Nice video testimony from a prominent LDS scientist

[_Simon Belmont]

No not really. I know from experience that it is likely I can drive with out accident but at the same time knowing that there is data that shows their is inherent risk. So because the risk is low I am willing to take the risk. No faith involved here.

Same for riding my bike on the open road. I ride in good weather 100-150 miles a week. I know there is risk because every year about 100 deaths occur by cyclist getting hit be a car. But I still take the risk be cause the benefit and enjoyment I get out weighs what I calculate to be a low risk. No faith involved. And I have had a few close calls.

Do you perform the statistical analyses yourself, or do you have faith that previous statistical analyses were performed correctly?

[_Simon Belmont]

How can you know that science and religion at the highest levels agree 100% when you then say you are not a scientist and don't understand much about science?

I don't know. I have faith that they do.

You make the claim, but having seen many of your posts, especially when you first arrived showed that you did not understand much about your own religion. You were the one expert on Joseph Smith who didn't actually know much about him. Now what advantage does faith give you? Most of us had plenty of faith in the LDS religion and understand it as well or better then you seem to.

Then why have you left if while much more knowledgeable people remain in it?

[_Simon Belmont]

Equating science with religion is not a good idea, because when you do, the next question you will be asked is, "Which religion is it that you believe equates with science?"

Well, I believe that Mormonism is the most truthful of the world's religions, although all of them have a degree of truth. It's like the monomyth -- at their most basic level, religions agree too.

You do not know that science and religion agree 100%. You simply have an unfounded belief that they do. Scientists have a great deal of evidence that they don't.

Can you name one aspect of science that does not agree with Mormonism?

As I have said before, you don't get to just say anything you wish, without evidence, and expect to prevail in a discussion because you proclaim "faith". You just look silly (because to do so is silly).

And neither can you. So, no more "no true Scotsman" fallacies.

In a debate or argument one makes as assertion and then backs it up with evidence. Your approach here is to make any statement you wish and then say that you have faith that it is true.

You often make the claim that Mormonism is "demonstrably false" -- and yet neither you or anyone else in 180 years have demonstrated it to be false. Why is that?

You stated above that the world is a dangerous place. If you believe this, have you ever thought that it is a dangerous place because too many people in it think like you do?

The world is not a dangerous place because of people who believe in an unconditional loving God who wants to see mankind succeed and return to live in glory with Him.

Seriously, Simon: Warren Jeffs had faith that it is okay to have sex with 12 year old females. Joseph Smith must have had less faith, because he stopped with 14 years olds. However, the motivations and faith as an excuse, were the same. Fundamental Islamists have the unfounded belief that it is okay to fly planes into building and kill thousands of innocent people. Scientologists have faith that they can be influenced by thetans, and for Mormons, it is Satan and demons.

Come on Simon, Really?

It isn't fair to discriminate against "fundamental Islamists" -- I don't believe that all of them desire to fly aircraft into buildings. Those that do are obviously sick criminals, but it isn't fair to condemn an entire people for the actions of a small group.

If you don't know the difference between Warren Jeffs and Joseph Smith then I can't help you.

[_Themis]

I don't know. I have faith that they do.

That's what we call a blind faith. Without any evidence as per your own admission, and yet you argue with one you agree knows much more about science then you do. This is called believing what you want. All to common in many different religions.

Then why have you left if while much more knowledgeable people remain in it?

The same reason that some may be more knowledgeable about their religions and believe, and I don't end up joining. Bias is a huge factor here that can affect the educated and uneducated. When it comes to the most knowledgeable and educated people in the world more of them are not religious then you find in the general population. Should I then stop believing based on this as you seem to be suggesting, but not actually following your own reasoning.

I stopped believing based on the evidence both physical and spiritual. I took a while after to figure out why people who know certain knowledge can still believe them even when there is so much evidence against like the Book of Abraham, Book of Mormon, etc. This of course is true for many religions, and even non-religious beliefs. I think it really has to do with how much one wants to believe something is true compared to how much they want the truth regardless of the outcome of our personal beliefs.