PhilStarbucksSilkySkills

He actually means read his books. Such as "The Demon Haunted World".

Sorry. I missed your point here.

As I know nothing about quantum physics, I cannot claim a belief in it. I can only say "I believe that the expert say this.......". Certain aspects of science can be described as factual (ie evolution, gravity, laws of motion etc etc) this is because of the evidence that supports these fields. Others less so because they do not have the same level of evidence. When I say that you do not have faith in science. I am talking about the scientific process. This scientific process has always demonstrably led mankind closer to the truth (ie describing reality) than anything else we have come up with. Ergo, we do not need faith in science as a process, because it has been demonstrated to work time and time again. If it didn't, most of the things you enjoy in your life (and take for granted) would not be there for you.

That is a poorly phrased question. How about "what created time?" or "How did time begin?" Looking for answers is great. The trouble is that some people make answers up like some kind of pacifier to help them get through the day. At the end of the day we either have a good idea about the origins of the cosmos or we don't. If we don't, then the answer is "we don't know, let's see if we can find out" or "I don't know and I don't care". It should never be "I don't know so I 'm going to make :censored: up".

You don't have "faith" in science Science is demonstrable. It works. It yields results.

Again. Go research the fossil record. You have been listening to creationist propaganda. Besides, as I just said, there is no split between humans and apes. We still ARE Apes. The evidence is irrefutable.

Sorry oafc, I disagree. That we can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. The scientific process only evaluates the evidence at hand. And science doesn't prove anything. Proof is a concept of mathematics or law. Not science

Let's suppose the answer was "I don't know" What's your point?

No there isn't. Go research the fossil record. Besides. We are STILL apes

I have no expectations beyond wanting people to answer questions honestly. Some people can be frustrating in that regard though. Anyway. Good debate. I'm off to the gym.

And I never suggested he did.

I'm not trying to drag him away from his belief, nor do I expect to. These things take time anyway (even if that was my goal) I'm merely fascinated by the thought processes that go on in the mind of the believer. With that I will always be driven to ask questions.

Well you didn't show science doing that at all. But regardless How do you decide what you believe exists before the evidence arrives, and what you don't believe exists?

There doesn't have to be. Very few people run around claiming there isn't one. And the ones that are, are being very silly. All any atheist has to do to win an argument is show that there is no good reason to believe in a god. Because that is all the atheist position is. There isn't any proof either that fairies don't exist, nor leprecauns, nor UFOs, nor the loch ness monster. Doesn't mean we are justified in believing in them.

You havent attempted to answer the key question once. Obviously because you are afraid of what the answer might be. I have restated it several times now. There's no way you havent understood it.

He had good reasons for believing we could fly eventually. He just couldn't finish the job. The idea was around. That's all. Its still required evidence to believe it to be true. These are poor examples. Just because someone has an idea and was spurred on by it does not mean they believed it on faith. There will be thousands of other people who attempted to prove things but failed. You don't get to hear about those. ------ And again you failed to answer the question. Please stop dodging it. Do you automatically believe something to exist until you prove it doesn't? Or do you require evidence for its existence first?

Which is why faith is ridiculous. You can believe any crazy claim with faith. It is the switching off of critical thinking

What is ironic about that statement? (except the word "proof" being a bit strong) I'd settle for decent evidence to believe in a deity. Alas, there's none I have encountered. The difference between Atheism and Theism (not religion - because there are actually "religious atheists") is that Atheists do not believe in a god. Thats it. Personally, whether science provides answers is irrelevant to the god question. If science knew nothing, there is still no reason to suppose a god exists. I am an atheist for the same reason that I don't believe in Astrology, Homeopathy, Big Foot or Pixies. I have yet to be convinced that they exist. I am a skeptic first and foremost. My atheism is a natural result of that skeptism. p.s. Some people don't believe in a god for stupid reasons too, like "I don't believe in a god because there's too much suffering in the world" or "I don't believe in a god because I don't like religion". These are not skeptical atheists.

Jeezuz, you are impossible. Always dodging the question. Do you believe that you should believe something until proven false? Is this your opinion or not?

You are making the claim that a god exists are you not? And you invited us to: "Prove there is no god and I will stop being religious" Your mindet appears to be that you will believe in something until proven false. And I have pointed out how fallacious an ideology that is.

You appear to be confused about the burden of proof oafc. This is what your argument sounds like to a rational mind: "Prove that fairies don't exist and i'll stop believing they do"

Never claimed you did. I can see now why you feel misrepresented as a christian if you jump to conclusions so easily. Drawing a cartoon is being extremist??? Give me a break!

I've noticed this in theist debates too. In debate and argument circles its called a red herring. They never can seem to stick to the subject at hand. They like to trick you into arguing a position that bears little relevance to the point being made. e.g. getting you to defending evolution when you are talking about proof for a god

It's probably coincidence

Why? Who else is there?