Atheists Trying Hard to Study Theism

"Rev. Karl E. Taylor" <ktayloraz@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
>Shutting down children's hospitals is not scientific?

it doesn't allow you to rule out many things quickly.

> objective evidence of a god, any god, I don't care 
> which god, you pick it.

Chango. google him.

bobo:
>|> | I am correct that theists and anti-theists are locked in
>|> | endless meaningless squabbles about that which NEITHER
>|> | really understands because they have not applied 
>|> | themselves?
>|
>|> You are wrong.
>|
>| where is the evidence of this? 

where is the evidence of this? 

>| engaging them in semantic games. meanwhile bunches of folx
>| are finding gods and interacting with them, as they see it.
>
>You've not shown that yo do.  

people are studying their experiences. 
there's obvious evidence. 

>In fact, you seem to have a big problem
>with the very simple concept of objective evidence.

reams and reams. check it out. it's fantastic.

>BTW, evidence of atheists pu****ng back against 
>deluded theists 

agreed that many theists are deluded.

>trying to force them to convert?

agreed that some extremist cultists
are imperialistic in the worst way, 
often wor****pping despotic gods.

> the idea that people believe different from 
> them, scares the **** out of them.

guess so. I think belief is way over-rated.

>|> The atheists would like nothing more then to 
>|> go about life and the business of living.  ....

>|> ...the theists keep shoving their delusions in to the
>|> faces of people that don't accept them.  The atheists,
>|> shove back.
>|
>| if you shoved back intelligently you might get somewhere.

> So, to you, demanding real, objective, testable, 
> repeatable, validated, and falsifiable evidence 
> of a god, is not intelligent.

that's the shove part. doing it intelligently is incremental,
removing their base level priorities initially rather than 
dealing with them in any seriousness in further encounters.
conclude positively about orishas as gods because they can
possess people, and then compare and contrast the "reality"
of these kinds of gods with ones that never possess anyone.

the religious olympics, pitting religion against religion 
for activities such as prophesying, miracle-generation,
and knowledge-generation. relic and saint making can be
engaged as side-attractions.

> Wrong, I want evidence.  Show me the evidence, 

I pointed to mounds of it, and means of delivering it.

> I'll study it and if it's valid I'll happily 
> shut the **** up.

I don't want you to shut up. my aim isn't to silence
anyone or to have them go away. only to engage the topic.

> Wrong.  It answers a number of questions that I 
> have never gotten answers to.

which ones?

>|> Where is it then?
>|
>| cf. anthropology, psychology of consciousness, and
>| sociology of religion. this is where gods are in
>| fact studied, and we can learn something of them.
>| waiting for futile online debate standoffs to end
>| is the height of folly, blessed beast!
>
>Anthropology, study of ancient and neo ancient cultures.

wiki:
	Anthropology (from Greek: ????????, anthropos, 
		"human being"; and ?????, logos, 
		"speech" lit. to talk about human 
		beings) is the study of humanity. 
		Anthropology has origins in the 
		natural sciences, the humanities, 
		and the social sciences.[1]

soft sciences. Tani doesn't like 'em.

>Got that one already.  Lots of great mythology and stories.  No gods.

you missed it. they had gods, you just 
have to become a participant-observer.

>Psychology of consciousness.  Hmmm, got that one too.  Funny thing, no
>one has been able to re****t about consciousness after the subject has
>died.  

right, so study gods while the people are alive.

> Guess you can leave that one out as well for 
> not only objective evidence of gods, 

I don't follow. it has exploration of mysticism, which is said
to be the direct experience of gods. ignore it if you like.

> but of the after life too.

agreed. that's a fantasy. we're finite animals and whatever
gods we encounter on the inner planes will be accessible 
only during our lives as humans. it's now or never!
 
>There is no "sociology of religion"  ....

>...neither of those provides objective evidence of a god either.

>Now, about that objective evidence, got any?

what you looking for and how can i provide it to you?
I cannot make all the children's hospitals close down.
got any other good hypotheses? :)

>You claim the gods

not really, i'm facilitating an argument that you and 
the dimwitted invaders who were other theists were
floating very badly about the necessity of faith. 
so far i only claimed that i've known many deities 
but through the medium of a human being. if you 
can get in there and test then you may be able to 
detect it like with some kind of instrument if you
really need to, like for feelings or thoughts or
experiences. 

do you have objective evidence for any of these
(feelings, thoughts, or experiences)? what is it?
 
> ...Lots of stories, some of them even pretty 
> good ones, but no gods.

possessory? you haven't observed possessions?
benighted ones! blessed beast!

boboro**** at-sign satanservice.org: compassionate Satan-servant since 9666

The Gospel of Satan exists! it's real! see http://www.gospel-of-satan.com/
EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION: http://ec.princeton.edu/
   1-800-584-9911