Syed's Mega-Thread

[Syed]

i would say god's magic cant be seen

That's right. Magic can't be seen or detected. God can't be seen or detected. We have no reason to believe in the reality of god's magic or god.

i do

- - - Updated - - -

i trust only which i agree

Which is another way of saying that you believe what you want to believe and disregard the rest.

dont you do that?

 

[DBT]

That's right. Magic can't be seen or detected. God can't be seen or detected. We have no reason to believe in the reality of god's magic or god.

i do

Of course. Your belief rests upon a foundation of faith.

"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)

 

[DBT]

dont you do that?

No. I consider the evidence.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Which is another way of saying that you believe what you want to believe and disregard the rest.

dont you do that?

If we did that, we'd be enjoying Hillary's transition much more than the one they show us on the news.

 

[AJ113]

The ability and performance of god rating quite poorly when compared with the ability and performance of policemen, apparently.

Therefore all policemen are gods? Hmm, I think I've gone wrong somewhere.

 

[DrZoidberg]

i trust only which i agree

Which is another way of saying that you believe what you want to believe and disregard the rest.

dont you do that?

No offence, but only idiots do that. If that's your strategy for figuring out what is true you have no way of knowing what is true. That attitude will make you foolish. This isn't me trying to insult you. I'm just explaining where that attitude will lead you.

Fundamentally it's arrogance. You're arrogant. Something which the Quran specifically says is bad. Please read your holy book closer. It's not as stupid as you seem to think it is

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

I think the body does lose weight when it dies. I looked it up after watching a Sean Penn movie a long time ago. In some experiment, a (hopefully) willing person sat on a scale. Then died. The scientists repeated that however many times necessary to fulfill the ritual and the results were that a certain amount of kilograms mysteriously go away when humans die. I explained it away with the evaporation of sweat but the stuff I read disagreed so I have been left to believe it since. They could have figured that one out by now but it was a thing at some point in time.

(emphasis added)

Not "as many times as necessary", but 6 times, which is not a large enough sample size by any measure. And of the six times, two were discarded as of no value (one of which because the subject died before the measuring equipment was set up), while others showed fluctuations in weight after death - falling, rising, falling again to settle. The oft-cited result of 21 grams was actually only measured in one instance. The experiments were never repeated by the original experimenter or by anybody else, so no independent confirmation can be shown. Sweat evaporation cannot be ruled out, as similar experiments with dogs - which cool off by panting instead of perspiring - showed no weight loss on death. And finally, the experimenter, in lieu of considering other possibilities, just said that the results led him to the "inescapable conclusion" that this was the soul escaping from the body - a conclusion that just so happened to coincide with his religious beliefs.

So no, these 1907 experiments shouldn't have "left (you) to believe it since". They're early 20th-century pseudoscience and, if they haven't been as thoroughly debunked as they might have been, it's only because nobody took them seriously enough to bother doing so, at least until the film "21 grams" came out.

 

[DrZoidberg]

I think the body does lose weight when it dies. I looked it up after watching a Sean Penn movie a long time ago. In some experiment, a (hopefully) willing person sat on a scale. Then died. The scientists repeated that however many times necessary to fulfill the ritual and the results were that a certain amount of kilograms mysteriously go away when humans die. I explained it away with the evaporation of sweat but the stuff I read disagreed so I have been left to believe it since. They could have figured that one out by now but it was a thing at some point in time.

(emphasis added)

Not "as many times as necessary", but 6 times, which is not a large enough sample size by any measure. And of the six times, two were discarded as of no value (one of which because the subject died before the measuring equipment was set up), while others showed fluctuations in weight after death - falling, rising, falling again to settle. The oft-cited result of 21 grams was actually only measured in one instance. The experiments were never repeated by the original experimenter or by anybody else, so no independent confirmation can be shown. Sweat evaporation cannot be ruled out, as similar experiments with dogs - which cool off by panting instead of perspiring - showed no weight loss on death. And finally, the experimenter, in lieu of considering other possibilities, just said that the results led him to the "inescapable conclusion" that this was the soul escaping from the body - a conclusion that just so happened to coincide with his religious beliefs.

So no, these 1907 experiments shouldn't have "left (you) to believe it since". They're early 20th-century pseudoscience and, if they haven't been as thoroughly debunked as they might have been, it's only because nobody took them seriously enough to bother doing so, at least until the film "21 grams" came out.

It's on Snopes.

http://www.snopes.com/religion/soulweight.asp

And absolute complete nonsense.

 

[Syed]

i trust only which i agree

Which is another way of saying that you believe what you want to believe and disregard the rest.

dont you do that?

No offence, but only idiots do that.

do you believe every shit richard dawkin said?

 

[Syed]

I think the body does lose weight when it dies. I looked it up after watching a Sean Penn movie a long time ago. In some experiment, a (hopefully) willing person sat on a scale. Then died. The scientists repeated that however many times necessary to fulfill the ritual and the results were that a certain amount of kilograms mysteriously go away when humans die. I explained it away with the evaporation of sweat but the stuff I read disagreed so I have been left to believe it since. They could have figured that one out by now but it was a thing at some point in time.

(emphasis added)

Not "as many times as necessary", but 6 times, which is not a large enough sample size by any measure. And of the six times, two were discarded as of no value (one of which because the subject died before the measuring equipment was set up), while others showed fluctuations in weight after death - falling, rising, falling again to settle. The oft-cited result of 21 grams was actually only measured in one instance. The experiments were never repeated by the original experimenter or by anybody else, so no independent confirmation can be shown. Sweat evaporation cannot be ruled out, as similar experiments with dogs - which cool off by panting instead of perspiring - showed no weight loss on death. And finally, the experimenter, in lieu of considering other possibilities, just said that the results led him to the "inescapable conclusion" that this was the soul escaping from the body - a conclusion that just so happened to coincide with his religious beliefs.

So no, these 1907 experiments shouldn't have "left (you) to believe it since". They're early 20th-century pseudoscience and, if they haven't been as thoroughly debunked as they might have been, it's only because nobody took them seriously enough to bother doing so, at least until the film "21 grams" came out.

dead body lose oxygen not soul

 

[Syed]

dont you do that?

No. I consider the evidence.

i have no problem with that

 

[Keith&Co.]

dead body lose oxygen not soul

And here you've been saying we die BECAUSE God yanks the soul... Make up whatever you're using as your mind, Syed.

 

[Syed]

i do

Of course. Your belief rests upon a foundation of faith.

"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)

faith mean trust

i trust my doctor, do you?

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

(emphasis added)

Not "as many times as necessary", but 6 times, which is not a large enough sample size by any measure. And of the six times, two were discarded as of no value (one of which because the subject died before the measuring equipment was set up), while others showed fluctuations in weight after death - falling, rising, falling again to settle. The oft-cited result of 21 grams was actually only measured in one instance. The experiments were never repeated by the original experimenter or by anybody else, so no independent confirmation can be shown. Sweat evaporation cannot be ruled out, as similar experiments with dogs - which cool off by panting instead of perspiring - showed no weight loss on death. And finally, the experimenter, in lieu of considering other possibilities, just said that the results led him to the "inescapable conclusion" that this was the soul escaping from the body - a conclusion that just so happened to coincide with his religious beliefs.

So no, these 1907 experiments shouldn't have "left (you) to believe it since". They're early 20th-century pseudoscience and, if they haven't been as thoroughly debunked as they might have been, it's only because nobody took them seriously enough to bother doing so, at least until the film "21 grams" came out.

dead body lose oxygen not soul

That's the opposite of what you've been saying throughout this thread.

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

Of course. Your belief rests upon a foundation of faith.

"Faith is like a piece of blank paper whereon you may write as well one miracle as another." ~ Charles Blount (1654-1693)

faith mean trust

i trust my doctor, do you?

I can go and see my doctor, or phone her, and I know I'll get an answer when I talk to her. No such luck with your gods and angels.

Also, faith doesn't mean trust. It's a whole lot more than just trust ... except when theists want to play word games to make it look like their beliefs make some kind of sense.

 

[C_Mucius_Scaevola]

No. I consider the evidence.

i have no problem with that

Really? I'd have said that was by far your biggest problem on here - we present evidence, you ignore it. Well, maybe it's just that you don't consider that a problem ...

 

[Keith&Co.]

faith mean trust

Wrong. Trust is based upon an established track record.
Faith is what you use when you don't have the track record to support trust.

 

[DrZoidberg]

i trust only which i agree

Which is another way of saying that you believe what you want to believe and disregard the rest.

dont you do that?

No offence, but only idiots do that.

do you believe every shit richard dawkin said?

No. I have a good example. Dawkins is a bad philosopher. He's a great biologist. I believe everything he says about biology. Because the scientific community supports what he says. Philosophers and sociologists have torn his philosophy book The God Delusion to shreds. He makes some generalizations about religious faith that the evidence doesn't really support. He sees religion completely as a one dimensional activity.

So I believe everything he says within his specialty and which is supported by the scientific community. I don't necessarily believe the things he has said outside of his specialty.

You're not a specialist within science (that's pretty obvious) nor theology (that's just as obvious). So just stop spouting your nonsense. How about asking questions instead of making statements? You will come across as more intelligent.

Intelligent people only open their mouths when they're sure to add to the conversations. Stupid people babble and bore their audience.

 

[Syed]

i trust only which i agree

Which is another way of saying that you believe what you want to believe and disregard the rest.

dont you do that?

No offence, but only idiots do that.

do you believe every shit richard dawkin said?

No.

welcome to idiots club

He's a great biologist. I believe everything he says about biology.

dont be robot

 

[Syed]

i have no problem with that

Really? I'd have said that was by far your biggest problem on here - we present evidence, you ignore it. Well, maybe it's just that you don't consider that a problem ...

your evidence not good enough for me