IAP Political Forum

I wasn't sure, Lobby or here, so I chose here. This footage (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/offbeat/2007/11/14/lai.gas.ghost.woio?iref=videosearch) is pretty amazing. I was wondering if maybe it's a feather on the camera lense or something like that.

2112, the link links to a video with footage of aftershocks in Chile...

I don't know why that link didn't work. I just tested it again, should be this one:

http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/offbeat/2007/11/14/lai.gas.ghost.woio?iref=videosearch

I've never seen anything like it. If it doesn't work, enter 'ghost' or 'creepy gas station' in the video search and you'll find it.

Yup, thats the chilean eartquake too.   Really creepy huh?  The ghost must be in the net, proving he exosts by hiding all the evidence - a historical singularity, no less.  Ask reasoned faith to explain it.

What's creepy is it worked for me first time. 

I am curious about the whole story, as the surveillance cameras are movable.  Just kinda unusual...

As to what it is on the video, I have no idea.  Something other than something on the lens.  As it moves and the camera moves with it...

Damn you CNN Video! :)

Both links still work for me...

Have I fallen asleep and awoken in the Dark Ages? Ghosts, witches in Africa, gods in biology, Vampire hunters in PA, demon possessions in France,...
come on people! I don't need to see the video to know it isn't a ghost. what is more likely? a ghost is REALLY caught on camera (this time, unlike the millions of other times) or one of the hundreds of other reasonable explanations?

Could please let me know what these 'hundreds of other reasonable explanations' are please?  Thanks.

No, Biker... if you feel like claiming it was a ghost, prove your claim. The burden of proof is on the one making the claim, and extraordianry claims require extraordinary proof. ;)

What I saw was a blue, out of focus object moving across the lens. Probably was caught close to the objective (maybe the camera is protected from weather inside a "fishbowl" case?), and probably the thing was being randomly blown by an air stream entering the (speculated) fishbowl case.

Anyway if someone claims it was something supernatural, I am on tenterhooks to know their evidence... 8)

Since I DIDN'T claim it was a ghost, I don't have to prove anything.  Feel free to go back and read my posts.  Please also feel free to point out where I said it was a ghost.  If you are able to do this I will apologize.  Otherwise I will happily accept your apology. 

Anybody can plainly see it is one more part of barny's war on faith.  In order to believe it is a ghost, you have to believe in the super natural.  If the supernatural exists, even in this small context, might God really be out there?  And I am not a part of his moronic attack on everything religious, no matter how small.  And we know how you believe Major. 

My offer to barney still stands. 

By the way, it also seems fairly evident that 2112 is asking 'ghost'?  NOT telling us that is what it is also. 

How about a car light reflecting off a window, how about a hoax (its been known to happen), or maybe it was a blue demon from the ice world Logidoep.

BD, ask yourself: "what conditions has made this camera, above all others, pick up the image of a ghost? Why do you feel the need to go to the most improbable case before ruling out all the others?  If all the other images of ghosts were hoaxs, or explained (and as far as I know all the major ones have been analyzed), then that means there is no evidence of ghosts (especially considering the ghost hunters use equipment that isn't designed to find ghosts - they use Radio Shack crap that makes a noise when you move it, or picks up the heat/cold on the wall beyond where they are pointing.)


Case in point, one ghost hunter said he found a cool spot, and when studied skeptically, they found out he was pointing his device at a cold water pipe (the machine picks up radiant heat).

Either way, there are no outstanding mysteries - only new ones. the score is: Science 1,000,000's vs superstition 0.

If you want to believe, go ahead. Beleive in Big Foot, Nessie, pixies, demons, gods, vampires - all those things that you can't prove they don't exist because they DON'T EXIST. Because there isn't evidence for them - unless you want to use RF's logic and claim that the existence of garlic is evidence for the existence of Vampires.  Or, that toadstool rings are evidence of fairies.  Or, chills in the body are evidence that a cat has walked over your future grave. Or that a claim of a virgin birth is evidence of god.

Superstition is a powerful tool - for tools.  Don't be manipulated.

But you did watch it right? It's just supposed to be something interesting to watch. I don't really believe that it's a ghost, but... could be an alien. Do you believe in aliens? They could scientifically be real, it's just a matter of whenever the government stops trying to cover them up. :)

Nope, I am oddly proud that I didn't. ;)

Yes, that is very odd. It will take up 20 seconds of your life and it's one of the best videos I've ever seen from CNN.com. You should watch it...


I'll bet you $5.00 that you still won't watch it. You'll debate it, but you won't watch it. :/

You noticed the emoticon? I knew you weren't claiming it was a ghost. ::)

You are right, though I would like to take your money. (Are you really going to bet me $5? ;-))

I am doing it to make a point. I have so much FAITH in my position that I don't need to see the video.
I bet it will be debunked before long.  Let's say: by Jan. 1, 2008.

If not, I will watch the damn video. ;D

Could someone post a still? I'm on a dial-up connection.

As long as it doesn't constitute internet gambling.


Well, now that you've made your point you can watch it in secret. No one has to know. ;)

I only say that because no one will ever debunk it, it will just fade away like everything else in the news.

I would if I knew how. If I can find a still somewhere I'll post it.

Pause the video, press Print Screen, open MS Paint, paste, save, upload. (Please)

Houm... here it is:

(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2180/2038831782_ae1632ae28_o.jpg)

(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2389/2038035707_4e52e2900a_o.jpg)

(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2123/2038035789_d9430bf151_o.jpg)

(http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2410/2038035883_2ad903fc22_o.jpg)

OMG OMG  I'm a believer!  Its the absolute dead spit and image of my cousin Eldritch.  Of course he's not dead yet, but these ghosts can time-shift can't they?   And a gas station in OHIO!!!!! He never ever could find Ohio on a map!! But after his death he WILL.   Shit, the coincidences are more than enough.  THIS MUST BE TRUE

Huh, for some reason I didn't think printscreen would work. The image doesn't look like anything on there.

IamMe, What happens is that blue thing is stationary for a long time and then suddenly it moves fast away, then around, then it ends up on the windshield of the car until finally it floats up and it's gone. I wonder what could cause that blue blur to do that.

Something natural, though it could be any number of things.

This would be a great time for RF to show us how ID works. What are the odds of it being God... err... the Designer himself? ;)

That's not the point. The point is that you need to watch it and then speculate. I watched it, I'm not saying it's definitely a ghost, or as one person put it, "An angel". How is this in any way about RF? Have you figured out what your grand point is in that regard? Are you completely on the side of science and not faith and therefore you're just completely closed to fantasy? I don't understand why you won't just watch it. Surely you've watched it by now.

I welcome you to post in the Reason vs. Faith thread.


Yes, I am on the side of Reason and Logic. Faith has not shown one iota of an ability to distinguish fact from fiction. Not one jot, or tittle. You are welcome to prove me wrong.

Let me say this, and then I will remove myself from this Ghost thread:

Whether we like it or not, there is a culture war. The people who want faith to be taken seriously and rationally are starting to lie, cheat and steal to keep their p.o.v. in the main stream culture. They have had a great run, and to be honest, I think they will continue to gain adherents because they are legally allowed to pedal pie in the sky dreams without any challenge.

however, scientists and rational people have started to assert themselves in a rare culture; that of Democracy where  the minority can voice their opinion, and make their case, without fear of death - something that was unavailable to unbelievers/infidels in the past.

I see this as an Age when if rational people don't make their case and put it on record (and the Internet is permanent - my children and RF's, et al,  will be able to see all we write) then we have done a gross dis-service to Reason and Logic and rational thinking.

Mythology is beautiful when taken in the proper manner, as a story to elevate the human race. We are amazing creatures and respond to fables and Hero Tales, etc.  But for Priests and wanna-be Prophets to assert scenarios as just-so narratives is appalling to the reasoning skills many of us have learned, though too few.

And be aware, these methods of reasoning have been hard fought for. Logic was essentially created by Aristotle (in terms of premise-conclusion), and other people have added VAST and INCREDIBLE additions to the study of logic. And Science.  We know so much about the world because people were curious and despite religious dogma, they pursued their curiosity.  Many were killed by the church for questioning. Many were ostracized for merely questioning.

Even today people threaten me with eternal damnation and eternal torture for speaking out. And I am a pawn in the culture war.

It is not religion, per se, that I have an issue with. Believe what you want to believe. But, when it starts to impact society we all have a right and obligation to speak out.

And when 80% of the population speaks out from a dogmatic p.o.v, and we rational people have an opportunity in this Age to counter, we had better or be damned by our children for not doing so.  If we have an opportunity to end violence and hatred toward homosexuality, or irrational claims of witch-ness, or subversive acts against science and learning, or to speak out about better moral values towards the planet and life in general, we MUST do so.


I am not the best spokesman, but I'll be damned if I don't try.  Bring 'em on.  What is posted on these forums will persist, and all we can do is make our case as best we can.

Let our progeny decide their own fate, but not from the dogmatic, one-sided view.

Your absolutely right.

If you think homosexuality is immoral, irregardless of religion....

If you think Global Warming is bunk, irregardless of religion.....

If you think all forms of human life are precious and need to be protected, irregardless of religion....

Barney is right....you have a duty and obligation to exercise your right to vote for for convictions....irregardless of religion.

That is not the purpose of faith.  You make a category error.  You seem to be a poor example of an advocate for logic and reason.


When you malign your opponents and then claim you have no ability to challenge opposing worldviews, you show the source of true deceit.



Your worldview will not gain popularity if you can't demonstrate that it is coherent and internally consistent.  You claim logic and reason as an attribute of your worldview but you can't internalize it and your worldview can't account for its source.  You say that logic "just is".  We can all see that logic and reason exists and Christianity provides a coherent and internally consistent explanation for it.  Your worldview simply hangs it out in thin air with no way to explain it.  Atheism/Materialism says that material accounts for everything but when it comes to an account for logic and reason you go silent.  If Atheism can't account for things we observe in this world then it cannot be a valid worldview.  Atheism has stolen logic and reason and claimed it for its own.  Atheists say "logic is" and they are right, but they don't wish to admit that the source of logic has been inherited from God who made humans in his likeness with many of his attributes and inserted his handiwork into this world as well. The evidence is there for all to see and the evidence is in each and every one of us and yet some deny it.  They don't wish to admit that God has already reveled himself to them through them. 



I have made my case, If Atheism/Materialism is true then it must account for everything we observe.  You are sorely behind.

Well said. 

I agree entirely.

I also think that if Theism is true it must account for everything we observe.  Materialism is indeed way behind, but look at what it has explained, exploited and made for the human race in the 300 years it has been growing! What future wonders can we expect!   

Happily, all Theists accept that the discoveries of materialism are not for them and reject them all - Amish to the core.  :lol: 

So, we have observed considerable amounts of information about brain activity and 'mental' events.  How does theism account for these observations - take, ooooh, free will for example....

That would be very easy to fake.

I agree with you on these points. I think the problem is that people can't find a happy balance. It's as if people can't be spiritual without going to an organized place to do so. And they can't be rational while still saying that something may be beyond the rational. It's nice that you've picked a side, but you're not even open to small wonders. I think you may be swayed a little bit if or when you have children.

Besides the smaller cults, just one little evangelical church can make millions of dollars because, people are hungry for answers. I suppose they will take whatever they can get, especially the closer they get to the end of their life.

I think the best offense to the absurdness of religion that this society has, is iPods, internet, cable, and all of the distractions that act as babysitters to make our children disconnected and complacent. It will turn them away from the dogma of religion, which is good, but it may keep them from any semblance of order, and that's bad. Children running around without order or respect turns into Lord of the Flies or any of the numerous stories following that pattern. Although I personally would rather live in a world with rules and order, I'm not sure if I would want that to come at the expense of being persecuted as a witch for not following a religion. And in that regard we have come far, but as a species we are still animals for the most part, attracting and repeling each other almost without a choice in the matter.


That's the thing, your point becomes less impactful when you call the other side dogmatic and one sided and then you aren't even open to possibilities of the irrational. And in that I just mean that you wouldn't even watch a short video about a supposed ghost at a gas station. How can the other side take you seriously, or be open to your point of view when you are so closed to theirs? At least that seems to be how you are coming across.

You'll have to clarify exactly what it is that you're against. You say the 80% of the population, so do you mean organized religion? People blindly following and damning those who don't?

I think the world will come out of it as long as we don't all die off before that can happen. If you pay attention, every human is on the same page in certain places, and we're constantly evolving. We've only just entered the age of mass communication, which will change the world for the better and the worse in incredible ways, but regardless it is changing. But there are things about our species that will remain the same. I'm not sure if talking on a forum will change anything, but you never know.

It's not that I am dead, in terms of mythical thinking. That is, small wonders do occur to me. I still have all the emotions and wonder that I had when I was a believer, the difference is that I attribute it to something different.  Instead of being certain that it is a god, or "God's creation" etc., I see it as a wonder of Nature and by that I mean that Nature is full of wonders, and we simply don't know that much about Reality.  I accept that we don't know and that making a story about it is fine, but don't expect it to be true in the end, just accept it as a possible explanation - or, simply say "I don't know" and revel in the mystery of life.

I simply see no need to take an extra leap and attribute Nature and all that mystery and wonder to a being that you have to invent properties for in order for it to be more plausible. (He's invisible, not of this universe, supernatural, unknowable, All-x, "Is what he Is", etc.)  I find that "rationalization" to be irrational for many reasons I have gone into.

People ARE hungry for answers but the Pope doesn't know more than a plumber about the afterlife, or life in general.  These cults and churches are raking in millions by giving non-answers.  They are ignorant of the truth - they have no idea if an afterlife exists or not, but will swear on Bible that they know there is and they base it on what? Faith?

I have had many discussions with people about death and dying and how atheists deal with it. Despite the longing of many Xians have that atheists, in their final hour, start blubbering and praying and, thus, Xianity somehow wins... ,it has been shown that being honest is helpful in a persons last days, and for their family. That kind words, talk of the persons life and their impact on friends and family, and the admission that we don't know if anything happens afterwards is just as soothing as the (vaccuous) promise of an afterlife - and MUCH MORE comforting than the threat of eternal torture and suffering, which I think is one of the most inhuman and immoral aspects of the Xian belief system.

Rules and order are fine, and can be achieved without religion, and without a belief in gods.  In fact, many animal species achieve this as a part of a natural settling.  Apes have quite impressive abilities to form communities in which rules are followed - though, they based it on an authoritarian model, something we have not shaken, it seems.

I was trying to make a point. And it was this:  There have been millions of claims of ghosts, the video is just yet another. All the claims have been debunked or somehow found to NOT be ghosts.  The presupposition that I should look at YET ANOTHER video to disprove ghosts becomes a farce.  If I look at this video, then the assumption is that I need to look at ALL videos and pictures, etc...  That somehow my belief must be based on an absolute knowledge of all videos and pictures, not to mention all claims of ghost sightings in all of history.

Why?  Because believers will always throw that out at you.  "You don't know everything, so how do you know John Smith didn't see a ghost in 1658?"  (Similarly: "you don't know everything, so how do you know a god doesn't exist?" Or, "how do you know Jesus didn't rise from the dead?")

Consider further. I don't know what a ghost IS. No one does because there has never been a test of one.  I could look at the video of a ghost and not know if it is a ghost.  A ghost is not an unexplained phenomena - we have a term for that: unexplained phenomena. (And most of those quickly become explained).
Is a ghost ecoplasma? Supposedly, they are spirits of the undead... hmmm... excuse me for being skeptical.

So, since I don't know what a ghost is in reality, or what it is supposed to look like, I would know if it was a ghost or an alien, or a newly discovered life form.

Perhaps it was just a reflection of something or a swarm of insects, or a fraud?


I will wait until someone claims that they have proven it is a ghost, and then look at the evidence.

I am against the mentality that I write that I am against. If there are xians out there that are reasonable and believe because it gives them a mild comfort, then I have little problem with them. I say 80% because 80% of people CLAIM to believe in God, though many often switch that, when pressed, to say that believe, but are not sure.  Which is not a belief as much as it is that they are expressing a well established meme.

It is the particular meme I have a problem with. Meme's aren't evil, but they can be, and when they rest on dogma and authoritarian fear-mongering, little good can come of it.

I am fascinated by your claim that you don't believe in the dogma of religion, but you believe in god. Where, if not from the dogma of religion, did you get the idea there was a god in the first place?  Every instance of you arriving at a belief in god is based on certain assertions and claims made by other people as fact.

I tend to agree with you. I am an optimist for humanity. I think we are a wonderful animal, full of potentials that we aren't even aware of.  I think our future rests on us understanding more about the universe and each other.
I see no value in religion, for various reasons, but I see value in mythology which religion exploits. I see that mythology should be embraced and enjoyed (this means that we should encourage Harry Potter and Saving Private Ryan and even real stories told in a way that express the mythological content.  - I have a very specific way that I approach Mythology: it is the "experience of meaning").

That is, I think its wonerful that people can get an emotional experience and learn life lessons - true life lessons - from watching Lord of the Rings, but I find it dangerous to humnity when some people feel that other people must accpet it as truth and real.

Jesus didn't rise from the dead, but the meaning of the story is very nice: that our memory in our friends and family (our "soul") lives on after us and works through the living in a way.  When that generation dies, they pass on their "soul" to the next generation which also includes a little piece of you.  It's not scientific, its just a nice way to think of humanity.  You have, in a way, a little quirk or perspective or saying, that your great-grandfather's buddy had and he passed it to your father who passed it to you. Maybe just a little cliche that he liked, but it helped form a way of looking at the world.

There are many examples as to how religion uses mythology like this, but then they make the claim that you MUST look at it this way or you are all wrong. (You MUST believe that Jesus physically rose from the dead, or else you go to Hell - and they have no proof of either... They are simply being assholes. Or, if you like, Muslims are being assholes if they think that we must accept their interpretation of mythology.)


I'm not forcing anyone to accpet my version of mythology, though there is no problem in asking. I won't threaten you with eternal torture if you don't. ;)  However, this is different from Rational thinking.  I am adamant about reason, logic and science being the best method for discovering truths about our universe and existence. It has proven its worth in the last 300 years.

I see a strong division is necessary when speaking of the two things in the public realm, but people are welcome to go home and believe whatever they wish: I just hope that when in public, and when considering the future of our species and planet, that society, as a whole - as a meme - accepts that Reason is the key to salvation, not faith.

Well that is more or less what I believe, that there are amazing things that happen in our universe that we have and still have to discover, but they are not necessarily the work of an almighty being or higher power, though sometimes I wonder about it. I'm glad to know that you are indeed a human. :)


I don't know that praying or not praying in the final hours solves anything. Death is something we all have to go through, and you are correct that not even the Pope can know what happens in the afterlife until he goes there. Even near-death-experiences have been proven to be not actually near death at all, and therefore invalid as a form of knowing what will come in the afterlife. But if there was ever a time to get religious or start praying, I'm sure it comes to many people when they are faced with a hardship such as knowing the end is coming soon.


Yes, they can be achieved without religion, but the authoritarian dilemmas are what we would have to deal with. Take the U.S. Justice System, possibly the best form of law in the world (I really wouldn't know, but it's enforced and appears to work based on legal rules, not religious ones), you have your lawyers fighting for their side despite whether or not they believe in the innocence or guiltiness of their clients, the judges who are smart but cannot possibly be 100% accurate with every case, and the fact that some people are being exonerated from cases decades ago based on new and conclusive DNA evidence proving their innocence. This is a system based on rules and seems effective enough, but should you find your way into this system, who's to say that you will be fairly treated? And besides that, in our country, even with the rule of law and enforcement of that law which protects us, people still turn to religion. It's as if humans just need it and always will need it, whatever the circumstances.


I'm just upset that out of the many videos I find, I post one that is actually interesting and you have decided that you will not watch it, and besides that you make it a point to tell me that you will not watch it. I don't think it's me that you're trying to make your point to, but you have upset me anyway. Don't worry though, I don't care that much, I just cared enough to ask you why you refuse to watch it. Did you refuse to read the article I posted about the cat who knew when people were going to die or did you skip that one and just talk about it, too? :)


I can't recall saying I believed in God, I'm not sure that I do. Sometimes I think I believe in a higher power, but I certainly don't believe that it is a Zeus-like figure in the clouds judging us all and putting us on his naughty or nice list. I vacillate between believing in purpose and believing in randomness, but that doesn't really change my personality or any of the actions I take. But now that you've typed that I remember you saying that you hated particular memes in the past. Do you think you've been a victim of these particular memes from authoritarian figures in your lifetime? Perhaps that is why you are so set against them. It might seem to others that you are against religion in general, but it appears to be something more specific. Delta9, too. I can't say that I've ever been forced into a religion or even expected to be part of one. If I had, I might have stronger beliefs or aversions to it.


I think the human race has a long way to go. The bigger the population, the more specialized each segment becomes. There are so many types of people in the world. Some of them only have their religion, and it is so deeply engrained in them that you would think it was part of their biology. And there are others that are not so deeply religious, but they need to conform to the norm that they will go to church no matter what they believe, because it is the norm. I don't know how and if religion could ever be just another pasttime, another form of entertainment, just a story. It is so much more to the majority than just a story. But, to me, it will always be a story that makes no sense and was poorly written. Perhaps that is the fault of human error.

Nice posts....both of you.

Thanks, Pat. It gives me Faith that people can have a civil dialogue about religion and beliefs!  :-)


And 2112($!), I think we agree more than we disagree but I think its safe to say you have a "spiritual" side that I no longer care for and feed. I miss it a little, but I find the alternative to be breathtakingly exciting.

Agreed.

Thanks Patton. :)

Oh, and just to address this common claim that "something happened to me" in my past.

No.  I have seen the ugly side of religion but in its more benign form (I once told a story of a bus that came through our neighborhood and said they would take kids to a circus. I was 11 and my parents let me go.  As soon as I got off the bus I was taken into a room, put in a chair facing 3 adults and asked to denounce Satan & Hell and accept Jesus as Lord - and then I could go to the "fair".  I read what they gave me (even though I thought saying "Hell" was a swear word) and went out to go to the fair. It was a poor excuse for a fair, and I remember having to leave shortly after.).

It's not a tragic tale, and I was a Xian for years afterwards. Even going to Bible camp.  But, I think it shows an ugly side of fundamentalists who are willing to make children, under the pressure of the adult-child relationship, say things that are contrary to the childs upbringing (thinking Hell was a swear word - I was a Methodist at the time) and swearing to a particular brand of Xianity.

For the record, some of the more pious Xians (who aren't on the board anymore) ridiculed me for having a bad experience with a priest or something - as if they were trying to make my hatred for religion about being molested, and mocking me for it.  Personally, I find that behavior disgusting and they should be ashamed, since, while I wasn't, it really does happen to people and mocking someone for grief is the most inhuman thing a person can do, imo. No one needs to comment on this, because I think we are all in agreement, but I just want some people to know that making those comments will come back to haunt them.

Anyhow, my "hatred" for religion is much like your dislike for it, or maybe its not that strong (disaffection?). Anyhow, I "hate" it (hate is a strong word, but I'll use it for now) because it shows a side of humanity that is ignoble, imo.  It honors authoritarian dogma and doctrine over freedom of thought.  If there is anything worse than that - other than physical brutality (and perhaps, even physical pain is temporary), then I don't know what is.

It is not the stories that I have a problem with - tell all the tales you want.  but for a person, like Ted Haggard or Billy Graham to prostyltize on the afterlife and god (something they can't possible know about), threaten people with Hell for not accepting their interpretation of old mythology and taking money from people who can ill afford to lose it is unconscionable.

The argument is that they bring people hope.  Well, so do a lot of other things - some are even proven to make the hope come true (for example, some people need medication, not prayer).

Then, on top of it all, you get people like the quotes bolded in the other posts, that tell us that we should throw away all other books. That "if only we'd trust ONLY the Bible" then we'd be ok.  That is about the stupidest and most dnagerous thing I've ever heard and unfortunately I hear it too often from religious extremists.  And I here it too often from well meaning Xians who live normal, good lives.

These normal people get th idea from the priests, the preists from the Bible.  Most preists are religious extremists, imo, they have little value in society. i also find that they have little reason for respect. (Some do as they are open and honest and act accordingly, others are zealots that are afraid that their world view needs to be protected to the point of condemning infidels).

A friend of mine thinks I am focusing on the wrong aspect of humanity. i am fascinated by Philosophy, Reason, Logic, Science, etc.  She thinks that Psychology is the most fascinating subect and can explain more than my view (though, she understands that they are related, she just feels that studying psychology would be more fruitful).

I tend to agree, but I can't help myself right now.

Anyhow, a rambling post, but inspired by a good, open dialogue.

Well put. I didn't think something terrible happened to you, but for whatever reason I imagined that you started out a Catholic or one of the more hardcore and ancient Christians, mainly because although you do try to spread your viewpoint you seem to aim it at the religious. For years you have remained in this section 'battling' the religious. Anyway, thanks for sharing.

Yes, its part sickness and part fascination.  Truth be told, I find religion fascinating, like an Extreme Book Club.  They can twist and dance with themes that aren't even in the book, but the implication that God meant for them to find something in it drives them to a fanatic analysis.

I also love mythology and the themes that are found in many books (the hero's tale, for example).

As I say, I just go nuts when someone tries to tell me that it is all true, or points to an absolute truth that if we don't accept, we burn forever. It's intellectual terrorism.

It is a shame that some rotten fruit can poison the whole bowl.

What happened to you Barnes would infuriate me as a parent, even though I am Christian....NO ONE speaks to my child in this way and under those conditions.

No matter how promising the message or what good deeds are inspired...there will always be some who pervert the message or corrupt the deeds for selfish benefit whether the message and deeds are religious, political, or otherwise.

I agree, as I agree that some atheists are asswipes.  In fact, generally, you can pretty much say that given any culture, time, belief or upbrining you are going to find asswipes no matter what.

I am leaning towards Determinism to explain it....but thats just me. I hope I'm wrong and people have Free Will to some degree or another.

I do, however, find it exciting - the Not Knowing...

Great thread guys.  Isn't it funny that a thread started with some gimcrack nonsense can lead to such careful and sincere discussions of beliefs in the metaphysics of the universe.

I think that determinism can be a much more varied and rich explanation of our feelings of self and self-worth.  Indeterminism is a (the only) counter, but this is I think explicable, if we can only put more investigation into the workings of the brain (consider the evolutionary reasons for recursive activity...).  Free will is not totally free and not solely a matter of will - so in its primitive form does not exist.  BUT individual responses to our social surroundings DOES exist, and this is enough to validate our identities.

Yeah, this is what kills me. It seems that it hinges on the fine line of what is a cause for something, or, can we really over ride a stronger reason to do something and move toward a less desirable action. And not as in "I stole a piece of gum even though I know it wasn't right, but it was sucha strong impulse in me", (or, resisting the uge to steal) I mean, if every cause and every inclination in your body is leaning towards one action, can you take an opposite action.

That is, I can see if Dualism is true: that if there is a "spirit" that is seperated from the chemical/physical make-up of our body it makes sense. But, since there is naff-all evidence for Dualism, it would suggest a form of Determinism in which we have the illusion of free will.

But this is not a very satisfying answer. (1. because I don't like the idea of dualism, 2. because it means that in order to understand our actions, we'd need to understand everything about everything that ever happened to us and how it impacts us: take about a lot work!) Not really reasons against it, just why I don't like it.

Oh, and it was once said by RF that QM Uncertainty threw in a wrench with respect to Determinism, but this isn't true. Just because actions are random doesn't mean they don't impact events.  A random coin flip can affect events (say, the start of a football game) but, we are talking REALLY random (since the coin sould be predicted if one knew all the physics - that is, it is not random, just a suprise to us.)  But QM claims that uncaused random events occur (as in, totally unpredicatable in theory and practice - absolutely beyond the ability to ever predict or measure).  Still, these things act upon the things that make up our being.  We are not in charge of them. They act on us and we respond.

Cal, what are some of the ways philosophers break out of the causal chain?  It seems to me that even response to our social situations are dependent on previous conditions. That nothing is in a vacuum, so how do you really know if you are acting freely, or not.

In fact, here is a thought.  Wouldn't true free will mean that if, in a social situation, you are offered a glass of red or white wine, you climb up the curtain and start hooting like an owl?

Notice that the shape doesn't change?  It's large at one end, and smaller at the other end....just like a small feather.  I think it's a blue feather caught on the lens, out of focus because it's too close, and the gets caught in the draft to fly around and come back to rest.  I've watched leaves do the same in this region, just on the ground.  Round and round all day long in wind currents.