1. Interview with Richard Dawkins and John Cornwell

Comment #68541 by darwin2 on September 7, 2007 at 1:21 pm

People like Cornwell frighten and annoy me. They tend to distort what people say and write. It seems like religious fundamentalists excel at doing this. Dawkins addressed the ridiculous criticisms of Cornwell and gave the latter a good lashing. Although I strongly believe in God and disagree with Dawkins on this issue, I strongly agree with Dawkins on his criticisms of organized religion so accurately expressed in the God Delusion.

2. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64752 by darwin2 on August 21, 2007 at 4:05 pm

Comment #64733 by sane1 on August 21, 2007 at 1:56 pm

Here is something to consider about your undisciplined sloppy deluded thinking: Though Prufrock may have exhibited tolerance of your nonsense (as have I in the past), the evidence is really not yet in on whether he is "[a] truly a great human being ." You can believe it, but be prepared for the consequences of making only a haphazard guess.

Sir, the evidence is in. Prufrock has demonstrated the virtue of tolerance a quality that is truly lacking on this planet. The Muslims can't tolerate the Jews or Christians or Hindus. The Christians can't tolerate anyone who refuses to believe Jesus is their Savior. The Jehovah Witnesses can't tolerate anyone other than their own and openly tell their followers to not overly socialize with non-believers. In fact I know of one Jehovah Witness family that has disowned their daughter because she married outside their church. They refuse to talk to her or her family including their grandchildren. Many atheists have a hard time tolerating the beliefs of others and get bent out of shape when someone mentions the word God. The Democrats barely tolerate the Republicans and the Republicans do the same to the Democrats. SO WHEN I SEE AN INDIVIDUAL LIKE PRUFROCK I BECOME HIGHLY IMPRESSED BY HIS TOLERANCE. IT IS SO REFRESHING IN THIS VERY INTOLERANT, DIVIDED AND BRUTAL WORLD. YES I WILL SAY IT AGAIN. PRUFROCK IS A GREAT HUMAN BEING!!!!!!!!!

3. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64748 by darwin2 on August 21, 2007 at 3:45 pm

Comment #64726 by phil rimmer on August 21, 2007 at 1:21 pm

"Please, now can we put this thread down and walk away slowly, before someone gets hurt?"

Why should anyone get hurt? Do mean physical hurt or psychological hurt? If you mean physical hurt are you implying that you know someone or several people who have threatened physical harm to me because of my beliefs? I must warn you if this is the case, you have a legal obligation to inform me of that individual or individuals. If this individual or these individuals do any physical harm to me or my family and it comes out in the investigation that you knew their intentions, you can be held criminally and civilly responsible. And as a matter of fact, I have been threatened many times in my life and am well capable of taking care of myself.

If you mean psychological hurt and you are implying that I am going to be hurt psychologically, don't worry about me. I am thick skinned, very tolerant, have a good sense of humor and believe strongly in the philosophy that if you can't stand the heat in the kitchen, get out and I can handle a lot of heat. I have never felt any comments posted at this website, however critical of my beliefs, that have in least upset me. I truly enjoy this website and will continue posting on it.

4. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64721 by darwin2 on August 21, 2007 at 12:57 pm

Comment #64619 by Prufrock on August 21, 2007 at 2:58 am
"Like Veronique, and indeed most people on this site, I believe only what I have evidence for or what I have directly experienced. I agree that man created God - well the Abrahamic God, anyway. Delusional means believing in spite of the facts suggesting otherwise and I guess as Professor Dawkins has stated a belief in God fits this definition. However, I am a little disturbed at the way in which we have attacked Darwin2 personally. We are trying to state a case for rationality, not behave like a starved pack of hunting hounds devouring a stag. Believe me, he is not the only person in the world with what seems to us like strange and unsupported beliefs. Any belief that is not supported by evidence is indicative of a lazy or malevolent mind for sure, but I am of the opinion that it is beliefs and attitudes of mind that are mistaken, indeed possibly insane, and not people. I am ignorant of many things and am not competent in anything I have not had the opportunity to practice in. I like to think, possibly mistakenly, that I am curious and able enough to learn and do these things, as would any of the 6 billion people we inhabit the earth. But we have to accept we are still in the minority in accepting the realities of the universe, ourselves and our place in that universe, and for whatever reason, people will still hold beliefs like Darwin2's strongly. Eventually, in time and with the right approach, people will see that rational, evidence based and objectivity does work for them as it does for everyone. Darwin2, I am of the opinion you should feel free to post and say what you've got to say, but don't expect us to like it or to respond to it! Veronique, I share your frustrations but telling to fuck off is not good. Better to tell the person you haven't heard so much crap since you got off the toilet this morning and leave him to read and hopefully learn as we all do. Reasoning with the unreasonable is not particularly fruitful."

I wish there were more people like you in our world. Sometimes I get pessimistic and down when I see the division and intolerance that separates people and all the violence and hatred that results from narrow mindedness and intolerance. I have never met you but your post produces great admiration and respect for you. You are truly a great human being and you give me hope in a world that desperately needs hope.

5. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64717 by darwin2 on August 21, 2007 at 12:40 pm

Comment #64539 by Bonzai on August 20, 2007 at 2:55 pm

"What is left of "consciousness" when the self is subtracted away? Can you contemplate "pure consciousness" without any awareness and personality? If this "soul" exists it would have to be some kind of "pure computing power", now in what way is that "you" in a more intrinsic way than the atoms that make up your body?"

Pure energy is thought without a physical body. Our souls are pure energy. Our soul is a distinct entity fully aware of itself. I have written the following poem that helps me understand this issue and may or may not answer your questions.

Who Am I?

Take away my name, family and friends,
Who am I?
Take away my job and possessions,
Who am I?
Take away my fame and power,
Who am I?
Take away my religious identity,
Who am I?
Take away my national identity,
Who am I?
Take away my political identity,
Who am I?
Take away my racial and sexual identity,
Who am I?
Take away my accomplishments,
Who am I?
Take away my humanity,
Who am I?
Now stripped of everything I identify with,
Who am I?
I am my ETERNAL SOUL
And my ETERNAL SOUL IS
ALL I AM
ALL I WAS
AND ALL I WILL EVER BE!

6. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64569 by darwin2 on August 20, 2007 at 6:08 pm

Comment #64536 by Tyler Durden on August 20, 2007 at 2:10 pm

darwin2,
"You keep spouting your opinion (reincarnation, karma, afterlife, etc), please show me some facts or empirical evidence and I will consider changing my viewpoint on the existence of god.

"The stage is yours..."

As I have stated many times on these threads, I have no empirical evidence at this time. The only fact is that we all die. If consciousness continues after death, you will get the empirical evidence you seek.

7. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64567 by darwin2 on August 20, 2007 at 6:03 pm

Comment #64532 by steve99 on August 20, 2007 at 1:45 pm

"You have also revealed a profoundly mistaken understanding of all the sciences."

"1. You claim that the Universe has a complexity that requires an explanation, when anyone with a knowledge of physics and thermodynamics knows that the Universe at its origin was very simple indeed, and physical complexity can (and does) arise spontaneously."

Behind the creation of our universe and all universes is God, The Supreme Designer and Creator.

"2. You claim that biological complexity requires explanation, when it has since the time of Darwin and Wallace been easily understood in terms of Natural Selection."

Natural selection is the method that God chose to create life forms.

"3. You use mathematical and logical terms in way that reveals you have very little idea what they mean, like 'infinity', which you claim is unknowable yet has been, on the contrary, well understood and a central part of mathematics for over a century."

As the end of infinity is unattainable so is intimate knowledge of God unattainable.

"Even worse, you simply ignore these devastating and unarguable criticisms of your views."

I find these criticisms neither devastating nor unarguable.

8. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64564 by darwin2 on August 20, 2007 at 5:49 pm

Comment #64300 by roach on August 19, 2007 at 12:51 pm

darwin2,
"You asked for some specific examples as to how your beliefs are inherently divisive so here goes. Since you beliefs are not based on any reason or evidence, they can safely be called faith based beliefs. Such beliefs will inevitibly divide people into believers and doubters. I cannot help but doubt (and even sometimes loathe) your theology. Your beliefs strike me as foolish, arrogant, and immature. And since they have no logic or evidence supporting them, I will be unable to be reasoned into believing them."

If you or anyone gets divided by my beliefs or anyone's beliefs, the problem lies not with me but with you and anyone else who permits himself or herself to be divided. Our world is so screwed up now and has always been since recorded history because people allow themselves the volatile and destructive luxury of not tolerating those who think differently than they do.

"Also, you posit this notion of a loving and perfectly just god. It should be clear to anyone who has learned of the tragedies of the world that such a being does not exist. I know you have argued that Earth is a "temporary hell" and that we have fallen here because of some other nonsensical reason. Yet, I really can't complain about this temporary hell called Earth. I live a comfortable life purely as a matter of luck. But there have been countless humans that have endured terrible suffering. What did they do to deserve such treatment? Apparently they are paying for crimes they didn't commit. If I ever meet the god responsible for this evil I'd make it a point to kick him in the nuts (if he has them)."

I believe in the theory of Reincarnation and Karma. There is nothing in this theory or my beliefs that says God punishes people for crimes they did not commit. You can call my beliefs fantasy but don't put in things that I did not state in my beliefs

"I suspect my last point may actually hit home with you because I'm going to step into the realm of wishful thinking (kinda). Let's assume that your perfect love god and eternal souls exist. I would find this to be a horrible reality. It is something I desperately would NOT want to be true. I do not want to live forever. And I especially do not want to live forever as a disembodied spirit unable to laugh, cry, smile, hold hands, hug, kiss, make love, have sex, drink beer, eat pizza, cook food, play sports, feel the breeze, swim in the ocean, take a relaxing morning dump, become exhausted, sleep, dream, etc. I'd much rather be human."

Again you can reject my beliefs as fantasy but don't put in things I did not state in my beliefs. I stated in my beliefs that our eternal souls were created in a perfect state of pure energy and as pure energy we could assume any physical form we chose and travel anywhere in the universe we desired. I also stated that our divine destiny for our creation was to participate with God in the creation process by creating our own universes. This involves learning the laws of physics and systematically and progressively learning to first create solar systems, galaxies and then our own universes. This also includes to be able to laugh, cry, smile, hold hands, hug, kiss, make love, have sex, drink beer, eat pizza, cook food, play sports, feel the breeze, swim in the ocean, take a relaxing morning dump, become exhausted, sleep, dream, etc.. If this reality bores you, I have to conclude you have a serious problem.

9. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64560 by darwin2 on August 20, 2007 at 5:24 pm

Comment #64285 by walk on August 19, 2007 at 11:44 am

" (On a side note, I don't see why you automatically suppose our amazing, awe inspiring earth is hell, I think it's an incredibly great place.)".

Our planet Earth is amazing, awe inspiring and beautiful. So is our observable universe with 150 billion galaxies and some galaxies having as many as 3 trillion stars. Unfortunately the vast majority of people live in poverty and lead lives of quiet desperation. A recent estimate by the United Nations said that 800 million people on our planet are undernourished. In my country, the United States, 47 million people are uninsured. Many people in my country work 2 or 3 jobs to make ends meet. Most people on our planet never get a chance to appreciate and experience the magnificent beauty of nature. So yes this is a temporary hell regardless of whether or not you believe or don't believe in God or the survival of consciousness after death.

10. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64534 by darwin2 on August 20, 2007 at 1:52 pm

Comment #64260 by n0rr1s on August 19, 2007 at 4:53 am

"Veronique, I think you are being too hard on darwin2. I think he comes here for the same reason others do: he thinks he understands something important and that other people need to hear it."

"Now, he is quite clearly wrong, and provably so. Unfortunately, he is clearly incapable of understanding the arguments. Therefore, I think it is pointless to debate with him at this point. However, I would welcome him to stay around here and continue to read the site. You never know, at some point the penny may drop, and he may begin to understand what it means to think rationally."

I am very interested in your statement "Now, he is quite clearly wrong, and provably so." I would like you to prove my beliefs are wrong. What irrefutable scientific evidence do you have? Not even Dawkins claims he believes 100% that God does not exist, although he states his beliefs in the non-existence of God is very close to 100%. So are you more intelligent than Dawkins when your state that I am "quite clearly wrong and provably so?'

11. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64533 by darwin2 on August 20, 2007 at 1:48 pm

Comment #64255 by Veronique on August 19, 2007 at 2:56 am

"You are talking to yourself here Darwin2. Time to leave this thread and, hopefully this site. You contribute nothing of value. You carry on like a two-bob watch. Your delusional beliefs are wrong-headed. Are you prepared to accept that you have delusional beliefs? I doubt it. Such is the power of the mindset. Such is the power of neurologically induced belief systems. I do not 'believe' in anything. I assess with the best available evidence that I can find. Belief doesn't even enter the equation."

Are you afraid of answering my question? All I asked was simply this. From a strict scientific and objective perspective, is it possible for God to exist and for consciousness to continue after death? It is a simple yes or no answer. Why are so many people at this website so intimidated by this question that they refuse to directly answer it?


Forensic what? Have you developed a forensic belief system.that overrides rationality and a scientific explanation for appalling events? Fuck off. You need a large dose of reason. Where do you get off? I don't even know there is an answer to that question.

Yes, I have an explanation that rationally and logically explains all appalling events that occur in the human condition. This explanation is found in the theory of Reincarnation and Karma.

12. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64531 by darwin2 on August 20, 2007 at 1:44 pm

Comment #64253 by irate_atheist on August 19, 2007 at 2:27 am

"I am a retired Forensic Specialist. I have worked intensely with many psychiatrists and psychologists who have found me to be a very sane, well balanced and competent individual."

- Perhaps they were just being polite to you. Have you ever considered that option? Perhaps you never shared your absurd views with them, in detail and with enough passion, for them to make a proper assessment of you.

I never shared my beliefs with them. All my dealings with them were on a professional level and specifically geared to criminal matters. However, if I would have dialogued with them on my spiritual beliefs, I can guarantee you that they would not have concluded I was insane. The phrase they would have used to describe my beliefs would be "VERY INTERESTING." You can test this by taking my book to any licensed psychiatrist or psychologist and they will say the same thing, "VERY INTERESTING."

"If, as a Forensic Scientist, you understand what evidence actually is, why are you prepared to believe (and spout) such obvious nonsense?'

Because I believe in God and I need to find out if God has a purpose for me and if He does what that purpose may be. My beliefs are the result of my spiritual journey to get answers here.

13. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64529 by darwin2 on August 20, 2007 at 1:40 pm

comment #64229 by roach on August 18, 2007 at 6:33 pm

darwin2,
"You say you admit that you may be wrong about your beliefs, yet you also say there is no argument or evidence that could change your mind. What an amazingly (un)comfortable position to take! As long as people are willing to talk to you, you will forever be on the defensive and be forced to use ever increasingly elaborate mental gymnastics to protect your unsupported claims."

I will repeat what I have said many times before on this and other threads. Subjectively I believe 100% that my beliefs are correct and I live and I will die with my beliefs. There is no argument or evidence that can change my subjective beliefs. However examining my beliefs from a strict scientific objective perspective, I admit my beliefs many be totally wrong. Some posters at this website say they can prove my beliefs are wrong but when I ask for that proof they never furnish it. Another puzzling occurrence at this website is the lack of willingness of many posters to give me a yes or no answer when I ask if their atheistic view may be wrong and if it is possible for God to exist and for consciousness to continue after death.

" Explain to me how your theism is any different (in terms of supporting evidence) than my pretend theism in which I argue that all those who seemingly die by accident were actually killed by God because they were sinners."

It is up to each person to honestly find out what he truly believes to be true and not true. At this moment in time there is no supporting evidence for my theism or your pretend theism. If you truly believe your theism, I respect your belief. All I ask is that you respect mine.

I don't like the use of the word sinner. I rather use the phrase "incorrect users of energy." As I stated frequently, I believe in Reincarnation and Karma. Those who get killed or survive an accident do so because of their Karma. If their Karma calls for them to die, they die. If their Karma calls for them to survive they survive. The most important thing that happens if they die is that their eternal souls survive. The situation that we find ourselves at any particular time in life is a perfect expression of how we used energy in past lifetimes combined with our use of energy in this lifetime. There are no accidental occurrences or chance relationships. All occurrences and relationships are but a note in a divine symphony composed and magnificently directed by a loving, merciful and perfectly just God to enable our eternal souls to ascend back to that perfect state of pure energy that God created us with and where we can fulfill our divine destiny which is to participate with God in the creation process by developing the ability to create our own universes and beyond.

14. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64528 by darwin2 on August 20, 2007 at 1:35 pm

Comment #64246 by captain underpants on August 19, 2007 at 12:11 am

Darwin2 wrote:
"and that is why we must learn, obey and master the laws of physics."

"I was unsure whether it was worth bothering to respond, but (a) what precisely to you understand the laws of physics to be? (b) how is it possible to both obey and master something at the same time? You are guilty at the very least of sloppy thinking."

Physics is the science of energy and matter and their interaction. The laws of physics apply to both intelligent life and non-intelligent life. For us, it involves using energy correctly and getting positive results or using energy incorrectly and getting negative results. For example look at electricity. If we plug an air conditioner correctly into a live electrical outlet, we can cool our house. If we use electricity incorrectly by inserting a knife in a live electrical outlet , we get electrocuted. The laws of physics also apply to thinking. If we think positive thoughts, we use energy correctly and have healthier physical bodies. If we think negative thoughts, we create negative energy and damage our physical bodies.

"In fact very little of what you write displays any logical coherence, and one has to wonder what you hope to achieve by posting on this site. Do you seriously believe that atheists/sceptics are going to be convinced that your deranged fantasies are the Ultimate Truth?"

I believe I have given new insight on the issues of God and the survivability of consciousness after death to one or more people who post on these threads. I don't mean that I have converted them to my beliefs. I mean that one or more posters now consider it possible for God to exist and for consciousness to survive the death of our physical bodies. And for this reason, I will continue to post on the website.

15. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64223 by darwin2 on August 18, 2007 at 5:56 pm

Comment #64161 by HFK on August 18, 2007 at 7:46 am

"Has anybody here actualy considered that people like darwin2 actually possess psychiatric disorders. It explains a lot for me as I am just "recovering" from a relationship with a woman who has Borderline Personality Disorder. This and conditions like these leave the victim in a delusional state even after you drill the truth into them with a pneumatic drill. Nothing we say will ever change the way they think so don't waste your time and walk away."

I am a retired Forensic Specialist. I have worked intensely with many psychiatrists and psychologists who have found me to be a very sane, well balanced and competent individual. I have dealt with many individuals like you who attempt to make psychiatric evaluations after reading a few books on psychology. Their conclusions often turn out to be very amusing.

You accuse me of being delusional. I am sane enough to realize my beliefs may be totally wrong. Are you sane enough to realize that your beliefs may be totally wrong and that you may be delusional in your present belief that God does not exist and that consciousness does not survive the death of the physical body?

16. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64221 by darwin2 on August 18, 2007 at 5:39 pm

Comment #64086 by Veronique on August 17, 2007 at 3:34 pm

"Maybe it's a bit like water wearing away at the banks of a stream. Maybe they feel that if they go on and on they will wear away at non-belief and be able to welcome one of us into their fold. I really don't know. Maybe they are drawn to slings and arrows; a disturbing mindset. All I do know is that they repeat their delusional beliefs ad nauseum."

My beliefs are only delusional if they are wrong. Your beliefs are delusional if they are wrong. I am not arrogant in that I openly state my beliefs may be totally wrong. Are you capable of stating openly that your beliefs may be totally wrong and that God may indeed exist?

17. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64220 by darwin2 on August 18, 2007 at 5:27 pm

Comment #63940 by walk on August 16, 2007 at 10:54 pm

darwin2,
"Thank you for your detailed, heartfelt response (#63929), and as roach said, I'm sorry for your loss of loved ones, but, (and this is with respect), you didn't answer my question "where did all that stuff come from?"
"I mean, if you're going to put out this extremely detailed account of how the "higher beings" and God are running the cosmic show, don't we at least deserve the courtesy of knowing where your ideas came from?"

First, I asked myself if it is possible for God to exist. My observations of the universe concluded that yes, it is possible for God to exist.

Second I asked is there any spiritual theory that adequately expresses a purpose to our lives. The only spiritual theory that I could find that adequately expresses a purpose in life and truly gave me answers to the human condition was Reincarnation and Karma.
This led me to conclude God was loving, merciful and perfectly just.

Then I asked how would a loving, merciful and perfectly just God have created us. I concluded such a God would have had to create us in a perfect state and advise us as to why we were created, what purpose or destiny do we have and what do we need to do to fulfill our destiny.

I then asked who instructed us and I concluded that since God is infinite and beyond us, He must have chose highly evolved intelligent beings to instruct us.

Being new souls, we must have misused our free will to get in this temporary hell called Earth. Now we must take responsibility for our mistakes so that we can return to that perfect state and fulfill our divine destiny which is to participate with God in the creation process and that is why we must learn, obey and master the laws of physics.

18. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64218 by darwin2 on August 18, 2007 at 5:22 pm

Comment #63936 by roach on August 16, 2007 at 8:03 pm

"darwin2,. Now you may think that your ideas of a "perfect love" god and "eternal souls" are not inherently divisive but they are. I'll go into why I think this is the case some other time."

How are my beliefs divisive? Please give me specific examples.

19. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64217 by darwin2 on August 18, 2007 at 5:20 pm

Comment #63906 by USA_Limey on August 16, 2007 at 5:00 pm

"I don't think Darwin2 accepts Christ does he? He's got his own thing going on."

I don't accept Christ as my Savior or Redeemer nor do I accept Christ as the Son of God. However I do admire the way Christ worked with the poor and troubled people of his time. I like the 8 Beatitudes and meditate on them every day.

20. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64216 by darwin2 on August 18, 2007 at 5:18 pm

Comment #63878 by sane1 on August 16, 2007 at 1:46 pm
Darwin2:

'You say: "As I said above I believe in Reincarnation and Karma. We are all living in this temporary hell called Earth because of mistakes we have made in previous lifetimes."
HMM..ok, Interesting idea. I do not know everything, so I'll entertain it. Please let me know why you think this is true. Any evidence at all would be appreciated. Something approaching proof would be thrilling. Failing reasonable proof from you, I'll then ask you to indulge my reasons for believing that Thor makes thunder."

Here are some of the observable facts about the human condition in this temporary hell called Earth. The vast majority of people live in poverty and misery. Some get education; most don't. Some have opportunities for success; most don't. Some die young, some die old and some die in middle age. Some survive car, plain and train crashes; some don't, etc., etc. Reincarnation and Karma give detailed explanations for every event that humans experience in their lifetimes.

21. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64215 by darwin2 on August 18, 2007 at 5:15 pm

Comment #63876 by steve99 on August 16, 2007 at 1:36 pm

"A finite being can never experience, meet or comprehend that which is infinite."
"There you go with your somewhat .... eccentric... understanding of maths. I suggest you read up on the lives and work of Cantor and Hilbert. They seemed to do a pretty good job of handling the infinite.
So let us sum things up so far... you claim God is infinite, but you don't know what infinite means. You claim that no-one can understand infinity, even though it has been a central part of mathematics for a long time."
"Can I suggest that you change your wording? Instead of saying "God is infinite", why not try the following:"
"Oh Lord...Oooh you are so big... So absolutely huge. Gosh, we're all really impressed down here I can tell you." (Monty Python)"
"I think that is perhaps a better summary of your views."

Let's put it this way. Infinity is beyond our understanding.

22. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64214 by darwin2 on August 18, 2007 at 5:13 pm

Comment #63873 by sane1 on August 16, 2007 at 1:25 pm

Darwin2 -
I see you replied to my earlier post (criticising your reasoning that the complexities of observed life prove the existence of a god/creator - your comment #2 above) by declaring that you "believe" in evolution.

"You may indeed "believe" it, but you don't seem to understand it. If you understood it and had basic powers of reason, you would not claim that complexity proves the existence of your "God, The Supreme Designer and Creator of All that exists."

I will never comprehend evolution with the depth of Hawkins or any scientist and many of the posters at this thread. However I do comprehend complexity and ultimately behind all complexity is God, The Supreme Designer and Creator

"EDIT: and you would not write as you did above: "I do claim that order and purpose can't come without a designer."

"Evolution explains it far better. Far better."

I disagree. God explains it better.

"EDIT: As I stated earlier, read the selfish gene - and this time try to understand it."

"And anyway, what explains your supreme being anyway? Hint: If you say he is a super evolved alien, you may still be dealing with realistic possibilities."

No God is not a super evolved being. God always was, is, and always will be.

23. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #64212 by darwin2 on August 18, 2007 at 5:09 pm

Comment #63861 by steve99 on August 16, 2007 at 12:53 pm

However behind science is God, The Supreme Designer and Creator of All that exists.


"As there is clearly no need for a designer, or creator, he is both pointless, and must be rather bored, not having much to do. Tell you what. If you can invent an unnecessary God, then I can invent a companion for him... perhaps they can play scrabble together or something to while away eternity.."

"See? I can play the "just make things up" game too!"

Yes steve99 you are free to make things up if you please.

24. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63929 by darwin2 on August 16, 2007 at 7:02 pm

Comment #63852 by walk on August 16, 2007 at 12:33 pm

"To darwin2/George Killoran: I read quite a bit of your 93 page "Darwinian Creationism" pdf. And while it's contents are completely incredulous to me, you seem to have admirable motives, have obviously invested a considerable amount of time and energy on these musings, and, refreshingly, do offer that you may be completely wrong."

"My question is: Where did all this stuff come from? Total fabrication? Hallucinations? New age websites? (Ramtha, Kryon?) A desire to compose a work of cosmological science fiction?
I'm not trying to be cute here. If you wouldn't mind, I'd really like to know."

I am 66 years old. I was brought up in a Catholic community. I went to Catholic grammar school, Catholic high school and Catholic college. I married into a born again Christian family. Most of my relatives and friends are really beautiful and ethical people . I have believed in Reincarnation and Karma for most of my adult life. I have on a few occasions tried to express my beliefs to my born again Christians and Catholic relatives and friends. I have tried to point out the fallacies of some of the dogmas of their religion. I always observed fear and discomfort in their eyes when I did this. So for most of my adult life I have been reticent to talk about my beliefs. Then one day in early 2005, one of my relatives told me, actually screamed at me that I was going to hell for eternity for my beliefs. That is when I decided to write my beliefs out and become more vocal about them. Since then I have lost some friends and a few relatives who keep their distance from me. I have made a commitment that I will never be hesitant again to discuss my beliefs with anyone. I came to this website because I believe most of the things that Hawkins said in his book the GD. I have also read the books of Harris and Hitchens. Since the dawn of civilization our planet has been screwed up and continues to be screwed up. One of the problems and perhaps it is the major problem is that people have difficulty having mutually respectful dialogues when they have different opinions about religion, economics, ethics, government and politics. Crimes, hard feelings, family disputes and war result from this. The major thing I wanted to achieve at this website was to see if I could actually have a mutually respectful dialogue with those whose views on God and the survival of consciousness radically differ from mine. Sadly I found the same reaction that I find in organized religions. People in organized religion tend to cut down and disparage those who think differently. So our world continues to be screwed up and the prospect for our civilization to survive the 21st Century gets slimmer and slimmer.

25. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63870 by darwin2 on August 16, 2007 at 1:22 pm

Comment #63748 by Hobbit on August 15, 2007 at 4:10 pm

darwin2 wrote:
I have never seen God nor do I have any hope of ever seeing God. God is infinite and I am finite. A finite being can never experience, meet or comprehend that which is infinite. But I do feel God's presence and I do know He has a divine plan for all of us. I developed my conclusions about God's existence and my purpose in life by using critical thinking skills in asking myself the deep questions about life and finding the answers that satisfy me.


"How do you feel His presence? Does He poke you in the back, tap you on the shoulder or make you feel special in your private place? How do you even know it's a He?"

I experience God by observing and appreciating His creations. I know this because I have concluded that God the Supreme Designer and Creator is responsible for all that exists.

"Do you need to take your "special medicine" to feel His presence? Or do you only feel his presence when you don't take the "special medicine"?

I don't take any special medicine.

"What is this divine plan? Why doesn't this infinite, all seeing, all knowing thing just come out and tell everyone?"

As I said above I believe in Reincarnation and Karma. We are all living in this temporary hell called Earth because of mistakes we have made in previous lifetimes. We will never see or speak to God but being a perfectly just God, He has placed the answers to the questions we have out there. It is up to us to take full responsibility to find them. No Savior or Redeemer can do it for us.

"I'm sorry but I don't think you did any critical thinking at all. You're afraid if you die, that's it! So you made a little security blanket for yourself in the form of your own special magical friend."

I am puzzled why many posters here think I am afraid to die. I have said many times above that objectively speaking my beliefs may be totally wrong and if they are I simply view death as a natural cycle of life and consider myself very fortunate to have had a very good life especially since most people on this planet live in poverty and live lives of quiet desperation. Subjectively I believe that my beliefs are 100% correct and I will live my life and die according to my beliefs.

"Have followers of other gods got it wrong? What's this infinite being going to do with all us non believers' when we snuff it?"

I have concluded that those religions that believe in eternal damnation, the devil, redemption, original sin, exclusivity of belief for salvation have definitely got it wrong. God is going to do the same thing with non-believers as He does with believers. We are all destined to participate in the creation process with God. It just takes some of us longer than others to get there.

26. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63859 by darwin2 on August 16, 2007 at 12:49 pm

Comment #63741 by the_assayer on August 15, 2007 at 3:39 pm

"Your God is a magician. Who just magicked things into existance. Where are the details?? If I asked you "why is the sky blue?" and if you answered back saying "God magicked it to look blue" would that be a sufficient answer? Aren't you taking the easy(lazy?) route to answering the question of how the universe was created? "

Why is the sky blue? Why does the fossil record prove that evolution is a fact? Why is the grass green? How were mountains created? The answers to these questions belong to science and science specifically answers them in detail. However behind science is God, The Supreme Designer and Creator of All that exists.

27. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63854 by darwin2 on August 16, 2007 at 12:39 pm

Comment #63740 by steve99 on August 15, 2007 at 3:35 pm

He is infinite

"This is a claim that needs clarification. As I am sure you know, there are many kinds of infinity, of different sizes. Is God infinite in the sense of the countable numbers? Or is he infinite in the sense of the real numbers? Or some higher infinity?"

"If you make a claim like this, then presumably you have a reason for making it, and you know precisely how infinite God is, so can answer my question."

"Of course, if you are just making things up and just playing with words, you won't be able to."

Steve99 my poem "THE ETERNAL CLOCK OF TIME" may answer this for you.

ETERNAL CLOCK OF TIME

One human lifetime equals
A nano second on the
Eternal Clock of time.

50 human lifetimes equal
A nano second on the
Eternal Clock of time.

The lifetime of a solar system equals
A nano second on the
Eternal Clock of time.

The lifetime of a galaxy equals
A nano second on the
Eternal Clock of time.

The lifetime of a universe equals
A nano second on the
Eternal Clock of time.

A million years equal
A nano second on the
Eternal Clock of time.

A billion years equal
A nano second on the
Eternal Clock of time.

A trillion trillion years equal
A nano second on the
Eternal Clock of time.

Eternity is forever and beyond
A nano second on the
Eternal Clock of time.

28. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63847 by darwin2 on August 16, 2007 at 12:22 pm

161. Comment #63716 by the_assayer on August 15, 2007 at 1:59 pm

To darwin2-
"You've forgotten to ask yourself "How can God create universes?" "What is that extra feature in him that makes him capable of doing all this magical stuff?" All you have done so far is to say that God had the intend to make a universe and he made one, just like that!! EVen I have the intend to create universes, but I can't create one. Why not? "

God can create a universe because He is All-powerful. We can't create a universe because we have not developed the skills at this point. However at some point in our spiritual evolution, we will have that ability

"Does belief in God help us answer that final question of why we exist? If all we can say is that God magicked the whole universe into existance, doesn't that leave you pondering-
"HOw did he do that???"

It can and it does. See my post #98 if you want more info.

"So, here you have people(like you)giving a name(god) to an entity whose features are not understood, whose methods of action are not understood and whose involvement in our world cannot be positively validated."

If consciousness exits after death, it will be positively validated

"All of this begs the question, "To what end is all this brouhaha about God?"

See my post #98 if you want more info.

29. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63841 by darwin2 on August 16, 2007 at 11:57 am

Comment #63716 by the_assayer on August 15, 2007 at 1:59 pm

"Until you can point to some evidence that science can do something with, you want to stop banging on the laboratory door and head over to the philosophy department."

That is an excellent point. I agree. Neither my beliefs nor the spiritual beliefs of anyone else belong in the science laboratory at this time. However this website is not a science lab. It is philosophy lab although it leans mostly to the atheistic philosophy. So I am in the right department to discuss my beliefs and to listen, respond and respect the beliefs of other posters here.

30. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63750 by darwin2 on August 15, 2007 at 4:16 pm

Comment #63705 by Raiv on August 15, 2007 at 1:24 pm

Darwin 2 wrote: 'Once we learn to obey God's laws, specifically the laws of physics, the universe will be ours and we will eventually regain that level of spirituality where we will be able to imitate God and create our own universes and beyond.'

"I'm confused on how I'm not obeying the laws of physics."

The law of physics as far as human interactions go is simply love thy neighbor as thyself and do good works. An example of violating the law of phyics would be this. If you hit your finger with a hammer when you try to hang a picture, the violation of the law of physics is hitting your finger with the hammer. The effect is pain. Your action involved using energy negatively and you got a negative result.

Why did you choose a loving god to believe in? why couldn't multiple gods have joined forces to create the universe(s)? Or maybe no gods but an unintelligent 'force' that we don't understand yet... or perhaps an evil god (that actually might make more sense).

I chose a loving God because that is the conclusion I came to after investigating the propositions concerning the issues of the existence of God and the survival of consciousness after death.

31. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63739 by darwin2 on August 15, 2007 at 3:34 pm

Comment #63691 by USA_Limey on August 15, 2007 at 12:10 pm

"If MY consciousness continues after death I am going to kill myself because I don't want to be the same place as Darwin2."

"HEY, isn't that an interesing thought? If there is an afterlife can you choose to end it through suicide? After all wouldn't there come a point when it just gets boring? Eternity is long time after all."

I have written the following two poems to reflect what heaven is like. There will be no boredom in heaven.

TO TRAVEL GOD'S
ETERNAL HIGHWAY

By George Killoran

Death is now near,
My last time for dying,
My Eternal Soul will be free forever
To travel God's eternal highway.

No more physical pain,
No more emotional pain,
My Eternal Soul will be free forever
To travel God's eternal highway.

No more worries about family and friends,
No more worries about losing my job,
My Eternal Soul will be free forever
To travel God's eternal highway.

No more worries about crime,
No more worries about war,
My Eternal Soul will be free forever
To travel God's eternal highway.

No more taxes to pay,
No more country to follow,
My Eternal Soul will be free forever
To travel God's eternal highway.

The following poem shows the stages we will go through as we learn to use God's laws of physics to create our universes.

TO MASTER GOD'S LAWS OF PHYSICS

By George J. Killoran

My eternal soul has learned to free itself from physical bondage.
My eternal soul has taken a gigantic step in learning
To master God's laws of physics.

My eternal soul has learned to travel the universe.
My eternal soul has taken a gigantic step in learning
To master God's laws of physics.

My eternal soul has learned to create a solar system.
My eternal soul has taken a gigantic step in learning
To master God's laws of physics.

My eternal soul has learned to create a galaxy.
My eternal soul has taken a gigantic step in learning
To master God's laws of physics.

My eternal soul has learned to create a universe.
My eternal soul has now fully learned
To master God's laws of physics.

32. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63735 by darwin2 on August 15, 2007 at 3:24 pm

Comment #63686 by Tyler Durden on August 15, 2007 at 11:07 am

darwin2,
"You seem to think that " all will be revealed " upon your death. What a waste of precious life. Why not try to find out answers while you're still living?"

"Afraid of what you might find out?"

If you read my above posts, you will learn that I have found out the answers while I am still living. I am not afraid of what I might find out. Are you afraid of finding out that God might truly exist and what the ramifications are for you? I have asked myself this question and have found out that the ramifications are beautiful for all eternal souls presently occupying these temporal human bodies.

33. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63733 by darwin2 on August 15, 2007 at 3:16 pm

Comment #63630 by Philip1978 on August 15, 2007 at 6:14 am

Darwin2
"Now, you seem to be asserting that you know your god exists and that we are wrong for suggesting proper evidence is needed, I suggest you take a long hard look at what people are typing to you. They are backing up their statements with more than just wild assertions of invisible grandeur."

Yes, they present evidence but their evidence does not disprove the existence of God.

"How do you know your god is God? Why not Zeus, the Spaghetti Monster, Allah, Baal, Odin? I have just as much evidence to suggest its them as you do your god if I use your line of reasoning."

I have described my God and my purpose in life very specifically. Now tell me how Zeus, the Spaghetti Monster, Allah, Bael, and Odin differ from the God I describe. Also tell me what purpose they have with us humans. Are they good and evil gods? Then tell me if these gods sound more reasonable then my God and why they do.


"Why not use Douglas Adams' statement "Anything that happens, happens", its reasonable and it involves simplicity without having to add gods to the event complicating it and letting it get wildly out of control. "

Accepting "Anything that happens, happens" is a poor excuse for being lazy and not wanting to take the time to investigate why it happens. If astronomers and other scientists took that position, we would all be living in more ignorance then our society presently lives in now.

"I am not perfect, nothing is, life is just weird sometimes, I don't have all the answers but I don't want to invent an answer from the invisible and improbable side of life when a simpler version exists without it. I hope you understand this, you probably will ignore a lot of what I have said because you KNOW your god better than me but ask yourself where is he and how come he doesnt make his presence better .known by simply proving to world he exist in a less complicated way?"

I never expect to meet God. He is infinite. I am finite but I can appreciate Him through His magnificent creations.

34. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63711 by darwin2 on August 15, 2007 at 1:51 pm

Comment #63598 by LeeC on August 15, 2007 at 3:43 am

"I am glad to hear God does not interfere... so what you are saying then is in the first 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 seconds of the universe after the big bang God fixed all the laws of physics and rested after a job will done."

Yes that is exactly what I am saying.

35. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63709 by darwin2 on August 15, 2007 at 1:44 pm

Comment #63287 by PeterK on August 13, 2007 at 7:54 pm

"Darwin2"
" So what would be the point of any one debating you if you will not alter your position, regardless of what counter-arguments are presented? You wish to engage "in a mutually respectful dialogue with anyone who would like to discuss in depth their arguments against the existence of God" , implying you wish to defend your argument in the province of logic--but to claim nothing will alter your position disqualifies you from that playing field. You have to understand that atheists do not embrace their position first, and then search for arguments to defend it--as do theists--their position is simply the result of critical examnination of the evidence which theists present as evidence to support their claims, and then arriving at an honest conclusion, without any self-deception or embracing a belief because they want to or it feels good. Atheism is simply the result of applying reasonable thought--and if you or anyone else would do likelwise, then tah dah!--you will become atheist as well.
I strongly suspect that the idea of you being an atheist frightens you, as the result of what your notion of what God is, and what the repercussions would be if you no longer believed in GOd would be--I daresay that at some point most atheists deal with this frightening thought when abandoning their beliefs, but nothing is more exhilarating that knowing that all your beliefs are the result of good, honest thinking--and knowing how to recognize the traps that exist out there to deceive, frighten and control your mind. It's your mind, and only YOU can control it. I wish you well."

I did not say I want to debate you. Debate implies a winner and loser. I am willing to enter in a mutually respectful dialogue about our belief systems. At the end of the dialogue, we will disagree with the conclusions about our differing beliefs but we will leave with a mutual respect for each other's beliefs.

I don't know why you and other atheists seem to think I am frightened of beoming an atheist or death. I have nothing to fear from death. If my conclusions are wrong and death ends it all there is nothing to fear. I have been blessed and have had a good life. I consider myself very fortunate since most people on our planet lead lives of quiet desperation. If I am correct and I totally believe I am, I believe I have completed my last incarnation and my eternal soul will be free of physical bondage and will start it eternal journey to fulfill its divine destiny.

I would like in turn to ask you a couple of questions. Is it possible for you to become a believer in God? Yes or No answer please. If your answer is No then do you admit that objectively and scientifically, it is impossible for God to exist? Yes or No answer please. If your answer is Yes, please tell me what it would take for you to believe in God.

36. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63704 by darwin2 on August 15, 2007 at 1:23 pm

Comment #63551 by Raiv on August 14, 2007 at 7:07 pm

Darwin2 wrote: "God knows exactly how the laws of physics will react in every occurrence both with intelligent and non-intelligent life in our universe and all universes. This is how God is omniscient and knows all about the future."

"Whoa, what happened to free will? Aren't we supposed to be able to damn ourselves to eternal torment in any way we please?"

God would not be loving, merciful and perfectly just to allow us to damn ourselves to eternal torment. We all make it sooner or later. It just takes some of us longer than others to make it.

37. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63703 by darwin2 on August 15, 2007 at 1:15 pm

Comment #63528 by TeapotTheist on August 14, 2007 at 5:18 pm

Darwin2 wrote:
"Objectively speaking everything I believe in may be totally wrong. If consciousness continues after death we will get the correct objective answer."

"It seems to me that this "let's wait until we die" thing is your comfort blanket against looking at the evidence against your god. You shy away from the possibility that your entire belief sytem is wrong - understandable, I suppose.."

I don't shy away from the objective reality that my belief system may be wrong. I have admitted it many times in my postings. The hard truth of the matter is most people at this web site including you shy away from coming to grips with the scientific and objective possibility that God might exist. Since it is a scientific possibility with eternal ramifications, it is time that scientists and scientifically oriented people get off their butts and start discussing the ramifications of what happens if consciousness survives death and God exists.

38. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63698 by darwin2 on August 15, 2007 at 1:01 pm

Comment #63503 by Hobbit on August 14, 2007 at 3:37 pm

"Tell me, what brand of religion do you follow? Does your god have a name? Do you follow his / her / its teachings from a book? Does he / her / it speak to you directly? Without any of these how do you know he / she / it is there?"

My God does not have a name although I often refer to God as the Supreme Creator and Designer of our universe and all universes that may exist. I belong to no organized religion but I absolutely and totally believe in Reincarnation and Karma

I have never seen God nor do I have any hope of ever seeing God. God is infinite and I am finite. A finite being can never experience, meet or comprehend that which is infinite. But I do feel God's presence and I do know He has a divine plan for all of us. I developed my conclusions about God's existence and my purpose in life by using critical thinking skills in asking myself the deep questions about life and finding the answers that satisfy me.

39. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63695 by darwin2 on August 15, 2007 at 12:51 pm

Comment #63498 by Science H Logic on August 14, 2007 at 2:32 pm

Comment #63296 by darwin2 on August 13, 2007 at 8:22 pm

"I have read Dawkins book as well as those of Harris and Hitchens. The design argument doesn't go ad infinitum. It stops at God."

"Why exactly do you feel that the argument must end at God? Why is he exempt from this logic?"

It stops at God because God is the Originator.

"I am willing to listen openly to any arguments and am willing to engage in a mutually respectful dialogue with anyone who would like to discuss in depth their arguments against the existence of God."

As has been said over and over again, the burden of proof in on the person advocating that existence of God. The only evidence you have given is your space shuttle analogy. And the reason I think so many people (including my self) thought that you didn't believe in evolution was because that argument usually refers to to biological complexity. So since you are not referring to such, I'd like to know what complexity are taking about? What is the space shuttle supposed to be an analogy of?

As I have a DNA and all life forms have a DNA, so does our universe. The energy at the very beginning of the Big Bang was the DNA of our universe out of which every galaxy, star, solar system and all life forms both biological and non-biological evolved.

40. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63694 by darwin2 on August 15, 2007 at 12:42 pm

Comment #63483 by Quetzalcoatl on August 14, 2007 at 1:13 pm

Darwin2-
Soon our mistakes accumulated to the point that they caused us to descend into the temporary hells of the physical world of which Earth is one of these temporary hells

"And what are the other temporary hells, if Earth is but one?"

Our universe is vast. Our Milky Way contains approximately 200 billion stars. There are approximately 150 billion galaxies in our universe and some jumbo galaxies may contain up to 3 trillion stars. So the other temporary hells are scattered throughout our universe.

"our eternal souls are relatively new creations of God.
"On what timescale? How new?"

We are the new kids on the block. There are highly evolved souls incalculable years older than our eternal souls. My guess is most eternal souls occupying this temporary hell called Earth are less than 20,000 years old.

we were immediately instructed by highly evolved spiritual beings

"Which spiritual beings? Angels? More detail please."

Call them angels or administrators but these highly evolved spiritual beings are light years more developed than us and are responsible for administering the law of reincarnation and Karma. Each eternal soul comes into a lifetime with specific karmic goals to achieve and is given a specific time to achieve those goals. That is why some eternal souls live short lives, some long lives and some intermediate term lives. But all life spans are but a nano second on the eternal clock of time.

"violating God's laws of physics specifically by using energy incorrectly
How can we violate the laws of physics, if God created them, and us? In what manner did we use energy "incorrectly"? What did we do with it?"

We were given free will and were instructed on how to use our free will to obey, learn and master God's laws of physics. Regarding mistakes, we probably started making small mistakes like lying, getting annoyed at people we may believe were occupying a place in space that we were exclusively entitled too and probably becoming very arrogant with our powers. Using energy incorrectly leads to negative results. Using energy correctly leads to positive results. For example, if we use electricity correctly by inserting a plug properly into a live electrical socket, we can light a lamp, cook some food, and play our TV. If we use electricity incorrectly by inserting a knife in a live electrical socket with our bare hands, we are going to get electrocuted. Most of us are living in this temporary hell called Earth because we have frequently placed knives in the live electrical sockets of spiritual evolution with our bare hands. Now we have to undo the damage we have created by misusing our free will, and learn how to properly use the electricity of spiritual evolution. Once we learn to obey God's laws, specifically the laws of physics, the universe will be ours and we will eventually regain that level of spirituality where we will be able to imitate God and create our own universes and beyond.

"The law of physics that will enable us to accomplish this is the law of reincarnation and karma
There seems to be no evidence for this law of physics, by comparison to all the rest that we know in detail, and the others that we can infer and at least have some theoretical and experimental grounding. Why is reincarnation and karma the exception?"

Reincarnation and Karma answer every question about the human condition. It tells why some people are born rich, some poor, some suffer immensely, some have relatively peaceful and prosperous lives, some are cured of diseases, some die from diseases, some die young, some die old, etc. etc. Yes this theory does apply perfectly to the human condition but where is the hard evidence? It is not believable without evidence and I agree evidence is lacking at this moment. Let's look at a scientific proposition that looks entirely feasible but also lacks evidence. Some scientists believe that there is an ocean under the ice of Europa and that marine life might exist there. This proposition is feasible but where is the evidence. Within the next 20 years if this proposition is correct we will get it when a spacecraft visits Europa and confirms this proposition. Likewise, we will die, and if the law of Reincarnation and Karma is correct, we will get the evidence to confirm this proposition. We don't have evidence now because we are temporarily blinded in this short lifetime by our mistakes in the past.

"If that's true, then HOW CAN YOU POSSIBLY KNOW ALL THAT? And how can the same source from which you obtained these ideas not provide us with even the most anecdotal evidence?"
I eagerly anticipate your answers."

I believe in One God who is loving, merciful and perfectly just and if He truly has these qualities He as to help us find the truth. If we truly want the truth we have to search for it. I have searched and found the truth in Reincarnation and Karma.

41. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63547 by darwin2 on August 14, 2007 at 6:53 pm

Comment #63478 by Oliver Leif on August 14, 2007 at 1:03 pm

"Some have denied that omniscience entails knowing all about the future. They say that omniscience only entails knowing what there is to know. But the future actions of free persons are open, and not there to be known about. Thus, not even an omniscient being could know about them. This may provide a basis for rejecting premise 3 of the argument."

God created the laws of physics and does not interfere. God knows exactly how the laws of physics will react in every occurrence both with intelligent and non-intelligent life in our universe and all universes. This is how God is omniscient and knows all about the future.

42. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63546 by darwin2 on August 14, 2007 at 6:44 pm

Comment #63449 by Oliver Leif on August 14, 2007 at 11:53 am

"By using the same logic applied to the Intelligent Designer argument, it has been shown that the argument itself, the one theists put forward, is a logical fallacy."

"And to this day no theist has been able to come up with a counter to that position without using the "god is outside human logic" trap."

That's your subjective opinion. My subjective opinion differs

43. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63544 by darwin2 on August 14, 2007 at 6:37 pm

Comment #63409 by mspatriot9 on August 14, 2007 at 5:01 am


To Darwin2
"And it's been presented countless times how the universe came to be...it's not the scientists fault you refuse to educate yourself. The information is widely available for free. You don't need to rely on school or college. You just need to do the study yourself."

Thank you for your detailed response. One amazing thing I find in the posts to me is that only a very small number of posters can openly admit that objectively and scientifically speaking God might exist and consciousness may continue after death. At least I can scientifically and objectively state that my subjective beliefs may be totally wrong.

44. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63543 by darwin2 on August 14, 2007 at 6:25 pm

Comment #63401 by uncle tungsten on August 14, 2007 at 4:42 am

"We shouldn't be surprised that someone who believes in a god cannot - or will not allow himself to - follow the logical argument that leads to the opposite conclusion. You claim, darwin2, that you are "willing to listen openly to any arguments and...to engage in a mutually respectful dialogue with anyone who would like to discuss in depth their arguments against the existence of God" but that is precisely what you are NOT willing to do. If you want to have that discussion you've come to the right place. However, simply repeating "God did it" doesn't cut the mustard. You say your argument is simply that the universe is so complex that it must have been designed; ours is that this complexity has arisen naturally. Our argument is backed by the entire weight of scientific experiment and obsevation; yours is backed by...well, you tell us. But before you do, let me repeat that just saying "God did it" is not sufficient."

You have me interested. Now please help me out here and show me how your argument backed by the entire weight of scientific experiment and observation proves that God does not exist and that consciousness does not continue after death.

45. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63541 by darwin2 on August 14, 2007 at 6:18 pm

Comment #63393 by Suffolk Blue on August 14, 2007 at 4:26 am

darwin2

"Believers used to use the Boeing 747 as the example of something complex and obviously designed, now it's a space shuttle. Is this progress?"

Yes, it is definitely progress. Now take it a trillion steps further and observe the complexity in the universe and you get its Designer and Creator, God.

46. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63538 by darwin2 on August 14, 2007 at 6:08 pm

Comment #63343 by Johnny O on August 14, 2007 at 1:58 am

"Might I suggest a few more for you? Start saying you believe in Zeus and that belief in Him is older than in the Abrahamic God so it must be true. Also perhaps you could come up with something as to why He would make other universes, (as you allude to in comment #39)? Why if Zeus is perfect does he need to create other universes just for us? In fact why ANY universe? Why not just a flat Earth that sits on the back of a turtle that is standing on the back of an elephant… oh wait, that's already been done."

I have believed for some time that there were other universes. Now theories such as string theory and multiverse theory seem to indicate that there may be an infinite number of universes and this means there are infinite possibilities for our eternal souls to grow in knowledge and wisdom.

God did not just create the universe for us. There are incalculable numbers of eternal souls that God has created and continues to create and new universes will continuously be created and at some time when our eternal souls reach maturity, we will also be able to imitate God and create our own universes. This is our divine destiny and purpose for existence.

47. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63489 by darwin2 on August 14, 2007 at 1:29 pm

=========================
Comment #63333 by Quetzalcoatl on August 14, 2007 at 12:56 am

Darwin2-
If consciousness survives death and hopefully it does


"Key word- HOPEFULLY. You keep bringing this point up as well. Essentially you're saying- "just wait until we're dead, then you'll see" (imagines Darwin2 shaking fist in a vaguely threatening manner). This kind of argument does not obviate the need to provide evidence or explain why you believe what you do.
Failed solar systems and natural disasters are caused by bad individual and collective Karma"


"Oh. Dear.

Plenty of solar systems failed and natural disasters occurred before humanity even evolved. Does that mean you believe in retroactive karma? Sounds a bit mean, doesn't it? And humans must have pretty powerful karma to be causing novas etc. And how do you define karma?"

SEE COMMENT 98

48. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63486 by darwin2 on August 14, 2007 at 1:23 pm

71. Comment #63325 by JimmyT on August 13, 2007 at 10:47 pm

Really, anybody who says...

"Failed solar systems and natural disasters are caused by bad individual and collective Karma"
...
deserves no respect at all. I don't know whether that statement is funny or insulting. darwin2 - you actually believe that the people who died in, let's say the Kobe earthquake, didn't die because they lived near the edge of a tectonic plate but because of Karma. Good grief.

You think God kicked the whole evolution thing off and let "nature" take its course. But you also think he interferes with goings-on down here in His perfectly designed world (for example by sending out punishments in the form of tsunamis).

This skewed half-Deism of yours is simply not compatible with evolution (unless you cop out and use Gould's non-overlapping magesteria argument) because of the complexity issue nearly everbody on this site has told you about. You can't have it all. Or maybe in your irrational one-man cult you can.

It seems to me that no matter how much science discovers about evolution and the early stages of the universe, it will always be "goddidit" with you. Answer PeterK's question. I think I know what the answer will be.

SEE COMMENT 98

49. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63484 by darwin2 on August 14, 2007 at 1:19 pm

Comment #63319 by JohnC on August 13, 2007 at 10:19 pm

darwin2: I am perplexed that scientists can actually come to this conclusion. I believe the opposite of what Dawkins says is true and that the preponderance of scientific evidence demonstrates ...


"So the problem is your perplexity. But rather than resolving that perplexity by getting some much-needed scientific education you ego-maniacally assert that you know better."

"How is it that generations of biologists since Darwin have no trouble understanding the emergence of complex design through natural selection, but you don't get it?"

"What credentials do you have to assess the "preponderance of scientific evidence"? Any?"

I have absolutely no credentials or any expertise in science. All I am doing is exercising my God given right to free inquiry into the existence of God and the survivability of consciousness after death. On these two issues I am on an equal par with Darwin and the greatest scientists on our planet today.

50. Interview with Richard Dawkins

Comment #63482 by darwin2 on August 14, 2007 at 1:11 pm

Comment #63318 by monoape on August 13, 2007 at 10:14 pm

darwin2 - However I do believe in one God but not their sick version of Him.

"So, you've created your own god? Seemingly your own 'god of the gaps'."

"Can you not understand the concept that just because you have a question that either science does not have an answer for, or that you don't understand the explanation to, does not prove the existence of some über sky fairy?"

"If you really can't grasp that argument then you've still got a lot of work to do before you shake off your bronze age superstition."

It is only superstition if it is false. Subjectively speaking this is what I truly believe. Objectively speaking everything I believe in may be totally wrong. If consciousness continues after death we will get the correct objective answer.