Hello from Atlantic Canada
Posted: 09 December 2008 08:12 AM   [ Ignore ]
Jr. Member
Avatar
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2008-12-09

Hello fellow Atlantic Canadians
feel free to join
Atlantic Atheists Secular Humanists Ethical Society
http://www.flightsimhq.org/brights/

 Signature 

Hypocrites beware, I’m prickly.
I boycott Facebook and Yahoo! for they have discriminated again me.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 December 2008 03:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 1 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5508
Joined  2006-10-22

Hi godfree2.  I hope those members here who fit that description take advantage of your invitation, and also I hope you stay on this forum, too, and participate.

Occam

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 December 2008 03:49 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 2 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  7593
Joined  2007-03-02

Another kitty person!  smile  Welcome.  Glad to have you here.

 Signature 

Mriana
“Sometimes in order to see the light, you have to risk the dark.” ~ Iris Hineman (Lois Smith) The Minority Report

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 December 2008 07:45 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 3 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  2008-12-09

Hello from Michigan.  First time at this site.  Hoping for skeptics that are not true believers, who are not afraid of saying I don’t know (the facts have not been established, are insufficient to prove a viewpoint/claim or to disprove a viewpoint/claim), and are able to doubt some (many?) scientific viewpoints as well as the spirit in the sky dogma.
Yikes, sounding a bit harsh?
Guess there is so little opportunity to openly express my disbeliefs.
Thank you

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 December 2008 08:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 4 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5508
Joined  2006-10-22

Welcome BDEye51.  I agree that we must not fear saying, “I don’t know.”  However, we all accept a great deal by faith.  The example I usually use is that I’ve never been to Australia so I have no first-hand evidence, but I (tentatively) accept the word of people and documents I trust.  I have no first-hand evidence of the lack of existence of a god, but from my reasoning and plausibility arguments, I have faith in the non-existence of any god.

Occam

Profile
 
 
Posted: 09 December 2008 08:36 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 5 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  2
Joined  2008-12-09

Agreed Occam - What I fear is the raging skeptical believer that dismisses all that disagree.  Those that I’ve seen who get so frustrated with their inability to sway others that they fall into the pattern of religious true believers of not listening, of only waiting for their opportunity to hammer others with their scientific truth.  Often time more science will show things to be more complex, and sometimes more bewildering or different (quantum physics, string theory - not that I begin to understand either).  I think most scientific arguements should begin with ‘Given what we know so far on this planet and subject to possible changes…’.  Take global warming and the human role in it.  There appears to be too many absolutes given (of course that is what many/most people want or need in order to act) that other views are brushed aside or ridiculed in order to have a solid base (belief system) from which to act.

I so want to provide some specific examples of what I am trying to communicate but my poor recall requires that I must first try to find long lost notes and saved files in order to do so.  Maybe with continued involvement with this site I’ll learn to respond more precisely.

Brian

Profile
 
 
Posted: 10 December 2008 09:42 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 6 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5508
Joined  2006-10-22

Your evaluation is accurate, BD, however, there are factors that may respond a bit to your criticism example of global warming.  We are almost never exposed to the original research, but rather to news articles about it.  This means the scientific findings that may have included all sorts of qualifications, questions that need further research, and alternative possible theories are reworked by the non-scientist reporters to a) get rid of all the “fussy” details and make the story more dramatic, and b) to tilt the article in the direction his editor or publisher wants.

Occam

Profile
 
 
   
 
 
‹‹ Aloha      Hi from NYC ››