As a scientist myself, I can assure you that on the evidence of your posts you don't. At all. In any way.

How can science investigate the supernatural? How do you put God in a test tube?





You're saying the same as the other poster. Yours is the only conclusion which is sensible and everyone else's is silly. Why?



What if those people were Muslims, Jews and even atheists? You can't get much more independent of Christianity than that

Yes you know everything and I know nothing. Classic argument from authority.

Ah, right. So now we establish that you don't understand what supernatural means, either. Sigh.


Am I? The definition of critical analysis is hardly my personal opinion.


These are all examples of other people of faith, are they not? Hardly an independent viewpoint on a faith system really. If they debunk Christianity it puts their own complex system of fairytales at risk.

Comprehension isn't one of your strong suits either, it seems.

I didn't claim to 'know everything'. I do, however, understand how science works. It's even been explained to you on this thread and others by several different people. And yet you continue to post statements that clearly indicate you either don't understand science or are deliberately misrepresenting it.

And BTW I was very careful to make plain that I was making a deduction from the evidence of your posts, not an assumption about you as a person of faith. There are any number of deeply religious people who not only understand science but are actually scientists. Often very good scientists. I reckon they'd be quite embarrassed by some of the stuff you've posted on this thread alone.

this from a man who believes in a giant sky pixie

tell us the one about some beardy bloke parting the sea

or maybe the one about feeding 5,000 people with a tin of john west and a couple of slices of warburtons

or my personal favourite, the one where some dude put 2 of each creature on a boat, and none of the predatory creatues ate the prey creatures, we came from Adam and Eve, but God didn't like how it tipped up, so he murdered everyone apart from this Noah bloke and his kids,and they gave rise to all of mankind (you know, even Asian, American, African, Middle Eastern, European variants, we're all from the same stock, yes siree)

you should move to the deep south, you'd be welcome there.

Nope, that bits true, they found the remains of a boat on top of a mountain in the middle east once so thats proof, they didn't offer any proof or anything, just said "We found this boat on top of a mountain, it must be Noahs".

It was buried under eighteen feet of fossilised animal s[ihit[/i.

I saw a program on it on Thursday, they changed the Noah story a bit (a lot) and ended it with....

This [size=50could[/size be conclusive proof on the existence of God.

It was carbon dated and accepted to be around the correct time (wtf does that mean

) but when I saw that the shroud of Turin carbon dating didn't match so they rejected it, you can't win.

They're on form on twitter today:

[iRev. Keith Roberts ‏@GodsLandGodsLaw

Christians have a MORAL OBLIGATION to God to ensure science is banned in America. It is the single greatest threat to Christianity! [/i

What a card.

And to think these idiots get tax exemptions into the billions of dollars to spread this rubbish.

And to lavish themselves with Lear Jets and posh cars. As they say on one of my favourite podcasts,

"Any preacher with more than one pair of shoes is a hypocrite"

Quote ="Neil"And to lavish themselves with Lear Jets and posh cars. =#FF0000As they say on one of my favourite podcasts, "Any preacher with more than one pair of shoes is a hypocrite"'" Who would that be? A bit of a read, but you get the point. www.secularhumanism.org/index.ph ... ragun_32_4

Quote ="Neil"And to lavish themselves with Lear Jets and posh cars. =#FF0000As they say on one of my favourite podcasts, "Any preacher with more than one pair of shoes is a hypocrite"'" Who would that be? A bit of a read, but you get the point. www.secularhumanism.org/index.ph ... ragun_32_4

[url=http://www.nonprophetsradio.com/The Non Prophets[/url Don't ask me which episode though, I've been slowly trawling my way through about five years worth.

I only occasionally dip into this thread now as it is largely boring. However your above assertion is as ridiculous as your overall position, since in the months the thread has run, you have yet to answer a single one of the many questions I put to you. My presenc eor absence is not the point. Your unwillingness / inability to give a straight answer to any straight quetsion is the point.


Accepting you are an adult of seemingly at least average intelligence, I will not insult it by a response that would even consider the possibility you actually fail to understand what "evidence" is, or that you actually believe what you just wrote.


You are attempting to equate a metaphysical religious experience, which even you must at least concede, in the absence of any of that "evidence" stuff [icould[/i just all be in your head, with proper "evidence", as understood down on this planet.


No. You don't. You claim to have had some sort of personal meeting, but this is a delusion.


The former can, or can be improved, or disproved, or refined. That is the scientific process. The latter clearly are a metaphysical concept incapable of evidence-based consideration. there is no evidence of "the Spirit", much less any such "gifts", and if others could replicate them, then you wouldn't need a "Spirit", would you?


Similar mental processes that lead millions of Muslims to deny Jesus was the son of god. Similar processes that led to the deaths of hundreds of cult followers at places like Waco. Can YOU explain the explosion of any number of hundreds of other religions across the world, followers of which all believe theirs is the only true religion and all others are misguided?


As this is a pure anecdote, you can hardly cite it as "evidence". But if I were wanting to create a cult of a risen-from-the-dead individual, how hard would it be to make a body disappear?


That evolution has taken place and does take place is indeed a hard fact. Further, that the basic propositions are true is supported by millions upon millions of hard facts. Millions of pieces of evidence (you remember that "evidence" thing?) all support and fit in to the evolutionary jigsaw.


Apart from its asinine qualities, that statement also demonstrates that you don't actually even have a clue what "light" is. (A fault shared, in fairness, by the authors of the original piece, but they at least have the excuse of living in a time of no scientific knowledge of such matters). Well done.

Now, you've had a few months to ponder my previous questions. Maybe you could start with a reply to any given one?

I can categorically state that Kirkstaller is correct, Jesus does exist.

In a moment of intense personal weakness and vulnerability (the night of the Leeds v Wigan game) Jesus appeared to me. I experienced an intense spiritual relationship with Jesus. It wasn't a conversation or dialogue, more just a deep spiritual understanding that I was lost, but now am found.
My previous sinful thoughts and actions will continue no longer. I now do not give to charity, what is happening to those African children is God's will.
I now no longer believe what the brain that God created and placed in my head tells me. I instead believe one particular interpretation of a text written hundreds of years after an event. I believe in the Ten Commandments, especially number 11.
So you should all desist in this unwarranted attack upon Kirkstaller, for he speaks the truth, as I am directed to believe it.

Now there's a tiny, tiny possibility that this intense spiritual experience was a combination of Leeds getting a good thrashing, copius amounts of alcohol and a chance meeting with Jamie Jones-Buchanan after the game, but I doubt. No, I met Jesus.

Maybe Jamie Jones-Buchanan is Jesus? His second coming is overdue, is it not?

Jamie Jones-Buchanan THINKS that he is Jesus - there is a difference.

As we well know, in matters of religion the burden of proof is reversed. It's therefore up to you to either prove that he's not Jesus, or begin worshipping him.

I saw him pick his nose once, surely the new Jesus wouldn't do that ?

Hmm. There could be something in that. If JC's last visit was J(A) then his second coming could be J(B). It would not take much digging to deduce that JC(A) could thus be unearthed as JC(B).

One doubt occurred, if JJB is in fact JCB, why does he play like a wtat, but then I realised that could be just demonstrating the human fallibility thing, so who knows?

Perhaps you could ask kirkstaller if it's the same guy that comes round for tea?

Kirkstaller strikes me as one of those Christians that imagines a white Jesus. In fact, don't they all imagine that?

As long as he didn't eat it, he could still be the Messiah.

That snot necessarily true.

Nope, my mistake. It was Jamie Jones-Buchanan after all. I mean Jesus' head would never be that shape.

But I did meet Jesus in another deep spiritual interaction, he said that Kirkstaller has it all wrong. Evolution is true, creationism is incorrect and it's just plain silly to take the bible literally and not apply its teachings to modern standards.
He said that the whole point of him going around doing good deeds was to try and inspire other people to also do good deeds, not blindly follow some ised interpretation of what he was trying to do or to take his teachings and tales as literal but as metaphors for how someone should live their life.
Basically he said that you only need to live by the bit that says "treat others as you would wish to be treated" and you'll do fine and fulfill his goal of trying to make things better.

Now I don't believe a word these so-called "scientists" say about evolution and the big bang and what have you, but I have faith in Jesus. So there. Conclusive proof, backed up with incontrovertible evidence.