Let's hypothesize what a "god" actually is

[pacer]

LMAO... Oh, I see... the studies are a COMPARISON, not a comparison! My bad!

I said that before. It was the correlation between blah blah blah a "select" group, not a comparison of spiritual vs non-spiritual living longer or a comparison of religious vs non-religious as to the prevalence of alcoholism, etc. All the studies had a criteria by which candidates were selected.

LOL... But the studies were specifically to study the correlation between religious and non-religious people regarding social disease, depression, suicide, happiness, etc.

No it was not; read the methodology carefully. The studies were the correlation between RELIGIOSITY AND HAPPINESS/MENTAL WELL BEING. They did not do a separate study of spiritual people and another study of non-spiritual and then compare the two. They had one select group to study the correlation between blah blah blah

Synonym of "CORRELATION"

interaction star
interrelationship star
parallel star
alternation star
analogue star
complement star
correspondence star
correspondent star
counterpart star
interchange star
interconnection star
interdependence star
interrelation star
match star
pendant
reciprocity
relationship

 

[Boss]

Read the conclusions carefully. The studies conclude the "correlation" between religiosity and happiness/well being WITHIN the study groups NOT a comparison between one group and another, spiritual vs non-spiritual or religious vs non-religious.

Correlation: mutual relation of two or more things, parts, etc.
Comparison: the act of looking at things to see how they are similar or different.

Man, you are REALLY splitting some hairs over this one.

The studies conclude a correlation.... (they cannot conclude a comparison.)
The studies compare two groups.... (they cannot compare correlation.)

 

[pacer]

As I said before, you really do need professional help, dude.

Anyone who rereads this thread will clearly see who needs professional help.

 

[pacer]

Read the conclusions carefully. The studies conclude the "correlation" between religiosity and happiness/well being WITHIN the study groups NOT a comparison between one group and another, spiritual vs non-spiritual or religious vs non-religious.

Correlation: mutual relation of two or more things, parts, etc.
Comparison: the act of looking at things to see how they are similar or different.

Man, you are REALLY splitting some hairs over this one.

The studies conclude a correlation.... (they cannot conclude a comparison.)
The studies compare two groups.... (they cannot compare correlation.)

LOL. You're grasping. Comparison is not a synonym of correlation. lol

 

[Boss]

No it was not; read the methodology carefully.

The methodology was different for each study. That is part of the criteria.

What you need to do is go study some fucking English and learn what words mean and how they are used in a sentence. You obviously have some retardation in that department.

 

[pacer]

No it was not; read the methodology carefully.

The methodology was different for each study. That is part of the criteria.

What you need to do is go study some fucking English and learn what words mean and how they are used in a sentence. You obviously have some retardation in that department.

Don't plagiarize me. I've told you repeatedly to brush up on your comprehension skills.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

If we allow for deities to literally exist, then they must have an orign and backstory. They have to have evolved on some planet somewhere in the universe. If your idea of a god is some kind of unexplained spiritual being who popped into existence one day then explain that. If, like me, you think maybe ancient humans encountered beings they couldn't explain (i.e. aliens) and lacking the idea of aliens from another planet took to calling them gods, angels, demons, etc. explain their orign.

Given the various religious descriptions of gods, namely how they seem interested in us, one might assume their orign and evolution is similar to our own, but much further along. Otherwise their being interested in us would be difficult to rationalize. Further, since they seem benevolent and akin to parents, one might conclude something in their history led to that nature. If they were simply like us, but with better technology I dare say we wouldn't be here right now, and they would be having wiped us out and taken over our planet. That we still exist after encounters with gods and divine beings suggests they're vastly superior to us, that our ideal little planet wasn't something they needed.

When reading the Bible's descriptions of encounters with divinity be it G-d, or angels, if we remove the divine aspect and replace those descriptions with more realistic 'aliens' and alien technology it's much more believable. The only alternative is it's all lies, and that seems unlikely. I think something was going on, and ancient authors used those words they had and understood the best they can. So instead of aliens, 'gods' interacted with them.

But that they were 'gods' instead of simply some strangers from far away (foreigners they recognized as other people et al. instead of 'godly beings') suggests vastly superior technology as well as physical appearences obviously 'not from this planet.'

Where they might be from is anybody's guess. Theorectical propulsion methods like literal warp drives right out of Star Trek are supposedly possible, just hugely impractical. But if physics allows something, we might conclude far older species might have achieved such technology. So they could be from just about anywhere in the galaxy. I don't think it'd make much sense to explore outside your own home galaxy, but who knows. There's certainly pleanty of stars and planets within a few thousand light-years of Earth. And anyone who could traverse interstellar distances would be for all intents and purposes god-like even to us today.

Bottom line though is if accounts of gods are to be believed as literal events, then they have to be from somewhere and possess physical bodies, and the technology required to have gotten here from some other star system. Believing in G-d as a ghost of sorts who can simply wish things into reality might well be the case, but isn't much fun to think about since Bewitched and I Dream of Jeanie already kinda covered it.

Why would they have to evolve on a planet? Why not evolve on stars?

Thanks. This made me laugh remembering a joke:
"A politician announces plans to send the world's first expedition to the Sun! A reporter asks him, "But Sir, the Sun is a blazing hot ball of gas." to which the politician responds, "Ah, thought of that. That's why we'll go at night."

 

[Boss]

Read the conclusions carefully. The studies conclude the "correlation" between religiosity and happiness/well being WITHIN the study groups NOT a comparison between one group and another, spiritual vs non-spiritual or religious vs non-religious.

Correlation: mutual relation of two or more things, parts, etc.
Comparison: the act of looking at things to see how they are similar or different.

Man, you are REALLY splitting some hairs over this one.

The studies conclude a correlation.... (they cannot conclude a comparison.)
The studies compare two groups.... (they cannot compare correlation.)

LOL. You're grasping. Comparison is not a synonym of correlation. lol

I didn't say it was, dimwit. The two words mean entirely different things and are used entirely different from each other. You're trying to demand that one apply where the other one is appropriate, not me. The studies concluded a correlation by comparing two groups. You cannot make a correlation of ANYTHING unless you compare. You keep idiotically stating they didn't make a comparison, they made a correlation. It is impossible they made a correlation without comparing something.

 

[pacer]

The studies concluded a correlation by comparing two groups.

These were not separate studies of spiritual vs non-spiritual or religious vs non-religious. These were studies to determine the correlation between happiness/mental well-being and religiosity WITHIN the select study group.

 

[hobelim]

The studies concluded a correlation by comparing two groups.

These were not separate studies of spiritual vs non-spiritual or religious vs non-religious. These were studies to determine the correlation between happiness/mental well-being and religiosity WITHIN the select study group.

I seem to vaguely remember you saying the exact same thing only a few minutes ago...

its like deja vu all over again.

 

[pacer]

The studies concluded a correlation by comparing two groups.

These were not separate studies of spiritual vs non-spiritual or religious vs non-religious. These were studies to determine the correlation between happiness/mental well-being and religiosity WITHIN the select study group.

I seem to vaguely remember you saying the exact same thing only a few minutes ago...

its like deja vu all over again.

You're right. Thank you for pointing that out.

 

[hobelim]

These were not separate studies of spiritual vs non-spiritual or religious vs non-religious. These were studies to determine the correlation between happiness/mental well-being and religiosity WITHIN the select study group.

I seem to vaguely remember you saying the exact same thing only a few minutes ago...

its like deja vu all over again.

You're right. Thank you for pointing that out.

Its not like you weren't clear the first seven times..


sheesh! some people.......

 

[pacer]

i seem to vaguely remember you saying the exact same thing only a few minutes ago...

Its like deja vu all over again.

you're right. Thank you for pointing that out.

its not like you weren't clear the first seven times..


Sheesh! Some people.......

lol

 

[Boss]

The studies concluded a correlation by comparing two groups.

These were not separate studies of spiritual vs non-spiritual or religious vs non-religious. These were studies to determine the correlation between happiness/mental well-being and religiosity WITHIN the select study group.

These were separate studies. They did conclude a correlation between happiness and well-being in religious people versus non-happiness and non-well-being in non-religious people. The studies did examine data within the selected group, as all valid studies do. I have no idea what kind of retarded point you are trying to make here, but look... here comes your ass clown buddy, hobelim to your rescue!

1500+ independent studies, many of which were peer reviewed, have concluded there is a correlation between religiosity and overall well being. That means, less alcohol/drug abuse, less depression and suicide, less stress and longer lifespan, more general happiness. This adequately confirms my original statement to that effect. You've offered NOTHING to refute it, and you've spent two days being a myopic little twit, trying to parse word meanings and such, in order to avoid admitting that I was correct.

Now this is par for the fucking course here. You idiots will absolutely FLOOD the board with troll-like garbage for as long as you can, in order to overwhelm every reader with your crap, so they don't see the actual arguments you lost. It's like a bunch of cats trying to cover up a cat turd in the litter box. Keep on scratching, Fluffy!

 

[pacer]

These were separate studies. They did conclude a correlation between happiness and well-being in religious people

Thank you. Not entirely accurate though. They did conclude a correlation between happiness and religiosity, blah blah blah

 

[hobelim]

The studies concluded a correlation by comparing two groups.

These were not separate studies of spiritual vs non-spiritual or religious vs non-religious. These were studies to determine the correlation between happiness/mental well-being and religiosity WITHIN the select study group.

These were separate studies. They did conclude a correlation between happiness and well-being in religious people versus non-happiness and non-well-being in non-religious people. The studies did examine data within the selected group, as all valid studies do. I have no idea what kind of retarded point you are trying to make here, but look... here comes your ass clown buddy, hobelim to your rescue!

1500+ independent studies, many of which were peer reviewed, have concluded there is a correlation between religiosity and overall well being. That means, less alcohol/drug abuse, less depression and suicide, less stress and longer lifespan, more general happiness. This adequately confirms my original statement to that effect. You've offered NOTHING to refute it, and you've spent two days being a myopic little twit, trying to parse word meanings and such, in order to avoid admitting that I was correct.

Now this is par for the fucking course here. You idiots will absolutely FLOOD the board with troll-like garbage for as long as you can, in order to overwhelm every reader with your crap, so they don't see the actual arguments you lost. It's like a bunch of cats trying to cover up a cat turd in the litter box. Keep on scratching, Fluffy!

wait a minute. I am receiving spiritual knowledge....


spend a lot of time alone don't you..... I can't imagine anyone putting up with your charming personality for very long....

 

[Boss]

These were separate studies. They did conclude a correlation between happiness and well-being in religious people

Thank you. Not entirely accurate though. They did conclude a correlation between happiness and religiosity, blah blah blah

No, it was entirely accurate and you didn't post all of what was said. Some of the studies focused on "religiosity" as opposed to "religion" or "religious belief" and they defined the terms of what the differences are. Some of the studies focused specifically on religious beliefs as opposed to those who practice no religion. When you are looking at 1500+ independent studies, they are all going to be different. What was not different was the conclusion made in every study. That universal conclusion supports my argument and refutes yours.

Oh, you can keep posting nonsense to the contrary all you like, the link is there for anyone who is interested in evaluating the information. The bottom line is, you and daws were schooled. Your asses were PWNED. Not just by a little bit, not subjectively, but unequivocally and irrefutably. Hobels has now jumped in to lend you moral support, I guess as a gesture of sympathy... but it's too late. Daws has already resorted to posting cartoons and memes, so it's obvious he has conceded the fight. You seem to be content with continuing to make a fool of yourself by parsing words and trying to change the meaning of reality. You've tried twisting my comments around to claim I've said things I haven't said, and I have called you out on every lie you've tried to tell. Yet, you continue on! Amazing!

 

[pacer]

Read the methodology and let's move along.

 

[pacer]

Erased...To end this silliness.

 

[Boss]

Read the methodology and let's move along.

I honestly don't have time to read the individual methodology of 1500+ researches. They all examined the prevalence of assorted social diseases and depression/happiness, etc. between people who are religious and people who are not. And they all came to the same conclusion. Their methodologies varied, some of them were peer reviewed studies from well-known and established reputable sources. They had various ways of grouping religiosity and non-religiosity or secular and religious. They all had differing criteria and standards, various sized test groups, etc. Every single one of them confirms what I stated, which you and daws challenged.

If this proves one thing, it is the absolute stubbornness of pinhead secular idiots like yourself, who will refute ANY AMOUNT of concrete irrefutable scientific evidence in order to cling to your irrational beliefs. You are not a scientist by any measure of the word... you are a radical fanatic practicing your faith.