egg

So you do in fact have faith, albeit not in something you identify as God? Have we established that much yet? Or are you still maintaining that you've gone through life without faith in anyone or anything in any situation?

This is not a biblical thread Matthew. It's blasphemy, ie related to God. It's you alone that brings this back to just the bible and what you understand God to mean. Now that you've researched and referenced Einstein's understanding of God, you at least now understand that people can have different conceptions of God. Agreed?

1. Faith does NOT need a deity. A God does not have to be a deity. Again your conflate god/religion/faith. Try breaking it down. Indeed, in the same post, you mention Einstein's conception of God which isn't a deity or otherwise religion based, so it beggars belief that you still conflate 3 separate things! 2. I'll defer to Google on this one...the Wright Brothers took a leap of faith...you've taken leaps of faith...it's a shame that your ego can't bring yourself to acknowledge that. "While not in a strictly religious sense, the Wright brothers did take a leap of faith by investing their time, resources, and energy into a project that was largely considered impossible at the time. Their belief in the possibility of human flight, despite the lack of scientific backing, fueled their perseverance and ultimately led to their success. Here's why it's considered a leap of faith: Lack of Scientific Support: Many prominent scientists and engineers at the time dismissed the idea of powered, heavier-than-air flight as impossible. The Wright brothers were essentially challenging established scientific paradigms. Extensive Experimentation and Risk: They poured years into experimenting with gliders and researching aerodynamics, facing numerous setbacks and even a serious injury during a demonstration. Uncertainty in Success: There was no guarantee that their designs would work, or that they could even fly successfully, despite their considerable efforts. In essence, the Wright brothers took a leap of faith by investing their time and resources into a dream, even when the odds were heavily against them. Their unwavering belief in the possibility of flight, coupled with their meticulous experimentation, ultimately led to one of history's most significant inventions".

He knows the answer mate, but is dancing around his handbag.

Mate, this is pointless. There's a theme with you that when you know that you can't worm your way out of a self imposed box that you talk nonsense. I've answered your daft questions. Nor answer mine, please.

Now you're being obtuse. It's bloody obvious, and my examples contain the answer with just a modicum of thought. That said, the short answer is that not everything in life has a scientific base to it. Now please answer me. 1. On what basis do you disagree with Einstein's views on the existence of God? I know you're a bright fella, but surely no brother than Albert... 2. Do you accept that the Wright Brothers took a leap of faith when they did something that all evidence said was impossible?

Einstein. Wright Brothers. See above. Was Einstein wrong?

You'll figure it out if you think about it.

Yes, and you can (and will have) take a leap of faith without precedent, and based on your faith in other people but without certainty. Your stubbornness to concede the point is equally admirable and tragic.

I CBA to set it out mate, too broad minded for you to comprehend. Your latter point is idiotic. The point, simply, is that people can see beyond science, even scientists.

Yep.

I know an esteemed Physicist. He believes in the creation theory, God, but is not religious. His explanation is fascinating. On that, many men of science are men of God. Einstein being one, even discounting coincidence as a thing, but rather considering them reminders of God's existence. The Wright Brothers were engineers who put faith in their plane doing what they hoped it would, despite all evidence suggesting it wouldn't.

It's not. It's about blasphemy. That's about God. Many people believe in something they choose to call God without following or endorsing any religion. You need to understand that faith exists without religion for many. On that, I don't believe your earlier claim that you have never taken a leap of faith or put your faith in someone or something. Everyone has done one or both. The issue is that you're unwilling to acknowledge the reality as you understand where conceding it will take the discussion.

Revolution

Ill repeat my unanswered point from the other day - have you ever taken a leap of faith, or put your faith in something or someone? Yes or no.

I think anyone of any age riding or driving something on the road that could cause an accident, or damage, should be able to demonstrate competence to do that and be insured to protect the risk to others. Policing it, now that's another matter but I fail to see how someone riding a 50cc moped has to demonstrate competence and be insured and someone riding a bike capable of similar speed doesn't.

I think a cycle test and insurance should be a mandatory part of cycling on the road.

Although that was always inevitable, the horrific approach and messaging from the US leaves no room for manoeuvre on the Ukrainian side, and creates expectation on the Russian side. It will still end in a carve up, but it's a question of when. With the apparent Russian dominance on the ground, and the inability to properly defend themselves without US intelligence and Musk's tech, I'd imagine the Ukrainians will do a deal sooner rather than later.

For me it's a bit meaningless. I'm ok being British, and don't see the point in celebrating an English day. If the others want to mark their days, fine.

H&W is accurate in what he says you changed. You know that, and you're doing yourself a huge disservice here.

I have neuro divergent adult children, and do some work with neuro divergence. Assuming MLG is neuro divergent (I'm not here to diagnose), he knows exactly what he's doing imo. He spent a year or so keeping quiet ISH on here, so I'm not buying the whole "lack of behavioural control" thing. If he's going to engage, he has to accept what comes from engaging as he does.

You lying sod. H&W is correct. I reacted, you changed it. Discussion with someone who is intolerant, belligerent, clueless, and dishonest, is pointless.

Matthew?

It's all doing something in the belief or hope that things will go ok, without anything to justify that faith. Who said anything about keys to paradise/the kingdom?