Octopuses are Aliens

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(08-26-2015, 03:07 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: Keep on keepin' on.

I've said this before and I'll say it again.  You can not prove the existence of god anymore than I can prove the non-existence of god.

It really is a silly argument.  You either have faith or you don't.  All this disagreement over which religion to believe in is ridiculous.

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-26-2015, 12:09 PM)GMDino Wrote: I am of the opinion that " more information = a better understanding and ability to come to a conclusion" that it wasn't magic or a god but rather that there is still a lot to learn and the more we learn the less we need a divine reason for it.

"Divine reason" with an emphasis on reason, shouldnt be part of the discussion. The discussion is simply, does the evidence point towards random or design?

People need to stop getting so hung up on "magic". it adds nothing.

"Theres still a lot to learn" isnt in dispute, but its a convenient excuse to use in the face of evidence that does, in fact, point towards the beginning of an answer. Even if the answer is still unable to answer a bigger qestion.

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-26-2015, 12:20 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: How you came to any of that conclusion based on my post is:

1.  interesting
2.  telling
3.  I don't have a three...I just feel lists should be in threes.

That being said, it is without a doubt that what you have written above is a prime example of what is inherently wrong with most of the debates in this forum.  I abhorrently despise this assumption without evidence that the majority of posters layout here as if you have quantified any and all of my beliefs on the topic through a response to a 3 word post.

Further more, it is disingenuous of you to go  beyond the post I responded to in order to further whatever narrative you subscribe to.  You know exactly what I was making light of.  I have more respect for you that your have shown me in the above abortion of an attempt to TommyGA9 me with false assumptions. 

Now that that has been taken care of..............






































































Bite me.   :blush:

No conclusion, homie. Thats why i threw a question mark in there. To try and draw out your thoughts on the topic. 

Im with you on drawing assumptions from a post, so ill leave you with this...









































*bites*. 

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-26-2015, 12:27 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: I've said this before and I'll say it again.  You can not prove the existence of god anymore than I can prove the non-existence of god.

It really is a silly argument.  You either have faith or you don't.  All this disagreement over which religion to believe in is ridiculous.

None of that is what any of this is about. 

"Fine-tuning"; random or design?

[*PhilHos*]

(08-25-2015, 12:17 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Need to see the calculations on this also.

It's been awhile and I don't recall which articles and books I read that mentioned this. I tried a quick google search and couldn't find them (it was a QUICK search, admittedly), but IIRC, the odds were something like 1 in 10 to the 400th power (it may have been higher) which qualifies as a statistical impossibility.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(08-26-2015, 12:38 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: None of that is what any of this is about. 

"Fine-tuning"; random or design?

You were discussing whether the universe was random or by design (by a god).  Am I correct?

[*bfine32*]

(08-26-2015, 12:20 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: I have more respect for you that your have shown me in the above abortion of an attempt to TommyGA9 me with false assumptions. 

SteelCitySouth Wrote:LOL...too ironic.

Agreed

[SteelCitySouth]

(08-26-2015, 12:43 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Agreed

LOL...You don't understand our relationship and why that is a typical post.  I would expect it from him as well and not think twice.

Edit: Forgot to add. Keep on keep'n on....

Edit again: Forgot to mention...most of what I posted had no value at all, as I'm sure he knows. Primarily only two words had meaning of which he responded to.

Edit: I swear it's my last.: LOL.

Edit: So I lied. I want to clear up what I mean by relationship. What I mean is that some times we kiss a bit.

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

rfaulk, I have to go, but I'll try to get to this later.

[GMDino]

(08-26-2015, 12:30 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: "Divine reason" with an emphasis on reason, shouldnt be part of the discussion. The discussion is simply, does the evidence point towards random or design?

People need to stop getting so hung up on "magic". it adds nothing.

"Theres still a lot to learn" isnt in dispute, but its a convenient excuse to use in the face of evidence that does, in fact, point towards the beginning of an answer. Even if the answer is still unable to answer a bigger qestion.

The evidence points toward random...and continues to point toward that.

"Magic" is no worse than "god" or "back of a turtle"...there's just as much evidence for all three.

You will see every step toward understanding as somehow meaning that since we understand how things worked together it must have been set up by design while ignoring that none of the evidence says that at all.

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-26-2015, 12:42 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: You were discussing whether the universe was random or by design (by a god).  Am I correct?

I originally said that there was much more of a statistical probability for ID than there was for it being random.

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-26-2015, 12:47 PM)SteelCitySouth Wrote: LOL...You don't understand our relationship and why that is a typical post.  I would expect it from him as well and not think twice.

Edit:  Forgot to add.  Keep on keep'n on....

Edit again:  Forgot to mention...most of what I posted had no value at all, as I'm sure he knows.  Primarily only two words had meaning of which he responded to.

Edit: I swear it's my last.:  LOL.

Edit: So I lied.  I want to clear up what I mean by relationship.  What I mean is that some times we kiss a bit.

That was 4 edits, not 3. Youre slippin, old man.

[SteelCitySouth]

(08-26-2015, 03:04 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: That was 4 edits, not 3. Youre slippin, old man.

IT"S NOT A LIST!!!!!

[RICHMONDBENGAL_07]

(08-26-2015, 03:03 PM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I originally said that there was much more of a statistical probability for ID than there was for it being random.

So you were discussing whether the universe is random or by design (god/ID).  Therefore my statement is true, you can not prove that the universe is by design any more than I could prove that it's random.  Statistical probability does not = proof.

So yea I'd say my previous post was on topic.  You can not prove that there is a god any more than I can prove that there is not.  I don't have a problem with religion and people who believe.  But it does bug me when religious people try to use science to "prove" that there is a god or "ID".  

[GMDino]

The octopus is just made in his image and we can explain everything at once.

[Belsnickel]

Y'all are weird.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(08-26-2015, 01:19 AM)rfaulk34 Wrote: I'm not following this line of thought.

The main point is cancer was designed along with everything else.  Cancer was designed (by a loving god) in such a manner to prevent us from developing a "cure."

[XenoMorph]

(08-26-2015, 05:23 PM)GMDino Wrote: The octopus is just made in his image and we can explain everything at once.

are you getting octopus confused with with Great Flying Spagetti monster?



Pastafarians believe.

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-26-2015, 12:53 PM)GMDino Wrote: The evidence points toward random...and continues to point toward that.

To borrow a phrase, "show your work please."

[*rfaulk34*]

(08-26-2015, 05:13 PM)RICHMONDBENGAL_07 Wrote: So you were discussing whether the universe is random or by design (god/ID).  Therefore my statement is true, you can not prove that the universe is by design any more than I could prove that it's random.  Statistical probability does not = proof.

So yea I'd say my previous post was on topic.  You can not prove that there is a god any more than I can prove that there is not.  I don't have a problem with religion and people who believe.  But it does bug me when religious people try to use science to "prove" that there is a god or "ID".  

I never sais anything about "proof".