are you atheist since ever or have you been believer once but no more? — SpaceDweller

I remember getting dragged by my big sister along to a church group when I was about 10 years old, she was 12.
I remember a lot of singing and handclapping. I remember being taken into a small room and 4 men standing around me with hands placed on my waist, shoulder and head as they said some words that meant nothing to me. They then asked me to speak something and I remained in awkward intrigued silence. I remember them taking all the youngsters in a van to the countryside. We had a good day and had to listen to crap psalm-singing on the van radio.
After about a month of this I remember my sister telling me we couldn't go back as the leadership of the group had just been arrested and were charged with fraud and abuse of young girls etc(not my sister thankfully).
That was my only experience with a religious group. I have no memory of ever being convinced by any of the god posits.

It's my guess you don't like that theists have some kind of hidden knowledge you have no access to. Which makes you rationalize it and pull it in the domain of primal fears ir whatever. So basically it's because you don't understand it.

It's clear now why you're an atheist! My deer god... :pray:

It's my guess you don't like that theists have some kind of hidden knowledge you have no access to — Haglund

That's just woo woo in my opinion. I am no more concerned about that than I am about magicians doing tricks I can't figure out.
I think I do understand perfectly well and my comment that personal theism comes from personal primal fear is correct.

and my comment that personal theism comes from personal primal fear is correct. — universeness

Which is another example if your digmatism... eeeh, dogmatism. Digit?

you were dragged into a sect, I'm glad you escaped, these are crazy people indeed.
it kind of explains why so much disgust toward religious.

It's clear now why you're an atheist! My deer god... :pray: — Haglund

:lol: I hope that's just your bad English! Don't tell me you believe that Deer have gods as well as your previous claim that Dino gods once existed or still do!

Which is another example if your digmatism... eeeh, dogmatism. Digit? — Haglund

Well, all I can respond with to that is a wee cheeky woof woof.

:lol: I hope that's just your bad English! Don't tell me you believe that Deer have gods as well as your previous claim that Dino gods once existed or still do! — universeness

:lol:

Damn you mr. Universe! :lol:

you were dragged into a sect, I'm glad you escaped, these are crazy people indeed.
it kind of explains why so much disgust toward religious. — SpaceDweller

Yeah, I was too young to know what was going on anyway so I and my sister were relatively unscathed by the experience.
I try not to conflate what some people do whilst flying a religious flag. I don't blame every theists or theism in general for the atrocities of some religious doctrines and its followers.
I am interested in the evidence for the god posit. I find none that is compelling.
I am therefore currently an atheist. I have said this many times but I do feel this to be very true for me.
I don't need the supernatural because I find the natural so super.

How in the world did this become a theology debate?

Damn you mr. Universe — Haglund

At least life offers us both a moment to have a wee laugh together now and then.
Viva la vida!!!

How in the world did this become a theology debate? — Philosophim

Causality......first cause......science versus god.

Causality......first cause......science versus god. — universeness

Causality doesn't have to result in origin debates. I honestly posted this because I was seeing some people on this board have issues understanding what causality was.

Yes! :love: :starstruck: :party:



We ended up in the wring thread indeed! There is another thread about atheism. Conflation and confusion...

What was the thread about?

Science and causality. Another about causality. Lots if causality going on. What would cause that?

Causality doesn't have to result in origin debates. I honestly posted this because I was seeing some people on this board have issues understanding what causality was — Philosophim

Ok, I appreciate your complaint. I will humbly bow out of the thread. You are the author.

Well, all I can respond with to that is a wee cheeky woof woof — universeness

You may be an atheist but at least you're a funny one! And nice to argue with! And speaking of woof woof. Someone staring me in the face...

:smile: :up:

If the people put their trust in you and give you power then you MUST do what you said you will do in the time you said you would do it. At every stage, you must explain what you are doing and why (fully open government,). If you fail, then you must fully explain why, to those you represent. They must then choose what will happen next. Accept your updated plan when you explain it and give you more time to try or you must give up your position and let another vote take place where alternative positions. — universeness

What if the people don't want gene tinkering and transhuman construction, spacetravel, computers with a mind, and all other fantasies you like?

While it solves some problems, it still uses renormalization. Indicating the string view is wrong and has to be replaced by a more fundamental unit. — Haglund

I always had a feeling that string theory was crazy balls. :)

always had a feeling that string theory was crazy balls — chiknsld

:lol:

My man! Strings are crazy balls... :lol:
Indeed! I envìsion a particle as a 6d space of which three are curled up to Planck sized circles. On this hyper sphere (actually the direct product S1xS1xS1) charge is injected. So every particle looks poinlike from a distance, while in reality it's a tiny sphere. The nice thing about them is that they cant form a singularity, like in a black hole. They all fit in one another, like you can squeeze tiny circles on a tiny long tube or cylinder. If gravity pulls them together no point can form.

The nice thing about them is that they cant form a singularity, like in a black hole. They all fit in one another, like you can squeeze tiny circles on a tiny long tube or cylinder. If gravity pulls them together no point can form. — Haglund

Oh wow, you're saying that a blackhole would cause an infinite chain-reaction of more blackholes were it not for these properties of the particle?

What if the people don't want gene tinkering and transhuman construction, spacetravel, computers with a mind, and all other fantasies you like? — Haglund

I will answer this in another thread as I respect @Philosophim's request to stick to the OP and discuss causality.

Oh wow, you're saying that a blackhole would cause an infinite chain-reaction of more blackholes were it not for these properties of the particle? — chiknsld

Dont think I said that. The formation of a black hole is rather tricky. The formation of the event horizon, I mean. Once it's there, does it grow? How can a small hole, seen from the outside, evolve into a massive one? This question has implications for the supermassive black holes in galaxies. Primordial bh are lately seen to be dark matter. An idea already proposed by Hawking way back. I think he was right.



Read it! :up:

Dont think I said that. The formation of a black hole is rather tricky. The formation of the event horizon, I mean. Once it's there, does it grow? How can a small hole, seen from the outside, evolve into a massive one? This question has implications for the supermassive black holes in galaxies. Primordial bh are lately seen to be dark matter. An idea already proposed by Hawking way back. I think he was right. — Haglund

Ah, I see, very interesting. :)

Ah, I see, very interesting — chiknsld

Yes. And that's all it is. Black holes can be mind boggling. "Boggle boggle".

Once it's there, does it grow? How can a small hole, seen from the outside, evolve into a massive one? — Haglund

Cause: energy/mass 'falls into,' the black hole.
Effect: the spherical expanse of the black hole increases.
Nothing more than that afaik.