zedvictor4

The Earth and ourselves are within the Earth's atmosphere. 

Does the integrity of all planetary spheres rely upon an atmosphere?

And I assume that the dictionary would definitely differentiate between the human and the human eye. I think also, that the dictionary would differentiate between the human being and the human body.

Such thoughts aren't hard though.

I thought that my double entendre was reasonably witty.

Did you get it?

Wouldn't that be nice?

On toast.

Convention and Oxford Dictionaries, would  appear to differentiate between Earth and atmosphere....On rather than within.

I think that convention has it,  irrespective of what one might consider to be literally correct.

Jam depletion. 

Perhaps he had a dirty head! 

A fructose bandit, that's what.

That's what German people must have said about Hitler back in the day.

All conservatives together hey!

Shittenhouse Rittenhouse, Mein Fuhrer.

Exactly.

Yes what?

Though on second thoughts, smoke tree an let the good times roll, isn't very Doc.

It would be correct to say that we reside within the Earth's atmosphere.

No what?

Are you Dr Franklin or his sibling perhaps?

If you can't work it out, I don't think that it will get any easier if I try to explain....Ask your parents or supervising adult, for assistance.

I think therefore I am...That's as certain as I can be.

I don't claim to be Atheist...I prefer not to be a labellist.

I don't necessarily need to explain the universe....Though I do like to contemplate such things....Though the only plausible explanation for the existence of matter, is magic...All other hypotheses fall down before they start.

I exist thanks to my parents...Though whether or not existence is a good thing, I've no idea.

And morals are very much a variable human construct.

You obviously never had bibles with pictures when you were a kid....And we all get brainwashed, it's the nature of the beast....Ultimate questions are not the exclusive remit of Christians.  We're all allowed to have a stab at them, you know.

Maybe newer P.C. picture bibles have a swarthier dark haired version of god.

Vishnu is as reasonable or unreasonable as any god hypothesis.

I don't believe in either, as belief overlooks proof.

Interestingly though, "chance happenstance" is as plausible as any other hypothesis that relies upon a magical beginning....And that's all of them.

Pooooff!....And there was a god.

No what?

"No",  with no accompanying explanation, is straight out of the Dr Franklin text book.

I love this stuff....And it might or might not be nonsense....And great if you're being paid regardless.

Ricci flatness and The calabi-Yau manifold....It's all in the name.

Wouldn't be as plausible if it was called the Smith idea.

Instinct and the endocrine system are extremely cynical.

So what is LOVE really all about?

Interesting how you incorrectly associate atheism with the Big Bang.

I personally, am sceptical of all creation hypotheses.....Scepticism tends to be the result of a lack of real proof.

When I was a child, the ethereal light skinned humanoid version  was the image portrayed in bibles and bible literature..... The time when people attempted to brainwash me with tall tales.

Maybe there is a newer P.C. Semitic version available now. Nonetheless a god created in mans own image.

And Vishnu was an example of an alternative god.....Humanoid, but with modifications.

As ever, I will always accept the idea of a GOD principle....Simultaneously, nothing and everything to do with the above.

Yep I was agreeing that you think that some P.C. is bad.

But you will undeniably also think that some P.C. is good.

Typically you will tend only to complain about the things that do not suit your way of thinking.

You're right though.

Death is inevitable.

And 183,000 is an emotional number.

Poetry.

I'm with Oromagi.

A written document is evidence. Though not necessarily proof of anything.

Hence a 2000 year old debate with no resolution.

The onus is on the believer of tall tales, to prove that they are not tall tales.

Typically believers will always try and avoid this little issue by shifting responsibility.

It's not a case of which came first.

Gods were invented.....Scepticism came later.

Prove the existence of a god and the time worn debate ends......Simple.

Any god will do.....It doesn't need to be the ethereal light skinned American/European version.

A four armed version will suffice.

Yep....Because you think that it is.

There is always correctness.

Some correctness is good.....but some correctness is better than other correctness...and vice versa, depending upon your point of view.

P.C. is a massive problem only if you think that it is.

And non-mythical is your assumption.....Same old same old.

What do you mean?

Explain this sin that you are so obsessed with.

What is catastrophic health?......Sounds nasty.

#60

You're desperately clutching at straws.

And: " Sin is what makes people stupid.".....Speak for yourself!

Yep #12...Old news.

The book is a book.....And the transfer of data is the transfer of data.....Or brainwashing, depending how you choose to look at it.

Which ever way you look at it, it's nonetheless an inevitable process.

Though, the hypothesis itself falls short of the mark, in the light of evolved knowledge.

The biblical compilers were rendered fallible by their own ignorance.

Well.

The Christian bible is as much a copy cat as any other mythological hypothesis. Copy cat is simply the development of ideas.

If I actually knew there was a god then I might have a chance of understanding it's real capabilities. This is not the same as understanding the mythical capabilities of a mythical god.

Death or not living is as essential as living, the two are inter-dependant.

Human emotion is and human bias is inevitable and therefore we oftentimes have a tendency to be selectively moral.. Nonetheless what is life and how do you unbiasedly differentiate between the life potential contained within one species and another, without being hypocritical.

And logic is believing in mythical deities and logic isn't believing in mythical deities....Relativism if you like.

Quite frankly, as I have said before, you are wasting your own time posting your stuff on a debating website, as most are not interested and probably no one has a clue what you are on about.

Take it to some serious scientists for real scrutiny.

O.K.

1. Meaning, value and purpose can be placed upon anything, they are not god specific qualities.....Ultimate meaning, value and purpose is only an assumption, no matter how strong ones beliefs might be.

2. As for the abortion issue.......Firstly explain what you think live is.....Not a life or a period of existence....But life.

3. The bible contains simple factual evidence, but it also contains a lot of supernatural embellishment. Therefore I prefer to regard the bible as a mythology or a naive hypothesis.  Mythologies and associated gods were once a  commonplace explanation of the unknown.

So in laymen's terms what did you just say?

Rather than explaining in simple terms you chose to further complicate or over-complicate your hypothesis....I think that this could rightly be attributed to ego.

As ever and unlike most, I make an effort to discuss with you, but you have a habit of making discussion difficult.

Yep. I agree also.

Though I prefer to say that fallible men compiled the Christian biblical hypothesis. over a long period of time.

And as a logical and sensible hypothesis, the "bible" was eventually found to fall way short of the mark.

Nonetheless, old habits of fallible people die hard.

Well.  Humans are neither 100% fallible or infallible....But what's this got to do with theistic literature per se....The question is fact or fiction, not the failings and/or abilities of it's authors.

And laying huge stones upon each other to build a structure is an achievable reality....Back breaking work for some poor bastards and the whims of self importance for others...Same as it ever was and as it still is.

Fact or fiction?....Same as it ever was and same as it still is.

Yep. I would agree that this is the best definition of love and/or unconditional love.

Other than that, love is an overused and misused epithet.....I love cycling, I love ice cream, I love donkeys etc. etc.

I love god.....How does one know if the they've never met it.....It might be a complete and utter emotionless bastard......Which it more than likely is.... Assuming  that such a principle is actually pertinent.

I'm not sure who and what you are referring to when you suggest "more Faith".

Faith has two main sub-definitions.

1. A general trust in day to day stuff....I have faith in the weather forecast etc.

2. Strong belief in doctrines of religion.

I have no strong belief in doctrines of religion, and little faith in the weather forecast....Though it is fair to say that we all need to have faith in day to day stuff, or we would never get anything done.

So can you explain, why you think that I might have more faith than you?

And I would suggest that you and more specifically your brain, derives meaning, value and purpose and attributes it to a god, relative to programmed information....In exactly the same way (process) that SkepticalOne and myself attribute meaning, value and purpose in other ways.

And furthermore, there is no factual evidence for the existence of a god, only hypothetical suggestion....Hence, you have faith and we are sceptical.

I'm not sure that you fully understand ego, but that's  a semantics issue.

Nonetheless, I would suggest that space is either finite or infinite and not both simultaneously.

Though occupied and unoccupied is logical, and so your proposition is sort of obvious if we accept the principle of ongoing universal expansion.

So: Two simple layman's questions based on the above.

1. Is matter a finite resource?

2. And if so, how does one visualise the movement pattern of matter and universe, post genesis?

Can you give me a simple, rational answer to these questions?

I agree.

The point simply is that faith, scepticism or irrationality and labelling them, are simply a bodily function that occurs within the brain.

And although religion is otherwise meaningless, it nonetheless can/does have meaning within said context. 

Yep.

But I've lost track of who it is we're supposed to be fucking.

Yep....My point was, there is no such thing as a true vacuum.

Nothing would be a true vacuum....Matter-less infinite space/macro infinite.

As such and at a basic level and from a laypersons point of view, your expansion hypothesis is sort of stating the obvious

Not necessarily.

Yep. Just as Europeans fucked the Native Americans....But that's all history now, and consigned to the past.

And Kurds just wannabe Kurds and are just as nationalistically biased and backward thinking as Turks and Greeks are.

Such is human nature.

One day perhaps we will realise that we are all human beings from Planet Earth........Fat chance!

Even the Scots don't want to be British....F**king United Nations hey.....LOL.

And present day Global politics is a different matter altogether.....Which is the point I'm actually trying to make.

Yep. I get where you're coming from.

Why after four years of personal incompetence is he still President?

Or perhaps more importantly, why after four years do the American people put up with such incompetence and why are they likely to vote him in again? 

Well, I think it's a lot to do with the innate corruptibility of the system, which is driven by the wants of the ego....Not just Trump's ego, but ego from the top down.

And why is Trump where he is and why do any Presidents get where they get?....Well, that's because they pay to get there and they pay to stretch the system to the limits of it's corruptibility.....And competence is not really a necessary requirement of the Presidential job.....Bizarrely, it's the most important job of all and yet the only necessary qualifications required are plenty of money and charisma....Try getting a cleaning job if you haven't got a mop certificate.

And who's going to vote for a nerd with a masters degree in politics and sociology......Boring.

And in reality the day to day lives of ordinary Americans, actually changes very little. So the whole Political thing is never anything other than media generated entertainment.

And it's like a football game, you pick your side, blue or red, and stick with it for life. 

How many people consider things as you and I do?.....Hopefully enough to make a difference.....Though, there's the corruptibility of the system and the habitual blinkeredness  of the ordinary American to overcome first.

What is a true vacuum? 

Because they are as deluded and cynical as he is....Simple.