.
However if you are wrong and there is no God or Jesus then we are back in a world with no definitives and thus the only course of action is to merely gather data. And at that point the side for atoms existing vs. not existing is heavily weighted in the first direction. See even if we are brains in a jar, logic will still hold. And so saying that because we can't definitively prove atoms exist, does not give free reign for anything else to be as real as atoms. You have forgotten logic, and evidence vs. non evidence of something existing. Even if a demon is controlling us, then we are in his world and whatever we see is as real as can be, and is thus defined as real. Therefore even still, any experiments we do, even if he changes the outcomes, are still valid and thus still carry more logical weight then a baseless statement about a book written 2000 years ago.
You lost me in your first sentance I don't care about your paragraph drawn from opinion if you can't offer me proof then what you have to say is relative. What you have learned is relative. And by what means you have come to that understanding is relative I want proof.. if you cannot offer it don't try and dance around the subject.
|
Walter1496211
Window Washer



Registered: 09/09/07
Posts: 639
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
|
Re: I want proof.. [Re: TheCow]
#7526642 - 10/17/07 04:27 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
My point exactly.
-------------------- you see the world through the window of your experience
|
TheCow
Stranger

Registered: 10/28/02
Posts: 4,790
Last seen: 15 years, 6 months
|
|
I know your point. Just be thankful though, that people like me still want to further science. I mean what would you do all day? Certainly not sit in front of your computer. No need to thank scientists though, your using our products is already endorsement of us enough.
|
Walter1496211
Window Washer



Registered: 09/09/07
Posts: 639
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
|
Re: I want proof.. [Re: TheCow]
#7526650 - 10/17/07 04:37 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Very well.. A shot? A beer? A shroom?
-------------------- you see the world through the window of your experience
|
TheCow
Stranger

Registered: 10/28/02
Posts: 4,790
Last seen: 15 years, 6 months
|
|
|
Walter1496211
Window Washer



Registered: 09/09/07
Posts: 639
Last seen: 16 years, 1 month
|
Re: I want proof.. [Re: TheCow]
#7526653 - 10/17/07 04:41 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
-------------------- you see the world through the window of your experience
|
elcharrosays
Stranger



Registered: 08/25/07
Posts: 1,503
Loc: south east
Last seen: 13 years, 5 months
|
Re: I want proof.. [Re: Nobodhi]
#7526906 - 10/17/07 08:30 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
see the problem here is that you keep throwing jesus and god into this whole thing and nobody really gives a shit about them because that conversation has been done more times than jenna jameson. philosophy and science were a whole lot more interesting.
and seriously dude. are you kidding me? your point is telling people not to ask for proof? do you remember how this thread started? do you see what the thread is called?! nobody has asked you for proof in anything in fact its been primarily the other way around.
--------------------
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
|
Go to school. I'm not going to waste my time explaining all these elementary questions.
|
OrgoneConclusion
Blue Fish Group



Registered: 04/01/07
Posts: 45,414
Loc: Under the C
|
Re: I want proof.. [Re: TheCow]
#7527075 - 10/17/07 10:04 AM (16 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
See even if we are brains in a jar,
Vat, dude! I prefer vat. It sounds more sci-fi and sinister and laboratory-like.
--------------------
|
NiamhNyx
I'm NOT a 'he'



Registered: 09/01/02
Posts: 3,198
Last seen: 14 years, 8 months
|
|
Walter, your point is weak and you have yet to respond to my post, which is much more relevant then most of the garbage you've repeated over and over and over again. If you want a dialogue, then dialogue for christ sake.
|
fireworks_god
Sexy.Butt.McDanger



Registered: 03/12/02
Posts: 24,855
Loc: Pandurn
Last seen: 1 year, 12 days
|
|
Quote:
Walter1496211 said: A personal friend of mine spent an entire six hours of his life falsifying information on wikipedia not a very good source IMO.
If that is the entirety of what your opinion on wikipedia is based upon, I'd have to state that your opinion isn't resting upon a good foundation. The content editing system makes it so that changed information is reviewed, and there are clearly a lot of dedicated individuals, much much more so than people like your personal friend, who ensure that information is accurate. In fact, I've read that scientific studies have determined that Wikipedia is more accurate than online versions of encyclopedias.
As with any source, it is to be taken as one perspective, and further research is advisable, but clearly Wikipedia is a great resource.
--------------------
If I should die this very moment I wouldn't fear For I've never known completeness Like being here Wrapped in the warmth of you Loving every breath of you
|
MushmanTheManic
Stranger

Registered: 04/21/05
Posts: 4,587
|
|
Quote:
fireworks_god said:
Quote:
Walter1496211 said: A personal friend of mine spent an entire six hours of his life falsifying information on wikipedia not a very good source IMO.
If that is the entirety of what your opinion on wikipedia is based upon, I'd have to state that your opinion isn't resting upon a good foundation. The content editing system makes it so that changed information is reviewed, and there are clearly a lot of dedicated individuals, much much more so than people like your personal friend, who ensure that information is accurate. In fact, I've read that scientific studies have determined that Wikipedia is more accurate than online versions of encyclopedias.
As with any source, it is to be taken as one perspective, and further research is advisable, but clearly Wikipedia is a great resource.
Nature.org conducted a study that concluded Wikipedia was slightly less accurate than the Encyclopedia Britannica. (Wikipedia had around 160 errors, the Encyclopedia Britannica contained about 135.)
That study was back in 2005, though. I'm sure wikipedia has become much more accurate since then.
|
|