there is only one god

[Shallow]

Eleven 2 Three;

I've read through your responses to me and to others and it seems you fail to acknowledge your science is largely based on faith. I admit my faith. I believe letting an old woman struggle and not helping her when she needs it is evil and goes against what is God. I believe that Good To be God. It's a feeling. A system of beliefs. I can't prove it and I don't intend to try because it cannot be done. I believe the good inside everyone is there because of God. I believe that everyone anyone that does not feel the need to help that woman is struggling with evil and needs to get rid of that evil. How exactly one would do that I don't know. How exactly that evil got their I don't know. I just won't allow myself to believe that someone can be born with a set of values that mean allowing a helpless woman to suffer causes pleasure. These are my beliefs about life. Because that is how I feel inside.

You attempt to use psychology as an explanation for certain feelings. Where is there any proof in that science? Science is in large part religion. People see patterns and deduce from those patterns "laws" but any scientific law is only a theory. Newton's laws of physics make sense to us now and they may make sense to us forever. You want to shoot a falling monkey that is on the same plane as you are and you have to aim straight and the bullet will fall with the monkey and strike it. You take air out of the equation any two objects of any mass fall at the same rate. We call it gravity. A magnetic pull that causes the objects, the bullet, the monkey to fall. But a scientific law is definite. And we can't be definite. We cannot predict the future. We do not know that every object from this point on will always fall at the same rate. It sounds stupid I know. I get it a lot. David Humew explained it much better than I and he changed the language of science.

Gravity is a phenomenon that we can have named and observed but you can't see it or test it. We just know that when you let go of something it falls. It's pulled. Do you know for sure that it isn't pushed? Do you know for sure that it isn't an energetic order that decides that this object at this time will fall, but at any other time it could be ordered to not fall. There is no evidence that that will happen, YET. And they yet is the point. We cannot assume that it is impossible for that to ever happen.

Let's say it did happen. All of a sudden certain objects with nothing in particular in common started floating while others did not. Scientists would come up with various theories to explain it even though they wouldn't have any clue because Newton's Laws would cease to exist but they'd make something up and a consensus would occur and majority rule would give us a new theory. Al Gore would blame it Global Warming. But is that really that much more concrete than some yokel claiming it's God's way of punishing us or whatever he'd say? Is it really? Have you seen gravity? Have you touched it? Opened it up inside and tried to figure out how it works?

It's merely a phenomenon that we cannot see so we figure out ways to explain it. We agree on what is the most logical but we can never really figure it out. For someone to convince themselves that it is figured out is foolish. It's not much less foolish to claim to know the earth is warming because fossil fuels are being over used and too much carbon is in the air than it is to say God made it warmer for fun. One may seem more logical but we have no real studies of how the sun works from the inside and we can't say for sure that it's not just the sun going through a warming cycle that will cool in time. Believing in a certain science because it makes the most sense at the time is fine so long as you understand that it is faith in that science. Faith you cannot prove. Presenting that science as concrete fact and teaching it as such to people that don't know any better is no different than teaching about Adam and Eve.

[LooN3y]

Eleven 2 Three;

I've read through your responses to me and to others and it seems you fail to acknowledge your science is largely based on faith. I admit my faith. I believe letting an old woman struggle and not helping her when she needs it is evil and goes against what is God. I believe that Good To be God. It's a feeling. A system of beliefs. I can't prove it and I don't intend to try because it cannot be done. I believe the good inside everyone is there because of God. I believe that everyone anyone that does not feel the need to help that woman is struggling with evil and needs to get rid of that evil. How exactly one would do that I don't know. How exactly that evil got their I don't know. I just won't allow myself to believe that someone can be born with a set of values that mean allowing a helpless woman to suffer causes pleasure. These are my beliefs about life. Because that is how I feel inside.

You attempt to use psychology as an explanation for certain feelings. Where is there any proof in that science? Science is in large part religion. People see patterns and deduce from those patterns "laws" but any scientific law is only a theory. Newton's laws of physics make sense to us now and they may make sense to us forever. You want to shoot a falling monkey that is on the same plane as you are and you have to aim straight and the bullet will fall with the monkey and strike it. You take air out of the equation any two objects of any mass fall at the same rate. We call it gravity. A magnetic pull that causes the objects, the bullet, the monkey to fall. But a scientific law is definite. And we can't be definite. We cannot predict the future. We do not know that every object from this point on will always fall at the same rate. It sounds stupid I know. I get it a lot. David Humew explained it much better than I and he changed the language of science.

Gravity is a phenomenon that we can have named and observed but you can't see it or test it. We just know that when you let go of something it falls. It's pulled. Do you know for sure that it isn't pushed? Do you know for sure that it isn't an energetic order that decides that this object at this time will fall, but at any other time it could be ordered to not fall. There is no evidence that that will happen, YET. And they yet is the point. We cannot assume that it is impossible for that to ever happen.

Let's say it did happen. All of a sudden certain objects with nothing in particular in common started floating while others did not. Scientists would come up with various theories to explain it even though they wouldn't have any clue because Newton's Laws would cease to exist but they'd make something up and a consensus would occur and majority rule would give us a new theory. Al Gore would blame it Global Warming. But is that really that much more concrete than some yokel claiming it's God's way of punishing us or whatever he'd say? Is it really? Have you seen gravity? Have you touched it? Opened it up inside and tried to figure out how it works?

It's merely a phenomenon that we cannot see so we figure out ways to explain it. We agree on what is the most logical but we can never really figure it out. For someone to convince themselves that it is figured out is foolish. It's not much less foolish to claim to know the earth is warming because fossil fuels are being over used and too much carbon is in the air than it is to say God made it warmer for fun. One may seem more logical but we have no real studies of how the sun works from the inside and we can't say for sure that it's not just the sun going through a warming cycle that will cool in time. Believing in a certain science because it makes the most sense at the time is fine so long as you understand that it is faith in that science. Faith you cannot prove. Presenting that science as concrete fact and teaching it as such to people that don't know any better is no different than teaching about Adam and Eve.

what about all those formulas? i dont really get it bcuz arnt those proven laws??

[Shallow]

Eleven 2 Three;

I've read through your responses to me and to others and it seems you fail to acknowledge your science is largely based on faith. I admit my faith. I believe letting an old woman struggle and not helping her when she needs it is evil and goes against what is God. I believe that Good To be God. It's a feeling. A system of beliefs. I can't prove it and I don't intend to try because it cannot be done. I believe the good inside everyone is there because of God. I believe that everyone anyone that does not feel the need to help that woman is struggling with evil and needs to get rid of that evil. How exactly one would do that I don't know. How exactly that evil got their I don't know. I just won't allow myself to believe that someone can be born with a set of values that mean allowing a helpless woman to suffer causes pleasure. These are my beliefs about life. Because that is how I feel inside.

You attempt to use psychology as an explanation for certain feelings. Where is there any proof in that science? Science is in large part religion. People see patterns and deduce from those patterns "laws" but any scientific law is only a theory. Newton's laws of physics make sense to us now and they may make sense to us forever. You want to shoot a falling monkey that is on the same plane as you are and you have to aim straight and the bullet will fall with the monkey and strike it. You take air out of the equation any two objects of any mass fall at the same rate. We call it gravity. A magnetic pull that causes the objects, the bullet, the monkey to fall. But a scientific law is definite. And we can't be definite. We cannot predict the future. We do not know that every object from this point on will always fall at the same rate. It sounds stupid I know. I get it a lot. David Humew explained it much better than I and he changed the language of science.

Gravity is a phenomenon that we can have named and observed but you can't see it or test it. We just know that when you let go of something it falls. It's pulled. Do you know for sure that it isn't pushed? Do you know for sure that it isn't an energetic order that decides that this object at this time will fall, but at any other time it could be ordered to not fall. There is no evidence that that will happen, YET. And they yet is the point. We cannot assume that it is impossible for that to ever happen.

Let's say it did happen. All of a sudden certain objects with nothing in particular in common started floating while others did not. Scientists would come up with various theories to explain it even though they wouldn't have any clue because Newton's Laws would cease to exist but they'd make something up and a consensus would occur and majority rule would give us a new theory. Al Gore would blame it Global Warming. But is that really that much more concrete than some yokel claiming it's God's way of punishing us or whatever he'd say? Is it really? Have you seen gravity? Have you touched it? Opened it up inside and tried to figure out how it works?

It's merely a phenomenon that we cannot see so we figure out ways to explain it. We agree on what is the most logical but we can never really figure it out. For someone to convince themselves that it is figured out is foolish. It's not much less foolish to claim to know the earth is warming because fossil fuels are being over used and too much carbon is in the air than it is to say God made it warmer for fun. One may seem more logical but we have no real studies of how the sun works from the inside and we can't say for sure that it's not just the sun going through a warming cycle that will cool in time. Believing in a certain science because it makes the most sense at the time is fine so long as you understand that it is faith in that science. Faith you cannot prove. Presenting that science as concrete fact and teaching it as such to people that don't know any better is no different than teaching about Adam and Eve.

what about all those formulas? i dont really get it bcuz arnt those proven laws??

Formulas that work, work. I'm not saying they don't work. I'm saying claiming to know they will always work is false but we cannot know that. How do we know the universe around us won't change and all of a sudden those formulas don't work. There is a reason why nothing is called a law in science any more. David Hume had large debates with the science community a couple hundred years back. Since then everything has been a theory. Science simply cannot predict the future.

[LooN3y]

can u send me a link where he explains this? if u can?

[Nat Turner-reincarnated]

One god and his name is ALLAH.

[7even]

Formulas that work, work. I'm not saying they don't work. I'm saying claiming to know they will always work is false but we cannot know that. How do we know the universe around us won't change and all of a sudden those formulas don't work. There is a reason why nothing is called a law in science any more. David Hume had large debates with the science community a couple hundred years back. Since then everything has been a theory. Science simply cannot predict the future.

Please don't bring the great David Hume in to argue in favor of faith and religion. Homie would turn in his grave.

[Shallow]

Formulas that work, work. I'm not saying they don't work. I'm saying claiming to know they will always work is false but we cannot know that. How do we know the universe around us won't change and all of a sudden those formulas don't work. There is a reason why nothing is called a law in science any more. David Hume had large debates with the science community a couple hundred years back. Since then everything has been a theory. Science simply cannot predict the future.

Please don't bring the great David Hume in to argue in favor of faith and religion. Homie would turn in his grave.

I'm not arguing in favour of my faith or religion. I'm not trying to convince anyome of thinking the way I think. I am trying to eplain to people that much of science is based on faith and religion. Not Christianity or Judaism but Science itself being faith and religion. The big bang is taught in schools as if it is concrete fact. I'm not arguing that God should be taught in science but that science should be taught truthfully. If you can't prove something scientifically it has no place being taught as anything more than a possible theory. Scientists know this. They don't go around knowing that is how the world was created. But students in high schools aren't taught it that way.

Evolution for example is currently the most likely scenario based on what we know with the information we have and the more information we get further helps the evoltion argument but to assume that there is no way new information will arise that gives us another theory is absurd. We cannot predict the future. Shit we can't even be sure of the past. Carbon dating goes haywire once we try studying things over 5000 years old or so. There is so much we don't know. So much that could completely change are way of thinking. To assume we have it right is stupid.

[Narrator]

Shallow, you talk too much.  You can get your hands chopped off for speaking the way you do.  Your death will be most unpleasant.

[Shallow]

Shallow, you talk too much.  You can get your hands chopped off for speaking the way you do.  Your death will be most unpleasant.

Then who is going to be your inside spy?

[Narrator]

Shallow, you talk too much.  You can get your hands chopped off for speaking the way you do.  Your death will be most unpleasant.

Then who is going to be your inside spy?

Someone black, of course.

[Elevz]

I understand you got your beliefs, so I'm not tryin' to disrespect that. But you don't even believe in miracles??

Why should I believe in something that goes right against all laws of logic? Even if I witnessed a miracle, it's more likely that I would doubt my own sanity before believing what I witnessed is actually true.

All I'ma say is you should listen to some Mahalia Jackson, that'll make you want to believe. Oh, and even Mariah Carey's Christmas album, since it's that time. Which actually what about Christmas time? Do you celebrate that shit?

Sorry homie, I'm not tryin to be disrespectful, I'm just curious.

Just because I'm not religious, doesn't mean I have no beliefs. I believe in a whole lot of stuff. I wouldn't be breathing if I didn't believe. I believe in people. That's also what makes my Christmas enjoyable, so surely I celebrate that by going out for dinner with my special lady, and having a good time with the family, with presents and all.

I don't see any disrespect! In fact, props for being so curious haha

I'll get back to the rest of the replies later, I'm kinda busy right now.

[QuietTruth]

I understand you got your beliefs, so I'm not tryin' to disrespect that. But you don't even believe in miracles??

Why should I believe in something that goes right against all laws of logic? Even if I witnessed a miracle, it's more likely that I would doubt my own sanity before believing what I witnessed is actually true.

That's interesting, lol. It's happened before when a blind man, suddenly get's his eyesight back. That's unexplained. And prolly will be forever. You know what I'm sayin'? Like there's no explanation for that shit except by the Grace of God. That's a fuckin' miracle. And you don't believe in those? That's the first time I ever heard that, lol.

All I'ma say is you should listen to some Mahalia Jackson, that'll make you want to believe. Oh, and even Mariah Carey's Christmas album, since it's that time. Which actually what about Christmas time? Do you celebrate that shit?

Sorry homie, I'm not tryin to be disrespectful, I'm just curious.

Just because I'm not religious, doesn't mean I have no beliefs. I believe in a whole lot of stuff. I wouldn't be breathing if I didn't believe. I believe in people. That's also what makes my Christmas enjoyable, so surely I celebrate that by going out for dinner with my special lady, and having a good time with the family, with presents and all.

That's what confuses me though. I don't know.

I don't see any disrespect! In fact, props for being so curious haha

I'll get back to the rest of the replies later, I'm kinda busy right now.

Aight cool, I didn't want you to think I'm tryin' to get all in your personal shit and everythang. Lol.

[white Boy]

David Hume
 
" I am apt to suspect the negroes and in general all the other species of men (for there are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction betwixt these breeds of men. Not to mention our colonies, there are Negroe slaves dispersed all over Europe, of which none ever discovered any symptoms of ingenuity; tho' low people, without education, will start up amongst us, and distinguish themselves in every profession. In Jamaica indeed they talk of one negroe as a man of parts and learning; but ‘tis likely he is admired for very slender accomplishments, like a parrot, who speaks a few words plainly.

[Shallow]

David Hume
 
" I am apt to suspect the negroes and in general all the other species of men (for there are four or five different kinds) to be naturally inferior to the whites. There never was a civilized nation of any other complexion than white, nor even any individual eminent either in action or speculation. No ingenious manufactures amongst them, no arts, no sciences. On the other hand, the most rude and barbarous of the whites, such as the ancient Germans, the present Tartars, have still something eminent about them, in their valour, form of government, or some other particular. Such a uniform and constant difference could not happen, in so many countries and ages, if nature had not made an original distinction betwixt these breeds of men. Not to mention our colonies, there are Negroe slaves dispersed all over Europe, of which none ever discovered any symptoms of ingenuity; tho' low people, without education, will start up amongst us, and distinguish themselves in every profession. In Jamaica indeed they talk of one negroe as a man of parts and learning; but ‘tis likely he is admired for very slender accomplishments, like a parrot, who speaks a few words plainly.

I never said he was Jesus. 7even was the one that called him great. I just brought up a debate he had with the science community. The content of one's character has no effect on the man's contributions or arguments. If Isaac Newton was found out to be a pedophile would that change his contribution to science? Hume is either a deep rooted racist or a victim of his times and what he saw. Either way that doesn't change the fact that science cannot study what hasn't happened yet. This all stems from positivism; that only through strict scientific menthod and study can something be considered science. The idea that if something isn't tested over and over again it cannot be true science. My argument takes it a step futher in saying that even the tried, tested, and true can change is the world changes and there is no way in knowing whether the world will change or not.

[7even]

1. You have to put this racist paragraph into timely context. Back when Hume lived that type of thinking wasn't tabu at all.
2. You should not condemn a person because of one issue you heavily disagree with. There's hundreds of texts by him that I can guarantee you would not be nearly as fed up with.

People too often rely on discrediting the person when they can't refute the argument.