Itoero

@Aidanbuk If you believe in a creator then you believe a person/human-like figure created this universe. How is that possible? Persons/humans developed/evolved on this Earth.... Why 'who'? Why not 'what'? Also, the big bang theory doesn't imply a creative force. It's about the evolution of the universe.

Ok but the real reason why I ask this is because Eise and many other people say that most scholars/historians/scientists agree Jesus existed. It's impossible to know what most scholars/historians/scientists think about Jesus. You can only make assumptions like that concerning the people you know or had contact with. Also, many scholars/historians/scientists are Christian or Muslim , It's pretty normal they think Jesus was a 'real' person. And many atheists were taught as a young child about Jesus and believe in his existence. Richard Dawkins was a Christian. The 'fact' that he knows a lot concerning biological evolution doesn't mean he's correct in everything else he says. He's subject to 'faith' just like everyone. He for example thinks vegans have the moral highground. And when he discusses religion Ive noted some of his statements are about faith-based believe and not about science. He for example stated in an interview that Muslim suicide bombers do their acts because they think Allah will reward them….while there are studies that show this is not true.

Many people believe that.

The only evidence for Jesus's existence is in religious scripture….It's unknown who wrote the gospels, they where written a lot later then Jesus's supposed Death. and were written in third person. Many stories are definitely made up. They are either scientifically impossible(miracles) and many stories that belong to the same Gospel are impossible to be written by one person(like the Birth and Death of Jesus)). There is no reason to believe Jesus existed. That's nonsense. Dawkins thinks its a fact Jesus existed...that's unscientific. And how do you know what the majoraty of scientists say about Jesus? This is part of your first post in this thread: "It is true that the historical evidence is not strong, but most academic historians agree that Jesus existed." =>Why do you say that? How can you know most academic historians agree Jesus existed? Ten Oz said this. I repeated it because it makes a lot of sense. Why do you think he had followers? Why illiterate? Why do you think Jesus could read but not write? If so, why didn't he learn? You talk with your faith.

yes he did, here: "hey have two choices. They can inbreed- to maintain the "purity of the breed" or they can outbreed- " to diminish the chance of genetic defects." They can not do both- because that's the way genetics works. " The blood line is not the same as the breed of a dog.

I don't have a mongrel. I have a West-Siberian laika

John Cuthber implied it in his post.

To maintain the purity of a breed you don't have to inbreed. You breed with dogs of the same kind but a different bloodline. When looking for a breeding partner, if possible, you need to try to diminish the chance on genetic defects. It's possible you have to travel to find a correct breeding partner for your dog. It all depends on how much time and effort you put into it. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4579364/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12535334

The pedigree system is just a classification system to categorize dogs. I've been to two dogsleddingfarms and It was pretty clear people care more for the validity of a dog then it's pedigree. There is nothing wrong with this system. There is something wrong with the way many dogs are bred, but that's not necessary related to this system. I payed 'a lot of money' for a dog free of known/predictable genetic defects. If people care for the dogs they breed then they try to diminish the chance of genetic defects.

Does 'being drunk' has an effect on this?

I would think that's meant with 'consciousness'. Our consciousness imo is due to the 'communicating' of neurons. Bacteria and even plants can react sometimes in a +/- conscious way to it's environment due to communicating. That's of course a very diminished form of 'being conscious'.

I sometimes have blurred vision(more then usual) and then I can somehow look for focus to have a 'clear' vision. I do have a neuromuscular disease...

"I eluded to the possibility that some historians think Jesus never existed, I take that Back, Jesus existed" He even changed his mind...How can Dawkins say something like that? He doesn't need to be an expert in scripture, applying your logic should be sufficient

There is a theory that argues that the relationship commenced once humans moved into the colder parts of Eurasia around 35,000 YBP. I'm all for this theory since I think Siberia had the correct environment. Even now you have the West and East Siberian laika, which imo look like domesticated wolves.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Siberian_Laikahttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Siberian_Laika Also, the gray wolf is the closest living relative of the dog but the wolves that dogs 'evolved' from were a different kind of wolf then the gray wolf. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Origin_of_the_domestic_dog

Australopithecus species ate mainly fruit, vegetables, small lizards, and tubers. They did not have much use of their canines.

Didn't Albert Einstein supposedly said this? I suppose there are many scientists that know there subject matter very well but don't posses the capabilities to explain/teach there subject matter to other people.

I never had a real idea concerning Jesus's existence, because I didn't care, thenl I saw a 'big questions' episode on YouTube where it's been said 'most scholars agree Jesus existed'.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7mRYiplTf3I where does this idea come from? Richard Dawkins for example seems to think it's a fact Jesus existed….very odd.

A person might need prior knowledge to understand something.

It's imo very likely it were different people's actions molded into one. Then many stories were based on different people's actions. If it was one person then he indeed should have had followers to record stuff. It's also unknown who wrote the Gospels. The names Matthew , Mark, Luke and John were added later.

Why would you keep an open mind about God when there is no logic based or evidence based reason to believe in God?

WAWWE = We Are Who We Eat... is not my philosophy of life.

A female who died around 90,000 years ago was half Neanderthal and half Denisovan, according to genome analysis of a bone discovered in a Siberian cave. This is the first time scientists have identified an ancient individual whose parents belonged to distinct human groups. The findings were published on 22 August in Nature1.https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-06004-0

Not really. Nothing is 100%proven but things are very often scientifically proven, like that lights is made of photons, for example. Quantum-gravity theories, the holographic principle, quantum interpretations need to be scientifically proven to become scientific. How can the evidence be consistent with the theory if we have to implement dark matter? The theory lacks. There is probably a gravitational field. But it's impossible to really know it. And why are people so certain the field model is correct? That means the point attraction is wrong. In 'science' things are proven all the time, like wave particle duality. I suppose general relativity is proven many times. 'The new theory makes the same predictions without dark matter'...isn't this correct? I didn't read the paper.