|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
posted November 14, 2008 03:02 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 15:04, 14 Nov 2008.
|
If my post wasn't an answer to the bird issue (wasn't even a question) then you are just selectively taking only answers that you want.
If someone says "bats are not birds right?"
should I say "yes they are"
since that would have more weight, at least count as an answer, compared to my post above? 
Why do I have to always detail my answer and explain why my answer and why I think it is so (for example, "Yes they are" has no explanation and no details at all, but if I say "Yes they are, because xyz..." then I do have, but it seems it won't be considered an answer). If detailing an answer makes it not belong as an answer anymore then I think it's either complete waste of time on my behalf, or a provocation to encourage posters to act like FortressFan, without explaining anything at all... (since otherwise they are ignored it seems).  (ok it was a bit sarcastic don't take it so seriously )
tell me what exactly did my post not address regarding that "issue" (with the birds ofc)
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted November 15, 2008 09:45 AM |
|
|
Hey The Death, I take it back, God is real.
I met him.
We ate sandwiches and talked about the latest Radiohead album.
The times, they are a-changin'
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted November 15, 2008 02:28 PM |
|
|
LOL  
don't make fun of that though, Gootch "talked" with God and he was serious (as an atheist obviously)  (can't remember the page in this thread tho)
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
TitaniumAlloy
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Professional
|
|
posted November 16, 2008 02:08 AM |
|
|
|
I am serious
|
|
Celfious
Promising
Legendary Hero
From earth
|
|
posted November 16, 2008 02:43 AM |
|
|
I had a near god experience just yesterday, I somehow found myself at ant.com and the web searches displayed that I had searched VIA Google were like this
The power of the dark side
"Dark Messiah of might"
"My name"
"This other guys name that tried to kill me in quotes"
"Do we need meat" Harvard
And the list went on, and I thought it was about time to meet god for real.
I thought it was like empty streets of NYC in devils advocate.
I thought it was Celfious meets "follow the white rabbit" in rl
etc
____________
What are you up to
|
|
The_Gootch
Honorable
Supreme Hero
Kneel Before Me Sons of HC!!
|
|
posted November 24, 2008 08:05 PM |
|
|
Quote:
don't make fun of that though, Gootch "talked" with God and he was serious (as an atheist obviously) (can't remember the page in this thread tho)
Evidence of voices in my head
|
|
Galev
Famous Hero
Galiv :D
|
|
posted November 27, 2008 01:07 AM |
|
|
@MightyMage
It is all that weird even to me, but I would like to tell/share this...
[Well I am not the most honest kind of men, I'm not free of hypocrisy nor Pharisaism (well, a shame and a poor excuse. I did not write here among many reasons, but two of those are the two above )]
Now what can I say after that?
Things change a lot and stuff, but I just accidentaly read your post on page6. I think you misunderstood something or people made you misunderstand it. (or it may easily happen that I fail in understanding...)
It is about Matthew 4:7 In your post it is written this way:
"It is also written: 'Do not put the Lord your God to the test."
In King James's translation (the only one in English I have acces to) says :
"Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God."
Note that it is very similar to that of the Hungarian translation (by Gaspar Károli).
I could not figure out what on earth it meant to mean for a long time. And one day I decided to look up the reference given by Károli (the translator). It lead me to Exodus 17:2-3.
"Wherefore the people did chide with Moses, and said, Give us water that we may drink. And Moses said unto them, Why chide ye with me? wherefore do ye tempt the LORD? And the people thirsted there for water; and the people murmured against Moses, and said, Wherefore is this that thou hast brought us up out of Egypt, to kill us and our children and our cattle with thirst?"
Well, in my read (and I suppose in some other people's) it means that tempting God (testing him) is when you whine "Whether God is with me?" grammatically proper way: "I wonder if God is with me." and continue it in thought: "I would like the Lord, to do this or that just to make sure he exists"
It might not explain anything to anyone. But many people do not throw such biblical quotes in your face when you have doubts. I doubt there are too many verses where God forbides people to ask questions.
Yeah, I know it was about 2 years ago, but it bothered me for some reason. I somehow don't like things being misinterpreted... I hope I was not too much pestering.
|
|
mitzah
Promising
Supreme Hero
of the Horadrim
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 02:13 PM |
|
Edited by mitzah at 14:25, 29 Nov 2008.
|
Good choice TA ! *gives cookie*
The most important thing that bothers me about religion (mainly the religions which draw their teachings from the bible) is that they suggest that you should simply believe without any shread of evidence. In the past century, people have come to realize that the bible is more like a story collection..so the church said: "Oh, well..you shouldn't read the bible as it is..it has a more metaphorical meaning..". Buck that! I can change the meaning of some things written in the "Legends of Olypmus" if I want to..
The good news is that more and more people are beginning to open their eyes. But damn..I've met people who actually believed that dinosaurs never existed..just because the bible didn't mention them.
I recommend the "Made Easy" videos, made by a guy who goes by the name of potholder : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg1fs6vp9Ok.
____________
| The HoMM Channel |
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 02:55 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 16:18, 29 Nov 2008.
|
Quote:
The most important thing that bothers me about religion (mainly the religions which draw their teachings from the bible) is that they suggest that you should simply believe without any shread of evidence.
No but when any kind of evidence that doesn't fit our normal theories appears (e.g: dark matter), we call it "dark matter" or "dark energy" and that's that. How is that different from God since it isn't measurable/testable either?
Yeah well 'energy' or 'matter' sounds much more pleasant to some people than 'God'. Well to be honest, you first have to believe in what you're doing/researching before you can prove it. If no one is willing to look at the microscope then a lot of stuff will never be proven
"Maybe the atheist can't find God for the same reason a thief can't find a policeman."
As for the dark matter thingy, I'm not gonna blame them if that's what they were indoctrinated with -- for example, I don't even think about matter myself, I only think about forces and fields -- no such thing as 'particles' IMO.
Quote:
I recommend the "Made Easy" videos, made by a guy who goes by the name of potholder : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg1fs6vp9Ok.
Einstein said Quantum Mechanics was signifying "the end of physics as a science" and yet people use it all day today. It also completely shattered the 'determinism' era -- scientists used to claim that the world is 100% deterministic and that "God doesn't play dice" (in Einstein) where you can substitute 'God' with the Universe, unfortunately that is not the case, so they were all wrong. But yeah, we never learn from history and we claim again that we know all that there is about the limited things we claim we know. Arrogance at best.
Now we claim "our ancestors were so stupid, now we don't know everything, but the few things we know, we know for sure". Sorry if I would rather go to someone uncertain than someone arrogant who thinks he now reached a point where suddenly he knows the true way. See the analogy above -- scientists used to believe "100% determinism" was true and believed that, they thought they knew it all and even that the Universe had no beginning (i.e no Big Bang). That's what they thought some 50 years ago, and they laughed at someone who claimed such "fairy tales" about a beginning of a Universe.
Arrogance? Well we most certainly don't learn from history or mistakes it seems... since we keep on claiming that "ancestors were so stupid" and "we are so Godly in knowledge about stuff we see".
By the way, Triangulation isnt very effective at long distances
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mitzah
Promising
Supreme Hero
of the Horadrim
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 05:03 PM |
|
Edited by mitzah at 17:33, 29 Nov 2008.
|
How can you make an analogy between a god and "dark matter" ? How is it NOT different ? You will never be able to prove that a god exists. Scientists didn't know about the DNA back in the early 1900s..just because they know about the DNA back then, doesn't mean that it was the work of a god. My point is that, just because you can't explain something right now, doesn't mean that it's the will/work of a god. That is absurd.
As a matter of fact, Einstein never did accept the quantum mechanics theory as a whole. He accepted the fact that the universe is deterministic in the sense that every event that occurs is caused by another event. And yes, I agree with that..I mean, if I get drunk (an event), it's because I've been drinking (another event). It's not the same with things being predetermined, as many believers believe .
Still, just because Einstein said that quantum mechanics was signifying "the end of physics as a science", it doesn't mean that it's true. For example, John Bell believed that quantum mechanics was not a realistic theory.
And by the way..which scientists are you reffering to ? Give us several examples.
An I would say that yes..our ancestors were stupid. They actually believed (among many other things) that Moses gathered two animals of each species and kept them into a damn boat..the bible even gives us the size of the ark. The dinosaurs didn't probably fit in, but two elephants did..
How is the link related to what you've said after that ? I hope that you don't actually believe Kent Hovind..
____________
| The HoMM Channel |
|
|
Galev
Famous Hero
Galiv :D
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 06:25 PM |
|
|
@Mitzah
Matthew 14:14-21
"And Jesus went forth, and saw a great multitude, and was moved with compassion toward them, and he healed their sick. And when it was evening, his disciples came to him, saying, This is a desert place, and the time is now past; send the multitude away, that they may go into the villages, and buy themselves victuals. But Jesus said unto them, They need not depart; give ye them to eat. And they say unto him, We have here but five loaves, and two fishes. He said, Bring them hither to me. And he commanded the multitude to sit down on the grass, and took the five loaves, and the two fishes, and looking up to heaven, he blessed, and brake, and gave the loaves to his disciples, and the disciples to the multitude. And they did all eat, and were filled: and they took up of the fragments that remained twelve baskets full. And they that had eaten were about five thousand men, beside women and children."
Now you need not to believe the above, but what have you just said about those fish?
|
|
mitzah
Promising
Supreme Hero
of the Horadrim
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 06:39 PM |
|
Edited by mitzah at 18:44, 29 Nov 2008.
|
Dude, that's not to be taken literally  . The idea is that a pair of hands working together can do a lot more than a thousand clasped in prayer  . I mean, if you want something, don't pray for it..just do your best to achieve your goal. It works, trust me on that.
Btw, is that from the same book which says that a woman's arm should be cut off if she grabs the balls of a man who's arguing with her husband ?
____________
| The HoMM Channel |
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 06:48 PM |
|
|
Quote:
How can you make an analogy between a god and "dark matter" ? How is it NOT different ? You will never be able to prove that a god exists. Scientists didn't know about the DNA back in the early 1900s..just because they know about the DNA back then, doesn't mean that it was the work of a god.
What makes dark matter any more true?
Quote:
My point is that, just because you can't explain something right now, doesn't mean that it's the will/work of a god. That is absurd.
yeah but "explanations" are flawed.
we don't gather knowledge. Science doesn't give us knowledge. It gives us information. BIG difference. Look at the redshift for example -- there were a few articles which claimed that redshift is not reliable in calculating distance (they said something like, two stars in the same galaxy have very different redshifts or something like that, and called it an "unsolved riddle").
We claim that we know the distances for example, because of information from redshift, but that isn't true and REQUIRES belief in the information or in the axioms/dogma that we believe in the Universe (in Einstein's case, determinism, in our case, whatever we draw analogies from).
For example, we didn't see any other star up-close except the Sun, but we draw analogies from the Sun. That's not knowledge, because it's interpolation. When we see small stars extremely far away, we are seeing information, not knowledge. We then create knowledge with our beliefs or axioms about the Universe, we draw analogies, etc etc... everyone has beliefs.
Quote:
As a matter of fact, Einstein never did accept the quantum mechanics theory as a whole. He accepted the fact that the universe is deterministic in the sense that every event that occurs is caused by another event. And yes, I agree with that..I mean, if I get drunk (an event), it's because I've been drinking (another event). It's not the same with things being predetermined, as many believers believe .
No, Einstein said "God does not play dice" (well God = Universe in his view) and that is false. So even though you agree with it, maybe because it sounds pleasant to you for it, it isn't true
Quote:
Still, just because Einstein said that quantum mechanics was signifying "the end of physics as a science", it doesn't mean that it's true. For example, John Bell believed that quantum mechanics was not a realistic theory.
And by the way..which scientists are you reffering to ? Give us several examples.
does it matter? I read it somewhere though (I put a link in this thread several times already) and I do know about a few like Einstein and Schrodinger for example.
Einstein had a "reason" to believe what he said -- because it would be illogical (in his opinion) and would render the universe non-deterministic or probabilistic, not very fond of it.
Quote:
An I would say that yes..our ancestors were stupid. They actually believed (among many other things) that Moses gathered two animals of each species and kept them into a damn boat..the bible even gives us the size of the ark. The dinosaurs didn't probably fit in, but two elephants did..
No I didn't mean that (even though dinos are dead anyway ). I meant that, we consider our ancestors stupid, right, but we consider ourselves on the edge of what we know, we know for sure and can't be wrong (even though we don't know much) which isn't very open minded. For example, in 100 years people will consider us stupid. And the cycle repeats. Shouldn't we learn from history?
Quote:
How is the link related to what you've said after that ? I hope that you don't actually believe Kent Hovind..
No that was another remark. And what's all this stuff with "belief" I thought science was not about belief. I don't believe him, but I think he is right -- the triangulation thing I mean. i don't attack people, I didn't even know the guy's name before you said it. Sorry if I just don't take scientists and "believe" them but he did have a point about triangulation.
BTW: Dawkins admits creation may explain life (i've just been redirected to it from another site, dunno about it)
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
Galev
Famous Hero
Galiv :D
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 06:54 PM |
|
|
I hope you don not really think that I can not recognize figurative sense when I see it.
Give a man a fish and he will eat for the day.
Give them a book and they starve while reading. does it sound all right?
Don't abuse figurative sense, please; making it look like as if religion left people starve... (for example)
|
|
Galev
Famous Hero
Galiv :D
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 07:02 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Btw, is that from the same book which says that a woman's arm should be cut off if she grabs the balls of a man who's arguing with her husband ?
There are only a few things that makes me really angry (="mad" and disgusted).
1, Ignorant people who do not understand things.
2, Stupid people who behaves as if they were ignorant.
3, People who try to make me angry on purpose.
4, Injustice.
Accept my congratulations Mitzah, you seem to achive at leat 3 of the above if not all
I knew I should not write in here anymore...
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 07:21 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Give a man a fish and he will eat for the day.
Give them a book and they starve while reading. does it sound all right?
More like:
Give a man a fish and he will eat for the day.
Give a man World of Warcraft and he'll starve playing it.
ironically, this version is actually the more true one in some cases
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 07:23 PM |
|
|
[troll]My favorite part of the Bible is the one that tells me how to manage my slaves.[/troll]
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
|
mitzah
Promising
Supreme Hero
of the Horadrim
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 08:01 PM |
|
Edited by mitzah at 20:03, 29 Nov 2008.
|
@TheDeath: Ok, I don't know if you understood my point..I meant to say that just because science doesn't have all the answers, it doesn't mean that it's not working.
So..should we gather "knowledge" from the bible then ? Of course all we can do right now is to make analogies..many analogies are true, many may not be true. It's better than not making them at all.
I also think that things are happening randomly, I don't think I made myself clear. Some things just happen, and some things happen, inevitably, because they have a cause (like in my example). I do not think that everything is happening for a reason and that things are predetermined, if that's what you're saying.
I do agree with that (people believe that something is true just because they could not imagine that they are wrong).
Well, I think "stupid" is not the appropriate word here..it's more like unknowing. Can't you imagine people inventing stories for things they couldn't explain (3000 years ago) ?
I don't mean "believe" as in "believe" (related to faith and all)..I mean "think".
Kent Hovind is a so called "doctor" and has a Ph.D. in theology or something..he has no knowledge of science, whatsoever (just look him up on Wikipedia). He is currently in jail for tax crimes. It is actually known that triangulation works for stars which are within a 400 light years range from Earth. Scientists use a star's color spectrum to determine higher distances. This has been proven to be accurate by testing it on stars which are 400 or less light years away (with triangulation). If it workd on a star which is 400 ly away from us, why shouldn't it work on a star which is 800 ly away ? Now this is what I mean when I say that Kent Hovind (and he's not the only one) has VERY limited science training (if any at all). He actually thought that the Earth had a layer of water around it which protected humans from the Sun's radiation .
That video of Dawkins is from a "documentary" made by some guy who's name I don't remember ("Expelled" was the name of the documentary, I think) which is taken out of context (the clip never gives us the question to which he is responding and his full answer; many of those who have been interviewed in that movie have been complaining that their full remarks have been cut). The whole idea is that Dawkins thought that it might be possible for humans to have been created by another alien race. The clip also says that "This is the basis of his disdain for creation science: that he dispises the moral dictates of God, and therefore deny His existence. This is the basis for faith in evolutionism for all evolutionists...". This is pure bs. "Evolutionism" is a scientific theory. It explains the diversion of life on Earth. It doesn't say anything about the origin of life, but the origin of species. This is basic creationist crap. They have no idea what the theory says, but they do like to comment on it. Hell, they couldn't even spell "laminin" right! And that scene where laminin is next to the cross just made my day . This is just as funny as the bannana being designed specifically for the human hand, by a designer . The clip also says that laminin is the cell which binds the cells together in humans. Again, this is false. Laminin is present in an living cretures and it does not have a "divine" origin.
@Galev: It doesn't sound all right because you've changed it (d'oh). I just told you what it means. "Don't abuse figurative sense, please; making it look like as if religion left people starve"..but you just said "figurative", I'm not making it look that way..it's a damn proverb.
Try to use the "edit post" button next time. I've learned that you can't take creationists seriously, I'm sorry .
____________
| The HoMM Channel |
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 09:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Ok, I don't know if you understood my point..I meant to say that just because science doesn't have all the answers, it doesn't mean that it's not working.
Did I say otherwise?
I don't have a problem with that -- but think like this: if you now are prepared to answer any "weird" situation with "we just don't know yet", how will ANY sign/proof of God ever get into you? (not saying that there are proofs, it's just a hypothetical question). If you keep on that answer to any question which you don't have answer to, it's basically similar to saying "God did it! Question answered", only that you use "I don't know yet, but I'm sure it'll be explainable with induction and repeatable logic", but scientists some 50 years ago said "I don't know yet, but I'm sure it'll be explainable with induction and repeatable and deterministic logic".. Phew how quick their thinking changes
More simply put:
Guy A: "There's no proof that God exists"
Guy B: "I can give you proof, but if I do, won't you reply with that's just something we don't know yet, nothing to do with God?"
isn't that like trying to tell others to find proof of microorganisms but you never wanting to look at the microscope?
Quote:
So..should we gather "knowledge" from the bible then ? Of course all we can do right now is to make analogies..many analogies are true, many may not be true. It's better than not making them at all.
nope. I'm not promoting religion with my posts. I'm finding flaws in the science -- mind you I'm not trying to prove God, I'm trying to disprove the fact that science doesn't require beliefs
Quote:
Well, I think "stupid" is not the appropriate word here..it's more like unknowing. Can't you imagine people inventing stories for things they couldn't explain (3000 years ago) ?
I don't mean "believe" as in "believe" (related to faith and all)..I mean "think".
Well mathematics is a story in itself too, but now we take it as the law of the universe -- it is an axiom so to speak, to assume that the universe follows mathematics laws.
Quote:
Kent Hovind is a so called "doctor" and has a Ph.D. in theology or something..he has no knowledge of science, whatsoever (just look him up on Wikipedia). He is currently in jail for tax crimes. It is actually known that triangulation works for stars which are within a 400 light years range from Earth. Scientists use a star's color spectrum to determine higher distances. This has been proven to be accurate by testing it on stars which are 400 or less light years away (with triangulation). If it workd on a star which is 400 ly away from us, why shouldn't it work on a star which is 800 ly away ? Now this is what I mean when I say that Kent Hovind (and he's not the only one) has VERY limited science training (if any at all). He actually thought that the Earth had a layer of water around it which protected humans from the Sun's radiation .
Like I said before, I don't care who he is. I don't have belief in authority, aka scientists, much like you don't have in priests. Why should I?
If it were Hawking or Einstein saying it, do you think I would interpret it differently or that I would care? In fact, he has a pretty good point with triangulation. Then, what you said with "If it workd on a star which is 400 ly away from us, why shouldn't it work on a star which is 800 ly away ?" and this is exactly what I was talking about:
this isn't knowledge, it is extrapolated information, or to put it more for the average Joe around here (if there's any), it's an assumption. Assumptions are based on beliefs -- i.e we believe it is uniform (the universe) and we use the logic of induction to apply that here. (if you want look it up on wiki, but don't take the mathematics definition, that's a different case)
Quote:
That video of Dawkins is from a "documentary" made by some guy who's name I don't remember ("Expelled" was the name of the documentary, I think) which is taken out of context (the clip never gives us the question to which he is responding and his full answer; many of those who have been interviewed in that movie have been complaining that their full remarks have been cut). The whole idea is that Dawkins thought that it might be possible for humans to have been created by another alien race. The clip also says that "This is the basis of his disdain for creation science: that he dispises the moral dictates of God, and therefore deny His existence. This is the basis for faith in evolutionism for all evolutionists...". This is pure bs.
Not sure if it's bs actually -- I know a lot of so-called evolutionists who claim here and there that "God is a bastard" or "why did God do X then?" as arguments. I realize they have other arguments but if they really didn't care about that, they wouldn't post it. It seems pretty clear to draw the conclusion here. And who said that I took the video as something else? Of course that's what I understood from it, that he thinks it's possible for us to have been created by "intelligent design". But of course it's easier for him to imagine aliens with human-like behaviors rather than Gods in another dimension, which is why he used that argument instead.
Quote:
"Evolutionism" is a scientific theory. It explains the diversion of life on Earth.
It's based on acquired information from data. It doesn't make it true however. For example, some aliens could have planted all fossils (just a hypothetical example). Not saying it's true, but whoever says it's knowledge is completely false. Period.
Quote:
And that scene where laminin is next to the cross just made my day . This is just as funny as the bannana being designed specifically for the human hand, by a designer .
While I agree that it sounds funny I can only start to wonder: isn't this the reason we don't find any "signs" by God? Isn't the fact that we dismiss them all as "silly" things because we don't want to believe? Aren't we ignoring something? (note: not saying that all of them are true, but SOME).
Take alien signs for example: sure not all of them are true, but that doesn't mean some aren't -- if we keep on saying "no such thing" or laugh whenever someone gives an alien video, just because there are 99 previous false ones, doesn't mean we should ignore the new one. If we do, it becomes impossible to ever find proof because we dismiss it.
So the question is not whether there is proof for God or not, but whether we open our eyes to it? Do we? and I mean it... seriously.
Quote:
Try to use the "edit post" button next time. I've learned that you can't take creationists seriously, I'm sorry .
Hmm not sure what wasn't serious (i'm not a creationist though) in what I said. But sometimes, if you at least want to accept something, don't start with "I know it's not true" because then you'll just bury your head in the sand.
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
mvassilev
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted November 29, 2008 09:39 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Guy A: "There's no proof that God exists"
Guy B: "I can give you proof, but if I do, won't you reply with that's just something we don't know yet, nothing to do with God?"
"We don't know" means "We don't know." "It's God" means "We don't know, but we're going to make something up."
I get your point. Now tell me, that if science is based on belief and so is religion, why is that of religion better than that of science? In other words, why should we believe in God?
____________
Eccentric Opinion
|
| |
|
|
This Popular Thread is pages long: 
