Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 181 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 137
C
Senior Member
OP Offline
Senior Member
C
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 137
DA and I are having a bit of a disagreement on another post and I wanted to post this here instead of hijacking the other thread more.

So, as a person who has graduated massage school and intends to become a therapist I have seen first hand as well as heard from instructors who are nurses and chiropractors how non-Western medicine can help conditions that Western medicine seems to only prescribe drugs for. Now I know the first thing out of DA's mouth will be where are the studies and I will provide them. One has to realize however that we are still working on getting massage viewed as a medical treatment so most medical professionals do like to do studies so I will provide information that is first or second hand experiences.

Multiple Sclerosis - my sister and one of my mom's friends has it. Both of them have completely stopped taking steroids and attend reflexology sessions. Why? In both situations the steroids did nothing to relieve symptoms or improve their conditions whereas the reflexology made the pain stopped and enable them to use the affected limbs much better then they had in years. My sister walks much better after reflexology for several days and her legs are not as stiff and useless. My mom's friend has been unable to use her arm due to pain. She went to reflexology and is using her arm in a normal manner now and has much less pain.

My teacher in massage school who was a nurse spoke of using massage to cure what the client had been told by doctor's was carpal tunnel. It was actually tense muscles in the pectoral area that once they were relaxed the pain and discomfort stopped. I can provide hundreds of examples but what I am curious about is if the people of science here see this profession and what it can do as scientific or not.

The reason I am curious is in trying to discuss some things with DA she kept mentioning people suffering in ignorance. Most if not all the knowledge we learned in school was based on oriental and other ancient knowledge that for a long time was disavowed as useless by the Western Medical community. Slowly that same community is realizing that these things are sometimes better treatments then what is available now.

Just a question for the posters.

With regards,

Chaoslillith

.
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Chaos wrote:
"So, as a person who has graduated massage school and intends to become a therapist I have seen first hand as well as heard from instructors who are nurses and chiropractors how non-Western medicine can help conditions that Western medicine seems to only prescribe drugs for."

What you have seen first hand is meaningless: Totally lacking in merit. And I say that as someone whose wife went to the University of Miami, received a Masters Degree in Physical Therapy, and received training in massage at a level you likely can not comprehend.

What matters is whether a statistically valid sample, in a double-blind situation, reaches the conclusion. Does massage have value? Absolutely.
Is it capable of doing the things you ascribe to it? No. Does massage have anything to do with the other nonsense you brought up like astral projection? No.

What you have done is hitch your wagon to the woo-woo, feel-good, thinking logically hurts my head, nut-case bunch. Where some things of real value are illogically connected to complete nonsense. Drawing an equals sign between massage and western-medicine and then drawing a conclusion is pure nonsense.

You have been taken in ... and a smart person would start trying to separate the wheat from the chaff.


DA Morgan
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 137
C
Senior Member
OP Offline
Senior Member
C
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 137
There is a great deal of "woo-woo" in massage that I dislike.

However, I ahte to tell you that I have seen many a western medical double blind test go awry, where all they were testing was a certain response and neglected to pay attention to the whole picture of side effects, symptoms and reactions to other medications until it was too late.

Science is not always all it is cracked up to be either and as a scientific person you should realize that there are other alternatives to drugs and Western medicine that are just as effective with less harm.

Yes, mssage has nothing to do with astral projection hence why I started a new thread about it.

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Dan - Chaoslillith called you a girl:

"The reason I am curious is in trying to discuss some things with DA she kept mentioning people suffering in ignorance."

Are you just going to sit there and take that?

Blacknad.

Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 137
C
Senior Member
OP Offline
Senior Member
C
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 137
Oh no, I am done in now!!

Sorry DA, I thought it stood for District Attorney Morgan and although Morgan can be either a male or female name and it could also be a last name it just struck me as female.

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Well I do have my feminine side Blacknad but Chaos certainly must hang around with some interesting women if they come off on his nonsense statements like Dick Cheney at a friend's house (with both barrels).


DA Morgan
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Dan, a feminine side? You mean like Joan Rivers? smile

Blacknad.

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
In response to:
"The reason I am curious is in trying to discuss some things with DA she kept mentioning people suffering in ignorance."

Blacknad asks:
Are you just going to sit there and take that?

Of course not. But I pick my battles. Far more carefully with a woman. ;-)

Does Jan Rivers have a feminine side? I find her about as obnoxious a human being as I've ever seen. Which likely explains part of why I almost never watch television. Count me among the few that have never once watched a single "reality" show and never once watched an episode of Seinfeld.


DA Morgan
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 137
C
Senior Member
OP Offline
Senior Member
C
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 137
DA,
Smart man. You can battle with me as I am sure that, although, I am not completely unarmed in a battle of wits with you, my weapons are not nearly as sharp.

The only "reality" show I watch is "It takes a Thief" on Discovery channel. It is quite fun to watch someone break into houses to teach people about security. If one considers Animal Planet reality TV I guess I am addicted to it.

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
With apologies ... that which is gently curved is often far more dangerous than that which is sharply pointed.


DA Morgan
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Would you like us all to leave you two alone? smile
Blacknad.

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
I don't think that will be necessary. Though it seems you went out of your way to introduce us.

Try to distract me from the challeng that you explain why a deity would create smallpox and polio except to bring misery and suffering.

And, note I said "and" why that very same deity would invent penicillin and then hide it.

That shoud redirect your attentions while I pull out my scuba tank and buy a ticket to Hawaii.


DA Morgan
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Dan,

I just don't see that we can have a dialogue on this subject.

You have challenged me, and I have spent the last few months thinking very thoroughly about what you have posted.

I will be honest and admit that I am forced to take the ignominious position of saying that there is no proof for God and believing his existence is not without problems - but I have personal experience that I cannot deny and you cannot accept. I am left in the weak position of saying that there is enough for the believer and the rest is down to us not having enough information (that's the ignominious part) about why God has acted in such ways and even created a universe that is difficult for his creation to accept.

I am in a difficult position - Amaranth reads many of these posts and I have a little understanding about her life experience so it is very easy to sound flippant & insensitive when talking about suffering. Then there is your experience and that of your wife that I have only just learnt about (to which I don't know what to say - 'I am sorry' sounds as pathetic as most things in the face of such). So it is easy to sound monstrous when abstractly talking about suffering.

I believe that God allows us the freedom to live life without reference to him, and that is why the proof is not substantive, but enough for millions through history. I also believe his promise to restore things and to act fairly towards those who have suffered including those that he has forcefully taken out of this life for one reason or another.

God is not a teddy bear who goes around stroking our delicate egos - he punishes sin and judges people and nations when they act in destructive ways. It is clear that the kind of groups that God took out in the OT were depraved or thereabouts. The worship of Moloch was much prevalent and this would entail practices like sacrificing children to the fire. Sodom was a place of degenerate disorder where visitors were, from what we understand, taken from houses and gang-banged. Scripture tells us that when humanity reaches these depths it is like a cancer that ravages and God simply acts to eradicate it, and that includes the people that cling to that behaviour.

We don't like it, and find it abhorent - but I accept it.

The whole philosophical idea about why would a good god create people and a universe where such horror exists, is simply where we part intellectual company (as if we hadn't before this point).

I firmly believe that there is no other way to create sentient creatures. When the scripture says that everything is possible with god, it is not a scientific statement. It means that everything that is reasonable is possible. It is not reasonable for god to exist and yet not exist ? so some things are clearly illogical and not attainable even for god. I think that creating sentient people that are not inherently self-seeking is of this nature. The world was probably always going to end up this way, but God has a plan for those who will accept his ways.

That?s why the message of Christ is so central. It was all about looking beyond our own needs. 2000 years later we are seeing the ultimate price that is paid when humanity ignores the message (and that includes most Christians). We will end up destroying the environment because even now we can?t go without our luxuries, and there are still people around who ignore the coming disaster and try to deny global warming is a reality, so they can live unhindered.

And while you rubbished what happened in Wales, it was an example, for a time, of what happens when people in great numbers experience real conversion and start dying to their own needs. There is enough on the net about it. Crime virtually disappeared. Alcoholics gave up the bottle. There are reports of previous hardened men becoming sensitive to their wives and children for perhaps the first time. You make one thing of this experience ? I make another. And never, it seems, the twain shall meet.

It does not present a problem for me that this is such a universe that spawns polio, or that sometimes I suffer with excruciating back pain, or that I spent my childhood in constant pain and terror at the hands of maniac step-father. I just have no philosophical objection to it. I don?t for one moment believe that God sat down to ?invent? polio so that he could have his fun with us. I do believe that he created a universe that these things could appear in as a natural part of evolution and we have a choice to reject him or believe that he will eventually restore all things, once we have made an INFORMED choice to be with him, or decided that it is not what we want. I find it useless to rail against it and demand our rights or say we refuse to believe in a God that operates in a way we don?t like. God is not Mother Teresa - he does not have that luxury - he has another job to do.

So, to you, I have just written a load of old crock. To me it makes sense.

So continue bashing the idea of God, or the religious, with my blessing. I have no objection to it. In fact despite our differences I have come to have a real respect for you and dare I say it, actually (through what you write) find you very likeable.

I also wish you the best with Chaoslillith.

I will now await the usual barrage where you make me look stupid smile

Regards,

Blacknad.

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Come on. I know the beating is coming. Do what you have to do quickly, and put me out of my misery.

Blacknad.

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Look - I can't handle any more waiting. The threat of the post is often worse than the actual post.

Blacknad.

Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Ah, I see Chaoslillith has a vote. I wonder who voted for her (was it a certain person that another certain person mistakenly thought to be a District Attorney?) - and rather an appreciative vote as well. laugh

Maybe I can form a plan to distract you with her after all, and then get away with posting any old rubbish I want.

I think she likes you.

Now I just need to PM her that I think Dan likes her, and my masterplan will be almost complete and Scienceagogo will be mine - all mine do you hear me. Bwah ha ha.

Blacknad.

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Ok I guess you've suffered enough.

Blacknad wrote:
"I will be honest and admit that I am forced to take the ignominious position of saying that there is no proof for God and believing his existence is not without problems"

One point to you for integrity.

Blacknad wrote:
"why God has acted in such ways and even created a universe that is difficult for his creation to accept."

An absolutely fascinating issue. If you, as a deity, wish those you created to worship you than you would create creatures that had that as an instinct. One does not need to learn how to digest food. One does not need to learn how to turn oxygen into carbon dioxide. One does not need to learn how to remove liquid and solid wastes from their body. These abilities are built into the mechanics of the system. Yet a thinking sentient deity created people who, the more analytical they are, the more they doubt the deity's existance. It is purely illogical.

Blacknad wrote:
"So it is easy to sound monstrous when abstractly talking about suffering."

Death out lot. None of us will get out of here any other way.

She just got their before me. But the point is that if one were to take religious scripture as a guide. There is no way she should have preceded me. Not by any measure imaginable other than a malicious god.

Blacknad wrote:
"I also believe his promise to restore things and to act fairly towards those who have suffered"

But, if you believe in him, you must acknowledge that he is the sole cause of the suffering. It is hypocritical to say "I will set things right that I screwed up ... whenever."

Blacknad wrote:
"God is not a teddy bear who goes around stroking our delicate egos"

His ego is far more fragile than mine. I don't care whether he believes I exist. I don't demand to be worshipped.

Blacknad wrote:
"he punishes sin and judges people and nations when they act in destructive ways."

Stop right there. Now you've done it. He punished Hitler how? He rewarded Anne Franke how? You sound like Pat Robertson at his most demented? Was New Orleans drowned for the sin of Madonna having been born there? Are California's earthquakes the result of having gays in San Francisco? Is Allah, well Yahweh really, going to smite the Palestinians for the Israelis? When?

A quick break for a line from Bob Dylan:
"If god's on our side he can stop the next war."

Blacknad wrote:
"and God simply acts to eradicate it"

Wholesale manure. He eradicated nothing. People did. People stopped Hitler. People discovered penicillin. People suffer through chemotherapy to develop medical protocols. And prevention? Doesn't that count for anything? Why is this all-powerful entity incapable of preventing anything? Lets start with bird flu.

Blacknad wrote:
"We don't like it, and find it abhorent - but I accept it."

Just like that? Just a shrug of your shoulders and you accept polio crippling innocent children? Just a shrug of your shoulders and you think a loving deity should be able to create penicillin but hide it from us?

Blacknad wrote:
"I firmly believe that there is no other way to create sentient creatures."

I firmly believe there are many examples of other sentient creatures on this planet that don't behave this way. The difference here is that you are engaged in idle speculation and I can point you to specific examples such as cetaceans and other primate species.

And even were one to accept your statement, ignoring the physical reality in which you live, that does not even come close to explaining why a god would invent syphilis, curable by penicillin, much less then hide the penicillin. Or is that

Blacknad wrote:
"When the scripture says that everything is possible with god, it is not a scientific statement."

Then it is a lie? If it is not the truth it is a lie. You are trying to so very very hard to justify your conclusion I am beginning to feel your pain. That's not a statement of sympathy. Just an acknowledgement that I understand what you are going through and I don't believe you are really convinced of your own argument. For example your very next sentence.

Blacknad wrote:
"It means that everything that is reasonable is possible."

Reasonable defined by you or by god? You see how this argument falls apart instantly?

Blacknad wrote:
"It is not reasonable for god to exist and yet not exist so some things are clearly illogical and not attainable even for god."

So you say you weak minded human. Is Quantum Mechanics reasonable? Is it logical? Ah but it is proven to exist.

Blacknad wrote:
"That?s why the message of Christ is so central. It was all about looking beyond our own needs. 2000 years later we are seeing the ultimate price that is paid when humanity ignores the message."

Assume the worst. Assume an hour from now your daughter is struck by a bus. Would you seriously turn to your wife and say "Darling ... she paid the ultimate price for ignoring god's message to humanity?"

Because if you are not. And we both know the answer to that. Then you don't believe what you wrote.

Blacknad wrote:
"We will end up destroying the environment because even now we can?t go without our luxuries, and there are still people around who ignore the coming disaster and try to deny global warming is a reality, so they can live unhindered.'

So we humans will, for millions of years, pay the price for the act of a single human female? At no point in time, ever, will there be a second chance? I wouldn't treat a dog that way.

So here we are ... many thoughts from your mind, words from your keyboard, and yet strangely enough not a single acknowledgement that your god created polio or malaria or murdered innocent newborn children with wanton abandon or created satan or could stop all this suffering and chooses not to. Or even that he intentionally chose a bloody way, a crucifixion, to communicate with his creations and one which all will acknowledge was an abysmal failure. What say ye?

Personally, as I've indicated above, I think you are desparately clinging to scraps and don't truly believe your own arguments. You started out with integrity and then worked yourself up, paragraph by paragraph into a defense too shallow to ignore.

Blacknad wrote:
"I also wish you the best with Chaoslillith."

You presume much that is not in evidence. Likely I am as old as her father and not half as attractive.

Blacknad wrote:
"I will now await the usual barrage where you make me look stupid."

Me make you look stupid? With apologies for saying this ... you did a more than adequate job and do not require my help. But here's how you can dig your way out.

1. Go back and reread your third paragraph. The one that begins ... "I will be honest...." That is where the honesty seems to have ended.

2. Provide an explanation, logically consistent, for the creation of malaria, polio, and leukemia covering only the death of children under age two.

3. Provide an explanation, logically consistent, for why god created syphilis and then hid the cure, penicillin.


DA Morgan
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Dan wrote - "Provide an explanation, logically consistent, for the creation of malaria, polio, and leukemia covering only the death of children under age two."

and - "Provide an explanation, logically consistent, for why god created syphilis and then hid the cure, penicillin."

but Dan also wrote - "Is Quantum Mechanics reasonable? Is it logical? Ah but it is proven to exist."


- So we can accept QT though it is counter intuitive, but cannot accept God's actions because they seem illogical. Even though his interaction with humanity and reasons for acting as he does are far more complex and opaque.


Dan wrote - "So we humans will, for millions of years, pay the price for the act of a single human female? At no point in time, ever, will there be a second chance? I wouldn't treat a dog that way."

- We are not playing the price for one persons actions. The Bible is clear - all have gone their own way and we are all culpable. We are responsible for our own actions and Christ is the second chance you deny. It is hardly God's fault that you find that second chance to be too bloody and clumsy. It is hardly God's fault if you refuse to accept that the event is larger than just a couple of hours suffering on the cross. Like petulant children we say, "I won't have it that way - I'll have it on my terms or not at all." It is beyond belief that God is to blame for not making you in such a way that you would find him acceptable. You are simply exercising your choice, which you made at one point in your life and have since continued to rationalise it, to the point that everything you now see supports it. This is how you get Republicans and Democrats - Tories and New Labour. They see the same things and read them in entirely different ways. And the same event will support both sides because they filter it through their assumptions and world-view.

It is a type of self deception to say that we arrived here from the moment of the big bang by random processes. The fact that the mind can impose itself on the body and impose order upon the physical world is, I believe, nothing short of miraculous. The fact that we have concepts such as beauty, justice, selfless love, mercy etc. points to a transcendent truth greater than purely physical processes. The fact that we believe that some things are wrong and that we rail against it, and just don't sensibly accept that 'that's just the way it is' points to an external measure and standard. Why on earth should anyone ever feel that anything is unfair? That poetry can charm the soul of a man and bring one to tears or evoke feelings of such wonder, points to more than us being the sum total of chemical reactions obeying set laws.

The danger of atheism is that as you you have said elsewhere, 'we are nothing special'. Atheism relegates us to lumps of animated meat with no value. You have said, the universe couldn't care less.

Well I don't believe it.

The fact that you deny any of my preceding points is telling. You place too much faith in the anthropic universe and the journey from the primordial soup through to the selection of completely random genetic mutations to bring us to this point. To have somehow created creatures of such stunning complexity both physically and more important mentally is, to me, missing part of the picture. I accept evolution, but think there is more to it than you do. I can only think that the laws of this universe were set up in such a way that evolution would necessarily bring about humanity. We are no accident.

Blacknad.

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Blacknad wrote:
"- So we can accept QT though it is counter intuitive, but cannot accept God's actions because they seem illogical."

Wrong wrong wrong. I accept quantum mechanics because it does not require a deity to design it with sentient intent. I accept because it does not contain a value judgement. QM does not murder children. QM does not create diseases with conscious intent. QM does not hide cures with knowledge of their therapeutic value.

Finally I can choose to not believe in QM and it does not care. I am not threatened with eternal damnation and the flames of hell.

Counterintuitive has nothing to do with it. A good but weak attempt to make gold out of hay.

Blacknad wrote:
"We are not playing the price for one persons actions. The Bible is clear"

Wrong wrong wrong again. Only two were given the opportunity to be in Eden. Once they were cast out all of their offspring for all eternity were damned with them. Fair would be if all of us got an equal shot of doing it right. So would you care to reconsider your answer?

Blacknad wrote:
"It is a type of self deception to say that we arrived here from the moment of the big bang by random processes."

No more than it is to say that it is impossible for a symmetrical mound to form by dropping grains of sand onto a single spot. You are making an assumption based upon smoke and mirrors. You've nothing to support your contention other than a deep-seated desire that it not be true.

Blacknad wrote:
"The danger of atheism is that as you you have said elsewhere, 'we are nothing special'."

And in what way is that dangerous? In what way is not being special a curse? Our star is not special. It doesn't seem to have a problem with it. My cat isn't "special" yet he is purrrfectly contented. What is your personal demon that makes you desire such attention?

Blacknad wrote:
"Atheism relegates us to lumps of animated meat with no value."

So what? Seriously. So what? It is the truth and you need to deal with it. There is absolutely nothing wrong with a statement of objective fact. The value of my life is what I make of it. It does not come from some invisible purple rhinoceros writing an anonymous book that says ... do what I tell you to do and you will be special.

Blacknad wrote:
"Well I don't believe it."

Of course you don't. Or at least you are trying really hard not to look at it too objectively. But as Dostoevsky wrote:
"Nature doesn't consult you; it doesn't give a damn for your wishes or whether its laws please you or do not please you. You must accept it as it is."

And your refusal to do so will not change the nature of reality. All it does is inhibit you from accepting her as she really is and being all that you could be because you wish it to be so rather than because someone tells you it is what you should do.

Blacknad wrote:
"Icon 1 posted March 09, 2006 08:24 PM Profile for Blacknad Send New Private Message Edit/Delete Post Reply With Quote Dan wrote - "Provide an explanation, logically consistent, for the creation of malaria, polio, and leukemia covering only the death of children under age two."

and - "Provide an explanation, logically consistent, for why god created syphilis and then hid the cure, penicillin."

but Dan also wrote - "Is Quantum Mechanics reasonable? Is it logical? Ah but it is proven to exist."


- So we can accept QT though it is counter intuitive, but cannot accept God's actions because they seem illogical. Even though his interaction with humanity and reasons for acting as he does are far more complex and opaque.


Dan wrote - "So we humans will, for millions of years, pay the price for the act of a single human female? At no point in time, ever, will there be a second chance? I wouldn't treat a dog that way."

- We are not playing the price for one persons actions. The Bible is clear - all have gone their own way and we are all culpable. We are responsible for our own actions and Christ is the second chance you deny. It is hardly God's fault that you find that second chance to be too bloody and clumsy. It is hardly God's fault if you refuse to accept that the event is larger than just a couple of hours suffering on the cross. Like petulant children we say, "I won't have it that way - I'll have it on my terms or not at all." It is beyond belief that God is to blame for not making you in such a way that you would find him acceptable. You are simply exercising your choice, which you made at one point in your life and have since continued to rationalise it, to the point that everything you now see supports it. This is how you get Republicans and Democrats - Tories and New Labour. They see the same things and read them in entirely different ways. And the same event will support both sides because they filter it through their assumptions and world-view.

It is a type of self deception to say that we arrived here from the moment of the big bang by random processes. The fact that the mind can impose itself on the body and impose order upon the physical world is, I believe, nothing short of miraculous. The fact that we have concepts such as beauty, justice, selfless love, mercy etc. points to a transcendent truth greater than purely physical processes. The fact that we believe that some things are wrong and that we rail against it, and just don't sensibly accept that 'that's just the way it is' points to an external measure and standard. Why on earth should anyone ever feel that anything is unfair? That poetry can charm the soul of a man and bring one to tears or evoke feelings of such wonder, points to more than us being the sum total of chemical reactions obeying set laws.

The danger of atheism is that as you you have said elsewhere, 'we are nothing special'. Atheism relegates us to lumps of animated meat with no value. You have said, the universe couldn't care less.

Well I don't believe it.

Blacknad wrote:
"The fact that you deny any of my preceding points is telling."

As is the fact that you refuse to acknowledge that your deity has admitted to the genocidal murder of billions, has invented and used against humanity weapons of mass destruction, tortured newborn children with painful diseases, and is the father of polio as well as Blacknad, of malaria as well as your wife, of leukemia as well as your daughter. Post after post you deny the reality and implications of your own belief system.

I sent you three challenges ... you were so struck with fear you didn't even acknowledge them.


DA Morgan
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
B
Superstar
Offline
Superstar
B
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 901
Dan wrote - "Wrong wrong wrong. I accept quantum mechanics because it does not require a deity to design it with sentient intent. I accept because it does not contain a value judgement. QM does not murder children. QM does not create diseases with conscious intent. QM does not hide cures with knowledge of their therapeutic value."

- My point was less complicated. It was simply that you believe in QM though it seems unreasonable, and at the same time you ridicule my belief in God because it seems unreasonable. The rest of the stuff about what QM doesn't do is irrelevant to this point.

?QM does not murder children.?

- And God does. As creator of this universe, it follows that he has the right to take children (or any one for that matter) out of this present experience of existence, and in any way he desires. You don?t like the idea, and neither do I. Whether we like it or not has nothing to do with whether it?s true. How would you even know whether any child that dies was going to go on and commit murder, or beat their wife or a whole host of things that we get up to? How can anyone be said to be so blameless that they have a right to demand that God should treat them one way or the other? How would we even know that the children that God takes are not people that would have accepted him, and they have gone, as Paul says, ?to a place that is better by far.?? You cannot know.

?QM does not create diseases with conscious intent.?

- Maybe God does, and maybe he doesn?t. Either way he allowed the situation to come to what it is. I won?t deny that, but I know Christians who have died of cancer and have faithfully reached out to God at the most difficult time possible, and have received peace and strength. It is clear to me after reflecting upon this fact that God is there for anyone and at anytime, and when people die He is able to shield them from the terror and horror of it as He ushers them beyond this life. Blame him for the fact that most people reject him if you want, and blame him for the fact that people look at the sheer awesome wonder of life and choose to believe in ?accident? rather than God. They are free to do so, I cannot.

I have experienced God in my life and find that even though there are troubling aspects to God, I cannot dispense with Him. In fact why should I expect to be able to figure him out. Can my cat figure me out. I cannot ignore that though I occasionally waver on an intellectual level, deep down I KNOW he is there and that this life is too extraordinary to be meaningless chance. I am fearfully and wonderfully made. I know this as surely as you know God is nonsense. Impasse.

The odd thing is that my faith has paradoxically been strengthened by hearing you rail against the idea of God. Thou doth protest too much, methinks.

I was bothered that you thought me an idiot. Now I am quite happy for you to consider me a fool.

There was a saying I picked up whilst living in Beirut ? ?You are standing in a valley to the East, I am standing in a valley to the West?. I don?t think we have a common tool to communicate with.

?Do not deceive yourselves. If any of you think you are wise by the standards of this age, you should become fools so that you may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God's sight. As it is written: "He catches the wise in their craftiness"; and again, "The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile?? ?We are fools for Christ?

1 Corinthians

Regards,

Blacknad.

Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
D
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
D
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 4,136
Blacknad wrote:
"My point was less complicated. It was simply that you believe in QM though it seems unreasonable,"

I got your point but it is valueless. I don't consider QM to be unreasonable. I consider it beyond my personal comprehension. There is a huge difference.

Blacknad wrote:
"As creator of this universe, it follows that he has the right to take children (or any one for that matter) out of this present experience of existence, and in any way he desires."

And you as his minion are, I assume, more than willing to carry out his orders, unthinking, uncaring, unsympathetic. That's right ... god wants her burned at the stake. No doubt from what you wrote you'd hold the torch.

Blacknad wrote:
"Maybe God does, and maybe he doesn?t. Either way he allowed the situation to come to what it is. I won?t deny that,"

So you acknowledge the possibility that your all loving god created smallpox and that brings no questions of morality to the surface. Fascinating.

Blacknad continued:
"but I know Christians who have died of cancer and have faithfully reached out to God at the most difficult time possible,"

So stupid people are supposed to suddenly get smarter before they die? Or should I just point out that your god created the disease, watched them suffer, watched their families suffered, listened to their prayers. And then went back to pulling the wings off of butterflies.

Blacknad wrote:
"I have experienced God in my life and find that even though there are troubling aspects to God, I cannot dispense with Him."

I know people that have experienced chocolate that say the same thing. I treat the two statements as having equal value.

Blacknad wrote:
"I was bothered that you thought me an idiot. Now I am quite happy for you to consider me a fool."

Actually I consider you an intelligentperson lacking in the courage to change his mind. Does that make you feel better?


DA Morgan
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 137
C
Senior Member
OP Offline
Senior Member
C
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 137
I cannot wait to get home on my ow computer where I can read all these posts thoroughly to appreciate the beauty of intelligent people.

To whoever gave me a vote thanks.

Now off to the UK water level thread to argue with Uncle Al.

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokÂþ»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5