CTA heading placeholder - short sentence tagline or statement to go here

If we're gonna cut and paste, here's a few quotes from a so called good hearted christian...... Take note of the final quote, where he uses the death of a poor woman as humour, just to make a point.....;

If I appear riled that is just my combative nature - I'm enjoying myself!

Did I upset you petal?

Tell me where I obfuscated and I will dumb it down for you

Your condescension is so needlessly rude it looks like arrogance covering up insecurity

so much of our culture is based to frog sh#t reveal your opinion to be the thing that is deficient?

A lady got dragged from her car and killed by a lion yesterday....perhaps she was paying no attention cause she was reading a book on symbiosis.....

Blob, way back on page 1 you said you know of well known surfers who are pedofiles
if they have been charged and CONVICTED.....name them .

Well, since I've been asked for it by our friend Blob, here's my 'boiled down' argument against the existence of God.

1. The consistent pattern of replacing supernatural explanations with natural ones.

Explanations once provided by religion or ‘God’ have over the millennia been consistently and multitudinously replaced by ones based on physical cause and effect. Give me one solid, immutable, evidence-supported, peer-reviewed example the other way and I'll reconsider my disbelief.

2: The inconsistency of perceptions of ‘God’.

Why, if God (or any other metaphysical being) is real, do peoples’ perceptions differ so wildly, yet their perceptions of the natural world share such commonality?

Simple - because God does not exist. Perceptions of ‘God’ are not perceptions of anything real. They’re made up perceptions, something that the part of our brain that's wired to see pattern and intention looks for, even when none exists.

3: The weakness and circularity of religious arguments, explanations, and apologetics.

"God exists because the Bible says God exists." "God exists because I feel in my heart that God exists." "God is an entity that cannot be proven by reason or evidence” “God is so powerful and all-knowing that we humans can’t possibly hope to understand him” (despite, allegedly, being made in his image). "We Christians/Jews/Muslims don't have to show you any reason or evidence, it's unreasonable and intolerant for you to even expect that”.

4: The increasing diminution of God.

Historically, the perceived power of God has been steadily diminishing for centuries. As human understanding of the physical world has increased, and the testing of theories and claims has improved, the domain of God's miracles and other supposed supernatural phenomena has consistently shrunk. Eg. Sinning against God is no longer to blame for tsunamis – we know they result from undersea earthquakes, which in turn we know result from tectonic plates shifting. Likewise, sinning against God is no longer to blame for plagues – we now know about microbes and viruses.

‘God’ has shrunk to now being just the god of the gaps. Whatever gap there is in our understanding of the world, that's what God is (supposedly) responsible for. But those gaps are diminishing fast.

5: The fact that belief in God runs in families.

The single strongest factor in determining whether a person believes in God and what their religion is? The religion they were born into and brought up with. By far. Very few people carefully examine all the available religious beliefs and select the one they think most accurately describes the world. Overwhelmingly, people believe whatever religion they were taught as children.

Yet no-one does this with science. We believe whatever scientific understanding is best supported by the best available evidence at the time. And as the evidence changes, so does our understanding.

Few people even do it with politics. Again, our positions shift with our circumstances and our attitudes. Witness the opinion polls that show support of same-sex marriage increasing with each new generation. Political beliefs learned from youth can, and do, break down in the face of the reality that people see every day. And scientific theories do this, all the time, on a regular basis.

This is emphatically not the case with religion. From which we can postulate that religion is not a perception of a real entity. If it were, people wouldn't just believe whatever religion they were taught as children, simply because it was what they were taught as children. The fact that religion runs so firmly in families strongly suggests that it is not a perception of a real phenomenon. It is a dogma, supported and perpetuated by tradition, social pressure and, in many cases, fear and intimidation. Not by reality.

6: The physical causes of everything we think of as the soul.

For centuries, the hypothesis of the ‘soul’ was the singular province of and irrefutable proof of a divine entity. However, today, despite the sciences of neurology, neuropsychology and neuroplasticity being in their infancy, the evidence – consistently, thoroughly, across the board – is that, whatever consciousness is, it is inextricably linked to the brain. We’re talking about rigorously-gathered, carefully-tested, thoroughly cross-checked, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, replicated, peer-reviewed research.

Consciousness and identity, character and free will, are products of the brain and the body. Biological processes, governed by laws of physical cause and effect. Consciousness is a product of the brain, not God. Period.

7: The complete failure of any sort of supernatural phenomenon to stand up to rigorous testing.

In the face of careful, rigorous, double-blind, placebo-controlled, replicated peer-reviewed testing, every claim of supernatural phenomenon by a religious or spiritual believer has fallen apart. Supernatural claims only hold up under careless, casual examination. They are supported by lousy (or simply no) testing methodology, wishful thinking, confirmation bias and a dozen other forms of cognitive bias. When studied carefully, under conditions specifically designed to screen these things out, the claims vanish. Which is why the James Randi Educational Foundation’s $1,000,000 prize is still unclaimed, despite more than one thousand attempts to win it.

8: The slipperiness of religious and spiritual beliefs and arguments.

For example, many believers say that if things go their way, it's a sign of God's grace and intervention; if they don't, then God moves in mysterious ways and has a lesson to teach that can’t be understood, and it's not up to humans to question his will. In the philosophy of science, a theory that can be supported no matter what possible evidence comes to hand is useless. The theory has no power to explain what's already happened, or to predict what will happen in the future. The theory of gravity, for instance, could be disproven by things suddenly falling up; the theory of evolution could be disproven by finding rabbits in the pre-Cambrian fossil layer. These theories predict that those things won't happen; if those things do, the disproved theories will be replaced by better ones. But if the theory of God's existence holds up no matter what happens -- whether someone with cancer that you pray to God for gets better or dies, whether natural disasters strike big sinful cities or small God-fearing towns -- then it's a useless theory, with no power to predict or explain anything.

No matter what happens, religious and spiritual beliefs can be twisted to prove that the belief is right. Just read Blob’s posts on this thread; when challenged, he simply shifts the goalposts. For example, he says in one post that the Bible is the perfect truth of God handed down to prophets, yet in another says that it can be interpreted differently by different readers? If it needs interpreting, how perfect can it be?

If a case can't be made and then stuck by, or modified, or let go, then it's not a good case.

9: The failure of religion to improve or clarify over time.

Over the years and decades and centuries, our understanding of the physical world has grown and clarified by a ridiculous amount. We understand things about the Universe that we couldn't have imagined a thousand years ago, or a hundred, or even ten. Things that make your mouth gape with astonishment just to think about. Why? The scientific method, a self-correcting method for understanding the physical world.

Our understanding of the supernatural world? Not so much – it’s in the same place it's always been: hundreds and indeed thousands of sects, squabbling over which sacred texts and spiritual intuitions are the right ones. And around in the squabbling circle we go.

10: The complete lack of solid evidence for God's existence.

There's no evidence for it. No good evidence, anyway. No evidence that doesn't just amount to opinion and tradition and confirmation bias. No evidence that doesn't fall apart upon close examination. As thousands of atheists before me have pointed out: it is not up to us to prove that God does not exist. It is up to theists to prove that he does.

On the balance of probability and the weight of available information, God almost certainly does not exist. In the absence of any solid evidence or arguments in favor of the probability of God's existence and in the growing raft of arguments against it, I will continue to be an atheist and act as if he doesn't.

stray gator wrote an excellent post that is now back a page and so might get lost in the ether... posted at on Wednesday, 10 Jun 2015 at 1:59pm

I don't agree with the conclusion (I'm not an athiest) but it's one hell of a good post. Check it out.

EDIT: Looks like he's stuck it on this page, while I was typing this one! Nice one.

Brilliant Gator.

James Randi wiki page is worth a read.

Weeks, hours of certain, well perhaps almost pondering and blithering to come up with a piece of boiled swiss cheese, concluding almost... but certainly?

Almost the truth... or certainly the truth. God help us.

Hey yeh, go for it its certainly offshore... well, almost! Hey, the lights are certainly on, well, almost!

I like it, what a sales pitch... of course it will certainly work... well, almost!!!

I like it!

Idiot.

On a lighhter note, it appears that Blob has wrested the Swellnet 500 trophy from Uppity.

You'd have to say it's almost akin to winning the Eddie.

SG2, great post previously.

Lost lizard. You write " it is not up to us to prove that God does not exist. It is up to theists to prove that he does."
That's a cop out..... And that is why my scaly friend, i am agnostic..... Hardcore atheists (I'm not calling you one btw) piss me off just as much as hardcore theists..... The real answer is "I don't know"...... No one can prove what happened before the big bang.... No one..... The sun might be an atom.... And we might be living on an electron.... And the milky way may be a molecule.... And all the galaxies may be molecules that make up a haemorrhoid on a giant in another void....
So you can keep on not believing without proof, and Blerb can keep on believing without proof.... It's all good.....
But a bloke that was alot wiser than lizard, dawg or blerb once said this;

"The mystery of the beginning of all things is insoluble by us; and I for one must be content to remain an agnostic"
Charles Darwin........

Gay-strator wins!! blob loses.
Close thread

Sg2...."The failure of religion to improve or clarify over time".

i dont know about that...firstly god created world in 7 days, then many hundreds of years later the catholic church said that each day was really 1000 years making it 7000 years old. pretty good clarification to me. maybe the bible should be re-written to say 7000 years....oh wait...that'd upset too many people who like it just the way it is.

yep..like i said right at the beginning of this article....very few people "find" god like rusty....99.9% of time they are simple born into believing it.

im totally agnostic on god, but the bible is the biggest load of bullshit stories ever....and its fooling millions of people into wasting time reading it. "word of god" - what a crock of shit.

'We have instruments that can measure these things.'

Limited instuments though. Extremely limited. Always by the user, the measurer. Just as an ants are. So an ant has a comprehension of a limited 'world', or universe. We have no instruments to measure what is the limit of , or beyond space, that our extremely limited instruments can measure. Or visa versa, the smallest particle and beyond. In that regard, we are like ants. Ignorant. Cocky, but very ignorant. We have no idea of the truth and limits of reality, despite all the posturing and gesturing.

As raised, we recognise patterns. If we decide to rely on our extremely limited physical senses, as the be all and end all, then those senses tell us that all we can comprehend, has a source. We identify the source of things. Suddenly, when our physical senses are inadequate, we make up a new rule, and say things just are. What is the source of the first pattern? Or will we just use the convenient, 'they just are story'?

'Why, if God (or any other metaphysical being) is real, do peoples’ perceptions differ so wildly, yet their perceptions of the natural world share such commonality?'

The commonality is a new, post colonial construction. For instance, the most successful Cultures ever in human history had an entirely different, incomprehensible to us, view of the 'natural world'. Our culture, who's record of success pales in comparison, used brute force and violence to smash and bash our entirely different 'natural world' view into them. A friend who is one of the top, highly esteemed archeologists in the country, once told me of the difficulty he had in trying to communicate with some Indigenous Australians who were the last to live in the fully Traditional sense, with no contact with our culture, until they had no choice. He said their view of things was so different that it made it almost impossible to comprehend what they were experiencing. But, having said that, he's not a swillnutter, so 'wot wood e farkin no aye!!!'

And, I'm certain thats all true!

Well, almost, and thats good a farkin nuff oi!

Your 'ona!

Fuck me no one has commented...?

I must be the first;)

@blob, in an effort to bring our discourse up to date and offer you a reply to your question, owed only due to your polite and generous nature, I'll answer your question here.

Let me first establish that my initial point was that religion shouldn't (IMO) be taught in schools until children are informed enough to decide if its something they would like to undertake OR in the context of studying religion in the general sense.

You've developed this statement into the question, "Then answer
Make it plain tim
You want to remove the right of parents to teach religion to their children in the schools and in the home.
Is that correct?"

I guess that's one way of putting it although I would balk at the notion that parents or the church or the state have a 'right' to teach religion to children, I don't understand this to be a right.

Therefore a more appropriate way to describe my point of view would be to say that I think that children should be sufficiently informed and mature enough to able to make their own personal choice about taking on a religion, I object to the idea of indoctrination into a religion when children's minds are vulnerable.

'Mr lift, before making our final, definitive decision, we just have one question. Can you fulfill the duties as described in the position description?'

'Yes, I am certain that I can! Well... almost!'

'Brilliant Mr lift! Then we have great pleasure in telling you that you are successful, and the position is yours! Well... almost!'

'Aye?!!! WTF?!! What's that supposed to mean?'

'It means exactly what it means, that the position is yours... almost!'

'That's fuckin' brilliant that is, have I got the fuckin thing or not?

'For certain Mr lift! Almost!'

'For fuck's sake, what does that mean?'

'We are on a slippery slope here Mr lift. What it means is that as our perceptions differ so wildly, and we are unable to reach commonality re the certain, yet almost position, there can be only one certain conclusion... almost... scientifically speaking.'

'And what's that then.'

'Its simply, scientifically brilliant! You don't exist'

'What... are you certain? '

'Well, almost!'

How can we sleep at night? There'd better be a God, or we're fucking, brilliantly doomed.

Blob.... Get over yourself mate..... Stop reveling in your own persecution here on swellnet.... I know it releases feel good endorphins which many self whipping religious types enjoy.... But these same endorphins can be released by going for a surf..... FFS.....

scientific proof...hmm...so one man sees blue another sees green...another sees brown....so who is right the majority ?

Is the majority scientifically right......how does man interpret science??

Tim interesting to read your points of view but I have probably missed.... what do you believe in if anything?

Rather than ask the question, how does man interpret science, perhaps a better way to understand science is that sccince is a human tool for interpreting our reality.

Brutus, on the question of god I am agnostic. On the question of christianity I am a firm non believer, I've spent too much time immersed in various cultures around the world for chrritstianity to make any sense to me after growing up as a practicing christian.

Ideologically I like to think of my mind as open and receptive, ethically I believe in understanding the ecological and human community we live in and practicing care and tolerance based on understanding.

Brutus, being a born again Christian do you support this as good christian thinking on the existence of god -

"I did say anyone can find out for themselves if they wanted to....but that's not you unfortunately
You won't ask, but you will get your ultimate proof"

Is this how you talk to people about Christianity and coming to god?

Blob , I don't know whats happened but Im feelin ya.....im a convert and I feel blessed........shit major drama just happened and may need some help

Back shortly.

Blob, sorry to take so long, bit of drama went down

need your help ...

a favour...........

Can I have another Altar Boy the last one just Split.

Happyas... I don't have a problem with probability... Dunno if you get into the forecast notes, but "probability" is a tool I use quite often.... And with east coast swells, i do ok.... I'd say 4 out of 5 times I get it right.... But 20% of the time, i get it wrong....
So if someone says to me "I don't believe there is a god.... I can't prove it but from what I have studied a god probably doesn't exist, so I'm backing that"..... I think that is fair enough... But if an atheist says "There is definitely no god" (and I'm not implying you or anyone here has said that), i say "prove it"..... They can't....
I say the same thing to anyone who says "there definitely is a god"..... Prove it...

Now, Benski.... I wasn't comparing scientific theories from way back when to now.. I was pointing out that theories once considered fact can and have been proven untrue... I wasn't comparing science from the earliest discoverers of plumbing to the hadron collider... That would be like comparing todays science to science in 1000 year time (if we are still here)... The making of the first bow and arrow was science.... But hey, should I compare it to a drone? No.... So I think it is "nonsense" that you have gone down that route of attack.... I also never said to "shrug our shoulders" in regards to the question of is there a god.... I just don't know.... But I keep my eyes open...

Benski, your definition of science is the definition of science today.... Not the definition of science then.... To them it was science.... Science continually evolves.... To Archelaus, he came up with a theory that the flat earth had a slight dome shape, which explained the changing astronomy depending on where one was standing.... Many learned men agreed with him, because it was "probable"....
But hey, we'll agree to disagree.....
As far as your last paragraph goes, this whole thread has been about god.... The probability of god, or no god.... BTW, do you believe in god?

There's more to you than meets the eye sheepio, I've always liked your weather posts but the breadth of your knowledge impresses me as I've said about many of the contributors on S/N

While were on science and the universe and reality and all that, try wrapping your head around this- https://www.digitaljournal.com/science/experiment-shows-future-events-de…

Silicun.. I don't know whether that was a compliment or a backhander. :p cheers, bro... You're keeping me on my toes....
Benski, My posts shouldn't confuse a man with your intellect, surely... Firstly my original post to gator was a tongue in cheek jibe re' his "the sun rises" comment... Go back and re read.... Hopefully you'll get the joke....
And as I said about science (even though I'm not as skilled as you and cannot use this thread to demonstrate an expertise gained by the may years of study like yourself), I'm sure you can comprehend that the definition of science has changed through the ages.... What was considered science 2000 years ago is now not considered science.... And even though in all our current wisdom we may think we have reached a pinnacle, and only a small amount is to be yet discovered on the "higher branches", I'd say there is a good "probability" that in 2000 years time, someone may read these ancient texts buried in swellnet and come to the conclusion that we were stupid, pretending to know all whilst shitting in our own nests...
Cheers, Benski....

'in regards to the question of is there a god.... I just don't know.... But I keep my eyes open...'

Why? Eyes are very limited physical organs. What is it that can decide to keep them open or closed. You, or the most esteem scientist on the planet can't pinpoint that. There is no common consensus on that. Yet the results, the indicators of you, the thing that can decide to think, or not, but isn't the thought, are easily observed. You arent though. Therefore, applying a common deduction, you don't exsist.

Ahh, Uplift.....Blob......... "Do you exist?"...... "Am I real"?..... Ted can answer that for you.......

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="

frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

No time to watch it now dawg, but will later.

Next someone will tell me that humans, with science, can create life, or that its inevitable with 'scientific' 'progress' that they will be able to someday!

1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nc6 3.Bb5 a6 4.Ba4 Nf6 5.0-0 Be7 6.Re1 b5 7.Bb3 0-0 8.c3 d5

Brutus ,can I ask how long you have been a Christian and how you came to be one ?
Blob what does Karma mean to you ?

I'll start by declaring that I haven't read the previous 13 pages in any great detail but that said any discussion relating to religion/Gods etc is always a very diverse & robust one based on my previous experience.

What I'm wondering/seeking an answer to, is which one of your Gods is responsible for breaking the Americas Cup trophy that has sat so proudly in a certain sailing club in Perth for so many years, yet as soon as Bondy croaked it, the trophy has too!! If it was Bondy's spirit, who's God does his spirit belong to now & what's with the broken trophy ??

Cheers for any input :-)

Hey Udo.......just wondering if you were going to answer or explain you pretty average comment???

Blob, sorry to take so long, bit of drama went down

need your help ...

a favour...........

Can I have another Altar Boy the last one just Split.

brutus wrote:ahh udo..you are better than making jokes ,about an issue that is horrific .......you might think its funny..maybe if you told some Abbo jokes ...you could complete your Vilification of religion and Race?

Explain what- pretty average comment on pure fact - Re the acts commited by religious bodies on children Acts which you described as Horrific
can you explain to us how this has been able to go on for so long
With some of the church elders being aware of these disgusting crimes and covering up for Peds in the church for Decades ?

Abbo jokes Nah not from me....why bring race into it ? ?

Blob ,Grub hmmm ? Grubs are boy rapists, How will GOD deal with these pieces of filth .

Udo..if you think its just Religious bodies that commit pedophilia....fair enough....but as you most certainly know there are plenty of pedophiles that are not Christians...so your comment is vilification.....and not really factual.....

vilification of race or religion is the same......and as you are aware ....currently there is a royal commission , which is getting to the truth from the churches..

making fun of a boy being split in 1/2.......hmmm

No where did I say that only the religious commit pedophilia
Where did I say a boy had been split in 1/2.

Udo....joking about an altar boy being split..or were you joking or not ..maybe you do need another one.....you know what you said and why....

as for your comments on religion...and your facts on pedophilia in the church.....I used your comment that you had split your altar boy...and your following comments showed only the churches ..so I used supposition ..which is a bit broad so...OK ...

Rabbits......my comments on the shark attack vitim ...I was not taking the piss....I have empathy for the victim friends and family....but....if you surf.....we are part of the food chain.....so get over it....I grew up with sharks and the knowledge the next surf could be your last........should be part of a surfers DNA......not some emotional knee jerk reaction.......

Cheers Brutus, it was actually a 'Hypothetical' ,its interesting the path Blob and yourself went down ..child rape.
When the comment didn't say that...and really could be mean something different but you both chose that line of thought.

I didn't say I had split my Altar boy.

This stuff's easy for me dawg, only takes a couple of minutes. I've got a deluxe memory too, that why it was so easy for me to get on those honour rolls.

God sees all dawg. You know that though. Come on now daaaaawwwwggggggggg!!!!

'Mate that was the young grommet version at chi's .... You know, as stated .... first ever trip away from surfing sand bottomed qld points... Solo trip....In fact first ever time in a steamer....Nothing to be ashamed of there, lift..... Honesty......Truth...... Surfing reefs got easier as experience grew ( you should fuckn know that - so this powder puff punch angle of yours has no effect on me)....
I even learnt how to turn a surfboard, mate..... You should try it one day'

Thats fucking hilarious, well done! Have a go at that knee high, one foot, liitle rampaging piece of onshore, pussy, gutless windslop! Tracks, dawg, where ya been? If only we could see the before and after, the tracks of that fucking ludicrous debacle. God knows dog, lists don't fool God!

So, as ya said, a steaming pile left at chis, the tracks, even though ya think ya covered them... God knows dawg!

imagine that scenario, in ya 'shot'... all the tracks. The kiddies, mums, dads, grannies, gramps, every form of water craft ever invented, all going for a swim, a paddle in the ludicrous, onshore, pussy, periodless slop. Dawgy world! And then a call, a spruik, a squwark bleats out across the car park.

'Its a farkin 999.9 hectar faaaarrrkin pascul spin orf eye, joinin' up wiva sub troorpical faaarkin derpreshun that farkin is aye.... an thats jus ther farkin lemon, next to the faaarkin... I luv shreddin faaarkin lemons aye, look out yar cunts, I'm on the farker!!!' Bin trackin it fur faaarkin munfs I ave... aye!!!'

And as the mighty, a paddlin' dawg grunted and squwarked his way through kiddies and families and flotsam wading about the fucking windblown, gutless, ludicrous puss, squwarking 'experienced' words left, right and centre, ala:

'Ere, stop wading in frunt a me when I'm 'eading out va back, fur the faaarkin peak fuck wits... lurn sum faarkin surfee rules ya cunts!!! Oiii!!! Put a farkin leggy orn that rubber ring ya cunt, ya mite farrkin kill some one aye!!! FFFFFAAAAARRRRKKKK!!!! Its a farkin uge faaarkin set aye, I just got back from steamin' up Chi's, I'm garn the fuccker aye!!!

And so the mighty dawg went the piddly bath tub sized lump of ludicrous puss... yes, tracks. And back tracking even further...

'Gidday mozza, they call me the farrkin' dawg, and I need a new speshalized faaarkin stick fur shreddin slabs, and reefes and bombs and shit aye... I do... aye maaaytte!'

'Faaark, sounds like you need me new 70mph, God Smacka 200... are ya a big, faaarkin afletic cunt!!! '

'Faaark, yeh, bin swingin' the faarkin axe aye, and bin around the sportin' an trainin' scene for yonks I ave!!!'

'Shit aye!!! Me too mmmaaayyte, I bin' training ve worlds greatest aflete I ave aye!!! Know just what ya need maaayte. Reverse v the cunt too!'

'Oii, 'ang on there maaayte, I faaarkin am not a faaarkin reverse v, ya cunt, me faarkin shouldas are so wider than me farkin guts... who faaarkin told ya they faaarrkin arnt... faaarkin wordy I bet aye!! Nuffin wrong wiv my shouldas aye ya cunt!!!'

Tracks. Forward tracking, so the dawg was on the set of the day, and as he squiggled and wriggled, and squwarked his way through the pack, in that pussy, ludicrous, wind slop, bath tub sized arena, masquerading as 'surf', his mind went into post steaming chi's overdrive.

'Faarrrk ere' comes as sectshun, a faaarkin doublin' growa too!!! Oii!!!!! You lil' faaarkin kids, stop wiv ya standin' an splashin' in me faaarkin sectshun ya cunts, can't ya's see she's faaarkin slabbin' on me!!! Faaarkkk oooorf!!! You too aye granny!!! 'Ere I faaarkin gooo aye!!! Full farkin power.... 70mph aye ya cunt!!! take vat, I'll teach ya ta slab 'orn me aye!!! YYYYYYYYYIIIIIIIIIIPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
YYYYYYYYYYYYTYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHOOOOOOOOoooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ride vat fucker dawg!!!'

And as the dawg paddled the half a dozen or so strokes back to the peak, through the kiddies and families and flotsam wading about the fucking windblown, ludicrous puss, he gave one final screechin' squwark...

'Thats owe ya ride a faaarkin' slab aye!!! Chi's mighta dun me up, but best faaarkkinn stick I evo ad aye!!! Fanks mozza, got va best slab orve me feeble life on it aye... I dun... aye!!! Oiii!!! Wot are yous larfin at ya cheeky lil cunts!!!! I'll hip an farkin shoul... well, I'll hip yas anyway ya faaarkin cunts!!!'

God sees all dawg. Even the relentless flow of frizbeed pie tins to the back of ya scone. And the truth in that, drool soaked, tattered, scratched, chewed, bloodied, trampled, stained, smelly, torn, sticky taped, and torn and sticky taped, and torn, and sticky taped and screeched and squwarked at list... dawg. Blax. God knows dawg. You know dawg. Ya can't fool God dawg. I know ya luv lists. Always have known dawg... no need to say it son. There's still time dawg, blax is ready!!!

'Next someone will tell me that humans, with science, can create life, or that its inevitable with 'scientific' 'progress' that they will be able to someday!'

i dare yas!

Yeah he lost it last time too goofyfoot..... I Posted a video of a muscleman and a puppy at him.... Upworth started farting and spitting like above...... Everyone laughed.... Even god..... Then upworth went and sulked for 3 months..... It's all there in the threads..... Recorded like a chapter in a holy book......
Chapter 4 - And upworth asked the lord, "ohh lord, I have battled them all and have succeeded.... But the evil poodle that cares for sheep knows my weaknesses.... He hath no pity for a simple plank riding soul.... For 90 days and 90 nights, I wept.... I prayed to you dear lord, to strike that poodle down.... But you have forsaken me my lord.... Why?"
And the lord saideth unto Upworth... "oh my large headed son, son of a hundred eggs, You say you wept for 90 days and 90 nights..... But those tears were not for me, your lord.... Those tears were shed for your ego..... An ego that has grown so large, you can no longer see your surfboard, or the good in this world I have created for all....... The poodle has come to humble you my large headed son....,... He is my messenger to you...... Listen to the poodle, for he brings you a gift.... The gift of everlasting generosity".......
:p

Yeh, sounds well, sounds... well, well sounds... well... well God knows about that list dawg. He knows everything. All about it... that stinkin', drool soaked, tattered, scratched, chewed, bloodied, trampled, stained, smelly, torn, sticky taped, and torn and sticky taped, and torn, and sticky taped and screeched and squwarked at list. Yeh, funny about that aye! Blax dawg... ol' yella! The list. Hey, take the goofball too, you's too shredda's will have a ball. Do it for soufl'e, and the Rev (if he's not busy trolling, ooops, sorry, I mean a lurvin' figjam... God knows these things... ya can't fool God)! Carefull ya don't take the wrong turn off lads... its been done before.... many times too! And don't charge too hard... wouldn't wanna charge too hard aye! Leave the calculators home too... and watch out ya don't get washed away!

Hey, why did you track, target and pinpoint and so called 'surf' (ee) that dribbling, piddling, little, bathtub style, sceric of windblown, pussy, gutless, feeble, lucky to be knee high, pathetic slop, that makes the mid look like slabs from hell anyway dawgy? God knows... remember now, don't change the story too much... now ... dawgy!

You all wanted him back, howling about how much you all missed him, nows he back & your all complaining again?!? Be careful what you wish for :-)

Ahhhhh. Rabs.... I'm not complaining... I wanted Upworth to come back after I wiped the floor with him....
This supposed god of yours may see all, upworth... He knows not all of us have latently gay mates with a camera sitting in a safe channel on a 6 foot day.... Post a photo of a big wave mate... Perhaps you look at your photo's like you look at your dick..... And as for posting a photo of yourself and one of a decent surfer below you like in the abbott thread, well that's just plain embarrassing ..... Jon Jon and uplift.... Nearly fell over laughing hahahahahaha....

And the lord saideth unto Upworth... " Oh my humpty dumpty boy, the strongest pedestals are not built with the twigs of self deception... They are built with the bricks of admiration from those around you.... For a pedestal built from ones own ego is an abomination......"

Now upworth... If you want to continue your futile waffle, perhaps we should take it to one of your many forum threads, and allow people here in the article section to get back on track......

Yipes! Cheepers! Biff! Bam! Holy pie tins batman!

Its all about the tracks, religion. But, that's not to say religion is necessarily God.

Up an at the pie tins and mop early today dawg... its a religion! Gave em a sermon and a floggin' I'll bet! Watch the shoulders but!

Of course its your dream to stitch me up. Along with blacks, your list... blacks... but, again... where were ya... dawgy? Ya had decades dawg, decades son! At your young age, I was still out there religiously all day, every day. Religiously. No dawg but, the dawg no where to be seen? Tracks dawg! Ok, ya left some skiddies at chi's, ya took on the mid, battled he mighty Fluerieu, left plenty of tracks there, but... oh well. Just cross it off the list dawg. If a few cliffs and rocks and hairy blokes have ya sweatin', and chi's has ya tremblin', and all alone freaked ya, seriously, you'll get fucking flogged dawg. Flogged. Drilled. Its blacks. Everything is as you described dawgy, but magnified a hundred fold. The real desert. Then of course, there's blacks. Not like the pictures dawg, much as you'd love to believe it on the end of the mop handle, kicking and cursing the pie tins. Over half my surfs were alone. Except for the big fish. And blacks. And God. From everything you've said on here, its just not for you dawg. I would be a ruthless, heartless, cold prick to say otherwise.

As for mopping the floor with me in the fitness world, shit dawg, I don't sort pie tins for a crust. I make my living at it, the fitness industry, can earn an income better than many from it. I've done it for over 40 years. But, if ya must, as I've said before, the bar's always in the rack dawg. Come in dawg, we'll train together. Bring the shoulders! But fuck that, I aint nurse maidin' the fuckin things... not this time dawg, that party's over. I'll guarantee you'll quit, give up, in lots of pain, or need surgery before we finish. The whole show will pop and tear. I would be a ruthless, heartless, cold prick to say otherwise. I won't tear and pop though, I have to do it daily, its my job. Come on in, bring the mop... if you must.

God see's all dawg.

'Next someone will tell me that humans, with science, can create life, or that its inevitable with 'scientific' 'progress' that they will be able to someday!'

I don't blame anyone for not going near that. Tracks. We know that we exsist. But asking, 'what are we', 'what am I', puts even the most supposedly esteemed minds into a quandry. Its easier to point out what we aren't. Not the thoughts, not that, not that... ad infinitum. There is so much disagreement and argument over what we are, it can't be seen, measured... not in the physical sense. So can that fact be used as a basis to say that we don't exist? Of course not, its ludicrous to suggest it. Ridiculous. We leave tracks, evidence of our existance everywhere. That we exist is blatently obvious. Only an idiot, a fool would try and reason that all the tracks are just flukes. That no one, or nothing made them. Archeology. Ditch it then. It's pointless.

Then, there's trying to reach a conclusion about life? Huge conundrum. Again. Plenty of tracks though. No one has been able to create it. Despite the best efforts. We know it exists, and we see all the tracks. What if we concede that humans, that is, that unmeasurable I/we/us, that unmeasurable life, with 'science', will be succesful, and create life? Classic. Could they do it? Supposing yes. Massive effort, massive long term focus, someone will be behind it. Design experiments, leave patterns, tracks. Tons of them. Guarranteed. Only a fool , an idiot would think otherwise. Or maybe its true, that classic, idiotic presumption, that classic 'reasoning'. Maybe the scientists should just forget it, shut the lab doors, and wait for a chair, or a test tube to just turn into life, people, dawgs, gators, surfboards and stuff. Or just chuck a few elements through the door, and let em go!

God leaves lots of tracks, patterns, designs.

There are other senses besides physical. I work with physical senses daily. Some people stop using them. So they atrophy. Feel your tricep? No, no matter how hard I try I can't feel anything. Just my back. Don't worry, thats just a habit, one pathway has atrophied along with the muscle, while another has been strengthened. Habits. Just keep trying to send a signal, don't worry soon you'll start to feel it. Its normal. In a year or so, you'll have awesome control, and your workouts will be easy. Some people work on the other senses. Our education system ignores them, and by the time children are adults, they are long forgotten. At the expense of others, purely physical senses. The consequences show. The sense of community, sense of well being, sense of intuition, sense of belonging. Sense of the big picture, God if you like, forgotten.

udo wrote:Cheers Brutus, it was actually a 'Hypothetical' ,its interesting the path Blob and yourself went down ..child rape.
When the comment didn't say that...and really could be mean something different but you both chose that line of thought.
I didn't say I had split my Altar boy.

So Udo...what was your point with the Hypothetical........what were you trying to say?

brutus [scientific proof...hmm...so one man sees blue another sees green...another sees brown....so who is right the majority ?]

i would suggest that the majority of people see colour the same way with a very small variation tolerance. So to answer your question, they are all right. Can we "prove" that everyone sees colours exactly the same....absolutely not. However, humans have spent 100's of thousands of years evolving, and that includes the cones and rods of the human eye too. Evolution of the human body has stood the test of time to develop the human eye into an organ that can spot a dangerous snake & determine the difference between a poisonous plant and one that is edible. We didn't get this far as an animal species just based on luck. Whilst the are a small proportion of people that have colour abnormalities including those that are colour blind, the rest of us just see colour much the same way.

majority nearly always wins, in science as in evolution.

happy my point is that science is not a 100% correct because of mans interpretation and mans science is often a theory and Trial and error.....massive mistakes get made in the name of science.....and often results in horrendous consequences ....and then we use the bad science and improve it.....

the majority nearly always wins is not very scientific.......so science like Christianity/the Bible is also open to interpretation......

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_science_and_engineering_blunders

a fellow searcher's idiosyncratic existentialism (can there authentically be any other?)

https://www.openculture.com/2015/02/hunter-s-thompson-life-coach-tips-fo…

YouTube : Stephen Fry annilates God. this clip and his others are a must watch.

Udo how can you annihalate God if there if there isn't one?

We as human beings still don't know all there is to know about our physical bodies let alone the workings of our mental state. How can we then assume to know how the hell we got here and what are purpose is. Faith seems to be a natural state for humans to hold onto or revert to in a crisis, but is without proof, without knowledge and therefore simply akin to a guess.

Surely an open mind is of more service than a closed one..........

hey rabbits.....how is being a born again Christian....close minded.....actually closing your mind to the possibility that there is a God...and there was Jesus.....there is a ton of evidence that Jesus did exist.....the debate is whether he was as he claimed...to be the son of God....

so there is not a lot of assumption....but a lot of facts....but you need to read and study for yourself.......that's an open mind......

People typically buy on emotion and then justify their choice with logic manufactured after the fact
This is not an open minded approach

A mind is like a parachute - it works best when it is open

“Faith is taking the first step even when you don’t see the whole staircase.”
Martin Luther King, Jr.
This is an open mind

Brutus I never said being a born again Christian was closed minded. My point was once anyone has made there mind up that they have the ANSWER to life, it's beginning & its purpose, without concrete proof, then they are essentially not allowing or necessarily willing to entertain other ANSWERS. So are you suggesting that those of us that haven't made a definite decision in regards to the ANSWER are in denial of the TRUTH?

There are so many questions that can't categorically be answered yet with concrete proof, therefore it relies on faith, a belief of the yet to be proven, IMO. Of course I don't assume to know the answer to any these questions myself. Still looking & learning.....

The greatest weight.—What, if some day or night a demon were to steal after you into your loneliest loneliness and say to you: "This life as you now live it and have lived it, you will have to live once more and innumerable times more; and there will be nothing new in it, but every pain and every joy and every thought and sigh and everything unutterably small or great in your life will have to return to you, all in the same succession and sequence—even this spider and this moonlight between the trees, and even this moment and I myself. The eternal hourglass of existence is turned upside down again and again, and you with it, speck of dust!"

Would you not throw yourself down and gnash your teeth and curse the demon who spoke thus? Or have you once experienced a tremendous moment when you would have answered him: "You are a god and never have I heard anything more divine." If this thought gained possession of you, it would change you as you are or perhaps crush you. The question in each and every thing, "Do you desire this once more and innumerable times more?" would lie upon your actions as the greatest weight. Or how well disposed would you have to become to yourself and to life to crave nothing more fervently than this ultimate eternal confirmation and seal?

The meaning of our cheerfulness.— The greatest recent event—that "God is dead,"' that the belief in the Christian god has become unbelievable—is already beginning to cast its first shadows over Europe. For the few at least whose eyes—the suspicion in whose eyes is strong and subtle enough for this spectacle, some sun seems to have set and some ancient and profound trust has been turned into doubt; to them our old world must appear daily more like evening, more mistrustful, stranger, "older." But in the main one may say: The event itself is far too great, too distant, too remote from the multitude's capacity for comprehension even for the tidings of it to be thought of as having arrived as yet. Much less may one suppose that many people know as yet what this event really means—and how much must collapse now that this faith has been undermined because it was built upon this faith, propped up by it, grown into it; for example, the whole of our European morality. This long plenitude and sequence of breakdown, destruction, ruin, and cataclysm that is now impending—who could guess enough of it today to be compelled to play the teacher and advance proclaimer of this monstrous logic of terror, the prophet of a gloom and an eclipse of the sun whose like has probably never yet occurred on earth?

Even we born guessers of riddles who are, as it were, waiting on the mountains, posted between today and tomorrow, stretched in the contradiction between today and tomorrow, we firstlings and premature births of the coming century, to whom the shadows that must soon envelop Europe really should have appeared by now—why is it that even we look forward to the approaching gloom without any real sense of involvement and above all without any worry and fear for ourselves? Are we perhaps still too much under the impression of the initial consequences of this event—and these initial consequences, the consequences for ourselves, are quite the opposite of what one might perhaps expect: They are not at all sad and gloomy but rather like a new and scarcely describable kind of light, happiness, relief, exhilaration, encouragement, dawn.

Indeed, we philosophers and "free spirits" feel, when we hear the news that "the old god is dead," as if a new dawn shone on us; our heart overflows with gratitude, amazement, premonitions, expectation. At long last the horizon appears free to us again, even if it should not be bright; at long last our ships may venture out again, venture out to face any danger; all the daring of the lover of knowledge is permitted again; the sea, our sea, lies open again; perhaps there has never yet been such an "open sea."

How we, too, are still pious.—In science convictions have no rights of citizenship, as one says with good reason. Only when they decide to descend to the modesty of hypotheses, of a provisional experimental point of view, of a regulative fiction, they may be granted admission and even a certain value in the realm of knowledge—though always with the restriction that they remain under police supervision, under the police of mistrust.—But does this not mean, if you consider it more precisely, that a conviction may obtain admission to science only when it ceases to be a conviction? Would it not be the first step in the discipline of the scientific spirit that one would not permit oneself any more convictions?

Probably this is so; only we still have to ask: To make it possible for this discipline to begin, must there not be some prior conviction—even one that is so commanding and unconditional that it sacrifices all other convictions to itself? We see that science also rests on a faith; there simply is no science "without presuppositions." The question whether truth is needed must not only have been affirmed in advance, but affirmed to such a degree that the principle, the faith, the conviction finds expression: "Nothing is needed more than truth, and in relation to it everything else has only second-rate value."

This unconditional will to truth—what is it? Is it the will not to allow oneself to be deceived? Or is it the will not to deceive? For the will to truth could be interpreted in the second way, too—if only the special case "I do not want to deceive myself" is subsumed under the generalization "I do not want to deceive." But why not deceive? But why not allow oneself to be deceived?

Note that the reasons for the former principle belong to an altogether different realm from those for the second. One does not want to allow oneself to be deceived because one assumes it is harmful, dangerous, calamitous to be deceived. In this sense, science would be a long-range prudence, a caution, a utility; but one could object in all fairness: How is that? Is wanting not to allow oneself to be deceived really less harmful, less dangerous, less calamitous? What do you know in advance of the character of existence to be able to decide whether the greater advantage is on the side of the unconditional mistrust or of the unconditionally trusting? But if both should be required, much trust as well as much mistrust, from where would science then be permitted to take its unconditional faith or conviction on which it rests, that truth is more important than any other thing, including every other conviction? Precisely this conviction could never have come into being if both truth and untruth constantly proved to be useful which is the case. Thus—the faith in science, which after all exists undeniably, cannot owe its origin to such a calculus of utility; it must have originated in spite of the fact that the disutility and dangerousness of "the will to truth," of "truth at any price" is proved to it constantly. "At any price ': how well we understand these words once we have offered and slaughtered one faith after another on this altar!

Consequently, "will to truth" does not mean "I will not allow myself to be deceived" but—there is no alternative—"I will not deceive, not even myself"; and with that we stand on moral ground. For you only have to ask yourself carefully, "Why do you not want to deceive?" especially if it should seem—and it does seem!—as if life aimed at semblance, meaning error, deception, simulation, delusion, self-delusion, and when the great sweep of life has actually always shown itself to be on the side of the most unscrupulous polytropoi[refers to Homer's characterization of Odysseus: much travelled, versatile, wily, and manifold]. Charitably interpreted, such a resolve might perhaps be a quixotism,[referring to Don Quixote] a minor slightly mad enthusiasm; but it might also be something more serious, namely, a principle that is hostile to life and destructive.—"Will to truth"—that might be a concealed will to death.

Thus the question "Why science?" leads back to the moral problem: Why have morality at all when life, nature, and history are "not moral"? No doubt, those who are truthful in that audacious and ultimate sense that is presupposed by the faith in science thus affirm another world than the world of life, nature, and history; and insofar as they affirm this "other world"—look, must they not by the same token negate its counterpart, this world, our world?—But you will have gathered what I am driving at, namely, that it is still a metaphysical faith upon which our faith in science rests—that even we seekers after knowledge today, we godless anti-metaphysicians still take our fire, too, from the flame lit by a faith that is thousands of years old, that Christian faith which was also the faith of Plato, that God is the truth, that truth is divine.—But what if this should become more and more incredible, if nothing should prove to be divine any more unless it were error, blindness, the lie—if God himself should prove to be our most enduring lie?

the above 'aphorisms' taken from this good book:

https://www.holybooks.com/wp-content/uploads/The-Gay-Science-by-Friedric…

Interesting when you come to Philosophers like Nietzsche.....very debatable stuff and interesting to see the human mind reach out and question....

but you wonder what the consequences of his thoughts and philosophy..was he happy , did he live a full life and a life where his teachings accepted , because of his personal example of how he led his life??

heres another side of his story.....would we want to emulate his life??

Well, I sure you all know that and IAMTROGENIC OVERDOSE is an occupational hazard for PHILOSOPHERS. It’s a well known fact that Decartes made the statement “Cogito Ergo Sum”. However, he does not appear to be extant at the present time since I have not seen any recent citations or published works online or at the bookstores. I think and therefore I am… I THINK? Of course, I might not be and then I would have to reevaluate my position. Perhaps CARTESIAN COORDINATES would help and I could then do some reality testing with my map and trusty GPS device. When I was a sailor I used to do that with a sextant, a watch, and a compass. Of course RADAR was helpful at times as well. This by itself is not sufficient without knowledge of speed, wind, current, and computing the drift to offset and refine one’s geographical self knowledge.
Vieleicht Herr Doktor Neitsche just failed to adjust for the current and drift during his internalizations of self knowledge. When really self absorbed narcissists get into their own GESTALT a bit too much then just APPEAR DEMENTED.

Brutus, I posted a Richard Flanagan quote a coupla times previously in this thread, concerning Nietzsche and Jesus, and their ideas...and their failure. Worth another look, maybe. I dunno.

I was intrigued by your mention of CS Lewis. I've only known him really for his Narnia Chronicles some of which I read as a kid. This lead me to research him and the work you mentioned. It's what threads can be when they're at their best, I'd like to think. Spread the knowledge.

I wasn't aware of his 'Christian apologist' (his term) philosophical writing. It seems that he may be more famous for these writings now, especially in America, and especially among evangelical Christians (just going by volume in a rudimentary internet search).

https://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/10/the-odd-story-of-c-s-l…

The guy who wrote this (and a biography on Lewis), AN Wilson, has also had his battles with faith, belief & non-belief...worth looking up in themselves. It's all interesting and "human, all too human" (a Nietzsche work by the by).

After some further research, it seems Lewis pretty much forgo this philosophical work to concentrate on his fiction after this debate (with a fellow philosopher and Christian)?

https://ralphriver.blogspot.com.au/2007/01/she-obliterated-me-as-apologi…

I will endeavour to add 'Mere Christianity' to my reading list, though I gotta say when it comes to English Lit Christian converts, I've always been a Graham Greene fan.

https://www.nytimes.com/1983/04/03/books/selection-the-uneasy-catholicis…

Complicated, absolutely, embarrassing, perhaps, and human, all too human, indeed.

Hey Shatner...hey its great to go back and forth...I learn heaps here and your links are a great read.....

Lee Strobel...the case for Christ.....from a lawyers perspective........argues the facts.....

I got nothing against God, I just don't like most of his fan club.

Hi Blob

"...attacked by determined enemies" jesus , thats a bit much dude. christianity is not being attacked....just religion in general. and its your responsibility to defend what you believe in. and yes, i would expect to get worse as more and more people become less religious they will question why you believe as you do. everyone wants to know the truth...and many people want others to believe as they do....its natural...its no different to how religious people spruke their ideas at my front door. whats that all about? if religion didnt get examined critically then we might all fall foul of becoming christians....what a terribly boring world that would be.

Markus that was beautiful. Sorry to all that were offended but nothing evil about being light hearted........I hope....

Rabbits....yeah was a bit tounge in cheek with that last bit, certainly not to offend. I have christian friends and its all good. im agnostic but i probably have more in commonality with good natured christians than most atheists. we are not enemies just because we have a difference of opinion about one simple thing such as the existance of god. i dont measure myself solely on account of my belief/disbelief about god and neither should christians. and even if we were to measure ourselves on the basis of the 10 commandments, we would fine that we have already much in common. ive never committed adultery (that i know of), and im too shit scared to steal. and i can surely say that i will never covet my neighbours ass. ;)

.