djack

Not really. They are crazed by religion. They already know it's true due to mom and dad beating it into their heads when they were children.
When you start off with your results you investigation will almost always prove it. At least to you.
The size of the earth isn't perfect. It just happens to be the right size.
Of all the billions of planets we know nothing about I'd bet there are a good many that are the 'perfect' size to have an atmosphere.
I once saw a video of some religious zealot trying to prove the existence of god with a banana. It's perfect wouldn't you know.

If you don't believe me

Bananas, proof that God exists

__________________

Comicsartist

Just watched, and while it might be nice to think that is proof, they still don't offer anything concrete. It could very well be that bananas were made for monkeys and we want to claim it for our own

But the question is, and I know this is going to bring the noise (which is somewhat what I want) but how do we know it's not true? Trust me, I'm not saying it is, but how do we know it's not? I completely agree that it sounds waaaaaaay out there, but what does science say to refute this guys claim? CAN science refute this claim? And if it does, isn't there a certain responsibility to present the data to the person making the claim?

(This is all assuming this guy is for real. At the end of the vid it says "for more crazy videos go to". )

Damn. This is a fine line to walk. Trying not to piss off anyone on either side, that is.

__________________

Heretic

Religions like Christianity have it as a cornerstone to proselytize. So when you get all of one or a few demographics into the fold you work on those who weren't interesting in your prior deliveries of the message. in a sense they're not aiming for people who don't fct check, rather those whose psychology is roughly parallel to their theology.

Science has nothing to say on this, because there's no data, no test therum to calculate the likelihood and no repeatable experiment to be performed. This is something I keep pointing out to the religious and atheists alike. That science doesn't deal in god, because that requires some form of data or mathematics to operate within.

__________________
"Enough!!" -so rang Barack Obama's voice off the walls of Mile High Stadium

Titanium Cat

Not only that but apparantly most humans peel bananas the wrong way like this guy describes, but monkeys have it right. Banana science is still an evolving field I guess.

You could also argue that the banana is nature's dildo. Was it god telling us to shove it?

Comicsartist

Might be right, lol. (Explains why this guy is dancing )

But the question still remains, if there is no way of knowing one way or the other if God does or does not exist, why can't the two extremes find common ground?

__________________

nroberts

What do I think? I think these are the same trivial arguments repeated ad-nauseum for the last several centuries. I've heard it all before.

1&2 - Argument from Design - it's all so complex that there must have been something even more complex to design it all. Well, that being the case, ... who designed the designer?

#3 can be chalked up to a lack of education and imagination. It could also be a purposeful misrepresentation of Darwinism but I'll not assume, for now, that they are actually being dishonest (though in many cases it turns out to be the case). It is true that DNA can't have just appeared from nothing. Nor that things just happen and appear like they do now. But Darwinism simply doesn't say this. It explains how things start simply and progressively, through much time, become more and more complex and ordered.

#4 - see "The Dragon in my Garage" by Carl Sagan: http://www.godlessgeeks.com/LINKS/Dragon.htm

#5 is just circular arguing with some arrogance mixed in. "It happened to me, or at least I thought it did, therefore it happens to everyone."

#6 is just, "Jesus had some cool stuff to say, therefor God." However, it wasn't that original and there are a LOT of people who say some really great and wonderful things, things I would argue are more impressive and enlightening than what Jesus said. Additionally it just assumes that what is said to have happened actually did, namely miracles and other such. Only one source for those claims exists.


It's a bunch of tripe. No proofs here. It's interesting that people claim that you must just accept God on faith but then repeatedly attempt to "prove" his existence. They claim that science and reason cannot investigate God but then turn around and attempt to use reason, though poorly so, to then prove that God is real. As Dennett says, if you want the net of reason dropped, then you don't get to bring it back when things stop making any sense nor to then prove your point.

Comicsartist

The same goes for Jesus too, basically. Whether or not He was divine isn't my point here, but we all know history can be and IS full of holes, so definitive proof for or against the existence of Jesus seems unlikely to be presented either.

__________________

Comicsartist

Read the rest of the posts before you go apeshit, please. Thanks.

__________________

nroberts

PEANUT BUTTER!!!

nroberts

That's your version of starting over is it? Ok.