I did watch your video, and I find it practically untenable.
Untenable? First, it’s just a viewpoint, and one in-line with my own views. I was simply using it to express my own viewpoint. Second, how is it untenable? Is it really unreasonable to expect proof beyond eye-witness accounts and hearsay for important things? Now sure, in a court of law or other similar situations, sometimes that’s all we have to go on. However, if someone testified that the perpetrator walked through a solid brick wall before committing the crime, would you still have faith in their extraordinary claim? Saying “I saw X” is acceptable at times without further proof. Saying “I say Y” and that goes against every reasonable thing you’ve ever heard, is when you say you’d need further evidence to substantiate those claims.
Very good point.
Not at all, i would require the same standard that i require for any exceptional claim. Also you are way of the mark if you think i just “accept peoples word for it”. I accept the method, and with very good reason…
. So PLEASE don’t say i accept the word of others in the same way you do with religion 
.The word “spirit” merely means “energy”. That is what it has always meant to the educated spiritualist or theist. Your spirit is your “inner energy” that is displayed by your activity, emotions, urges, desires, and so on. It is a physical reality although a little tough to measure precisely.
BTW - why is a reason needed ? And if one were given - would we even recognise it ? Again, to assume we would do so,is man-centred: but man is only one of many species of living things - what possible reason can man have for supposing that what suits him would therefore suit a shell-fish or whatever it might be ? It is quite possible that they are telling man “why” they act, & that man is too dense to understand them. They are not rational - we are not crustacean. What does a non-crustacean know of crustacean ? Next to nothing ! As well might a dog try to translate human life into language his own kind “understand”. Crustaceans may well be atheists, & be trying to get it it into our thick heads that there is no deity. Why not ask a sunflower its reasons ?
Energy? What kind? Do you mean ATP?
I don’t know what ATP means. As far as what kind… I don’t really think that is so easily defined. It would be of the kinetic nature of course, but anything more specific, I’m not sure how to even think about it.
news.wisc.edu/packages/emotion/
I say that I know God exists, and you say that it is really a belief.
Would you please repeat the exceptional and statistically improbable emergence of complex life from primordial elements on Earth for me? If not, why not?Not at all, i would require the same standard that i require for any exceptional claim. Also you are way of the mark if you think i just “accept peoples word for it”. I accept the method, and with very good reason…
If i want to i can review the experiments and results, and see why the result is 93 million miles. Oh and with the right equipment i can also REPEAT the experiment, not that i need to for the method does that for me
I don’t know there is no god, and i don’t believe there is no god. I lack any theistic belief for there is no evidence to suggest any of the theistic beliefs i have encountered are true. If you look at my religion, it does not say atheist, it says none.
Your wrong about it being statistically improbable under the correct conditions it is in fact inevitable.
Energy = ATPI don’t know what ATP means. As far as what kind… I don’t really think that is so easily defined. It would be of the kinetic nature of course, but anything more specific, I’m not sure how to even think about it.
What would you call the energy that causes a dog to bark or feel the urge to chase a rabbit? Biochemical would obviously be involved, but that doesn’t identify the actual physical motion nor the mental passions. Bio-electric would come into play with the neurology.
The term was coined long before such detailed categories ever existed.
Another confusion is that in many scriptural writings, a “principle” is spoken of as a “spirit” even though there is a technical difference.
The Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are all of both principle and spirit (physical energy). Personally, I tend to think of the Father in merely the principle form even though it could include the energy that results due to the principle.
Principles are “super-natural” (above the natural) in that they are conceived as the “guiding or controlling principles” of motion and situations. These are the world of the “divine” perfect things (perfect concepts, much like a perfect square that cannot be actually represented in physical reality).
Get the words straight and the rest starts falling in line with Science and logic. It all actually fits despite how many people misunderstand the concepts yet preach anyway.
Religious people are not often wrong about what they say, they just don’t really understand what they said.
We know that life emerged at some point in time because here we are. You can verify that fact for yourself at any time. We don’t know exactly how it happened. Are you suggesting that God had to intervene to make it happen and we shouldn’t bother looking for natural explanations?
Exactly, “god did it” is the exact same answer as “i don’t know”. If you believe god did it that is fine, the next question would be “how did god do it?”.
The correct conditions are statistically improbable.
If you can’t answer the questions briefly either you don’t understand the papers or they don’t exist!
Exactly! You have failed to do so.
It is an intelligible proposition - unlike the proposition that irrational, purposeless matter has produced rational, purposeful minds…If the mind is merely brain activity why have human beings always distinguished the mind from the brain?
What a preposterous statement! It would be headline news all over the world if scientists had explained how the mind works.
Well when you have a 200 billion galaxies, each with 200 billion stars, and our star has 8 planets, many of which have multiple moons… are theyThe correct conditions are statistically improbable.
.