Unfortunately, the founder of the collective you mentioned is on an extended hiatus from VS, so I couldn't speak for her.

I believe this question was brought up before in this thread:
http://www.videosift.com/talk/Feedback-on-Religious-Dialogue-in-Comments

It would be nice to have some balance in this area. If no current goldies show any interest, then my suggestion would be to post 50 sifts and start one.

That way as the founder you could control content that goes in it...making sure it's not derogatory towards Christianity....like Gwaan does for Islamica

Which leads to the next question, what to do when a collective owner goes missing?

We could guilt-trip them into coming back to take care of their child??? Auction their collective after a month of inattention? Spam them with e-mails?? I like the 3rd suggestion.
I was once told when I first joined the sift, and noticed the usual, rabid counterpoint to anything remotely conservative, that going up against this type was like "knocking over chess pieces with a water pik" I chuckled at and appreciated the simile, and found this to be an adequate observation when applied to the dynamic between the faithful and faithless, (with regard to spirituality)....I like to look at it this way-
Those most rabid in their derision of religion, (and so-flagged, "conspiracy theories"), are invariably the folks with the most lop-sided, un-actualized and sophomoric world views. They tend to be insect-type personalities, who are satisfied being bound to the available sensory apparati, and have no room in their process for the unexplainable or metagnostic, unless that unknown factor is part of some scientific method or on-going codification or experimentation. This has everthing to do with imprint, experience, and exposure, and most of them will probably say, "Thank Bob, I was not imprinted with, or exposed to that, etc, etc, blahppity, blah blah, so many variations on a theme.

I propose a collective that encompasses the best of both worlds, the mundane and the supernatural. A pit, where the the zealots of both camps can preach, pontificate, and perhaps, proseletyze in.....call it, hell, God Vs.Satan, Black Vs. White, Light Vs. Dark...........

As long as the world spins there will be those bound to duality, meditating upon the differences of a single thing
kicking a horse without legs, trying to get the thing to move.......

You Christains can be preachy, lemme say, but those damn God-boppers must have some secret seminary somewhere as well....lioke I have suggested in the past, "Oh ye that have all the answers"....G E T A R O O M !!!!!

We were planning on updating the rules in VS 3.0 to allow us to seize a collective that goes un-loved for an extended period of time. I suppose we could do it now if anyone wanted us to award them the religion collective.

"I was wondering if any would be interested in starting a collective of videos that actually doesn't bash belief in God but openly discusses it with, well, some respect."

Amen, and *quality!

Gold Star member gwaan has awarded SilentPoet one published post for this quality Sift Talk contribution.

"Those most rabid in their derision of religion, (and so-flagged, "conspiracy theories"), are invariably the folks with the most lop-sided, un-actualized and sophomoric world views"

Choogie, do you have ANY evidence for that at all?
ad hominem all the way home

Here is an example of an uncalled attack on a person in this thread: http://www.videosift.com/video/No-arms-No-legs-Nick-Vujicic

Remember attack the belief, not the believers.
(But on a side note, the Bible already told us this would happen...)

written by westy
"lol not only did het get saverly phisicly disabled at birth but mentaly disabled by whoever tought him religoin. harsh"

This suggests that Nick Vujicic is mentaly disabled since he believes in Christ.

heh, you must be new around here... Westy, when comprehensible is taken with a LARGE grain of salt.

At any rate we don't believe in censorship so how would you suggest mediating this. To me it seems like the correct response is to engage in dialog and call people out for ad-hominem when it happens.

Welcome to the internet?

Yeah, let's not forget this is the internet, general interest here looms around certain aspects (i.e. Bush-bashing) and that's just the crowd. This is a community of votes and if enough people who sift through the queue like a certain subject it'll get published.

Don't forget about the Islamica collective as well.

Choogie, do you have ANY evidence for that at all?


"ad hominem all the way home"

What, any evidence for an opinion or some anecdotes involving past experience......my apparatus ticks differently, I suppose.


Yeah like I said before, lop-sided, un-actualized, and sophomoric.... the Jungian model for self-actualization for the reference....."folks what don't know the sum total of themselves"

But on a side note, the Bible already told us this would happen

Ugh, I hate when people say that. That's how the Phelps justify their actions. I dunno what it is, but something about that statement has always rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe it's because I feel it's a way of dodging skepticism.

Where did Marr go?? I miss him.

heh, you must be new around here... Westy, when comprehensible is taken with a LARGE grain of salt.

At any rate we don't believe in censorship so how would you suggest mediating this. To me it seems like the correct response is to engage in dialog and call people out for ad-hominem when it happens.

Yes, I am new around here. Thanks for the advice.

written by karaidl

"But on a side note, the Bible already told us this would happen"

"Ugh, I hate when people say that. That's how the Phelps justify their actions. I dunno what it is, but something about that statement has always rubbed me the wrong way. Maybe it's because I feel it's a way of dodging skepticism."

If you haven't noticed yet, I am not dodging skepticism.

Look here.
"I was wondering if any would be interested in starting a collective of videos that actually doesn't bash belief in God but openly discusses it with, well, some respect."
If I were dodging skepticism, I wouldn't discussing God with skeptics, would I?

Anyhow, I left that as a side note just to show that believers would be treated harshly, no matter what precautions are taken. People tend to not get along with Truth. FYI, I don't care much for WBC either. I think they are very mislead.

[Edit- fixed a grammatical error on my part.]

LOL (that means "laugh out loud" since you are new to the intertubes)...

Look, do you realize what Westy's avatar (the picture by his name) is?? And the whole typing to be illegible thing?? FFS it is humorous banter just to get a reaction out of people or just to spout off whatever the hell he feels like saying.

This is the internet and mixing in religion... and you are going to be offended by *that*??

"the Bible already told us this would happen"
No, God's words somehow divinely ended up in the Bible. Poor, "believers" have it so rough. What about believers who think rote learned dogma is stupid? That's a believer.

What I think is that a rash of GodTube submissions showed some folks over there the power of the VS traffic, and all of the sudden videosift heathens need saved. That's what I think is happening with all the recent sensitive folks.

There are like 100 better examples on the sift of insensitive, pagan blashpheming and general ranting but all anyone cares about is one toe torso guy.

JD has a point - This is the second time someone wrote in about Westy's and Gluonium's comments on just one video. Enough, already.

written by joedirt
"LOL (that means "laugh out loud" since you are new to the intertubes)...

Look, do you realize what Westy's avatar (the picture by his name) is?? And the whole typing to be illegible thing?? FFS it is humorous banter just to get a reaction out of people or just to spout off whatever the hell he feels like saying.

This is the internet and mixing in religion... and you are going to be offended by *that*??

"the Bible already told us this would happen"
No, God's words somehow divinely ended up in the Bible. Poor, "believers" have it so rough. What about believers who think rote learned dogma is stupid? That's a believer.

What I think is that a rash of GodTube submissions showed some folks over there the power of the VS traffic, and all of the sudden videosift heathens need saved. That's what I think is happening with all the recent sensitive folks.

There are like 100 better examples on the sift of insensitive, pagan blashpheming and general ranting but all anyone cares about is one toe torso guy.

I am new to this site, however I am not new to the internet. The language in internet lingo is appcreciated, but not needed.
As for Westy, I don't care if he is just doing what he does to get a thrill, it is simply wrong.

I think it is possible to openly discuss God in a civil manner. I at least will try.

As for the rest of Christianity, I never said we were perfect. I will try to be civil and open in the discussion and I ask that others do the same, believer or not.

Question: do you think that I came from GodTube? If so, that is not the case. I used StumbleUpon to find this site and thought it was pretty cool. I mostly lurked here for several weeks, and today (or tonight) was the first day of my contribution.

You are right. They are better examples out there. In fact, I gathered all the ad hominem posts out ther concering belief and unbelief, I would have a very, very, very long post, no?

written by karaidl
"JD has a point - This is the second time someone wrote in about Westy's and Gluonium's comments on just one video. I suppose all the others counted for nothing."

I suppose. Sorry, but I just didn't have enough time to post every single ad hominem. I will try to post that in a seperate thread later. Anyhow, I used or tried to use Westy's post as an example of what not to do. The link to the video was posted in a thread whose link was posted here. I figured everyone would have seen it and knew what I was talking about.

In conclusion, I really don't think it is too much to ask that we treat each other with respect. So why am I getting some heat for pointing out what shouldn't be done? Yeah, the is bad coming from both sides, and, yes, I did post an example from only one side, but I never said one side or the other was blameless.

It's not about equal opinion, it's the internet, you're going to run into morons on both ends of the spectrum. We can't censor comments that may be insensitive to others. There is a line but noone's crossed it so far. Like I said before it's a democratic community, if enough people like what you post and you spend enough time in the queue it'll get published.

And SP, like James said, don't take Westy seriously, because none of the rest of us do. I suppose that might be part of why you're running into hostility here. You have to realize Westy is our village idiot.

And to clarify what I wrote before, I actually read JD's comment wrong. What I meant was, "I suppose all the other videos that respect religion (like the ones out of Islamica) counted for nothing." Take for example, the video I linked in the last paragraph, where you'll find the comments to be very civil.

Lastly, another reason you're hitting so much resistance here is because it appears that you have an agenda on the site. You avatar has a cross in it, your video challenges logic and basically says it can't be used to disprove God, and your first SiftTalk post is about religion. I'm noticing a pattern here, and I think the some of the other sifters are, too.

There was another user such as yourself, his screenname was Marr. He was only around for a few days to debate with us over a video I posted called "The Atheist Delusion." The reason he was so received was because he provided a level headed discourse with the atheists on the site. But what you're doing sounds more like censorship, or at the very least, trying to get people to change. You'll never get a good welcoming from people if your first impression is criticism. Instead, I would encourage you to help atheists understand Christianity better, just like Marr did, but above all, do not try to change them.

written by thesnipe
"It's not about equal opinion, it's the internet, you're going to run into morons on both ends of the spectrum. We can't censor comments that may be insensitive to others. There is a line but noone's crossed it so far. Like I said before it's a democratic community, if enough people like what you post and you spend enough time in the queue it'll get published."

Very well, I suppose. I just really wanted to know if anyone was interested in discussing God in civil manner. By the way, I do not remeber asking for eaqual opinion. Nor do I remember asking for any kind of censorship. I do, however, remember asking that we treat each other fairly.

written by karaidl
"And SP, like James said, don't take Westy seriously, because none of the rest of us do. I suppose that might be part of why you're running into hostility here. You have to realize Westy is our village idiot.

And to clarify what I wrote before, I actually read JD's comment wrong. What I meant was, "I suppose all the other videos that respect religion (like the ones out of Islamica) counted for nothing." Take for example, the video I linked in the last paragraph, where you'll find the comments to be very civil.

Lastly, another reason you're hitting so much resistance here is because it appears that you have an agenda on the site. You avatar has a cross in it, your video challenges logic and basically says it can't be used to disprove God, and your first SiftTalk post is about religion. I'm noticing a pattern here, and I think the some of the other sifters are, too.

There was another user such as yourself, his screenname was Marr. He was only around for a few days to debate with us over a video I posted called "The Atheist Delusion." The reason he was so received was because he provided a level headed discourse with the atheists on the site. But what you're doing sounds more like censorship, or at the very least, trying to get people to change. You'll never get a good welcoming from people if your first impression is criticism. Instead, I would encourage you to help atheists understand Christianity better, just like Marr did, but above all, do not try to change them."

Yes, well, thank you for the info.

As for your JD comment, the link you posted shows what seems to be a minority on this site, that is open and civil discussion.

As for any hidden agenda, I have none. I admit, I do hope I can tell others about Christ while I am here, but I will not be sneaky about it. As for the video I posted on logic, it simply says logic shouldn't and really can't be used to disprove or prove God. You end up with two answers to the same question.

So what if my first post dealt with God? I myself found to video to be funny. I can add other videos if you think I have no other intrests, but I will not just act like I do not believe. I tend to enjoy video games, various forms of trip-hop, and like most toher people, stupidity amuses me. Trust me, I have more videos to offer.

As for Marr, it sounds like he had a good plan. I wish to do something similar. I never asked for censorship, I just ask that we treat each other with respect if we are to discuss God in a civil manner. I am open to any and all questions. Besides, who was I critizing in my video? I showed both believers and non-believers that they cannot use logic to prove their point. As for trying to change people, I know full well it is not my place to do that.

Hmm, I think this may be a good time to state that I was a former atheist, so, yeah, I know where many of them are coming from. I had the same questions they have, and like them, I tried to find my own answers.

I do hope I can tell others about Christ while I am here

That's exactly what I'm refering to. People liked Marr because he wasn't trying to push his religion. To you, you're doing a service, but on our end it seems like you're trying to force it on us. Yes, I know that's not your intention, and that will probably be your first response. I just want you to know that's how it's received, regardless of intention. Gwaan gets along very well with everyone here because he does not try to spread the word of Islam, but clears up misconceptions that people have on it. He doesn't preach, he doesn't try to get anyone to change, he just wants them to understand.

who was I critizing in my video?

Nobody, I'm refering to this post.

As for any hidden agenda, I have none. I admit, I do hope I can tell others about Christ while I am here, but I will not be sneaky about it.

ZOMG!! We really are not in need of saving around here. I realize some people have a calling, and those people should go watch the evangelical bowling girl video.

If you want to peddle God to us, fine, just don't demand we be civil. If you want to have a civil discussion about religion, fine, just don't go around pushing your beliefs and Christian whatever as more correct, or needing to be given equal weight of sensititivity whatever. Once you used the term 'believer' you showed your hand as a concern troll trying to improve some level of discourse.

Look, this site has tons of debate, politics, religion, islam, asian, GodTube videos. Just because it is not 90% Team Jesus is probably more a reflection that the world is in fact a world where Christians are a minority, and you can take your one correct answer and spread the word somewhere where people have time to care.

silentpoet said: "Yes, I am new around here."

No kidding! Just coming back here after a day since you posted. I noticed the "P" still here. I have to take issue with that. The folks here normally never discourage a new member, but this time I have to.

It doesn't matter what your mission is whether it's saving the world or making sure everyone's wearing matching socks. You're not even a member yet..you just look like a glorified troll right now.

So.... (in "Christ" of course ) please... shut up, put up ...and gather a few ears that wants to hear before you wear you welcome out before you even get started.

For silentpoet: Look in a irony mirror dude...


http://www.videosift.com/video/8-Reasons-Why-I-Dont-Share-My-Faith

written by karaidl
"I do hope I can tell others about Christ while I am here"

That's exactly what I'm refering to. People liked Marr because he wasn't trying to push his religion. To you, you're doing a service, but on our end it seems like you're trying to force it on us. Yes, I know that's not your intention, and that will probably be your first response. I just want you to know that's how it's received, regardless of intention. Gwaan gets along very well with everyone here because he does not try to spread the word of Islam, but clears up misconceptions that people have on it. He doesn't preach, he doesn't try to get anyone to change, he just wants them to understand.

who was I critizing in my video?

Nobody, I'm refering to this post."
Listen, sharing my faith isn't the only reason why I am here. And do not assume you know why I do what I do. What have I preached so far? That we should try to be civil when we discuss God and perhaps that logic cannot be used to dsiprove or prove God. I see no wrong in that and really feel that all this negativity is undeserved. I have not pushed my religion whatsoever. I haven't said one word of the Bible. Heck, I haven't even mentioned Jesus. I try to help both Atheists and Theists with my video and now I am being told that I am pushing my beliefs on others. Please explain to me exactly how I have pushed my beliefs on others.

As fot the criticism, my bad. I just really don't want that sort of thing to happen. I guess I am am just weird for thinking someone shouldn't be called mentally disabled for belief in God.

I apologize for a double post, but what I wanted to say seemed to beig to be processed in one post.

written by joedirt

"As for any hidden agenda, I have none. I admit, I do hope I can tell others about Christ while I am here, but I will not be sneaky about it. "


"ZOMG!! We really are not in need of saving around here. I realize some people have a calling, and those people should go watch the evangelical bowling girl video.

If you want to peddle God to us, fine, just don't demand we be civil. If you want to have a civil discussion about religion, fine, just don't go around pushing your beliefs and Christian whatever as more correct, or needing to be given equal weight of sensititivity whatever. Once you used the term 'believer' you showed your hand as a concern troll trying to improve some level of discourse.

Look, this site has tons of debate, politics, religion, islam, asian, GodTube videos. Just because it is not 90% Team Jesus is probably more a reflection that the world is in fact a world where Christians are a minority, and you can take your one correct answer and spread the word somewhere where people have time to care."
What have I pushed so far? Nothing so much as that we should try to be civil to each other and that neither theists nor atheists can prove their beliefs to be truth through logic. No as for whether or not my beliefs desrve equal respect, that is up to you to decide. All I asked however is that we not attack each other. That we be civil. I really don't see why I am getting all this flak for just hoping that we can get along.

As for telling others about Christ while I am here, I refuse to just act like I don't care whether or not people know Christ, but I will force nothing on anybody. If someone wants to hear it I will be here. Other than that, no, I won't be hitting everyone over the head with a Bible. Come on, give me a little credit here!

Look, I have lurked here for a while. I know there are tons of videos on religion. I noticed that any dealing with Christianity were either there to be made fun of or when someone actually tried to be civil about anything, some lets say less than civil comments where left about anyone who believed. I don't think that has to be the case. I want to help people try to understand Christianity a little better. Maybe then they won't be so quick to bash it believers.

On a side note that video you spoke of here, this is just sad. The girl in this video is simply to young to even begin to fanthom God. This is just plain brainwashing. They have instilled in her some of the rethoric, quotes, and bible verses, but she has no clue what any of it means. She just wants to try...something. She is still too young to make that kind of decision for herself and I really think that someone forced her into this thing and just brainwashed her. Unless a child that age has experienced the death of someone close to them, they really won't think about God or the Bible. I think she is really got in emotion more than the Holy Spirit. This troubles me...
Does anyone have any more information on this?

written by swampgirl
"silentpoet said: "Yes, I am new around here."

No kidding! Just coming back here after a day since you posted. I noticed the "P" still here. I have to take issue with that. The folks here normally never discourage a new member, but this time I have to.

It doesn't matter what your mission is whether it's saving the world or making sure everyone's wearing matching socks. You're not even a member yet..you just look like a glorified troll right now.

So.... (in "Christ" of course ) please... shut up, put up ...and gather a few ears that wants to hear before you wear you welcome out before you even get started."
Geez, I already stated above I would post some toher videos. Just give me some time. I have been busy. Besides, I cannot post another video til my first one gets through.

written by joedirt
"For silentpoet: Look in a irony mirror dude...


http://www.videosift.com/video/8-Reasons-Why-I-Dont-Share-My-Faith"
See? That is what I am talking about. I have yet to preach anything from the Bible. All I asked is that we try to be civil, and it is like I did something horrible. I didn't throw anything in your face. I didn't tell anyone they're going to Hell. I never even talked about Jesus! Why am I receiving so much fuss over something I haven't even done as of yet?!

I do hope I can tell others about Christ while I am here

Heck, I haven't even mentioned Jesus (ED -- see above for "mention" of JC)

I try to help both Atheists and Theists with my video and now I am being told that I am pushing my beliefs on others. (ED -- see above for mention of desire to push beliefs)

As for telling others about Christ while I am here, I refuse to just act like I don't care whether or not people know Christ (ED -- Unless you are equally open getting to "know" other entities like Mohammed or Buddha or Vishnu or Satan... I'm guessing people don't come to this website to "know Christ" or in any way be converted)

Look, you are welcome to submit videos. Please follow the guidelines and submit interesting videos you found on YouTube or wherever and not ones you uploaded, as you semi-imply ownership of the inspirational limbless guy.

I do appreciate your comments regaring Jesus Camp bowler girl. I'm surprised you haven't seen the movie. It is interesting regardless of your views of evangelicals.

Submit more Christian videos into the queue and don't complain there isn't enough. Probably just not enough interest as most people are saturated with living in Christian nations. You may even make a first post that says, "please keep this discussion civil" on your submitted posts.

But, again, you have no way to demand people remain civil especially with you alterior motives, which for those who have been around awhile can spot like... well like the letter "t" in your avatar.

I didn't tell anyone they're going to Hell. I never even talked about Jesus! Why am I receiving so much fuss over something I haven't even done as of yet?!

You know the sketchy looking teenager who is pacing nervously in a store, looking aroun shiftily. That is you, and we all know where this is going....

i'm a bit drunk (its my 24th birthday and i just got my degree grade), so take this with a pinch of salt..

1. I wouldn't use an ad hominem attack if I was trying to make a coherent and logically robust argument about something.

2. I like raw data, examples and evidence. They are the bread and butter of hypothesis testing and epistemology. I am science-bias in this sense. I prefer ideas / theories / opinions / arguments that are falsifiable and that can be verified to those that are not and cannot be. I'm most interested in information which helps us best manipulate our environment/brains/bodies to our evolutionary advantage.

3. Given 1 and 2, I think I'm a believer in scientific method and rational skepticism before I'm a believer in atheism or mind-body materialsm or anything of that ilk.

written by joedirt
"I do hope I can tell others about Christ while I am here

Heck, I haven't even mentioned Jesus (ED -- see above for "mention" of JC)

I try to help both Atheists and Theists with my video and now I am being told that I am pushing my beliefs on others. (ED -- see above for mention of desire to push beliefs)

As for telling others about Christ while I am here, I refuse to just act like I don't care whether or not people know Christ (ED -- Unless you are equally open getting to "know" other entities like Mohammed or Buddha or Vishnu or Satan... I'm guessing people don't come to this website to "know Christ" or in any way be converted)


Look, you are welcome to submit videos. Please follow the guidelines and submit interesting videos you found on YouTube or wherever and not ones you uploaded, as you semi-imply ownership of the inspirational limbless guy.

I do appreciate your comments regaring Jesus Camp bowler girl. I'm surprised you haven't seen the movie. It is interesting regardless of your views of evangelicals.

Submit more Christian videos into the queue and don't complain there isn't enough. Probably just not enough interest as most people are saturated with living in Christian nations. You may even make a first post that says, "please keep this discussion civil" on your submitted posts.

But, again, you have no way to demand people remain civil especially with you alterior motives, which for those who have been around awhile can spot like... well like the letter "t" in your avatar.


I didn't tell anyone they're going to Hell. I never even talked about Jesus! Why am I receiving so much fuss over something I haven't even done as of yet?!
You know the sketchy looking teenager who is pacing nervously in a store, looking aroun shiftily. That is you, and we all know where this is going...."
Fine, I mentioned his name, but don't act like I have been pushing my beliefs on others. Telling people about Christ and forcing my beliefs on others are two totally idfferent things. I said I would be here if anyone wanted to know about him. If someone wants to hear it I will be here. I did not, however, say I would force anything on anyone.

Who said I wasn't open? Do not assume to already know me. I certainly will not be as hostile to others wishes to share their faith as you have mine.
I never complained there wasn't enough. I simply stated that I thought there was a need for it and asked if there was anybody interested. I wasn't blaming anybody here for not posting enough "Christian" videos. I just wanted to contribute.

I have no alterior motives. What? Do I have alterior motives simply because I openly profess my faith? Do you just assume that any Christian willing to share their faith has alterior motives? I already said I wouldn't force anything on anyone. I will answer questions, maybe submit a video that helps explains the Bible, but I will not do that where and when it is not wanted. Geez, as for my avatar that's the picture I use for my myspace. I like that avatar because I photoshoped it. Here is my myspace. http://profile.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=user.viewprofile&friendID=79915810

What is your problem? Why can't people be civil? Why would the fact that I open profess my faith be a problem with people being civil?

Look again at how you are handling this. I have done nothing wrong. I have withheld nothing. Yet you accuse me of alterior motives.

Why? Because I might actually be honest about what I believe? I really hope this isn't the way this site treats all of it's new members.

written by pipp3355
"1. I wouldn't use an ad hominem attack if I was trying to make a coherent and logically robust argument about something.

2. I like raw data, examples and evidence. They are the bread and butter of hypothesis testing and epistemology. I am science-bias in this sense. I prefer ideas / theories / opinions / arguments that are falsifiable and that can be verified to those that are not and cannot be. Specifically, I'm most interested in information which helps us best manipulate our environment/brains/bodies to our evolutionary advantage.

3. Given 1 and 2, I think I'm a believer in scientific method and rational skepticism before I'm a believer in atheism or mind-body materialsm or anything of that ilk."
Umm. Who is #1 directed at?
I can't blame you for #2. I am mostly the same way, minus that last bit on manipulation of our eniviorment.
So you are agnostic?

Hmm. Tell me where you think we came from.
Oh and happy birthday, mine was wednesday. lol.

"but I just didn't have enough time to post every single ad hominem."

Then why not ya don't, and waddle off.....

"Umm. Who is #1 directed at?
I can't blame you for #2. I am mostly the same way, minus that last bit on manipulation of our eniviorment.
So you are agnostic?

Hmm. Tell me where you think we came from.
Oh and happy birthday, mine was wednesday. lol."

i think it was me generally reflecting on the usage of ad hominem on the sift from both sides of the atheist / theist divide.. strange thing is tho i find myself agreeing with choggie on most of this thread despite his ad hominem tendencies.. go choggie!

yeah i think i'm agnostic. i just don't know, and not sure if i can know. its a bit like the teapot orbiting the earth argument - possible but unlikely - but since its possible i deny atheism. the general spirit of my number 2 there was that i think its more valuable to spend time on ideas / theories that are falsifiable. that's my bias - a bias towards the falsifiable.

where we came from? well creationism is one of my pet hates, along with scientology. i generally subscribe to the big bang / evolution / fossils and carbon dating are cool school of thought..

written by choggie
"but I just didn't have enough time to post every single ad hominem."

Then why not ya don't, and waddle off.....

I may point out ad hominems later on if they keep showing up. Until then I don't think it is too much to ask that we avod ad hominems altogether, do you?

written by pipp3355
"i think it was me generally reflecting on the usage of ad hominem on the sift from both sides of the atheist / theist divide.. strange thing is tho i find myself agreeing with choggie on most of this thread despite his ad hominem tendencies.. go choggie!

yeah i think i'm agnostic. i just don't know, and not sure if i can know. its a bit like the teapot orbiting the earth argument - possible but unlikely - but since its possible i deny atheism. the general spirit of my number 2 there was that i think its more valuable to spend time on ideas / theories that are falsifiable. that's my bias - a bias towards the falsifiable.

where we came from? well creationism is one of my pet hates, along with scientology. i generally subscribe to the big bang / evolution / fossils and carbon dating are cool school of thought.."

Yeah, I often see it on both sides as well. I can see how you appreciate Choggie's opinion on those that claim they have answers. Most of them do not care to hear the answer of the other. As for God being like the orbiting teapot, I would have to disagree. A teapot isn't necessary for our existence. A God, Creator, or even perhaps a Big Bang is. The very laws of phyics say that if somethings is built, it must have a builder, no. I think that can apply to the world as we know it. Evolution explains or tries to explain how we got where we are now. That is to say, it explains how we could have progressed from rocks to humanity. It does not however get to the heart of the matter: how we came to be. And neither does the Big Bang, that cosmic explosion that supposedly created this world. For something to come to pass, something must something must set it in motion, no? I tend to think that evolution/big bang theory just puts a band-aid on the question rather than answer it. Very smart people behind those theories though, I have to say. I just don't subscribe to them. What I have yet to figre out is how atheist believe that the Big Bang or evolution can somehow resolve the need for a God/Creator when both of those theories still require something to start those processes. For the Big Bang, it would be, of course, the Big Bang. And for evolution, life. To me the idea that both of those processes are self evident seem, well, absurd. Any explosion has to have started from somewhere and the process of evolution cannnot start from something not even alive to begin with. Both theories have huge gaping God shaped hole in them. Both have already falsified themselves as a replacemnt for God.

But that is just my opinion. What do you think?

Let's keep this on subject here. SiftTalk is either about VideoSift or general internet media, not about where you think existence came from.

written by karaidl
"Let's keep this on subject here. SiftTalk is either about VideoSift or general internet media, not about where you think existence came from."

Hmm. Good point. My apologies for getting off subject. Anyone wishing to talk about that subject should comment my profile.