tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post3543113360375014556..comments2024-03-14T08:15:15.207-07:00Comments on CADRE Comments: The Banana: Proof of Atheism!BKhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01967809861892681780noreply@blogger.comBlogger50125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-44772734008435388032017-03-23T08:09:14.937-07:002017-03-23T08:09:14.937-07:00my argument assumes that naturalistic Causes are n...<i>my argument assumes that naturalistic Causes are negated, they are,Ihvedispro ed them</i><br /><br />You've disproved naturalistic causes? I think you should inform the scientific community about this. This is big news. I mean, really, really big news. You have accomplished something that all philosophy and all of science in the history of mankind has been unable to do.<br /><br />Or im-skepticalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08267710618719895303noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-22421071995211017282017-03-22T21:34:04.556-07:002017-03-22T21:34:04.556-07:00the universal nature is evidence of divine because...the universal nature is evidence of divine because religious experiences are not genetic and have to be culturally constructed, so they should not be universal.<br /><br /><br />- No. That was part of your argument that I rebutted before. Your argument states that because the experience is ABOUT the divine, then it MUST BE divine. That does not follow by any valid logic. Your argument is not Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-59771088961462244812017-03-22T21:29:18.935-07:002017-03-22T21:29:18.935-07:001) who is "they?"
- The authors of a cou...1) who is "they?"<br />- The authors of a couple of articles that YOU cited as part of your research, and YOU said "You need to read this". If I get the time, I'll go back and find the name.<br /><br /><b>I don't remember it but just being part of a broad category proves nothing one way or the other.</b><br /><br />(2) you are contradicting yourself, first say it'sJoseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-52588895604684904382017-03-22T09:38:42.140-07:002017-03-22T09:38:42.140-07:00How does being part of a abroad category of experi...<i>How does being part of a abroad category of experience mean that it is not the result of divine encounter? Just being a broad category in no way rules out divine origin.</i><br />- It doesn't. What it says is that these experiences are not all religious in nature.<br /><br /><i>(1) who is "they?"</i><br />- The authors of a couple of articles that YOU cited as part of your im-skepticalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08267710618719895303noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-68099538571655995292017-03-21T23:30:12.453-07:002017-03-21T23:30:12.453-07:00I suggest that evolutionary nature of religion in ...I suggest that evolutionary nature of religion in and of itself is not enough to rule out God,After all if God uses evolution in creation then we should expect God to allow evolutionary nature of religion to shape human development. Here is my article (part 1) showing how the evolutionary nature of religious development is not contrary to God.Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-3449691331900505922017-03-21T22:26:40.970-07:002017-03-21T22:26:40.970-07:00Papa seems to use Wiki a lot. In fact, he has plag...Papa seems to use Wiki a lot. In fact, he has plagiarized from there before:<br /><br /><a href="http://crudeideas.blogspot.com/2016/07/how-world-looks-with-or-without-god.html" rel="nofollow"> <b>Crude Ideas: How the World Looks With or Without God</b></a><br /><br /><a href="http://dangerousidea.blogspot.com/2012/03/reply-to-loftus-on-argumentum-ad.html?showComment=1331353475089#Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-726975622180707182017-03-21T22:09:34.528-07:002017-03-21T22:09:34.528-07:00case in poimnt his secomnd wiki that he linked to ...case in poimnt his secomnd wiki that he linked to says "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2011) (Learn how and when to remove this template message)"Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-57116574285529976942017-03-21T22:08:01.328-07:002017-03-21T22:08:01.328-07:00wikipidia is not a authoritative source, I never q...wikipidia is not a authoritative source, I never quote them, my quotes are from the authors.Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-52462599207933755192017-03-21T22:05:24.126-07:002017-03-21T22:05:24.126-07:00Andrew Newberg, one of the pioneers in researching...Andrew Newberg, one of the pioneers in researching neural activity of religious experience and God talk tells us that none of the research disproves God, in fact it can't.<br /><br /><br />"…Tracing spiritual experience to neurological behavior does not disprove its realness. If God does exist, for example, and if He appeared to you in some incarnation, you would have no way of Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-52400915417287398172017-03-21T22:05:09.209-07:002017-03-21T22:05:09.209-07:002: Religious Gene is good argument for God
Nichol...2: Religious Gene is good argument for God<br /><br />Nicholas Wade tells us neither side is threatened by a God gene:<br /><br />But the evolutionary perspective on religion does not necessarily threaten the central position of either side. That religious behavior was favored by natural selection neither proves nor disproves the existence of gods. For believers, if one accepts that evolution hasJoseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-89095247580942099562017-03-21T22:04:16.987-07:002017-03-21T22:04:16.987-07:00That sort of makes one think of genes as little gu...That sort of makes one think of genes as little guys holding committee meetings in your head and planning strategy. If it's that cut and dried why not just make a gene for cooperation and cut out the religious mumbo jumo? If it's just an alteration of existing function, then individual conscious decisions may be involved after all. Or, were we provided those functions that we might Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-30068422152003232892017-03-21T22:03:36.747-07:002017-03-21T22:03:36.747-07:00According to Kirkpatrick it's way too early to...According to Kirkpatrick it's way too early to claim there's a God Gene. There's no way to sort out that it's a real gene or just a combination of other genetic traits. Even if there is such a gene that is not a defeat for religion.<br /><br />One of the main problems with arguing for a God gene is that the kinds of explanations often used to justify it are piecemeal and don'tJoseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-78501079656698107812017-03-21T22:03:00.718-07:002017-03-21T22:03:00.718-07:00you should read this in the previous link to get t...you should read this in the previous link to get the full effect bit since they seem to igore my links.<br /><br />1: no basis for religious gene <br /><br />Blakmore himself tells us that our brains "light up" (respond by beginning to work more) when we hear God talk. That's really the basic idea, along with the universality issue, of proving a God gene. But that is not proof of a Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-68614877785818645412017-03-21T21:49:02.318-07:002017-03-21T21:49:02.318-07:00here is some of my good disproof of the genetic re...here is some of my good disproof of the genetic religion hypothesis.<br /><br /><a href="http://metacrock.blogspot.com/2013/10/is-science-one-gene-away-from-defeating.html" rel="nofollow"><b>here</b></a>Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-69364560154187904042017-03-21T21:39:31.799-07:002017-03-21T21:39:31.799-07:00apalinton said...
JBsptfn
The Wiki articles were c...apalinton said...<br />JBsptfn<br />The Wiki articles were chosen simply for your benefit as an intro to the world of enlightening research in this area. If you want, you could start with a book I have in from of me at this moment by Associate Prof Jesse Bering, "The God Instinct". It really is a scintillating read into the mechanics of god belief. In fact any book from these Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-55616073382773712632017-03-21T21:32:13.781-07:002017-03-21T21:32:13.781-07:00What a pile of crap. Your so-called "mystical...What a pile of crap. Your so-called "mystical experience" is just part of a broad category of experiences that are common to mankind. Maslow calls them peak experiences. And the studies you cite tell you that. <br /><br /><b>How does being part of a abroad category of experience mean that it is not the result of divine encounter? Just being a broad category in no way rules out divine Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-42791788293250885082017-03-21T16:41:03.457-07:002017-03-21T16:41:03.457-07:00Apologise. Armin GeertzApologise. Armin GeertzPapalintonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03818630173726146048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-1951055786060200892017-03-21T16:40:02.943-07:002017-03-21T16:40:02.943-07:00JBsptfn
The Wiki articles were chosen simply for y...JBsptfn<br />The Wiki articles were chosen simply for your benefit as an intro to the world of enlightening research in this area. If you want, you could start with a book I have in from of me at this moment by Associate Prof Jesse Bering, "The God Instinct". It really is a scintillating read into the mechanics of god belief. In fact any book from these researchers, Pascal Boyer, Papalintonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03818630173726146048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-38224826177427737152017-03-21T12:12:04.656-07:002017-03-21T12:12:04.656-07:00Why is JBsptfn always engaging in gratuitous perso...Why is JBsptfn always engaging in gratuitous personal attacks? There are all kinds trolls and scumbags on the internet. This guy pops up at sites where Papalinton hasn't even visited, and starts his trolling and slinging accusations out of the blue. What a piece of work.im-skepticalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08267710618719895303noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-39978923863906269842017-03-21T10:36:26.487-07:002017-03-21T10:36:26.487-07:00Why is Papalinton always using Wikipedia for info?...Why is Papalinton always using Wikipedia for info? I don't know everything about those subjects, but I know that Wiki isn't always that good. I am surprised he didn't plagiarize something from it. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-41877459691909740192017-03-21T08:09:55.761-07:002017-03-21T08:09:55.761-07:00Empirical studies show that the kind of religious ...<i>Empirical studies show that the kind of religious experience known as "mystical" is universal. The names and doctrinal ideas are different but the experiences are the same. Yet the experiences should not be the same since religion is cultural. Religious symbols are cultural. Atheists have countered this argument by saying that religion is genetic, but there is no basis for saying im-skepticalhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08267710618719895303noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-43321120027231938682017-03-21T07:31:17.508-07:002017-03-21T07:31:17.508-07:00Nothing in evolution of religious ideas that indic...<br />Nothing in evolution of religious ideas that indicates no God or that gives reason not to believe in God,. Here is my account of the evolution of the God concept treated in such a way that justifies belief in God.<br /><br /><br /><br /><a href="http://religiousapriori.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-evolution-of-god-concept-part-1.html" rel="nofollow"><b>evolution of god Concept 1</b></a><br /><Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-7356308266679847222017-03-21T07:20:32.866-07:002017-03-21T07:20:32.866-07:00Papalinton
"Even at the popular level such a... Papalinton<br /><br />"Even at the popular level such as, HERE and HERE, there is much significant information that these areas of research are confirming a consistent narrative which shows no evidence of a interventionist hand of god, supernatural or otherwise."<br /><br /><b>BS! that assumes that miraculous intervention is the only reason for belief in god, tyat is just nonsense, Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-37143778808845423752017-03-20T19:35:14.485-07:002017-03-20T19:35:14.485-07:00JBsptfn
The scope of your comment signifies a prof...JBsptfn<br />The scope of your comment signifies a profound lack of knowledge on the scope and depth of the research literature that abounds in the areas of the contemporary history of religion and religious beliefs, the sociology of religion, the anthropological and cultural determinants of religion and religious belief, notwithstanding the rapidly expanding areas of neuroscientific Papalintonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03818630173726146048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6363362.post-81526655524929484122017-03-20T18:16:11.370-07:002017-03-20T18:16:11.370-07:00yes it does, you are not answering my argument you...yes it does, you are not answering my argument you are asserting that because you can't understand it, it can't be right.you are limiting truth to your understanding, you also tacitly admit you lied because it turns out you do not have any evidence the studies are wrong<br /><br />you still have not addressed how I say they back my arguments,Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.com