Amir Khan arrested for assault

[Fenster]

A supernatural being/diety comes from a belief in whichever religious tale you've bought. As an agnostic you believe the evidence of these thousands of gods is nonsense, right? These tales/beliefs are clearly man-made? But you can never say never...

Athesim doesn't have to prove anything. It's based on learning and common sense. It's not about faith/belief.

Atheism is the beleif that science is infalible and complete enough that you can make a dogmatic conclusion from it.

You've said it yourself: science is always changing, how can it be infalable? Our scope and comprehension of science are nowhere near complete enough and probably never will be.

It's very egocentric to presume that humans have the intellectual capacity to fully understand and explain existence.

Faith in science is still faith.

You're also a little off the mark about what being agnostic is.

Science is infallible? I never realised this was claimed, I thought it was the exact opposite. I thought it was constantly trying to discover how stuff works.

Faith is not required to dismiss supernatural beings from stories.

[AdamGB]

Yes! The very essesence of science is that it is fallable...
To base a dogmatic beleif on something that is fallable requires you to have faith in it.

Not placing belief in a Deity or believing there is a no Deity in existence at all are very different things, one requires FAITH in the scope of Science, the other does not, I'll let you figure out which.

[Fenster]

Yes! The very essesence of science is that it is fallable...
To base a dogmatic beleif on something that is fallable requires you to have faith in it.

Not placing belief in a Deity or believing there is a no Deity in existence at all are very different things, one requires FAITH in the scope of Science, the other does not, I'll let you figure out which.

I'm not sure what you mean by "dogmatic belief?"

Can anyone prove there wasn't a supernatural creator? No.

Does science prove how things work? Yes. That is a fact not faith.

[AdamGB]

Dogma is essentially the opposite of theory... Google?

Science is not dogmatic in nature, stating the total nonexistence of god is

I'm now not even sure you can grasp science in anything more than a vague and oversimplified manner either, let alone how it relates to the concepts we're discussing so I think we're at an impass.

Lets talk about Hamed being overhyped by nostalgic jingoists instead.

[Fenster]

Dogma is essentially the opposite of theory... Google?

Science is not dogmatic in nature, stating the total nonexistence of god is

I'm now not even sure you can grasp science in anything more than a vague and oversimplified manner either, let alone how it relates to the concepts we're discussing so I think we're at an impass.

Lets talk about Hamed being overhyped by nostalgic jingoists instead.

Sorry for being so intellectually inferior to you Adam. I don't have the time to entertain you with Naz at the moment.

But just do me the favour of explaining exactly what I have faith in?

[AdamGB]

I thought I already had... This is why I'm saying we're at an impass.

[Fenster]

Can you put it in layman's terms please? (this is not an argument)