Total posts: 511
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
You are taking a single phrase out of context and applying a literal interpretation to it. When commencement speakers say "make a difference" they mean a positive difference, or "improve things," which I suspect is clear when you look at the most commencement addresses in their entirety.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Analgesic.Spectre
Yes, democracy fails, but it fails less than any other system.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@secularmerlin
Yes, hypothesis would be more accurate. I was, however, careful to say "proposed."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@vagabond
One might respond with the observation that the overwhelming majority of scientists reject the overwhelming majority of proposed theories.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
And you need an education instead of wiki.Did you even read your own link? None of these are original cultural stories of the Inuit people. This is 19th century inuit mythology.
Read the link again. It says the Qiqirn was referenced in a book the 19th century. It does not say that book is the origin of the myth. The myth itself is far older.
If that is not enough, here is a page that mentions some more monsters in Inuit mythology.
"Supernatural beings accompany many Inuit myths, including: Mahaha, a demon that terrorizes the Arctic and tickles its victims to death; Ijiraat, shapeshifters that may change into any arctic animal but may not disguise their red eyes; Taqriaqsuit, shadow people who are rarely seen but often heard; Qallupilluk (or Qalupalik, see below), scaly, human-like creatures that snatch children into the sea; Inupasugjuk, giants who capture humans; and Tuniit, who are seen as simple-minded but extremely strong ancestors of the Inuit."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
Many African cultures, and Eskimo cultures did not develop monsters.
You really need to make sure of your facts before making such claims.
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qiqirn: "In Inuit mythology an ijiraq is a sort of shape shifter who kidnaps children and hides them away and abandons them..."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ijiraq_(mythology): "In Inuit mythology, Qiqirn is a large, bald dog spirit that terrifies the Inuit people."
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ethang5
God stories preceded natural catastrophes. And the exist where the weather is always serene and kind.
I think you need to reconsider both statements.
Natural catastrophes have occurred since the beginning of time, and no place on Earth has weather that is always serene.
Created:
Posted in:
Most people have some level of sensitivity to toxic plants. It's the world's most common allergy. Sensitivity to poison ivy, oak and sumac tends to decline with age. People who got rashes as children usually see their sensitivity decrease by early adulthood. People who were once allergic to poison plants may even lose their sensitivity entirely later in life.
Another source says that some people have no reaction on their first exposure, but do subsequently.
Created:
-->
@EtrnlVw
How do you tell that something is designed? What properties does it have that non-designed objects lack?
Here the theist runs into a problem. If everything is designed, then there is no non-designed object you can point to as an example. To be consistent, you must maintain that a run-of-the-mill rock appears just as designed as the most complex living thing. You lose any distinction between a watch and a rock, from the standpoint of the appearance of design.
The argument from design gets things backwards. Life evolved to fit the universe, not the other way around.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Outplayz
Asking who created God seems like a perfectly valid way to counter the theist assertion that all things require a creator. If theists alter the assertion to say that all things except God require a creator, then they are hard-pressed to do so without special pleading or circular reasoning.
As for your assertion that "time, space, energy, etc." caused God to manifest, how is that qualitatively different than asserting "time, space, energy, etc." caused the universe to manifest? The latter explanation seems superior by Occam's razor.
Created:
-->
@janesix
Nature is filled with complex patterns that, at first glance, appear to be designed, but for which we now have a better explanation. Take snowflakes, for instance. If you understand crystal formation, then the complex patterns of snowflakes become explicable without resorting to a designer. Biochemistry is orders of magnitude more complex than crystal formation, but there is no reason to believe it is different in principle.
One might also turn the question around and ask theists to give an example of a non-designed object.
Created: