Ask an American, agnostic and atheist man pretty much anything

[ozymandias]

Dear,you are trying to claim your supriority here,

You can call it that. I call it having a rational discussion.

with im a scientist and we are some kind of goats here,who have to ask you for the right path or some kind of openning of our eyes to the truth.

Sorry if it looks that way to you. I'm just trying to provide my point of view, and lay out some sort of logical groundwork for a discussion. Without some common ground, we can't even have a conversation.

[ozymandias]

You felt in the trap dear,
seems you are that very guy who thinks we are enslaving our women and you must save them

I never said that. I said I can't wrap my head around the fact that someone said that. That is not a comment I would see in my daily life. To see someone use it is flabergasting...

[faye]

Sorry, I misread what you posted. Since you are not making any effort to read my replies, I am not making much effort to read and reply to yours. It's not worth the effort to feed a troll like you.

oh my god. you made a mistake. now for the excuses.....sigh*

'troll' as supernatural creature of scandinivian folklore?

[faye]

Any will do.
How? No idea. But it's up to the person making the claim to provide the proof. Scientifically speaking, a vision and a dream are about the same as a hallucination -- figments of his mind. If these creatures actually did exist, though, they would not just exist in his mind, and thus *some* sort of evidence could be found.
Why? He presumably wants to be taken seriously, or use these things as evidence themselves.

*sigh*

[faye]

Actually, it's quite easy. They have done repeated studies showing that hallucinations are caused by electrical or chemical imbalances in the brain, while no evidence exists that these hallucinations are real. Since we can show evidence that they are imaginary only, and you cannot show otherwise... well, it's pretty clear what's going on...
I have no idea -- but you believers willingly jumped into this thread, and expect us to take your hallucinations seriously, or as evidence of anything other than an electrical or chemical problem in your brain -- obviously you care. If you didn't care, you would either not be posting about it here, or would accept the fact that we are not gullible and require more than your words on an online forum as proof the events you claim happen occurred.
We don't need to. You are the one claiming to have had them, you prove them. That's how things work in real life.
I can't claim to have a herd of living T-Rex in my basement, and demand that it be considered true until someone disproves it. No, the one making the claim (especially outrageous ones) to prove their claim (especially when asked).
Given the huge body of science, and the basic understanding most people have of reality, it's actually quite easy and rational to make a judgment on these issues. It's far more likely that you hallucinated (which fits into modern science, biology, and rationality) than something supernatural happened (which does not fit into those things, and you provided no evidence for).
Since you failed to provide any evidence, we only have the evidence modern science has provided regarding these visions in general. In general, they are brain problems, and a few are illusions of some sort. Since no one has ever proven their hallucinations are real (pretty much by definition, actually), there is no reason to assume that your hallucinations are special, especially without any evidence from you.
Until you provide evidence otherwise, it's rational and reasonable to 'assume' there is nothing special about your hallucinations.

*sigh*

just because action or supposed chemical imbalance, can be detected in the brain, is not the thought, is not the vision, is not the hallucination etc. you may have an idea of what YOU THINK things are but that is not proof that this it is what they are.

still proving to us that you believe that scientists are the only ones, to inform us of what is 'real', 'reality' and 'truth'.


show me proof, that you and scientists are the only ones capable of judging what is reality and truth.


you are not even certain that EVERYTHING you think you percieve is not just a figment of your imagination.

[کیش]

Faye, your making a lot of sense. I'm impressed with your spirituality.

What causes chemical imbalances in the brain? It is related to a spiritual vision. The Prophet used to suffer from seizure like symptoms during his revelations. Like I said, science explains the workings of the lord. No one is denying science, but you can't deny an existence of God; that is a conclusion of a benighted experiment.

[faye]

it's amusing watching someone telling us the faults of religion then taking the same position of telling us what reality and truth is, and is not.

they can deny the existence of an intelligent creator and anything else they don't believe in, due to their limitations, they just can't prove it.

[کیش]

The funny thing about Atheists in general is when you ask them clear cut to proof their is no god, and they get offended and commit a real fallacy (this word is thrown around a lot but this is when you use it the correct way)

I believe Atheists have a problem following the rules that God has sent forth. They refuse to follow the commandments that same way the devil refused to prostate towards Adam. The devil felt he was above humans. Atheists believe science is above God.

[khushal]

Pascals wager was not really answered rationally. Even Einstein admitted he could not argue against Pascals wager.

When one denies the existance of a creator, then one must deny the existance of creation even if everything is the figment of imagination, the imagination exists therefore imagination itself is creation and the figments are also creations. Can creation come from nothing, if so than nothing is also the figment of imagination and that is something. The idea of nothing itself is creation.

[SiiNii]

Ozzy,

what is your career field / how do you make a living?

[ozymandias]

oh my god. you made a mistake. now for the excuses.....sigh*

Sorry if you see it as an excuse.

'troll' as supernatural creature of scandinivian folklore?

Troll as in 'internet troll': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

[ozymandias]

*sigh*

just because action or supposed chemical imbalance, can be detected in the brain, is not the thought, is not the vision, is not the hallucination etc. you may have an idea of what YOU THINK things are but that is not proof that this it is what they are.

still proving to us that you believe that scientists are the only ones, to inform us of what is 'real', 'reality' and 'truth'.


show me proof, that you and scientists are the only ones capable of judging what is reality and truth.

This is not something I believe, and will not be providing proof for it. Anyone is able to document and provide proof, not just scientists.

you are not even certain that EVERYTHING you think you percieve is not just a figment of your imagination.

Some things are clearly more imaginary than others.

[ozymandias]

Faye, your making a lot of sense. I'm impressed with your spirituality.

What causes chemical imbalances in the brain?

Biologic, environmental, or genetic issues.

It is related to a spiritual vision.

Citation needed.

The Prophet used to suffer from seizure like symptoms during his revelations.

Which is why some scholars believe that he suffered from mental illness.

Like I said, science explains the workings of the lord. No one is denying science,

Actually, quite a few people, yourself included, are doing just that in this very thread.

but you can't deny an existence of God;

I can. I see no evidence for the existence of a god, or gods. See? Just did.

that is a conclusion of a benighted experiment.

Oh? What experiment?

[ozymandias]

it's amusing watching someone telling us the faults of religion then taking the same position of telling us what reality and truth is, and is not.

they can deny the existence of an intelligent creator and anything else they don't believe in, due to their limitations, they just can't prove it.

Exactly! That's what agnostic means! I am agnostic because you cannot provide a falsifiable definition of 'intelligent creator'. That's a limitation we all have.

I deny the existence of your creator, though, because you have yet to provide any evidence or rational argument to justify belief.

[faye]

Sorry if you see it as an excuse.
Troll as in 'internet troll': http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_%28Internet%29

ooooooooooooooo