my favorite quote is by Phil Plait @ The Amaz!ng Meeting 8 in Las Vegas: it captures the heart of the problem.
this sounds very ambiguous/meaningless is there really any reason to discuss any further? you have just shown your closed-mindedness. if you are...
you seem to have trouble accepting the possibility of trivial relationships between non-trivial things.
i did not say that everything is trivial. i said that "god" being everything, is trivial.
if they specialize in making predictions then wouldn't you expect less error? to me. but it should not give much confidence to anyone...
i'm sorry i haven't replied in a while. i've been busy. i would like to return once more to the idea of false negatives/positives. i don't think...
it's funny how people didn't see this problem with near-field-communication coming. it was so obvious from the beginning. some things need to stay...
great show. but there would always be the uncertainty of not knowing if you really got back home.
there may exist different treatments of the information (i don't deny this). but the cultural bias is much stronger and more common. and there is...
the burden of proof may be something you consider cliche but it is reasonable. i encounter this pattern everywhere in the real world. ex: when you...
i didn't say they don't do it at all. the appearence of new relgions pretty much proves this. i don't think they do it sufficiently. because the...
i disagree. especially when the "god" discipline is spoon-fed to children. against what anxiety? then indeed it makes sense that there would be...
not scientific in what way? the James Randi Educational Foundation has been doing scientific tests of supernatural claims and none have passed....
i haven't seen any reliable predictions, that come from "god" theories. i consider myself making considerations about something, as a way of...
if you interpret "god" as synonymous to "good" and reality. then it is expected that you will encounter it everwhere. it sounds like a...
personal? well, it is ultimately up to the individual to make determinations
no. my interpretation of non-existence is: not being able to find evidence supporting existence. i don't feel the need to repeat this every-time....
you are taking my words far too literally. i don't claim that non-existence can be proven (i already know this is not possible).
the distinction of whether something exists or not
it's funny how you seem to be making the same point as me. by saying that we cannot deny existence you are also suggesting that existence would...
Separate names with a comma.
