From: keith@cco.caltech.edu (Keith Allan Schneider)
Newsgroups: alt.atheism
Subject: Re: Help
Date: 13 Nov 92 00:27:31 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

Mic.Oettinger@launchpad.unc.edu (Mic Oettinger) writes:

>Ok, people, I have been reading this board for quite some time, and
>personally, I must say both sides are arguing for nothing. You are all

Arguing is useful for its own sake.  If you don't think so, you are reading
the wrong group.  Not only does arguing clear up some things, it also
focuses people's train of thought and crystallizes their logic.

>wasting your breath because you know as well as I that there will never
>be what you would call proof unless God shows himself to each and every
>atheist in this world. Every atheist I have ever encountered sticks to the
>tiring line, "If I didn't witness it, I don't believe it." First of all let

How about "I didn't witness it adn I don't know anyone who has, so I don't
believe it"?  Is that better?

>me ask you this: Did you witness any of the scientific proofs for anything
>beyond what one can prove in an ordinary lab setting? Probably not. In fact,

Oughtn't you read the FAQ?  If you had, you'd know full well the answer to
this one (it IS in there isn't it?).  Scientific assertions are not
taken on faith.  If a scientist discovers something, then he'd better well
prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, or he'll be trashed by the scientific
community.  What does he have to do to prove it?  Well, he has to publish
his methods and results, and other scientists have to be able to reproduce
the experiment with similar results.  I personally do not need to do
exery single experiment.  I know that others have performed it and that
if I really wanted to, I could easily do the same.

This all differs from religion in which claims are made that are not
readily supported...

>I'm sure there are abundant examples where you are trusting the claims of
>a few mere men (or women) without witnessing proof yourself.

Sure, but I know if I ask one of these people to show me, they'd be more
than happy.

>As a second point, I'd like to assert that no human can even hope to talk
>intellectually about the reality that exists beyond human scope. You have

This is true by definition and is thus a rather meaningless statement.
OF COURSE humans can't discuss things beyond their scope.

>no idea whatsoever whether unicorns really do exist or not because you have
>not had the opportunity to visit any other planets in any other solar
>system. So how can you be so bold to discount the existence of anything?

Who is discounting the existence of anything?  All I am saying is that
whether or not God exists, I choose not to believe in Him.  The same
goes for unicorns on other planets.  If they do exists, they seem to 
have little or no effect upon my life.

>Thirdly, and I ask this out of sheer confusion myself (and I'd really like
>true opinions on what you make of this), I am aware that your wonderful
>scientists have now discovered a way to tap the area of the brain that
>triggers out-of-body experiences, and that they now in fact have a laboratory
>where one (with much money to blow) can experience an OOB. Given that
>after coming back from one of these the person can relay information which
>occured in other rooms/states/countries/etc while they were 'gone', what
>do you make of this obvious proof that the human body entails more than
>its physical being? How would you explain this, and does this not provide
>a damn good proof that when we die we are only leaving our physical body?

This paragraph seems like total garbage to me.  If it is not, set me
straight by providing a reference.  I don't mean to call for evidence
on this, but if it is true, then it is pretty remarkable and demands
inspection.

>*Note: This is absolutely NO claim for Christianity or any other religion
>       but merely a strong validation for eternal life. (no reference of
>       Heaven, Hell, God, angels, etc. just the facts)

Huh?  You havn't presented ANY "facts" at all.

>I'd appreciate any input and anybody who would like to know where this
>laboratory is, I can certainly give you that info.

Please tell me.  Why didn't you just post it to begin with?  Some secret?
I hope it isn't somewhere in Utah...

keith