Go to The Reverend Kooka Speaks About Religious Bulls#!t
- Add a comment
- Go to IF ONE BELIEF IS PROVEN WRONG, THAT MEANS OURS HAS TO BE RIGHT
Kooka
It's not going to work with gomedome and me. He is too spiteful and harbors on the past. He wants to keep blaming me for whatever and I got rid of a husband who constantly did that, so I really don't have to take that anymore. I believe in forgive and forget, but evidently that is not his forte. So, I'll just leave him alone and go on my merry way without saying anything than can be detrimental to keeping a bad thing going. I hope you understand.
posted by
b2008
on December 16, 2007 at 6:37 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: bpitter
Yes, I thought you were responding to me at that time and I just apologized to you for not understanding. I thought you were still responding to my request. Sorry again!
1. So you do believe in aliens but don't believe anyone has seen one on this earth, right? So you believe that everything who claims to have seen flying objects did not see what they said? There are even pilots who have seen flying objects that were in formation, they claim and shot out of view like nothing man has ever known. Do you really believe pilots could make up such a thing?
2. Regarding the solar system, read this and please give me your comments:
The idea that the universe is a product of chance requires belief in what scientists describe as many "lucky accidents" or "coincidences." For example, the universe is made up of an abundance of the simplest atoms—hydrogen and helium. Life, however, requires not only hydrogen but also an abundance of more complex atoms, especially carbon and oxygen. Scientists used to wonder where such precious atoms come from.
Is it just a coincidence that the complex atoms necessary to sustain life are manufactured inside certain giant stars? And is it just by chance that some of these giant stars explode as supernovas, spewing out their treasure chest of rare atoms? Sir Fred Hoyle, who was involved in the making of these discoveries, said: "I do not believe that any scientist who examined the evidence would fail to draw the inference that the laws of nuclear physics have been deliberately designed."
3. I meant something other than humans, like aliens for instance. Do you believe that something or some alien form could have made humans?
4. So who made the animals that we might have evolved from? I'm just trying to get your view of how any living creature came to exist on the earth.
Finally, can I give you other information to respond to also? Somewhere between what you believe and I believe there must be a middle ground where we can agree. Do you think?
babs
posted by
b2008
on December 16, 2007 at 8:19 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: RSM
"The first person was clearly evolved from an animal. I have seen too much proof and logic that backs that up."
"It was not about belief at all. belief does not need proof to back it up."
You believe what you want and I will believe what I want. Good luck!
posted by
RedStatesMan
on December 14, 2007 at 8:35 PM
| link to this | reply
kooka_lives - I'm not even going to respond to that earlier comment
posted by
gomedome
on December 14, 2007 at 1:00 PM
| link to this | reply
FineYoung
Deductive reasoning fails to work for any form of religious beliefs really, that is why it is called 'belief'. In truth believers would look better if they stopped trying to find proof and just said 'This is what we believe, live with it and leave us alone' and left it at that. I think that would also get the non-believers to back down. I know I get more vocal the more I have to hear about how my beliefs are wrong or that I am being narrow minded because I am unable to believe as they do.
posted by
kooka_lives
on December 14, 2007 at 12:03 PM
| link to this | reply
bpitter
You misunderstood the intention of the post I think. I was not saying anything about you and I have never made nay claims at all that you were trying to push your beliefs on me. I read the article you linked to and I saw the very clear flaws in the thinking used there. Such thinking can never be considered proof at all.
I am glad to see you understand that there is gray in the world, since I have seen many believers how do not understand that at all. For them everything is either good or evil.
And now to your questions.
Do you believe in aliens?
Yes I do, since due to the size of the universe the odds of Earth being the only planet that was able to produce life is fairly nil. But I do not believe they have visited the Earth yet and I regretfully doubt we will encounter them in our life times.
Do you have a theory of how the solar system evolved?
I agree with the common scientific ideas right now. The Big Bang and the clouds of gases cooling and forming into planets and all that.
Do you believe that there must be someone or something smarter than the average person?
Than the average person, yes. IQ wise, I am as well as anyone with a higher than average intelligence. But I think what you are actually asking do I believe there has to be something smarter than man out there. No, I do not believe there must be something smarter than man out there. There might be something smarter than us out there, but it is not a 'must'. Just having more knowledge does not mean something is smarter.
What is your theory of how man came about?
At some point after the Earth cooled enough inorganic compounds were struck by lighten and radiation and ended up forming proteins. This was followed during the course of a million years or so by similar activity still taking place to cause those proteins to become what we consider life in its simplest form.
And I mean, do you think the first person was born or evolved from an animal, or what?
The first person was clearly evolved from an animal. I have seen too much proof and logic that backs that up.
You still seem to think that I am taking all this personal or that it is upsetting me, and I can promise you it is not. I have no problem with an open and honest exchange.
The only part of the post that was talking about you was that you were the one who gave me the link. That was it. The post was about the article and was not directed at you in any way.
posted by
kooka_lives
on December 14, 2007 at 11:59 AM
| link to this | reply
RSM
Did you not just write another comment to me in another post here talking about how I need to stop belittling you? But I guess you can come here and belittle me and my beliefs all you want.
reading your comment it is clear you did not understand any of the post itself and instead decided that I was trying to attack belief as a whole somehow. the post was about the foolish logic that is used to try and prove God. I was at no point saying anyone's BELIEFS where wrong.
It was not about belief at all. belief does not need proof to back it up. This was about certain believers who show themselves to be ignorant and foolish by pretending they have proof that they really do not.
If you do not feel I have anything of value to say in this blog, then don't read my posts here. You obviously are unable to understand them anyway due to your preconceived beliefs about me.
posted by
kooka_lives
on December 14, 2007 at 11:42 AM
| link to this | reply
Re: kooka_lives - we could write a book of lame proofs of God's existence
We could also write a book on how gomedome and kooka have wisdom beyond all others here on earth. How they know all and the rest of us who disagree are simply poor little gnats in their world. This blog is ridiculous not in the fact of kookas' beliefs but in the way it is delivered daily. Trying to legislate how to prove someone's beliefs to be wrong and then coming to a conclusion based on the author's governing is ridiculous. Kooka, please do not spend so much time trying to prove the meaning of life and just live it. If all of this analysis by yourself and gomedome is a part of the life of an atheist (which I doubt it is needed) then I know I simply do not desire your beliefs because I do not have that much time.
posted by
RedStatesMan
on December 13, 2007 at 8:23 PM
| link to this | reply
Re: deductive reasoning is a bad method of proving God.
Anyway is a "bad" way of proving God when you don't believe, don't you think?
posted by
b2008
on December 12, 2007 at 4:23 PM
| link to this | reply
Gomedome
That's funny!
posted by
b2008
on December 12, 2007 at 4:22 PM
| link to this | reply
Kooka,
I'm not one who wishes to make you believe one way or another because there could always be a third or fourth way instead of just two. Life doesn't evolve around good and bad or right and wrong. There's always shades of gray.
I could have given you something even greater than that to read which would be even harder to disprove but I'm sure you would find a way:) so I'm not even going to bother. What I do want to know is do you believe in aliens? Do you have a theory of how the solar system evolved? Do you believe that there must be someone or something smarter than the average person? What is your theory of how man came about? And I mean, do you think the first person was born or evolved from an animal, or what?
Now it's just my curiosity so don't blame it on anything regarding religion. I just want to know how you feel the earth came into existence and every other star in the universe. That's all.
And remember, I'm not the one trying to tell you you're wrong in what you believe. I'm not the one who is trying to be difficult with you. I'm trying to learn what makes people think the way they do. So I know you're not talking about me in your last post!
babs
posted by
b2008
on December 12, 2007 at 4:19 PM
| link to this | reply
kooka_lives - we could write a book of lame proofs of God's existence
I think since I have been on this site I have heard everything in that regard. The last one was the "observation equals foregone conclusion" argument. It went something like this:
"when we look at a car we know that it must have been designed by someone, so too when we look at a tree we know that it was designed by someone" . . . when I added that every car on the road today has had multiple designers, they of course skipped over this reality by saying that God was all powerful and didn't need any help. Then I asked them to give me an accurate description of just one car designer derived from observing only the car itself. They ended up telling me that I was lost, confused and living in darkness.
posted by
gomedome
on December 12, 2007 at 2:01 PM
| link to this | reply
deductive reasoning is a bad method of proving God.
Great post.
posted by
FineYoungSinger
on December 12, 2007 at 11:36 AM
| link to this | reply