Incidentally, there’s no such thing as trying to explain things “from a secular standpoint.” You’re either following scientific method or you’re not. “Secularism” doesn’t play into it.
We’ve been through this before. Apparently you have some “special” definitions of “atheist” and “agnostic” that few but you use.
Websters defines atheist as “one who denies the existence of God”
It defines an agnostic as “One who believes that it is impossible to know whether there is a God.” or “One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.”
So, I am correct in my usage. An atheist denies the existence of God, an agnostic isn’t sure.
Yeah, wow, neither me, nor Webster’s nor the Princeton Dictionary, nor Wikipedia know what they are talking about either, since they all agree with me.
True, I don’t spend that much time reading the religion debates in GD, but then I also don’t get my economics from Spongebob Squarepants, or my particle physics from online porn. This hardly disqualifies me, and it’s not like wasting time with a bunch of other assholes in GD makes you something special.
That was sloppy, I’ll give you that.
The scientific method is useful in some cases. It sucks in some others.
For example, pure logic and the scientific method would handle a problem like “I need to eat,” by randomly taking a bite out of everything until something edible was found.
Me, while you’re still gnawing on your desk, my faith will lead me to the refrigerator right away.
Headlines at the local newsstand, 1/16/09:
Tampa Tribune: PILOT GUIDES HUDSON MIRACLE
USA Today: 'MIRACLE ON THE HUDSON’
St. Petersburg Times: 'HELL OF A LANDING’
I read the Times. 
How do you think people found out what was edible? Magic refrigerators?
Why not just pray for food right at your desk?
According to the Bible, some people solved the problem of “I need to eat” by having faith that God would rain food on them. Good luck with that.
The nice thing about the scientific method is that it builds a framework of knowledge, until finally you can go directly to the refrigerator thanks to all those tireless cavemen who initially bit things at random.
Of course you can worship your refrigerator too, if you want. People have worshipped less useful things.
Also, your method sucks. Proper scientific method would lead one to determine that the safest course of action would be to observe other people (and animals) taking bites out of things and seeing what happened, rather than risk injury or poisoning by taking bites out of things. If monkeys seem happy eating bananas, chances are good that humans would be happy eating bananas.
Well, if you think Og the caveman used the Scientific method, than why haven’t we found his lab notes?
I see. So, you have observed that other people are happy going to Church and beleive in God, so therefore according to your version of the scientific method you should go to Church and believe in God.
Got it.
God helps those who help themselves.
Like them, if God speaks to me directly, sends me on a mission, and tells me he’ll provide, than I’ll take his word for it. Seeing as he hasn’t it would be foolish of me to think I’ll get the same deal.
Heh. Evolution doesn’t really work that way. The idea that we arrived just fully formed and had to figure out what to eat is a religious one. You have it backwards. Our distant ancestors evolved to eat what was available.
I do quite like it.
Tried that already, for over 20 years. Turns out that there are *other *people who don’t go to church and are happy who DON’T come off as self-righteous douchebags who claim to know the ONE TRUE WAY TO LIVE FOR EVERYONE. The act of observation only really works when you, you know, observe.
I am still curious, though; did God send you magic refrigerators to tell you what you can and can’t eat? Or are we going by the bible here? If so, that really sucks because shellfish can be mighty tasty and nutritious.
We did. Cave paintings depict prey animals being hunted.
I see. So for some people it apparently works, and for some others it apparently doesn’t.
So, I guess people should make up their own minds and respect those who disagree. Right?
That’s my original point.
Not unless God was the guy at the appliance store who sold me the fridge.
Of course God did all these good things. He was inside you urging you to do them. That doesn’t mean he didn’t wave a magic wand, however.
True, and a clever comeback, but you can hardly tell me they represent a hypothesis and not a fait accompli.
sigh For some people, believing in Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy works…for a while. Then they grow up. I’m not going to disillusion some young person believing in them, but I’m not going to endorse a continued belief in them in someone who really should know better.
Why not a hypothesis? “Og sees deer. Og throws spear at deer. Deer dies. Og eats deer.” Hypothesis, or record of observation. Either way, it’s a record, the prehistoric equivalent of “notes” which predate any formal version of the scientific method.
And when he rains food on you, you’ll help yourself, won’t you? So why go to the refrigerator, unless your faith in its power is greater than your faith in God?
Well, I’m not trying to tell you your own religion. If you believe that the refrigerator speaks to you more clearly than God, I won’t argue otherwise. Just promise that if your fridge sends you on a mission to kill people, rather than just to get food from it, you’ll clear it with the other appliances first.
There’s probably some logical fallacy about disregarding lectures on evolutionary principles when they are delivered by refrigerator-worshippers, but I’m not sure what it is. Amana hominem, maybe?
That is wise. The refrigerator is a jealous lord, I hear.
If the cave paintings predated hunting then you might argue that they are a hypothesis. Since they don’t, you can’t.
How do you know that Og wasn’t hypothesizing about a new approach to hunting? Maybe some of the “notes” that he recorded are a kind of shorthand that he used to describe how the wind shifts or the time of day that hunting is most successful. I don’t know if it is or isn’t. But it could be.
This portion of the argument is pretty ridiculous anyway, and completely misses the point, which is that you live in a fantasy world where magic refrigerators trump the scientific method.