Australian Politics Forum - Atheists open churches around the world

Kytro

Gold Member

Offline

Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #120 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:00pm

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 11:56am:

Kytro wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 11:15am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 9:31am:

My standard of evidence is irrefutable proof. You have provided absolutely none. Archaeology can be (and has been) faked or misidentified. Yu have provided no reputable eye-witness accounts and by your own admission, a historian's writings are worthless unless he was there. All you have provided is a handful of 5th-hand comments and unprovable archaeology.

This is an impossible standard, science can only discount things, it cannot prove them.

Of course it is. I know that as well. What I object to is the complete rejection of any evidence that isn't overwhelming or irrefutable. Most complex arguments are weighed by a multitude of evidence of different sources and provability. We consider DNA evidence irrefutable and yet, it is just a probability argument, but one that is so high as to be considered 'close enough'.

I would enjoy a Christian apologetics debate but the ground-rules have to accept evidence of a variety of sources and provability. After all, most historical claims can only be supported by a variety of evidence, none of which is irrefutable.

This is problem for all historical sources, but what helps the most is independent correlation of fact. There are some parts of the Bible that are quite troublesome because they contradict other sources that have independent correlation.

It's also a mistake to view the Bible as a single source, as of course it's not.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #121 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:02pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 11:13am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 6:35am:

Really? Do the math. From single celled organism to fully sentient human life is about a million evolutionary steps. Each of these steps has a probability of occurring of about one in a hundred trillion. So the possibility of use having evolved is about a hundred million trillion to one.

And I am being generous.

Wow. So Longy is a Evolution denier as well. With Ajax being a Moon landing hoaxer I guess it explains a lot about the AGW deniers. They all have no idea about science.

Longy, your logic is completely flawed.
The process of natural selection dictates that evolutionary changes that are advantageous will continue to the next generation. Those that are not will die out. Natural selection over millions of years makes it inevitable that more complex and successful life forms will develop.

Can you find a single example in the natural world (and universe) that shows change from the simple to complex without intervention? What part of 'natural selection' dictated that we have two eyes for stereoscopic vision and depth perception? What was wrong with just one? Which part of natural selection developed a multi-use throat for breathing and eating without problem?

And where did cognition come from?

If you went to Mars and found a computer there (not from earth) you would consider it 100% proof positive of the existence of a martian race or another sentient race that had lived there. Why would it not have simply evolved out of the minerals on the planet? It is infinitely less complex than a human.

And there is the problem. Evolution is a probabilistic nightmare even without considering the question of how exquisite design appeared out of nowhere.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #122 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:04pm

Kytro wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:00pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 11:56am:

Kytro wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 11:15am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 9:31am:

My standard of evidence is irrefutable proof. You have provided absolutely none. Archaeology can be (and has been) faked or misidentified. Yu have provided no reputable eye-witness accounts and by your own admission, a historian's writings are worthless unless he was there. All you have provided is a handful of 5th-hand comments and unprovable archaeology.

This is an impossible standard, science can only discount things, it cannot prove them.

Of course it is. I know that as well. What I object to is the complete rejection of any evidence that isn't overwhelming or irrefutable. Most complex arguments are weighed by a multitude of evidence of different sources and provability. We consider DNA evidence irrefutable and yet, it is just a probability argument, but one that is so high as to be considered 'close enough'.

I would enjoy a Christian apologetics debate but the ground-rules have to accept evidence of a variety of sources and provability. After all, most historical claims can only be supported by a variety of evidence, none of which is irrefutable.

This is problem for all historical sources, but what helps the most is independent correlation of fact. There are some parts of the Bible that are quite troublesome because they contradict other sources that have independent correlation.

It's also a mistake to view the Bible as a single source, as of course it's not.

My problem with the 'debate' so far as that it has declared the entire Bible as no evidence whatsoever. That kind of debating style makes any kind of worthwhile debate worthless.

BTW 'independent' correlation isn't proof - just evidence. (I assume you know that, but on here, it is easy to assume the contrary)

Back to top

IP Logged

Stratos

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4725

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #123 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:15pm

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 11:52am:

You look for any possible weakness and use it to completely refute the evidence.

Incorrect again. I ask for specific evidence which YOU say exists, then you miserably fail to provide said evidence, in this case that there were eyewitnesses to Jesus.

So does such a thing exist, or are you again lying?

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 11:56am:

I would enjoy a Christian apologetics debate but the ground-rules have to accept evidence of a variety of sources and provability.

Again, I have laid my ground rules since the very beginning, any contemporary evidence, either written or archaeological. Stop embarrassing yourself by using a blatant straw man of my argument.

I think that is a perfectly reasonable set of criteria to establish a historical basis for a person.

Back to top

Pete Waldo wrote on Jan 15^th, 2014 at 11:24pm:

Thus killing those Canaanite babies while they were still innocent, was a particularly merciful act

IP Logged

Stratos

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4725

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #124 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:19pm

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:04pm:

My problem with the 'debate' so far as that it has declared the entire Bible as no evidence whatsoever.

I have done no such thing. I have mentioned that the gospels do not count as eyewitness testimony because they are anonymous books written at the earliest 40 years (first gospel)and up to 70 years (fourth gospel), after the events were supposed to have happened.

You really lie a lot for a "Christian"

Back to top

Pete Waldo wrote on Jan 15^th, 2014 at 11:24pm:

Thus killing those Canaanite babies while they were still innocent, was a particularly merciful act

IP Logged

Stratos Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 4725	Re: Atheists open churches around the world Reply #125 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:22pm mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:02pm: Which part of natural selection developed a multi-use throat for breathing and eating without problem? You think the fact that we can choke on our food is evidence for a loving benevolent creator?
Back to top	Pete Waldo wrote on Jan 15^th, 2014 at 11:24pm: Thus killing those Canaanite babies while they were still innocent, was a particularly merciful act IP Logged

Kytro

Gold Member

Offline

Blasphemy: a victimless
crime

Posts: 3409
Adelaide
Gender: male

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #126 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:37pm

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:04pm:

My problem with the 'debate' so far as that it has declared the entire Bible as no evidence whatsoever. That kind of debating style makes any kind of worthwhile debate worthless.

BTW 'independent' correlation isn't proof - just evidence. (I assume you know that, but on here, it is easy to assume the contrary)

While you can't dismiss it entirely it's not particularity strong evidence, especially for spectacular events. Even for things that have some evidence, you can't then assume the rest of the text is equally valid.

Yes, correlation isn't proof, but it does add to the evidence.

An example of one the issue is the slaughter of the innocents. Herod was a figure whose reign was documented by Flavius Josephus, and while Herod's other misdeeds are mentioned, this isn't.

Other problems arise in Mark's account, such as his obvious lack of knowledge of the local geography.

Going from Tyre via Sidon to the Sea of Galilee requires backtracking the entire distance.

Back to top

IP Logged

Prime Minister for Canyons

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 26906
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #127 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 1:28pm

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:02pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 11:13am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 6:35am:

Really? Do the math. From single celled organism to fully sentient human life is about a million evolutionary steps. Each of these steps has a probability of occurring of about one in a hundred trillion. So the possibility of use having evolved is about a hundred million trillion to one.

And I am being generous.

Wow. So Longy is a Evolution denier as well. With Ajax being a Moon landing hoaxer I guess it explains a lot about the AGW deniers. They all have no idea about science.

Longy, your logic is completely flawed.
The process of natural selection dictates that evolutionary changes that are advantageous will continue to the next generation. Those that are not will die out. Natural selection over millions of years makes it inevitable that more complex and successful life forms will develop.

Can you find a single example in the natural world (and universe) that shows change from the simple to complex without intervention? What part of 'natural selection' dictated that we have two eyes for stereoscopic vision and depth perception? What was wrong with just one? Which part of natural selection developed a multi-use throat for breathing and eating without problem?

And where did cognition come from?

If you went to Mars and found a computer there (not from earth) you would consider it 100% proof positive of the existence of a martian race or another sentient race that had lived there. Why would it not have simply evolved out of the minerals on the planet? It is infinitely less complex than a human.

And there is the problem. Evolution is a probabilistic nightmare even without considering the question of how exquisite design appeared out of nowhere.

You answered it in your own question. Stereoscopic vision is easier with two eyes. As for the throat, I would say it the respiratory/digestive system started as one big system whereby the organism absorbed everything they needed in one system. But it was inefficient so split into two. You can also argue that the separation of oesophagus/trachea is actually evidence against a creator since an intelligent design should have the oesophagus at the front being filled from the mouth and the nose emptying into the trachea at the back so food can't get stuck.

But on the other foot how do you then explain the recurrent laryngeal nerve mariacostel using non evolutionary processes

Back to top

In a time of universal deceit — telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

No evidence whatsoever it can be attributed to George Orwell or Eric Arthur Blair (in fact the same guy)

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #128 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 3:50pm

Stratos wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:19pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:04pm:

My problem with the 'debate' so far as that it has declared the entire Bible as no evidence whatsoever.

I have done no such thing. I have mentioned that the gospels do not count as eyewitness testimony because they are anonymous books written at the earliest 40 years (first gospel)and up to 70 years (fourth gospel), after the events were supposed to have happened.

You really lie a lot for a "Christian"

Once again, you simply set up arbitrary standards designed to just repeal any evidence you don't like. It is juvenile and I am simply using your standards to deny the existence of any historical figure whatsoever.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #129 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 3:52pm

Kytro wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:37pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:04pm:

My problem with the 'debate' so far as that it has declared the entire Bible as no evidence whatsoever. That kind of debating style makes any kind of worthwhile debate worthless.

BTW 'independent' correlation isn't proof - just evidence. (I assume you know that, but on here, it is easy to assume the contrary)

While you can't dismiss it entirely it's not particularity strong evidence, especially for spectacular events. Even for things that have some evidence, you can't then assume the rest of the text is equally valid.

Yes, correlation isn't proof, but it does add to the evidence.

An example of one the issue is the slaughter of the innocents. Herod was a figure whose reign was documented by Flavius Josephus, and while Herod's other misdeeds are mentioned, this isn't.

Other problems arise in Mark's account, such as his obvious lack of knowledge of the local geography.

Going from Tyre via Sidon to the Sea of Galilee requires backtracking the entire distance.

Thanks for the highlighted bit. You are apparently the first person here who understands the concept of building a case using evidence other than the irrefutable type - especially since that kind of evidence does not exist.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #130 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 3:56pm

Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 1:28pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:02pm:

The_Barnacle wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 11:13am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 6:35am:

Really? Do the math. From single celled organism to fully sentient human life is about a million evolutionary steps. Each of these steps has a probability of occurring of about one in a hundred trillion. So the possibility of use having evolved is about a hundred million trillion to one.

And I am being generous.

Wow. So Longy is a Evolution denier as well. With Ajax being a Moon landing hoaxer I guess it explains a lot about the AGW deniers. They all have no idea about science.

Longy, your logic is completely flawed.
The process of natural selection dictates that evolutionary changes that are advantageous will continue to the next generation. Those that are not will die out. Natural selection over millions of years makes it inevitable that more complex and successful life forms will develop.

Can you find a single example in the natural world (and universe) that shows change from the simple to complex without intervention? What part of 'natural selection' dictated that we have two eyes for stereoscopic vision and depth perception? What was wrong with just one? Which part of natural selection developed a multi-use throat for breathing and eating without problem?

And where did cognition come from?

If you went to Mars and found a computer there (not from earth) you would consider it 100% proof positive of the existence of a martian race or another sentient race that had lived there. Why would it not have simply evolved out of the minerals on the planet? It is infinitely less complex than a human.

And there is the problem. Evolution is a probabilistic nightmare even without considering the question of how exquisite design appeared out of nowhere.

You answered it in your own question. Stereoscopic vision is easier with two eyes. As for the throat, I would say it the respiratory/digestive system started as one big system whereby the organism absorbed everything they needed in one system. But it was inefficient so split into two. You can also argue that the separation of oesophagus/trachea is actually evidence against a creator since an intelligent design should have the oesophagus at the front being filled from the mouth and the nose emptying into the trachea at the back so food can't get stuck.

But on the other foot how do you then explain the recurrent laryngeal nerve mariacostel using non evolutionary processes

How was it 'decided' that stereoscopic vision was better? Remember, evolution involves not design and merely minute and effectively random changes. SO what are the chances of two eyes developing by chance? One in a billion, trillion? And then you need to ask how did the brain 'evolve' to process two signals that are different and get stereoscopic vision instead of dual images? We struggle to even understand how to process that in computers now! How was such a concept as 'vision' even come into being? And why just a portion of the spectrum?

everything to do with vision screams out DESIGNER. The chance of it developing by accident and so absolutely fantastically is.... NIL.

PS stereoscopic vision isnt' easier' with two eyes. It is IMPOSSIBLE without. How would anyone determine stereoscopic vision was even better without knowing what it is - and it had to be done without any thought.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #131 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 4:00pm

Kytro wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:37pm:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 12:04pm:

My problem with the 'debate' so far as that it has declared the entire Bible as no evidence whatsoever. That kind of debating style makes any kind of worthwhile debate worthless.

BTW 'independent' correlation isn't proof - just evidence. (I assume you know that, but on here, it is easy to assume the contrary)

While you can't dismiss it entirely it's not particularity strong evidence, especially for spectacular events. Even for things that have some evidence, you can't then assume the rest of the text is equally valid.

Yes, correlation isn't proof, but it does add to the evidence.

An example of one the issue is the slaughter of the innocents. Herod was a figure whose reign was documented by Flavius Josephus, and while Herod's other misdeeds are mentioned, this isn't.

Other problems arise in Mark's account, such as his obvious lack of knowledge of the local geography.

Going from Tyre via Sidon to the Sea of Galilee requires backtracking the entire distance.

it is an interesting point, but only interesting. The absence of this account means what? He didn't know of it? It essentially proves nothing and at best makes a mild suggestion.

Back to top

IP Logged

Quantum

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3373

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #132 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 4:01pm

Stratos wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 7:08am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 6:33am:

Of course you believe in THEM.

Yes, because there is contemporary written or archaeological evidence, which I encouraged you to look up. I will now do something quote shocking and direct you to the evidence:

Pontius Pilate:

-The Pilate Stone, dated from the early 1st Century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilate_Stone
-The writings of Philo of Alexandria, contemporary Historian.

Herod

-Numerous buildings that he commissioned to be built, and his tomb has been discovered
-The writings of Josephus, while not contemporary [highlight]do appear to be accurate[/highlight], as they have given us the location of key physical proof such as the aforementioned tomb.

If you can provide similar evidence for Jesus I will be perfectly happy to agree, but you have failed to do so.

Let me just get this straight... You use the writings of Josephus as evidence for Herod, and yet the same Josephus is not evidence for Jesus when he wrote about him.

Back to top

IP Logged

mariacostel

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 7344
Sydney
Gender: female

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #133 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 4:22pm

Quantum wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 4:01pm:

Stratos wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 7:08am:

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 6:33am:

Of course you believe in THEM.

Yes, because there is contemporary written or archaeological evidence, which I encouraged you to look up. I will now do something quote shocking and direct you to the evidence:

Pontius Pilate:

-The Pilate Stone, dated from the early 1st Century https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilate_Stone
-The writings of Philo of Alexandria, contemporary Historian.

Herod

-Numerous buildings that he commissioned to be built, and his tomb has been discovered
-The writings of Josephus, while not contemporary [highlight]do appear to be accurate[/highlight], as they have given us the location of key physical proof such as the aforementioned tomb.

If you can provide similar evidence for Jesus I will be perfectly happy to agree, but you have failed to do so.

Let me just get this straight... You use the writings of Josephus as evidence for Herod, and yet the same Josephus is not evidence for Jesus when he wrote about him.

You got it!!! The problem is not an intellectual problem, but far deeper. Herod's existence is neither here nor there. It frankly doesn't matter much to anyone at all. But Jesus? Now if ever a claim upset people it was His. So it is easier to just deny that He ever existed, even if it means mounting an thoroughly unsupported and hypocritical stance.

I understand it perfectly. But it is still wrong.

Back to top

IP Logged

Stratos

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 4725

Re: Atheists open churches around the world
Reply #134 - Nov 12^th, 2015 at 4:44pm

mariacostel wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 3:50pm:

Once again, you simply set up arbitrary standards designed to just repeal any evidence you don't like.

Bollocks, this whole thing started when YOU claimed there were eyewitnesses to Jesus. This is simply asking you to substantiate your claim.

Quantum wrote on Nov 12^th, 2015 at 4:01pm:

You use the writings of Josephus as evidence for Herod, and yet the same Josephus is not evidence for Jesus when he wrote about him.

Please read all of Josephus writings on Jesus in context before you comment on them.

edit: I specifically mention they are accurate because they were directly used to uncover other evidence by the way, in this case the tomb of Herod.

Back to top

Pete Waldo wrote on Jan 15^th, 2014 at 11:24pm:

Thus killing those Canaanite babies while they were still innocent, was a particularly merciful act

IP Logged