Author Topic: Evidence for life on Mars  (Read 3624 times)

Offline Jackal1

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9092
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #105 on: March 05, 2005, 02:39:16 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Now which theory was more logical in the end? :D

One is theory, one is not in my viewpoint.
Since you seem to be a guy that wants to quote studies, etc, how about the recent study to calcualte the odds that your evoultion theory could have happened?
I cannot quote the exact numbers but it was in the millions to one odds that it could not have taken place.
You also seem to be a guy that likes to ask a lot of questions , but does not answer any given to you, so I will let you reference and look up the study just as you suggested others to do when you first came into this thread.
Democracy is two wolves deciding on what to eat. Freedom is a well armed sheep protesting the vote.
------------------------------------------------------------------

Offline Siaf__csf

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2213
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #106 on: March 05, 2005, 02:46:36 PM »
Quote
However using logic to argue faith is a fruitless endeavour.


That is very much true, my friend.

I never had a slightest need to explain anything with a higher force. I'm not bothered at all with questions like why are we here, where did all this come from etc.

Therefore I have no need to be religious. My perception of world is based on logic and study. Some others rely on faith.

However no argument can change the fact that if religious fanatics had thier way, we'd still live in our villages on a earth-centric universe in strict fear of God and the inquisition.

Interesting read about the history of distortion, lies and corruption of science created by religion:

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/White/

Especially the part: http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/White/creation/final-effort.html
« Last Edit: March 06, 2005, 01:45:40 AM by Siaf__csf »

Offline Seagoon

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2396
      • http://www.providencepca.com
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #107 on: March 05, 2005, 03:57:21 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Maverick
Seagoon,

Thanks for the reply. I suppose it really should have gone in another thread but your eloquent reply about the bible earlier piqued my interest. It's unusual to have a bible scholar here. This is not meant as a slight to those who study the bible on their own or as part of their religious study.

The 2 volumes I was referring to were the King James version and the Dueay (sp??)(I know it's pronounce dooway but don't know how to spell it. :)) version. I guess one is related directly to the common bible found in most Protestant Denominations versus what is normally associated with the Roman Catholic Church. This of course brings up the debate on the "editing" that was done to make the King James version different from the other earlier version.


Hi again Maverick,

If you want to start another thread on bible translations, I'd be willing to offer up what little I can.

The translation you are referring to is the Douay-Rheims which as you said is a specifically Roman Catholic (RC) translation. The name comes from the cities in which most of the translation work took place. It owed its origins to the RC desire to counter the outpouring of Protestant translations of the Bible into English at the time of the Reformation, and in particular the tremendously influential "Geneva Bible." The first edition was published 3 years before the King James Version (KJV), although the bibles had no relation. The original versions of the Douay-Rheims (hereafter DR) and the KJV also substantially differed in that the DR was a translation of Jerome's Vulgate Latin translation of the Greek (and therefore a translation of a translation) while the KJV was for the most part a translation of what is now known as the Textus Receptus edition of the Greek.

Later versions of the DR were revised to include more direct translations from the original Koine Greek (the language the New Testament scriptures were originally written in) and todays most commonly used English DR (the 1899 American version) is much closer than the original printing to the Greek. However, if you want to see the abiding influence of theolgy on translation in this version take a look for instance at Heb. 10:12 which in the DR is:
"But this man, offering one sacrifice for sins, for ever sitteth on the right hand of God"

The translation implies an ongoing never ending sacrifice, but the Greek, is outos de mian uper amartiwn prosenegkas  qusian eis to dianekes ekathisen ev dexia tou theou which translated into the English is: "but He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God" which is a big theological difference.

Anywho, like I said if you want to discuss bible translation and exegesis and whatnot in a separate thread, I'd be willing to do so.

- SEAGOON
SEAGOON aka Pastor Andy Webb
"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion... Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." - John Adams

Offline Siaf__csf

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2213
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #108 on: March 05, 2005, 04:28:57 PM »

Offline Holden McGroin

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 8591
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #109 on: March 05, 2005, 05:16:49 PM »
Quote
In the sphere of religion, as in other spheres, the things about which men are agreed are apt to be the things that are least worth holding; the really important things are the things about which men will fight."
- J. Gresham Machen  


"G-Dammit where's the beer I ordered?" (overheard just before the fight broke out.)
Holden McGroin LLC makes every effort to provide accurate and complete information. Since humor, irony, and keen insight may be foreign to some readers, no warranty, expressed or implied is offered. Re-writing this disclaimer cost me big bucks at the lawyer’s office!

Offline Lazerus

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2159
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #110 on: March 06, 2005, 03:28:33 AM »
Siaf__csf, just something to consider. The biblical stories that you are arguing against were written in a context that was viable and comprehensible to the audience. Their 'world' was limited to the area around them. The 'world' that was flooded could very well be just a small area to us. 'Every creature' could just as well be every creature that they knew about in their small geographical surroundings.

Literal translations of the bible will always lead to concrete arguments against it. What you need to understand is that the scriptures are either alegories, or stories of limited perspective.

2000 years from now people will think we were idiots. Self centered and unable to grasp the reality of the universe. Remember that in the early 1900's, scientists declared that they had discovered all there was to discover, and that scientific research was a waste. They were very wrong.

Alternate views are the way to go when it comes to analyzing anything. The damned good book isn't an exception.





tired, drunk, browbeaten Lazerus.l :cool:

Offline Siaf__csf

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2213
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #111 on: March 06, 2005, 09:44:45 AM »
Lazerus the reason why the book is the way it is now is because it was written by humans during decades, mostly based on ancient mythology which was translated to christianism. Just as christmas celebration was originally a pagan tradition untill christians adopted it.

storch

  • Guest
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #112 on: March 06, 2005, 10:12:55 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Lazerus the reason why the book is the way it is now is because it was written by humans during decades, mostly based on ancient mythology which was translated to christianism. Just as christmas celebration was originally a pagan tradition untill christians adopted it.


did you know that textual archeological discoveries have been analysised by skeptics attemping to prove your very point and have only been forced to report at how amazingly consistent the bible has been translated throughout time?

you are far off base with these biases.  do a little research of your own and try to prove your point convincingly.

Offline Siaf__csf

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2213
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #113 on: March 06, 2005, 10:23:49 AM »
Do me a favour and read the near century old analysis by ANDREW DICKSON WHITE
LL.D. (Yale), L.H.D. (Columbia), PH.DR. (Jena) (Late President and Professor of History at Cornell University)

He digs into the several inconsistensies within the bible. After you read the quite long article, return here and make your claim again.

You miss the point totally as I was not talking about the translations and/or copies but the actual writing process of the original.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2005, 10:31:06 AM by Siaf__csf »

Offline Leslie

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2212
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #114 on: March 06, 2005, 10:28:43 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Lazerus the reason why the book is the way it is now is because it was written by humans during decades, mostly based on ancient mythology which was translated to christianism. Just as christmas celebration was originally a pagan tradition untill christians adopted it.



I don't buy that.  But you gotta admit, at least folks are nicer to each other at that time of the year. :D




Les

Offline Siaf__csf

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2213
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #115 on: March 06, 2005, 10:32:12 AM »
I know it's only internet but here goes:

http://www.didyouknow.cd/xmas/xmashistory.htm

Offline DREDIOCK

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17773
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #116 on: March 06, 2005, 12:34:39 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Leslie
I don't buy that.  But you gotta admit, at least folks are nicer to each other at that time of the year. :D




Les


Actually today's style of Christmas celebration is one point I have to at least semi agree with Siaf on. It is the collection of various cultures that make up how we currently celebrate it.
I imagine a couple hundred years form now it will be even more different still.

But I gave up debating the subject with him as he provides little compelling logical arguments for himself that cant be shown an alternative is at the very least possible.
And refuses to see or I should say consider obvious alternative possibilities that even my 8 year old daughter could think of for herself
 And when alternative views or explanations are possible he just comes up with some other "but how about" or repeats the same thing you just debunked.

His best effort in our discussion at a logical and reasonable debate was to provide a link to a site which whose views has no claim of legitimacy or respectability or about as much claim as "The national Inquirer" or "Star Magazine"and whose primary concern seems to be that of getting rid of Bush.

In short it could have been written by anybody including himself and he points to it as though all in it were absolute fact when in reality its just a blog he happens to agree with that could have as I said been written by anyone.

As for myself I am far from a bible thumper and have no claims of being so.
I do however try to look at all possibilities and dont see the world as black or white.
I believe Creation and Evolution are both correct in some aspects and both wrong in others. I believe they in reality co exist. Or at least the possibility thereof

As for the odds against evolution. We all know that sometimes odds are beaten and simply because the "odds" are vastly against something happening doesn't mean it wont or didnt
If the odds are lets say 100 billion to 1  and there are 101 billion planets in the universe well then I'd say that its probably happened on one of those planets.
And just because something is beyond our current comprehension doesnt mean it wont or cant happen.
For example Try telling someone from ancient times we would be able to one day fly to the moon. or talk to someone thousands of miles away in an instant by talking into a little box in your hand and what do you think the reaction would be? What kind of odds do you think they would give you on that happening?
 Even as recently as a little over 100 years ago a news reporter once said something along the lines of "To think a man can build a machine he can fly in the air on is as rediculous as thinking one can strap themselves to a rocket and fly to the moon"

  I believe "Gods image" or Gods true image is a spiritual one and not physical, therefore evolution or natural adaptation through changing climate, inbreeding crossbreeding of species etc and  that spirit is passed on regardless of physical appearance is not only possible but IMO probable.

These are what I see as possabilities.
But there will always be some that have such tunnelvision can only see black or white and refuse to even consider other possibilities that no amount of reasonable or logical debate will ever change many of these peoples opinions no matter what.

Siaf is obviously one of these types,while not alone as Im sure there are plenty on the creation side that are the same way.  Therefore prolonged and continued debate is pointless.

Thank goodness all of mankind isnt like that or we would still be living in caves.
Death is no easy answer
For those who wish to know
Ask those who have been before you
What fate the future holds
It ain't pretty

Offline Siaf__csf

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2213
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #117 on: March 06, 2005, 12:52:52 PM »
Quote
In short it could have been written by anybody including himself and he points to it as though all in it were absolute fact when in reality its just a blog he happens to agree with that could have as I said been written by anyone.


Heh, the good thing about Bible is that you can open it up and verify every point made in the 'blog' as you call it. I dare you to do it.

It's interesting that you call the website of 'the center for the study of complex systems' the national inquirer or star magazine.

Quote
But I gave up debating the subject with him as he provides little compelling logical arguments for himself that cant be shown an alternative is at the very least possible.


You actually claimed that the flood theory was backed up by science. By that I guess you refer to the ice age and the resulting flooding. There's only one problem with that - the timeperiods don't match even by far. It's all covered also in the White writing. Please read it before you attack me.

What I see here is sudden panic and a resulting character attack when you suddenly realize you have no counter arguments to give as the text I provided was very thorough. Denial has been also characteristic through the history of theology. Nothing new there.

The 'how about' part was just an attempt to turn the discussion over to force you to think the issue in an irregular way. Break out the learned pattern and use your own brain for a change.

Quote
And refuses to see or I should say consider obvious alternative possibilities that even my 8 year old daughter could think of for herself


I can see how an 8 year old can think that way. You however should have progressed from that level.

If I can provide you with blatant inconsistencies and paradoxes in the scripture you're basing your faith on, doesn't that make you at least think and do research or is the blind faith still overcoming reason?

The comments like 'look at the birds and the trees, how can it be' sounds unbelievably naive and outright childish to me. It proves that the said person never questioned anything he was religiously taught in his life. Or simply just couldn't think complex enough.


http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/White/

Please read it.
« Last Edit: March 06, 2005, 01:02:06 PM by Siaf__csf »

storch

  • Guest
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #118 on: March 06, 2005, 01:01:12 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Do me a favour and read the near century old analysis by ANDREW DICKSON WHITE
LL.D. (Yale), L.H.D. (Columbia), PH.DR. (Jena) (Late President and Professor of History at Cornell University)

He digs into the several inconsistensies within the bible. After you read the quite long article, return here and make your claim again.

You miss the point totally as I was not talking about the translations and/or copies but the actual writing process of the original.


yawn.... yes yes the clever Mr. White.  a rabid antitheotic academic, first president of something or other no?.  where is he today?

do you know that the phophesies made in the Bible are 100% inerrant?

go read up on that then come back with a response.

Offline Siaf__csf

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2213
Evidence for life on Mars
« Reply #119 on: March 06, 2005, 01:02:54 PM »
Quote
where is he today?


Umm.. he died 1918. You didn't even bother to check who he is. Typical.

Quote
go read up on that then come back with a response.


I suggest you take the time to read the link I provided. It's very thorough and covers the whole issue far better than I ever could.

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/White/
« Last Edit: March 06, 2005, 01:43:26 PM by Siaf__csf »