Penn & Teller - The Bible Myth

Sandok

I "should" include myself in the list, very true but I shouldn't And yeah, I love my word choices Tis completely cohrerent with the subject though

No need to apologize, the discussion was still civil (unlike some previous times ) but yeah, I dunno I am finally starting to get bored with it. You can only argue so much...

Maddogg6

So you finally got it... 'there is no god' was a response - NOT the original ASSERTION..
Which was what I was talking about... Ok... phew .


Colors aren't JUST assigned 'a name' - they are also assigned a 'formula' for recreating that color repeatably.

And we DO have ways to 'measure' (and thus PROVE) color.
Next time your at a paint store... ask how they make the all those different colors repeatably - and for ALL the color charts of ALL the greens they offer..
And notice how many 'names' there is - but its just 'marketing' material - the real relevance is the formula to make it.

- but don't ask them for 'green' - they will say 'which green?'. Which makes another point... if theres a slightly different shade of green - they don't get argued over - they get their very own unique name and yes, some times the same color will be called two different things. - but thats where the 'formula' comes in.

Maybe try googleing - 'standards for calibration' - because your example could be applied to ANY thing - like 'prove 12 inches is a foot' - this is called 'unreasonable' argument - as, such 'measurements' is part of a consensus of standardizations necessary for international trade. And yes - color CAN be measured and quantified - just like length, mass, velocity etc etc..

Now if you point to sky and you call it 'green' - its called 'color blindness' or plain ol stubbornness or ignorance. And a quick trip to an opthomologist would prove and explain why, your seeing the sky being green if it is in fact blue. (Ive seen a green-ish sky before in a storm, but we'll ignore THAT particular case - as I'm sure its not your point)
If you don't have vision problems - you have other problems (read: abnormality) if you persist with calling a blue sky - green.

So yes, we do have ways of settling those types of disputes and yes I could prove to you what color is what - as long as your being reasonable (re: 2b).

Necrosis

I've had it all along. The color example is only a generalization.

What you would do is confirm if what I think is green is what you think is green. You then would ask me to produce evidence of what I've seen to confirm it. The problem with this is say I was on LSD. If I went back to take a picture of the sky /w the picture showing a blue sky. Did I still see a green sky?

Zelig

You guys are even confusing me with your analogies trying to explain upon whom the onus of proof is upon. In the end, it's a moot point, because it's impossible to disprove God, Allah, Zeus, Shangdi or the Flying Spaghetti Monster because of their very nature.

Only proof of omnipotent beings is possible (provided that they actually exist), they are defined such that proving their existence false is impossible.

Necrosis

You forgot one, the creature from Stephen King's "It".

It's all in good fun.

Maddogg6

Hold on... its not what I think is green - its compared to what the standardization calls 'green'. BIG difference - its no longer an opinion, but a measurement agreed upon by a consensus.

A drug such as LSD causes temporary brain abnormalities - and quite possibly you seen a blue sky as green. Even tho you've added previously unstated conditions to your example, its still irrelevant.

Seeing as how proving omnipotence true is theoretically possible - then imo this supports that the burden of proof should fall upon those asserting omnipotence exists. no? And, how is that moot?

blown503

If the bible is a myth, where did we come from? Are we Penn And teller magic? Are we an illusion? Everything you eat is dirt or made from it in some sort of way. Only our GOD could make every form of food we eat from dirt, period. Maybe monkeys made us right?

Necrosis

Let me get this straight you need to form a committee to agree what is green? You should know what is green.

Yeah because I didn't realize I have to give you the latitude, and longitude where I seen the sky. It's relevant if I say it is.

If proving omnipotence is impossible. What can be described as "Having unlimited or universal power, authority, or force; all-powerful." Which could also mean science then itself is limited because if what you say is true its impossible to know every thing.

OT: That is the problem with debating on some thing here because ground rules must be set. No party involved in such debate should set said rules.

Maddogg6

It DOES take a committee to agree on units of measure (color formula based on measurement) - I guess you didn't read up on standards or color management... or ever learn what a simple prism does.

http://www.tedmontgomery.com/tutorial/clrspcGR.html

And notice - NO NAMES - just formula to recreate the colors.

???????????????????
Ok now your just being completely irrational and unreasonable.
We're done now.


I dunno - BUT...
If the bible ISNT a myth - why are there false statements made in it? - And what other statements made (that we cant prove) are false as well ??

edit: - I just noticed this...
You produce products for thief's huh? - you obviously don't take the bible too seriously either??????
(THE ONLY use I can think of for a portable RFID erasers 'before they leave the store' - is for theft...) - but please correct me if Im wrong - and Id like to learn more about the company you do this for. (ya know, like the legitimate use of such portable products)

jp306

Speak about your God and what you believe all you want , but don't start telling me your God is my God too. I choose If I have a God or not and who that God is or is not.

SFOSOK

I'm cool with people believing in athiesm or what ever they may choose. I only have a problem when people start overstepping their boundary into my by grouping all christians into one group and harassing them for their beliefs.

To believe in nothing requires belief. To believe in science requires belief in something that cannot be proven (which cannot). To believe in logic requires belief that your logic or someone else's predefined logic is true.


Telling someone my God is their God is the same exact thing as tell me there is no God.


F*cking prove it or shut the hell up already. I'm not goin to say there was no big bang because I can't show it never happen.



Saying premade theories on how the world started (thats all they are) is no less or greater than saying God created it.


Everything science is based on all originates on things that are theorized (aka haven't been proven). The same is true with religion belief.




Do ya'll get off on thinkin your better than someone? Thinkin you know the "truth" so you are therefore superior?

Well I can tell you thiis much, there is no absolute "truth". Only what you believe. So before you make about how there is no God or anything along those lines think, prepare to prove it, or shut the f*ck up.

Sandok

Let me shut this discussion up once and for all You will never ever ever be able to prove god exists and you will never ever ever be able to prove that god doesn't exist.

Only in death will you know, so come on...

Blown503, you are obviously from south indiana...

SFOSOK

My point, there really shouldn't be a discussion because its opinion vs opinion.

Maddogg6

because you don't address any specific comment - and say "y'all" - means to me too right? - you can shut the F*ck up/off. We've been pretty civil here (thread not locked is it? - well maybe now it will be, thanks to you??) - and I don't see what spurred on your rant here.

AND, I can ask you the same question - DO YOU feel all superior so much that it compels you to be the great defender of christianity???
(did you say you were against mainstream and defended the 'little guy' before too??? - isn't christianity 'mainstream'??)

Oh and all those F*CK's - is that a new christianity sect thing or something now?? or maybe just a another hypocrite like sooooo many others Ive met???.

Maybe YOU should not read this forum. pfff- typical religious fanatic mentality - 'lets shut it down, I don't like/agree what they say' ,cant make an argument to save your life, and not to mention the lack of understanding the importance of debate.

SFOSOK

There is no arguement when it is about opinions. There are no absolutes in religion and belief because each person is different, believes their own things, and has their own opinion.

I don't think you get the fact that you think what you believe is a fact therefore you will defend it as such, where as I feel the same way about something totally different.

To some up this thread it is pointing fingers saying your stupid because you don't believe what I think is a fact.

What you base your arguement off of is opinion and the same with myself. Therefore there is no rational arguement with religion because its all based off of opinion and some sort of faith in the unknown.



Edit: What I'm trying to show is that it is equal what we both defend in that it cannot be proven. What your saying is that its not equal and that I am ignorent for not believing your way which is just ignorent itself.


Also, I'm all for debating but not for a subject that there is no rational answer for.


Again you may say, "There is a rational answer!" or something of the sort which you cannot prove or disprove one side or the other. Your side is an opinion whether you like it or not, just saying something is a fact doesn't make it so. The same goes for religion.

Dowaco

"Green" is light with a wavelength of about 492-577 nanometers. The wavelength can be measured using a spectrometer. The problem is that "green" is a label that civilization has assigned to that wavelength.
Whether you see this wavelength as the same color as the next guy depends on the rods and cones in your eye and how your brain interprets the signal it receives from the optic nerve. This signal can be distorted by drugs (ie.viagra) and is observer dependent (relative to the acceleration of the object). A machine can do the measurement and tell you what wavelength you are seeing. What you choose to call it is your responsibility.
People in the same culture are taught very early on what color is what by looking at the same rainbow of colors. There is consensus as to what green is and a preponderance of the populatiuon will agree. That is not to say that scientific fact is decided upon by consensus, only that there is consensus as to what term to use to call the thing.

There is no measurment that can prove or disprove the existence of an all powerful being or beings. Furthermore, it is accepted that there is no possible experiment that can ever test the theory. You either believe or you don't believe. Dying will not prove anything unless there is a God, and in either case there is no way to report the result back to the rest of us.

Rather than classify people who do not agree with you as arrogant or elitest, why not look for other reasons? Maybe they are skeptics because they have been disappointed by what has transpired in the world in the name of religion. They see that every culture has a different God, and that people who believe are no more "good" than people who do not. From what I have seen, tolerance is not a strong suit of any religion despite what they preach. Maybe the hypocracy that runs rampant in every religion is enough for one to question the sanity of believing in a God.

Anyway, I say believe if it makes you feel better. Don't believe if you cannot take the leap of faith. Tolerate your neighbor and don't try to kill him if he does not belive in your God. Don't impose your beliefs on others. Teach to those who want to learn. Amen

BWX

I make an observation about atheists in general - things I have observed over a lifetime. Then you say I don't "comprehend" what "the conversation" was about? Yeah that makes a lot of sense. Read below..

Actually I wasn't even referring to anyone in particular in this thread, yet you obviously take offense to my statements- then feel the need to quote me, and respond with a "you don't comprehend" and a "learn to read" insult. Nice..

Also, what kind of person calls people who believes in any deity more "gullible, illogical, spineless, fearful and presumptuous" than people who don't? Read my other post..


Read below- maybe you are the one who needs to read more carefully?

Along with many other posts by other people discussing the same thing..

Let me guess, you are an atheist- that's why you took offense to my observations? That's the only reason I can think of, but your post just reinforces my previous observations about atheist in GENERAL. Also saying "there is no god" when 90% of the people who live in the country DO believe in God, IS an assertion.

Penn and Teller are the scum of the earth BTW.. not funny at all. I wish they would stomp on a Koran instead of a Bible, but no they are too cowardly to do that though, someone would probably blow them up if they did.

Necrosis

I understand the reference to color in regards to it being some thing that could be measured. What about some thing that can not? How about theoretical particles in Quantum Mechanics? A great example would be Dark Matter. It has yet to be proven yet but there is on going projects to try to capture it. Just because some thing is less likely doesn't mean it should be over looked.

OT a bit here but what about all those haunting stories? You think by now something or some one would have given a definite sign. If black holes exist and worm holes are possible then why not?

BWX