Make a case for your faith (or philosophy)

[136or142]

My views are that the Universe, the earth and (some) life on it were created.  I'm prepared to believe that chemical processes can explain how life started from non living matter (I guess that's organic matter) but I don't see any explanation for consciousness. So, I believe this creator likely made some life conscious but that humans came from evolutionary processes as did other lower life forms with consciousness, .  There is no reason I'm aware of to believe this creator is the God of the Bible or the God of any religion.

I also believe that the near death experiences that aren't actually near death experiences but are misnamed brain death experiences are really something and the so-called scientific explanation of 'dying neurons firing' is pseudo science.

It's kind of interesting how similar the arguments used by those who believe in UFOs and the so-called scientific explanation of brain death experiences are:
Believers:  "We know UFOs are from outer space but we don't just don't understand the science of how they get here yet."
Scientists: "There is no explanation in physics to explain how UFOs can get here and you can't simply make up your own physics to explain it."  

And
Scientists: "We know 'NDEs' are just dying neurons firing but we don't understand the science of how that works yet."  
'NDE' believers: "There is no explanation in physics to explain how dying neurons firing can be coherent and you can't simply make up your own physics to explain it."

Similarly, I also believe that there is something going on with some of the reincarnation stories.

I don't know what to make of either the brain death or reincarnation testimonies, but, while I believe they are potentially evidence of an afterlife, I also see no reason to believe they validate the God of any religion.

I am a big believer in science and the scientific process, but as long as humans are scientists, it will never be perfect.  As I alluded to above, with all the conditions it took to allow for life on earth, I find it odd the degrees to which mainstream scientists will go to to rule out the possibility of a Universe or Earth creator.

Scientists say that 'a creator is outside of science' because it can never be proven, but then they explain the existence of life on earth by saying that physics shows it's possible for an infinite numbers of universes to exist.  Well fine, but that can also never be measured, so it also can never be proven, so it's also outside of science.

Scientists can believe what they want, and maybe the likelihood of an infinite number of universes is more likely than the likelihood of one creator (if probabilities can even be assigned to this), but scientists also take as a matter of faith that an infinite number of universes exist.

[136or142]

My philosophy is simply to go where the evidence leads on the basis of 'what is most likely' even if that means going against orthodox theories. Similarly my philosophy is to look for truth and intellectual honesty, while allowing for people to make honest mistakes in these endeavors and also allowing that there are many things that I (and everybody else) don't know anywhere near enough about to understand the evidence to form a valid opinion.

For instance, I would be interested if a scientist here disputed my assertion as to my claim that they essentially have faith in anything that allows them to not have to consider that there might be a universal or earthly creator.

So, in that regards, I don't agree that 'everybody is entitled to their own opinion.' The ideas that all opinions are valid or that all opinions are equal are possibly the worst concepts to be derived from egalitarian democracy.  People are only entitled to their own valid opinions.  This obviously does not include such things as favorite colors.

Valid opinions are:
1.Based on generally accepted facts
2.Logically consistent (free from cognitive biases or logical fallacies.)

My political philosophy is derived by trying to determine Pareto Optimality.