10:03, Wed 22 May
๐Ÿ˜‚ if i understood what half of those words meant i bet it'd be even funnier.

qb wont define god as he's not actually after a proper discussion as shown by the way he backed off when the DoG arrived.
AnE - conspiracy theorist, ardent viler-hater, nutjob cyclist, Cubie-bater, go-to iconoclast
10:42, Wed 22 May
Reading through this only surprise thus far is neither A_n_E or QB announcing themselves as the real god.
10:44, Wed 22 May
That's right he hasn't but he's making an equivalence of "faith" between scientific theory and the supernatural.
10:46, Wed 22 May
Of course the gaps in scientific knowledge require a leap of faith. To believe in the Big Bang you have to take a leap of faith that accepts that there was something there before it happened, even though science has no explanation for what it was, how it came to be or why it began. To believe in the theory of evolution requires a leap of faith to accept that the first cells appeared and then began to evolve into other things, changing from chemistry to biology - An initial self-replicating molecule spontaneously formed, 'evolved' into single-cell organisms which 'evolved' into multi-cell organisms, which 'evolved' into vertebrates like fish and so on. The theory of natural selection requires a leap of faith, that things happen by chance. Nature has no foresight, no powers of reason, just short term survival. So much of nature's survival relies on luck and what in film and theatre is called a MacGuffin - in the case of evolution the latent genome that serves no purpose or even lessens survival rates but is there none the less and allows the species to adapt later when that particular something becomes necessary (pepper moths evolving from light to dark colouration after the industrial revolution for example) that it requires a leap of faith to accept that unknown and move on with belief that the rest of it is right.

It is incumbent on science to prove or disprove myths - that's kind of the point of science, to explain how and why - and science does fit evidence to prove a theory, which is why theories become outdated or are proven to be false and why eminent scientists disagree about things. Filling the gaps with God is no less lazy than filling the gaps with "we don't know but let's move on". Science doesn't "know", science believes until a better theory comes along and for the ordinary Joe to believe in science is as lazy and nonsensical as believing in a sky fairy that magicked up the world and everything in it, innit. Science is the new religion.
11:03, Wed 22 May
This is like a thread from the olden days.๐Ÿ˜

For what it's worth, I think AnE has every right to ask QB to 'define his terms' as QB is asking the question.

There are plenty of holes in your argument QB as well, you are using some really old school classic internet argument techniques. It's like an old school masterclass. There's been a couple of ad hominems, some propositional fallacies, plenty of ambiguous statements presented as fact. just need a Hitler reference and I've got four corners on my 'internet forum bingo' card.

I cannot define God for someone else and it is irrelevant to the question. The concept of a supreme being is all that's necessary for AnE to answer the question. You don't have to subscribe to a set definition or adhere to any religion to believe in a 'higher power'. It really is quite simple. Why would someone avoid answering?

Holes in what argument? I'm not stating a case, I'm asking some questions and offering some comparisons, not presenting facts or arguing one against another. Do you believe in aliens visiting earth and do you believe in God (of any description or definition) are questions, not arguments. Quite why AnE is scared to answer them is unknown.

๐Ÿ˜‚ if i understood what half of those words meant i bet it'd be even funnier.

qb wont define god as he's not actually after a proper discussion as shown by the way he backed off when the DoG arrived.

I am indeed after a proper discussion and Steve is capable of having one and, as I stated, an interesting one at that. I'm more than happy for that to happen after the initial questions have been answered. That's hardly 'backing off', is it? Unlike yourself, refusing to answer simple questions.
11:10, Wed 22 May
QBBC2
I cannot define God for someone else and it is irrelevant to the question. The concept of a supreme being is all that's necessary for AnE to answer the question. You don't have to subscribe to a set definition or adhere to any religion to believe in a 'higher power'.

you've given me 2 definitions of god within that phrase. "supreme being" and "higher power" ๐Ÿ˜‚
AnE - conspiracy theorist, ardent viler-hater, nutjob cyclist, Cubie-bater, go-to iconoclast
11:12, Wed 22 May
They're synonyms, not definitions you plum.

Answer the questions.
11:16, Wed 22 May
QBBC2
They're synonyms, not definitions you plum.

Answer the questions.

i cant until you tell me what you mean by God. Once we've cleared that up then I'll quite happily answer your question.
AnE - conspiracy theorist, ardent viler-hater, nutjob cyclist, Cubie-bater, go-to iconoclast
11:21, Wed 22 May
That's a pathetic cop out you'r clinging onto there AnE

It can be any definition you like, it's you who either believes or does not believe so therefore it must be your own definition.

In the meantime how about answering the other question - do you believe aliens visit the earth in spacecraft? Use your own definitions.
11:25, Wed 22 May
QBBC2
That's a pathetic cop out you'r clinging onto there AnE

im not clinging to anything, it's like me saying "what is china?" you wouldnt know whether i was referring to the country or the ceramic. and obviously the answer would be different depending on which one was meant.
AnE - conspiracy theorist, ardent viler-hater, nutjob cyclist, Cubie-bater, go-to iconoclast
11:32, Wed 22 May
If the c of china was capitalised then it would be obvious, and you presumably believe in the existence of both anyway so it's a moot point.

Do you believe in any form of God (or god) and do you believe aliens visit earth in spacecraft?
11:35, Wed 22 May
QBBC2
If the c of china was capitalised then it would be obvious, and you presumably believe in the existence of both anyway so it's a moot point.

ok then, what is a nail?
AnE - conspiracy theorist, ardent viler-hater, nutjob cyclist, Cubie-bater, go-to iconoclast
11:53, Wed 22 May
QBBC2
Of course the gaps in scientific knowledge require a leap of faith. To believe in the Big Bang you have to take a leap of faith that accepts that there was something there before it happened, even though science has no explanation for what it was, how it came to be or why it began. To believe in the theory of evolution requires a leap of faith to accept that the first cells appeared and then began to evolve into other things, changing from chemistry to biology - An initial self-replicating molecule spontaneously formed, 'evolved' into single-cell organisms which 'evolved' into multi-cell organisms, which 'evolved' into vertebrates like fish and so on. The theory of natural selection requires a leap of faith, that things happen by chance. Nature has no foresight, no powers of reason, just short term survival. So much of nature's survival relies on luck and what in film and theatre is called a MacGuffin - in the case of evolution the latent genome that serves no purpose or even lessens survival rates but is there none the less and allows the species to adapt later when that particular something becomes necessary (pepper moths evolving from light to dark colouration after the industrial revolution for example) that it requires a leap of faith to accept that unknown and move on with belief that the rest of it is right.

It is incumbent on science to prove or disprove myths - that's kind of the point of science, to explain how and why - and science does fit evidence to prove a theory, which is why theories become outdated or are proven to be false and why eminent scientists disagree about things. Filling the gaps with God is no less lazy than filling the gaps with "we don't know but let's move on". Science doesn't "know", science believes until a better theory comes along and for the ordinary Joe to believe in science is as lazy and nonsensical as believing in a sky fairy that magicked up the world and everything in it, innit. Science is the new religion.

I'll refer you again to the fundamental difference between science and religion. The foundation of science is that it knows nothing and seeks to find out. Religion already has all the answers. They aren't equivalent leaps of faith at all. It isn't incumbent on science to disprove myths. You're a clever bloke so stop being silly.
11:53, Wed 22 May
It's lots of things - both objects and a verbs. I believe in the existence of nails and the idea of nailing, whatever the definition.

Again though, this is a moot point. I didn't ask what God is, only whether you believe in the existence of God in any form. For your comparison to be relevant you should ask if I believe in the existence of any form of nail. If, in order to answer the question you personally feel the need to define what God is then that's up to you but that definition is yours, not mine. You can answer the question with or without a definition. If you believe or disbelieve in God then you must have your own definition of what God is as a concept, otherwise you cannot believe or disbelieve. If you don't know whether you believe in God or not then the answer is "I don't know" and no definition is necessary.

You still haven't said whether or not you believe aliens visit earth in spacecraft. Do you not know whether you believe or not?
JCL
12:03, Wed 22 May
Hello,
Damn this is just like the old day.
For the record (and I know no one asked me): -

I donโ€™t believe in God
I donโ€™t think alien life forms visit our planet in spaceships
I do believe there is other life in the universe, probably been on our Galaxy
I donโ€™t think we will ever be able to prove there is intelligent life
I do believe we will prove there is basic life forms out there
I like the idea of the multi universe / inter dimensions. (Those cats must see something when they are sketchily staring at a wall) We probably all need to do some DMT or Ayahuasca but there is more out there then we can see, no doubt.
I also believe in dinosaurs. (Often wonder if religious types watch history programs and just go โ€˜nopeโ€™)
It's always easier to believe something than understand it.