GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Believe me its laughable. When i look at any thing, i feel his presence. Small stone, tree, animals, star, moon, human being. Everything remind his presence. For a atheist these are mere natural. There is veil on eyes, seal on heart. Even if they see the sign, they wont accept.
"I see a stone, I feel good, therefore God" is not laughable?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaanAli
I never say, holy book is true because its saying so. I said holy book can be proved true with help of science. Quran and science go hand to hand. They didn't contradict so far.
Incorrect.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaanAli
Maurice Bucaille was a French medical doctor, member of the French Society of Egyptology and an author. In 1976, he published his book, The Bible, The Qur'an and Science which argued that the Qur'an contains no statements contradicting established scientific fact. In 1991, another book by Bucaille, Mummies of the Pharaos: Modern Medical Investigations, was published in English.
Who has independently validated his claims?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaanAli
Like him there are several. But you wont believe because you don't want to. If some scientist said E=mc2. You believed. But if same scientist says, there is GOD. You wont believe him. M I right? (E=mc2 was mere example, dont argue on that. )
I accept that E=mc^2, largely because it was verified when it offered the only valid explanation for the amount of energy released from nuclear fission, so it has evidence in its support. "Belief" has nothing to do with it. And if someone has an alternative explanation, I'll look at it.
We have dog who turns panic before thunderstorm from distance so that translates as he feels God coming?
//offtopic
The dog can probably hear it coming. (It is said that dogs can hear sounds with frequency up to 60khz and can notice sounds than 4x times further (when compared to humans))
It is also worth pointing out that with a scientific claim, if it is to be accepted, the scientist will have to show his/her workings To use the e=mc2 example, I am able (if I wish) to work all the way backwards to verify that e does indeed equal mass multiplied by the velocity of light squared. I can see whether it should be accepted and that is not something you can do with the ineffable.
Do you have proof of your grandfather of grandfather? If you dont have proof, will you consider him a lie. Your logic.
Yes, we all have that "proof", it's coded in our DNA. You have a genetic "fingerprint" of your grandfather and grandmother that can be identified (again, thanks to science).
Yes, we all have that "proof", it's coded in our DNA. You have a genetic "fingerprint" of your grandfather and grandmother that can be identified (again, thanks to science).
Not to mention official records (birth, death, immigration, land purchase, etc.), old photographs/news stories, burial sites, passed-down stories/recipes/traditions/property, and common knowledge of how people come into existence.
Distribution: RedHat 9, Sun solaris 10, Windows 2000
Posts: 46
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by acid_kewpie
That's just nonsense. E=MC^2 can be accepted as true, but it can be shown to be true through science as well. So much science is pieced together out of building blocks of knowledge, because at some level you need to be able to take a baseline of facts and progress from there. Here, you would start with E=MC^2 as a fundamental truth when progressing forwards, but IF you want to you can go all the way back to justify it. There is naturally no such scenario for God and all. You can start from God existing and move forwards, but you can't go back, so everything is obviously undermined.
I said, no argument on this.
You yourself said, make a baseline of facts and progress from there. What if those baselines are not exactly correct. A single new fact can destroy complete viewpoint. This is not new with science.
Science boundary ends with human brain boundary. GOD is far beyond that.
Distribution: RedHat 9, Sun solaris 10, Windows 2000
Posts: 46
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arcane
Did you know some animals sense danger? We have dog who turns panic before thunderstorm from distance so that translates as he feels God coming?
Why human dont have that sense?
Why evolution/nature didnt give us that capability?
Dont we want to know the storm coming?
Why are we not having best capabilities exists on this earth.
Why nature failed here?
Quote:
Also want sign of miracle? Turn off computer and ask God to or Ghost to turn it on pressing that small button on PC case and even better disable power source before that so that they turn it on with miracle not trickery. Miracles is what describes supernatural beeings like God in first place and if they can't do miracles they don't exist or are different from description which also prooves books are fake proof.
Sorry, I am not that great soul to call GOD and give you proof. FYI, all Prophets did some kind of miracles with help of GOD. People around them are witness for that. There again no proof of those miracles. Knowledge of those miracles been shared generation to generation and this will go on. Few people in between can not come and change that.
Quote:
Lol in that case second scientist will be fake because when science comes with public announcement with discovery they provide details. Go back in school in math lesson. When you asked teacher why is that or this formula correct or incorrect she or he easily in front of your eyes prooved it. When someone simply says something is true without any supporting base of facts|evidence it is just not science anymore.
This is what I said. Before reaching to any conclusion disprove holy book with help of your science. Can you?
Quote:
Double standarts = lies in face = discussing with you = waste of our time. If you will say science itself can't proove book then it is still hypocracy because if you can't proove temperature with radiation you don't need radiation next to you when you proove it using something else because all involved tools make proof not just one.
I am saying in very simple words. Disprove holy book Quran with help of all your sciences. Can you take that challenge?
Why human dont have that sense?
Why evolution/nature didnt give us that capability?
Dont we want to know the storm coming?
Why are we not having best capabilities exists on this earth.
Why nature failed here?
You should learn how evolution works before trying to discuss it.
Quote:
FYI, all Prophets did some kind of miracles with help of GOD. People around them are witness for that.
Didn't David Copperfield or the Great Houdini do the same? Are they prophets now?
Quote:
Disprove holy book Quran with help of all your sciences.
Sorry, but this isn't the way it works. You believe that the Qur'an is true, so you are the one to prove that it really is.
Why evolution/nature didnt give us that capability?
Why should it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaanAli
Dont we want to know the storm coming?
Sure, but what does "want" have to do with it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaanAli
Why are we not having best capabilities exists on this earth.
Why should we?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShaanAli
Why nature failed here?
The use of the term "failed" is meaningless in this context.
The problem here is that all of your questions assume:
- There is purpose in nature
- There is something special about humans
And since a purely naturalistic view of our planet is unburdened with those preconceptions, they're not arguments against it. But since those arguments ARE valid preconceptions of your religion, these questions effectively challenge your own belief system.
So... why did God not give us the very best abilities? Why did he fail us?
Distribution: RedHat 9, Sun solaris 10, Windows 2000
Posts: 46
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SL00b
"I see a stone, I feel good, therefore God" is not laughable?
Keep that stone there intact and make sure nobody touches that, not air no water. And lets see evolution change that to something else.
Quote:
Incorrect.
Provide proof.
Quote:
I accept that E=mc^2, largely because it was verified when it offered the only valid explanation for the amount of energy released from nuclear fission, so it has evidence in its support. "Belief" has nothing to do with it. And if someone has an alternative explanation, I'll look at it.
In other words, bad analogy.
It means till someone else dont come and disprove this you will keep accepting this. This is then your belief in this. Since you are not sure 100%.
You yourself relying on some other source(s) to provide you proof. How do you know they are correct or not. How do you know what you study in school is 100% correct. Who validates that? AND Who validate the validator?.... Ofcouse you didnt go in depth of that, You didnt verify anything by youself..... It means YOU BLINDLY BELIEVE THAT. Isn't?
I just came to know E=mc^2 is not correct always !!!!! (source internet, verified: NO)
Distribution: RedHat 9, Sun solaris 10, Windows 2000
Posts: 46
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by easuter
Yes, we all have that "proof", it's coded in our DNA. You have a genetic "fingerprint" of your grandfather and grandmother that can be identified (again, thanks to science).
Did you capture DNA of all your ancestors? How will you get DNA of your grandfather's grandfather.
Did you capture DNA of all your ancestors? How will you get DNA of your grandfather's grandfather.
Thats easy, assuming that the remains are still around DNA can be extracted from the bones of the grandfather's grandfather to confirm DNA. Also that is assuming the grandfather's grandfather's remaining DNA is still viable, assuming the grandfather's grandfather is not cremated or the remains no longer available.
But the point is DNA is the most effective way of determining/verifying lineage.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.