Re: The existence of God
 

No, it's faith. You may think that having faith is foolish, but many others do not. Do you not have faith in anything?

I don't believe in God, but I'm not going to turn a theological debate into a logical one, because that's just building a straw man as no one believes that religion is at all logical.

It's really not.

We know that life can exist, we know that we're not at the limit of our scientific abilities, so therefore it's a logical conclusion to say that a civilisation could existed before us, has evolved further than us, and is more scientifically advanced than us, based on the fact that there are over 100 billion galaxies in the universe, and each of them has any number of solar systems, and any number of planets. The law of averages logically states that at least one of them will be home to advanced life, and if they've managed to avoid the numerous extinction events that we've had on this planet (remembering humans only started out 200,000 years ago in a universe billions of years old) then it's not a stretch to say they might have ray guns. Just think where we'll be in just another 1,000 years.

Re: The existence of God
 

They are the same when one calls them a figment of ones imagination. other than that, what is the likely logical statement under the rules of logic that make one so much different to the other? :)

God may not exist. therefore he is and was as real as the fairies are to some. only difference being is that God was written about more than the fairies were.

Re: The existence of God
 

It is not "logical", it is reasonable to consider the possibility of life on other planets. I am open to this possibility, however since it cannot currently be proven either way and nor is there any logical foundation for such a claim it is also reasonable to consider that we may indeed be the first sentient and possibly most advanced race in the known universe (ignoring the possibility/complexity of multiverses/parallel universes). There "logically" has to be a first in any set of given events.

To argue the point of alien life forms more advanced to ourselves must in the current climate be attributed to a "faith" of sorts. Therefore this would discount the possibility of logic and you yourself have said are incompatible.

---------- Post added at 10:17 ---------- Previous post was at 10:14 ----------

In order for the statement to be logical fairies would have to share the same traits as god. Fairies are attributed generally to be magical beings, no religion has ever attributed such qualities to god, miraculous maybe. Also God is an omnipresence which Fairies are not. Point being I could go on all day citing the differences but 1+1 = 2 not 1+2=2.

Re: The existence of God
 

How isn't it logical? It's based on inference, which is at the very heart of logic.

You cannot say for sure that there is other life forms, advanced or otherwise, however you can logically deduce that there very well may be.

You cannot do the same for God, therefore your point that saying that it's just as tenuous to say there is more chance that aliens exist than God does is clearly wrong.

The point that we don't know for sure doesn't make it faith based statement to talk about the possibility. Faith would be stating that you believe that there are ray gun wielding aliens in the universe. That has no evidence, and would be a statement of faith. However saying that there's more chance of ray gun wielding aliens than there is of God isn't faith based, it's based on inference. It doesn't say they are there, but that based on what we know, there could be.

Re: The existence of God
 

Inference based upon what premise?

That it is likely that there are Alien life forms superior to us which may weild ray guns?

I think it is outside of this particular debate but you cannot prove the inference nor measure it at this time. Since you cannot do either you are left with philosophical logic?

As I said previously you can logically prove something based upon a false premise, it doesn't make the out come true or right.

In order to be convinced you'll have to walk though the logical argument starting from your premise and ending with your logical conclusion.

Re: The existence of God
 

What is the difference between magic and miracles?

---------- Post added at 14:54 ---------- Previous post was at 14:40 ----------

Premise: life exists on earth
Premise: There exist other planets like earth
postulate: No unique occurrence happened to begin life on earth
Conclusion: It is likely life exists on other planets.

Of course this is not a proof because it rests on the postulate being true.

Re: The existence of God
 

It also (imho) depends on the second premise being true, and the definition of "life" - does all life have to be earth-like?

NASA

Re: The existence of God
 

magic is basically an illusion. a miracle is unexplainable.



then is this not just a theory rather than a truth? you can't commit to one nor the other as we don't have any facts other than life does exist on earth.

the 'assumption' that other life exists at this time relies on your belief, or faith. much the same as those who believe in God and those who don't. neither know for sure.

Re: The existence of God
 

Not in the context I was referencing. The context was that fairies exist and are magic.


I have not committed to anything. I gave a logical argument for the existence of other life based on limited information.

/Head explodes.

You know some people only consider their own existence to be truth and everything else a theory.

Re: The existence of God
 

I believe in strict scientific parlance it's not even a theory, it's a hypothesis.

Incidentally, to answer a question someone asked earlier, the Bible doesn't say God hasn't created life elsewhere. Some Christians have inferred that and made a doctrine out of it (much the same as heliocentric creation, or flat earth creation, are not in the Bible but were nevertheless made points of dogma that gave the Pope a real headache when they were shown to be false).

I can't see my faith being dented if it is discovered.

Re: The existence of God
 

Don't they just..and the other more easy going atheists are getting sick of it as we get lumped in with them..

I'm wondering if we can use the term fundamentalist atheist to describe the former? Don't know what my kind of atheist could be termed though...:D

Re: The existence of God
 

Read my post about "ramming" Maggie!!!!

I like NOT to class anyone with any tag, what ever their belief, that is just rude and just not needed!:)

Re: The existence of God
 

I was a reasonable example and an attempt at a logical one but the logic didn't work. You failed to resolve a logical truth from it becasue you had set it up with dirty data.

You could have gone down the road of:

There is life on Earth
Bacteria has been discovered on Mars (Hence Life)
Therefore the is life on other planets.

I only take issue with the "logical likelyhood" of ray gun weilding aliens. The example by TheDon given previously was a myriad of stepping stones in logic which was reasonable but not logical per se. The initial premise led from one maybe statement to another much like chinese whispers.

I agree that it is likely that sentient existence exists on one or more planets in the universe.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...New-Earth.html

Re: The existence of God
 

you forgot to mention those of us who class ourselves as agnostic in one form or another!

Re: The existence of God
 

Love the definition of an apathetic Agnostic -
"the view that there is no proof of either the existence or nonexistence of any deity, but since any deity that may exist appears unconcerned for the universe or the welfare of its inhabitants, the question is largely academic"