How can homosexuality not be a perversion?

I responded to the false claim of "you cannot prove a negative" with a specific example of how a negative can be proven. It's a common but completely mistaken belief that people hold, so I like to make it a point to show that it actually CAN be done. I then made sure to specify that it can only be done with regard to a closed set (and not an open one, such as what this side discussion is about). So, while his claim happened to be correct within the context of this specific topic, it is not correct in general, which is what many people mistakenly believe.

And yes, you are correct about the last part of your response as well.

 

Sorry mate.
Science depends on proof.
Challenge it with better science.
If religions are unfalsifiable, they are also unprovable because you can recreate them as necessary.
Religion and its relevance is recreated every morning on UL BBC radio for its allotted 5 minute slot where some religious bod tries to equate the daily news with some timrless Christian principle. Sometimes I laugh at the giant leap of relevance I am asked to make.
Of course religion is falsifiable.
It keeps changing its relevancy

 

and I got that -- but was not necessary .. kind of down a rabbit hole similar to typo/grammar nazi .. an irrelevant technical point --- .. and I granted and gave kudo's in fact for your closed set comments .. after which you then go into another defense of the necessity of typo Nazism. Good .. Got it so far .

correct about the last part meaning you agree there is evidence for God ? .. clarify ?

 

Doesn't make use of it... you even indirectly admitted it yourself in your previous response.

Science is not "better" or "worse". It is simply a set of falsifiable theories.

Yes, religions are unprovable. So?

Religion is not falsifiable. That's why it is called religion rather than science.

 

Yes, there is evidence of God. Life itself is evidence of God. So is the Holy Bible. So are miracles. So are NDE's. So is the existence of the universe. So is the existence of very intricate and complex structures/rules/conditions for life within the universe.

None of those things are proofs of God's existence, but they are definitely evidences of it.

 

It is a moronic form of existentialist zombieland to talk "defacto Proof" ... in a discussion of God- on this much we agree..
So "Evidence" that would strengthen the claim for divine forces at work..

Step 1) Define God -- Divine Force ? as the evidence will depend on the definition now won't it
" The ability -- through force of will - to manipulate matter/energy - external to ones body" is my proposed definition .. and its a good one . as feel free to propose another definition that does not include the divinity having the above ability.

So when you figure out how - through force of will - to levitate your dog .. these I consider "God-like" Powers.

Step 2) Notice where you fit into the equation .. having the ability - through force of will - to manipulate matter an energy internally to some degree .. but not externally. Thus distinguishing between you .. and the divinities.

Step 3) Evidence ? Myths Fables and Miracles don't count - sorry .. hope this is evident from the definition .. if not do not hesitate to ask why this be the case. Miracles fail the repeatability test for example ..

NDE - Had one ... perhaps from a personal perspective - and even that is grey .. but not from an external Evidence perspective - and failing the repeatable test .. albeit there is something to be said for the similarity of the NDE's .. striking and worthy of note .. but .. not going to admit into evidence at this point.

"Life Itself is Evidence of God" - Bingo - I agree.. the Gifted Stamp goes to you but how ?

"Life" is what in human terms .. same place I put my abortion marker .. can't morally pass go after this point.. "I Think - Therefor I Am"
The fetus lacking the physical ability to capacitate "The Soul" ..the "I AM" prior to the wiring of the brain being completed ... at whicy point . the brain lights up like an Xmas Tree "I AM" has arrived...

And whats so special about IAM .. has the ability - through force of will - to manipulate matter and energy.. 75% of the way towards God-hood ..

Now tell me - how did the will bridge the gap ? one day molecules are banging together .. they order themselves into more and more complex structure over time .. self replication built into the system (which is another example .the system designed to operate a certain way but that is another proof) .. at some point in all his chaos - matter and energy came together in a certain configuration -- known as <insert name here>

Mathematically speaking - the only thing you can know for sure .. is that this event happened .. you exist - thus .. prior to that event happening .. there was a finite probability of that event happening .. how do we know ? because it happened .. so there must have been the probability .. retardless how large .. of those molecules forming you .. those molecules opening up eyes .. and realizing "I AM"

Thus - existence is eternal - assuming time is infinite .. as in infinite time .. all finite probabilities re-occur infinitely.

But OK .. we have arrived .. this blob of molecules realizes it exists .. amazing .. and perhaps a rock knows it exists .. but what it doesn't have is the ability manifest those thoughts into physical reality .. wiggle its pinky .. get up and walk.

So .. how did the blob figure out how to do that .. I think X .. and pinky is going to move .. how did the thought manifest itself into physical reality ? Don't know -- and no one does -- but .. it happened .. progressing you on march towards godhood.

"Evidence" -- So if you have these abilities .. you being a blob of molecules .. logic dictates that these blobs could form elsewhere in the multiverse - some 85% of the way towards "God-hood" the ability to manipulate the external environment through force of will ..

but - there is one being that is at 100% ... that we know for sure --->>>> and to pass this test .. is what do you call that Star Trek test that is supposed to be unable to pass .. so Kirk Rigs the test. Kobiashi .. something like that.

Hint .. answer the first question put to you

 

Nope, not evidence.

 

A manageable closed set is more accurate. A book can be a closed set, or even the laws of a country. However, for the purpose of saying that X does not exist within, and proving that with such a huge set, it's as unprovable as an open set. Or maybe more to the point the amount of time to prove such would not be heeded by the one you're trying to prove it to. Hell, there are people here who wouldn't bother to take the 5 minutes to read a Dr Seuss book to have it proved that a given line is not in there.

 

Dont be silly. Something abstract isn't given a name because of your personal view of it.
Of course religion is falsifiable. Modern concepts of religion are very different from earlier concepts. The protestant reformation falsified Catholicism. King James falsified earlier biblical texts. We don't believe in angels anymore and have made Genesis a full metaphor instead of a factual account.
Religion us constantly falsifying itself as it struggles to make itself relevant as time makes changes to reality.
Where the god squad fails is that when religion does fail, you merely close your eyes and attribute it to some god who is also constantly changing in nature in order to keep up and stay relevant. For example god used to be used as a threat to women who wore skirts above the ankle. Today god doesn't care.
God used to be the guy who created the stars. That was proven false and today we know how that happened.
God is constantly being falsified.

 

I love how people elevate themself above God and think that they are God....

Only a damn fool says in his heart that there is no God

 

@Giftedone
You discussed the idea of life being some evidence of god. Life i define as something that can self replicate.
If that is so, man is god because man has created life in a lab.
Life is just a fortunate combination of chemicals whose properties we call life. It started at the edge of steam vents in the ocean where the right chemicals came to have the ability to form into cells which can subdivide.
The rest, as they say, is history.

 

It takes a boatload more faith to believe that life is just random chance and circumstance than to actually believe in an intelligent creator.

Yes... Intelligent person will believe that we are just pond scum from a volcanic vent...

 

You did not address the arguments made -- self replication is mentioned. but your argument is a non sequitur .. It does not follow that because life exists "self replication" and that man has created life .. something that self replicates .. that man is God. nor does it meet the definition of God given

I address the fortunate combination .. specifically .. do a mathematical proof for the eternal existence of the soul ..

Explaining what happens .. is not an explanation of how it happened to begin with .. in other words .. Through force of will you can make your pinkie move .. If I ask you .. how did you do that .. you can not tell me .. other than to say "I think it and it happens"

Great .. tell me how it happened the first time .. how a thought managed create the pathways via matter and energy .. to make your pinkie move .. to manifest itself into physical reality.

 

Only because that is how YOU interpret them. Like someone watching a magician and assuming it is evidence of some wondrous thing.
It all falls apart when the magician explains it to you.
The Wizard of Oz is revealed.
The existence of the universe is not even evidence of a God. There is nothing to say that the universe, or any other universes, have to exist. There could just as easily be...just nothing.
An endless totally empty infinite space where nothing exists. It wouldn't matter because there would be nothing to be aware of it.
The only reason God exists is because mankind needs to explain what he sees. So he creates an imaginary something designed to be the final answer to amy question or proposition. Until we find the real answer.
It wouldn't matter a damn if there was nothing. We and life are just an accident of the universe and after death, will rejoin the rest of it . The only thing that dies is our self awareness.

 

I didn't say man is God. I said that if life is what defines God, then man has become God by creating life.
If we know how to make life, we know how it happened in nature and without some god. I already wrote that life is just a result of chemicals and chance. It didn't have to happen. We and all life arose from inert matter. Scientists have replicated it. Life isn't the result of some conscious purpose. It is pure chance.
When that first cell divided by itself, it has taken billions of years of trial and error, development of species, some successful and some not, and some luck to arrive at our highly complex life form. Arms and legs appeared before our brains grew the billions of interconnected neurons that allow our self awareness and the capacity to think and react both rationally and emotionally.
That first cell division was a chemical reaction plus chance. Not design.

 

BTW I cant do a maths equation for the existence of the soul since it doesn't exist.

 

Ok so how does all this address the concept of whether homosexuality is a perversion or not?

 

So if I can prove #1 is possible (ie your definition occurs) Then you’ll agree god exists? Because I can.

 

All those examples of some miraculous development of life is not via some conscious manipulation by a supernatural being.
We are the actors of our brains.
Our brains have their origins in the billions of years of the development of the original single cell which by chemical means, divided and repeated the same act.

 

Sometimes, it just might be the most simple of explanations. Lliberal folks just cannot fathom that there are folks smarter, more prescient, etc than they are. So, they reject the notion that any other can be more than them.

 

Once again a rightist uses any touch he can find to throw snowballs at his political opponents.
Using of course the ridiculous pronoun THEY meaning no one in particular.
Can we stay on topic please and not divert into a political snowball fight,?

 

What a bleak existence.. but I for one, am sure glad you have all the answers....

 

Why don't you tell us where this original single cell came from?

 

Man you just pissed off a bunch of non-binaries

 

I got a question for the atheists. Y’all like science so I’ll use science.

A) An object in motion must stay in motion unless otherwise acted upon by an outside force.

B) Energy in this context can be described as an object and “A” still applies. This can be reasserted as “energy in motion must stay in motion unless otherwise acted upon by an outside force”.

C) The ONLY object that can neither be created nor destroyed is energy.

Therefore the ONLY thing that could have existed prior to the “Big Bang” is energy (according to sciences understanding).

So my question to y’all is… if energy is the only thing that existed prior to the Big Bang; and if energy is an object; and if energy in motion must stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force…

What outside force was it that acted upon the energy preceding the Big Bang, which changed said energy in motion’s state to initiate the Big Bang?