Self Deceit and Faith.

by hillary_step 208 Replies latest jw friends

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    So it's not a matter of faith, any more than finding the footprint of a shoe in the mud and wondering if a shoe made it.

    So you believe in Bigfoot?

  • Superfine Apostate
    Superfine Apostate

    if you show me enough evidence to back it up, i believe in bigfoot. a footprint may be a hint, but a full-scale skeleton is more convincing.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips

    I've seen Bigfoot. (Just kidding)

    Around here he is called the "Florida Skunk Ape".

    alt

    alt

  • tijkmo
    tijkmo
    So it's not a matter of faith, any more than finding the footprint of a shoe in the mud and wondering if a shoe made it.

    finding a footprint of a shoe in the mud merely tells you that a shoe has been present and the 'size' of the shoe...it does not tell you the material that the shoe is made of...it does not tell you whether the fasteners are laces, velcro, zips..it does not guarantee the age of the shoe, the usage of the shoe, the height of the shoe..it does not tell you how many feet the wearer had, the sex of the wearer or if he/she was in fact wearing a shoes on his/her hands and walking on them.

    all of that information is assumption - for which one requires faith. either in ones own ability to come up with a plausible (but not definitive) explanation - or in the opinion of someone we consider to be an expert - or an eyewitness who we believe to be telling the truth.

    are you in fact an eyewitness of prehistoric birds and the make-up of their feathers?...do you know anyone who is/was?

    then your belief is based on faith...

    which is fine...

    for you.

  • tijkmo
    tijkmo
    enough evidence is available to form a theory.

    indeed.

    but not a fact

  • Superfine Apostate
    Superfine Apostate

    a scientific theory IS as factual as it gets.

  • serotonin_wraith
    serotonin_wraith

    Bigfoot? Well let's see the site it's taken from, maybe there'll be more information about those footprints.

    tijkmo, I'll apply what you put to the feathers.

    it does not tell you the material that the shoe is made of

    There are fossils of plants. This doesn't tell us what the plants were made of. But all around us today there are plenty of plants that have the same kind of shapes as these fossils, so it's safe to assume that these fossilized 'plants' weren't made of metal or anything. It stands to reason that they would be similar to plants today. Unless you need to have faith to think fossilized plants weren't really metal or something?

    it does not tell you whether the fasteners are laces, velcro, zips

    We still know it's a shoe, which is all I'm saying about the feathers. We may not know the exact chemical composition of the feathers - I'm sure there are some differences to modern feathers - but they're still feathers.

    it does not guarantee the age of the shoe

    In the case of the fossils, we can date the rock and find the age of them.

    the usage of the shoe

    The usage of the feathers is based on their size, shape, direction, etc. We know some definitely couldn't be used for flight, for example. No faith involved, just looking at the wingspan to body ratio could tell us if it could fly.

    the height of the shoe..it does not tell you how many feet the wearer had, the sex of the wearer or if he/she was in fact wearing a shoes on his/her hands and walking on them.

    Yes, much of that would be assumption. Assumptions I have not made. I said there were feathers, not that I knew their sex or what they ate or how fast they ran, etc. We know where the feathers were on the body - with an imprint of the animal in the rock how could we not?

    The rest of what you say has nothing to do with what I've said. I've not made claims to know everything about the species.

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    if you show me enough evidence to back it up, i believe in bigfoot. a footprint may be a hint, but a full-scale skeleton is more convincing.

    I could say the same thing about Archaeopteryx. Burn

  • Superfine Apostate
    Superfine Apostate

    erm... we've got plenty of archaeopteryx fossils. not just footprints. i don't think you can say that about bigfoot?

  • BurnTheShips
    BurnTheShips
    erm... we've got plenty of archaeopteryx fossils.

    Is there a complete skeleton? I am just putting the same burden of proof on Archaeopterix as I am putting on Bigfoot.

    At least people claim to have seen Bigfoot.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit