C0ntr013r

Joined

• started 35 topics
• posted 547 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by C0ntr013r

• 
  449

  Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

  by LAWHFol in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

  i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

  "atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  C0ntr013r

  On what basis can science dismiss fairies, or is stating that fairies don't exist unscientific?

  You can't prove the non existence of fairies, if that is what you are asking.

  But since the argument would stem from; "fairies exist" the burden of proof would be on the person making the claim, so we would not believe in fairies unless the evidence is provided.

  What we would not do is claim; "there is no evidence for fairies, therefor fairies can't/don't exist".

  It is really a waste of time to argue this since it has been established as a logical fallacy. Here is a short summery of what it is and how it works:

  http://philosophy.lander.edu/logic/ignorance.html

  
  

  As for it being a scientific question.

  Science deals with proving and disproving theories and hypothesis through evidence. And I don't think fairies qualify to be dealt with scientifically. Have some scientific paper or study been done about them? Since most don't believe in them it would be a waste of time.

  
  
• 
  26

  Photobombing the Ministerial Servant's incentive rewards at the Regional Convention

  by oppostate in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  watchtower marketing incentive rewards for young single baptized males in the 0rganization.. .

  the face of the photobombing brother in the background says it all.

  like a child in a candy shop.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  C0ntr013r

  Watchtower marketing incentive rewards for young single baptized males in the 0rganization.

  Just young once? Think of all the pedophiles this picture will attract, they might be a bit old for them, but still...

  Some of them might be under 18...

  
  
• 
  21

  Jehovah's Witnesses "Handling Child Abuse Matters" flowchart

  by jwleaks in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  jw leaks courtesy of the australian royal commission.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  C0ntr013r

  So...

  1 Witness and Confession + no reporting laws + ecclesiastical privilege = no report

  2 Witnesses and Confession + no reporting laws + ecclesiastical privilege = no report

  Confession + no reporting laws + ecclesiastical privilege = no report

  
  

  If none of the above apply: check with society...
  

  
  

  So if you live somewhere where there are ecclesiastical privilege it will be better to confess because they will use this privilege to not report it...

  Quote:

  Note: We will claim this is part of confessional ritual where privilege is available
• 
  449

  Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

  by LAWHFol in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

  i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

  "atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  C0ntr013r

  The problem isn't a lack of evidence full stop.
  The problem is a lack of evidence where there should be evidence.
  Do you agree that there is a difference between those two statements?

  Who is this addressed to?
• 
  65

  [Day 4 - 31/7]The Royal Commissions investigation of child sexual abuse within Jehovah’s Witnesses. + VIDEO

  by C0ntr013r in

  1. watchtower
  2. child-abuse

  by popular demand i give you day 4, and i will finally get a couple of days to sleep .

  part 1 has been uploaded and part 2,3 and 4 will soon be available.. part 1:.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9lmlcdqesa0&list=plpq6kz-aghvqbadlzmqn26dvmpzddxlui&index=11.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  C0ntr013r

  GUIDELINES FOR BRANCH OFFICE SERVICE DESKS - 2013
• 
  449

  Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

  by LAWHFol in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

  i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

  "atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  C0ntr013r

  I think the thread has been derailed enough too, so lets forget about the multiverse for now.

  The points on which I disagree with you are:

  Lack of evidence automatically discards a hypothesis in science.

  I don't think that is how science works.

  I re-iterate: Atheism is scientific.

  Science is Atheistic, Aelveistic etc...
  

  I disagree with this because Atheism deals with belief, or the lack of it to be precise. Hence not science.

  Absence of evidence is good enough to discount ALL of the above for any practical and scientific purpose.

  I disagree with this because it is a logical fallacy

  You can disregard the derailment.
• 
  449

  Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

  by LAWHFol in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

  i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

  "atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  C0ntr013r

  thiest: "you cant prove god dosent exist therefore he does! I see what i want to and therefore you cant me convince otherwise! Also people who dont believe exactly as i do suck!"
  athiests: " but we are simply being logical. We just want some reason and evidence" (repeat pointlessly ad infinitum)
  i would like to believe my summary will save some time and effort but history suggests it wont..

  This is actually a discussion of Gnostic vs Agnostic now thou

  EDIT: I am also trying to show that Atheism is not science.

  And it is actually the reverse:

  atheist: you cant prove that god exist therefore he does not!
  
• 
  449

  Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

  by LAWHFol in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

  i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

  "atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  C0ntr013r

  Exactly. The reason being a model has to correspond to physical observation. So how does it become evidence? Because it can now make predictions which correspond to experiment and observation.

  Yes, and I suggested that "something" within science can be a hypotheses without evidence. If the multiverse has evidence my example was a bad one, but you are completely missing the point.

  
  
• 
  449

  Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

  by LAWHFol in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

  i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

  "atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  C0ntr013r

  That is why I used the word "suggest". Mathematics suggests a way the universe could work. It IS a proof IF it is corroborated by observation. WHY? Because it can now make PREDICTIONS. This is not controversial.

  I agree, and we can call it a theory when we have enough observable evidence. Before that we call it a hypothesis.

  If you merely meant "suggest", what is "obvious proof" doing in this context?
  

  Mathematics suggests a way the universe could work. It IS a proof IF it is corroborated by observation. What the mathematics now allow you to do is to make PREDICTIONS. This is not controversial.

  There is no proof of a Multiverse, and how could there be? If there are other universes outside of our own, how would we know about it? Still it is a thought entertained in science and in some of our models.
  1. Wrong there is obvious proof. There are mathematical models that may suggest a multiverse.

  You say there is obvious proof of a multiverse, do you not? Or how am i supposed to interpret this comment?

  Remedial: You're still doing it wrong. You don't quote an encyclopedia. You quote the source within the Article.

  LOL, did you look up the source? It is a few book that are not available online, or do you want us to buy some book on ebay for this discussion?
  
  

  Please see: The Multiverse Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics - Raphael Bousso, Leonard Susskind

  I will look into it, did you read the entire book yourself?
• 
  449

  Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

  by LAWHFol in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

  i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

  "atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  C0ntr013r

  Please see: How to Prove It A Structured Approach - Daniel J Velleman

  I looked thought it. And again, I don't deny the existence of proof by mathematics. I simply say that there are mathematical models which are not considered evidence within themselves.