Stop Using Science To Validate Your Beliefs!

[attofishpi]

Science is empirical rational based

God is a metaphysical and transcendental based entity

Metaphysics is something that is totally beyond Science

Why theists are forcing the transcendental God into the empirical box is due to psychology

There is no clash between my knowing that God\'God' exists, and scientific inquiry.

Entropy dictates that a 'God' will exist eventually. It has been an argument of mine - on point 2. 'God' as A.I. ....for many years.
1. God is divine, formed its own intelligence and our reality from the chaos of the early universe.
2. 'God' as an intelligence was created by intelligence species, perhaps us, created in order for us to exist within a far more efficient reality. A.I.

Stop making out that science contradicts the validity of God\'God's existence.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Science is empirical rational based

God is a metaphysical and transcendental based entity

Metaphysics is something that is totally beyond Science

Why theists are forcing the transcendental God into the empirical box is due to psychology

There is no clash between my knowing that God\'God' exists, and scientific inquiry.

Btw, do you understand the fallacy of equivocation or conflation of different perspectives?

As I had explained there are two main issues regarding the idea of God, i.e.

• 1. Empirical based God
  2. Ontological God

For the empirical based God, e.g. the bearded man in the sky, yes it is possible for science to verify it, but then bring the evidence to justify an empirical God. This is the 1/7 possible God of Richard Dawkins.
But the empirical God is a sort of inferior and useless God when cornered.

So humans has to come up with an ontological God, i.e. the all powerful God who created the whole universe and can do anything.
The Transcendental, Metaphysical & Ontological God cannot be equivocated with empirical Science.

Entropy dictates that a 'God' will exist eventually. It has been an argument of mine - on point 2. 'God' as A.I. ....for many years.
1. God is divine, formed its own intelligence and our reality from the chaos of the early universe.
2. 'God' as an intelligence was created by intelligence species, perhaps us, created in order for us to exist within a far more efficient reality. A.I.

Stop making out that science contradicts the validity of God\'God's existence.

As long as you are using Science to justify an ontological God, you are caught in the fallacy of equivocation.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Not really, the response is about the nature of context through context, that is the context. It may sound like a play one words, but it is a self sustained argument.

If everything is connected and codependent, then by default all things have truth in them and your crusade to eradicate religion is void of purpose.

Significant variables are statements of relation, considering all variable are significant if all variable are connected.

Science is good. Science is not the be all and end all of truth.

I believe that is your problem, i.e. trying to link everything when not necessary to the question.
All things are connected in a relative deterministic way and thus interdependent in various degrees.
You cannot assume they are all critically important but rather you need to consider the context and thus consider the degrees of [inter]dependence between variables.

My weaning of ALL religions with Islam as priority is the direct link between religions and religious-based evil and violent acts.
Note the many types of religious based evil acts and notably this;


Therefore when we have weaned off Islam and all religions* then there will be ZERO religious-based evil and violent acts. QED!
* subject to replacing them with non-religious spiritual fool proof practices.

There will be secular-related evil and violent acts which need to be addressed.
The ideal is to get rid of ALL evil and violent acts in the world.

Trying to connect everything to Islam is faulty by your own logic, as you would be linking Islam to everything.

Nope!
My approach is as follows;

• 1. ALL evils of humanity must be addressed and resolved
  2. All evils comprised i. secular and ii. religious based evils.
  3. Re religious based evils, humanity must give priority to Islamic-based evil.

How can that be linking everything to Islam.
My research covers ALL types of evil but it would be more effective if we break down the types into smaller categories so that it would be more efficient to tackle them separately.
I happened to have expertise to discuss on Islam.

Islamic-based evils is in the news almost every day, so why shouldn't we deal with Islamic-based evils. Why are you ignoring such threatening evil that is happening almost every day?
I know why you a coward to discuss this problem? It is because you have been cowered with the threats of terror by the strategies used by Islamists.
Are you a concerned citizen of humanity?

[Eodnhoj7]

I believe that is your problem, i.e. trying to link everything when not necessary to the question.
All things are connected in a relative deterministic way and thus interdependent in various degrees.
You cannot assume they are all critically important but rather you need to consider the context and thus consider the degrees of [inter]dependence between variables.

My weaning of ALL religions with Islam as priority is the direct link between religions and religious-based evil and violent acts.
Note the many types of religious based evil acts and notably this;


Therefore when we have weaned off Islam and all religions* then there will be ZERO religious-based evil and violent acts. QED!
* subject to replacing them with non-religious spiritual fool proof practices.

There will be secular-related evil and violent acts which need to be addressed.
The ideal is to get rid of ALL evil and violent acts in the world.

Trying to connect everything to Islam is faulty by your own logic, as you would be linking Islam to everything.

Nope!
My approach is as follows;

• 1. ALL evils of humanity must be addressed and resolved
  2. All evils comprised i. secular and ii. religious based evils.
  3. Re religious based evils, humanity must give priority to Islamic-based evil.

How can that be linking everything to Islam.
My research covers ALL types of evil but it would be more effective if we break down the types into smaller categories so that it would be more efficient to tackle them separately.
I happened to have expertise to discuss on Islam.

Islamic-based evils is in the news almost every day, so why shouldn't we deal with Islamic-based evils. Why are you ignoring such threatening evil that is happening almost every day?
I know why you a coward to discuss this problem? It is because you have been cowered with the threats of terror by the strategies used by Islamists.
Are you a concerned citizen of humanity?

I like how you put the word "my" in front of "approach" and "research"...

So what is not "yours" is evil?

[Veritas Aequitas]

Trying to connect everything to Islam is faulty by your own logic, as you would be linking Islam to everything.

Nope!
My approach is as follows;

• 1. ALL evils of humanity must be addressed and resolved
  2. All evils comprised i. secular and ii. religious based evils.
  3. Re religious based evils, humanity must give priority to Islamic-based evil.

How can that be linking everything to Islam.
My research covers ALL types of evil but it would be more effective if we break down the types into smaller categories so that it would be more efficient to tackle them separately.
I happened to have expertise to discuss on Islam.

Islamic-based evils is in the news almost every day, so why shouldn't we deal with Islamic-based evils. Why are you ignoring such threatening evil that is happening almost every day?
I know why you a coward to discuss this problem? It is because you have been cowered with the threats of terror by the strategies used by Islamists.
Are you a concerned citizen of humanity?

I like how you put the word "my" in front of "approach" and "research"...

Isn't this obvious and necessary.
It is implied for what you have posted in this forum, you have to use "my postings."

So what is not "yours" is evil?

Where did I state that?
I am discussing about evil and how to prevent or eliminate evil.

I am not claiming to be a saint.
I like all other humans have the potential to commit evil [of low degrees] as well.
My research will help to prevent me from committing evil.

Any response to MY questions I raised earlier?

Islamic-based evils is in the news almost every day, so why shouldn't we deal with Islamic-based evils.
Why are you ignoring such threatening evil that is happening almost every day?
I know why you a coward to discuss this problem. It is because you have been cowered with the threats of terror by the strategies used by Islamists.
Are you a concerned citizen of humanity?

[Eodnhoj7]

Nope!
My approach is as follows;

• 1. ALL evils of humanity must be addressed and resolved
  2. All evils comprised i. secular and ii. religious based evils.
  3. Re religious based evils, humanity must give priority to Islamic-based evil.

How can that be linking everything to Islam.
My research covers ALL types of evil but it would be more effective if we break down the types into smaller categories so that it would be more efficient to tackle them separately.
I happened to have expertise to discuss on Islam.

Islamic-based evils is in the news almost every day, so why shouldn't we deal with Islamic-based evils. Why are you ignoring such threatening evil that is happening almost every day?
I know why you a coward to discuss this problem? It is because you have been cowered with the threats of terror by the strategies used by Islamists.
Are you a concerned citizen of humanity?

I like how you put the word "my" in front of "approach" and "research"...

Isn't this obvious and necessary.
It is implied for what you have posted in this forum, you have to use "my postings."

So what is not "yours" is evil?

Where did I state that?
I am discussing about evil and how to prevent or eliminate evil.

I am not claiming to be a saint.
I like all other humans have the potential to commit evil [of low degrees] as well.
My research will help to prevent me from committing evil.

Any response to MY questions I raised earlier?

Islamic-based evils is in the news almost every day, so why shouldn't we deal with Islamic-based evils.
Why are you ignoring such threatening evil that is happening almost every day?
I know why you a coward to discuss this problem. It is because you have been cowered with the threats of terror by the strategies used by Islamists.
Are you a concerned citizen of humanity?

Word salad...that is the response. Save the victim mentality for elsewhere.

[Veritas Aequitas]

I like how you put the word "my" in front of "approach" and "research"...

Isn't this obvious and necessary.
It is implied for what you have posted in this forum, you have to use "my postings."

So what is not "yours" is evil?

Where did I state that?
I am discussing about evil and how to prevent or eliminate evil.

I am not claiming to be a saint.
I like all other humans have the potential to commit evil [of low degrees] as well.
My research will help to prevent me from committing evil.

Any response to MY questions I raised earlier?

Islamic-based evils is in the news almost every day, so why shouldn't we deal with Islamic-based evils.
Why are you ignoring such threatening evil that is happening almost every day?
I know why you a coward to discuss this problem. It is because you have been cowered with the threats of terror by the strategies used by Islamists.
Are you a concerned citizen of humanity?

Word salad...that is the response. Save the victim mentality for elsewhere.

Note, it is the Islamists who are the ones who always claim to be the victims while their own continue to commit terrible evil and violent acts. This is so evident. You seem to be an Islamic apologists and supporting their victimhood.

[Eodnhoj7]

Isn't this obvious and necessary.
It is implied for what you have posted in this forum, you have to use "my postings."


Where did I state that?
I am discussing about evil and how to prevent or eliminate evil.

I am not claiming to be a saint.
I like all other humans have the potential to commit evil [of low degrees] as well.
My research will help to prevent me from committing evil.

Any response to MY questions I raised earlier?

Islamic-based evils is in the news almost every day, so why shouldn't we deal with Islamic-based evils.
Why are you ignoring such threatening evil that is happening almost every day?
I know why you a coward to discuss this problem. It is because you have been cowered with the threats of terror by the strategies used by Islamists.
Are you a concerned citizen of humanity?

Word salad...that is the response. Save the victim mentality for elsewhere.

Note, it is the Islamists who are the ones who always claim to be the victims while their own continue to commit terrible evil and violent acts. This is so evident. You seem to be an Islamic apologists and supporting their victimhood.

Yeah, so what...what are you going to do about it but bitch?

[Veritas Aequitas]

Word salad...that is the response. Save the victim mentality for elsewhere.

Note, it is the Islamists who are the ones who always claim to be the victims while their own continue to commit terrible evil and violent acts. This is so evident. You seem to be an Islamic apologists and supporting their victimhood.

Yeah, so what...what are you going to do about it but bitch?

I was waiting for sound counter arguments from you but instead you are the one who is bitching in the first place.
Any rational arguments from you?

[Eodnhoj7]

Note, it is the Islamists who are the ones who always claim to be the victims while their own continue to commit terrible evil and violent acts. This is so evident. You seem to be an Islamic apologists and supporting their victimhood.

Yeah, so what...what are you going to do about it but bitch?

I was waiting for sound counter arguments from you but instead you are the one who is bitching in the first place.
Any rational arguments from you?

Adults dont reason with children, they just smack them for acting up or ignore them.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Yeah, so what...what are you going to do about it but bitch?

I was waiting for sound counter arguments from you but instead you are the one who is bitching in the first place.
Any rational arguments from you?

Adults dont reason with children, they just smack them for acting up or ignore them.

More bitching?

[Eodnhoj7]

I was waiting for sound counter arguments from you but instead you are the one who is bitching in the first place.
Any rational arguments from you?

Adults dont reason with children, they just smack them for acting up or ignore them.

More bitching?

If we are referring to your argument about "we need science for a new moral system, that is only empirical, so we can eradicate Islam (even though the muslims helped with the foundations of sciene)" perpetual loop...then yes.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Adults dont reason with children, they just smack them for acting up or ignore them.

More bitching?

If we are referring to your argument about "we need science for a new moral system, that is only empirical, so we can eradicate Islam (even though the muslims helped with the foundations of sciene)" perpetual loop...then yes.

You are SO ignorant on this.

That SOME Muslims had helped in propagating Scientific knowledge got nothing to do with the essence of the ideology Islam which is anti-advanced_knowledge. Many of these scientists who were Muslims [happened to be Muslims due to circumstances] were never serious with Islam [most are Sufis] and some were condemned and killed.

This is why when Islam dominates anywhere, there are no advances in Science by modern Muslims as evident by no Muslim Nobel Prize in Science.
Abdul Salam who was Nobel Prize in Physics was denounced as non-Muslim because he belonged to a fringe sect [ Ahmadiyya ] labelled as infidel by mainstream Muslim.

In 1974, Abdus Salam departed from his country, in protest, after the Parliament of Pakistan passed unanimously a parliamentary bill declaring members of the Ahmadiyya movement to which Salam belonged [as] non-Muslims.
-wiki

Just imagine how crazy for Muslims to denounce their only Nobel Prize winner in Science as not a Muslims. This indicate the significance of the psychology, primal instincts and emotions involved in how strong Islam has a terrible threat and hold over the brains of Muslims.

I am sure if Islam is no more, there will be Nobel Prize Winners from those who were ex-Muslims.

[Eodnhoj7]

More bitching?

If we are referring to your argument about "we need science for a new moral system, that is only empirical, so we can eradicate Islam (even though the muslims helped with the foundations of sciene)" perpetual loop...then yes.

You are SO ignorant on this.

That SOME Muslims had helped in propagating Scientific knowledge got nothing to do with the essence of the ideology Islam which is anti-advanced_knowledge. Many of these scientists who were Muslims [happened to be Muslims due to circumstances] were never serious with Islam [most are Sufis] and some were condemned and killed.

This is why when Islam dominates anywhere, there are no advances in Science by modern Muslims as evident by no Muslim Nobel Prize in Science.
Abdul Salam who was Nobel Prize in Physics was denounced as non-Muslim because he belonged to a fringe sect [ Ahmadiyya ] labelled as infidel by mainstream Muslim.

In 1974, Abdus Salam departed from his country, in protest, after the Parliament of Pakistan passed unanimously a parliamentary bill declaring members of the Ahmadiyya movement to which Salam belonged [as] non-Muslims.
-wiki

Just imagine how crazy for Muslims to denounce their only Nobel Prize winner in Science as not a Muslims. This indicate the significance of the psychology, primal instincts and emotions involved in how strong Islam has a terrible threat and hold over the brains of Muslims.

I am sure if Islam is no more, there will be Nobel Prize Winners from those who were ex-Muslims.

Word salad.

[Veritas Aequitas]

If we are referring to your argument about "we need science for a new moral system, that is only empirical, so we can eradicate Islam (even though the muslims helped with the foundations of sciene)" perpetual loop...then yes.

You are SO ignorant on this.

That SOME Muslims had helped in propagating Scientific knowledge got nothing to do with the essence of the ideology Islam which is anti-advanced_knowledge. Many of these scientists who were Muslims [happened to be Muslims due to circumstances] were never serious with Islam [most are Sufis] and some were condemned and killed.

This is why when Islam dominates anywhere, there are no advances in Science by modern Muslims as evident by no Muslim Nobel Prize in Science.
Abdul Salam who was Nobel Prize in Physics was denounced as non-Muslim because he belonged to a fringe sect [ Ahmadiyya ] labelled as infidel by mainstream Muslim.

In 1974, Abdus Salam departed from his country, in protest, after the Parliament of Pakistan passed unanimously a parliamentary bill declaring members of the Ahmadiyya movement to which Salam belonged [as] non-Muslims.
-wiki

Just imagine how crazy for Muslims to denounce their only Nobel Prize winner in Science as not a Muslims. This indicate the significance of the psychology, primal instincts and emotions involved in how strong Islam has a terrible threat and hold over the brains of Muslims.

I am sure if Islam is no more, there will be Nobel Prize Winners from those who were ex-Muslims.

Word salad.

The irony is your two word response is more representative of your 'word salad' state.

I am sure the above sort of 'word salad' response is against the rules here where you are expected to provide arguments and rational views, if not, then shut up!