Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Tank-Ace on February 04, 2014, 06:10:38 PM
-
See Rule #14
-
Public school textbooks are using the same word science for observational and historical science. They arbitrarily define science as naturalism and outlaw the supernatural.
Just started watching it and it's already turned into magic vs science debate. Really genius, there's no mention of supernatural magic in the science textbooks in public schools, and you just can't understand why?
-
I'm debating a 4 year old about the tooth fairy tomorrow.
Make sure you tune in!
-
I will say that Bill Nye smashed with the Science Hammer.
Absolutely infuriating to me that all of Ham's answers boiled down to "well, I just believe in god". And I'm religious myself!
-
What did you expect?
-
Go ahead and believe whatever you want, just not with my tax dollars in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.
-
Go ahead and believe whatever you want, just not with my tax dollars in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.
This. However you forgot separation of church and state. :aok
-
More like seperation of science and magic.
-
More like seperation of science and magic.
Basically, yes.
-
read it and weep:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx
-
More like seperation of science and magic.
lol, as if they aren't the same thing...
-
read it and weep:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx
That's a sad commentary on America today. I'm a Christian, but, if we listened to the church, we'd still believe the earth was flat and that the sun revolved around it. God doesn't intend that we use a man made book to prove anything about our faith, that's why it's called FAITH. If you have to use the book to justify your faith, you no longer have any.
-
(http://i1076.photobucket.com/albums/w460/Mar0100/nmBr9.jpg)
-
read it and weep:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/155003/hold-creationist-view-human-origins.aspx
Yes, it is sad.
ack-ack
-
Ham's graphic designer is pretty good. Never seen such a vapidly polished presentation. :)
-
We don't know crap. The most intelligent scientists of their time thought the Sun orbited the earth, the world was flat
and Columbus was first to discover America.
We are arrogant, we assume we know all. Hint: we are far from knowing about a lot of things.
As a whole....we've got a lot to learn.
At the time things did happen, we weren't there and have no conclusive proof on how the Pyramids were built,
Stonehenge etc. Get a grip and come back to earth. A lot we say we know is based on theory, no tangible proof.
Keep an open mind and deal with facts alone. We'll learn more.
-
We don't know crap. The most intelligent scientists of their time thought the Sun orbited the earth, the world was flat
and Columbus was first to discover America.
We are arrogant, we assume we know all. Hint: we are far from knowing about a lot of things.
As a whole....we've got a lot to learn.
At the time things did happen, we weren't there and have no conclusive proof on how the Pyramids were built,
Stonehenge etc. Get a grip and come back to earth. A lot we say we know is based on theory, no tangible proof.
Keep an open mind and deal with facts alone. We'll learn more.
Enlightening, thanks.
-
You've been watching too much Bugs Bunny. The earth was known to be rounds since ancient times. In fact the earth's circumference was first calculated correctly around 200 BC.
-
was that before or after they decided you would fall off the edge if you went too far out to sea?
-
A lot we say we know is based on theory, no tangible proof.
Right there is your problem, you don't know what a scientific theory is.
Also, who is we?
-
Supernatural?
Gibberish
As someone said "There are no ghosts in the ghetto"
I saw a three legged dog once :old:
-
Right there is your problem, you don't know what a scientific theory is.
it's a guess posed by someone with .phd tacked onto their name...that is all. the only thing that makes them correct is "scientific consensus" until someone else comes along to show they are erroneous.
-
The better we understand our universe, the better; I hold knowledge to be intrinsically good. Even if the current theories are not perfect, they much better than nothing, as they at least partially explain how our universe works. And they are magnitudes better than made up stories.
-
it's a guess posed by someone with .phd tacked onto their name...that is all. the only thing that makes them correct is "scientific consensus" until someone else comes along to show they are erroneous.
That is simply not true. Even so you have placed your finger on the reason creationism is not science. In your words no one can ever come along and show that it is erroneous as it is founded on the premise that the bible is literal and correct. It's explanation of the natural world is fixed and unchanging, it is not falsifiable, that is why it isn't science.
-
(http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130114160526/creepypasta/images/4/41/I-like-where-this-thread-is-going-20886067270.jpeg)
Seemed fitting regarding some of the replies.
-
And they are magnitudes better than made up stories.
you mean like percival lowell's story about mars being inhabited, which was accepted as "unassailable" in 1907?
That is simply not true. Even so you have placed your finger on the reason creationism is not science. In your words no one can ever come along and show that it is erroneous as it is founded on the premise that the bible is literal and correct. It's explanation of the natural world is fixed and unchanging, it is not falsifiable, that is why it isn't science.
you must have me mistaken for one of the "ignorant faithful". not even close, but i also don't believe the story about the fish whose descendants miraculously survived multiple extinction events and eventually built civilization as we know it.
-
Let the religion bashing begin!
-
Let the religion bashing begin!
Who is bashing religion? All I'm saying is creationism isn't science. That is all.
-
you must have me mistaken for one of the "ignorant faithful". not even close, but i also don't believe the story about the fish whose descendants miraculously survived multiple extinction events and eventually built civilization as we know it.
What did I say that makes you think that I think you are one of the ignorant faithful? I don't know what that means. You are entitled to believe what ever you want. I am only saying that creationism does not follow principals of scientific inquiry so it isn't science.
-
We don't know crap. The most intelligent scientists of their time thought the Sun orbited the earth, the world was flat
and Columbus was first to discover America.
We are arrogant, we assume we know all. Hint: we are far from knowing about a lot of things.
As a whole....we've got a lot to learn.
At the time things did happen, we weren't there and have no conclusive proof on how the Pyramids were built,
Stonehenge etc. Get a grip and come back to earth. A lot we say we know is based on theory, no tangible proof.
Keep an open mind and deal with facts alone. We'll learn more.
You are wrong about Columbus. There was an entire community of Portugese sailors and navigators who thought the World was round. They even had globes that depicted that areas that had so far been charted. This is where Columbus got many of his ideas and motivations.
-
You are wrong about Columbus. There was an entire community of Portugese sailors and navigators who thought the World was round. They even had globes that depicted that areas that had so far been charted. This is where Columbus got many of his ideas and motivations.
The issue during the time of Columbus wasn't whether or not the world was round, as you pointed out it was already known (Pythagorus first wrote about the Earth being round) and Columbus owned a copy of Ptolemy’s "Geography". The problem Columbus was facing wasn't whether the Earth was flat, but rather the size of the ocean he was planning to cross. Unfortunately for Columbus, he used incorrect math (Italian math) instead of Arabic math, which resulted in his figures being grossly incorrect. If he had used Arabic math, he would have accurately predicted the size of the ocean.
ack-ack
-
Right there is your problem, you don't know what a scientific theory is.
Also, who is we?
Theory....key word. And believe it or not I did grad college.
I've learned a great deal in 64 years, but still need to learn a great deal more.
I won't live that long, neither will you or anyone on this earth for that matter.
Probabilities are just that, more then likely possible but who knows for sure?
big difference between a probability and fact.
-
Theory....key word.
And one of the most misunderstood one outside the scientific community ;)
-
(http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20130114160526/creepypasta/images/4/41/I-like-where-this-thread-is-going-20886067270.jpeg)
Seemed fitting regarding some of the replies.
(http://www.wildcotton.com/img/FullSize/X232-Here-Dragons.png)
IN before the lock. :bolt:
-
That's a sad commentary on America today. I'm a Christian, but, if we listened to the church, we'd still believe the earth was flat and that the sun revolved around it. God doesn't intend that we use a man made book to prove anything about our faith, that's why it's called FAITH. If you have to use the book to justify your faith, you no longer have any.
actually the Bible in the Old testament clearly states the world is round..... :aok
-
you mean like percival lowell's story about mars being inhabited, which was accepted as "unassailable" in 1907?
Not familiar with it. But if it was based on any amount of data what so ever, even if its just visual observations of mars though a telescope and saying "looks sorta like its inhabited", its better than the bible.
-
Not familiar with it. But if it was based on any amount of data what so ever, even if its just visual observations of mars though a telescope and saying "looks sorta like its inhabited", its better than the bible.
well I will not disrespect HTC rules.....
ill just say this.....if you want to be blind....continue on with your route....
if you want to be knowledgeable....
find out why I say
666=WWW
that is FACT I am not making that up.....
666=WWW
-
Yes yes, Hebrew for 666 when translated. Forgive me if I ask what the relevance is.
-
Yes yes, Hebrew for 666 when translated. Forgive me if I ask what the relevance is.
you really dont see the connection?
is it coincidence....
that the Bible says everyone will accept this number....and now a days in almost every home across the world....
WWW is in their home?
if that in itself does not speak volumes.... nothing will.
-
Please don't tell me you're talking about the internet :huh.
-
Please don't tell me you're talking about the internet :huh.
oh I know.... heavens NO...... NOT the internet......
what the hell is wrong with you...Truth is right in your face and still you cant see it for what it is....
hey good luck with that....I am sure when you explain to our Father that the internet is at fault and you had NO IDEA...
im done with the thread....getting to close to breaking HTCs rules.
-
What's so special about a number and "www" being the same in Hebrew?
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26232318/carl-sagan-children.jpg)
-
Go ahead and believe whatever you want, just not with my tax dollars in violation of the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America.
your tax dollars were spent on filling the pothole in front of your house, move along :).
semp
-
What's so special about a number and "www" being the same in Hebrew?
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26232318/carl-sagan-children.jpg)
check PMs
and as far as that pic goes....I disagree...every child is born Naturally believing in GOD.
-
check PMs
and as far as that pic goes....I disagree...every child is born Naturally believing in GOD.
Really? When I was young I had no idea of who God was until my parents told me that I was a Catholic and had to believe in him. Lucky for me, I rarely did anything my parents told me to do.
ack-ack
-
Really? When I was young I had no idea of who God was until my parents told me that I was a Catholic and had to believe in him. Lucky for me, I rarely did anything my parents told me to do.
ack-ack
I highly doubt you remember being 2-3-4 years old....let alone what you even "thought" about.
-
was that before or after they decided you would fall off the edge if you went too far out to sea?
you have been fooled. when the legend becomes fact, print the legend. in school they teach about columbus based on a book that was fiction. you may want to read it some time.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Life_and_Voyages_of_Christopher_Columbus
semp
-
I highly doubt you remember being 2-3-4 years old....let alone what you even "thought" about.
I remember when my brother was born. I was 18 months old. my mom was surprised when I described the room and the position of the bed down to the footstep I had to use to look at my brother. i can describe the house I lived until I was two in down to the location of the rooms and positions of the beds and that was before my brother was born.
semp
-
did anyone make it through that? :confused: It made my body hurt just trying to watch it? :uhoh
I hope someone talked about dreams and intuition :old: :ahand :bolt:
-
did anyone make it through that?
I tried but the video was blocked here in Germany :D
-
I remember when my brother was born. I was 18 months old. my mom was surprised when I described the room and the position of the bed down to the footstep I had to use to look at my brother. i can describe the house I lived until I was two in down to the location of the rooms and positions of the beds and that was before my brother was born.
semp
not likely....more likely you heard the stories for so long they became memories to you...
-
Draw a circle as big as you can on a sheet of paper, that is all of the "true" knowledge in this world, in the universe!
inside that circle draw a small circle, about a quarter inch in diameter , that is what bill Nye knows,
now draw a smaller circle ,that is what Ken Ham knows!
Now tell me how either one knows anything or everything about exsistance in the universe, or even on the planet compared to all that is real and true?
Then explain why Albert Einstein believed, and if you think Bill Nye is smarter than him?
Then explain how any of it matters?
People believe what they want to believe , some for better, some not so much, I trust in the fact that whatever it is that is controlling my life, so far so good! I also believe that having faith in something bigger than your self cannot hurt you nearly as much as having faith in nothing at all,
All that said, I would bet that the earth is almost a hundred million years old , and that fact is relevant to my exsistance !
-
I have a few memories of my first year of life. I know they are memories because no one could have known. Th most vivid is this: My crib was in the living room of my parents apartment, right next to the inner wall. Above my crib was a small mantle with some pictures and other decorative items on it. One of these items was an abstract statue of a bird with a long craning neck. Outside the living room was a streetlight that shone some light into the living room... That bird cast a terribly scary shadow on the wall right above my crib, every single night. I could not have told anyone that, so no one could have told me.
-
I have a few memories of my first year of life. I know they are memories because no one could have known. Th most vivid is this: My crib was in the living room of my parents apartment, right next to the inner wall. Above my crib was a small mantle with some pictures and other decorative items on it. One of these items was an abstract statue of a bird with a long craning neck. Outside the living room was a streetlight that shone some light into the living room... That bird cast a terribly scary shadow on the wall right above my crib, every single night. I could not have told anyone that, so no one could have told me.
This is starting to sound like prof. Duncan's psycotherapy in the christmas claymation Community episode.
-
This is starting to sound like prof. Duncan's psycotherapy in the christmas claymation Community episode.
By far the worst episode of an otherwise brilliant show.
-
Season four aka the gas leak year episodes were all worse.
-
Draw a circle as big as you can on a sheet of paper, that is all of the "true" knowledge in this world, in the universe!
inside that circle draw a small circle, about a quarter inch in diameter , that is what bill Nye knows,
now draw a smaller circle ,that is what Ken Ham knows!
Now tell me how either one knows anything or everything about exsistance in the universe, or even on the planet compared to all that is real and true?
Then explain why Albert Einstein believed, and if you think Bill Nye is smarter than him?
Then explain how any of it matters?
People believe what they want to believe , some for better, some not so much, I trust in the fact that whatever it is that is controlling my life, so far so good! I also believe that having faith in something bigger than your self cannot hurt you nearly as much as having faith in nothing at all,
All that said, I would bet that the earth is almost a hundred million years old , and that fact is relevant to my exsistance !
excellent post
:aok
YOU are controlling your life ;) freewill
although I do believe everything happens for a reason.
-
I take that back they werent all worse.
-
ok here are some facts that you wont find in any book.....
everything happens for a reason.....
my dad was a very viscous man, he beat the friggen crap outta me...everyday..... until I started running away...
because of this I spent my entire juvenile life locked up....or living on the streets.....except for a couple times I got out and went to foster homes...and a group home....or escaped.
I went to prison at 18 for the first true crime I committed when I was 17,.....yet already had 7 years locked up....
by time I was 18 I hated GOD..... hated him with every ounce of what I was......as a matter of fact hate and anger is all that I knew....
if I never went to prison I would NOT have my kids....
if my dad never beat me I would not have gone to prison....
if I never went to juvi jail/prison I would not of been drawing my whole life....
fact is I met someone while I was in prison...I ran into him again after I got out....his girlfriend at the time...is my wife now and the mother of 6 of my kids.....tomorrow is our 21 years of being together......
LOVE is all thats important in this world......everything we NEED to live can hurt us.....kill us even....
yet LOVE which one does NOT need to live..... we can never get too much of....
the Love of my kids took me.... a man who should be a sociopath.....a man who had NO emotions but anger and hatred.....and showed me whats important....
LOVE is a word overly used in this world...but very few know what Love really is.
God is Love....how can I ever turn my back on Love/God.....
-
You turned your life around, perhaps in part due to the human parenting instinct, which is very powerful. You did that... If you need to project that accomplishment on someone else because you're suffering from guilt, then choose someone worthy of the praise, like your kids or your wife.
-
I think people miss the fundamental difference between these two. It's not about how smart these two men are, or how much they know. It's about the method they use to obtain their information. The difference is Bill Nye can use his process to make predictions based on the evidence at hand. You simply can't do that with the bible.
-
not likely....more likely you heard the stories for so long they became memories to you...
sure, since you dont have memories of your own you will assume that nobody else has.
semp
-
every child is born Naturally believing in GOD.
Evidence?
Please explain the following non-deity based religions:
Theravada Buddhism
Animism
Taoism
Bon
Mimamsa/Samkhya/Carvaka Hinduism
Jainism
and the presence of their ~1 billion adherents.
-
Draw a circle as big as you can on a sheet of paper, that is all of the "true" knowledge in this world, in the universe!
inside that circle draw a small circle, about a quarter inch in diameter , that is what bill Nye knows,
now draw a smaller circle ,that is what Ken Ham knows!
Now tell me how either one knows anything or everything about exsistance in the universe, or even on the planet compared to all that is real and true?
Then explain why Albert Einstein believed, and if you think Bill Nye is smarter than him?
Then explain how any of it matters?
People believe what they want to believe , some for better, some not so much, I trust in the fact that whatever it is that is controlling my life, so far so good! I also believe that having faith in something bigger than your self cannot hurt you nearly as much as having faith in nothing at all,
All that said, I would bet that the earth is almost a hundred million years old , and that fact is relevant to my exsistance !
Einstein was a deist. Or an agnostic. Or a pantheist. Or a "religious non-beliver", all by his own admission.
His 'god' for lack of a better term, was strucutre in the universe. He believed in the "god of Spinoza", impersonal and non-interventionist, if it exists at all.
Some relevant quotes:
“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.” (1954)
“My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment.” (1950)
“I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our own being.” (1949)
"I'm not an atheist, and I don't think I can call myself a pantheist. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written those books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child dimly suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn't know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of even the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws. Our limited minds grasp the mysterious force that moves the constellation" (1949)
-
Ink, faith and belief in science aren't mutually exclusive. Like wise, I don't have to hold the bible as a literal record of our history in order to believe.
Now you're free to believe as you like; but I will say that evidence is on my side.
-
the 6 "days" of creation...were millions and millions of human life spans....billions.....
I don't listen to what men say the Bible says...
I know our spirits inside of us......Love incarnate....... is eternal......
it will never be destroyed...
our life here on earth is a blink of an eye compared to forever......
me personally I would rather travel the billions and billions of universes..walk on the surface of the sun if I so choose...as a powerful spirit...that has NO time constraints....that has NO restrictions except what our creator....the hand that molded or bodies and our spirit put on us.....
then be stuck in a place forever without love...knowing full well it was MY choice that put me there.
-
"The fool has said in his heart, there is No God." :frown:
-
"The fool has said in his heart, there is No God." :frown:
Who is No God?
-
actually the Bible in the Old testament clearly states the world is round..... :aok
Here is one verse there are a few examples through out the book:
"It is he that sitteth upon the CIRCLE*
of the earth, and the inhabitants
thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the
heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent
to dwell in." --Isaiah 40:22
Job 26:10
He drew a circular horizon on the face of the waters,
At the boundary of light and darkness.
-
Here is one verse there are a few examples through out the book:
"It is he that sitteth upon the CIRCLE*
of the earth, and the inhabitants
thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the
heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent
to dwell in." --Isaiah 40:22
Job 26:10
He drew a circular horizon on the face of the waters,
At the boundary of light and darkness.
Isaiah....that is part of the dead sea scrolls.... :aok
good post BTW
-
(http://manonthelam.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Universum-Flat-Earth.jpg)
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-m7gTm2E2r8k/UOKWunmWOXI/AAAAAAABWcA/vTErR3G1kLs/s1600/7e5d24b6cc20b8918bbd7d7210b51b8f.jpg)
-
As a scientist and an atheist Jew all I can say is:
Jebus! how many times do we have to kill this god?
-
Here is one verse there are a few examples through out the book:
"It is he that sitteth upon the CIRCLE*
of the earth, and the inhabitants
thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the
heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent
to dwell in." --Isaiah 40:22
Job 26:10
He drew a circular horizon on the face of the waters,
At the boundary of light and darkness.
Am I supposed to drink the wine first cuz that does not offer ANY proof the world is round.
More like sic clues that are obvious in hindsight. :lol
-
I pity those who do not believe in God. How sad a life must be thinking it has no purpose and plan, that we are all just the result of random chance and that death is truly the end for us.
Belief has never been a problem for me personally. It's the faith part that has been difficult, but nothing in life worth having is easy I suppose.
-
actually the Bible in the Old testament clearly states the world is round..... :aok
I don't remember that part but I would not be surprised. People knew the world was round since at least a few hundred years B.C., more than a thousand years before the current version of the old testament and hundred of years before the earliest versions of it.
There are many indications for the curvature of the earth that even people in the bronze age could have figured out, and at least some did. The story about Columbus having to convince people that the world is round is total rubbish. What was arguable at the time was the exact circumference, which Columbus adopted the smallest estimate he could find in order to "sell" his journey.
-
Arbiter, I'm very fond of life and intend to live life to the fullest. I need no promise of an afterlife to enjoy this one life that I have. As another atheist once said: "The only position that leaves me with no cognitive dissonance is atheism. It is not a creed. Death is certain, replacing both the siren-song of Paradise and the dread of Hell. Life on this earth, with all its mystery and beauty and pain, is then to be lived far more intensely: we stumble and get up, we are sad, confident, insecure, feel loneliness and joy and love. There is nothing more; but I want nothing more." What makes me sad is thinking if there really is a plan, how sad that the plan involves hunger, sickness, misery and a cruel death for so many.
-
"People believed the world is flat" fallacy was just a 19th century mockery of out dated religious thinking, nothing more.
Aristotle and the ancient Greeks even knew it was round.
The mistakes back then were that they thought they were the centre and everything orbited earth.
-
Science: Matter and energy can not be created or destroyed just transformed. Where does your energy go when you die? Atheist's say it just goes Poof! Like Magic. :lol
There is no proof of anything, only mathematical consistency between theories, and consistency between theory and observation, until new observations contradict it. There is no proof that you exist, but some observations make it a credible hypothesis.
An education in physics is often like that. People tell you about firm, unbreakable rules and then later they say "well, that was just an approximation valid when such and such conditions are met and the real rule is this other thing". Then eventually you more or less catch up with some part of the leading edge of science and you get to participate in learning the new rules.
-
What do you mean by "your energy" ?
-
What do you mean by "your energy" ?
Your Brain's electrical impulses if you will. Your consciousness? Are we just shorted to ground when our blood ceases to pump? I have many questions science can't answer.
-
Your brain produces about 20-25 watts of electric energy when you're awake, or about enough to power a small light bulb. A bit less when you sleep. Your braincells produce energy by burning oxygen and nutrients (mostly hydrogen), in essence like a hydrogen fuel cell. This combustion is part of our metabolism and produces electricity and heat from chemical energy. When your braincells are deprived of oxygen and/or nutrients they stop producing electricity, and eventually you'll die. When you die the three different energies in your body (chemical energy, electricity and heat) dissipate into the environment around your body. The electricity becomes heat when the cells die and can no longer hold the potential differences. The human body is not a closed system, we leak energy to the surrounding environment all the time, mostly through loss of body heat.
I'm sure you have many questions science can't answer, but so what?
-
This thread went off the tracks a long time ago. It was about a debate with a guy who thinks that the bible is the best source of scientific evidence ever, and that children should learn about Noah's arc in science class.
-
Your brain produces about 20-25 watts of electric energy when you're awake, or about enough to power a small light bulb. A bit less when you sleep. Your braincells produce energy by burning oxygen and nutrients (mostly hydrogen), in essence like a hydrogen fuel cell. This combustion is part of our metabolism and produces electricity and heat from chemical energy. When your braincells are deprived of oxygen and/or nutrients they stop producing electricity, and eventually you'll die. When you die the three different energies in your body (chemical energy, electricity and heat) dissipate into the environment around your body. The electricity becomes heat when the cells die and can no longer hold the potential differences. The human body is not a closed system, we leak energy to the surrounding environment all the time, mostly through loss of body heat.
I'm sure you have many questions science can't answer, but so what?
so I take it you don't believe humans have a soul/spirit?
-
Religion and science can cooperate with one another, but neither side wants the other the dictate rule sets.
-
so I take it you don't believe humans have a soul/spirit?
That is a question I can't answer until someone gives me a clear definition of what a soul/spirit is.
-
This thread went off the tracks a long time ago. It was about a debate with a guy who thinks that the bible is the best source of scientific evidence ever, and that children should learn about Noah's arc in science class.
We all look to the writings from people in the past to learn more about what they thought and how they lived. The Bible is one record from the past that has many truths that should be learned and studied in school as much as Aristotle, Galileo, Isacc Newton, ect. But because of some people claiming it's a book of fiction and "magic" it's not given the respect it deserves in society.
The Bible is not the only place a record of a great flood exists. Many stories are based on fact though the details may elude us.
That is a question I can't answer until someone gives me a clear definition of what a soul/spirit is.
Science is the wrong tool to discuss Spiritual matters. it only can describe the Physical.
-
In that case the answer is: No.
-
That is a question I can't answer until someone gives me a clear definition of what a soul/spirit is.
the soul is our connection to all humanity...our connection to Yahaveh...it is where Love resides....its more then that....it is our conscience....our will to live....our "heart" if you will.....
I have had people try to tell me that "Love" is not real.....of course they had no kids.... :rofl
the only way I can "prove" that we have a Soul.....
ask any Parent (who has a conscience).....what happens to them when they see their child get hurt.....
a parent feels that pain even though the pain was not on our bodies...
not just Parents but anyone who LOVES someone else...they can feel them in their "heart".....
our Soul can not be destroyed by anything other than the creator.....
now I believe a soul can be twisted and corrupted.....
those people will never experience true Love, they will never inherit the kingdom of God....which is inside us......
"you will know them by their works."
-
Then the answer to your question is: No.
-
This thread went off the tracks a long time ago. It was about a debate with a guy who thinks that the bible is the best source of scientific evidence ever, and that children should learn about Noah's arc in science class.
lol, true. too bad people like Ham get called on to represent people of faith. like those moron white supremacists that get on jerry springer spouting "it's in the babble", "cuz gawd sayed so in the gawspels"...ignorant inbred turds that got dropped on their heads as babies. lol.
-
Soul,
Immaterial aspect or essence of a person, conjoined with the body during life and separable at death.
The concept of a soul is found in nearly all cultures and religions, though the interpretations of its nature vary considerably.
The ancient Egyptians conceived of a dual soul, one surviving death but remaining near the body, while the other proceeded to the realm of the dead. The early Hebrews did not consider the soul as distinct from the body, but later Jewish writers perceived the two as separate. Christian theology adopted the Greek concept of an immortal soul, adding the notion that God created the soul and infused it into the body at conception. In Islam the soul is believed to come into existence at the same time as the body but is everlasting and subject to eternal bliss or torment after the death of the body. In Hinduism each soul, or atman, was created at the beginning of time and imprisoned in an earthly body; at death the soul is said to pass to a new body according to the laws of karma. Buddhism negates the idea of a soul, asserting that any sense of an individual self is illusory.
Roman Greeks are the real Palestinians, :old:
:cheers:
-
Then the answer to your question is: No.
that would be a partially wrong answer and there is scientific evidence that shows there is some sort of energy force that exists within the body as we live and exits at the time of death. as to what it's called...some are willing to step on the bomb and call it the soul.
-
Slate
Myth:
a traditional story, esp. one concerning the early history of a people or explaining some natural or social phenomenon, and typically involving supernatural beings or events.
As the episode Cooperative Caligraphy reinforces, mythology is a universal anthropological phenomena.
To their credit most christian sects recognize the biblical biological and cosmological explanations as myths. The significant exception being the puritan branches in the US.
The bible says the supernatural did it. Supernatural is another word for magic. That's not dismissing, that's a fact. Nobody knows how magic works, if they did it wouldn't be supernatural. So answering the question, "how did this happen" with "the supernatural did it" is another way of saying that nobody knows. In my opinion, "nobody knows" isn't a scientific explanation.
-
Science: Matter and energy can not be created or destroyed just transformed. Where does your energy go when you die? Atheist's say it just goes Poof! Like Magic. :lol
My energy will go the same way my laptop energy goes when I shut it down.
Too bad I will not be as easy to reboot.
so I take it you don't believe humans have a soul/spirit?
I will not bother to ask for a definition of soul/spirit, because I know it will be too vague for me to understand it. However, going with the concept of some sort of individually unique eternal entity, how does it work in religion exactly? There is a pool of new souls that wait to take their short turn on this world and then get sorted out to eternity in heaven/hell?
This brings up so many questions!
How long will this continue? until the massiah comes? and what then, will there be souls in the pool that didn't get to try their mortal life before the massiah came? or are souls created as needed?
If whether or not the massiah comes depends on the behavior of current mortal souls, does that mean that being bad causes more souls to be created because the end-of-times was delayed?
What about souls that were put in a body of a deformed fetus and died hours after birth? do they get a new ride?
Did Neanderthals have souls? did they get to the same heaven/hell as us? because I'd really like to meet one.
and so much more
-
Then the answer to your question is: No.
that is sad.
you have never felt the pain of someone else?
has your life been so screwed up that you absolutely disbelieve any aspect of Love or God?
God is Love...if you could "see" Love you would see God.
I honestly pity you.
-
Religion Vs. Science
Test one : Reality
Religion = Faith = Fail
Science = Observed = more questions = Fail
Test two : Whats for dinner
Religion = Kill = Yum
Science = Kill = Yum
Test Three : Its Raining
Religion = Faith = Build a house
Science = Particle interaction = Build a house
Test Results = Its a Push!
:cheers:
-
Soul,
Immaterial aspect or essence of a person, conjoined with the body during life and separable at death.
The concept of a soul is found in nearly all cultures and religions, though the interpretations of its nature vary considerably.
The ancient Egyptians conceived of a dual soul, one surviving death but remaining near the body, while the other proceeded to the realm of the dead. The early Hebrews did not consider the soul as distinct from the body, but later Jewish writers perceived the two as separate. Christian theology adopted the Greek concept of an immortal soul, adding the notion that God created the soul and infused it into the body at conception. In Islam the soul is believed to come into existence at the same time as the body but is everlasting and subject to eternal bliss or torment after the death of the body. In Hinduism each soul, or atman, was created at the beginning of time and imprisoned in an earthly body; at death the soul is said to pass to a new body according to the laws of karma. Buddhism negates the idea of a soul, asserting that any sense of an individual self is illusory.
Ahhh, thanks for the explanation. You posted this while I was typing my other reply.
And now after reviewing the list above comes the inevitable question:
"How the F did any of them know that?"
I mean, what, people 2000 years ago were smarter? god used to walk around and explain these things? BS! they did what every child does when you ask him about something that interests him, but he does not understand - he makes up! and when different people in different places in the world make things up, they make up slightly different things and we end up with the mess described above.
Now what am I supposed to do with my soul? or perhaps my two souls? stay with the body? go towards the light? consult my karma and crawl into a new body?
-
Ink, There is no need to pity me, but thank you for your consideration. I feel the pain of others. I have feelings... I just don't see them as a soul or spirit or anything beyond the natural world. My country is about 70% atheist, and we love our children very much.
-
that would be a partially wrong answer and there is scientific evidence that shows there is some sort of energy force that exists within the body as we live and exits at the time of death. as to what it's called...some are willing to step on the bomb and call it the soul.
My answer is still: No. I don't believe in a "soul" or "spirit" that cannot be defined by the parameters of the natural world. When scientists speak of the soul (if at all), it's usually in a materialistic context, or treated as a poetic synonym for the mind. Everything knowable about the "soul" can be learned by studying the functioning of the brain. In their view, neuroscience is the only branch of scientific study relevant to understanding the soul. Of course, most spiritual people view the soul as emphatically more definitive than the scientific concept. It's considered the incorporeal essence of a person, and is said to be immortal and transcendent of material existence. I don't believe in that.
-
Double post...
-
Ink, There is no need to pity me, but thank you for your consideration. I feel the pain of others. I have feelings... I just don't see them as a soul or spirit or anything beyond the natural world. My country is about 70% atheist, and we love our children very much.
and this is exactly why this world is still going...
Yahaveh is long suffering....he does not want to lose any of his children...so he will let us continue destroying ourselves letting us think we can rule our selves until we go so far as to destroy everything....
then he will put a stop to it....
personally I think it is over due....but I am not the creator nor do I think as him....I am just the clay....I have no business to tell the molder what to do with his creations.....
-
Never understood peoples' need to discuss stuff like this. Has there ever been a case, particularly on the internet, where one of the people on either side of one of these discussions went, "Y'know what? You're absolutely right!" I bet if there ever has, the number of cases could be counted on one hand.
We're playing with ourselves, nothing more. With that said, before the lock, who doesn't enjoy a bit of that now and then? :D
that is sad.
you have never felt the pain of someone else?
has your life been so screwed up that you absolutely disbelieve any aspect of Love or God?
This right here is the attitude that irks me to the deepest level. Not necessarily directed toward the individuals that hold this belief, but more toward the hubris of the idea that if you aren't part of belief system X, this fundamental part of humanity is not possible for you. That's the kind of thinking that can and often does plant the seed for coming to the conclusion that people who do not believe as you do are subhuman.
I assure you, Ink. The full range of human emotion is available to people regardless of whether they believe in God or not.
Wiley.
-
Not familiar with it. But if it was based on any amount of data what so ever, even if its just visual observations of mars though a telescope and saying "looks sorta like its inhabited", its better than the bible.
The brilliant thing about science is that it openly admits it knows squat, and it will change it's mind if the evidence suggests it needs to.
I was very unsure about this debate, but Ken Ham dropped the ball horribly. Normally he performs a fantastic Gish Gallop that makes any scientist talking to him look indecisive and makes science look wishy-washy and ill-defined and incapable of providing the "facts" necessary to convince people to "believe" in science. Bill Nye was really well prepared and stuck mostly to his guns and used his years of experience as a performer and educator to make Ken Ham fall back on the old, "I read a book" excuse.
-
but he does not understand - he makes up! and when different people in different places in the world make things up, they make up slightly different things and we end up with the mess described above.
Now what am I supposed to do with my soul? or perhaps my two souls? stay with the body? go towards the light? consult my karma and crawl into a new body?
Essentially the point of my post.... However I did like the christian part where they just copy the Greeks and add some stuff ..So and So Said.... :rofl
It's your soul you do what you want with it... :)
-
and this is exactly why this world is still going...
Yahaveh is long suffering....he does not want to lose any of his children...so he will let us continue destroying ourselves letting us think we can rule our selves until we go so far as to destroy everything....
then he will put a stop to it....
personally I think it is over due....but I am not the creator nor do I think as him....I am just the clay....I have no business to tell the molder what to do with his creations.....
None of that makes any sense to me.
-
and this is exactly why this world is still going...
Yahaveh is long suffering....he does not want to lose any of his children...so he will let us continue destroying ourselves letting us think we can rule our selves until we go so far as to destroy everything....
then he will put a stop to it....
personally I think it is over due....but I am not the creator nor do I think as him....I am just the clay....I have no business to tell the molder what to do with his creations.....
Yahaveh/Jehova's witness?
-
Now what am I supposed to do with my soul? (...) go towards the light?
(http://www.pxleyes.com/images/contests/locomotive/fullsize/light-at-the-end-of-a-tunnel-4cd5ad021e13f.jpg)
-
(http://www.pxleyes.com/images/contests/locomotive/fullsize/light-at-the-end-of-a-tunnel-4cd5ad021e13f.jpg)
No no, its Buddha. He's reached critical mass and started thermonuclear fusion.
-
My answer is still: No. I don't believe in a "soul" or "spirit" that cannot be defined by the parameters of the natural world. When scientists speak of the soul (if at all), it's usually in a materialistic context, or treated as a poetic synonym for the mind. Everything knowable about the "soul" can be learned by studying the functioning of the brain. In their view, neuroscience is the only branch of scientific study relevant to understanding the soul. Of course, most spiritual people view the soul as emphatically more definitive than the scientific concept. It's considered the incorporeal essence of a person, and is said to be immortal and transcendent of material existence. I don't believe in that.
not that i'm saying what you believe is wrong but, if we were to follow the logic of being defined by the parameters of the natural world, plants would not be classified as alive in any sense. think about it...
-
Sure they would. Plants are alive, because we say so. "Life" is just a human definition of complex chemical processes. Nothing more.
Oh, and that definition isn't terribly specific btw. There is a lot of discussion in the scientific community of just where to draw the line.
-
None of that makes any sense to me.
I hate to say it...but I am not surprised.
I do not say that in disrespect....
"....Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance"
Yahaveh/Jehova's witness?
no "J" in Hebrew...it is Yahaveh.....and jesus is also wrong...his name is Yeshua.....
if you could find an early(very early say 1611) KJV Bible the name "jesus" is no where in it...the word used is "Iesus" a translation of Yeshua...
the one thing I do agree with the Jahovehs witness...is the fact that Yeshua, never died on a "cross" he was pinned to a tree.(the greek word for cross IIRC is "stauros" which means "stake" the cross was a pagan symbol the catholics brought into their religion...
but they call him jesus just like the rest of the world....and they know that Jahoveh is incorrect...but humans are stubborn creatures.
-
No it is in no way disrespectful to call me evil and tell me I'm going to burn in hell for not believing in your God. If I were to be frightened by the threat of damnation I would have to do some considerable research into which Hell is the worst... Because if I choose to worship your God then I will surely be dammed by a hundred other Gods, and their followers.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26232318/1512772_619755484726880_1924539286_n.jpg)
-
I hate to say it...but I am not surprised.
I do not say that in disrespect....
"....Above all, you must understand that in the last days scoffers will come, scoffing and following their own evil desires. 4 They will say, “Where is this ‘coming’ he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation.” 5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water. 6 By these waters also the world of that time was deluged and destroyed. 7 By the same word the present heavens and earth are reserved for fire, being kept for the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
8 But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day. 9 The Lord is not slow in keeping his promise, as some understand slowness. Instead he is patient with you, not wanting anyone to perish, but everyone to come to repentance"
no "J" in Hebrew...it is Yahaveh.....and jesus is also wrong...his name is Yeshua.....
if you could find an early(very early say 1611) KJV Bible the name "jesus" is no where in it...the word used is "Iesus" a translation of Yeshua...
the one thing I do agree with the Jahovehs witness...is the fact that Yeshua, never died on a "cross" he was pinned to a tree.(the greek word for cross IIRC is "stauros" which means "stake" the cross was a pagan symbol the catholics brought into their religion...
but they call him jesus just like the rest of the world....and they know that Jahoveh is incorrect...stubborn creatures.
As you point out, there are problems with books translated numerous times, especially when we are talking about poetry.
-
No it is in no way disrespectful to call me evil and tell me I'm going to burn in hell for not believing in your God. If I were to be frightened by the threat of damnation I would have to do some considerable research in which Hell is the worst... Because if I choose to worship your God then I will surely be dammed by a hundred other Gods, and their followers.
This.
INK, you strongly believe you are correct. But so do many others who believe in a god or many gods that share nothing with your narrow interpretation of him. They all believe they are right, and many also have a book explaining the origins of our world. They are all just about as likely to be correct.
Now if you believe god gave us free will, it must also follow that god will accept our choices, and act in his own time regardless of our choices. If this is not the case, and he is waiting for us all to accept what you purport to be the truth, he would not have given us free will. He'll also more than likely be waiting until the last human dies.
Out of curiosity, how would you reconcile the existence of extraterrestrial life? Given the size of the universe, its VERY probable we have some company somewhere. But lets say that hypothetically we find sentient life on a world in the Epsilon Eridani system.
-
Out of curiosity, how would you reconcile the existence of extraterrestrial life? Given the size of the universe, its VERY probable we have some company somewhere. But lets say that hypothetically we find sentient life on a world in the Epsilon Eridani system.
i can answer that one but right now it's just a theory...plenty of circumstantial evidence exists on our planet, just not enough to conclusively say one way or the other.
Sure they would. Plants are alive, because we say so. "Life" is just a human definition of complex chemical processes. Nothing more.
Oh, and that definition isn't terribly specific btw. There is a lot of discussion in the scientific community of just where to draw the line.
so you believe plants are alive yet the idea of an energy or force that exists within all living organisms isn't believable?
-
No it is in no way disrespectful to call me evil and tell me I'm going to burn in hell for not believing in your God. If I were to be frightened by the threat of damnation I would have to do some considerable research into which Hell is the worst... Because if I choose to worship your God then I will surely be dammed by a hundred other Gods, and their followers.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/26232318/1512772_619755484726880_1924539286_n.jpg)
once again you do not understand what was said.....
that verse is to show why Yahaveh is long suffering.....
if you took it as directed at you personally ......nothing I can do about that....
-----------------------------------------------------------------
I have a narrow interpretation of God..... :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
thats funny dude.
do any of you actually read what is typed or do you pick a word here and there and assume what was meant....
well no matter to me I did my job...if anyone wants to actually have a convo that isn't full of idiotic remarks and full of assumptions PM me....
otherwise I will not reply in this thread again.
-
hey Ink, i have a quick question before you go...
-
An energy or "life force" that exists outside the realm of the physical world? No, that is not believable.
-
I have a narrow interpretation of God..... :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl
yes
thats funny dude.
okay
do any of you actually read what is typed or do you pick a word here and there and assume what was meant....
yes, we just disagree with what you type.
well no matter to me I did my job...if anyone wants to actually have a convo that isn't full of idiotic remarks and full of assumptions PM me....
otherwise I will not reply in this thread again.
That would probably be for the best.
-
No Ink, I don't take it personally. :)
-
An energy or "life force" that exists outside the realm of the physical world? No, that is not believable.
even if there is tangible evidence that it exists? just like anything else in science, it just depends on whether or not you believe the source...
-
(https://scontent-a-sea.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/t1/1797508_759372680740379_1334605950_n.png)
Thread can be locked now :aok
On a side note...it is truly, honestly SCARY to me that someone who is as clearly delusional and mentally unbalanced as ink has children to raise.
The gibberish in this thread is bad enough, but when added to all of his other posts about beating up people who argue with him on the internet, and taking out moving trucks with flying kicks... :uhoh
edit: oh and...just because I love this quote
"Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too?" - Douglas Adams
-
even if there is tangible evidence that it exists? just like anything else in science, it just depends on whether or not you believe the source...
False. Science is not authoritarian and its not just a matter of opinion.
Science needs to be observable, testable, repeatable and falsifiable.
If it doesn't comport with reality, its not science.
-
(https://scontent-a-sea.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/t1/1797508_759372680740379_1334605950_n.png)
On a side note...it is truly, honestly SCARY to me that someone who is as clearly delusional and mentally unbalanced as ink has children to raise.
You can go fuq yourself, bringing anyone's children into it is messed up.
-
False. Science is not authoritarian and its not just a matter of opinion.
Science needs to be observable, testable, repeatable and falsifiable.
If it doesn't comport with reality, its not science.
do you view paleontology to be a science? how about psychology? or archeology?
-
You can go fuq yourself, bringing anyone's children into it is messed up.
I'm pretty sure ink already started it, when he implied that those of us who don't believe in God can't really love our kids
:angel:
-
On a side note...it is truly, honestly SCARY to me that someone who is as clearly delusional and mentally unbalanced as ink has children to raise.
The gibberish in this thread is bad enough, but when added to all of his other posts about beating up people who argue with him on the internet, and taking out moving trucks with flying kicks... :uhoh
if it was your intention to prove there are no limits to human stupidity, you hit a home run...
-
even if there is tangible evidence that it exists? just like anything else in science, it just depends on whether or not you believe the source...
Are you referring to the for-some-reason-still-brought-up 1901 experiments where an American doctor recorded a minute loss of mass upon death of patients that no one else has been able to reproduce in a reliable fashion in the past 113 years?
If not I'd actually be really curious about this
-
if it was your intention to prove there are no limits to human stupidity, you hit a home run...
What a surprise, the supporter of religion resorts to insults and hatred towards someone with a different point of view.
Imagine that!
To forestall any response suggesting that I was insulting ink - I really wasn't. Everything in my post was a fact, in the same way that science tries to only deal in facts. I truly do find it scary. He clearly is delusional and unstable based on his posts in this and other threads.
-
What a surprise, the supporter of religion resorts to insults and hatred towards someone with a different point of view.
Imagine that!
To forestall any response suggesting that I was insulting ink - I really wasn't. Everything in my post was a fact, in the same way that science tries to only deal in facts. I truly do find it scary. He clearly is delusional and unstable based on his posts in this and other threads.
You sound so dumb sometimes.
It's not a fact that Ink is anything, its all your opinion and perspective.
-
You sound so dumb sometimes.
It's not a fact that Ink is anything, its all your opinion and perspective.
Ummm....he believes in things that are demonstrably not true. That's delusional. That's like, the definition of what delusional is :rofl
Being mentally unbalanced is a pre-requisite for being delusional. Even without considering all the evidence from other threads where he freaks out and threatens to beat people up, or tells stories about things that are clearly either delusions, or the fabrications of a pathological liar...that is still a fact.
-
What a surprise, the supporter of religion resorts to insults and hatred towards someone with a different point of view.
Imagine that!
To forestall any response suggesting that I was insulting ink - I really wasn't. Everything in my post was a fact, in the same way that science tries to only deal in facts. I truly do find it scary. He clearly is delusional and unstable based on his posts in this and other threads. Cold hard facts.
what insults or hatred? i was simply stating cold hard fact...if you cannot handle statement of fact, then maybe this isn't the right discussion for you. there is a discussion about trains that may be more suitable...
Are you referring to the for-some-reason-still-brought-up 1901 experiments where an American doctor recorded a minute loss of mass upon death of patients that no one else has been able to reproduce in a reliable fashion in the past 113 years?
If not I'd actually be really curious about this
nothing so mundane. i'm just talking about the research that has been conducted over the years regarding the biological energy field or the so called aura if you will.
-
nothing so mundane. i'm just talking about the research that has been conducted over the years regarding the biological energy field or the so called aura if you will.
such as
-
do you view paleontology to be a science? how about psychology? or archeology?
Psychology and paleontology are scientific disciplines (I worked in the field of psychology for several years). They use the scientific method to produce results. The work they produce is observable, testable, repeatable and fasifiable, otherwise its not considered accurate.
Archeology has a foot in the camps of science and humanities. It uses scientific methods for much of its work, but also relies on histories and human cultural studies and interactions, so cannot be considered as a 'science' alone.
Science is not a matter of which sources you chose to believe, that's just bias. Science is a method of determining the explanation that best fits the evidence. Its the best and most reliable method of doing this that humankind has developed.
Does it get everything right? No. All answers in science are tentative and subject to be overturned, even the 'laws' (as they are descriptive, not proscriptive). Thus, Copernicus overturned Ptolmey, Einstein overturned Newton, uniformism overturned catastrophism and Darwin disproved Lamarck. Science often works by people trying to break the work of others (often kindly known as peer review ;))
Now, if you can provide a peer reviewed study on 'biological auras', that'd be great.
-
Read Rene Descartes.
"cogito ergo sum"
Like some religions, the current liberal green movement if very cultish. In religions, you can't be too holy. In the lib green movement, you can't be too green.
"go 100% green, kill yourself." (I made that up)
-
Read Rene Descartes.
"cogito ergo sum"
Like some religions, the current liberal green movement if very cultish. In religions, you can't be too holy. In the lib green movement, you can't be too green.
"go 100% green, kill yourself." (I made that up)
Haven't we de-railed the thread enough already? Do we have to make it a 'right wing vs liberal' trainwreck as well? ;/
-
It's obvious to me that no one here watches the history channel,if you did you would clearly know that it was the aliens that started all this! :neener:
Politics and religion are verboten here but all I have to say is Man made God in his own image and found it was good,religion is the opiate of the masses.....
Sry Roy but I couldnt help myself! :O
:salute
-
Ummm....he believes in things that are demonstrably not true. That's delusional.
So you insulting him and calling him delusional is any better than the behaviors you assign to him? But I guess that is just your highly "rational" mind at work I guess.
:rolleyes:
-
It's obvious to me that no one here watches the history channel,if you did you would clearly know that it was the aliens that started all this! :neener:
Politics and religion are verboten here but all I have to say is Man made God in his own image and found it was good,religion is the opiate of the masses.....
Sry Roy but I couldnt help myself! :O
:salute
(http://joelmturner.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/ancient-aliens.jpg)
-
So you insulting him and calling him delusional is any better than the behaviors you assign to him?
If you call someone with no hair 'bald', is that insulting them, or stating a fact?
If you call someone who is morbidly obese 'fat', is that insulting them, or stating a fact?
If you call someone who writes the following 'a delusional lunatic', is that insulting them, or stating a fact?
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,358885.msg4759952.html#msg4759952
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,358885.msg4759860.html#msg4759860
http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,358885.msg4759984.html#msg4759984
"666=WWW
that is FACT I am not making that up.....
666=WWW"
:rofl
-
Psychology and paleontology are scientific disciplines (I worked in the field of psychology for several years). They use the scientific method to produce results. The work they produce is observable, testable, repeatable and fasifiable, otherwise its not considered accurate.
Archeology has a foot in the camps of science and humanities. It uses scientific methods for much of its work, but also relies on histories and human cultural studies and interactions, so cannot be considered as a 'science' alone.
Science is not a matter of which sources you chose to believe, that's just bias. Science is a method of determining the explanation that best fits the evidence. Its the best and most reliable method of doing this that humankind has developed.
Does it get everything right? No. All answers in science are tentative and subject to be overturned, even the 'laws' (as they are descriptive, not proscriptive). Thus, Copernicus overturned Ptolmey, Einstein overturned Newton, uniformism overturned catastrophism and Darwin disproved Lamarck. Science often works by people trying to break the work of others (often kindly known as peer review ;))
so science can be wrong regardless of how many people believe whatever theory is being postulated at the time. and it can boil down to being a matter of which sources you choose to believe, especially in the fields of physics, archeology and astronomy to name a few. take the field of physics for example, string theory vs loop quantum gravity.
psychology is the one field i find to be the most subjective of all fields. yet, people readily jump on one bandwagon theory flavor of the month after another. it's no wonder people are messed up in the skull.
-
"You're delusional."
"No, you're delusional."
"no, you are."
"uh uh, you are."
-
(http://images.sodahead.com/polls/001788259/583270842_71036_284758636335_109748_n_answer_2_xlarge.jpeg)
-
The concept of a soul is found in nearly all cultures and religions, though the interpretations of its nature vary considerably.
Argument from popularity.
The concept of dragons is found in nearly all cultures and mythologies, though the interpretations of their nature vary considerably.
Which is more real then, a dragon or a soul?
-
It's funny the "scientists" in here leave no room for possibilities. Science is all about possibilities...
-
Science is all about possibilities...
Spot on :aok That's why professional fence sitters (also known as agnostics) like myself keep an open mind about the existence of some kind of omnipotent being, or an afterlife. As soon as there is some kind of evidence to support it, we'll quite happily change our minds.
On the other hand, believing in something despite piles of evidence to the contrary (Earth is 6000 years old, intelligent design, etc) is just idiotic. Or, 'faith', if you prefer that term.
-
Spot on :aok That's why professional fence sitters (also known as agnostics) like myself keep an open mind about the existence of some kind of omnipotent being, or an afterlife. As soon as there is some kind of evidence to support it, we'll quite happily change our minds.
On the other hand, believing in something despite piles of evidence to the contrary (Earth is 6000 years old, intelligent design, etc) is just idiotic. Or, 'faith', if you prefer that term.
Thank you. My expectations of a response without sarcasm and an air of superiority were low. Well done.
-
so science can be wrong regardless of how many people believe whatever theory is being postulated at the time.
Yes. Science is always tentative.
and it can boil down to being a matter of which sources you choose to believe, especially in the fields of physics, archeology and astronomy to name a few. take the field of physics for example, string theory vs loop quantum gravity.
No. That's false. You don't get to pick and chose your facts in science and you don't get to chose some sources and ignore others (otherwise, you end up looking like Deepak Choopra, or Michael Behe in Kitzmiller v. Dover). String theory and loop gravity are theoretical frameworks, not properly graduated theories.
You do know there is a difference between the popular usage of the word 'theory' and the scientific definition 'theory', don't you?
psychology is the one field i find to be the most subjective of all fields. yet, people readily jump on one bandwagon theory flavor of the month after another. it's no wonder people are messed up in the skull.
"People" =/= science. Just because popular opinion about particular psychological theories oscilates and people have subjective interpretations of those theories, doesn't mean that the science is incorrect.
-
even if there is tangible evidence that it exists? just like anything else in science, it just depends on whether or not you believe the source...
No tangible evidence exists, thus I have no confidence in anyone claiming there is such a thing.
-
It's funny the "scientists" in here leave no room for possibilities. Science is all about possibilities...
Sure, but all we need is evidence.
Its possible that there's a teapot orbiting the sun in between Earth and Mars, but the time to believe that is when I'm presented with evidence, not with assertion.
-
Sure, but all we need is evidence.
Its possible that there's a teapot orbiting the sun in between Earth and Mars, but the time to believe that is when I'm presented with evidence, not with assertion.
I'm sure a fine mind like yours is recognized in your scientific community by using such analogies as fine tools of debate. Such a credibility builder
-
I'm sure a fine mind like yours is recognized in your scientific community by using such analogies as fine tools of debate. Such a credibility builder
As debating tools go, it sure beats 'because the Bible says...'
Speaking of debating tools, has anyone asked Bill Nye what that was like for him? *ba-dum tish*
-
As debating tools go, it sure beats 'because the Bible says...'
Speaking of debating tools, has anyone asked Bill Nye what that was like for him? *ba-dum tish*
I believe his words were "deeply disturbing".
-
I'm sure a fine mind like yours is recognized in your scientific community by using such analogies as fine tools of debate. Such a credibility builder
Its not my analogy. Russel's Teapot is a rather famous example (at least in philisopy, apologetics and science) used when discussing the burden of proof and unsubstantiated/unfalsifiable claims. Others of the same ilk would include the invisible pink unicorn, Sagan's dragon and the intangible red ribbon.
Its an example that those making the claims (i.e there is a god(s), soul, dragon or teapot) are required to support them with evidence. Otherwise, there is no rational reason to believe the claims.
-
The religious debate is a lose-lose. Asking an atheist to look for a god is like asking a thief to find a policeman. I do laugh at the scientific hypocrisy though...and then seeing them stumble about defending it...oh the possibilities.
-
Spot on :aok That's why professional fence sitters (also known as agnostics) like myself keep an open mind about the existence of some kind of omnipotent being, or an afterlife. As soon as there is some kind of evidence to support it, we'll quite happily change our minds.
On the other hand, believing in something despite piles of evidence to the contrary (Earth is 6000 years old, intelligent design, etc) is just idiotic. Or, 'faith', if you prefer that term.
Agnosticism addresses knowledge ('knowledge that', rather than 'knowledge of', which is awarness of a concept). Theism addresses belief, specifically belief in a god or gods. These are two different questions.
Thus, you can have the following:
Theist gnostic - "I believe and I know that a god/gods exists"
Theist agnostic - "I believe a god exists, but I don't know if a god exists or not"
Atheist agnostic - "I don't believe a god exists, but I don't know if a god existis or not"
Atheist gnostic - "I don't believe and I know that no god/gods exists"
With theism, there are only two possibilities: either you believe, or you don't.
Think about a jar of coins. There is either an even or an odd number of coins in the jar, just two possibilities.
The theist position is one of a positive claim, such as: "There is an even number of coins in the jar". This is analogous to the claims "There is a god/gods".
The atheist response is one of skepticism. The response is: "No evidence has been given to support the claim that there is an even number of coins, therefore I don't believe it".
Note that this is not a positive claim. The atheist is not rejecting the possibility of there being an even number of coins ("A god existis"), nor are they asserting that there is an odd number of coins ("No god exisits"). All they are asserting is that the positive claim has not meet its burden of proof and been substantiated and thus they don't believe it.
-
St George slayed the last Dragon. :old:
(http://resources.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/stgeorge/festival.jpg)
Thank your lucky stars! :old:
-
"I think fish is nice, but then I think that rain is wet, so who am I to judge?"
-
St George slayed the last Dragon. :old:
(http://resources.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/customs/stgeorge/festival.jpg)
Thank your lucky stars! :old:
I though I did that when I shot down FBDragon in a friendly fire incident in FSO :headscratch:.
-
FBDragon is a wannabe after fame... :old:
However loriettes are yet to make an acceptable rhyme or song, the closest they got was "Puff the Magic Dragon"... and no one is happy :old:
Like Icarus, I hope his fake wings melt :old: