Why Do People Laugh at Creationists?

,    »  -   1,641 Comments
685
7.34
12345678910
Ratings: 7.34/10 from 128 users.

Storyline

Why Do People Laugh at Creationists?

In this amateur documentary creationists are tackled at every level from the scientific illiterates who want to play in the scientific arena but don't even understand the words they use, to convicted fraudsters like Kent Hovind who abuse the scientific illiteracy of people to dupe them out of money.

An enterprise which is clearly very successful as merely the tax Hovind didn't pay was about a million dollars. Hovind himself has no discernible academic education, and gets by solely on using his confident delivery of scientific terms to convince his audiences that he knows what hes talking about.

Then of course there are the professionals such as the Discovery Institute, the hub and founders of the Intelligent design movement. After the humiliating rout of ID in court where it was found that ID is not science, and that ID is only a relabeling of creationism the Discovery Institute do not utter the word once in their latest promotional video.

Instead they now have decided to teach the controversy which is an irony as they are the only people who disagree with evolution. What they are really asking is not to teach the controversy, but to teach their views, which are supported by neither research or evidence, in schools.

More great documentaries

1,641 Comments / User Reviews

  1. Epicurus

    Jesus titty F**king Christ!!! You are so amazing for posting this Vlatko.

    Thunderf00t and his videos will go down in history and this is one of the best youtube series ever made!

    Vlatko, you need to come to Toronto and toke with me...we need to chill.

  2. SwedeLad

    This is a brilliant documentary. Thunderf00t should have this put on DVD. I've been watching this series since he first released Part 1 and I was immediately hooked.

  3. Capricious

    thunderf00t pwns. He doesn't put it on DVD because he would have to sell it and does not ever want to be accused of doing what he does for profit.

  4. nick_kcin

    nice one vlatko, if you want another good set of youtube vids to upload I recommend potholer54's made easy series

  5. Mart

    excuse me, but creationism is christianity in disguise...so whats next ? really if this absurd position becomes mainstream what would be the next course of action for intelligent designers...i wouldnt think it would be anything other than supernatural....u guys suck

  6. non_serviam

    Creationism is Christianity *in disguise*? They go around openly saying that the Bible is their basic source of knowledge. Not much of a disguise.

  7. rebelliuss

    @VenomfangX.. LMFAO!!..

    @The Discovery inst...LMFAO!!..

    @All creationists...LMFAO!!..

    @Thunderfoot.. Thank 'GOD' for people like you, You're my new hero..;o)

    to quote nick.. "nice one Vlatko"

  8. darwinianewton

    BRILLIANT! even if he didnt want them accusing him of trying to turn a profit, imagine the dissemination of knowledge from a dvd. Ofcourse, dvds can be banned or burnt in bonfires. thank Man for the internet

  9. eireannach666

    HA! That was good. Kept me entertained for quite a while . Finally finshed. That kid made me want to slap the piss out of him , though. I did like the usage of movie clips etc. Made it even more humorous .

    Nice job Vlatko.

  10. Joe_nyc

    Looks like all the religees have been chased away. :(

  11. Epicurean_Logic

    @joe 'Looks like all the religees have been chased away'

    dude, its hard to find a religion free corner to gather your thoughts in. I can see why you Americans are having such a problem with them. They seem to breed like little bunny rabbits.

  12. Epicurean_Logic

    The only other safe area is the female orgasm explained section.

  13. Achems Razor

    What ?? No religee's??

    Holy jumping mother-f**k**g. Ch***t!!...Eh.. Have to stop this swearing!

    I must watch the doc. The religee's will come.

  14. Epicurean_Logic

    lol if they do they wont like what they see.

  15. Jeff

    Man I love science!

  16. darwinianewton

    stayed up all night watching this one.Then most of the morning laughing at venomfangx THANK YOU VLATKO! THANK YOU This site is amazing, i literally have been checking it daily for months now. This doc is just the cherry on top. Keep up the superb work V

  17. Life.Is.The.Alien

    I watched until vid 8... it makes me sick what people will believe.

  18. Canadian

    There are so many religious people on this site, where did they all go?? someone come and defend your 6000 year old earth.

  19. Bobby D

    Think someone just got pwned. Some people will believe what they want to believe... a shame, b/c science and evolution is freaking COOL if you give it a chance.

  20. Seb

    Praise Jebus

  21. dj

    What idiots. For me this is hard to watch .
    I just want to grab these creationists by the neck and .... well you get my drift .
    I had a similar conversation with my brother .
    He is a creationist also. I allowed him to tell me just what his beliefs were. When he was finished, I proceeded to inform him about science and reality and my beliefs. About half way through, he stood up and shouted in my face that I just took a dump on his god .
    My reply was i hope i didn't get any religion on my ass!
    That was about 5 yrs. Ago and we no longer speak to each other.

  22. Chief

    Creationist have mis-educational DVDs and other visual aids to promote their unscientific views. The have 'theme parks' to highlight imaginary events that have evolved from a primeval understanding of nature, making humans and dinosaurs coexist. The have musical advertisements of Noah's Ark blasting the airwaves. This document is but a small tool launched against the distorted views of Hovind and the other characters spewing thier illogical ideas.

  23. eireannach666

    @Cheif

    Right on , brother. I know too well of which you speak. I have been stuck trying to loosen this "Bible Belt" that Ive been forced to live in for the past 5yrs. I came to the region due to work and was surprised at the dramatic difference in lifestyle and ideas on life here as opposed to Cali, where I came from. Every where you turn, whether it be on the street or on the news , everyother word is about Jesux ,God , or the bible . Not in the way of debat but in total acceptance and obedience. Sad really.

    (Those that dont know, the bible belt is a region of the US where religion makes the rules. States such as Tx , OK, Ks, Mo , Ar , Al , Ms etc, mainly in the south. Its intresting to be an atheist from Cali and living in the south. To say the least.)

  24. ChristPuncher

    Ah good ol religious brainwashing, i couldnt even begin to imagine how perfect our society would be without it! Gotta love that "gettem while their young" theory. Reminds my of my Uncle Ted's Motto...he's in jail now...probably alongside a few Cardinals. :P

    (For their protection, some uncles names, crimes, and cellmates may have been changed...but not likely, knowing my lazy ass.)

    (i wish i really had a pedophile uncle to make this all the more funny)

  25. ChristPuncher

    LOL @ Eire!

    You poor thing! stay away from utah! :P mormon central! i thank god i live in canada where each city is just like the next, but with different restaraunts.

  26. Tina

    AWESOME!! Great work! I must share it with others. :)

  27. Randy

    I have great respect for the intellect of Ben Stein, and have since... well, back when he was a speech writer for Nixon. I agreed then and have recently agreed with many (certainly not ALL) of his op. ed. pieces on American domestic "issues".

    I watched his "Expelled" documentary and shook my head through it, knowing that even as he is a christian, his real religion is neo-conservativism. And even if he knew that the science he espoused was faulty, he would embrace it, and proclaim it, for the good of his "movement".

    His fields of knowledge are broad and deep, but I suspect that his scientific accumen has suffered from a lack of attention, due to his focus on many other fields and disciplines.

    But, ultimately, all of his information must be carefully considered angainst his overwhelmingly entrenched neo-conservative views. Which clearly color all of his actions and opinions, as I see it.

  28. eireannach666

    @Christpuncher

    Dated a mormon once , she was into some weird but enjoyable things that would make John Holmes blush. Didnt work out , though , once her parents found out my beliefs and the unmentionable things I did to their spring flower , well you get the picture.
    Funny people. I thought they were the cookiest of all religions until I learned of scientology. So congratulations mormons , you are no longer the most insane religious group.

  29. eireannach666

    @Randy
    WOW! I didnt know Ben Stein was involved with "neo-conservatives"
    Ever read Neoconservatism: The Autobiography of an Idea, Irving Kristol? neoconservative ideas are kind of farfetched in my opinion.The whole using religion as a tool of promoting morality and all, I didnt finish it all. I never got too deep into all that , something didnt seem right about these people to me.

  30. Randy

    @eireannach666

    Well, he was and is an influential voice in the Republican party and I would say that he has contributed to the movement over the years.

    And yes, I have read that frightening book, and there is a documentary on this sight that explains the movement very well. Adam Curtis' "The Power of Nightmares".

    Very compelling and scary stuff.

    Of course, to be fair, the movement has undergone many changes from Nixon's time to now. And I do not know how influential he may be in the current incarnations.

  31. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Huh.Ill have to check that out real quick. Thanks for the reference .

    It was a crazy book. I got a hold of it about 8 or 9 yrs ago in college from a roomate. He was weird now that I think about.

  32. steve

    Isn't it funny how much the Creationists are like the Global Warming people... ha

  33. Randy

    @Steve who wrote:

    "Isn’t it funny how much the Creationists are like the Global Warming people… ha"

    Steve don't open that kettle of poisonous snakes! I think your ideas are probably similar to mine and that global warming has indeed become a kind of "secular religion" of late. So let's not start a war...

    I'll just say this, I was at a dinner with some nice liberal friends of mine, very cool, very "artsy" people... when I casually mentioned my research that global warming seemed to not be supported by any real science... well! The level of snarling, foaming at the mouth, and table slamming was really terrifying for me...

    So, I backed off... I suggest you do the same... LOL!

  34. Epicurean_Logic

    Oh Randy we were having so much fun in this Religious free zone (R.F.Z) and you had to come and use that big brain of your to say something intelligent. Get with the program dude.

    Please dont forget though Randy. I love you buddy.

  35. Randy

    @Epicurean_Logic

    Dude! Did I bring everybody down? Totally, sorry!

    Yes, it was a blast seeing the creationist "scientists" get their collective arses kicked into the dirt by simple things like, logic, math, and observable scientific method!

    WHOO! Pass the bong-of-truth, dude!

  36. eireannach666

    @Randy

    HA! Always pass to the left dude. You are a evil s.o.b. , you know that?

  37. Epicurean_Logic

    @Randy. you know that i am in a funny pisstaking mood at the moment. Its only because my mono amoebic brain is in its down cycle, and that i have a bad habit of larking about at inapropriate times. and after reading some of my own comments a distinct lack of lucidity too! and bad spelling . oh and finally terrible grammar.

    I want to be like randy when i grow up.

  38. eireannach666

    @Epicurean_Logic

    I think youve just been "cheifing " too much tonight. Then again you will probably say that's an oxymoron.

  39. zardoz

    You fevered Darwinists are kind of pathetic really. Your desperation is palpable. So anyone who believes that some kind of innate intelligence is intrinsic to this universe is a kook? How about the fact that particles have been demonstrated to exist as wave forms/probability patterns until they are humanly observed, causing them to collapse into material/particle form (two slits experiments). In effect, consciousness has been demonstrated to create reality. How can this phenomena be explained by anything other than the presence of innate intelligence within the universe? Since intelligence is intrinsic to Consciousness, the two slits experiment is itself a demonstration of the very act of intelligent design or intelligent creation, if you prefer. Intelligence could not have developed "naturally" in the universe since it was already here from the start, and an inherently intelligent design can only have come from an intelligent designer. (And don't try to pretend that such experiments are "nothing but...". Any reputable physicist would agree that the implications of such experiments were/are profound and revolutionary in the history of science. And don't play with words. Step up to the plate or don't bother.)

  40. Epicurean_Logic

    @ Zardoz

    your semi-intelligent utterances have nothing whatsoever to to with the doc. please watch it first before you comment.

  41. eireannach666

    @zardoz

    You have just answered the question being asked. People like you and your statments are why we laugh. Please watch this doc , it is quite entertaining.

  42. Achems Razor

    Don't scare @ Zardoz: away! (LOL)

    He/she is either a creationist and/or ID. proponent, a real physicist maybe?,

    Since the person is trying to include some aspect of Quantum physics, "consciousness"?? in his/her as yet undefined utterances, would like to hear more. Would like to know why Zardoz figures the slit experiment is intelligent design.

  43. eireannach666

    @Achems_Razor

    Just giving him a hard time. Zardoz should still watch the doc.

    no disrespect Zardoz , just always got to be on the defensive w/ all the people trying to push religion. Im always down to listen to someone if they know what they are saying.

  44. Randy

    @Epi_Logic

    No, seriously, I took your point. I wasn't making fun of you. You were right, I totally brought the room "down".

    Bong-of-Truth all around!

  45. Epicurean_Logic

    @ Randy. I was just trying to keep the jokes going on and then after sending i got a bad feeling that i had somehow offended you which i obviously didn't intend or want. I probably overanalysed and should have realized that you are a big enough man to look at the bigger picture.

    To be honest my emotions are all over the place at the moment cause of women issues, and my decisions and understanding are a bit off.

    All hail the bong of truth!

  46. Epicurean_Logic

    @ Zardoz, you said,

    'In effect, consciousness has been demonstrated to create reality. How can this phenomena be explained by anything other than the presence of innate intelligence within the universe?'

    What in the hell are you blathering on about man? you make no sense whatsoever. Talk English not gibberinglish please.

    The only person with any hope of entertaining those ideas is Achems and despite his creative mind even he will probably tear you to pieces.

  47. ChristPuncher

    Awesome, just when everyone is getting along under a single topic, here comes a creationist to crazy things up a bit :P Maybe he should take us all on a bonding trip to one of his creationist amusement parks.

  48. Randy

    @Zardoz

    You are either a follower of "The Secret" or Deepak Chopra or any of that ilk. As Deepak was a principal architecht of "The Secret" I will point out that he was cornered by Richard Dawkins (and others at various times) and he had to stammer his poor understanding of Quantum Mechanics. He finally admitted that his use of Quantum Theory was only a "metaphore" for his explanation of the Universe.

    You and he use grossly mis-interpreted QT laws and expressions when you use them as examples of "mystical consciousness" existing in the Universe.

    My most shocking revelation of this fact, was when I realized that you and he and The Secret got almost all of the Heisenburg Uncertainty Principles completely wrong, mixing the conclusions to the point of unrecognition.

    But, the most important thing you must remember, is that we are not trying to destroy any idea that there may be some, unknown and, perhaps, UNKNOWABLE intelligent force in the Universe, as you espouse. That's fine if you want to believe it, however there really is no testable proof as of yet.

    What we fight against are the bronze-age ideas of the bibley, fundy, born-again, christian myths that these people try and pass off as indisputable truth.

    Keep that in mind.

  49. i.know.nossing

    @ Zardoz.. "consciousness has been demonstrated to create reality".. is that like saying, 'if you imagine it, then it becomes real?..

  50. ChristPuncher

    consciousness doesnt mean imaginiation, it means awareness. So i think what he is trying to say is that "if you are aware of it, it is be real" Personally i dont know, im just speculating.

  51. ChristPuncher

    OOps, this "is" should be a "must"..or just remove the "be" typo!

  52. i.know.nossing

    @christpunhcer... thanx for your answer, but then i ask, to be aware of something don't you have to be able to imagine it first?..

  53. i.know.nossing

    i mean imagine it to be possible..

  54. Jenn

    Haha, I thought this was going to be something ridiculous, but the comments reassured me. :p
    Ya'll always brighten my day.

    Thanks for keeping us ejumakated, Vlatko, haha.

  55. Achems Razor

    Shyte!! I bet you-all scared @ Zardoz, away, Really wanted to hear his scientific proofs. Or at least the proofs from the scientists.

    Another one that has some proofs, as above, @ go2mark. except you cannot pay me enough to watch biased creationist garbage.

  56. ChristPuncher

    @i.know.nossing

    Thats some mind blowing s***...i better put this bong down!

    I couldnt answer that, but im interested in seeing someone like Ben Steins response to that...i imagine its possible he is aware of the answer :P

  57. HaTe_MaChInE

    @Randy - "You and he use grossly mis-interpreted QT laws and expressions when you use them as examples of" Amen.

    You have to realize that there is in fact no such thing as "Quantum Theory". Acknowledging that there is is falling for the same practice being used by ID proponents... Teach the Debate.

    It think the nutbag "Quantum Theory" morons are worse then the creationists.

  58. D-K

    @Zardonz: "So anyone who believes that some kind of innate intelligence is intrinsic to this universe is a kook?"

    No. Anyone who believes it in the absence of any logical reasoning or published experimenting is naïve and or gullible. By getting defensive you're trying to devaluate people with a scientific mindset by questioning their readiness to judge. This is pointless and no argument for your case.

    "How about the fact that particles have been demonstrated to exist as wave forms/probability patterns until they are humanly observed, causing them to collapse into material/particle form. How can this phenomena be explained by anything other than the presence of innate intelligence within the universe?"

    The problem is that the absence of a scientific answer inevitably results in believers to attribute it to a divine being or as you said, innate intelligence. As technologies evolve and experimenting on such levels become feasible, a scientific answer might arise. Experience tells us that in such cases people such as yourself, evade consequence and claim that other yet unexplained phenomena "prove" the existance of innate intelligence.

    By not attributing specific properties to such an intelligence/entity, besides that it creates all that we are currently incapable of answering, you basically say that you believe in something without knowing what it is. If you don't know what it is, you don't know what it does an as such your claim consist of illogical sandcastles, and as the tide of science washes away one, you claim residence in the next one.

    That is not a belief-structure, it simply shows your inability to cope with the fact that some phenomena simply cannot be answered at this time, with our current technology and understanding of the mechanics involved. Your beliefs will continue to be met with skepticism as you have no clear idea what it is that you belief, and as such you are incapable of defending it logically.

  59. HaTe_MaChInE

    @ zardoz -"How about the fact that particles have been demonstrated to exist as wave forms/probability patterns until they are humanly observed"

    That is actually not a fact... No where near a fact. I think you might have made it up. Actually you dont seem that smart. I bet you are the copy paste variety.

    Exactly what are "probability patterns" and what do they have to do with waveforms?

    You do realize that 99.9% of all quantum mechanics cant be directly observed by people. When you turn on a radio you are not observing particles hitting the antenna.

    The slit experiment shows that photons show both wave AND particle properties(duality) . A person cannot make a photon be just a wave or just a particle. When you decide to detect a photon you can decide if you want to detect it as a wave or a particle. The same way if you want to travel to china you can plan your trip either going west or east. Just because you decide to go east doesn't mean that since you observed china in the east your observation created a china.

    Lets use a fishing example. A fish has duality just like a photon. The only way to catch a fish is a hook(wave) or dynamite(particle). When I throw the dynamite into the lake I'm not creating the fish. I'm just making a decision which way I'm going to catch it. When a fish floats up to the top, it doesn't mean that fish was any less likely to be caught with a hook.

    So once again to cement it. A photon is BOTH wave and particle. I cant make it one or the other because it is actually both. I just have to make a decision what kind of machine I'm going to use to detect it. A wave detecting machine (radio) or a particle detecting machine (phosphorus plate).

    Photons will always be wave and particle. They dont need a magic person in the sky to observe them for them to be that way.

  60. zardoz

    I'm not a physicist nor do I claim to be especially smart. I do try to think for myself, however, unlike most of you lot who behave like a gang of ideological thugs. In response to the non-thuggish replies -

    HaTe_MaChInE - A single photon fired at two slits creates an interference pattern (in accordance with Huygens Principle) on the screen behind it. The photon behaves as a wave, passing through both slits at the same time. The act of placing a particle detector between the slits and the screen causes the interference pattern to collapse and a particle to be detected. In effect, if the experimenter looks for a particle (uses particle detectors), then a particle is found; if the experimenter looks for a wave (uses a wave detector), then a wave pattern is found. 'Physicist Nick Herbert says this has sometimes caused him to imagine that behind his back the world is always "a radically ambiguous and ceaselessly flowing quantum soup." But whenever he turns around and tries to see the soup, his glance instantly freezes it and turns it back into ordinary reality ("Holographic Universe", Michael Talbot).' You are ignoring the fact that it is the act of observation itself that changes the results of the experiment (and we're talking about subatomic particles, not fish or countries).

    D-K - "No. Anyone who believes it in the absence of any logical reasoning or published experimenting is naïve and or gullible. By getting defensive you’re trying to devaluate people with a scientific mindset by questioning their readiness to judge. This is pointless and no argument for your case."

    I'm not being defensive and I'm not anti-scientific (I have a science background). I'm responding to the defensive use of ridicule expressed in advance by most of the posters in anticipation of anyone who might dare to challenge the status quo. It is lowbrow bullying behavior and antithetical to any true scientific ideal.

    "...That is not a belief-structure, it simply shows your inability to cope with the fact that some phenomena simply cannot be answered at this time, with our current technology and understanding of the mechanics involved. Your beliefs will continue to be met with skepticism as you have no clear idea what it is that you belief, and as such you are incapable of defending it logically."

    You at least acknowledge that these results remain inexplicable to conventional science. I don't need to posit an alternate theory in order to point out perceived contradictions in evolutionary theory. I think the double slit experiments clearly demonstrate that some form of innate intelligence exists within the universe, hence implying an intelligent designer. If I *were* to posit an alternate theory, however, I think these results could make a strong case as being evidential of the "simulation hypothesis" attributed to Nick Bostrom. In a simulated reality such as an FPS (first person shooter) video game, the program doesn't bother to draw a screen unless your character is actually looking at it. Virtual locations that are not being actively observed exist only in their implicate order (to use Bohm's term) or implied reality, until there is an intention to observe them causing the program (universe) to manifest their explicate order. Our universe, of course, would be a far more complex holographic simulation that anything we can presently imagine.

  61. ChristPuncher

    Zardoz, i think you are forgetting the main point here.
    Creationism is just so full of holes, it cannot be possibly defended without contradicting itself. I think the biggest problem is, it is setting back the study of where we actually came from, which i find to be a very important aspect of human existence, maybe the entire point of it? Creationism just defies all the laws of nature and says the reason for that is to test our faith! what a crock! I wish my mind was sharper right now, cause i was waiting for my turn to tear into this garden of eden lover! you'll get it yet boy!

  62. eireannach666

    There are different interpretations of this experiment, butfrom what I understand , the 'electron' doesn't go through either slits. An electron behaves like a wave and the wave goes through both slits at once creating somewhat of an interference pattern.
    If you sent at a time, electron neutron, photon or whatever, and recorded where it ended up, after many events, you would have an idea of a true interference pattern.
    So, the electron can be thought of as going through both slits at the same time and interfering with itself , right ? Same as the many universe idea where the electron goes through one slit in one universe, and the other slit in another, right? This seems flawed because , looks like we can only calculate probabilities .Not really explaining anything . Visualising what actually happens is not possible.

    Randy can you elaborate any on this?

  63. eireannach666

    @Randy /Achems/Ep/HM somebody who knos a little on this than I .

    My last post is only coming from th bits that I do know so if you would be so kind as to enlighten me on anything Im missing . Hence the question marks.

  64. Ampexone

    Excellent film. Great comments.
    Thank you.

  65. D-K

    @Zardoz:

    "I’m not being defensive and I’m not anti-scientific (I have a science background). I’m responding to the defensive use of ridicule expressed in advance by most of the posters in anticipation of anyone who might dare to challenge the status quo. It is lowbrow bullying behavior and antithetical to any true scientific ideal."

    Having a science background I can safely assume you'd know that when you go from the "two slits experiments" to evidence of innate intelligence you are making quite a leap. You make no aspirations to attempt explaining the nature of this supposed entity, so it adds up to nothing more than an extrapolation. Allow me to quote a certain someone:

    "If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence."

    I think you'll agree that your hypothesis lacks scientific scrutiny, and as such this assumption can't be taken at face value. If pressed I can actually see how the slit experiment would take you to the mindset of where you're at, but as I mentioned, supporting evidence remains underwhelming at this point, therefore there is no logic on your side, only faith.

    Faith is hardly an appropriate companion when you consider the implications of you hypothesis, and as such i'd advise you to employ the scientific mindset, rather than the fantastic.

  66. Epicurean_Logic

    @ Zardoz.

    Firstly i am really pissed at you because i had to read your seemingly contradictory long winded statement that seems to be pro-creation whilst on the other hand you seem to accept some scientific ideas... so i am actually quite puzzled by your words.

    It seems to me that you are trying to use science in order to dispute scientific logic which is what real scientists actually do, but then you offer no solutions in response and furthermore when you dispute evolution by saying, 'it has many holes in it' and then push creation which you can drive the proverbial bus through... it just seems strange. Noone is disputing that there are gaps in human scientific knowledge but compared to dogamtic belief in ancient,mysterious and unsubstantiated knowledge thats exactly the way we want it! Furthermore when put in context of the doc your case and argument is severely weakened.

    Please post your alternative theories as the non-religous amongst us are always happy for the odd morsel of creationist speculation that gets gets thrown into our pit. The lion always enjoys he oppurtunity to sharpen its teeth!

  67. kask

    I think for those individuals who want to maintain their beliefs and yet not be required to be at odds with current scientific trends, might find reading the following book, "The Lost World of Genesis One - Ancient Cosmology and the Origins debate" by John Walton, helpful. This book, provided the framework I needed to freely explore current scientific theories, concepts and ideas without needing to toss my belief in a God out the door.

    On a slightly different note, wouldn't it seem more appropriate to listen to each other. Who here, including myself, individually understands all things? If we truly are seeing things differently from our perspective, are we collectively looking at the same thing? It's possible. It isn't like we have discovered the Theory of Everything just yet. Maybe we won't. But if there is one, maybe it will include the fact that more than 1/2 if not 2/3's of the world believe in something godlike out there. And let us not forget our friendly anthropologists who suggest that man has been made to be subject to something and if that something is not cosmic in nature, that man will live in various forms of repression. (Ernest Becker, Denial of Death - Pultzer Prize 1974)

    We may know alot, but it seems that the more we learn, the more we learn how much we dont know. No one has this all figured out quite yet. If modern science says we evolved, cool, and I do mean cool...cause woh, what an amazing process. One might be inclined to say "Hello World! Whoever woke me up, I'd like to thank them or him or the council they might be."

    One more small point that made it difficult for me to see and accept the possibility of evoloution, people who use evolution to remove intelligence as a possible explaination. Can we keep the discussions of evolution in the scientific realm please? Comments such as "without cause," are not testable and therefore not science. Science may prove evolution, but it cannot speak about it happening with or without cause, that belongs in another classroom along with creationism and intelligent design.

    Lets figure this out together.

    Peace.

  68. Epicurean_Logic

    Thanks for your tolerant and open minded views @cask you seem to have a view of religion that is much more in line with the views of religious poeple here in the UK. Sadly this does not seem to be the general case in the U.S.

    Please bear in mind that the aggressive stance taken by the non-religous on this forum are in large parts a response to the dumbed down, money grabbing T.V evangelist points of view that are exibited in this video as well as to historical and literature based criticism. This needs to be applauded, preserved and encouraged when used against the aggressive form of christianity that is brewing in the U.S.

    I now strongly believe that the aggressive verbal opposition is really important in the U.S. as the religous paradigm across the pond seems unbelievable at best and dangerous to rational thinking at worst.

    I can't really comment on your first paragraph as i have no requirement for it, but i really like the comments in your last paragraph and your statement that,

    'We may know alot, but it seems that the more we learn, the more we learn how much we dont know.'

    Although i will not be headed down to the local church any time soon, i thank you for confirming my belief that logical progressive American religous belief does exist.

    peace.

  69. eireannach666

    @Epicurean_Logic
    I have to co-sign on that one. I did like the statement cask made in the end "newCan we keep the discussions of evolution in the scientific realm please? Comments such as “without cause,” are not testable and therefore not science.". Very well put to both of you.

  70. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    As long as I have breath in my lungs, at least you'll have one true believer to laugh at.

  71. eireannach666

    @mJy hEeSaUrSt

    Thanks. You will provide us with alot of fun and laughter at your expense . Much appreciated.

  72. Epicurean_Logic

    @ HaTe-MachinE, you said

    'You have to realize that there is in fact no such thing as “Quantum Theory”. '

    if your problem is in the use of language and are trying to differentiate between quantum- theory or mechanics then you will have to elaborate further ( maybe you are implying that is does not qualify as a fully formed theory of which i dont really know), if you are talking about the pseudo quantum ideas then i think it has to be said that popular culture frequently takes scietific ideas and relates them to the social arena like sci-fi and philosophy, and can SOMETIMES be a fun way of putting the message out.

    I have to say that quantum 'theory' is the most powerful mathematical tool we have at our disposal at this present time and provides the most accurate solutions to problems that we seek to solve, even though it doesn't really make sense at the human scale of observation. I am sure that you know all this basic stuff but i add it for completeness.

    Please clafify.

  73. Epicurean_Logic

    it always seems to be at the exact moment the message is sent that i notice the dumb spelling.

    Blah... clafify... i meant clarify.

  74. eireannach666

    @Epicurean_Logic

    Wonder what happened to@ Zardoz. I was kind of wanting to hear more from him.
    And nobody did ever answer my questions on that topic. I guess Ill have to either go read up on it or assume that my basic concept was right.

  75. Epicurean_Logic

    I dont want to be rude to anyone- my new understanding of conciousness has made me realize this. lol. But be thankful for small mercies.

  76. Achems Razor

    @ Zardoz:

    Most posters are easy to get along with, some are not! Ha, I know.

    I sorta know what you are referring to, you are basically saying the Universe is a mind construct, from the collective consciousness. From the Kant philosophy, most of scientists are Empiricist, Tabula rasa.
    It does strike me as funny though, a lot of bona-fide physicists are now referring to the ancient eastern thinking to formulate there hypothesis.

    But you say it must be ID, maybe, but for my thinking nothing to do with a bearded one looking down and playing with us little carbon units from his lofty perch up high.

    I do realize there are a lot! of scientists that are now referring to Quantum Mechanics and all its subs, as the gospel truth, I have a long list of scientists, physicists etc:. Except it is still mostly maths, constructs as yet, for one thing they are still trying to work out Einstein gravity, gravitons into Quantum gravity, the two somehow do not mix.

    A lot of the stuff is still ideas, and there is nothing wrong with that.

    ("Time") you know! "The bald headed hermit"!! has to be included into any meaningful discussion in this realm.
    Is time but an illusion? Theoretical Physicist "Julian Barbour" seems to think so, Google..."Julian Barbour"...on his end of time theory.

    Chow.

  77. D-K

    Eireannach:

    It's not very scientific to assume a basic concept is right by lack of opposing responses. Might you be an undercover creationist plotting to learn our ways, breed with our woman and destroy us from the inside? It seems very possible...

    Although seriously;

    Kask: You do yourself a great service by remaining in a somewhat neutral stance regarding such issues. I applaud such a mindset in religious people as it is commendable for one to seperate himself from the pack in the searh for truth.

    History tells out that more often than not, many ideas and theories based on extrapolation upon those ideas lead to popular misconception, something quite hard to be overcome.

    One needs but look at history's greatest scientist who were met with ridicule yet admirably (and somewhat foolishly) stuck by principle and their ponderings.

    " Science may prove evolution, but it cannot speak about it happening with or without cause, that belongs in another classroom along with creationism and intelligent design"

    Thusfar, in my personal conviction, cause seems relative in the scope of underlying mechanics that support all that we perceive, but as most of us, I'm eager for the day I'm proven wrong or right, I'll accept both outcomes with welcoming hands.

  78. Achems Razor

    @ eireannach666:

    The double slit experiment doesn't cause particle wave duality, it merely demonstrates the inseperability of the inherent, wave and particle natures of light and "other quantum particles"

    Are you referring to Multiverse theory?
    What the multiverse theory, or "M" theory, says is that this universe is but one vibrational unit, of which we are in tune with, in a unlimited sea of probable vibrational units, that co-exist along side of us, some only a planck length away. That is also where string theory comes into play.

    Peace...

  79. eireannach666

    @DK

    You miss interpeted what I was saying. I stated what I knew and then was simply asking if anyone knew more than I and to please elaborate , since my knowledge is limited on the two slits experiments. Please read the posts above that.(Which my typing was all jacked up on) and Im sure I have the basics down and see it as intresting but it doesnt really seem to prove jack about any ID. Since you are talking , though , why dont you use that big sarcastic brain of yours and elaborate further on the topic.

  80. Epicurean_Logic

    @ Achems when you say,

    'you are basically saying the Universe is a mind construct, from the collective consciousness.'

    by the above reasoning doesn't that mean that if some part of the collective 'conciousness' are removed or die for example then some part of the universe will disapear?

  81. eireannach666

    @Achems Razor

    See , Im familiar with multi-universe/string theory but I kind of got the point that they were tryng to use this two slits experiment to either A. get some kind of proof to back up ID
    or B.the same for multi universe.

    But I think you summed up the validity of this for me "it merely demonstrates the inseperability of the inherent, wave and particle natures of light and “other quantum particles”

    Pretty much I as I figured , flawed because , looks like we can only calculate probabilities .Not really explaining anything .

    Much appreciated.

  82. Achems Razor

    Some part of the universe? No! actually all the universe will of course disappear, but only to the consciousness that disappears or is removed. It will all still be there to the rest.

    Am not being facetious.

  83. Randy

    The universe was here long before we were. Knowing that, it is reasonable to assume that it will be here long after, we as a species, kick it.

    Look, this whole concept of consiousness creating reality mysticism proceeds from one faulty assumtion, for which many scientists even fail to realize:

    Human consiousness is nothing. It barely exists.

    We are not the pinnacle of "creation". We are not even close, in my opinion. We are just the top of the food chain, which, by the way, is the most precarious position to have achieved. If the top goes, there is always another "top" to replace it, and the chain is indisturbed. The bottom or the middle is much more precious!

    And, by the way, we ain't even the TOP. The top of the food chain is bacterium and viruses that outnumber every living thing that ever existed on the planet, everyday, by about a trillion to one! And they eat us, all the time.

    And, by the way, it ain't even a chain! We are all, eventually food for something else.

    Our species is tiny, insignificant and un-noteworthy. That does not upset me, does that upset you?

    Think it terms of billions of years, not a couple of generations. That will give you the perspective you need.

    Does that mean we should just give up? No, of course not. Live your tiny life and take care of your tiny-lived people and then just give up your tiny, rented life. Learn all that you can, but don't think you can keep anything, or that what we do matters to the Universe or the Earth.

    The Earth is fine. We're the ones that are going away!

  84. eireannach666

    @Randy

    THAT, my fried was perfect , right on. Ive always thought the exact same way.

    Keep passing that "bong of truth" around.

  85. HaTe_MaChInE

    @ Epicurean_Logic - There is such a thing as quantum mechanics. I think quantum mechanics is very interesting and one of the most accurate devices to test a system that man has ever used.

    Saying quantum theory is like saying algebra theory, or geometry theory.

    If you find a published paper on quantum theory i will retract my statement. I really cant say I have read anything in academia on a quantum theory. Im using the word "theory" in the same context as in theory of evolution.

    I just dont like the word theory being thrown around any time someone comes up with a random idea.

  86. go2mark

    "Learn all that you can, but don't think you can keep anything, or that what we do matters to the Universe or the Earth." if this is true and we chose to teach this to our children then we have no reason to be concerned when justice and morality cease to be a integral part of society. after all we are just worms with a pedigree.

    "Our species is tiny, insignificant and un-noteworthy. That does not upset me, does that upset you?". unfortunately this is not the case. we are a very proud, selfish species and seek-out recognition and admiration and take offense when it is not received. Our lack of humility could be considered the number 1 reason for eventual elimination. The paradox is that it is this same characteristic of self preservation which helps us survive.

  87. go2mark

    quantum field theory has been developed by the rational that we need to find a way to conjoin relativity with quantum mechanic so as to arrive at a TOE (theory of everything). some believe this will answer all our questions and then we will not have to have these discussions any more. happy happy joy joy. how come no one talks about ren and stimpy anymore ?

  88. Epicurean_Logic

    @ Achems, well, as usual Randys over inflated brain hit upon exactly where i was going with the argument. nuff said.

    @H_M i thought that is what you were were hinting at but wasn't sure and i am glad you clarified your reasoning. people out there might infer from your comment that Q.M. is some crazy ( although it is the some sense crazy) idea that has no foundation or use in science.
    i would describe a theory in simple terms and a large number of theorems that combine and link to form a universal idea. would it be correct to say that there are not enough individual theorem or linking concepts.any idea about what fails to qualify it as a theory?

  89. Randy

    @go2mark

    “Learn all that you can, but don’t think you can keep anything, or that what we do matters to the Universe or the Earth.” if this is true and we chose to teach this to our children then we have no reason to be concerned when justice and morality cease to be a integral part of society. after all we are just worms with a pedigree."

    Morality and justice are human ideas that do not exist in nature. But, they MUST exist in our societies and for very sound Evolutionary reasons. As I have stated many times.

    Teach your children to be productive and responsible members of society because it is beneficial to society... not because some god will get angry.

    “Our species is tiny, insignificant and un-noteworthy. That does not upset me, does that upset you?”. unfortunately this is not the case. we are a very proud, selfish species and seek-out recognition and admiration and take offense when it is not received. Our lack of humility could be considered the number 1 reason for eventual elimination. The paradox is that it is this same characteristic of self preservation which helps us survive."

    Pride, admiration, all, again, human things and just as insignificant as we. The whole human package is so tiny, it may as well not exist at all.

    But we can try to do better, why not. I don't think it will do any good, but I still try to be productive and moral and take care of those around us.

    But, I think the Earth is about done with us.

  90. Randy

    @HaTe_MachIne

    Yes, even I am often confusing the terms "Quantum Mechanics" with Quantum Theory as if they are interchangable. I suffer from poetic liscense, I am afraid...

    My terms are sometimes not as precise as they should be, sometimes, but I hope to get the meaning across in a palatable way.

  91. Epicurean_Logic

    @go2mark 'after all we are just worms with a pedigree' try not to take Randys terse critcism too personally you know what these 'ivy leauge eggheads' can be like with the way they relay information.

  92. Randy

    @Epi

    Those were go2mark's words not mine...

  93. D-K

    @eireannach666

    I myself don't understand the science to such a level in which I can simplefy it enough for myself to fully comprehend, let alone make it understandable to you.

    All I can and will do, is judge any theories and hypotheses on their logical construction, reserving all judgement and pre-conceived notions in an attempt to dismiss as little as possible, granted that it remain somewhat comprehensable. When delving into the area of quantum-anything, my personal comprehension of the subject matter simply ceases to be. I have accepted and embraced my limitations, all that remains for me, logically, is to judge on logic and logical probability with the knowledge that I do understand on a fundamental level.

    It is arrogance coupled with humility that allows me to be a free- and critical thinker, yet allows me to be open-minded to possible information contradictory to what I assessed to be logical in the first place.

    What I mean to say is, I have in-depth knowledge, but don't judge it to be sufficient to pass around, and even moreso pass it around as fact.

  94. go2mark

    “Learn all that you can, but don’t think you can keep anything, or that what we do matters to the Universe or the Earth.” also this flies in the face of what the author of this doc has stated in that what we learn collectively will impose radical transformation on our evolutionary trajectory.
    Ultimately science tells us that there is a plank length and plank time which lends to the hypothesis that there may also be a point were we can know if and when life had a beginning and hence understand what is consciousness. damn will someone please change the bong water already.

  95. Epicurean_Logic

    oh ok i jumped into your conversation on evolution which was very interesting and got the impression that mark was offended by your comment on high school education. just poking my nose in where it shouldn't be. sorry.

  96. Epicurean_Logic

    O.K. gents i am off out drink and smoke myself into a masturb@tive stupor. catch up later.

    thanks

  97. HaTe_MaChInE

    Consciousness is a biochemical process. If you say consciousness is anything else I would like to see the paper. If there is no paper then it is not science. If it is not science it is no different then a bronze age book about jew zombies.

    Strings, branes, dimensions 4-11 are all fun and exciting to think about. There is one problem when you get past the 'think about' part is that they cannot be tested. If you cant test it, it is just not science. I have a funny feeling that it will be science soon but right now it just isnt. If you try to backup your idea using noting but other ideas you have failed.

    I hurts me to say this but it true.

    Using strings and membranes to backup your idea is no different then using a the bible, the koran, or FSM.

    It doesn't take a "religee" to pervert ideas into something they are not. All it takes is someone that says what people want to here , and have no ability to backup what the are saying.

  98. Randy

    Well, there ya go...

    The Machine just nailed it in a couple of paragraphs and I have been dancing around that idea for like... 16 posts...

    So many "movements" have been founded on the "what if..." parts of Quantum THEORY, that it often gets jumbled up with the nuts and bolts part... the Mechanics, which ARE science.

    Bravo, my friend. Have another hit on the Bong-of-Truth!

  99. katerpult

    good one. worth the time.

  100. go2mark

    HaTe_MaChInE05/14/2010 at 20:04
    "Consciousness is a biochemical process. If you say consciousness is anything else I would like to see the paper" if this is the case then we should soon enough have a well documented explanation for it. by that reasoning we should be able to test for justice and morality as well. in the end test tubes will hold all the answers. (laughs , lay off the sticky green ) science is just a tool and without hypothesis it serves no one. you have zero proof that " Consciousness is a biochemical process " only conjecture . But i bet you could get a good job at a major pharmaceutical company.

  101. D-K

    Randy: Agreed, his logic is sound.

    Higher probability of a theory doesn't justify passing it off as fact.

  102. D-K

    Note to self: tab+enter does not equal shift+enter.

    I meant to add that the testing-ground might become apparant, or at least seems probable, when the weakness of gravity is explained. Something I personally think will have a profound impact on the theory leading up to TOE

  103. Randy

    @D-K

    What would you bet your life on? The higher probablity or the... maybe...

    What would you bet your child's life on?

    What would you bet the future of the human species on?

  104. HaTe_MaChInE

    @go2mark - "if this is the case then we should soon enough have a well documented explanation"

    The well documented explanation for consciousness being a biochemical process is that nothing outside of biology has ever demonstrated consciousness. If you have another hypothesis i suggest you write it, test it, reproduce it and go collect your Nobel Prize. Since that requires imagination, hard work, and intellect I have a feeling you will not be getting published any time soon.

    "justice and morality" are opinions. Science does not test opinions. If you want to setup a concrete definition of morality that is free of opinion, Im sure there are hundreds of ways to test for it. Much like the part in this docu' that showed that piranha do not eat their own kind during a feeding frenzy. Could this be considered a level of morality?

    Good news is that Vlatko has a created a venue where there is no censorship of faulty ideas. Therefor we are both free to post no matter how illogical our statements are.

  105. go2mark

    the bet you make should decided based on the reward that is expected.
    ie: betting your life on an uncertainty is only foolish when the stakes are big.
    if you believe you have nothing to lose then you are not really gambling anything at all.
    therefore if there is nothing after this life then there is no gamble.
    but if there is something then it means everything.
    so which is the bigger gamble ?
    1) hold onto this life because there is nothing else or
    2) sacrifice this life because there might be something more.

  106. go2mark

    "The well documented explanation for consciousness being a biochemical process is that nothing outside of biology has ever demonstrated consciousness" ok i was not aware that biology has definitely demonstrated consciousness . i would like to read that if you could
    point me to it. also i would like to see some of your published work so that i have a better idea of whom i am conversing with.

  107. Randy

    Let me try this again. The reason our life is precious is that there is nothing after. This is not a "dress rehearsal".

    Our species should survive and thrive longer, not for you and me, because we are NOT important, but our species is, (to us, not to nature, there's plenty more of us where we came from), That is how nature works.

    Science could help us to thrive and live past this precipice, but we are probably too silly a species to realize that. So, our species will die off, sad for us, not for NATURE. Nature rolls merrily on.

    The bet should be on science to keep our species alive as long as we can... but alas... I fear we will not heed it.

    Life is sacred, individual life is NOT. Individual species are NOT sacred... ALL life is sacred. And that is not in any jeopardy. Life on this planet is doing fine and does not need us to go on.

    It is up to us to keep us alive. But we won't... but that's ok... there is plenty more to replace us.

    I don't know... am I not being clear about that?

  108. Randy

    Once more... as long as a few microbes survive the atomic holocaust, this planet will be a vibrant, powerful eco-system again in just a few million years.

    We can not effect it in any way, either positively nor negatively. It has survived MUCH greater catastrophies and disasters-- long before we ever even THOUGHT of leaving the oceans. let alone discovered oil or industry...

  109. IlovemyselfmorethanI

    Hey I seriously am curious, no sarcasm in these questions:

    "Let me try this again. The reason our life is precious is that there is nothing after. This is not a “dress rehearsal”."

    -- If there is nothing after, why does that make life precious? Is it because it is short?

    "because we are NOT important, but our species is, (to us, not to nature, there’s plenty more of us where we came from), That is how nature works."

    -- So hypothetically speaking, if the world became overpopulated, and our resources dwindled because of such, (or is this happening already?)we would be behaving morally if we nuked a 3rd world country that had no economic contribution to the rest of the world, because then we would have more resources for the rest of the population that forms our species?

    "Life is sacred, individual life is NOT"

    -- The closest synonym to the word 'sacred'-- that has no religious bent-- is the word 'inviolable'; prohibiting violation, violence, infringement. I think this is a scary proposition, wouldn't you want to agree?

  110. go2mark

    yes that comment was crystal clear. What you left out that it is just your opinion and not science. I enjoy your point of view but i just don't agree with all of it.
    Science does not say that life is precious , it only maps out what we observe without opinion either way. we dont need science anymore than we need awareness. its just there as a consequence of our existence. you may be offended by this only because you are a scientist and without science your life might have no meaning. ( not meant to be directed at you personally) A devoted scientifically minded individual should have no accountability to anyone or anything because nothing is sacred. It is just nature and nothing more.

    Will you not converse with someone unless they share your views . Science would be rather lame without opposing views to to forge the empirical evidence that is required to reach a consensus . Hence we have an alliance to explore and compare points of view. I do agree with you that we will not be able to save ourselves but for altogether different reasons.
    Again all with good intentions, nothing personal , just observations.

  111. Randy

    @ilovemyselfmorethani (really?)

    Last question first... "Sacred" is a poetic term I used, because it is often used by people in reference to life, even as they don't understand it. But I do believe in "sacred" things, not in a religious way, but in the sense that these things are, indeed, "inviolable". My marriage is, for example, sacred to me. And look up the latin root, "it's in the blood...".

    But, in scientific terms maybe I should have used the word, "Valuable". Replace sacred with valuable.

    Life, (our individual life), is/should be valuable to US because, this is all we get. We better make the most of it!

    Nature has a sure fire method of population control. Starvation. It always works. We don't need to do anything about it, like kill people, (which would be against our evolutionary predalections, we are social mammals, we have a built in "moral" code, as I explained).

    But, science could probably help us out there, if we could get the politicians and the religees out of the way... NAH!

  112. Randy

    @go2mark who wrote:

    "Science does not say that life is precious..."

    Science does say that nature shows that life is precious. Not human life, but ALL life. Nature has shown that to us very well, if you care to look.

    When I say life, you think human life. I mean all life. When I mean human life, I say so.

  113. GreatBigBore

    I'm generally in agreement with the guy, and I appreciate his efforts. But I do have to say that he's wrong on one point, which he incorrectly makes in part 10: gravity absolutely IS necessary for life to occur. Biochemistry can occur in the absence of gravity, but gravity had to exist in the universe in order for stars to form, because stars are the source of the heavier elements necessary for biochemistry to start. When the universe first cooled enough for matter to exist, the only matter present was hydrogen and helium. It took billions of years of fusion and zillions of supernovas to produce all the other elements.

    Bottom line is that gravity absolutely is necessary for life, unless we're going to say that some kind of biochemistry is possible with just from hydrogen/helium interactions.

  114. go2mark

    yes i agree with you here but our "relative morality" is not universal and i am sure you will agree that unfortunately all science is not used in a purely un-selfish way. Also there is no doubt that religion has had a big part in human suffering. Science has no need for religion or morality or personal opinion but religion ( for lack of a better word ) includes all of these.

  115. ChristPuncher

    To think that the human species is anymore than a parasite on the earths surface, that cant be shaken off, is absurd. Theres very little we can do to this earth that it wont survive. Litter and pollute all you want, it will only effect the lifeforms living on it, and it wont take long in the grand scheme for it to repair. Stop worrying about the earth! worry about yourselves!

  116. Randy

    @go2mark

    By the way, everything I have said is backed up by science. You wouldn't understand, so don't try. Just study! And you will see.

    @Greatbigbore

    The "guy" was saying that microscopic life is not effected by gravity. It may as well be floating in space. Gravity IS necessary for building planets and stars, but micrscopic life, for example, doesn't need it.

    We need it. But we come from the microscopic, so...

  117. go2mark

    ok but human life is part of all live therefore must be also "precious". Sometimes all we have is our words and that is just 1 of our inherent limitations. My experience in life tells me there is more. i could be wrong.

  118. IlovemyselfmorethanI

    @ Randy

    Yeah I was serious. Thanks for the clarifications buddy.

  119. Randy

    Take humans out of the equation, as we simply are too insignificant to consider, at this point.

    Now look at the Earth and 4 billion years of evolution... now do you see what I'm talking about?

    You see a thriving nature just churning along, surging, dying, changing... and going on and on in a wonderful continuum that never ends, until the sun explodes and sends our biological material into space...

    Maybe to land on some other world...?

  120. GreatBigBore

    @Randy
    Right, at 1:40, he's SHOWING that life can FUNCTION without gravity. But he's SAYING (or at least suggesting/implying) that life can EXIST without gravity. I'm on his side, and I've never seen him wrong before. I think one mistake can easily be forgiven. He's right on all other points except this one.

  121. Randy

    @greatbigbore

    I repectfully disagree that it is a mistake. If life can FUNCTION without gravity, than it can EXIST without gravity... don't you agree?

    Essentially, all life on this planet began without gravity, being as gravity had no effect on it... right? Gravity's effect had no contribution.

    Am I understanding your point?

    @ilovemyself

    I wasn't making fun of your questions, they were very good questions!

    I was actually poking fun at your name, with the (really?) comment, forgive me... I was being a smart-a**!

  122. go2mark

    why do people laugh at scientists

    "Essentially, all life on this planet began without gravity, being as gravity had no effect on it... right? Gravity's effect had no contribution."

    are you serious ?

  123. Randy

    Yes, mark.

    As explained in the doc, MICROSCOPIC life is unaffected by gravity. Gravity's force has no effect on it. Fact.

    And microscopic life is the dominant life-form on this planet.

  124. go2mark

    If life can FUNCTION without gravity, than it can EXIST without gravity... don't you agree?
    how do you know that life can function without gravity.? because we went up in space for months ? We have no idea what an extended stay might do. not to mention i dont believe we even truly understand everything there is to know about gravity yet.

  125. go2mark

    without gravity we could be living in a totally different dimension where we breath with our eyes and see with our ears. This is just insane to say we know how life would be without gravity and i think QM has spelled that out.

  126. GreatBigBore

    @Randy
    You and I entirely agree on the facts. We disagree only on conceding this point to the narrator. Here's why I can't concede his point:

    1. At 1:40, he shows that life can FUNCTION without gravity.
    2. At 2:04, he shows that without the weak force, the universe would be "largely indistinguishable from our current universe".
    3. At 2:11 he concludes that gravity is irrelevant IN THE SAME WAY as the weak force is irrelevant.

    We know that gravity does not affect biochemistry directly, but we can't say that gravity is entirely irrelevant to life. We can't say that a universe without gravity would be "largely indistinguishable". A universe without gravity would definitely be a universe without life, because it would be all hydrogen and helium.

    At the very least, he's stretching the point. He's trying to say, without realizing it of course, that if gravity had shut off after a while, life could have occurred. That's a really weird point to make. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt and just saying that he's flat wrong, which is the more intelligent mistake in this case.

  127. Achems Razor

    Wow! a lot of fatalist stuff.

    There is much, much, more, out there, than what our limited 5 senses allow us to see and comprehend. We all basically have blinders on.

    Nobody knows for sure that their is nothing out there after life, that all there is, is "oblivion".

    I have said it before and will say again, there is no such thing as "oblivion", if there is , than someone define it for me, tell me what it looks, feels, smells, tastes like!

    Since nobody knows "oblivion" than there is always something.

  128. Randy

    Mark...

    If you learned about gravity and mass in school, you would understand what we were talking about.

    The mass of microbes is so negligable that gravity has no effect on it. Especially in water.

    Viruses actually float around only efected by air and water currents, not gravity.

    They stick to things, that is what they do. They are sticky. But, if they don't make contact with a surface they float around.

  129. Randy

    @Greatbigbore

    Ah yes, I understand your point now... you are looking at the Universe as a whole and the creation of the panet itself through gravitational forces.

    OK, but I think he was being more "local" in his point.

    But, I would speculate this: perhaps life has evolved somewhere in space, without the aid of a planet...?

  130. go2mark

    yes i have no problem with that but the facts are that gravity is so intrinsic to our very existence that life may or may not exist at all without it. maybe it would never have even gotten started. ( if in fact it ever did ?)

  131. Randy

    No. To most of the life on this planet, as I said, gravity is NOT important at all.

    Most of the life on this planet is microbial. And we came from them, so... again... gravity is not important to life...

    (exceot as the builder of the PLANET on which we all live, as GreatBigBore points out...)

  132. J

    90% of all off these comments are arguing semantics, and liberals self-congratulating themselves on their collective "open-mindedness." Good lord, how nauseating.

  133. go2mark

    its nice to know there is at least 1 person on here who has it all figured out.
    too bad he doesn't want to share. i wonder if J stands for jesus ?

  134. D-K

    @Randy:

    "What would you bet your life on? The higher probablity or the… maybe…

    What would you bet your child’s life on?

    What would you bet the future of the human species on"

    1, higher probability is still a maybe, so without quantifying the "maybe", you leave too much to the imagination.

    2, probably nothing.

    3, I don't get where these questions refer to to begin with, this one least of all. Please elaborate.

  135. Randy

    D-K

    For thousands of years, that is exactly what religion and cult leaders have been asking us to do, bet our lives and our children's lives and even our species on an untestable... maybe...

    Finally science says, "we have a scientific method that can prove and test and experiment so we can bet our lives on something testable... even if it may not be absolute, it is a better bet than superstition..."

    So, far, betting on science has given us... everything around us...

    Now the cult leaders are screaming... "NO! Bet your lives and your children's lives and the human species on these ancient beliefs, that never really worked before, but we are pretty sure they will work THIS TIME!"

    Pretty sure is not enough for our survival. The best bet is science.

  136. Randy

    @J

    I'm not a liberal... I hate hippies...

  137. HaTe_MaChInE

    @Randy - "I hate hippies..." Amen

  138. D-K

    @Randy:

    Please enlighten me as to what gave you the notion that i'm pro-religion? I despise logical fallacies, I seek truth and as such, have adopted the scientific mindset.
    Building on that, I have also adopted the ability to be truly emotionally detached and thus objective in an attempt to truly understand seemingly incomprehensable processes.

    Unless of course i'm just totally not getting the punchline, in which case, to my defense; I am baked.

    enlighten me, please.

  139. Randy

    @D-K

    LOL! Ok, then... enjoy that! But I would suggest you scroll up to try and take in the entire exchange between you and Hate_MAchine, and me... there is a whole idea there...

    And to that I would add: It is perfectly acceptable for men and women of science to reject delusion and fantasy as not worthy of consideration. The line must be drawn. And anything untestable, immeasurable, or otherwise, unobservable, is meaningless... to science...

    Anything else is philosophy. Which is fine and worthy of study, but "Philosophy bakes no bread!"

  140. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    What precisely do people think most funny about believers? Just curious.

  141. D-K

    Randy

    Lies and slander! Mockery! There has never been a conversation between us 3, on this page i've replied to Zardoz...

    Oohh... wait.. I see it. There has been a mix-up I think.
    You agreed with Hate Machine, and I agreed with you agreeing with him.

    "Using strings and membranes to backup your idea is no different then using a the bible, the koran, or FSM."

    This is what I was referring too with higher prob.
    I agree with you both, I could make up a contradictory theory if you wish to debate for the sake of debating, but it seems counterproductive.

    Although I love a good squablin'..

  142. go2mark

    @mJy hEeSaUrSt
    I would say that depends on who you ask, but there is a new cartoon show coming out on comedy central which aim is to mock jesus christ. it seems they were intimidated to much by islam to mock Mohammed . Another prophecy fulfilled.

  143. go2mark

    if i may quote a Sir James Hopwood Jeans to backup my previous statements .

    "The outstanding achievement of 20th century physics is not the theory of relativity or the theory of quanta, or the dissection of the atom, but it is the general recognition that we are not yet in contact with ultimate reality."

    which i believe still holds true more than 60 years later.

  144. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    Mark, that was a good quote. I actually agree with that. People think that I am "reTarded" with a cross rather than a "t", because I'm a creationist, but people just gloss over the huge mathmatical and logistical metamorphic problems with evolution and accept it as fact. I just wish I was educated enough to answer my own questions about both creation and evolution, such as why ARE fossils segregated into different layers? "The Flood" alone may or may not account for this segregation, but I think that is too simple an explanation. What do you think? Is your name "Mark" or is that a Bible reference in your name? You don't have to answer if that is too personal.

  145. Randy

    @mJy hEeSaUrSt who wrote:

    "What precisely do people think most funny about believers? Just curious."

    I personally, do not find you funny at all. I find you dangerous, evil, monsterous, and the very end of the entire human species.

    I find your religion offensive and insane. If your religion turns out to be true, as I have said many times, I would join Satan in his army to destroy the monster you worship.

    And if your monster-overlord sends me to hell, I would go there happily, with both of my middle fingers shoved into his/its face.

    I do NOT think christians or any of their kind, to be good people. There is NO place in my thinking for your ideaology, and I have studied it intensely...

    But, that's just me...

  146. D-K

    Also, pitchforks are in this summer, so heaven can suck it.

    Seriously though, the thing about religion that's "funny" is how succesful it is in causing the stagnation of the progress of human kind and the search for truth.

  147. Randy

    @D-K

    I have to apologize to you! I have been reading your posts all over the site and I see that I got you all wrong!

    And I see that, even in this thread, I mis-understood your intentions...

    I thought you espoused irrationality, but you actually do not. And you are very funny!

    Enjoy the Bong-of-Truth, my brother. And forgive my harsh words!

  148. Randy

    @Achems Razor who wrote:

    "Wow! a lot of fatalist stuff..."

    Probably about my many dissertations about humanity not being important and no afterlife.... (we have had this discussion before, he and I)

    But I will re-paste my earlier post:

    "Take humans out of the equation, as we simply are too insignificant to consider, at this point.

    Now look at the Earth and 4 billion years of evolution… now do you see what I’m talking about?

    You see a thriving NATURE just churning along, surging, dying, changing… and going on and on in a wonderful continuum that never ends, until the sun explodes and sends our biological material into space…

    Maybe to land on some other world…?"

    Achems, don't you see great joy in that? I do. Humanity may mean nothing, but we are just a small piece of life... LIFE is eternal... just not my life, or yours, or any other humans'...

    What's not to see as beautiful or joyous in that?

  149. D-K

    Pay it no mind, fellow seeker of truth. In heated debate, sometimes one's quickness of tongue preceeds even thought.

    It might be me though, I had a bit of a run-in with Epicurus as well in the "million dollar mind reader" comment section, but that turned out to be a very enjoyable discussion, that lead to the discussing of bongs as well, albeit not the metaphorical ones.

    I pay thanks to your kind words, gentle sir, and side by you in the battle against irrationality. May we prevail in our quest for truth and be aided by logic and reason!

  150. Randy

    There is no excuse, sir. A quick tongue, belies a thoughtful mind!

    I was being harried, in my defense, by a young slacker with not even a high school education... so I was distracted... although that is to my discredit, as well, as I should have ignored him completely, but I thought I could educate him... well, that is why I never became a teacher...

    I love Epicurus, but he can be an intellectual "Quizinart" if you are not up to his challenge!

    See, now you've got me writing like you... all "Elizabethan" and stuff... actually we are writing more "Victorian", like Dickens or Melville...

    Anyways, thanks for understanding...

  151. eireannach666

    @D-K

    What are you babbling about. I think you missed what I was trying to understand . Besides , not to be rude but you took a cheap pot shot at me when I wasnt directing any dialog nor questions at you. As Nobody fully understands QT. Better to try than to dismiss .

  152. D-K

    @eireannach666:

    I find myself asking the very same question.. I did not take a pot-shot at you.. what comment are you referring to?

  153. Randy

    @eireannach666

    Ssshhhh! D-K is a friend! Calm down! I misjudged him...

  154. Randy

    I think we both mis-read his posts...

  155. D-K

    Why is there a mob at my door... and what's with the torches.. it's 3pm..

    Randy!! You got some 'splainin to do!!

  156. D-K

    I probably didn't help with the confusion.. I have a seriously weird sense of humor, and i'm not always cristal clear in what I mean..

  157. Randy

    @D-K...

    *tears running down face-- laughing like a loon*

    can't type...

  158. Don

    The only reason people can be this stupid is because (as a species) we're egotistical and arrogant. So don't laugh too hard at creationists, any one of us could have become one.

  159. Randy

    Yes, D-K, that "argument" seemed to come out of nowhere! You must have been MUCH amazed!

    WOW!

  160. Randy

    @Don who wrote:

    "The only reason people can be this stupid is because (as a species) we’re egotistical and arrogant. So don’t laugh too hard at creationists, any one of us could have become one."

    Yes, indeed, I WAS one! For one year and seven months in high-school, (a thousand years ago) I was a born again a**hole.

    It's the most shameful time of my life-- however, I learned a great deal about how they think, and I was able to read their novel (bible) several times, and attend classes!

    So, I can combat them on any level.

    And I know, that their god is evil, first hand!

  161. eireannach666

    @D-K

    Maybe we misinterpreted eachother.

    My bad.

  162. eireannach666

    @D-K

    I reserve a stance similar to Randy's , "I mis-understood your intentions…"
    Don't sweat it , life goes on.

    @Randy
    Thanks for catching that , I had to re-read everything . Good looking out.

  163. go2mark

    @mJy hEeSaUrSt
    yes mark is my name but i chose this handle before i became aware. i chose it only because i thought it would be an easy email address to give out. if you have a question about evolution you better ask randy. he has a PHD. ill just sit back and watch (i promise). dont take anything too personal in here. it is mostly pointy headed douchebags just stroking themselves. as far as the flood look at what happened to Mt saint helen after only 30 years to get an idea on a smaller scale. multiply times 1000 and you get and idea of what is possible in a relatively short period of time. no question is irrelevant just sometimes our heads get in the way.

  164. Loves To Spooge

    Yeah Thunderf00t is a great dude who has been fighting the good fight over on youtube.

  165. Randy

    @eireannach666

    Yes, it's frustrating when people don't take ALL of your posts into consideration before making judgements.

    I hate it when people do that to me, and I did the same with D-K. If you look at his posts around the site, you get a real feel for his ethos.

  166. Randy

    @go2mark who wrote:

    "if you have a question about evolution you better ask randy. he has a PHD. ill just sit back and watch (i promise)..."

    You say that like I should be ashamed of the fact that I worked hard for my PHD and you should be proud that you could barely finish high-school...

    Dude... THAT is what is wrong with this country. People who work hard at education are called ELITIST and scorned...

    People who sit back in the trailer and live with mom and dad are praised...

    DUDE!

  167. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Im just going to go over to Europe and buy him a beer and we can have a "bong" of truth " session."

    Its sometimes hard to get what people mean online, you cant see body language or hear tone of voice, so its left to the reader to distinguish. Which is why humor and sarcasm can be mistaken for insult. It only works when the intentions are obvious or explained . We should all be careful of what we say. I am guilty as well.

  168. go2mark

    yes randy please google sarcasm. my post was only to make the other poster
    aware of how cynical we can be in here. do not take this stuff so serious.
    90% of all our post are just fun and games.

    Please tell me which thread i can search for your best posts so that
    I can know how to best respond to you. i don’t want to short change you.
    I have searched a few and have come up empty. sincerely

  169. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    @ Mark. Yes, I remember Mt. St. Helen's eruption and the discoveries of how quickly things can take place afterward like the formation of canyons and the reason why the Petrified Forest in California was like it was as the trees were swept into Spirit Lake and waterlogged at different speeds due to different levels of rootmass and weight, therefore falling and being trapped in an up-right manner at different levels, just like the Petrified Forrest which they say took millions of years to form. I think they took down that sign once it was proved by examining the rings of the threes that they all came from the same forrest despite the different layers of rocks. I had forgotten about that, but that is what I am talking about. We sometimes think we have all the answers only later to be proved incorrect in all our assumptions concerning the fossil layer. I'm not convinced yet that the fossil layers proves evolution. It only proves there were animals, perhaps at different times, that do not exist today. We are not entirely sure how long it took to form them even. To use that to say there is no god is a stretch by any means I think.

    @ Randy

    "I find you dangerous, evil, monsterous, and the very end of the entire human species."

    How, might I ask, are we so "evil, dangerous, monsterous, and the very end of the entire human species"? Seriously.

  170. Randy

    @mJy hEeSaUrSt wrote:

    "How, might I ask, are we so “evil, dangerous, monsterous, and the very end of the entire human species”? Seriously."

    I will just mention one out of the many atrocities your monster-god-myth has perpatrated on the human species. This is just ONE example, but very significant:

    The oppression of women. Women are better than you, they are better than your god. But your god cursed all women with "an issue of blood and pain of child-birth" because of the actions of ONE woman. That is EVIL!

    Plus, if jesus wiped away all origianl sin, then born-again women would not have issues of blood or pain in child birth, but... alas... a big lie...

    Then there is your god sanctioning slavery, and all forms of sexual oppression which is essential for the species... etc.

    Your religion is EVIL to our species.

    Science, has no such evil. That would be just YOU!

  171. eireannach666

    @go2mark90% of all our post are just fun and games.

    Some of us are trying to learn and better our knowledge on things by taking notes from more experienced minds , while not having to debate religious hocus pocus, ya dig?

  172. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    @ Randy

    Good point about Eve's curse. You've stumped me on that one. On the sexual oppression, I would disagree. Heterosexual monogamy after marriage is a benefit to the human race not a way to destroy it.

  173. go2mark

    @eireannach666
    ok i see you are versed on the double slit experiment. i will make a note of that.
    Were you aware that most of the ivy league universities were started by
    christian organization with christian money. no comment needed. i would
    like to try to learn something here so i will just observe for now. sincerely

  174. Randy

    @mJy hEeSaUrSt

    Sorry, honey. I know the bible inside and out and I know science inside and out... I am your worst freaking nightmare!

    As far as sexual repression, I will lay, Ted Bundy, The BTK killer, Richard Speck, and a couple of dozen serial killers that were born out of christian sexual repression.... on YOUR doorstep.

    And that is just in the last 40 years or so... there are thousands of men and women that relieve their christian, sexual oppression out on US, thanks to you! Oh, I have a solid background in psychology, as well...

    That blood is on YOUR hands!

    And then you go back in history and we talk of wars in the name of religion... torture... and it goes on and on...

    A god of FIRE and BLOOD, is what you worship!

    Gratz!

  175. eireannach666

    @go2mark

    Eh , Ive done a little digging on the doube slits and from what I gatherd , it doesnt really explain much.Like I said before we can only calculate probabilities .

    Achems put it best though , "it merely demonstrates the inseperability of the inherent, wave and particle natures of light and “other quantum particles”

  176. Charles B.

    Randy: I'm impressed you have your Ph.D. That's so cool. I really respect that. I wish I had mine, but it would most likely be a Th.D. as my greatest desire for advanced studies would still be in the field of theology.

    I'll try to answer the "Eve" riddle if I may, but I first wanted to ask, "Do you really believe there is a God to hate"? If so, I'll try to answer the Eve question. If not, then it wouldn't matter to you even if I gave a good and accurate answer.

    What the hay!?! Why not? For others' sakes as well, even if they laugh at the answer, I'll try.

    In brief: Adam and Eve were caretakers and the sanctioned and intended progenitors of the human race. When they sinned, the whole of their governance also suffered including their decedents and even the Earth was cursed because of Adam's sin. I admit it sounds a bit "unfair" but who are we to set God's standard of what is "fair" and "unfair" in the way the universe is run? It's the very reason why we needed Jesus' propitiation on the Cross to "pay for" Adam's sin. I would like to point out that in the Bible, the buck stops with Adam and not Eve. Adam was a full participant in the rebellious act with eyes wide-open. It says somewhere in the New Testament that Eve was deceived, but Adam was not; he rebelled knowingly whereas Eve was duped to some extent.

    But, the good news is that in the eventuality of God's eternal kingdom, all the consequences of Adam and Eve's sin will be eradicated along with the sin nature of mankind. That time has not yet come, so until that time when sin is entirely removed from the Earth, then there will be the consequences and repercussions of that first sin. "Sin" proper will only be done away with in the future eternal kingdom of God, but for an individual Christian's life, sin will be eternally non-consequential at the time of our individual death as long as we are "in grace" when our death comes.

    The slavery issue is a bit more complicated. If you really want a reply, I can try.

    In short: We are in the interim period and sin and it's results are not fully eradicated yet, but it shall be some day soon.

    Peace.

    P.S. May I ask what your PH.D. is in?

  177. eireannach666

    This constant bombardment of theology and the bible is harshing my morning mellow.

  178. go2mark

    it would be interesting to find a correlation between the non locality in QM and the current understanding of dark matter. from what i have read the elusive nature of the bosan particle imitates the findings from the dbl split. but like you said what will that even tell us ?

  179. Randy

    @Charles B.

    Of course, I do not believe there is a god to hate. But I hate the worship of this myth which is so destructive to our species.

    But as I have said many times, not knowing everything, I must contentd that there may be a very little chance, (2% maybe) that you are right.

    And as I say, if that 2% turns out to be true, I would be in the rebellion against this god-thing.

    And I wonder why you christians would not. It hurts us. Why do you love it?

    There is a Renaisance riddle, and maybe someone could tell me the great philospher that wrote it... my quote is slightly paraphrased as I do everything from memory...

    "Either god is unwilling or unable to rid the world of evil. If unable, he is not omnipotent, and unworthy of worship... If unwilling then he is malificent, and MUST not be worshipped..."

    I would go further, if unwilling [to rid the world of evil] it is only worthy of REBELLION!

    Luckily, science shows that there is almost NO chance of your god being a reality.

  180. Randy

    @Charles B.

    I have a PHD in World History and another in Classical literature...

    I am working on my masters in Evolutionary Biology but my dissertation is a bear.... I have been working on it for over ten years! I keep getting hung up on the "Aquatic Ape Theory" which my professors do not like...

    But, my "female of the species choosing primary sexual characteristics in males" went over pretty good, just not "masters" material.

    And I went to law school, but never finished, and went to med-school but never finished. And then I went to some other schools, but I can't really talk about them...

    I audited many classes in every school I attended. Keep in mind I had no money so I had to depend on scholarships and very hard work.

  181. eireannach666

    @Randy “Either god is unwilling or unable to rid the world of evil. If unable, he is not omnipotent, and unworthy of worship… If unwilling then he is malificent, and MUST not be worshipped…”

    Holy unicorn poo batman! I know this . Its driving me insane now that , I too , can not remember . Ahhh.
    Im going to have to find out, Its one of those types of things.

    Oh and thanks , I now am going to have to go redo my resume' . I feel so tiny.
    Impressive. I guess I got my humble pie for the day.

  182. ern

    When you stick to the science and facts, you're certainly doing a service. But not all ID advocates and YECs are quite as idiotic as the ones you hammer at. Yes, they're all wrong (and most are hilariously so), but you don't do yourself any favors by reading YEC comments in a bad Southern accent. You don't engage the big guns at Discovery as often as you should. Hovind and this internet video guy are low-hanging fruit. Easy targets. But I suppose it's convenient that they consolidate a lot of the scientific illiteracy out there.

    In any case, your videos are overall fantastic, and much appreciated.

  183. Charles B.

    Randy: Hum. I respect you very much Randy. You seem genuine at least. As far as the 2% possibility of God theory, I'll leave you with a quote from Spok on Star Trek: "When all other possibilities have been eliminated, then the remaining possibility, no matter how unlikely, must be the correct one." I like it! Quoted from memory also, of course. Good night to you.

    Peace.

  184. Randy

    Um... Charles...

    That quote was from Arthur Conan Doyle's "Sherlock Holmes", the Star Trek movie cribbed it... for Vulcans? Seriously?

  185. Randy

    Sorry, should have said, "SIR" Arthur Conan Doyle...

  186. Rebelliuss

    @Randy.. i think the quote you were paraphrasing was.. “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”.. the quote was originally said to have come from Epicurus, but first appears in the writings of Sextus Empiricus..

  187. eireannach666

    spock, Ha!

  188. Randy

    I wrote:

    "I have a PHD in World History and another in Classical literature…"

    Let me say this, those two PHD's are very hard to make a living with!

    Unless I wanted to go on Oprah Winfrey and sell a cult...

    I had to use my self-taught computer training and my experience in marketing to make a living!

    Still, I am proud of my achievements, and I managed to build a business that actually employed people and contributed to the common good.

    Although, I lost 18,000 US dollars in the first stock market crash! And my savings went to...valhalla!

    *shakes fist*

  189. Randy

    @Rebelliuss wrote:

    "@Randy.. i think the quote you were paraphrasing was.. “Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent. Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent. Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil? Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?”.. the quote was originally said to have come from Epicurus, but first appears in the writings of Sextus Empiricus.."

    You know, I thought it was Epicurus, but I was afraid everyone would say I was totally "gay" for the guy that calls himself "Epicurus" on this site... (because I kinda am...)

    Or, Epicruean_Logic, who everyone knows I love... (but not is a "gay" way.... you all get that, right?")

    LOL!

    Thank you, Rebelliuss! I am getting old and my brain is fried by the demon-drink...

  190. D-K

    @Charles:

    "When all other possibilities have been eliminated, then the remaining possibility, no matter how unlikely, must be the correct one.”

    Sadly, there is no way of knowing how to eliminate all possibilities at this time, obviously, as we cannot account for all the variables. It's also quite a tall order to assume that we know when we actually have accounted for all variables as the description of god's properties is too vague and abstract and does not require a set nature.

    This argument goes hand in hand with the argument that God cannot be empirically disproven, which counts for exactly diddly-squat, as none ficticious characters can be empirically disproven.

    My personal favourite is, "God works in mysterious ways" at an attempt to sooth one's query's with mythicality, which is.. well.. it's silly.

  191. D-K

    @Eierannach:

    Let it not trouble you, a simple misunderstanding. I know I seem like I am on the fence at times, but this is because I scrutinize scientific arguments as well as religious arguments to maintain an objective view. My scientific demeanor employs the wisdom instilled in these words, I quote:

    “If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence.”

    I favour the scientific view/explanation because logic and reason favour it, I shall remain objective for ever more, though.

  192. Achems Razor

    Thanks for finding the solution to the, Either God is unwilling or unable...thing.

    Of course had to search the whole net. to try and find, hate that first thing in the morning. Don't do that shyte! (LOL)

    Congrats on your accomplishments @ Randy, sincerely!

    @ Charles B:

    Of course Adam was going to aquiesce to Eve's demands, or do what? hump a tree?

  193. Rebelliuss

    @Randy.. your welcome.. it's one of my favourite quotes..;o)

  194. eireannach666

    @Rebelliuss
    thanks for reminding me about epicurus . It was winding me up trying to rember. Randy's riddles , man.

    @D-K
    That kind of thing happens now and then. No sweat.

    "belivers to maintain an objective view,"
    Thats what I like to hear.
    Prost!

  195. Randy

    @D-K (who makes me laugh like a... laughing person!)

    I would submit this to you, respectfully, (in the certain knowledge that you have read it before...):

    I wrote:

    "And to that I would add: It is perfectly acceptable for men and women of science to reject delusion and fantasy as not worthy of consideration. The line must be drawn. And anything untestable, immeasurable, or otherwise, unobservable, is meaningless… to science…

    Anything else is philosophy. Which is fine and worthy of study, but “Philosophy bakes no bread!”"

    And to that I would further add my own quote, "... but science can bake bread enough to feed the world... if we let it..."

    Now you must make fun of me... D-K! Belittle me! I was pompous and need much belittling...

  196. Randy

    I wrote, unfortunately:

    "Now you must make fun of me… D-K! Belittle me! I was pompous and need much belittling…"

    OK. THAT sounded gay! I am so sorry D-K... that embarassed us both... I thought I was being humble, but you know... it turned all gay...

    Sorry!

  197. Randy

    Not that there is anything WRONG with that... it's just that it is not cool to bring another guy into that whole thing...

    Sorry!

  198. eireannach666

    S&M Randy? Never would have guessed. lol Just kidding.

  199. D-K

    @Randy:

    Ah, but the fact that you'd recognize yourself as such eliminates the need for me to point it out. If I were to do so anyway, i'd be pompous myself and kicking a man when he has conceited the error of his ways, hardly an image I want to establish for myself.

    As I stated somewhere on this site amidst of my incoherent babbling, arrogance and humility are a necessary combination leading to self-confidence and self-doubt. When both are in healthy balance it leads to scrutiny as well as the means to stand by one's conviction, leading to awareness and insight.

    Your extensive knowledge concerning the subject matter is something I simply do not possess, all that I am currently capable of is examining for logical fallacies, and to provide a healthy dosage of giggle.

    Know that my sarcastic ways lurk in shallow water and that anyone who dare oppose, without proper argumentation, shall succumb to the rapier that is my tongue, readily held aloft to pierce through insubstantial utterences.

    I have a feeling, I shall soon be required to bring my A-material to ridicule those that so deserve it, and we shall make light of their ponderings, so that we may bask in the glow of our self-righteousness and laugh merrily as they plummet off their wit's end.

    We fight the good fight, noble is our cause and truth be our guidance.. We shall unify and lay waste to those that oppose us unarmed and ill-informed, and take many a hit from the bong of truth.

    aut vincere aut mori, brother.

  200. D-K

    I sometimes exchange humour for poetic symbolism, it is but one of many quirks that make up D-K's psyche. Young of body, young of mind and quite disturbed, such is I and such is warranting of self-admiration, arrogance and loathing for simplicity.

    So that I may confuse and lay harm to those I so see fit.

  201. Randy

    Oscar Wilde? Is that you?

    You are killing me, man...

    You are a writer out of another century.... as a PHD in Classical Literature, I love it!

  202. Randy

    OK, I will re-submit my post, WITHOUT, the homo-erotic end-quote! (Again... so sorry!)

    @D-K

    I would submit this to you, respectfully, (in the certain knowledge that you have read it before…):

    I wrote:

    “And to that I would add: It is perfectly acceptable for men and women of science to reject delusion and fantasy as not worthy of consideration. The line must be drawn. And anything untestable, immeasurable, or otherwise, unobservable, is meaningless… to science…

    Anything else is philosophy. Which is fine and worthy of study, but “Philosophy bakes no bread!””

    And to that I would further add my own quote, “… but science can bake bread enough to feed the world… if we let it…”

    Ok. That's it! It is pompous but I will just let it "drift"

  203. D-K

    Does like better sans homo eroticism.. ;)

    I haven't read anything of Oscar Wilde but I hear myself associated with him on multiple occasions, maybe I should dabble in his writings..

  204. eireannach666

    @Randy

    I like philosophy for the most part but its sort of like pancakes/flap-jacks . Ever notice how when you first get a bite your thinking ," Mmm this is pretty freakin good" , but by the time you're half done you're sick of them?

  205. D-K

    Wow... that last comments was poorly constructed and grammatically disturbing

    I shame myself..

  206. eireannach666

    I have said this before but got moderated but I think it applies to the conversation at hand here.
    "The mocker is never taken seriously when he is most serious." -James Joyce but a littlle sense of humor is always welcome in my opinnion. Sorry mr. joyce Ihad to throw that in there.

  207. D-K

    @eireannach666

    Maybe I'm over-analyzing but does eireannach666 mean "I reenact the devil"?

  208. D-K

    Damnit, again with the tab+enter.

    By which you symbolize that you're an anarchist?

  209. Randy

    @eireannach666

    "I like philosophy for the most part but its sort of like pancakes/flap-jacks . Ever notice how when you first get a bite your thinking ,” Mmm this is pretty freakin good” , but by the time you’re half done you’re sick of them?"

    That is an excellent metaphore, but philosophy is a BIT more nutricious. Like say religion, "Lucky Charms!", philosophy, "Shredded Wheat"...

    Like that maybe?

  210. ChristPuncher

    No, i believe its gaelic for Irish Man...man specifically.

  211. eireannach666

    @DK
    Eireannach just simply means Irish in Gaelic when directed towards a person. The 666 is just to tease the people who are all jacked up on jesux. My own personal poke at them. I worship nothing.

  212. Randy

    @D-K

    Some Oscar Wilde quotes off the cuff, and just from memory:

    "Times are so bad, the only things we can afford to pay, are compliments!"

    "I am a drinker with a writing problem!" (That's me)

    "Work is the curse of the Drinking Classes!" (That's me... wait...)

    Anyway, yes, definitely familiarize yourself with Wilde...

  213. ChristPuncher

    oh...i thought eireannaigh was the female translation? Bah i have no clue anymore

  214. eireannach666

    Really close ChristPuncher but man would be , fear=man bean= woman . and Ainnir = girl; young woman,. When directed towards the general. My favorite ,"Ta tu go h-aileann.= You are beautiful. An bhfuil tu posta ?= Are you married ? Just in case your in an Irish pub and you see a ginger queen.

  215. D-K

    @eireannach666:

    I love all things Irish, yet have not delved in the realm of Gaelic. Coincidently, i'm listening to "The Blood of Cuchulainn" as I type.

    It allows my mind to flutter as if carried by a gentle breeze.

  216. Randy

    @D-K

    Dude. You are SO high!

  217. Randy

    And, I wish I was.

    I am going to re-post something else. With no homo-erotic overtones... Because I thought it was pretty good... 'Course my professors think it is derivitive... whatever, PROF!

    Anyways, here it is...

    I wrote:

    “Take humans out of the equation, as we simply are too insignificant to consider, at this point.

    Now look at the Earth and 4 billion years of evolution… now do you see what I’m talking about?

    You see a thriving NATURE just churning along, surging, dying, changing… and going on and on in a wonderful continuum that never ends, until the sun explodes and sends our biological material into space…

    Maybe to land on some other world…?”

    And that is THAT!

  218. eireannach666

    @DK

    Great instrumental ! From my favorite movie . I can dig it.

    @Randy
    I think DK's a McCoy.Looks like we have the starts of an "away team".

  219. Will

    "Philosophy bakes no bread"?

    Spoken like someone who fails to understand what philosophy is.

    Almost all sciences come from philosophy. The vast majority of them were, at one poitn or another, philisophical schools of study. Once they became proveable they stopped being philosophy and became science.

    Do not underestimate the role that philosophy plays in the advancement of scientific understanding, my friends.

  220. Randy

    @Will

    Well, Will, that is not my quote that is an acient greek (?) quote, I only added to it.

    However, my personal hero Carl Sagan, had great contempt for Plato, Socrates, Pythagyrus, and others, because they denied the scientific method.

    I LOVE those guys and can quote them at will... but Carl says... No. They hurt science. Didn't help it.

    So... I have to tip my hat to Carl, who was smarter than anyone in this generation.... including myself, and you...

    I'm just sayin'... Carl Sagan...

  221. D-K

    ,

  222. D-K

    Carl Sagan was fantastic, I paid tribute to him in the Cosmos comment section.

    Also, I came by the instrumental trough the Saints as well, it ranks quite highly in my top 10 of favourite movies.

    And yes.. high... good god I am.. one of the several benefits of being dutch, there is no limit to my green supply.

  223. Randy

    @D-K

    I'm just sayin'... Carl Sagan!

  224. eireannach666

    @Randy
    "That is an excellent metaphore, but philosophy is a BIT more nutricious. Like say religion, “Lucky Charms!”, philosophy, “Shredded Wheat”…Like that maybe?"

    I likes. That fair to say , it just seems philosophy " debate" turns into the evil hairy fat step-sister religion "arguement" . As long as that doesnt stick her two cents in Im cool with philosophy. Oh how I loathe that witch. *cringe*

  225. Randy

    I have the "Cosmos" box set... When I was kid, I watched every episode on PBS, like it was my religion...

    Carl was like... my god!

    I would watch it on bended knee, hushed and silent, taking everything in... If I could light candles, I would!

  226. eireannach666

    @DK
    Thats ok because its legit in California now.

  227. D-K

    @eireannach

    Seriously? Arnie legalized mary j?

    liberals rejoyce!

  228. D-K

    Oh, yes.. I equate liberals with hippies sometimes.. I feel they are interchangable when it comes to this particular matter.

  229. D-K

    @Randy:

    Carl Sagan!

  230. Randy

    @D-K

    "Oh, yes.. I equate liberals with hippies sometimes.. I feel they are interchangable when it comes to this particular matter."

    I must agree. But don't tell HaTe_MAchiNe... he is nasty and punched Achem's cat!

    (That is in reference to another series of posts on... "The Genius of Charles Darwin"? Was that the series...?)

  231. Randy

    Achems Razor would know...

  232. Quimbys

    While I understand these people's desire for God's existence to be true, I am just tired of their views holding so much power over everybody else's lives. So, thanks for going to so much trouble to refute the claims of these Christian cultists. It was funny yet tragic to watch the narrator go through the motions of considering each statement and then showing how clearly absurd it, and therefore creationism, is. I have been thinking for a while about how Western society is tolerant toward Christian. I have often wondered why. Christianity has had its day. I now realize that it's time for tough love. These militant creationists are just children who refuse to grow up. I think it's time to do what we should do with any child who refuses to become responsible members of society: stop accommodating them. This tough love approach is the answer.

    Thanks for the great movie.

  233. Randy

    @Quimbys

    It really is rather tiresome, isn't? The constant shooting down of their "ducks" in the gallery?

    I agree with you. When will we be done with this?

  234. D-K

    @Randy: 2029, The quantum revolution.

    I'll be 41 by then but at least my kids won't have to deal with religion.. I silently hope natural selection will kick in long before then, or some type of seperation occurs, but realistically I don't see that happening.

    My hope and money is on the notion that quantum computing will render religion obsolete. That seems like a relatively unrelated cause-effect scenario but if I had to explain it all, i'd take up some serious commenting real-estate.

    Here's to hoping the projections are accurate.

  235. Randy

    @D-K

    I'll be dead, but good luck with that!

    The Phillies won, again, over the Brewers...

    But, seriously, D-K... good luck with that! I'm sure it will be really good for you!

    I'm just sayin'... Me? Dead. You? Not so much...

  236. D-K

    Kurzweil and Kaku are popping pills to make it to that date, and they're in their 60s.. Do you pre-date them?

    You're telling me you'll pass up a chance to see religion get kicked in the shin, smacked with a shovel and buried so deep that satan himself will laugh at the scripture?

  237. Randy

    HAHAHA! IN 2029 you"ll be 41? Oh, Holy Batman!

    What are you, 12?

    HAHAH! I love you, seriously... I just feel really old right now...

    You are wonderful, with your young, fresh brains....

    BRAINS!!! (that was a zombie movie reference! "Return of the Living Dead!")

  238. Randy

    Seriously, I would totally eat your brains right now...

    How do you think I got so smart?

  239. D-K

    @Randy:

    Well... 22
    I too, am quite taken with my brains.. they still have that wiff of freshness to them.. possibly still bubble-wrapped..

    You deftly evaded the question btw, like a gazelle, skipping graciously past the jagged rock of realism..C'mon..Í'm curious.

  240. Randy

    Well, I think I answered the question, my good friend, D-K!

    AS I wrote:
    ----------------------
    "I’ll be dead, but good luck with that!

    The Phillies won, again, over the Brewers…

    But, seriously, D-K… good luck with that! I’m sure it will be really good for you!

    I’m just sayin’… Me? Dead. You? Not so much…"
    ------------------------------
    I mean, I think if you look over my posts, this does not dis-please me...

    But I hope you and all of your beautiful family will be very happy!

  241. D-K

    Fair enough, I shall query no further.

  242. Randy

    @D-K

    See, now I get all wanting you to query further...

    Did I offend you in some way?

    I can do that...

  243. D-K

    No you cannot, (check the million dollar mind reader comment section for clarification)

    summary: i'm pretty much a psychopath.

    But it speaks to your character that you'd worry of such a thing. You speak young of spirit for someone who will not last another 20 years, this is commendable considering the time from whence you came.

  244. WTC7

    ... wisdom comes with age... they say

  245. Randy

    @D-K who wrote:

    "But it speaks to your character that you’d worry of such a thing. You speak young of spirit for someone who will not last another 20 years, this is commendable considering the time from whence you came."

    I watch a lot of "South Park"!

  246. jimmy

    I f@#king hate Ben Stein.

  247. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    @ D-K

    You and others like you are so anxious to rid the world of Christians, but you must remember that in world history the intellectual was right behind them and was next in line in the firing line. Kill the Christians first, and then kill whomever else might one day work against you. Example, China. The Red Guard killed the Christians first, then the intellectuals, and finally, Mao killed and imprisoned the very Red Guards he used to kill the others. Just rewards in my opinion. Be careful what you wish for, because who else does as much good world wide as the religious? No one. When you are in need and your house burns down, do you go to the United Atheists of America for help, or to the Red Cross? It's something to think about. Even non-religious help organizations have many believers in their ranks that keep them going. I thought about doing the Peace Corps myself.

    I'll still be living in 2029, so as long as my heart is still beating, you'll not be rid of us unless you and others like you come put that bullet in my head first.

  248. Quimbys

    @mJy hEeSaUrSt

    Whoa whoa whoa. Where did the bullets come from? Who mentioned bullets? Only you mJy hEeSaUrSt. Grow up and please try to read what is being said instead of substituting your own paranoid reality into the conversation.

    Good Luck.

  249. D-K

    @Quimbys: Me thinks the person is wearing a logic-proof vest, cease fire! CEASE FIRE!

  250. D-K

    See, Randy?

    "Know that my sarcastic ways lurk in shallow water and that anyone who dare oppose, without proper argumentation, shall succumb to the rapier that is my tongue, readily held aloft to pierce through insubstantial utterences.

    I have a feeling, I shall soon be required to bring my A-material to ridicule those that so deserve it, and we shall make light of their ponderings, so that we may bask in the glow of our self-righteousness and laugh merrily as they plummet off their wit’s end"

    I FREAKIN' CALLED IT, SOMEONE GET ME A CAKE ALREADY!

  251. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    @ Quimbys

    You called me a Christian "cultist" and are advocating "tough love" against us.

    You say we should stop accomodating Christians in the West. As I Christian, I've found very little tolerance from others outside of the faith. Christians are killed (literally) by the thousands world-wide. That is cold hard "reality". There should be more acceptance of Christianity not less.

    The threat of physical death for our beliefs is a very real thing. How many atheists are killed yearly for their beliefs? I can't think of any off hand, but there are countless faces and names that are killed for their faith in Christ. Who now is the paranoid one? Not me. I'm the realistic one.

    Please wake up and don't contribute to a growning system of world-wide intollerance of Christians. Anyone you persecute is defended by everyone except the Christians.

    I do hope no one kills me before my time for my faith, but it's a possibility, and much more so than you.

  252. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    P.S. I don't fear a government of Christian people, but a government or society of atheists really scares me. Trust me, if they ever get rid of us all in the West, then we were just the first to go.

  253. D-K

    Oh man.. I could totally rip that apart, but i'm leaving this one up for you, q-man

  254. Charles B.

    Everyone: calm down.
    Q-man, say "Sorry".
    D-K: Be nice.
    mJy: Chill. No more comments today.
    Randy: No wrathing allowed.
    Reb: Saw you on the other thread. Welcome back. Sorta.
    WTC7: Long time no comment.
    Razor: Where are you today?
    Vlatko: You rock as always.
    666: Yes, you irritate me a bit with your name. Happy now?
    Charles B: Oh, that's me! Log off. It's family day!

  255. D-K

    Religious people, always telling everyone what to do..

    I kid.. I kid..

  256. Charles B.

    Grrrrr! Gotta log of now. Wife's upset! Smile. :-)

  257. Randy

    Charles, didn't I tell you to start calling me by my title!

    You can call me Dr. or Rev., but either way, you get nothing but contempt from me unless you address me properly!

    I am not tip-toe-ing around you people anymore.

    When you work your fingers to the bone for some advanced degrees, come talk to me, otherwise, keep your place!

    Done with pampering christians!

  258. eireannach666

    @DK
    LOL Yeah, the " Governator " pulled off the bud bill and it passed. California here I come, right back where I starteted from! 41? Ouch and 10 to that. Aww hes just a pup. lol South Park is ritual on Wedsdays in my home.

    @ jimmy
    Well, Ben Stein still loves you.

    @Chuck B
    If my name gets to you than it is doing its job but if something so small gets to you , makes me ponder how you will deal with larger issues?

  259. Randy

    @Caroline Harris

    What I read your hysterical post, is that you lost someone, either a child or a parent, and you are desperate to see them again in some... "afterlife"

    People like you usually rail against brilliant minds like Richard Dawkins because he seems to prove, (to you), that you will never see them again...

    You frantically hold on to the idea that there simply MUST be some place where you will see those people you love again. There simply MUST be! And you stomp your feet like an angry child.

    Let it go. Intellectuals know what is going on, you are just being petulant.

    And if you address me, it will be "Dr. Randy", or "Reverend Randy". But, do NOT presume to address me without my proper title. No self procalimed christian is allowed to, from now on...

  260. Hardy

    I urge EVERYONE to watch part 19. Seriously.

  261. Achems Razor

    @ Charles B:

    Don't worry am here.

    Am on so many TDF sites, have lot's of e-mail notifications.
    Takes time to read all.
    Am going to watch part 19 right now.

  262. Quimbys

    Honestly I don't understand the reactions to my post. I will not apologize for calling mJy hEeSaUrSt paranoid. Nobody here wants to kill Christians. Second this is the weird accommodation of Christians that I am talking about. Many seem to think I owe mJy an apology including those who support my views. Yet these are the same people who agreed with the movie which seemed to be calling creationists stupid.

    This type of dialog is called an exchange of ideas and critical thinking is all that is necessary to make a good point.

    We just had a Christian in the White House and boy did he make a mess of things. The US is in the worst shape it's been since the Great Depression. Bush committed some of the most immoral acts in our name and decreased our Constitutional liberties while simultaneously giving the treasure to his cronies. Blah blah blah. I could go on but why should I? We all know what happened.

    I respectfully renew my call for no longer putting up with the insanity that is Christianity. I insist that this does NOT mean kill Christians.

    Thank you.

  263. Randy

    @Quimbys

    I agreed with you, utterly and completely. Christians ARE paranoid.

    They get every consideration in this country, massive tax breaks, nervous legislature afraid of their every whim, building permits not granted to any other organizations, etc. but STILL they think everyone is out to get them!

    Well, sweeties! I am out to get you!

    Anyways, yeah, Quimbys, rock on, you speak truth!

  264. Nada

    This was one of the best documentaries ever! I LOVE it!!!

  265. Randy

    @Nada

    Hello! Good to see you!

  266. WTC7

    Charles B.

    Hope all going fine for you! As for my not commenting, I really try to stay out of topics about religion. But I'm still around :-)

  267. eireannach666

    @Quimbys

    I think some just missed your point , man. Religious people always get butt hurt when you say anything that makes them out to be anything but awesome people . Especially when it makes them question their beliefs and faith. Dont sweat people like that. I thought the " tough love " point was a good and valid one. I wouldn't look too much into the opinion of a person who worships ghosts.

  268. Nada

    I just went back to read all the comments and I'm LMFAO!

    @Randy - Once again, I agree with most of what you've posted. But you almost made me pee myself laughing. That's NOT cool! LOL Seriously though, you're becoming my TDF comments hero.

  269. Randy

    @Nada

    *blushing*

    When a woman compliments me, I become eight years old again...

    Thank you! That is all I can say...

  270. D-K

    I agree with quimbys as well, christians enjoy too much special treatment. Never has there been such an example of "truth does not lie in numbers"

    I'd imagine Galileo nodding at this point, perhaps even shaking his fist at you christians..

  271. D-K

    And I still want my cake, damnit!

  272. Nada

    @Randy - You're very welcome! I just don't have the boobs to say the things you have the balls to say. But I'm thinking them... ;)

  273. D-K

    They allow you to say things too??? Wow...

    Boobs... such magical things..

  274. Randy

    @Nada

    *blathers, bumbles*

    My IQ just dropped, like, 68 points...

    AND, my wife just smacked me! Thanks!

    LOL!

  275. eireannach666

    @Quimbys

    I wouldnt give anybody an apology unless I was wrong or rude and I wont give any religion any extra rope. A matter of fact , Id give them just enough to hang themselves. Religious people are typically babies and just need to be told no when it comes to society .They are not better then anyone and deserve no special treatment. I wish religion could be done away with so society can progress. Its stupid to hold onto superstitions.

    You are not wrong , if anything he owes you one for being a religious , fact denying , delusional nut case.
    As they all are.

  276. McGarvey

    @ His Holiness the very Reverend Dr. Randy

    And so she should smack you. Pretending you're on the internet to engage in intellectual discourses when all the time you're using it to trawl for chicks! Why, you're no better than the rest of us! You're like some kind of intellectual peacock - "look at my beautiful ideas/thoughts they are much more brilliant and colourful than the next guy's." I am saddened.

    ;)

  277. Randy

    @McGarvey who wrote:

    “look at my beautiful ideas/thoughts they are much more brilliant and colourful than the next guy’s.” I am saddened."

    HAHAHA! LOL! Hey! Isn't that why we do anything as males?

    McGarvey! You are killing me, man... funny, funny man!

  278. Nada

    @D-K - Yes, we all know they're magical. ;)

    @McGarvey - That's so sweet! (I think) LOL

    @Randy - Tell her I'm harmless. I'm happily married to an intellectually stimulating (atheist) man that doesn't have time to join me in the documentary watching world. Too bad. I'm sure he'd have brilliant things to say.

  279. Randy

    Nada is so cool!

  280. McGarvey

    @ Randy

    Yes, all of human achievements - the sciences, architecture, music, art, religion, drama, literature, etc - were created by men for the purpose of impressing the opposite sex. Apart from musical theatre which was created by men to impress the same sex. ;)

    @ Nada

    It must be sweet. It certainly was written in good spirit and with no kind of malice! Just playful joshing!

  281. Randy

    *OUCH!*

    Another smack from my wife...

    Sorry!

  282. Nada

    @Randy - LOL! Actually, I consider myself a geek. A math geek in some ways. I love numbers, I love Excel. LOL Unfortunately, I don't watch Futurama though. I'm more of a "Family Guy" type of chick.

  283. D-K

    Family guy is good too, although their marketing strategy went the way of south park with the controversy... It has lost it's magic of season one, with stewie's use of fancy language, (I'm very much a fan of the fancy language) and it's-off-the-wall comedy. I still watch it though.

    Geek woman are awesome, the geekier the better I say. If I could get a woman citing excell code, adjusting her 5inch thick glasses while she rolls D&D dice with one hand and writes prime numbers in haiku format with the other, I'll be all over that.

    ...

    I forgot which comment section this is..

    *checks*

    Ah, the creationist thing.. splendid!

  284. McGarvey

    @ D-K

    Greek(sic) women - they're a riot. (topical)

    This woman you speak of has three hands because she is adjusting her glasses, rolling dice and writing haiku all at the same time. You can have her, mate! I don't think I could be with a three handed woman, although actually, now that I think about it... ;)

  285. Nada

    LMAO! You guys are sick, errr, I mean funny! Sorry to disappoint but I'm not that geeky. I'm not geeky looking, I don't think. I just turn into a geek when my kids bring me Math homework or when a co-worker needs help with Excel or databases. LOL

  286. Diddle

    @doc: because they're funny

  287. D-K

    McGarvey:

    Ah, but one can throw a pair of dice while adjusting glasses, which is what I meant. She'd have another hand free for various other one-handed activities.

    And Total Recall has removed my prejudice towards extra body parts anyway, so i'd be down either way.

  288. Randy

    When I met him backstage at the Spectrum in Philadelphia, (1984), we ate cuurried rice and spoke of Taoism and of Boolean algebra...

    He was a great man...

    All Hail Dio, indeed!

    I am so sad...

  289. Charles B.

    Dr. Randy: If you like, I'll call you "Dr. Randy". As I said before, I deeply respect you for your hard work and dedication in seeking your higher level degrees. You DO deserve it! Sincerely.

    However, I wouldn't call you "reverend" as you don't meet the qualifications there. A "reverend," or I prefer the word "pastor," by necessity needs to be at least a professing Christian minister, in my opinion.

    Sorry about the loss of Ronnie James Dio . Seriously. I just saw the headlines too.

    Peace to you today.

    Charles B.

  290. eireannach666

    R.I.P. Dio.

  291. Randy

    Charles:

    "However, I wouldn’t call you “reverend” as you don’t meet the qualifications there. A “reverend,” or I prefer the word “pastor,” by necessity needs to be at least a professing Christian minister, in my opinion."

    I'm ordained in THREE churches! I know you think the sun rises and sets on your little jesus...

    BUT, there are OTHER religions besides yours.

    I am a Priest in the World Wide Church of Satan.

    I am a high-priest (of the thirty second order) in the Ordo Templi Orientis, AND the Church of Set...

    I am a High-Priest in the Wiccan Church.

    And I am a Minister of the Discordian Society.

    All of them required great study and classes, and everything...

    So you couldn't get certified in ONE religion, but I became a priest in, what, FOUR?- Plus, I got PHD's and am working for my Masters!

    Hmmmm... How do you feel about your life now?

  292. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    @ Quimbys

    No one needs to apologize. We are all free to speak our own opinions for now, unless you live in the half of the world where you can't express your religious views openly, which was my point exactly. Let's not make America into the next place where Christians need hide in little rooms just to love Jesus or loose their lives. That's all I was saying.

  293. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    @ Randy PH.D. et, al. degrees, etc.

    I thought satanists and witches were more secretive about their ignobility!

  294. Randy

    @mJy hEeSaUrSt

    No. YOU need to apologize. Quimbys said nothing wrong.

    You went on a horrible, paranoid rant. You are unbalanced and unstable.

    YOU apologize!

    Oh, and if it was up to me, you would all be hiding in little, dark rooms like cockroaches, afraid as you are, of the light of truth and knowledge and wisdom...

    Get a JOB!

  295. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    Horrible paranoid rant? Hardly. In what way? I didn't threaten anyone or insult anyone. S/he responded to my post to D-K, so I replied to her overreaction. If she wants an apology, she has a mild one, but I see nothing wrong with my post. Besides the Jews, Christians really do live on the edge of martyrdom world-wide. No time for this tonight anyway. Logging off.

  296. Randy

    Yeah... that's what I thought you'd do.

    I am not one to be screwed-with today...

    My Pope... MY Light of the World, went out yesterday!

  297. Will

    Documentary was great, but this conversation is a waste of time. These folks think that a dude lived in a big fish and that you can steal a man's strength by cutting off his hair. You think you're going to logic them into not believing what they've been taught to believe? Forget it. Let them have their little temper tantrum in the comment section when someone posts, yet again, more evidence of how silly it is to believe that a man who is his own father had himself killed to cleanse us of sins we haven't even committed yet.

  298. Randy

    @Will

    LOL! That was well put! And well observed. Thank you.

    Not that you need my approval... I'm just sayin...

    Carl Sagan!

  299. Charles B.

    Dr. Randy: I do wish I had more education and the higher level degrees and I do with I had full ordination, but I have a good and fulfilling life. I'm a happy man. My life isn't over yet. It's only just begun in fact.

    I'll research the orders you mentioned and get back to you if I feel I have anything relevant to add, but the title "reverend" or "pastor" as I prefer, is mine to gain in time and not yours. You can call "ragweed" a "rose" but it doesn't make it so.

    Two questions, however, if I may: I didn't think Satanists were atheistic and I've heard they really don't like Wiccans at all. How can you be all three at the same time? If you are grieving you don't have to respond. I'm just curious.

    With Peace,

    Charles B.

  300. Charles B.

    P.S. Tomorrow is a "no TopDoc comment" day, per the will and honor of the lioness!

  301. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Yes he was. He will be missed by fans and the world alike.
    Laterz.

  302. Will

    @D-K

    If you actually read the parable, they never actually say "Whale", they say fish in the bible.

    So there. :-p

  303. Randy

    Actually the word used most commonly is "Leviathan" which can also be interpreted as "Kraken" from Greco-Roman mythology... so...

    Really, a TON of bulls**t.

    Next...

  304. D-K

    @Will

    Damn those shrewd biblians! I have been bested, I am undone..

  305. D-K

    @Randy, in future instances, please save my honor with quickness of tongue, rather than have me admit defeat and revel in shame before you cast aside popular misconception..

    (even if though your comment came first, I wanna be irrational sometimes too, y'know)

  306. Randy

    @D-K

    I am sorry if I offended you. You know that I like you and respect you.

    I am just very... "LASHING OUT" today...and I may offend people I love, so... my family all knows that... so they give me leave...

    I ask, maybe, that you give me leave, as well.

  307. D-K

    Ha! you did not offend me, nor are you capable of it, my obviously sensitive friend. I sometimes forget that my severe emotional detachment to this world does not apply to my fellow man. I'm a sarcastic, uncaring s.o.b, and as such nothing can really get to me.

    As i stated before, you CANNOT offend me. Seriously, check the "million dollar mind reader" comment section (discussion between me and epicurus), you'll get a feel of what you're dealing with here (me).

    I shall grant you leave, my incapacity of being emotionally attached does not permit me right to deny others of what is clearly normal human behaviour.

    I shall refrain from further (tongue-in-cheek) tauntings until you may once again be of eased mind.

    de gustibus non est disputandum

  308. Ruth

    Apart from your metaphore I am a product of rape when my mother was 16. good can come from evil. a child is not the evil of the parents. A lot of good came from the selfish act.

  309. Randy

    Well, what I mean is... the "Ancient Art of War" was written by Sun Tzu.... maybe...

    Most people know that...

    But the Tao was written or invented by Lao Tsu (?) I do all of this from memory... I'm sorry, Ruth!

    Hi, Ruth!

  310. Ruth

    Hi and bye for tonight.

  311. eireannach666

    @Ruth
    "when my mother was 16. good can come from evil. a child is not the evil of the parents. A lot of good came from the selfish act."

    This refers to religion in my eyes. That is the other side of horror , what you been through.

    So sad, indeed.

  312. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Lao Tzu!!
    Im somewhat of a fan.
    "Even when the last starhas implodedand only blackness remains,the Tao will be Tao:emptiness in emptiness,silence in silence,nowhere,yet everywhere;beyond existence,yet the essence of life."

    Lao Tzu

  313. Randy

    @eireannach666

    Lao Tzu! Yes that's it! Well, Dio and I talked about him, (The Master) for quite a while.

    An interesting quote, from memory, forgive me if I get some of the details wrong.... Dio is dead, you know...

    The student approached the master Lao Tzu and said, "I will not eat meat!"

    The Master said, "Why will you not?"

    The student replied, "Because animals are our brothers, and I will not eat my brothers!"

    Lao Tzu, puzzled, replied, "And why should you not eat your brothers?"

    And the riddle goes on and on... infinite regress, that is the trouble with god's morality. Under scrutiny, it falls apart.

    Anyways... now I am more sad... thinking about Dio and Taoism...

  314. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Dhao/Tao is a great source of wisdom, heck that is what it is about.

    "The Tao is the source of all wordsto those that are silent.
    The Tao gives true powerto those who do not use power.
    The Tao fills with thoughts those minds not attached to concepts.
    The Tao shows the way to those who do not need to be shown.
    The Tao approaches those who have stopped searching for the Tao."
    Slainte

  315. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Do you feel that QT/M has any validity? Or are people just fishing?
    Seriously.

  316. eireannach666

    Sometimes right now since Ive left the pin - seems like Im right back there again.

  317. charlesovery

    extremely entertaining video

  318. Charles B.

    eireannach666: Who did you have as a Sunday school teacher when you were a kid? Charles Manson?!? Learning about God is nothing like "mind rape".

    Well, nonetheless, if your mind's been "raped" by some false religion, then why don't you try a little "brainwashing" instead? But, I must caution you that only the precious red blood of Jesus Christ can wash a dirty old nasty brain white as snow. Don't settle for anything less!

    Eire, You've reminded me of my Sunday school days as I kid. I loved the little felt boards and Bible stories you can color with crayons, and the little songs, and crawling under the pews and looking at people's feet. I've nothing but happy memories of all my childhood days in church.

    Hey! Let's sing a song I haven't sang in years!

    Sing with me:

    10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 . . . . Blastoff!

    Somewhere in outer space
    God has prepared a place
    for those that trust Him and obey!

    Jesus will come again
    although we don't know when
    the countdown's getting lower every day!

    10 and 9, 8 and 7, 6 and 5 and 4
    call upon the Savior while you may!

    3 and 2 coming through the clouds in bright array
    the countdown's getting lower every day!

    "In my Father's house are many mansions. If it were not so, I would have told you so. I go to prepare a place for you and if I go and prepare a place, I will come again and receive you unto myself, that where I am, there you may be also." John 14:2-3.

    Man, I even remembered the Bible verse! I haven't thought of that song for a long time. I gotta start teaching that to my boy now. He'll love it. There's hand motions too at the beginning. Loved it then! Love it now! :-)

    Thanks for the stroll down memory lane, Eire!

  319. Randy

    Charles:

    As I have said before, I submit to you that EVERYONE that went to sunday school had Charles Manson as a sunday school teacher...

    Religion is not a good thing... I've been there. I am a priest... it is bad!

    Religion=BAD!

  320. Charles B.

    Eire: "Do you feel that QT/M has any validity? Or are people just fishing?
    Seriously."

    I'm not Dr. Randy, but what part of Quantum Mechanics are you asking about? You sound forlorn.

    Anyway, good night to all. Midnight again in Korea.

  321. eireannach666

    @Chuck B. " Who did you have as a Sunday school teacher when you were a kid? Charles Manson?!? Learning about God is nothing like “mind rape”. and " Eire, You’ve reminded me of my Sunday school days as I kid. I loved the little felt boards and Bible stories you can color with crayons, and the little songs, and crawling under the pews and looking at people’s feet. I’ve nothing but happy memories of all my childhood days in church."

    I burnt my church down when I was a lad. You are mind raped as are any cultist such as yourself . Who is your preacher? Jim Jones? Well you even have the theme song down. What are you mormon?

  322. Charles B.

    Dr. Randy: Well, the woman with the speckled hornrimmed glasses could get a little cranky with us . . . but she was trying! She really was! I feel guilty for making life so hard on her in Sunday School class now! :-)

    JK

    Good Night.

  323. Epicurean_Logic

    lol@ Charles

    My favourite hymn was and always will be 'to be a pilgim'. i can still remember the words to this day. Its such a rousing tune and kids love it 'cause its funny and uplifting. Thats one thing i will give you christians, you know how to write an uplifting hymn.

    On the negative side, i am sure that you knew this might be coming 'By the rivers of babylon' psalm oh i cant remember the number, has a disgusting last line.

  324. Randy

    @eireannach666

    "I burnt my church down when I was a lad. You are mind raped as are any cultist such as yourself..."

    Dude! That is NOT cool! Rein it in, my brother! Destruction of property is always a bad thing...

  325. Charles B.

    Egads! Everyone's on line now. I gotta get to bed.

    No. Not Jimmy Jones (but I did go to college with the same denomination he did). They were actively trying to "defrock" him when he skipped town with the church's cool aide containers . . . . That's a joke by the way. Never met the guy, but he was with the Disciples of Christ denomination where I went to school.

    Not Mormon either.

    I've been in Pentecostal churches, Assemblies of God, and oddly enough Baptist and Presbyterian churches a lot too. I'm a PresbyAssemblyBaptiCostal most likely. I don't go where the fire is, I try to take it with me and leave it behind when I go. Works for me.

    Peace.

  326. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Well I did. It was an accident but true. I had a thing with fire . Didnt mean that it was to be repeated. Vandalism is pointless .

    @EP " ‘By the rivers of babylon’ " Sublime did an alright remake of that.

    @Chuck B " I did go to college with the same denomination he did "
    Science H. Logic! That explains alot , my religious rival.

  327. Randy

    There was a great Irish folk-rock singer/writer that did a cover of that... What was his name... "Something" McLean.

    I have the album... but it's been awhile, he wrote "American Pie"

    He did a cover... let me see if I can remember the lyrics...

    "By the waters, the waters, of Babylon;
    We laid down and wept, and wept, for thee Zion;
    We remember thee, remember thee;
    Remember thee, Zion..."

    Is that what you guys are talking about?

  328. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Don Mclean? 1971?
    Also Sinead O'Connor did it as well.

  329. Randy

    Yes, of course, thank you!

    My brains are old, forgive me...

  330. Epicurean_Logic

    @ Randy yep, thats the one. it comes from psalm 137 in the bible and Boney M did a version too. it talks about the israelites desire to leave Babylon.

    The part that Boney M omitted was the last paragraph,

    'happy shall be he, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones'.

    talk about a killer punchline!

  331. eireannach666

    @Ep
    "peterCharles you are an indefatigable beacon of hope despite the fact that after your preaching you will also try and sell me aunty noras cream tarts at the weekly bazaar."

    Ha! Ha i Ha iDude , thank you so much for the laugh. I needed that.

  332. eireannach666

    @Randy
    The more I researh into Carl Sagan the more I love this guy. I am mad at myself for not getting an earlier start! I especially like it when he stated "It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."- Carl Sagan

  333. Randy

    I'm just sayin'... Carl Sagan!

  334. Epicurean_Logic

    @ Eire there are two steps that help people overcome any of the various forms of addiction. They have to want to get help for their problem, that is they have to see that addiction causes family, communication and the like problems. without this there really is no hope for rehabilitation.

    Also, they need group help sessions with people who have similar problems. it is almost impossible for loved ones to give this type of help, and external parties have to get involved as any comment made by loved ones has the effect of isolating the person further.

    please think about this as a start towards a possible solution.

  335. mental_masturbators

    All you worshipers of science and maths and carl and cream tarts are overlooking the fact that you are no different than someone who worships the supernatural. You are all here either to inflate each other ego's or to denigrate any opposing views to justify your self worth. I am no different and am as guilty as the next. This is our nature as the insignificant entities that we are. The mirror of truth obscures that which is behind the observer. If an individual has truly encountered the supernatural do not expect proof. A true encounter would most likely only result in insanity as it would mean an inability to continue to relate to our current reality. We are limited by words and/or maths or art to express ideas and must propitiate humanity by reducing our hypocrisies and increasing our humility. The enemy is selfishness and greed. Choose the natural progression which is assimilation and resist the tendency to demoralize.

  336. oliarguello

    @mental_masturbators

    I completely agree in what you are saying. People rarely have an open mind and when they do indulge in the opponents view its to simply say "what that means to say is this or that", which in effect just feeds the ego keeping a person in a close minded prison by reinforcing their own beliefs. The ego is diabolical in creating these illusions...these pseudo-progressive cycles.

    Tolstoy said it best with " Even the strongest current of water can not add a drop of water to a cup that is already full".

    I have been exposed to some "supernatural" events repeated times and very skeptical each time until I was convinced completely. Even though I was skeptical, I remained with a truly open mind. Someone who is close minded will not even expose themselves to such experiences. And as great as books and documentaries are for gaining knowledge, those wont cut it in terms of experiencing something first hand.

    We all know science is incomplete and we definitely know theology is grossly outdated. And while I know stubborn religees ( lol love that term) will call me a blasphemer and stubborn scientist will call me irrational, the truth is out there. Since I know the realm of divinity to be true, and I know real science is also true( not the creationists pseudo-science, I come from a scientific college education)...two truths can not contradict each other, but instead there is an accord with some unknown mechanisms to explain the harmony.

  337. D-K

    "I have been exposed to some “supernatural” events repeated times"

    Do tell, and don't worry, I'm an optimistic person, my cup is (only) half-full.

  338. mental_masturbators

    yes i have had a few unexplainable encounters myself. have you seen the doc "cold fusion"
    on here yet ?. Its a good example that if we allow a little bit of uncertainty into our thinking
    there is a chance that it can open up big possibilities. thanx for the feedback.

  339. blah

    i don't think it's fair to say that religion is bad; technically, evolution could very possibly be false. firstly, look at the mistakes made through history; the piltdown man, the Nebraska man (who was proof for the Scopes Monkey Trial!) the New Guinea man... secondly, morphology is an extremely tricky branch of science; there is a lot that can be mistaken while examining bones. There was once a primate named Oliver, who morphologists suspected to be a human-ape hybrid. turned out to be a normal ape. thirdly, and many great paleontologists have agreed with this, nothing has been found to purport as a transitionl species of man.

    im not saying im a creationist (i stand in between, truthfully) but a lot of you are coming to conclusions without looking at both sides of the matter.

  340. oliarguello

    I am not sure who said it, but someone in here mentioned how many atrocities stem from religion ( wars, inquisition, hate crimes,etc) but that no such atrocities come from science. I disagree.

    The Tuskegee experiments, Atomic/Neutron/Hydrogen bombs, Eugenics, MK-Ultra, The Aversion Project, Unit 731 experiments, etc.

    You may argue that science is not to blame but the evil men who use 'the progress of science" as a guise for their sociopath tendencies. You can make the same argument for theology....that theology isn't evil but the men who kill in the name of GOD are (And the men who preach such dogma). It would just prove a point I have made in other posts that religion/spirituality in itself is not evil, its the men with twisted morals who justify their atrocities by killing in the name of GOD. The commandments explicitly say thou shalt not kill....it does not say thou shalt not kill unless you pray first and put a cross on your weapons.

  341. oliarguello

    @mental_masturbators

    I have not seen Cold Fusion but I will check it out! Especially since I did see "Can We Make A Star On Earth" which deals with the various methods of attempting cold fusion around the world.

    @D K

    LOL "only half full" :)

    Well my experience is that there is a curandera (a hispanic shaman of sorts) who is a medium for a "healing spirit". At first i thought it was a bunch of mumbo jumbo and there was some trick and people are just told what they want to hear, like a psychic does.

    Essentially this is the procedure. You wait in line, you end up in room where someone lightly douses you with holy water and a flower on the back of your neck and head while they say some prayer. Then you stand in front of the curandera woman with your palms up. You dont say a word, she doesnt ask you anything, she just passes her hands over your body without touching you and mentions either physical/health issues you have, relationship/work/ issues you have, or things that are to come to watch out for.

    At first i thought it was speculative stuff that I did not even bother confirming with a doctor, and although some of the personal things were accurate I thought there was some sort of trick. So I stopped going for years.

    Here are the things that convinced me

    1) My mom got cancer and the doctors told her it was ovarian cancer. We went to this woman ( admittedly out of desperation) to see what she can do. She said the doctors are wrong, that its stomach cancer and to ask to test for it. Turns out she was right and it was stomach cancer.

    2)She has cured one woman from AIDS( doctor confirmed )without any pharmaceutical medicine.

    3)Cured various forms of cancer or has prolonged their lives by many years for those who only had a few months to live. I know people can say this happens occasionally, but its astounding that it happens to over 90% of the people who go and without surgery or chemo, and we are talking about 30 out of 33 people that I know of. That defies statistics.The three people that I know who went there and had cancer went once or twice and stopped going.).

    3) Advanced leprosy cured without any surgery or medicine.

    4)People confined to wheelchairs have walked again.

    And a few other miraculous things I wont mention since they can be dismissed or excused as coincidence by a naysayer.

  342. mental_masturbators

    excellent post oliarguello, thanks for sharing your unbiased observations.
    I hope this will invite some more equally evenhanded conversation.

  343. Randy

    No. Religion is bad. Religion is evil. It is the end of our species. If you espouse it, you have to think, "what kind of person does that make me? If I want to destroy my own species?"

    It is acceptable for men and women of science to reject delusion and fantasy. Science only relates to things that are measurable. Open your mind to things that are measurable, reject all else, or doom the world.

    AND, you destroy our country if you do not study maths. Thanks for that!

    I am almost dead already, but I would rather you not doom my nieces and nephews to the Dark Ages.

    I don't care what your mommy or daddy say. And if you don't own a house, rent a home on your own, or have a high paying job, or built a business to employ people as a result of an education you need to step aside, you are NOT contributing.

  344. Epicurus

    @oliarguello wow this woman is the cure for all these ailments and she lives where and does what exactly?

    why is she hiding from the world?

    my skepticism says that you have embellished what you know about this person and the experiences you listed,maybe not intentionally but due to group think and group polarization.

    I would put my house on the fact that she couldnt provide results under double blind experiments.

    you also said:

    I am not sure who said it, but someone in here mentioned how many atrocities stem from religion ( wars, inquisition, hate crimes,etc) but that no such atrocities come from science. I disagree.

    The Tuskegee experiments, Atomic/Neutron/Hydrogen bombs, Eugenics, MK-Ultra, The Aversion Project, Unit 731 experiments, etc.

    You may argue that science is not to blame but the evil men who use ‘the progress of science” as a guise for their sociopath tendencies. You can make the same argument for theology….that theology isn’t evil but the men who kill in the name of GOD are (And the men who preach such dogma).

    however the claim being made is that religion gives excuses for atrocious acts, religion also does state in certain areas to behave in immoral disgusting ways. Science on the other hand is just a method of discovery that gives us the most objective view of a particular phenomenon. using the scientific method people may be able to do bad things but the results of the scientific method will not direct them to do bad things and will not give them a way to excuse themselves morally of a bad thing. Religion on the other hand is PERFECT for just that and is guilty of it all throughout history.

  345. Epicurus

    yea hes a pimp....and now for Blah....

    blah, you said

    "i don’t think it’s fair to say that religion is bad; technically, evolution could very possibly be false. firstly, look at the mistakes made through history; the piltdown man, the Nebraska man (who was proof for the Scopes Monkey Trial!) the New Guinea man…"

    technically evolution could be as false as germ theory. it pretty much cant be. it is confirmed. evolution is a fact.

    now as for the mistakes...those are what is known as hoaxes. and evolutionary scientists are the ones who discredited these hoaxes. just because some people try to pull off a hoax doesnt mean there are problems with the theory.

    your second point was,

    "morphology is an extremely tricky branch of science; there is a lot that can be mistaken while examining bones. There was once a primate named Oliver, who morphologists suspected to be a human-ape hybrid. turned out to be a normal ape. "

    just because something is tricky doesnt mean there are problems with the present theory. all branches of science are tricky. there is a lot to be mistaken while examining bones that is why we are constantly checking our methods and data and allowing others to do so. the primate oliver you speak of IF found as a fossil would have absolutely been considered ONLY a chimp. its because of examining its genes and skeleton that we were able to determine it as a pure chimp.

    Oliver's cranial morphology, ear shape, freckles and baldness fall within the range of variability exhibited by the Common Chimpanzee. (Hill, WCO; in Bourne, GH (1969). Anatomy, behavior, and diseases of chimpanzees (The Chimpanzee. 1. S. Karger. pp. 22–49.)

    lastly,

    "thirdly, and many great paleontologists have agreed with this, nothing has been found to purport as a transitionl species of man."

    depends on what you mean. im sure there are many many many fossils which show intermediaries between ape and human.

  346. go2mark

    how about obsessed does that work for ya ?
    or in Dr phdb's case possessed .

  347. oliarguello

    @Epicurus

    She lives in Tijuana Mexico and works both there and in Santa Ana, Ca.

    She isnt hiding, in fact she sees about 100 people a day in the span of 5 hours ( 4 times a week in Santa Ana every other week, not sure how often she sees people in TJ).

    I am not embellishing the experiences. Of course I dont expect anyone to jsut take my word for it and completely believe me. I simply stated that these are my experiences ( since someone asked for the details) and thats why I know the divine world exists. Believe me I was very skeptical when I first went as a high school senior and didnt give it much thought and when I went to college ( in fact i became an atheist while in college).

    Since the experience with my mom...well that peaked my curiosity and started to note and try to debunk what was going on, but at the same time continuing to go out of curiosity. But as more and more people got cured , more and more statements about my lifes' details were mentioned, well there started being more of a trend than coincidence.

    As for group think and polarization...i dont think that is an influence on me. Not being boastful, its just that the overwhelming majority are extremely poor and uneducated hispanics. Nothing wrong with that but aside from a hello and observing their progress, there really isnt any common ground to talk with them ( they arent really into talking about theology and science....I am not really interested about banda music and hispanic celebrities, which is what I overhear them talk about).

    I would equally be willing to bet anything I own on her capabilities. I have taken friends there and they say things like " how the hell did she know my brother is schizophrenic"...or " how did she know my dad is an alcoholic". So when she mentions things, they are pretty damn specific.The first time my friends went,they would leave in tears mostly because of the shock but also partly because they are women LOL.

    and you said:
    "however the claim being made is that religion gives excuses for atrocious acts, religion also does state in certain areas to behave in immoral disgusting ways. Science on the other hand is just a method of discovery that gives us the most objective view of a particular phenomenon. using the scientific method people may be able to do bad things but the results of the scientific method will not direct them to do bad things and will not give them a way to excuse themselves morally of a bad thing. Religion on the other hand is PERFECT for just that and is guilty of it all throughout history."

    That is exactly why I mentioned that religion is grossly outdated and corrupted by dogma from sociopaths. Christianity if full of sooooo many contradictions in the details (such as the thou shalt not kill...but preachers later add on its ok to kill as long as you pray first and put a cross on your shield since you are really saving souls in the long run). But the messages from Jesus, who the whole religion is SUPPOSE to be based on, teaches tolerance, love, love your enemy, and self improvement of spirituality ( no need for organized religion). And even that is corrupted by others stating hes going to come back and kill non believers and send them to hell...Jesus cant be both.

    A huge issue with religion is that its blasphemy to try to update religion or question anything or you go to hell. That is the very definition of propaganda! Yet it is changed, And who changes it? The people in position of power. Positions of power usually attract people who want to exploit things ( see US federal government).

    So as you can see true spirituality teaches love, but corrupt men in organized religion advocate hate. And sure, science teaches progress, but corrupt men utilize that progress for destruction ( per the examples I gave earlier). ...I make a joke with my friends that any new technology is immediately used for either to make a weapon or use it for porn. LOL

    The common trend here is that there is virtue in science and in spirituality, but its man who defiles those ideal institutions. I have seen people claim once religion is gone there will be peace. I am pretty sure man can find another excuses to hate each other such as resources, race, mental illness, and unchecked negative emotions stemming from fear.

  348. Randy

    @oliarguello

    "I would equally be willing to bet anything I own on her capabilities. I have taken friends there and they say things like " how the hell did she know my brother is schizophrenic"...or " how did she know my dad is an alcoholic"

    This is a con. A magic trick. I have done it many, many times. Indeed, I made a pretty good living at it for awhile, until my ethical and moral obligations got the better of me.

    It's called, "Cold Reading". You look at your subject and size them up... if it is a young girl, she probably has father issues; if it is an older person, they probably have a parent that passed away. You shoot out wild proclomations at first, and then slowly narrow in based on clues from the subject.

    If you know people, you know they are not as different as they like to think they are.

    But, the most important thing: The subject, (Mark, or Dupe) will always remember the "hits" of the reading, but seldom do they remember the "misses".

    It is a magic trick. A lie. I have seen this woman, she was examined in the "Skeptical Inquirer" (a magazine co-founded by Carl Sagan... by the way...) She is a con artist.

    Don't be a dupe. Study your maths!

  349. oliarguello

    @ Randy

    "No. Religion is bad. Religion is evil. It is the end of our species. If you espouse it, you have to think, “what kind of person does that make me? If I want to destroy my own species?”"

    A bit of flaw in your logic. You only assume I would advocate the destruction of my species based on the ASSUMPTION religion will destroy man.

    Religion has been around for thousands of years, modern science has been around for a few centuries. I think science has the upper-hand in destroying humanity....Ill compromise. Scientific discoveries in the hands of insane sociopathic religious fundamentalists will destroy humanity....hmmm not exactly the harmony between theology and science I was looking for though . LOL. But then again maybe it will be a eugenics atheist who ends humanity ;)

    Besides I support the virtuous aspects of spirituality/religion and denounce any part of theology that does not lend itself to humanity flourishing ( thats why I said religion has been corrupted by dogma and needs to be updated/refined).

    "It is acceptable for men and women of science to reject delusion and fantasy. Science only relates to things that are measurable. Open your mind to things that are measurable, reject all else, or doom the world."

    Pretty sure people who "measure" things are perfectly capable of detonating weapons of mass destruction. I do open my mind to the measurable but keep an open mind to what is not totally understood yet ( in science and spirituality) if you only stick to what is known and dont ask questions or challenge things for improvement, there is stagnation which leads to decay/entropy and eventual destruction.

    "I am almost dead already, but I would rather you not doom my nieces and nephews to the Dark Ages."

    Neither would I. I am pretty sure I mentioned there is an accord between spirituality and science, one does not negate the other if you accept there are some truths in both and dont immediately close yourself off to what you dont know or understand. Both can be embraced and progressed. And simply reading a book or watching a doc. really isnt enough.

    "I don’t care what your mommy or daddy say. And if you don’t own a house, rent a home on your own, or have a high paying job, or built a business to employ people as a result of an education you need to step aside, you are NOT contributing."

    Thats an odd assumption. Was that jsut some random drunken rant?

    If yo must know. I became a lab supervisor for a biomedical device/biotech company at the age of 26. I rent because I am not married, plan on furthering my career, and dont know where exactly I will end up.

    Its a bit sad that you wrote what you mentioned. I know so many people in this economic crisis with engineering/business/programming degrees, people with ton more experience than myself, people with good work ethics, etc and they can not find jobs.

    But then again I heard you can be sarcastic( or projecting?).

  350. Randy

    Yes, religion has been around for thousands of years. So has racism, sexism, murder, rape...

    But, we don't NEED that anymore. We live in the 21st century. Get over religion.

    It's done. EVOLVE! Get better at life!

    I'm just sayin'... Carl Sagan...

  351. oliarguello

    @Randy
    "This is a con. A magic trick. I have done it many, many times. Indeed, I made a pretty good living at it for awhile, until my ethical and moral obligations got the better of me.

    It’s called, “Cold Reading”. You look at your subject and size them up… if it is a young girl, she probably has father issues; if it is an older person, they probably have a parent that passed away. You shoot out wild proclomations at first, and then slowly narrow in based on clues from the subject.""

    LOL. No whos making embellishing remarks. You have 1-3 minutes in the room with the woman without her asking you anything and you not saying anything. You are telling me you can tell where someones cancer is based on facial cues? That someones dad is an alcoholic based on someones posture? That the first thing you mention is that the person is constantly worried about brother that has schizophrenia? You can cure someone with AIDS with no medicne by staring really hard at them? That you can, for 90% of the people, cure cancer or prolong their life? LOL

    Like I said she sees 100-150 people per day for four days. You are telling me she can remember physical, emotional, and life issues of 400-600 people?

    Of course there are tons of con artists who give the genuine people a bad name. Like I said I was very skeptical and read up on tricks psychics use to try to debunk whats going on. None of those tricks are done.

    Ok obvious you are making stuff up to prove a point. But like I mentioned before you can remain stubborn in feeding your ego instead of opening your mind to possibilities.

    Please read my previous post about the procedure of what happens when you see this woman. take into account how many people she sees. And I would welcome any actual viable theories or methods to debunk what she does. I am all for seeking the truth in everything.

  352. Randy

    But, you have been very respectful and so I engage you with all the respect you deserve.

    I am sorry if I seem harsh or crass, but I am a grumpy old guy...

  353. oliarguello

    @ Randy

    you really should get off that religion is evil by nature. really try to incorporate this into your mind.......evil men do evil things. religion or theology dos not make men evil, only evil men use religion as a guise to do evil things.

    Explain this one to me.
    I am spiritual...religious....theist...whatever you want to call it. I have never gotten in a fight, I am pro gay marriage, I have zero desire to kill anyone who does not agree with me, I dont think people of different belief structures are going to hell and I embrace science.

    Where is the doomsday scenario in me? Where is the Dark Age revival in me?

  354. Randy

    @oliarguello

    "Like I said she sees 100-150 people per day for four days. You are telling me she can remember physical, emotional, and life issues of 400-600 people?"

    I could. I still remember every person I ever read. And, I remember every word typed by every person on this site.

    Freaky people like me make really good con-artists. But I don't do that anymore...

    That would be wrong.

  355. Randy

    @Ruth

    Hi, Ruth!

    I have a remitting/relapsing course of MS and some other physical stuff. Vasculitis, arteriol stenosis, etc.

    I was cute for about two years, then I turned into a grotesquery. My wife still loves me, that's all that matters.

    BUT! The cool thing is, when I die, Linda, (my wife), gets a HUGE paycheck! She is the only thing that is important to me, so...

  356. Reb

    Why do we laugh at creationist? Because it is against the law to shoot them.

  357. Charles B.

    Mr. Mark: Even if you don't agree with Ph.D. Randy, it's not such a good idea to joke about him dying. The Bible says that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but would have all men come to repentance. In the old testament, Solomon, while whe was still righteous, was pleasing to God for he asked for "wisdom" rather than the life of his enemies or for wealth.

    Be gentle, kind, loving, peace-creating, patient, not self-seeking, faithful, and have self-control if at all possible. We may be the only "Bible" that some people will ever read. Let's walk our talk.

    Remind me of this post the next time I need it too!

    Dr. Randy: I'm sorry to hear about your medical conditions. I can pray for you if you'd like me to. I feel inclinded to tell you that God is gracious and as long as there is breath in your lungs, He's only a prayer away. Better late then never.

  358. Charles B.

    oliarguello: I'd be inclined to think of you as "lukewarm", or as I call it "pukewarm" myself. Sounds like you stand for nothing spiritually. I noticed you didn't include "Christian" in your description of your self. You are most likely not well liked by either side theology wise, are you?

  359. Draw For Joy

    Everyone believes what they want.

  360. Randy

    Charles,

    I know the bible better than you.

    But thank you, for your prayers and concern. It's not necessary, however. I have a HUGE life insurance policy and medical coverage, (that I pay for MYSELF).

    As Chris Rock said, "COVERAGE! It's the most important thing in life. If you've got coverage, at least you know you're gonna die on a MATRESS!"

  361. D-K

    @Charles

    "The Bible says that God takes no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but would have all men come to repentance. In the old testament, Solomon, while whe was still righteous, was pleasing to God for he asked for “wisdom” rather than the life of his enemies or for wealth."

    Asking for wisdom is the same as asking for wealth, both are instruments to improve a person's status. It all depends on motivation, and to my recollection, none is stated. At least not in the part of the bible you're referring too.

    Motivation is key, wealth can be just as righeous an instrument if used properly. Neither one is inherently good or evil, remember that.

  362. oliarguello

    @CHARLES

    You said that I stand for nothing spiritually. Please elaborate.

    I am not Christian in the organized religion sense because its full of contradictions. A few simple examples are idoltary ( walk into most churches and you see statues to kneel before, crosses all over the place, clutching a bible to your chest and praying over it, etc), the churches are ran like businesses, they tolerate pedophilia ( catholic church), sects calling each other heretics yet they claim themselves to be the one true church based on dogma, the hate of gay people because Jesus never condemned homosexuals...he condemed sexual perversion. I will elaborate since I know that will open up a can of worms......Back in those times preachers were against it because there was no love in people having gay sex, it was a debaucherous act akin to threesomes in our time. But now gay people have relationships and truly love each other.....why hate two people who have a relationship based on love? Most Christians are guilty of exactly what Jesus was preaching against( instead of dictating the letter of the law, take the spirit of the message)and I believe he would be appalled at the churches today since people have not learned anything and its exactly like it was before.

    I am Christian in the spiritual sense in that I take Jesus's message to heart and understand his messages. Love, tolerance, and spiritual development from within. His greatest message second to love is your connection to GOD( better to pray by yourself in a closet than to make a huge show out of it to validate your spirituality by external things/people). Jesus was the epitome of what can be (Son of Man) and was as perfect as man could be and his connection to GOD was the purest. Its impossible for man to be perfect, but the virtue lies in self improvement. Therefore we are given a gift of everlasting self improvement. This is why the thief on the cross who repented, the prostitute that repented, the prodigal son, the lost coin found, all those are far more revered than the man nearing perfection...because as hard as it is to keep ones' balance on the tight rope of perfection, imagine how difficult it is to see an infant go from crawling all over the ground to take that first step onto the tightrope.

    P.S. I get the Book of Revelation reference "lukewarm" "puke-warm". Thats a reference to agnostics or someone who says he beleives in GOD, but doesnt really strive to actually do so. Didnt Jesus say " You will call me Lord, but you do not do what I say"...keep in mind what fruit you bear, what foundation you use for your house. Not by deeds necessarily but by adhering to HIS message, not the dogmatic message of subsequent and prior preachers. In other words...think about it, dont jsut do what fellow churchmemebers/leaders tell you is right.

  363. oliarguello

    @ D-K

    You wrote:
    **Asking for wisdom is the same as asking for wealth, both are instruments to improve a person’s status. It all depends on motivation, and to my recollection, none is stated. At least not in the part of the bible you’re referring too.

    Motivation is key, wealth can be just as righeous an instrument if used properly. Neither one is inherently good or evil, remember that.**

    Ha. I just finished typing something similar about self improvement.

    I agree about the bit about wealth. Being wealthy isnt necessarily destructive. The reason Jesus told a particular rich man to sell all his belongings and give away his riches was because he knew that man was waaayyyyy too attached to his belongings to move forward spiritually. Its like when he said " if a hand causes you to steal, its better to lop it off". Hes not saying necessarily amputate yourself, but to change aspects in your life that keep you from self improvement. And if one change isnt working, its time to do something different or more significant.

  364. blah

    @Epicurus
    "evolution is a fact"
    there you are wrong, my friend; evolution can never be a fact. a fact is a theory that has been proven correct. Newton's laws, for example, are facts. I am a human, that's a fact. gravity, though, is a theory, since we cannot prove that it's the gravitational forces keeping us on this planet. just as we cannot prove evolution, at least not until more fossil proof is found.

    you also said

    "just because something is tricky doesnt mean there are problems with the present theory. all branches of science are tricky."

    not all branches of science are tricky in the sense i mean. if you noticed, most branches of science arent based around drawing bipedal hominids out of a couple of jawbones (metaphorically)
    also, morphology is the only branch of science that we use to prove these bones were our ancestors. and for the genetic testings, think about this; when the Neanderthal mtDNA results were received, they found Neanderthals were less chimp-like than we were. how does that work out, since we were the ones who survived? and how much of the common DNA is the result of interbreeding?

    and the last point; there hasn't been a find that is truly in between ape and man.

    also, religion cannot dictate men to do terrible things; only men can do that. religion is just a...suggestion, on how to lead a good life. to be "the best you can be". whether men decide to use religion, science or excuses to do terrible deeds, it is their choice alone. we live in the 21st century, epicurus, we should know now not to judge a group of people just by their ancestors/ the individuals of the group.

  365. Randy

    I really don't know how many times I have to type this:

    EVOLUTION is a fact. We see it happening all around us everyday. Darwin had a theory about it, it was called "Natural Selection". His theories might have some holes, but evolution is a fact.

    And I also talked about the Neanderthals on many occasions, you have to look around for my posts... I'm not repeating it. But, blah is wrong.

    And religion does NOT teach you to lead a good life. Evolution/nature does. Get over religion, it has outlived its usefulness.

  366. blah

    tell me Randy, how does evolution teach you a good life? does it advice you to be a good person? does it help you achieve greatness? does it teach you ANYTHING, really?

    okay, i probably am wrong about the Neanderthals; but who IS right??!!! in the past week, i have found at least 28 different theories about their bones. each theory was basically there to disprove the next one. and they all made no sense in the end.

    and religion will never outlive its usefullness. never.

  367. Randy

    Again, that would be DR. Randy.

    I have earned my education through great trial and I deserve that respect.

    And if you do not understand evolutionary science then you need to defer to your betters, as we have struggled and done the hard work to think these things through.

    A good place to start? Carl Sagan! "Cosmos" is on this site... go watch it.

  368. Randy

    Much respect and admiration for Epicurus...

    That's all I will say, as to not embarass us both!

  369. Charles B.

    I haven't much time this week to answer posts. Busy life; happy days.

    oliarguello: It's just a gut feeling. Your outlook on life is more dangerous than any I've found on this site so far, I think. I might define it more if I have time and I can later on. Not all spiritual "healing" is of God. My discernment is telling me that your healer's knowledge is of a demonic source. I met an ex-Satanist who said he was never shocked by very specific knowledge expressed by mediums as he knew their sources from a frist hand basis.

    Dr. Randy: You may indeed know more of the Bible, (or not), but I have it hidden in my heart, and not just my mind. Between the two of us, I'm by far the wiser one as I do not only lean on my own understanding, but on God's still small Voice as well.

    I'm surprised also that you don't advocate spiritualism if you are a true high level Satanist priest.

    Peace.

  370. Randy

    @Charles

    Honey, I keep saying over and over, all those times are in THE PAST! I WAS a Satanic Priest, I was a christian, I WAS a Wiccan High Priest... etc...

    I got over it! You can too. I saw through all of the lies, with, you know, knowledge!

    Thank you for addressing me properly! My Reverendhood means nothing except all of the work I put into it... My PHD's mean very much to me!

  371. Rob

    It appears to me that any doc regarding religion or spirituality brings out peoples inner retard/bigot.

  372. Charles B.

    Dr. Randy:

    Hum. I thought you were currently all those things. I guess I missed the past tense in your posts. I didn't know that Satanism was that easy to walk away from. I thought it was like the "mob" where once a member, always a member unless you had God's help to break free from it.

    I've never met or even heard of a non-Christian ex-Satanist before, but granted, I run in Christian circles, and it's just not a common topic on the bus to the market or such.

    So, ya gave up not only Christianity and the one true God, but all that other cr-ap for a belief in "nothing"? I'm rather glad you're not a practicing Satanist, but how depressing.

    Ok: Funny thought time! I researched James Randi and read over his Wikipedia page just to see if he were really YOU, but then on the end it said that he admitted to being "gay" in March of 2010. Hum. An 81 year old gay man? I wouldn't think there'd be many. I guess it's not Dr. Randy! LOL That would be fun to have been arguing with the "Amazing Randi" all this time.

  373. Randy

    No. I admire James Randi very much. He is a great magician and another brilliant mind, (he hung with Carl!), but I ain't him.

    And, seriously, Charles what you think you know about the world is so limited... I mean, if you just hang out with christians you are really hypnotising yourself...

    You need to mix it up, buddy. Get some fresh ideas!

  374. Charles B.

    I'll keep it in mind. Mix more. OK. Got it.

    Tomorrow is Buddha's birthday and I celebrate that day as it's when God spared me and gave me a new lease on life. In 2007 I had a contract in hand to teach in the Sichuan province of China but I didn't get my visa very quickly, so in contempt, I withdrew my application so I can say I was never "denied" a visa and went to Korea instead. The school I had a contract with collapsed killing everyone inside. I would have died too most likely had I not had such a hard time getting my visa that summer. The quake hit on Buddha's birthday 2007 if I remember correctly. Shook me up so badly that for months I was in shock and awe and I renewed my vow to love and serve God more whole-heartedly. He spared my life so I could be here today telling you the story. I'm planning to go with friends to climb the mountain out behind our house (a big undertaking) with wife and kids in tow. Sounds fun, doesn't it? It's good to be alive!

  375. Randy

    Sounds to me like the Chinese government saved you! LOL!

    No, that is a good story, and it does sound great, your little hiking trip!

    Impossible for ME, nowadays, but, there ya go!

    And life is great! For a little while, then it just gets tedius! Enough already! HAHA!

    Have fun!

  376. Achems Razor

    @ Charles B:

    Howdy Charles, I say this without malice as usual, but you say God saved you from death at Sichuan Prov. in 2007, It must be your own personal God then, not any God for the masses?

    Must of been other God fearing Christians that died at Suchuan Prov., why is that? does God play favorites? Lets some live, lets others die, it is some kind of game for him (them)? like pinball?

    Anyway have fun climbing your mountain. I climbed many a mountain, but never without two big cans of bear spray, and my trusty re-worked 303 rifle. Big Grizzly's you know!

  377. D-K

    Thanks Epicurus, saved me a lot of typing. I frea-king hate it when people base their entire worldview on assumptions. Most of the times you have to argue around endlessly to finally expose the bit of crooked "logic" that negates all that follows, but this was nice and quick.

    All hail efficiency!

  378. D-K

    @Randy: Don't you dare blame bureaucracy on the Chinese!

  379. D-K

    @Achems, You should see the mountains my lady creates when molehills get in her way on pms-week..

    I'd rather be on one of your mountains, armed with cottonswabs and glaced in honey, then to try and use logic on that woman..

  380. Achems Razor

    @ D-K:

    PMS! Ha,Ha, been there many times;

    Try Bear spray, just kidding!!!
    It is amazing what runaway hormones can do to the fairer?? sex.
    Best thing to do at that magic moment in time is to stay the h*ll away from the little women.

  381. Reb

    @Achems, the survivors of every life threatening event all claim it was the "grace of god" that saved them even if many innocent people including children and infants were killed. This is the sort of ignorant arrogance that comes with christianity. To these people it is all about 'them' and they were spared while so many others were not by this so-called just and righteous deity.

    Of course, this is the same deity they claim creates these disasters in the first place as a 'sign' or a 'punishment'. The OT demon god killed over 32 million of his own creation and superstitious people thank this monster when they end up in a survivor situation. Can you spell FRUITLOOP?

    The scrolls of Nag Hammadi(which date back eons prior to the so-called jesus era) tell us that yahweh/jehovah was a demon and the OT patriarchs served the devil without even knowing it. That would account for the senseless mass murders and the constant threats from the mongrel god against going off to serve other gods. Talk about a psychopath!! As I have stated before, I wouldn't have that bloody psychotic creature in my neighborhood much less bow down and worship the thing. Yahweh was the evolution of Amen-Ra the Egyptian sun god who was quite vicious. The Egyptians would begin their prayers with Amen and end them with Amen. Know anyone else who ends all prayers with Amen? This also has a lot to do with the Essenes, writers of the Dead Sea Scrolls, possessing the copper scroll of Akhenaten(moses). The OT where the names were changed to hide the obvious.

  382. D-K

    @Reb:

    "To these people it is all about ‘them’ and they were spared while so many others were not by this so-called just and righteous deity.

    Of course, this is the same deity they claim creates these disasters in the first place as a ’sign’ or a ‘punishment’. The OT demon god killed over 32 million of his own creation and superstitious people thank this monster when they end up in a survivor situation. Can you spell FRUITLOOP?"

    It's like a perverted kind of Stockholm syndrome, the way you described it..

    It's some perverted kind of stockholm syndrome

  383. oliarguello

    @ Achems Razor.. You beat me to the punch! The irony was apparent to me that he was spared yet who knows how many died, especially in a not so swift, very painful deaths.

    Buuut.... everyone dies, so nobody is playing favorites. Since everyone is destined to die GOD allows certain tragedies to happen which are only tragic in our eyes (Job ...anyone? aka the devil causes those disasters). I look at it like a chemistry reaction. A particular reactant doesnt like being heated, bombarded with another molecule to be destroyed or modified, but its necessary to get the process going for the desired result. By definition a reactant will be used and changed whether it wants to or not, jsut like how we are destined to all die whether we like it or not.

  384. oliarguello

    @REB

    The scrolls of Nag Hammadi...never heard of that, I will look into it ( so thanks for that). Kinda goes along with what I was saying about "the devil" causing the disasters.

    I think the same thing is going on in modern religion. Christianity was all fine and dandy initially, but it has been corrupted to hell ( pardon the pun). I mean Inquisition, vatican being filthy rich, idolatry in all of the churches, protecting pedophile priests( and using the church members to pay for the lawsuits ), preachers with gold watches, mansions, and 5 cars.

    Pretty sure Jesus is just as pissed at most Christian churches as he was with the Pharisees.

    As for Judeo-Christian-Islam GOD stemming from the Egyptian ideas. I dont think there is anything contradictory about that. Its all an evolution of understanding. Thats like saying pharmaceuticals are based on phrenology. Even though in a way its true ( phrenology lead to psychology, lead to neuroscience, lead to pharmaceuticals in conjunction with chemistry), they are far from being the same.

  385. Achems Razor

    @ Reb:

    Yes, know about "AMEN-RA" I always read all your posts, find them most enlightening! Learned a lot from you.

  386. Achems Razor

    @ oliarguello:

    I do not believe in man made Devils, nor do I believe in any of the 28,000,000 man made Gods either.
    So, anything you say to me about "Gods Or Devils" would be "moot".

  387. Reb

    @D-K It is a type of Stockhom syndrome in that it uses fear of the controller and absolute obedience. If you ever read the OT you will see how this god changes his attitude in the blink of an eye. The poor people don't ever know what mood this loony will be in next. The OT priests use the "great day of the lord" in two completely different versions. When they are displeased with the people they use that coming day as judgement against the 'chosen' but when they are good little sheeple it is used as a day when god will avenge them before their enemies. It happens over and over and over throughout the OT.

    What kind of loving god wants his creation to fear him? Only the devil would want that. I don't give a rats behind who anyone thinks they are but no one can love what they fear. Just as the victims of the Stockhom syndrome the religious nuts develop total dependence upon pleasing a wrathful god and they throw their entire lives into pleasing a monster. They become so controlled they see every little thing negative as a warning from god 'just for them' and they get back in line. They soon learn to love this attention because they have convinced themselves they must be special for god to single them out so often. It is also akin to Munchhausen syndrome because they love to tell the near fatal disaster god saved THEM from and what god REVEALED to them. In a way it is sad to see but soon becomes repulsive.

  388. oliarguello

    @D-K

    "Of course, this is the same deity they claim creates these disasters in the first place as a ’sign’ or a ‘punishment’. The OT demon god killed over 32 million of his own creation and superstitious people thank this monster when they end up in a survivor situation. Can you spell FRUITLOOP?”"

    I completely agree. It is a weird form of Stockholm Syndrome ( awesome Muse song by the way).

    When people raise their fist in the air blaming GOD for their "punishments" I tell them....uh what about blaming the devil for your tragedies?

    As for the term GOD and Devils...Meh. GOD-Universe...Devil entropy..tow-may-toe tah-mah-tow. Different words talking about the same thing. But I know people cling to their semantics...especially since not everyone thinks the way I do ( dualistic pantheism) and the terms carry a lot of baggage. But in context one must use the proper terms, I have come to find ( GOD & devil when talking about theology....Universe entropy when explaining those theological ideas scientifically).

  389. oliarguello

    @REB

    I like the cut of your jib.

    People rarely think. I think religion lends itself to people who dont think for themselves. Plus if you couple that with the propaganda of " believe everything we say or you will go to hell....or change anything and you will go to hell" well the poor souls dont have a chance.

    Heck I am religious/theist/spiritual but I am grounded by logic and science and I question things and seek the truth ( search a post above with the word "curandera" to see why i know the devine is real). I am constantly told I am going to hell or that I am a blasphemer ( and scientific colleagues call me irrational). Its admittedly difficult to keep a truly open mind and being skeptical at the same time, but I believe thats how the truth is sought.

  390. Reb

    @McGarvey

    Some people want truth and others run from it. Until you read the contents from the books ommitted from the bible, the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Nag Hammani you will never understand how far the lies go. You are free to believe what you wish as simple blind faith requires no knowledge at all. It is for the very lazy and fearful. All christianity requires is a verbal confession of belief in jesus. It reminds me of the Cowardly Lion in the Wizard of Oz when frightened he closed his eyes and keep saying "I do believe in ghosts, "I do, I do believe in ghosts".

  391. Achems Razor

    @ oliarguello:

    Okay I was a little harsh, I apologize,
    Had to look up "dualistic pantheism" don't know everything, (LOL)

    Are you also naturalistic? Carl Sagan's definition of spirituality, "the human relationship to the numinous" just saying,

    I am a little into "Kant" philosophy.

    Be careful you might get attacked as religee's do, or is it just me? (LOL)

  392. McGarvey

    @ Reb

    "Some people want truth and others run from it" -Hmmmm
    You haven't tackled the issue, which is that the word "Amen" (from Hebrew meaning 'so be it'), has no connection with the similarly sounding Egyptian god. Why would it? There's no root, it makes no sense. I posted a link to an Egyptology forum where the author discusses in detail the etymology of Egyptian words but you ignored it, offered no counter evidence and then gave me an arrogant lecture on how you're very clever and I am lazy and fearful. You remind me of the tin man from the Wizard of Oz.

  393. McGarvey

    I meant the scarecrow

  394. Reb

    @McGarvey

    I saw the forum. Just because someone writes their opinion on a word I don't have to buy it. I know better. There are forums all over the net to prove whatever you want, however when you dig deeper you will find lies. The items I suggested for you would be too difficult for you abilities. They are not the fairytales you are used to. You just do not want to put forth any effort to educate yourself so stop wasting my time. The END!

  395. Epicurus

    I cant believe no one else noticed this but charles said

    "I didn’t know that Satanism was that easy to walk away from. I thought it was like the “mob” where once a member, always a member unless you had God’s help to break free from it."

    ...im just speechless...did you ACTUALLY believe this? if so you really do have an extremely sheltered ignorant view outside of your belief system.

    and like everyone else said....im glad you say the christian god specifically saved you while who knows how many children died...and he saved you so you could do what amazing task exactly?

    what is more likely do you think that the muslim god saved you from that disaster, that the christian god did it, or that it was a coincidence that happens to people all the time? and why?

    the thing with coincidences, there is so much going on in the world, so many variables, and so much time that it would be really weird if there never were coincidences...in fact they are statistically necessary.

    and i cant believe there are still people that believe there was a mass exodus of jews out of egypt....could anyone point to ONE external source of evidence other than the bible?? hell if ANY group was in the desert for that long they would have left artifacts....and while we are on the exodus, why are there no artifacts of pharaoh's army in the red sea?

  396. Aaron

    Creationists are an example of the Dunning-Kruger effect, in which those who are incompetent believe they are more competent that they are, and those who are competent mark themselves as being less competent than they are. Clearly they are also practicing "reverse science" by first arriving at a conclusion and then attempting to gather data to support it. Truly laughable.

  397. Steve

    Science is not flawless. It is performed by humans. I believe everything was created. You can't disprove this. Even scientists like Hawkins can't explain how everything got started. You can "make believe" that human's small minds can explain everything, but we are only kidding ourselves. The fact is rationality, when used, can only come to one conclusion.

  398. Charles B.

    Epicurs: I will give you a link to the discoveries of the Exodus. They are still there. Anyone can dive down and see them. Go to arkdiscovery . com and click on the Red Sea clip. Charriot wheels and human bones are found just as plain as day. The docs there seem to be very well done. They are also on Youtube so maybe we can get them posted here.

    Dr. Randy: God does watch over the righteous. You can shorten your life and God's will for your life by sin such as king Josiah did. He died before his time needlessly. If you die while righteous, then we just have to trust it was God's time for you to go.

  399. raerae

    good stuff.it always comes as a suprise to me how blind religion can make people. as for the science people no matter how smart they think they are or how many big words used somethings will never be explained.the creation of this amazing universe is no mistake it is no doubt devine in my mind.i would also like to add that whatever whoever created it would not trust man to pass on the word. that would be down to chance

  400. Randy

    @Epicurus, who wrote in answer to something Charles B. wrote:

    I cant believe no one else noticed this but charles said:

    “I didn’t know that Satanism was that easy to walk away from. I thought it was like the “mob” where once a member, always a member unless you had God’s help to break free from it.”

    …im just speechless…did you ACTUALLY believe this? if so you really do have an extremely sheltered ignorant view outside of your belief system.

    -------------

    Yes, Epicurus, I DID notice that, but when I read it I knew there was no point. He has been indoctrinated...

    I used to get that propaganda/conspiracy theory stuff from christians as well, when I was one of them. That Satanists were a big, scary, powerful force in the world and blah blah... And, christians that claim they WERE once Satanists and confirm this theory, are lying to impress the pastors and congregation.

    Let me give every body the scoop on The Satanic Church(es):

    The biggest groups are, indeed, in California (hippie land! lol), where it does serve as a kind of social club for actors and movie directors and musicians, etc. These people are usually tremendous, self involved a**holes and they are bored and get some "kicks" out of it on a saturday night.

    They do have some money, but they have influence only over (some small amount of...) movies and music and other fatuous entertainments. There is nothing there but idle luxury.

    There are small enclaves of the bored rich, usually trust fund babies who never worked a day in their lives, in other parts of the country. They are mostly looney as hatters but harmless, because true LeVay Satanists never condone harming anyone... Yes, there is even a moral code in the Satanic Bible!

    AND, most important, those two groups have been dwindling since the seventies.

    The rest? Chubby D&D dorks in their mother's basement's, dressing up in ill-fitting black robes, chanting stuff, and listening to heavy metal.

    That's it! I mean, really not a threat to anybody and most of these people were either too arrogant or two silly for me to associate with any longer, so after I got my "certification", I walked away.

    With all of my certifications I can still legally marry people and preside over funerals, (which I have done for friends), but, yeah, no big deal, and it is all in the past.

    Although, I still keep some of my regailia and "magical tools" around the house as decoration! It's pretty cool looking! And, acares the christians away!

  401. Randy

    *scares the christians away... that should have been, sorry.

  402. JD

    Where did Noah put the termites and woodpecker on the arc?

  403. oliarguello

    @ REB

    Thanks for the article I will read it as soon as I can.

    @ Epicurus

    I saw what Charles said about leaving Satanism. I thought he was being sarcastic. If he was being serious...yikes! No wonder he is stuck where he is and his soul being at the mercy of his pastors thinking.

    @Randy

    Ive actually read quite a bit on Satanism, Paganism,Wicca, etc to "know my enemy" ( by the way...apparently I am going to hell jsut for doing this..LOL.. gah the propaganda never ceases).

    Funny how your keepsakes would make a Christian run in fear. I could look at some of that stuff as just interesting since I know none of that stuff has power over me. I have come to learn the spells are the same as prayers .... they jsut change your psyche in a subtle way ( unconscious thoughts/actions) or in a significant way ( conscious thoughts/actions). The earthly beliefs I mentioned above feed the ego and keep you "trapped" in the materialistic to feed the animal self ( urges to be satiated). The more divine beliefs have the same mechanism on the mind but eliminate the ego to transcend ones self.

    Well that last sentence is true for the truly enlightened, most people still feed their ego even in divine beliefs, since they rely on others for their understanding. It was Kant who said this about enlightenment

    "Enlightenment is man's release from his self-incurred tutelage. Tutelage is man's inability to make use of his understanding without direction from another. Self-incurred is this tutelage when its cause lies not in lack of reason but in lack of resolution and courage to use it without direction from another. Sapere aude! "Have courage to use your own reason!"- that is the motto of enlightenment.

    Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why so great a portion of mankind, after nature has long since discharged them from external direction (naturaliter maiorennes), nevertheless remains under lifelong tutelage, and why it is so easy for others to set themselves up as their guardians ( leaders for the people desiring to be lead). It is so easy not to be of age. If I have a book which understands for me, a pastor who has a conscience for me, a physician who decides my diet, and so forth, I need not trouble myself. I need not think, if I can only pay - others will easily undertake the irksome work for me.

  404. oliarguello

    @ JD

    LOL! That was pretty funny!

    Ever see that Robot Chicken sketch? A unicorn and his wife forgot to set the alarm and frantically pack their stuff and go to the beach only to see the ark miles away. They are soon met with other creatures who overslept like cyclops, dragons, and centaurs.

    They cut to the ark and someones asks Noah why cant they jsut go back for them. And Noah said " Cuz GOD hates freaks"...guy asks again " Well what about these fairies?" and Noah pulls out a giant wooden sledge hammer and smashes them . LOL

  405. McGarvey

    @ JD

    He put them next to the beavers! Obviously.

  406. Epicurus

    i bet you also believe he found all those other places and that the dinosaur tracks with human tracks in Rose Creek texas are real also....*sigh*

  407. Hardy

    "@Epicurus, who wrote in answer to something Charles B. wrote:

    I cant believe no one else noticed this but charles said:

    “I didn’t know that Satanism was that easy to walk away from. I thought it was like the “mob” where once a member, always a member unless you had God’s help to break free from it.”

    …im just speechless…did you ACTUALLY believe this? if so you really do have an extremely sheltered ignorant view outside of your belief system."

    I had to LOL! You have obviously not read the older discussions with Charles on this site, the ones that go into 'witchcraft, sorcery and demons'. Yes, it's all very real and very dangerous to him.

  408. Charles B.

    Epic: You asked for proof, and I have you a website. After 3,000 years one wouldn't expect to find anything, let alone the Chariot wheels. And yes, they where there as you can clearly see from the videos. Yes, I knew what you said about Mr. Wyatt. Why do you assume I don't research a topic thoroughly? Even Jesus has been called a fraud, but that doesn't make it such. The powers that be have a vested interest in not supporting Biblical archeology, if not outright destruction of the objects found.

    oliarguello: You have proved to be as black-hearted as I first discerned. You are definitely a "foe" of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

    Dr. Randy: If all you say is true, then good for you. Leaving Satanism was a good thing. I'll drop the subject, accepting your viewpoint and experience as being what you say it is, but I feel you are trivializing the spiritual nature of such an order. I'm not 100% sure you're who you say you are, and if you are, perhaps you are truly more clever than I initially suspected. By making fun of the Satanic order you effectively allow it to continue without opposition of any kind as you've lead others to believe there is nothing of worry or substance there.

    If I'm able, I'm trying to shake the dust off my feet from you guys and just watch the docs when I can and nothing more.

  409. Epicurus

    you gave me a website that is neither academic nor credible. if i gave you a website by some random person claiming they were abducted by UFOs or some claim by a muslim you would be more skeptical. this is what i mean by a double standard of evidence and pandering to your bias.

    that video did not show wheels from the exodus. that video was no more proof of your claim than the big foot video is of big foot. i just cant believe how gullible you allow yourself to be in this particular area of life.

    The powers that be are absolutely religious and would LOVE to find proof of each of their religions claims.

    what you just did here was create an imaginary group of "they" and just assume that they dont like your religion...amazing.

    you believe the man who "claimed to have found Noah’s ark, the Biblical Ark of the Covenant, the location of Sodom And Gomorrah, the Tower of Babel, the true site of Mt. Sinai, the true site of the crucifixion of Jesus, and the original stones of the Ten Commandments." and you just buy it all, hook line and sinker...even though you can never find ANY verification of these things outside of this one kook....im just flabbergasted.

    just admit when you are wrong.

  410. afly_on_the_wall

    soooooo, anyone following thunderfoot's (the narrator and producer of this video) on you tube? how he got Pakistan to ban you tube and other sites because of the may 20th "draw Mohammad day" just wondering what the thoughts might be here on that

  411. oliarguello

    @charles b

    I dont want to jump to any conclusions here. How exactly am I a foe of Jesus Christ?

    Oh and about your earlier post judging the curandera as demonic. Her church preaches about Jesus and loving him and his messages. People who see her and get help arent asked to pay...there is a donation box and people jsut drop donations of a dollar or 5 or 10, or nothing if you are poor and cant afford to pay anything. There is no collection plates passed around at the church. Jesus was called demonic for his abilities ( yet all he did was help people and talk about GOD) as were his apostles who were also granted with these abilities to help spread the truth. Any of this sounding familiar.....I really believe you are just as guilty as the stubborn Pharisees who fear anything good that shifts their paradigm of thought and status quo.

  412. oliarguello

    or black hearted for that matter

  413. Hardy

    Satanism, witchcraft, sorcery. I just can't get over it, it's so damn ridiculous. It's like 12-year-old who insists Santa is real and Harry Potter actually exists.

    Sorry for any offense, but I find it scary that people might still want to go back to the middle ages and burn people who 'look like witches'. The good old 'float or sink test' - if she sinks and doesn't come up, she's a innocent and didn't deserve to die. Too bad. But if she magically comes up and flies away, she's a witch and should be burned. LOL.

    But hey, there is still justice: Charles can tell me I'm going to hell all he wants.

  414. Reb

    Folks, Charles has not one clue what the bible teaches and if he did he would soon come to realize he worships the evil side of human existence. That is why he is so angry at anyone who does not see things his way. He is the product of the 'Lord God' who makes his first appearance in the second chapter of Genesis when GOD has completed his work.

    In the first chapter we are clearly informed that GOD did his creations in seven days and rested. He did not create one man and one woman but an entire race of humans. He did not lock them away in a garden but told them to go forth over all the earth and subdue it. They were free to eat all the fruits and herbs that were available with NO restrictions given. GOD was very pleased with all he had made.

    After GOD had finished all his work we next find Lord God, another member of the Elohim, who begins his work on the seventh day as a slap in the face to GOD. The Lord God had dominion over a garden area where the food of these gods were to be grown. The second chapter tells us that humans were needed because in the Lord Gods domain and the last line in verse 5 is " and there was not a man to till the ground." Slave labor needed! The sumerian version of these gods tells us they also needed slave labor to mine for gold. Verse 12 in chapter 2 informs the reader that the gold was good in that land. More slave labor needed! This Lord God was a nasty piece of work and didn't even have sense enough to create females for his male creations. He first had his men look at the animal kingdom for a helpmeet but even as dumbed-down as these humans were, they had more sense than this perverted a-hole. Read the entire first two chapters and see there are two creating gods and people like Charles are products of the Lord God/yahweh/lucifer.

    Actually, the creation stories in the bible are a re-telling of the ancient sumerian epics that far pre-date the time of the hebrew bible. The bible authors borrowed these tales while in Babylon and used them to create a cosmology for themselves and leaders/priests have conned mankind ever since with these gods.

    I also believe we create our own good or evil and can manifests what we create by using war and hate or love and kindness. The hateful Lord God was constantly proclaiming there was no other god like him, acknowledging the existence of other deities. His followers, such as Charles have that same spirit and become furious and use the same old Lord God threats of eternal punishment and wrath if everyone does not step in line. Charles, you are a train wreck and seem to be getting loonier as time goes by.

    After we read the tales of God and the Lord God we get to meet the Lord but I will let the reader check that out. If you pay attention when the bible deals with these obviously different characters, those with a working brain will see they are not the same.

  415. Hardy

    'That is why he is so angry at anyone who does not see things his way.'

    I disagree. Charles very rarely gets angry during these 'discussions'.

  416. Reb

    @Hardy
    Re:Charles
    Perhaps I should have said he gets his little panties in a wad.

  417. oliarguello

    @Hardy

    Witchraft, Sorcery, etc etc all that stuff...for anyone who has actually read it ( not hating on you....its directed to charles B) will realize its just self hypnosis really ( see earlier post about subconscious and conscious thoughts/actions).

    People who think its some sort of evil magic are

    1) People susceptible to its "evil powers".. a sort of self fulfilling prophecy.When you fear something, thats when it has power over you.
    2) Watch way too many Hollywood movies
    3) Only believe what their preacher or congregations has told them ( and conveniently tell them not to dare read or look into any of it)

    Someone may argue " Hey isnt that contradictory to your belief in the curandera since she seems magical?". Well I dont beleive in magic. I think miracles, specifically health related ones can be explained. The quantum theory of super strings suggests everything is connected by vibrating strings of energy, DNA has a low frequency vibration, different combination's of HVPGS voltage and pulse rates has been shown to increase DNA and protein synthesis( ive read this stuff in scientific journals; can easily be looked up). I hypothesize subtle manipulation of energy can therefore lead to DNA transcription and then protein expression ( for those of you who dont know, the main purpose of DNA is that its transcribed then translated into proteins). Heck it might jsut be within ones self and all the curandera is doing is making a suggestion and its like a placebo effect...shes not doing anything and you are manipulating your own genes. But there is something to be said about her being able to pinpoint health issues and mention specific details about ones life.

    Now that I think about it, I suppose this type of manipulation can cause "evil" health problems. But from what I have experienced you have to let yourself be open to these type of health manipulations at a molecular/quantumn level. I have seen a few forced people to see the curandera and they dont seem to get much help.

    I know I know...its all hypothesis and speculative. I dont claim to be entirely correct. I am simply looking for answers to what I have observed... and magic ( and even cold reading)doesnt cut it:)

  418. Reb

    @Epicurean_Logic

    Thanks and I have read everything Reed has written but I am glad you posted the link so others will take a look. Everyone here, I mean the thinking people, would enjoy his work.

    BTW, one doesn't have to venture far into the 'holy word' to find filth and ignorance galore.

  419. Charles B.

    I'm trying to cut back on the comments both reading and writing.

    Epic: I'll research more about Wyatt (in-depthly), but If God is real (a given for me), and a true servant of God who is also an archeologist wants to find something, whom do you think God would entrust the find to? The true believer. Did you watch the videos before you condemed their scholarship and truth? I missed the Tower of Bable one. Are you sure that is correct? It's not important. I'll go over them again myself. I was a hard sell when I first watched them, but I found myself persuaded in every one eventually.

    Mr. Razor: I believe God is for real; getting all the monkeys and whatnots in the whole world to one spot to board the Ark is cake; c'mon!

    The reason that I felt so strongly about Oliarguello is that he is a spiritualist not a Christian. My gut is telling me he's not "one of us". He's an impostor and the most dangerous of any of you guys. You're a down-right honest Atheist. He's something altogether different. But, God is the ultimate judge and not I. God knows those that truly belong to Him and those that don't. We may be very surprised at the true "sheep" and the "goats" when all is revealed fully. I do hope I'm wrong, but I can't shake the feeling that I'm not.

    Oliarguello: If I've misjudged you, sorry. But, my gut feeling is persistent; I can't shake it. Had someone said to me that I was black-hearted, my reply would have been that my heart is washed white as snow by the precious red blood of Jesus Christ. I'm not a Pharisee, but I'm very fair, you see, as we are all equal at the foot of the cross. But, without the cross, there is no salvation. That's my yardstick. Plain and simple. You remind me of one of the characters in a C.S. Lewis novel. The one about Mars where the most evil and vial were not opposed as vehemently by the angels (Eldels) as the lukewarm, because such were the most likely never to mend their ways.

    P.S I have some doc links for you for the "Finger of God". It's a great documentary in 10 parts. A bit odd at first but the parts about the move of God and the miracles in China and Africa made me weep. I want to be a missionary too so badly these days! You can look it up on Youtube. I'm debating posting them here, but I don't want to abuse Vlatko's hospitality. I've asked him to post the doc. if he can. Anyway, you can find it very easily on Youtube. I'm meeting more and more people miraculousl healed by God and some to very great extents like with Cancer, heart diease, and other such things. It's happening! These are very exciting days. I'm more excited now then when I was a new believer. These are just the beginning of days of the greatest move of God the world has ever seen.

    Peace to you. May the peace of God rest upon you. God alone know your heart. I trust Him, and so should you.

    Reb: I can't even hardly understand what you're talking about. If I have the mental strength I might try again to read your post. But, may it ease your heart (or not) to know that even without Mr. B. the love of God and the heart of God still beats strongly and fiercely full of fire and passion in millions and millions and millions. You'll only get your soles burned trying to stamp out the fire in our hearts.

    Peace even to you today.

    Charles B.

  420. Hardy

    'I want to be a missionary too so badly these days!'

    Whoop-dee-f*cking-doo. Exactly THAT is a huge part of what's wrong with the world today.

    I give up, Charles. There is a barrier so strong in your mind that it would kill you to question it (literally), so I will leave you be from now on.

  421. Reb

    @Charles

    You can't understand my posts?! One thing I do is write simple and clearly enough for even a dullard such as yourself can understand. I don't spout bible without giving the proof. You don't 'understand' because you refuse any form of truth.

    Your heart is not filled with love. You are a self-righteous, arrogant and extremely brainwashed hypocrite. I have said it before and I will say it again, any 'god' that would create such a place as a burning hell for his own creations can go burn there himself. Any human who stoops to the level of wishing that on another human is long past the point of simple insanity. They have crossed into a religious cult life that is not only repulsive but dangerous to this planet. You are no different than the ancient hebrews who thought god told them to rape, steal and kill for him, and they did it! The killed their kids. They killed and ate their kids. They cooked their food with their own feces by order of this nutjob god. They saved the little girl enemy virgins "for themselvs". That is just an example of the monster you serve and call god. Jesus was no better and was the one who uses the threat of hell to keep people in line. He can kiss my arse and so can you. You must be a lonely and pathetic little man to come here trying to impress this forum with your syrupy sugary phony posts that all lead to the ultimate judgement from the great c.b.

    You need serious professional help and I hope you get it. In the meantime I suggest you don't address me again or I will be forced to tell you what I really think.

  422. Achems Razor

    @ Charles B:

    C'mon! Charles, you know that the Ark is an impossibility! Ha,Ha, we have been through that before.

    You figure that getting everything on board the Ark from all over the world in, was it in 7 days or so? a cake walk? Refer to my above site,
    "Problems With The Bible" Google it again.

  423. Achems Razor

    @ Charles B:

    You are right, am a Atheist, and am not a spiritualist, at least not in the spiritualistic sense, might tend to philosophical a bit though.

    But why are you so afraid of @ oliarguello? why would you find him so dangerous? Please elaborate!

  424. oliarguello

    @Achems Razor

    I am curious too as to why he accuses me of being a foe of Jesus/GOD and why he says I am black hearted. His current explanation is that he has " un unshakeable feeling".

    Well earlier, he said I was treading on dangerous territory for thinking outside the Christian box, then he said the person I know who performs miracles was demonic in nature.

    He jumped to conclusions that I was some Satanic worshiper becasue I read books on the occult to inform myself of "the enemy" ( notice I said read...not praised, not practiced, not defended, not preached about...read; afterall who fights his enemy without knowing anything about them?). He also doesnt seem to like the fact that I use science to explain some theology ...particularly that I believe GOD and Universe are really the same thing.I then explained to him that the person I know who performs miracles teaches about Jesus message, the love he taught, etc.... So now that he realizes I am doing this for the sake of enlightenment and follow GOD....his conviction that I am demonic is now just simply some "unshakable feeling" based on his earlier presumptions.

    Its ironic that he condemns me as a foe and the miracle worker is demonic. Yet he JUST posted something about miracles in China and Africa and wanting to go there.

    These are my conclusions. i gave him chances to explain himself. But all he says now is that he has some feeling. So based on our conversations, I have to go on what was said and what has culminated.

    Charles B. I really suggest you look to information to educate yourself outside of Christian texts. What you call Satan is very clever and has infiltrated many churches and preachers. I think Satan jsut laughs at people who believe in a text that is totally contradictory and remain in churches that are completely hypocritical and blasphemous even according to their own doctrine.

  425. Epicurean_Logic

    Hey Achems. Do you want to continue the discussion on Barbours time model. It seems as though we have give Her_Majesty the slip for the time being!

  426. Randy B

    Are you people all just ranting or just ignorant? Reb, you said "ancient hebrews who thought god told them to rape, steal and kill for him, and they did it! The killed their kids. They killed and ate their kids. They cooked their food with their own feces by order of this nutjob god. They saved the little girl enemy virgins “for themselvs”. That is just an example of the monster you serve and call God" Where is THAT in the Bible?? Do you really believe that is what Christianity is al about??
    And what about your own evolutionist, such as Farr and others that say there is a "creative force"? Hmmm, sounds like God to me. And besides, there is NO proof for evolution. I am not talking mutation. But if you truly believe in evolution, show my your proof. Explain the incredible complexity of a simple cell! Let alone the structure of DNA. Did that just happen?? You must have an incredible amount of faith!
    Please, people, really research all this before you say such silly things.

    Peace, brothers

  427. Achems Razor

    @ Epicurean_Logic

    Well I do not know? you can run, but you can not hide from the_Trolls. (LOL)

    Just because I look into things, does not mean that they are etched in stone for me.

    Yes, Barbours is a different outlook on Reality. But does not mean it's true. I'm just saying! (LOL)

    Everything that I was quoting from Barbours book would be from memory, fully studied the book about 2 years ago. Had it from the Library.

    If you want to continue fine, but like I said, it would be from memory. But if I get one whiff, of you know who, will discontinue discussions again!

    @ Randy: you know that I have respect for you. But, the thing is, @ Reb is very well voiced in what he is saying.
    I know he can fend for himself, so will leave it to him.

  428. D-K

    Damnit, this thing got all out of hand in my absence.. Now i'll never get caught up.

    Are we still arrogant and creationists still delusional?

    *checks*

    Ah, marvelous! Carry on good people..

  429. Reb

    @Randy

    Point to one post that I even mention evolution, you pinhead. I am not atheist nor agnostic. I am Deist and if you ever read The Age of Reason by Thomas Paine, you will find my views there. I just refuse to scrape and bow and grovel before invisible beings. If there is a creator, it is not the savage mongrel of the bible.

  430. Epicurus

    @Randy,

    In the book of Ezekiel 4:12-13 the Lord said:
    QUOTE
    "And thou shalt eat it as barley cakes, and thou shalt bake it with dung that cometh out of man, in their sight. And the LORD said, Even thus shall the children of Israel eat their defiled bread among the Gentiles, whither I will drive them."

    Here, if we fail to be nice to god, he will force us to eat our children.

    Leviticus 26: 29
    "You will eat the flesh of your sons and the flesh of your daughters."

    Next, because people have turned their back on god, he will force them to cannibalize their sons, daughters, and each other.

    Jeremiah 19: 9
    "I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and daughters, and they will eat one another's flesh during the stress of the siege imposed on them by the enemies who seek their lives."

    As if this weren't enough, here's some more.

    Ezekiel 5: 10
    "Therefore in your midst fathers will eat their children, and children will eat their fathers. I will inflict punishment on you and will scatter all your survivors to the winds."

    Murder, rape, and pillage at Jabesh-gilead (Judges 21:10-24 NLT)

    Murder, rape and pillage of the Midianites (Numbers 31:7-18 NLT)

    More Murder Rape and Pillage (Deuteronomy 20:10-14)

    David's Punishment - Polygamy, Rape, Baby Killing, and God's "Forgiveness" (2 Samuel 12:11-14 NAB)

    Thus says the Lord: 'I will bring evil upon you out of your own house. I will take your wives [plural] while you live to see it, and will give them to your neighbor. He shall lie with your wives in broad daylight. You have done this deed in secret, but I will bring it about in the presence of all Israel, and with the sun looking down.'

    Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the Lord." Nathan answered David: "The Lord on his part has forgiven your sin: you shall not die. But since you have utterly spurned the Lord by this deed, the child born to you must surely die." [The child dies seven days later.]

    Rape of Female Captives (Deuteronomy 21:10-14 NAB)

    "When you go out to war against your enemies and the LORD, your God, delivers them into your hand, so that you take captives, if you see a comely woman among the captives and become so enamored of her that you wish to have her as wife, you may take her home to your house. But before she may live there, she must shave her head and pare her nails and lay aside her captive's garb. After she has mourned her father and mother for a full month, you may have relations with her, and you shall be her husband and she shall be your wife. However, if later on you lose your liking for her, you shall give her her freedom, if she wishes it; but you shall not sell her or enslave her, since she was married to you under compulsion."

    do you want more?

    what proof do you want of evolution?

    would you like genetic evidence? would you like evidence of actual organisms we have witnessed in the laboratory? do you want fossil evidence? endogenous retroviruses?

    if you believe evolution states things "just happen" it shows that you have NO IDEA about evolution and should probably keep your mouth shut about it. would you pretend to understand quantum chromodynamics? stop pretending that you have an educated credible opinion.

    @Charles
    You said; but If God is real (a given for me), and a true servant of God who is also an archeologist wants to find something, whom do you think God would entrust the find to?

    this about sums up your ability to think critically. please go research what psychologists say about your belief in a deity.

    look up B.F. Skinners work on superstition.

  431. Randy B

    First of all, I am another Randy, but the same as the last Randy...should have but a B there to distinguish between myself and the other Randy that wrote first.

    I cleaned my truck yesterday, then I rested. Was going to catch the new Robin Hood, but got to busy with other things.
    But I did watch a bit of the History Channel about aliens populating the earth. Ah ha!! So THAT is where we came from! But alas, the same dilemma...where did THEY come from?

    There wheels were so dirty with brake dust on them, but I got them all clean and look so good. Yes, Reb, it was still I washing the truck and was still the same truck. And it was still yesterday that I washed the truck. Just so you are not confused. Yes I am being abit unkind here...just trying to make a point. And I will admit it is not the greatest analogy, but still think it is valid.

    Yes, there are some good arguement against God. And alot of religion is...well, not so good. I must admit. But there are also alot of very educated men, some former aetheist, some mere agnostic, that after much research and soul searching (yes, I believe we have a soul) have come to conclusions other than alot on the post.

    Excuse me if I segway often, just want to express thoughts as they come. This is not going to be graded I hope!! But I have a question. For any that want to answer. Is there right or wrong? Is there evil? Yes, this could open another digression altogether, but still relevent to whether there is a loving God, yet a supreme God, that created ....well, everything. As someone mentioned the string theory (theory, remember), everything seems to be made up of some particle or energy form, but the order and the design of it....well, do you really believe it just...happened? That would take more faith than any Christian view. In my opinion anyway.

    Love the opposite views, though. Think more christians should understand and know the opposing viewpoints. But think the same for the Aethists

    May we all find truth. I SHALL set us free!

    Blessings

    Randy B

  432. Reb

    Rape: Numbers 31:7-18, Judges 21:10-24, Deuteronomy 20:10-14, victim of rape forced to marry her attacker Deuteronomy 22:28-29 , rape victim killed because she didn't scream loud enough Deuteronomy 22:23-24,When the chosen go to war and kill all the men they can keep any woman they find attractive and take her home and use her until he tires of her Deuteronomy 21:10-14, here god says each man must get at least two woman from the spoils of war Judges 5:30, here a man sells his own daughter as a sex slave Exodus 21:7-11. Only a dimwitted blind fool could read this filth and see a righteous god.

    Cannabalism abounds in the bible: "And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat." -- Leviticus 26:29

    "And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters." -- Deuteronomy 28:53

    "And toward her young one that cometh out from between her feet, and toward her children which she shall bear: for she shall eat them." -- Deuteronomy 28:57

    "Through the wrath of the LORD of hosts is the land darkened, and the people shall be as the fuel of the fire: no man shall spare his brother. And he shall snatch on the right hand, and be hungry; and he shall eat on the left hand, and they shall not be satisfied: they shall eat every man the flesh of his own arm." -- Isaiah 9:19-20

    "And I will feed them that oppress thee with their own flesh; and they shall be drunken with their own blood, as with sweet wine." -- Isaiah 49:26

    "And I will cause them to eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters, and they shall eat every one the flesh of his friend." -- Jeremiah 19:9

    "Therefore the fathers shall eat the sons in the midst of thee, and the sons shall eat their fathers." -- Ezekiel 5:10

    "I will not feed you: that that dieth, let it die; and that that is to be cut off, let it be cut off; and let the rest eat every one the flesh of another." -- Zechariah 11:9

    Sometimes the Bible just reports, often with apparent relish, cases of cannibalism.

    "This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat him to day, and we will eat my son to morrow. So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him." 2 Kings 6:28-29

    "The hands of the pitiful women have sodden their own children: they were their meat." -- Lamentations 4:10

    "Who pluck off their skin from off them, and their flesh from off their bones; Who also eat the flesh of my people, and flay their skin from off them; and they break their bones, and chop them in pieces, as for the pot, and as flesh within the caldron." -- Micah 3:2-3

    "Heap on wood, kindle the fire, consume the flesh, and spice it well, and let the bones be burned. Then set it empty upon the coals thereof, that the brass of it may be hot, and may burn, and that the filthiness of it may be molten in it, that the scum of it may be consumed. She hath wearied herself with lies, and her great scum went not forth out of her: her scum shall be in the fire. -- Ezekiel 24:10-12

    Feces eating:
    “Has my master sent me only to your master and to you to speak these words, and not to the men who sit on the wall, doomed to eat their own dung and drink their own urine with you?”
    –Isaiah 36:12

    God orders them to cook bread over human feces, but changes his mind and allows them to use cow dung instead.

    Prepare and eat this food as you would barley cakes. While all the people are watching, bake it over a fire using dried human dung as fuel and then eat the bread.” Then the Lord said, “This is how Israel will eat defiled bread in the Gentile lands to which I will banish them!”

    Then I said, “O Sovereign Lord, must I be defiled by using human dung? For I have never been defiled before. From the time I was a child until now I have never eaten any animal that died of sickness or was killed by other animals. I have never eaten any meat forbidden by the law.”

    “All right,” the Lord said. “You may bake your bread with cow dung instead of human dung.”
    –Ezekiel 4:12-15

    There is no end to the filth and savagery in your holy book. I didn't even go into the constant incest, human sacrifice to yahweh/satan and other equally repulsive tales. You don't even know what that damn book says as I could list hundreds of such verses you obviously have no knowledge of. Idiot!

  433. Reb

    @Epicurus

    You beat me to the punch. I also posted those but am being moderated. These numbnuts don't even know what their precious holy bable even says. lol

  434. Randy B

    Epicurus, chill, dude!! Would you believe that those that may not be to your standards should not speak! What beleif system is that? But, here, so you can prove your point, explain the workings of mitochondrion and biologically, the how and why of it's intrical evolutionary development? And the evolutions ideas of, if not "just happened", that life began on this earth in the first place?
    And don't be so angry and judgemental...you will sound like one of us Christians!! :)

    Also, in my last post I typed "I shall set you free" I hope all knew I meant, It, meaning the truth, shall set you free.

    Be cool, and love others! Now THAT can't be all bad, can it?
    Peace,
    Randy B

  435. Epicurean_Logic

    Guys, have you noticed that Randy doesn't sound like himself?
    for example,

    'Hmmm, sounds like God to me.' I am pretty sure that Dr Randy is much more eloquant than that.

    'And besides, there is NO proof for evolution.' What. the guy is pro- evo down to the ground!!??

    'And what about your own evolutionist,' like he isnt pro evo.

    Somethings up here.

  436. Achems Razor

    @ Randy B:

    This can,t be Randy, Randy.

    Who the H*ll are you, another religee, trying to trick us.

    Complete tricksters!! Get away and don't proliferate!

  437. Epicurean_Logic

    I am talking about the post attacking Reb btw. not Randy B's. Call me paranoid but is this some kind of christian plot to divide and conquer? Or is Dr Randy having a bad day?

  438. Randy B

    LOL You people are easily confused!!
    No I am not the Rev. Dr. Randy.
    I am just another Randy that happened to run across the post and am just adding my 2 mites worth. And I am learning!!
    Ah, Faith. We all have it. Seems we all just believe what we want to believe, just on faith. Ah, yes, there are little smidgeon of reality, but mostly it all comes down to faith. What do I believe...hmm.
    Well, hope that clears up that.
    Razor, can I just...liferate?

  439. Randy

    It's a damn good thing someone owned up to that NOT being me!

    I have been away for health reasons, (I am having a slight relapse of my MS and my left hand is trembling so makes it hard to type...)

    But, I leave the good fight to my super-intellectual friends, Epicurus, Reb, Hardy, Epi_logic, et al...

    Can't stay long... see you all as soon as I recover...

    Dr. Randy!

  440. Epicurean_Logic

    Get well soon buddy. The basket of fruit is in the post.

  441. Randy

    Ok, one last thing before I go lie down as even this is sapping my strength... but, I think my friends will get a kick out of it:

    When I get a relapse, my left leg also goes numb and weak, so I walk with a walking stick, or staff. I find it much more helpful than a cane, which I also have, but I prefer my staff, (which I got years ago at some witchy-store), because it is better and just looks cooler!

    Well, yesterday, as I hobbled past my front picture window, I noticed the local Baptists were prowling again. I recognized their "sunday suits" and the shiny bibled tucked under their arms.

    Now, I have told them time and time again to leave my house alone. That jesus was not welcome here, but they have some trouble remembering, so, I knew they would show up.

    I lie in wait for them, gathering my strength, so that my hand would not shake and my leg would not give out...

    As soon as they arrived at the door, before they could ring the bell, I flung the door wide and brandished my staff like Gandalf before the Balrog.

    I cried out:

    "BACK! BACK, christians!
    Back to the Dark Ages!
    There is NO PLACE for you here in the 21st Century!"

    And promptly slammed the door on their jaw-dropped faces!

    I felt so good for the rest of the day, even as I hobbled, I walked on clouds!

    So, I leave you with that! Hope you liked it, it took alot out of me!

    g'night!

  442. D-K

    Great stuff!

    I like to make up funny stuff to tell those people too.. You wouldn't believe the laughs i've had..

  443. Epicurus

    @Randy, what are you even saying in your post to me...please, you dont have to try and sound smart or poetic when you speak, just type your questions out.

    "explain the workings of mitochondrion and biologically, the how and why of it’s intrical evolutionary development?"

    i have NO IDEA what you are TRYING to say here so please try again, and i will love to explain it

    "And the evolutions ideas of, if not “just happened”, that life began on this earth in the first place?"

    this part i think you are asking me how life started in the first place.....well that is not evolution, that is abiogenesis and there are some great ideas for that with some wonderful evidence supporting some of them.

    and how is what i posted to you angry? im sorry are you not upset by killing babies and raping women?

    also said we all have faith...explain to me, do you thing we all share the same faith as someone who believes in a god? because i can promise you i dont hold any faith in anything the same way one has faith in a deity.

    PS, i was aware Randy B was not Randy.

  444. Reb

    @fakeRandy(most likely Charles B)

    Here are a few more jewels about the demon god of the OT and his sick lust for child sacrifice. These would make great bedtime stories for the kiddies.

    Exodus 22:29-30 :
    “You shall not delay to offer from the fullness of your harvest and from the outflow of your presses. The first-born of your sons you shall give to me. You shall do likewise with your oxen and with your sheep: seven days it shall be with its dam; on the eighth day you shall give it to me.”

    Ezekiel 20:25-26 this lying devil admits the laws he had given were evil:

    “Moreover I gave them statutes that were not good and ordinances by which they could not have life; and I defiled them through their very gifts in making them offer by fire all their first-born, that I might horrify them; I did it that they might know that I am the LORD.” These are the works of some evil perverse and evil men.

    Gosh, I think I will tell my kids they will have to burn their puppy so I can horrify them to make sure they know who is in charge here.

    "Serving a mean god makes a mean man". Thomas Paine

  445. Eloka

    Ever notice that in the bible it's always the woman's fault? LOL Even if he was barren it was her fault. I really don't know how women can be Christians, how is it any different to Islam?

  446. Reb

    @Eloka

    Yep, take a look at Lot offering up his two innocent daughters to perverts to do as they pleased with. Imagine any decent man even thinking of handing his daughters to even one man much less an entire demented population! Lot was a worthless liar like his uncle Abraham who was the first deadbeat dad and pimp.

    Also, since the Lot family had to flee the city in such a hurry where did they stop to get enough wine to get a grown man so drunk he had no idea he bonked his own children....twice? Truth is he raped his own daughters but had to blame the women since they don't matter in the twilight zone of bible world. Another fine more story to read the children about the good god...not.

  447. Epicurus

    It will yet be the proud boast of women that they never contributed a line to the Bible.
    -- George W. Foote

  448. Charles B.

    oliarguello: The heart of the matter can be summed up in your last post; you said: "I really suggest you look to information to educate yourself outside of Christian texts. What you call Satan is very clever and has infiltrated many churches and preachers. I think Satan just laughs at people who believe in a text that is totally contradictory and remain in churches that are completely hypocritical and blasphemous even according to their own doctrine."

    You are clearly rejecting the Bible as any form of standard by which you live your life and the Church as any standard by which one is accountable. In fact, you accuse the churches of following Satan without knowing it. A real Christian just doesn't do that.

    Jesus said that the Kingdom of God was like a dragnet that pulled in fishes of all kinds; some good and some evil. At the judgment, or the last days, the evil will be sorted out and destroyed while the good preserved. Granted, this is an analogy, but the purpose is to convey a literal truth that the church will have both good and evil people within it working often side by side. A good Christian never gives up; you don't abandon the true Church or reject the true sheep when a wolf or two creeps in; You tend the sheep and fight the wolves! And certainly you don't reject God's Word seemingly entirely and profess to be a Christian of any kind.

    Nonetheless, God is the final judge and not I. He knows your heart and that is all that ultimately matters; seek to serve Him the best you can but don't compromise the very heart of the Gospel which is salvation through Christ alone via faith and repentance from your sins.

    Peace to you. Let's call a truce.

  449. Charles B.

    I had notice Dr. Randy hadn't comment for a while.

    Dr. Randy, I'm sorry that your MS is acting up. Your story about the Baptists at your door and your walking stick in hand like Gandalf before the Balrog was funny and I laughed in spite of myself. But seriously, may I pray for your health?

    With fullest sincerety of heart,

    Charles B.

  450. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    @ REB

    What's your preoccupation with rape? You sure are a vile one, aren't you? Are you a Johnny Reb(el) or a Reb(a)? Either way, just let me say, "Jesus loves you still. Let him into your heart today and be free from your obvious hang-ups."

  451. Achems Razor

    @ Charles B:

    You wouldn't be the phony "Randy B" would you? (LOL)
    I am still trying to figure out the weird scenario about the two "Randy's" I trust no one!

    You did not answer me about the "Ark"? Charles.
    What's the matter, no rebuttal of @ Reb's, fine post's??
    I'm sure everyone would like to hear your take, I would!

  452. Epicurean_Logic

    Achems. Do you not remember the story of Jesus disguising himself as an old woman in order to preach his message to the leppers. Well to be honest i just made that story up. But you know what i mean.

  453. Achems Razor

    @ Epicurean_Logic:

    Yes! I do know what you mean!

  454. Charles B.

    Razor: Normally I wouldn't tell you if I did use another pen name or not, but out of respect for you, and Dr. Randy, and the total oddness of the posts I'll truthfully tell you, "No, I'm not "Randy B." But it sure sounds like me doesn't it?!? Right down to the "peace" thing on the end and talk about "faith" and my capitalization of things and calling you "Razor". I've been framed!

    Let's ask Dr. Randy to analyze them as he said once he could do that. I think it's Reb posing as Randy B. trying to make it sound like me, as odd as that sounds, for whatever reason. Maybe so he can spout more trash from being "asked" about his topics. Who knows? It's an unfortunate coincidence in names and styles for sure if not. I respect Dr. Randy more than that to use his name to jab at that troll, Reb. Surely I could come up with a better pen name than Randy's if I wanted to. Maybe it really is some new "Randy" guy that really likes his truck. The chances of that are better than the odds of evolution being even remotely possible, wouldn't you think? :-)

    I'm trying to cut back on time on-line. I'm always irking the Mrs. of late with on-line "chat" with "unbelievers". That's you guys, and I must admit that she's got a point there. I've got more important obligations. Reb's posts would take hours of research to rebuttal as every concept is odd and turned on it's head. He's not worth my time.
    As for Noah's ark, which mystery are you most interested in me answering? Getting the animals there is no problem. God had them moving there for who knows how long. And yes, they probably worked on the Ark for years. I am not sure about the overcrowding aspect. Let me think about that a bit more. Before the flood the atmosphere was different. The water came from multiple sources as it also says the "fountains of the deep" were opened up. There may have been a 'water canopy" in the sky as well. I'm not a "Young Earther," so dinos on the Ark is a big "maybe" but baby dinos were quite small if they were on the Ark. Good night.

    Peace to you all.

    Charles B.

  455. Reb

    @Charlestheliar

    Now Charles you know the bible says to bear no false witness or accuse without proof. Vlatko has access to our email addresses complete with IP addresses if he so chooses. Only a dimwit like you would pose as such a ridiculous character and only a christian would stoop to such a degrading level. I have no problem saying exactly what I mean. You sissy whining little demon. Crawl back under your slimy rock and Vlatko has my full permission to run an IP address check as YOU are the most likely new Randy.

  456. Achems Razor

    @ Charles B:

    Okay, I'll bite! Tell me then, how did your God of the bible get the the animals from all over the world? Noah had 7 days to load the animals, that means 2 animals had to be loaded every second, 24/7.

    How could Noah have gathered male and female of each kind, when some species are asexual, others are hermaphrodites.

    Ark was not big enough to house 2 (and some cases 7) species, unclear if 7, or 7 pairs of species.

    How did the population of the earth become so large again in a few years with only 4 women (Noah's wife and 3 daughter in-laws)

    There is much more, will leave that for now.

    And please don't say the disclaimer, "God works in mysterious ways"

    Peace.

  457. land_of_the_lost

    @: Randy
    see what happens when you persecute christians

    "I have been away for health reasons,
    (I am having a slight relapse of my MS and my left hand
    is trembling so makes it hard to type...)"

    guess your harry potter spells backfired on you.
    guess that makes you a muggle.

  458. Vlatko

    According to emails and IPs, Randy B. and Charles B. are different persons.

  459. Hardy

    Reb, I find you a LOT less sympathetic than most believers. Seriously, take a chill-pill and converse in a civil manner, no need to be screaming across the interwebs.

  460. D-K

    @Land_of_the_lost_humour:

    If you're gonna poke fun of someone for having MS, at least make it funny. Now you've just embarrassed yourself. And if you do a reference to a well-known franchise, make sure it actually makes sense.

    ..

    You look stupid.

    @Hardy:

    Sympathy counts for nothing, it aversely affects human progression and we should be rid of it. I'm not pleading for insultive conversation filled with derogatory remarks, I'm simply implying that sympathy serves no purpose.

    Proper etiquette when it comes to conversation with this particular subject matter, is almost exclusively exhibited by agnosts anyway. Might as well take from his "screamings" what makes sense rather than focussing on absense of sympathy.

  461. D-K

    @Charles B

    What is the difference between a "real christian" and a fake christian, Charles?

    "In fact, you accuse the churches of following Satan without knowing it. A real Christian just doesn’t do that"

    Where is it written what makes a real/fake christian, I'm quite curious to know, seeing as I find this particular accusation occuring a lot. Not a day goes by that I don't see a christian calling someone else not a proper christian.

    And here I am trying to figure out what exactly DOES make a good/real christian..

    Care to lend a hand?

  462. Hardy

    @D-K: Proper etiquette is all I asked for. The sympathy issue was just a personal touch.

  463. Reb

    @Hardy

    Mind your own business. If you don't like my posts, don't read them. You are one to talk about proper etiquette!

  464. Hardy

    Yeah, yeah, virtual discussion is virtual. What the hell.

  465. oliarguello

    @ Charles B

    I did say read texts outside of Christianity. Not to reject Christs teachings, but to enhance your understanding of things. I should have admittedly been more clear and said "In addendum to the Bible, read texts outside of Christianity".

    To put it more concretely , you can never understand biology completely if you dont study,physics, math, chemistry etc. Studying biology and claiming you understand physics, math, chemistry, etc is arrogant, delusional, and you just end up limiting yourself.

    Yes I do PARTIALLY reject PARTS of the Bible in that its outdated, contradictory, and I know how the Bible came to be. I know you fear GOD and think that if you question the Bible yo are going to Hell....that is not the case. Just because someone wrote something down, claimed to be influenced by the holy spirit and its the word of GOD, doesn't mean its true. You really think GOD told someone to stone your neighbor to death if they commit some small sin in a passage, but then Jesus says to forgive and tolerate your enemies. How can an infallible book mention those two things?

    But I do not reject Jesus's messages and philopsophy on how to live life ( and in fact many other things he said and did). In fact reading texts outside of Christianity has enhanced my understanding of what Jesus taught. Meanwhile people grossly misinterpret his message and pretty much ignore what he said.

    By the way . Judging me...then saying you cant Judge me only GOD can. Thats the typical double think hypocrisy that staying in a corrupted congregation does to warp your mind. Which is a shame. Faith in the unknowable is fine and can be great, but blindly being dooped in what can be known is tragic.

    ***In fact, you accuse the churches of following Satan without knowing it. A real Christian just doesn’t do that.***

    Man. Thats how the devil beats you. You stay in total submission looking at the ground and dont take a look around. Did you completely ignore how i pointed out all the ways a church lets in the devil ( idols everywhere, ran as a business, pedophile priests protected, etc)? Do you really think GOD or Jesus wants you to remain in such places? Like I said, just because they wear the clothes, hold the books, , place a cross on their building, and sing the glory...does not mean GOD is running the show there.

    I am not saying this to bash you. I am saying this so you open your eyes and mind, and realize you are being dooped ( again not by Jesus message, but by evil corrupt men and churches).. Just because someone puts a cross on their shirt, holds a bible, does not mean anything they say is true. Just look at all the evangelists caught up in scams. They were supposedly true Christians and nobody had a clue for decades of what their true nature was. Open your eyes and think.

  466. Reb

    @ oliarguello

    That was a remarkable post. No just deity would have anything to do with the atrocities presented in the OT and many in the NT. When the main themes of any work are genocide, child abuse/pedophilia, theft, human and animal sacrifice, rape and incest, etc, you can use common sense and quickly realize this is not a good book or a good 'god'.

    The story of Yahweh is the retelling of Enlil the Sumerian son god who was given only the land of Jacob/Israel. The most high god in the assembly of gods portioned out the land and people just as in the Sumerian epic the hebrews learned while in Babylon.

    The Dead Sea Scrolls used the much older version of this story from the Greek Septuagint text.

    "When El Elyon gave to the nations their inheritance,
    when he separated the sons of men,
    he fixed the bounds of the peoples according to the number of the sons of God.
    For Yahweh's portion is his people,
    Jacob his allotted inheritance."

    El Elyon is the father god and most high god of these various son gods. This is NOT speaking of angels. Yahweh/Enlil hated his brothers and hated his alloted people. In the Sumerian Epic of Creation his brother, Enki was the one who entered the prison work farm of Edin, not Eden, to tell the people there his brother was a liar and to leave the hard toiling they were being forced into. There are many references to the sons of god and the most high god in the OT. The older versions of the bible are very clear about El Elyon as the father god. In Psalm 82 the father god tells them they are gods but will die like men for the way they treat the people and judge them wrongly. Yahweh was by far the most brutal and bloodthirsty of these son gods.

    The hebrews also borrowed from the law code of King Hammurabi of Babylon to get their ten commandments. Those law codes predate the hebrews by hundreds of years and included approx 135 laws much more just than the absurd Levitical laws.

  467. David

    I once believed in creationism but have since become disillusioned in it. However, I do still believe in intelligent design.

    I think this documentary is great and very well thought out, but there is a difference. I don't cling to the bible word for word, but I also don't believe that life formed from bubbles and lightning bolts either. Humans have proven time and time again that they don't in fact know everything, and I refuse to believe everything that scientists exclaim to be undeniable truth.

    When did the Big Bang turn from a joke into a universally accepted theory? I absolutely refuse to believe that everything we live in and accept as "science" today was formed out of a complete disorder of nothingness.

    Look at the anatomy of the human body and then compare it to a single celled organism. If you can honestly trace an evolutionary path from one to the other, you're living in a fairy land. It just doesn't follow.

    I guess what I'm trying to say is, don't group creationists with believers of intelligent design. Intelligent design just says that there has to be something out there that made this happen, creationism claims to know exactly who it was, when he did it, and how it came about.

  468. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    Vlatko05/24/2010 at 18:43 According to emails and IPs, Randy B. and Charles B. are different persons.

    Oh good. So the new "Randy B." is not the old "Charles B." It's nice to know that Reb is being harangued from multiple sources rather than just one source with a schizophrenic personality!

    I have six theories:

    1. Topdoc is being invaded by the "B's" and this is just the first of many confusing and potentially dangerous impostor "B's" from outer space.

    2. The "B" brothers are twins separated at birth. I've heard of these guys! They even name their pets the same stupid name like "pizza pie".

    3. Clones. Got to be clones.

    4. There is a secret "God vibe" that is inspiring both of them. How nice. I don't mind that.

    5. Charles B. can space and time travel to other time zones and IP address just to harangue Reb. Hey, I've seen "Heroes" and I believe!

    6. There is really two of us all over the world: two "B." brothers. Two Randy's. Two Epic's. Two Reb's . . . . . . . . well, let's not get carried away. It's just a theory. Science at work. A wonderful thing!

  469. Randy

    I'm having a good day today, (so far at 6am EST), so I will jump in here real quick...

    First of all: I never suspected the sneaky fakeRandy to be Charles B. Charles can be frustrating in his naivte and his dogmatic views, but I believe him to be an honest man.

    There is one very under-handed, very creepy little "christian" to whom such behavior has been standard practice on these boards: go2mark.

    From my analysis of the writing style, I suspect fakeRandy AND "land-of-the-lost" to be one in the same, go2mark.

    land-of-the-lost wrote at me:

    "see what happens when you persecute christians

    “I have been away for health reasons,
    (I am having a slight relapse of my MS and my left hand
    is trembling so makes it hard to type…)”

    guess your harry potter spells backfired on you.
    guess that makes you a muggle."

    Well, go2mark, another way to look at it is that my spell worked SO well, it took a lot out of me to cast!

    And, by the way, the Dark Angel of Malice, Azazel, that I sent to you- came back soon after and reported that your life was so sad and tragic, cursing you would be... redundant...

    LOL! Anyways enough of that nonsense!

    @Hardy, who admonished Reb for his angry tone:

    Hardy, I understand Reb's frustration and rage. I try to rein it in most times, but it does get away from me! The hurtful ignorance of these people can be more than a thinking person can bear!

    For example: A fundie church from Kentucky, or some such place, the very one that pickets the funerals of gay men, have made a public announcement that they will be protesting the memorial service for Ronnie James Dio on Sunday, May 30th.

    Now, this monsterous, depraved, and deplorable behaviour is beyond my capacity for tolerance! I mean, aren't funeral services sacred to these people?

    Even Neanderthals respected their dead.

    That is an example of their christian "morality". The idea fills me with such rage, I do not know what to do with the anger!

    Any funeral service I go to, I respect the bereaved, inasmuch as, if it is a Catholic service, I say the "Novena" along with the priest. If Jewish, I say the "Kaddash" (sp?) along with the Rabbi, and sit shiva respectfully, etc.

    There is my atheist morality.

    My rage is so white-hot, that I lay it at the feet of any christian that walks the Earth! Any man or woman that follows this demonic mythos that inspires such hate!

    I hate violence, (although I understand there are appropriate times for it!), but when I read the call to arms that many of my fellow, "metal-heads", have put out to wade into the picketers with baseball bats, I must say, I wanted to be there with them! And my bat would be studded with spikes!

    Ronnie's wife made a public appeal to peace, and I respect that, but I guarantee, there are many of my brothers and sisters out there that will not.

    There could be blood come Sunday, and I will be silently cheering them on!

  470. mJy hEeSaUrSt

    @ Dr. Randy

    I just watched The Bridge and I facepalmed and my stomach tightened when you said "I will jump in here". It took me a full second to realize you weren't planning suicide with that statement. I am a Christian, but I am not heartless. I agree with you about the funerals. Don't paint us all with the same brush.

  471. Charles B.

    Wow!

    Land of the Lost: That's not the way to change a sinner's heart. Jesus said that without love we are nothing. Have a little compassion and let's not embarrass ourselves (as I'm a Christian too) by showing lack of concern for Dr. Randy's condition. Watch Finger of God and see on the end how that one well-meaning pastor in Turkey hindered the move of God by not loving and not letting the missionary from Africa pray for healing for the Muslim woman. I wondered after the film of he caused her to harden her heart and was lost when she might have been healed and believed through love. Let us love first and speak much less than we listen. Nonetheless, peace to you. We live and learn and grow.

    D-K: In a simple brief, a true Christian is one that has asked Jesus to forgive his or her sins through what we call "repentance" through faith that it will be done.

    Oli: You're good. You even have Reb paying you compliment. Not I. You're not a true Christian. Prove me wrong, Oli, by saying that you adhere to the following statement fully and unconditionally: "I serve the Lord Jesus Christ of Nazareth and Him only do I serve."

    Dr. Randy. I'm so sorry to hear about the protests planed for Dio's funeral. That's just in bad taste I think and potentially . . . . well, it's just not right I don't think as I can't see how that could be done in "love" very easily. Let's hope all passes peacefully. I am happy that your MS is better today. Sincerely.

    Razor: I don't know all the details about the ark. God works in mysterious ways. ;-) HA!

    Oh, almost forgot!

    mJy: Option 7: He's a cousin! Or maybe not. Let's just ask him.

    Randy B.: Who and where are you and why are you so happy and cheerful and probably good-looking, just like me? :-)

  472. juju man

    religion is a great moneyspinner
    anyone got any advice on starting a religion?

  473. D-K

    Charles said:

    "D-K: In a simple brief, a true Christian is one that has
    asked Jesus to forgive his or her sins through what we call “repentance” through faith that it will be done"

    But repentance does not dictate behaviour, how could you call Oliarguello "not a true christian" when you don't know for a fact whether he repented or not? And how does one know whether or not their sins are forgiven?

  474. Nada

    @ Dr. Randy - I truly hope you're feeling better. {gentle cyber hug}

    @ Charles - I watched part of the Finger of God you so often refer to and I couldn't stop either laughing or trying to stop myself from throwing up. I will watch the rest tonight after taking a healthy dose of Dramamine.

  475. Nada

    @ Epicurus - As I moved up to the top of the page, I noticed your first post. I'm in Ottawa and my hubby's from TO (well, Acton). ;)

  476. D-K

    @Nada:

    Dramamine only works well if you have a case of ignoritis or gulliblosis, I'm affraid it won't have the desired effect on you..

  477. Nada

    @ D-K - Unfortunatly I don't have either of those. I guess I'll just have to take my chances or ask my doc for something stronger. ;)

  478. D-K

    I hear areyoufreakinkiddinmeafyl is getting some good results.. it's still in the trial stage though..

    Ask thine physician!

  479. David

    SMK,

    No, it really isn't. It's a bit like a classic syllogism, sure all creationists believe in intelligent design, but not necessarily all ID believers believe in creation. If you actually cared to study both you would see how different they are, however I agree they have many similarities.

    Mainly, I see how you can laugh at creationists but you'd have to be extremely closed minded to laugh at believers of ID. I don't claim to know that there's a god or who he is or if he likes us or not. But in my eyes, there's no way everything we study today was formed by chance out of disorder.

  480. Vlatko

    @Randy,

    Fake Randy (or Randy B.) is not go2mark either. Randy B. is just another guy with unique email and IP.

    Having mentioned that I went on checking go2mark and guess what... This guy posts with the following nicknames across the entire website:

    @land_of_the_lost
    @go2mark
    @mental_masturbators
    @pointyheadedleprechaun
    @God
    @i doubt it
    @mark

    He has 85 comments overall. I won't delete them because the discussion will look chopped in certain posts since people where replying to him. However he is banned forever.

    And that brings me to the next point. I was thinking about this a lot and few visitors suggested this via emal. I have to put in place a proper commenting system where everyone should need to log in to comment (with verified email address), the comments could be flagged, liked or disliked by the visitors. Several flags and the comment will be burred down. Also threaded comments in place. Visitors would be able to sort the comments: new, old, popular etc. And few other features.

    The main problem is that when people land on some page at TDF they think this is a forum when they see the massive amount of comments. In fact it is not. This is a blog and comments are meant to be just opinions/reviews of the post (the documentary in this case) not a vague debate and personal chit-chats.

    That is why I created the Forum (the separate system) where people can debate, discuss and share their info amongst each other. But that has proven to be non efficient. People are very rarely going there. It is Siberia. They simply like to comment here. Not a problem fine by me, but I have to sort this out ASAP.

    By implementing more efficient commenting system probably I'll have to kill the forum. It is just consuming resources anyway.

    So I'll work on this and see what comes out.

  481. Hardy

    Kudos to you for all the work you are putting into this, Vlatko. I'm interested in the changes you are planning for the comments-section, they sound like good ideas.

  482. Achems Razor

    Kudos from me to @ Vlatko:

    Been on these forums a long time, it is like a way of life. (LOL)

  483. Reb

    @Vlatko

    This site is one of the best on the net and I appreciate the hard work you do to keep it updated. Some of the subjects are hot topics and we do get overheated. I tried the forum but no one was home!

    May I also suggest that people who plagarize from other sites without giving credit to the true author be removed also. It is one thing to disagree and try to prove a point but stealing the work of others is a revolting way to do it. I will debate a topic with anyone but not while they stoop to taking what is not theirs.

  484. Vlatko

    Thanks guys (and girls). I appreciate that.

    @Reb, done that.

  485. D-K

    This outdated browser at work forces me to comment, otherwise I get stuck with comments from last week, and it doesn't load any comments that are recent.

    Bit weird, and I have the same problem on other sites (kotaku), this computer is just crap.

    Because I check this site all night (yeah, nightshift baby) I end up having to spam comments, just to be able to see comments of others. Sometimes I use a different name with a comment concerning the doc, so I don't look like a commenting section-hogging asshole.

    Just for clarification.

  486. mfJosh

    This is a great documentary...Don't get me wrong, I do not deny the existence of a Creator, Allah, Krshna,Jehova, etc. But these so called Christians who try to bend established science as a cheap way to "prove" that their "God" exists are a joke. There are 110 reasons to laugh at these people...Ice Shields, Clouds stopping X-Rays...wow, what High School did this freak supposedly teach at?

  487. Randy

    Ok, here I am one last time before I collapse for the day... This will probly take me 20 minutes to type so I may be behind the discussion, please bear with me...

    Vlatko, thank you for your attention to this site and your efforts to bring us all of these worlds of information.

    Thank you too, for your info and actions on go2mark, and I appologize to Randy B. for mistaking him for that little creepy dude!

    I have only one concern about your proposed changes. And an appology for being one of the worst offenders in the "chit-chat" department. I just get a little starved for intellectual conversation since my PHD buddies are all off doing important work around the world, while my PHD's are what they affectionately called, "Dr. What-a-Waste-of-Time!" LOL! (I miss them...)

    Anyways, before I collapse, you mentioned:

    "...the comments could be flagged, liked or disliked by the visitors. Several flags and the comment will be burred down..."

    As was demonstrated in this very documentary, the screeching howler-monkeys that defile reason and rationality, are fond of censorship. What would stop them from diligently "down-flagging" the intellectual converstaions that disagree with their doctrine, in favor of biblical passages that advocate the destruction of knowledge?

    I apologize for the hyperbole. It is still a sore subject for me...

    Just a thought... and now off to a pharmacalogically induced coma...

    Thank you again for this wonderful site!

    RANDY

  488. Randy B

    Wow, I almost have become famous while only commenting on a few posts. And funny how some peoples conclusions were...well, not only entertaining to read,but so wrong as to who I am.
    All I can add is you have evil "christians" and you have evil aethist. Don't believe that Mao, Stalin, Hitler and others were believers in Christ. And I doubt Hawkins and others like him are planning there next eradication of Lutherans.
    As for mitochondrion, I would just like to know the evolutionary progression of these organisms. How the came to be. Also Epicuris, you DO have faith..you believe what you believe without every little bit of proof. You believe that, some how, some way, and maybe even for some reason that life formed sometime, someway in the universe. and there is NO ancient text from here or anywhere to even collaborate it.
    Hope that makes easier sense to you.
    Also, I know I can not prove the existance of God. You can never prove the opposite. Been that way for a long time. With great minds on both side.
    Nuff said
    Peace, all

  489. D-K

    @Randy: Ah..pharmacalogically induced coma's... those are the best kind..

    @Randy B:

    "Also, I know I can not prove the existance of God. You can never prove the opposite. Been that way for a long time. With great minds on both side.
    Nuff said"

    That's not an argument.. that's nowhere near "nuff said".. it's more like "nuffin said"

    Just because something can't be disproven, doesn't make it a compelling argument. You'd have a tough time disproving any fictional character..

  490. Charles B.

    Dr. Randy: Ha! Your post was funny. The funniest part about it is that I just sent a private e-mail to the Vlatko saying the same thing, but I was worried about the Evolutionists ganging up and drowning the Christians' posts out. We all see the world through our own lenses sometimes, don't we?

    Peace to you, Dr. Randy. Recuperate your strength. It would be less challenging and a lot more boring without your comments.

    Charles B.

  491. Charles B.

    Randy B. This is a hard-sell group here. I shy away from the DNA arguments. Geniuses all of them, just not many "believers". Best of luck! ;-)

  492. Ruth

    Hi, Randy! don't drink diet soda It willmake the nerves with ms worse and the brain. get lots of fresh air. No artificial sweetners.

  493. Achems Razor

    @ Ruth, is right! Don't drink or eat anything with artificial sweetners, like Aspartame etc:

    In fact if you can cut out all sugars, anything that can turn to Glucose, like breads, pastry's, starches like potatoes, etc:
    I'm just saying.

  494. oliarguello

    @REB

    Thanks for the compliment to my post :)

    And thanks for enlightening me about El Elyon. WOW. I never even heard of that, I will definitely look into that. I have come to meditate on the idea that theology has evolved from culture to culture ( most recently all the different sects of Christianity and each calling each other heretics). B

    Because of the ego and name calling, a religion would like to believe their religion is the one true religion which might make some vague reference to past influences but only as a setup to their own religion. When this is done over and over, the true origins are lost;sometimes on purpose ( ala book burnings) and sometimes by accident( El Elyon for example;pagan traditions merged into Christian practices as another example).

    @Charles B.

    What exactly do you mean by “serve” Jesus?

    If you mean following his messages on how to improves one’s spirituality, affect those around yourself positively, doing all I can to improve myself without bothering him for help with trivial things, loving who he was/is and what he stood/stands for, trying my hardest to mimic how he lived his life, trying to understand his messages by educating my mind as much as possible with a variety of ideas, disciplines, and fields,... trying to point out the very evils he pointed out in his time that are occurring today,….. then yes I serve Jesus of Nazareth completely.

    If you mean serve him by…. Following anyone who states some agenda and uses his name in vain, following people who call for violence on innocent people who just think differently or live differently, following a book that has some of his messages and the rest of the 75% is dogma that contradicts what he says, wearing jewelry with a cross and his dead body on it, clutching an idol or book as if it was some holy relic( I would not burn it, but I certainly wouldn’t treat it like a treasure with emotional attachments to it), chastise and hate people who are following the same path but use different terms, use fear/intimidation/anger/hate to preach his messages, …..in that case no.

    Notice the difference? The first paragraph has a theme of improvement and seeking enlightenment…the second has a theme of following blindly.

  495. mik robins

    religion is the anti-christ.they killed jmmannual and changed his name to jesus.666=killer of truth and that's what they did.literally.Religion hates anything that says not true."fear god"yeah sure.im scared.

  496. Reb

    @oliarguello

    Right! El Elyon(Most High God) was the chief Cannanite deity and father of the biblical "son's of god" of which Yahweh was one. Yahweh was the "man of war" god of the Hebrews but he desired to be the most high god himself. El Elyon and Ba'el(brother of yahweh) were the main competition and along the way and hundreds of years of scripture redacting, El Elyon and Yahweh were merged as one god. If you have a library that has the Encyclopedia Judaica you can look these things up and get a much different view than what we have been given. The son gods that ruled the other nations were all sons of El Elyon the Most High God.

  497. Randy B

    oliarguello, I could not agree with you more. I believe Christ himself was anti-religious! And I think you are so right about all the "sects" as I believe most are. Yes, people just listen to a preacher and believe whatever he says and do very little study of the Bible and History. I am guilty of that myself.
    But let me just pose another question, perhaps D-K can answer with a good arguement. What happens when we die? Do we still exist? I am sure I will get a great, intelligent and provable answer to this.
    Please have sympathy for my ignorance.
    God bless ye, merry gentlemen

  498. Charles B.

    Oli: You still get an "F" from me in "servanthood" for Christ. You missed the whole point. It's not about you at all.

  499. Epicurean_Logic

    @ Charles. i agree with you totally apart from your harsh F grading of Oli. He is not a servant of Jesus he is an admirer of the gentle, kind and spiritual aspects of Jesus. As a non religous person i can also say that Jesus had some great humanistic characteristics, but i also cannot believe that he was the son of god. Oli B+.

  500. GodisAwesome

    Okay, as I allowed the documentary to continue, at least he begins to take on Dembski. While there is still too much preoccupation with Hovind. Still, the documentary maker does not deal as much with Dembski's science as I would have hoped for. He seems side-tracked by the ID court case, the loss of which proves nothing about the validity of their science.

  501. Epicurean_Logic

    'the validity of their science.' lol.

  502. D-K

    "I am guilty of that myself.
    But let me just pose another question, perhaps D-K can answer with a good arguement. What happens when we die? Do we still exist? I am sure I will get a great, intelligent and provable answer to this"

    Of course I have provable answers, I have just been keeping them from the world to watch religee's and atheist squirm in their ignorance, mwuahahah!

    Seriously though, of course I don't know. But then again, I'm fine with there being no answer (yet), I can live with uncertainty, so much so, that I don't have to adapt my lifestyle based on assumptions and wishes.

    I'm perfectly content in my little luke-warm square of logic and reason. Not knowing the answers to certain questions only breeds curiosity and personally, I can handle curiosity. I can handle it moreso than to change my lifestyle and worldview on an assumption that reguires a leap of faith, an act of irrationality.

  503. GodisAwesome

    Epicurean_Logic,

    Try not to be guilty of an appeal to your own authority. That's no better than the typical Creationist's ploys. The fact that something I wrote caused you to laugh out loud fails to invalidate it. In fact, yours was an ironically illogical response in light of your screen name.

  504. Achems Razor

    @ GodisAwesome:

    Out of the 28,000,000 Gods in recorded history, which one is the most awesome?? And why??

  505. D-K

    *lays ear on train track*

    Golly! Hear me brethren of faith, the train of logic cometh forth. Let us delay our muddling on the tracks of science, and jump out of the way, lest we get run down!

    Make haste men and woman of faith! Return to the oasis of peace of mind, we really have no business screwing around on the tracks of science anyway..

  506. GodisAwesome

    Achems Razor,

    That question (as to why) is one for which the answer would take far too much bandwidth, and I'm not inclined to be baited into it.

    As to the God I am referring to, He is the one the Hebrews call "Jehovah." By inference, you seem to suggest that He is no more "real" than the imaginary deities strewn throughout history, however, I am convinced that He has proven Himself with many astounding proofs, both from a historical/legal sense and (to a lesser degree, somewhat confounded by our limited knowledge) scientifically.

    By definition of God being a single transcendent being who Himself is the cause of all physical laws and all matter in the cosmos, there are also not 28,000,000 Gods in recorded history. In fact, from my vantage point, there is only one. All other deities are imaginary, fictional, or too limited to fit the definition.

    Now, remember, I will not be baited into a "put up or shut up" on my evidence. There are any number of good places one can visit on the internet for such "proofs," and I will assume and even stipulate that you have considered such evidence but remain unconvinced. I have come to the opposite conclusion (at least for now), but I am open to new information and alternative hypotheses. Are you?

  507. Epicurean_Logic

    @ GodisAwesome

    I wasn't trying to invalidate, just expressing my honest feelings.

    I would ask you about the 'science' of I.D. but to be honest, and especially in the light of this doc, i dont require it. I have been round the merry go round too many times to on this one. Peace.

  508. GodisAwesome

    Since my previous comment has awaited moderation for so long I thought I'd alter it just a bit and see if that get's through the bot.

    One can pick a few well-chosen, useful idi__ts in any field and falsely extrapolate conclusions which they erroneously apply to everyone within it. This is even easier with so-called Creationists. Why? Not necessarily because their overall theory is incorrect. It may or may not be. I would have liked to see the documentary author take on the real scientific heavyweights within the movement, such as Hugh Ross. Instead he picks apart theories and presenters that true scientists within the movement find just as laughable as he does.
    He therefore merely proves that Creationism is a belief held by a lot of people, among which are some who are not too bright, but he does not prove Creationism is wrong any more than he would by demonstrating the thickness of people who don’t know the valid scientific reasons for believing in evolution, yet continue to do so.

    There are admittedly far more ill-informed Creationists, but a scientific approach to discrediting them would require the documentary maker to take on the best of them, not these clowns.

  509. Epicurean_Logic

    @ GodisAwesome

    Oh my, you really have just shot yourself in the foot when you claim that Yahweh is the one true god. I can clearly say to you that Yahweh is one of the most horrible of all choices for a deity.

    Have you not read the OT?

  510. GodisAwesome

    Epicurean_Logic

    Why did you choose the name Epicuren Logic? Your statement is illogical.

    My point is that we do not have a "choice" when it comes to deities. I have not "chosen" Yahweh. He is the one true God. It would make no difference, as far as that statement is concerned, if He was all kisses and hugs, or the worst kind of devil.

    I do disagree with your assessment of His merits, but whether I do or not says nothing about whether or not He is God. Your misunderstanding of His standards and what true righteousness is does not alter Who He truly is, any more than my limited understanding of you would alter you in any material way.

  511. GodisAwesome

    Furthermore,

    You'll be glad to know my foot is intact.

  512. Epicurean_Logic

    @GodisAwesome,

    'or the worst kind of devil.' is a pretty fair description, and the question remains have you not read the OT?

  513. Epicurean_Logic

    @GodisAwesome,

    'I do disagree with your assessment of His merits' So you have sadistic and violent murderous tendencies. Oh well each to his own.

  514. Hardy

    Meh, I'll stick with Thor.

    Want to argue about which of our gods is more awesome? I'm sure mine can totally beat yours up.

    /sarcasm off

    Close-minded fool is close-minded.

  515. Epicurean_Logic

    'Why did you choose the name Epicuren Logic? Your statement is illogical.'

    Are feelings logical?

  516. Epicurean_Logic

    @ Hardy now your talking, Thor is a great god maybe a direct descendant of Zeus and Baal.

  517. GodisAwesome

    Epicurean_Logic,

    Sorry to leave such a pertinent question on the table. No, I have never read it completely through. However I feel quite confident that I have read the passages which give you such pause regarding God's character. I have a philosophical construct that allows the Creator absolute sovereignty and total liberty, even to the point of behaving in ways that even the brightest of His creatures may not fully comprehend.

    I do not "give God a pass," because for me to do so implies a status in the universe that I do not have. He determines what is right for Him to do in every given moment and He is always correct, regardless of what I think. He is God. I am His creation. He is my Sovereign. I am His subject. The whole nature of our question implies that you somehow feel you are allowed to stand in judgment over Him, and my clear understanding is that we may not.

  518. Nada

    Is someone out there doing research into the brains of religees and non-religees? If so, care to share a link? I did briefly see something about someone working on a "god gene" but that's pretty much it.

    I just don't get how logic can escape a human being of this day and age. I just don't get it.

    I'm going to stick to believing in Santa. He's nice. And He brings presents. :)

  519. GodisAwesome

    Nada,

    Good idea, at least for you. Why wrestle with something so difficult it has occupied the thoughts of the brightest men and women for centuries? Stick with Santa. That's more at your level of comprehension.

    Sarcasm aside, the fact that you fail to see the logic may say more about you than it does about me. Have you even considered that?

  520. Epicurean_Logic

    @ Nada there are a few phsycology docs on TDF that suggest that belief in god may be located in the temporal lobes (under the temples). Quite interesting.

  521. Achems Razor

    @ GodisAwesome:

    You asked if I am open to new info. and alternative hypotheses?

    You betcha!! Am the master of delving into the depths of the Rabbit hole, minus any man made God, (Gods) of course.
    I want to see how deep it is! there is no bottom as yet.

    Am with @ Epicurean_Logic: and @ Hardy: on this debate.

    I presume with your smug answers, you have found the bottom of the Rabbit hole? if so, pray tell gives us your synopsis.

  522. Reb

    God is awful and his followers are fools.

    This country was NOT founded on christianity and when the Puritans arrived dragging their hateful holy books of the devil that marked the downfall of this nation. That is one reason Washington wrote "the United States of America is in no sense founded on the christian religion" when he penned the Treaty of Tripoli. Nothing could be clearer.

    "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying the cross." Sinclair Lewis, It Can't Happen Here, 1935

    Well, it is happening here and Lewis was saddly correct and the religious morons have nearly destroyed this nation along with many more countries they have marched their sorry arses into claiming to bring freedom and god while they robbed and murdered and turned those nations into poverty ridden third world countries. The tables are turning and they are about get a heavy dose of their evil medicine and as usual, the innocent will suffer right along with them.

    Letters of Thomas Jefferson:

    "Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth."
    Thomas Jefferson - "Notes on Virginia"

    "History, I believe, furnishes no example of a priest-ridden people maintaining a free civil government. This marks the lowest grade of ignorance, of which their political as well as religious leaders will always avail themselves for their own purpose."
    Thomas Jefferson- to Baron von Humboldt, 1813
    .
    "On the dogmas of religion, as distinguished from moral principles, all mankind, from the beginning of the world to this day, have been quarreling, fighting, burning and torturing one another, for abstractions unintelligible to themselves and to all others, and absolutely beyond the comprehension of the human mind."
    Jefferson - to Carey, 1816

    "As I understand the Christian religion, it was, and is, a revelation. But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed?"
    Jefferson -letter to F.A. Van der Kamp, Dec. 27, 1816
    .

    "I almost shudder at the thought of alluding to the most fatal example of the abuses of grief which the history of mankind has preserved-- the Cross. Consider what calamities that engine of grief has produced!"
    -letter to Thomas Jefferson

    Ben Franklin

    "If we look back into history for the character of the present sects in Christianity, we shall find few that have not in their turns been persecutors, and complainers of persecution. The primitive Christians thought persecution extremely wrong in the Pagans, but practiced it on one another. The first Protestants of the Church of England blamed persecution in the Romish Church, but practiced it upon the Puritans. They found it wrong in Bishops, but fell into the practice themselves both here (England) and in New England."
    .

    "Lighthouses are more helpful than churches."
    .

    "The way to see by faith is to shut the eye of reason."
    -in Poor Richard's Almanac
    .

    Thomas Paine Age of Reason

    "Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half of the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind.
    .

    "What is it the New Testament teaches us? To believe that the Almighty committed debauchery with a woman engaged to be married; and the belief of this debauchery is called faith."

    "All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."
    .

    "The study of theology, as it stands in the Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authority; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion."

    I could list thousands of such quotes from the vast majority of the founders of this nation but the deaf and blind would look the other way.

  523. D-K

    @God is awesome:

    Faith itself is illogical, irrational. The fact that you can't see that, plus the fact that you cannot logically deduce it, says more about you than anyone else.

    Faith is unwavering in the absense of logic, rationality or proof, it is hardly your place to judge other people on their perception what is logic or logical.

  524. GodisAwesome

    Here's the thumbnail:

    1. No person, living or dead, has demonstrated to my satisfaction, any ability to foretell the future with a failure percentage of zero, yet the God of the Bible, through His prophets has demonstrated such an ability. Ergo, He may indeed exist.

    2. I have not been able to account for the purported resurrection of Christ as either illusory, a-historical, or simply of a gnostic interpretation, especially in light of the known history of the body which He left, the church. The physical resurrection of Christ appears (to me) to be historical, and by extrapolation, evidence of God's existence.

    3. I have not found reasonable explanations for the amount of scientific knowledge contained within the pages of Scripture, since the text was physically written by bronze age people, who probably didn't personally possess such knowledge, or, in some cases even understand what the implications were of their writing. From such things as declaring a spherical earth, innumerable stars, that the earth is suspended upon nothing, an explanation of the hydrological cycle, etc. their appears (to me) to be supernatural inspiration and help for the writing of Scripture.

    4. I cannot personally account for the extreme number of coincidences that would account for the various streams of evidence (legal/historical) all coalescing around the Hebraic expression of God and His Son/Physical Representative, the Lord Jesus. Therefore, in all likelihood, these are not coincidences, but corroborative evidence.

    5. I find the Scriptures to be accurate regarding the known histories of the region, and that it has even been archeologically vindicated when thought to be inaccurate, and find no reason to dismiss without evidence, what it teaches about God.

    6. I find compelling, the testimonies of hundreds of millions of Christians who testify that they have a personal relationship with Christ, not merely a belief system, or systematic theology regarding Him.

    7. It seems to be historically accurate that many of the Biblical witnesses were martyred for facts which, if untrue, they knew to be errant. This greatly differs from modern martyrs who may be dying for lies that they believe to be true.

    And those are but a small portion of one side of my rationale.

    As I've previously written, I have no intention of being baited into a long band-width consuming discussion with those who find these facts less gripping than I do.

  525. GodisAwesome

    D-K,

    Far be it from me to judge anyone's logic. I just asked the question. Certainly the question inferred a response with which you disagree, but that is for you to wrestle with, just as I do.

  526. kask

    What if faith is an epigenetically induced faculty of the brain? If so, those who don't have faith simply do not have the genes turned on or off, whichever is opposite of those who do have it.

    We really need a place to speak freely and where criticism is helpful. All ideas are good and if found wrong should be easily expunged and those who created them should not take it personally.

    Let's learn and encourage each other to a better understanding. It is obvious that those with and those without faith, aren't going to be rid of those who disagree. So, maybe we should try to understand what this may mean instead of assuming it is one or the other.

    As someone once said, "Do everything in love."

    I appreciate people of faith, but I also appreciate the frustration that comes with having to deal with closed minded individuals.

    Peace.

  527. Achems Razor

    @ kask:

    Yes, there is a God module in the brain.

    Those that have it tend to be the most close minded of all. Of course that it my own perspective.

    I do believe that most atheists are very open minded, they are not scared that God may strike them dead, or not allow entry into the golden gates of their heaven, it seems to me most religee's have to curtail even there thoughts , definitely there actions, that go against bible teachings, which is called heresy in the religious doctrines. I do believe religee's actually live in fear, even of themselves.

  528. D-K

    1: ". No person, living or dead, has demonstrated to my satisfaction, any ability to foretell the future with a failure percentage of zero, yet the God of the Bible, through His prophets has demonstrated such an ability. Ergo, He may indeed exist"

    Enter D-K: You'll find I have similar godly powers, behold:

    There will be conflict in the future, there will be a pandemic in the future, faith will be questioned in the future, we'll have extremely fast computers in the future. This all shall come to pass, and you shall believe my word is absolute.

    2: "I have not been able to account for the purported resurrection of Christ as either illusory, a-historical, or simply of a gnostic interpretation, especially in light of the known history of the body which He left, the church. The physical resurrection of Christ appears (to me) to be historical, and by extrapolation, evidence of God’s existence"

    Have you been able to account for the probability of resurrection? Does it seem probable because there is no account for it being a-historical?

    6: "I find compelling, the testimonies of hundreds of millions of Christians who testify that they have a personal relationship with Christ, not merely a belief system, or systematic theology regarding Him"

    If credibility lies in numbers, how do you feel about the millions of claims of people being abducted by aliens?

    "7. It seems to be historically accurate that many of the Biblical witnesses were martyred for facts which, if untrue, they knew to be errant. This greatly differs from modern martyrs who may be dying for lies that they believe to be true"

    How do they differ, Wherein do they differ?

    Note that I am not attacking your cause for faith, I'm merely curious to the logic leading up to it.

  529. GodisAwesome

    D-K,

    It would be fine with me if you were attacking it. If it withers under such attack it's fairly unsubstantial.

    1. There is a qualitative difference. Many Biblical prophecies appear to be full of such detail and fulfilled to such specificity that their fulfillment rules out either a) a lucky hit, or b) a generic pseudo-prophecy.

    2. I may be a little thick, and not completely understand what you are asking here, but; No, I have not discerned any way to calculate a resurrection probability, since it was an event that apparently has only happened (if it did) once. I assume the number would be incalculably high against it happening, however, at least to me, it is a well-attested historical fact. Therein lies the metaphysical/rationalists rub.

    6. I did not mean to imply that I find the testimonies compelling only because they are so numerous. I find them credible for multiple reasons, among which is that they are so uniformly attested to.

    7. They differ substantially as to nature. I explained the difference within the body of my text. If the 1st century Christians died for a lie, they did so even though, in many cases, they would have known it was a lie. THAT IS THE DIFFERENCE. A 1st century believer could have thrown up hands and pleaded, "Wait. This is going too far. You got me. We moved the body and then one of us posed as a risen Christ. Please don't kill me. I'll recant." That is a material difference that, for me, makes the difference.

  530. GodisAwesome

    I do admit that even a cursory reading of many of the above posts, reminds me that I am not nearly as smart as I think I am. There are some comments from some very bright and literate thinkers. From this point on, I will bow out and (hopefully) continue to learn from their input.

  531. Epicurus

    @godisawesome,

    everyone of your points was based on “I find” or “I feel” basically, “I take on faith”

    everyone of your points could be argued in detail but I could just as easily replace everything you said concerning the hebrew stolen deity (from the zoroastrians) and replace it with ANY deity.

    but lets look at them as best i can, i wont give them anymore time than you did.

    1. you just used post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy on the bible and you sit here and try to sound LOGICAL?? the majority of the so called prophecies are dead wrong, and the others are like i said post hoc reasoning.

    2.you take this story that has been adopted from older mythology on faith. you just accept the stories told to you and written down years after the events supposedly took place.

    3. first off people knew the earth was a sphere very early on by simple mathematics. Eratosthenes famously calculated the Earth’s circumference by showing that when the Sun shone directly down the wells at noon in Alexandria on a certain day, it was shining at an angle of 7 degrees to the vertical 50 miles away. So the circumference of the Earth was 50 X 360/7 miles. this was 200BC, Pythagoras also stated it around 600BC.

    all those other things you mentioned were first of all discovered else where and taught to the hebrews. nothing about those pieces of knowledge would require divine inspiration.

    4. is just silly nonsense. it is more double standards of evidence and self serving bias.

    5.Harry Potter is accurate when describing London. The Bhagavad Gita is accurate in its historical and geographic points about India, and the Quran is also accurate in those areas….stop only noticing the INSIGNIFICANT hits and pay attention to the misses.

    6.there are more non-christians than christians, and there are just as many people of other faiths who have the same if not more convincing stories….the people willing to blow themselves up seem to believe in their god a little more than any christian.

    7. people are willing to die for what they believe all the time. that doesnt make them right. if anything its a better argument to show they are delusional or crazy.

    do you really think your arguments from ignorance and incredulity are LOGICAL?!?!?

    Holy jumping Jesus on a pogo stick!

  532. Randy

    I have to jump in here, as painful as it is for me to do so...

    Epicurus, Reb, and D-K have this well in hand, and I would applaud them if my left hand was working!

    But to their excellent arguments, I would add my standard boilerplate:

    Your religion (and ALL religions in my view, but this one most desperately), is EVIL!

    You align yourselves with a demonic mythos that seeks the end of our species. That makes you an enemy of humanity.

    I will mention just two examples out of 100,000 throughout history and even to the present day, that invalidate any supposed "good" you think this islamo-christianity monster has implemented:

    1) The institutionalized, rape, torture, oppression of women!

    2) The destruction of the Library of Alexandria, and the flaying alive of its then curator, Hypatia; a remarkable woman. A scientist, a mathemetician, strong and powerful in her position as curator... beaten by a christian mob, stripped, and flayed ALIVE with abalone shells!

    Carl Sagan said the destruction of the Library was like the entire human species had lobotomized itself!

    If the repository of knowledge in this great library had been allowed to survive, (if christians hadn't burned it because they thought "book-learnin" was of the Devil), we may be already at the first stars by now!

    Every thing you do, you do as "The Body of Christ" according to the horror novel you call the bible. So everything done by christians is done by christ. You align yourself with an unforgivable, irredemable monster!

    Your religion is, by definition, APOCOLYPTIC! Meaning, you want the end of the world! It's a thing you devoutly wish to come to pass!

    You are not with the good guys!

  533. oliarguello

    @ Charles B

    Its not about me at all? Hmmm i think you need to re-read the sermon on the mount again.

    As for getting an F, so much for you not judging me and only GOD can ( weren't you just guilty of this in your previous comment against me).

    I have tried to explicitly ask you to explain what "to serve" meant and how am I " blackhearted and a foe of Christ". Instead of having a discussion to seek the truth you resort to name calling and judging without any explanation aside from "a gut feeling".

    I am causing you to judge, hate, and call me names ( demonic, going to hell, no a true christian etc etc).

    I think we must part ways on this discussion.

    I have tried to open your mind a little on the pitfalls of what you follow. We are both on a narrow road trying to do our best. But I feel you are running haphazardly on this road that is filled with landmines ( idoltary, greed and corruption in church, protecting pedophile priests, hate people who dont agree with you) and some preacher at the end yelling for you and waving a cross around to hurry and not worry about anything. Meanwhile you arrive at the end blown to pieces , but are confused because you were told it would be ok. I walk the same road, notice the guy yelling and screaming, but I tread lightly and scrutinize the path, I learn what makes up a bomb ( the guy yelling says its ok that they are all rocks, and if bombs are there its ok) and decipher if what i see on the road is a rock or a bomb and take my steps accordingly.

    Your heart, soul, and hands are open and in the right place. But you need to open your mind as well.

    You are more than welcome to reply, but i more than likely wont respond on this subject. Maybe in another topic we shall cross paths again.

  534. Reb

    @Randy

    Kudos!

  535. Chief

    @ Randy

    I wish that it were not so, but it is absolutely the truth. Christians continue to look forward to the "Second Coming of Christ" which entails the "Rise of the Anti-Christ" and all of the attending miseries that accompany purported prophecies. These and other beliefs like it are anti-human; as such, they are in and of themselves blatantly inhuman!

  536. oliarguello

    @Randy

    I agree. When I was a child I never read the Bible, I heard passages, and believed whatever the priest said.

    Then I actually read the Bible. Initially I thought I just didnt understand.

    I was reading about incest, rape, murder, etc. I seriously thought I was just reading it incorrectly.

    Then I independently read about the history of the Bible ( from both atheists and theists points of view) and realized its not really what people calimed it to be.

    There are some good and wise things in the Bible, but there is also a lot of things that are grossly misinterpreted and ridiculously contradictory.

    @GODISAWESOME

    You would seriously worship a deity that is evil? You claim that he is the one true GOD and whatever his nature is...thats what it is.

    In the next breathe you admit you have not read the old testament but essentially got the jist of it. Well I have read the Bible in its entirety twice and partially in Spanish. A contradiction lies in the NT and OT GOD especially when coupled with passages that state GOD is infallible and never changes.

    That alone should trigger your brain to start questioning things and seek the truth.

  537. Reb

    What kind of person wishes for the return of some being who is going to lead the 'saved' in the biggest mass murder ever known?

    The Book of the Revelation sounds exactly what the NWO ghouls are planning against humanity. It is quite possibly their handbook for world domination. Keeping with bible tradition it is unbelievably violent and the bloodshed again is the featured item. If I have to murder one human to get to his new heaven and earth(NWO), I'll pass.

    I think it reveals jesus for what he truly is and people still don't catch on. He announces at the end of the book that he is the bright morning star just like Lucifer is described. hmmmm

  538. GodisAwesome

    Epicurus,
    If you're interested, and could confine yourself to the arguments I denoted, I would be more than happy to engage you further on these issues. Just so you know, your rebuttal is fairly easily refuted, but, to be fair, I'm sure you have more to offer in each area and that I may sincerely gain new knowledge and understanding in the process.

    Just let me know.

  539. kask

    @Achems Razor

    I may not always agree with your interpretations, of which I don't have any current examples, but I certainly appreciate your approach and your scope of knowledge.

    Peace.

  540. satir

    a God that made everything is a wonderful invention for people too lazy or too stupid to pursue understanding the true nature of our place in the universe. (it had it's place when our understanding was as limited as it was)
    A simple "answer" that even a child can understand...
    great if you are willing to live the rest of your life with an understanding as simple as a childs'... not so great if you actualy want to go further and mentaly grow to a true understanding.
    modern humanity is way past needing the mental crutches that our distant ancestors did...

  541. kask

    @satir

    "modern humanity is way past needing the mental crutches that our distant ancestors did…"

    Is this a current anthropological and psychological understanding?

    Try reading Ernest Becker "Denial of Death" and maybe you could see why I question your assumption.

    I think Freud, Rant, Adler and many others whom have studied the nature of man would disagree with your assumption.

    However, I suppose new information that I don't have could make me think otherwise.

    Peace.

  542. satir

    Granted, the psychology of why the human mind would create and cling to such a myth is a very interesting study. but it is a very different question to the practical scientific one of the existence of a god. humans are one of the least evolved and come from the youngest evolotionary tree in the world, our brains are very good at being social animals, not very good at many other tasks (just just look at our historic resistance to any idea that is challenging to the social order and protocol...) just because we seem to have a historic psychological "need" to anthropomorphosize powers beyond our current understanding doesn't make it a valid scientific need. we are just barely coming to understand the living world that surrounds us but we dont cling to the old ideas that made sense at the time with what we could see or prove way back then, why would we cling to an ancient answer to anything else especialy one as profoundly important as our origins?

  543. Randy

    *Dr. Randy applauds satir, and then collapses... perhaps to watch the Phillies get humiliated by the Mets one more time...*

    One last thing... typing with only one hand... very difficult...

    To all those that point to science as being as destructive as religion, I say, sure... yes... science is a human thing... it is often corrupted.

    Science is a tool, like a hammer. A hammer can be used to build a house, or it can be used to kill a man.

    But, science is a human thing--- never claimed to be perfect or "divinely" inspired. It corrects itself, much like our US Constitution.

    What is religion's excuse? Being as it is supposedly inspired by some imaginary diety?

    Religion is done. Evolution and nature has a better morality already built in. Study it, and be a good person.

  544. kask

    It has been suggested by smarter people than myself, that mankind has been made to be subject to something; even something cosmic in nature. (Again read some of the latest anthropological studies on man)

    So which came first, the chicken or the egg? Did we make up something to be subject too because of this "fake" need, or are we subject to something because it represents reality?

    The religious may say, "See of course there is a God we were made to be subject to him." The non-religious may say, "Of course man made it up." But since no one in the last EVER can seem to answer this observation with clear fact, wouldn't it be wise to not make hasty assumptions about the truth of religions.

    All ideas, religious or not, deserve the ability to grow as we learn new things. God has not been killed yet, maybe never.

    Can we continue to explore the world around us and hold each other accountable, keeping an open mind, until things are proven wrong?

    On a side note: Creationists, though a God, assuming one exists, could do what has been suggested in Genesis 1, you might want to read up on what main stream intelligent people of faith are saying about it.

    Peace.

  545. satir

    we have always needed to neatly explain what we can't understand and make theories, baseless or founded it doesn't matter, that then become a part of our social order and understanding. the scientific question then is very different to the philosophical one. the greatest advancements that have propelled us have always been outside of the accepted wisdom. the accepted wisdom and and our dogged need to cling to social or moral mores has then always stood in the way of real knowledge and true understanding. But we are no less moral now that we don't believe the earth (and God's image) is the center of the universe as was feared nor will we be any less moral or more inclined to be amoral if we believe in a nomogenist creation or in a magicaly spontaneous one... opposition of a belief because of ancestral mores is a unfortunate legacy of the human mind and its need to deify and anthropomorphosise. the seperation of church and state, religion and science, law and belief is the only proven course for continued human advancement both socialy and scientificaly and therefore shows our lack of a real need for a "god"

  546. Randy

    OK, I have to collapse now, I have exceeded my maximum battery power, at this point, but I must say this:

    Satir: I love the way your mind works, but please, I have only the use of one hand and yet I manage paragragh breaks and capitalization. Your stuff is great, but try and not vomit your information all over us! Think and plan your answers.

    @kask

    The egg came first. Obviously. All life started from single cell organisms. The debate is over... get WITH that!

    No ideas about religion deserve to grow. I will cut and paste my own axiom here:
    ------------------
    "And to that I would add: It is perfectly acceptable for men and women of science to reject delusion and fantasy as not worthy of consideration. The line must be drawn. And anything untestable, immeasurable, or otherwise, unobservable, is meaningless… to science…

    Anything else is philosophy. Which is fine and worthy of study, but “Philosophy bakes no bread!””

    And to that I would further add my own quote, “… but science can bake bread enough to feed the world… if we let it…”
    --------------------

    OK? Get it? Grow up and be real men and women, who look out for one another and who are in no need of imaginary friends, or ghostly parents.

    G'night!

  547. MrOz

    Just as a primary note, I only watched parts 1 and 2 because I don't have 5 hours to waste on youtube videos.
    That being said, this video is just as biased as the, let me point out, 1 (one) young uneducated(?) creationist.
    I can say for a fact that not all creationist follow what Kent Hovind or the Discovery Institute teach.
    What was presented, for the most part, was quite true, but the generalization of creationism was not (although I'm sure many people believe what this one creationist fellow was teaching).

  548. Epicurus

    Charles B. sounds like Joseph Goebbels. I'll let you figure that one out.

    PS Randy, have you looked into cannabis as medicine?

  549. Epicurus

    @Godisawesome, if you really feel up to it. Im sure this will just be the same old apologetic rhetoric that will be easily shown to be void of any logic other than fallacies.

    but please, try your best...

  550. Charles B.

    Epic: I've never been called a Nazi before. I never thought I would be. In my 33 years as a Christian, I've never been called a "Pharisee" before either. This is really a bad week for me, or you guys just just have no concept of a person's character. Amazing!

  551. Charles B.

    Dr. Randy:

    Epic is right. Cannabis might actually help if used medicinally to relax you. I've never met an up-tight "toker" before. I bet even Epic is "mellow" when he's smokin'! It's worth a try if you can get some medicinally for the pain. Perhaps that is what God created it for in the first place.

  552. Epicurus

    lol i was more calling you a propagandist, and a very good one at that. your rhetoric is pretty good.

    i will be honest and admit im always smoking cannabis. before i did smoke i had an anger problem as well as anxiety, insomnia and an eating disorder. i guess you could say it mellows me out nicely.

    but yes cannabis has been shown clinically to have very helpful effects for people with MS.

  553. Sick of Lies

    Charles B.,
    The atheist here on TDF are true persecutors that we Christians are taught to "lead to the water"...I say,let them muddy it up and when they thirst, they will have only nothing to drink except that polluted water they have created on their own .... I myself have been kicked around and kicked off because they feel I am a stupid believer of the made up God fairytale and apparently TDF likes the pro evo crowd to keep doing so,I'm araid.. if evolution is only an assumption, i will never understand what they are so afraid of in this world to not even add the existence of God on the table, if they are really wanting to cover all the bases of theory they hold so dear.

    KASK wrote"On a side note: Creationists, though a God, assuming one exists, could do what has been suggested in Genesis 1, you might want to read up on what main stream intelligent people of faith are saying about it."
    Kask,Simply put any main streamer of faith is lost within the dogma of the masses by being taught in school that evo/creation is more plausible or being pushed to being in your way to "fit in", however this is only a dead end for yourself and them as the creation model cannot allow it to be. As God created in six days not over millions of years.

  554. Sick of Lies

    Kask wrote: "The religious may say, “See of course there is a God we were made to be subject to him.” The non-religious may say, “Of course man made it up.” But since no one in the last EVER can seem to answer this observation with clear fact, wouldn’t it be wise to not make hasty assumptions about the truth of religions."

    Atheist would rather close their eyes and believe in a self absorbed assumption than to be knowingly wrong...God fearing folk know that to assume is self-destruction.

  555. Randy

    @Epicurus who wrote:

    "PS Randy, have you looked into cannabis as medicine?"

    Absolutely! Cannabis calms my tremors and is the best medicine... I don't know... like... EVER!

    Unfortunately, in my state, NJ, governor Corzine had a medical marijuahna (sp?) before the state senate, but then, he was voted out, in favor of a gigantic, fat, "Sopranos" type christian that hates anything that relieves pain in favor of his bible.

    So... despite how great cannabis really is, christians want me to suffer. Well, screw them! I will succeed, despite their monstrosity!

    I am a grown man! Eat me, Christy!

    (Reading your many posts, I see why my master's thesis' keep getting rejected... you are exact science, I am still trying to be all poetic and "Classical Literature"... I totally admire your "hard science".... you rock!)

  556. GodisAwesome

    Epicurus,

    it's good to see you have such an open mind. Your assumptions are particularly strange in light of the fact that you misrepresent and caricature my arguments. I'm sure that's not on purpose, but it illustrates an important point. I don't believe my arguments the way you misstate them, which is convenient for you, but it keeps you from actually dealing with them. Let's start with number one.

    The reason why prophecy is an indication of the divine authorship of the Scriptures, and hence a testimony to the trustworthiness of the Message of the Scriptures, is because of the minute probability of fulfillment.

    Anyone can make predictions. Having those prophecies fulfilled is vastly different. In fact, the more statements made about the future, and the more the detail, then the less likely the precise fulfillment will be.

    For example, what's the likelihood of a person predicting today the exact city in which the birth of a future leader would take place, well into the 21st century? This is indeed what the prophet Micah did 700 years before the Messiah. Further, what is the likelihood of predicting the precise manner of death that a new, unknown religious leader would experience, a thousand years from now - a manner of death presently unknown, and to remain unknown for hundreds of years? Yet, this is what David did in 1000 B.C.

    Again, what is the likelihood of predicting the specific date of the appearance of some great future leader, hundreds of years in advance? This is what Daniel did, 530 years before Christ.

    If one were to conceive 50 specific prophecies about a person in the future, whom one would never meet, just what's the likelihood that this person will fulfill all 50 of the predictions? How much less would this likelihood be if 25 of these predictions were about what other people would do to him, and were completely beyond his control?

    For example, how does someone "arrange" to be born in a specific family?

    How does one "arrange" to be born in a specified city, in which their parents don't actually live? How does one "arrange" their own death - and specifically by crucifixion, with two others, and then "arrange" to have their executioners gamble for His clothing (John 16:19; Psalms 22:18)? How does one "arrange" to be betrayed in advance? How does one "arrange" to have the executioners carry out the regular practice of breaking the legs of the two victims on either side, but not their own? Finally, how does one "arrange" to be God? How does one escape from a grave and appear to people after having been killed?

    Indeed, it may be possible for someone to fake one or two of the Messianic prophecies, but it would be impossible for any one person to arrange and fulfill all of these prophecies.

    Professor Emeritus of Science at Westmont College, Peter Stoner, calculated the probability of one man fulfilling the major prophecies made concerning the Messiah. The estimates were worked out by twelve different classes representing some 600 university students.

    The students carefully weighed all the factors, discussed each prophecy at length, and examined the various circumstances which might indicate that men had conspired together to fulfill a particular prophecy. They made their estimates conservative enough so that there was finally unanimous agreement even among the most skeptical students.

    However Professor Stoner then took their estimates, and made them even more conservative. He also encouraged other skeptics or scientists to make their own estimates to see if his conclusions were more than fair. Finally, he submitted his figures for review to a committee of the American Scientific Affiliation. Upon examination, they verified that his calculations were dependable and accurate in regard to the scientific material presented (Peter Stoner, Science Speaks, Chicago: Moody Press, 1969, 4).

    After examining only eight different prophecies (Idem, 106), they conservatively estimated that the chance of one man fulfilling all eight prophecies was one in 10^17.

    Now figure the likelihood that this same man would live the life Christ did, and convince hundreds of eyewitnesses, who comprised at least part of the early church, that He was that self same Messiah.

    I am not even started good on this argument. You can see why I hesitate to be baited into these discussions. They consume so much time.

    God is Awesome.

  557. Randy

    @godisawseome, (wretch!)

    Don't talk to Epicurus, talk to me. Tell me why women must be opressed by your god, all women throughout history. Tell me why, if jesus wipes away all original sin, born again women must, "suffer issues of blood and pain of child birth..."

    Tell me, specifically, why Hypatia had to be slowly and brutally flayed alive for your god. Tell me that.

    Tell me, why the Library of Alexandria, the great repository of all the knowledge in the world had to be destroyed by your god.

    Tell me you are good. Explain to me how your mom and dad and you are good.

    Tell me.

  558. Charles B.

    GodisAwesome: Wow!!! That was well said. I'm working on some Biblical conundrums that Reb has brought up on this thread and Because the Bible Tells Me So. I'm not out of my league academically, but I'm "mind-tired," and I just have so much on my plate and it does take hours and hours to formulate a well thought-out Biblically accurate reply. If you have the inclination and the ability, and the time, could you also give your opinion on the passages that Reb is talking about? Nonetheless, I can handle it if you cannot.

    Respectfully,

    Charles B.

    SOL: Long time no post! Have you really been "kicked off" or is that just a hyperbole? I certainly hope so.

    Dr. Randy: I thought you were Canadian! I'm sorry to hear that you can't get your Cannabis legally. My mind changed on the subject last year when I discussed it here on TopDocs and people pointed out that alcohol was legal and twice as deadly, or more. I had to admit that was probably true. Perhaps indeed for pain relief is what God had created the Cannabis plant for. I'm still not sure it should be smoked for pleasure however, but I have I suicidal/homicidal friend that seemed to be able to "cope" when he is smoking it. It's not a black and white call, like I used to think it was. But, in your case, I think it's OK. I take aspirin when I have a headache. That's a "drug" too, I suppose. You have my promise to pray for you as often as I can remember to do so.

    Peace to you.

  559. McGarvey

    Genesis 1:29
    "And God saith, `Lo, I have given to you every herb sowing seed, which [is] upon the face of all the earth, and every tree in which [is] the fruit of a tree sowing seed, to you it is for food;"

  560. Randy

    OK. I read that no one has answered any of my questions.

    Charles B. I respect you, but you have no insight for me.

    Your religion fails.

    Why did Hypatia have to die a slow, horrifying death for your god?

    I am full of energy today, ready to do battle with you!

    Take me on!

  561. Randy

    I'm sorry, Charles. I can't really hear your justification for the rape and slow torture/murder of a great woman...

    I'm sure you have some biblical justification for this great crime against humanity...

    I am waiting... I am like... 57 years old... I can't wait too long...

    I'm just sayin'... Carl Sagan!

  562. Randy

    La, la, la... still waiting for some kind of answer...

    The answer is: Mom and Dad and Granny and Granpa are wrong and they lied to you!

    Be a man, be a Woman! Be somthing better than the monsters that try to destroy all of humanity.

    Evolution has a better plan, get WITH it or kill us off. I don't really care anymore!

    It's up to YOU and your progeny! Evil creatures!

    Be ashamed!

  563. Randy

    Ok. I'm getting that the christians can't answer my specific questions, being all silly and such...

    @Epicurus

    What do you think of the newest studies concerning the Epi-genome, specifically, the idea that epi-genomic damage can translate to grandsires?

    In other words, if you are exposed to toxic chemicals, (because of christians), then your grandsires can suffer damaging genetic effects?

  564. Randy

    @godisawesome

    Please call me, DR. Randy, my Ph.D's are silly but they took a great deal of work to acheive.

    Also, you can call me Reverend Randy, that will also work, as I slaved over those certifications, as well.

    Are your answers to my questions full of bile and spite? That is the only reason I can see that Vlatko would put them in moderation...

    (Holy Batman, I feel GOOD today!)

    Please tell me how Hypatia's rape and murder was good for your god!

  565. Charles B.

    Dr. Rady: It's family night. Later. If it passes moderation, I want to see what GodisAwesome said first.

    Peace. :-)

  566. satir

    @Sick of Lies
    I think what drives Atheists to "beleive" in the absense of a "god" is that there is really no reason to do so anymore. If someone were to come to you and tell you "hey, you are an evil person and I decided that I'm going to kill myself so you can be magically absolved of your unseen, undetectable evil" I think you would probably keep walking and probably not be inclined to add any of your spare change to his outstretched coffee can... yet, we dont look at those who beleive in fairies, spirits, demons or magical unseen powers as crazy. Instead, so long as their magical accounts of unverifiable interaction with sweet or evil nothings mesh with the mythology we were raised with it is a-ok... how is that a sensible view? out-moded and frankly archaic world views based on ancestral mythologies can work great for worker drones that need only to understand enough to know how to pick up a car key, to a car they will never understand, drive to work to perform a function they can barely see a value in, in an office full of people they will never relate to. You can live a perfectly "fulfiling" existence by blindly following the flow, you dont need more than about a 70 or so IQ to get through life and even succeed fairly well at it. Sure there has been a recent movement of claiming that christianity talks about a "personal god" and promotes individuality... give me a break, dressing up intolerance and trying to spin it as "personal choice" is just more emperors new clothes. And sadly most will continue to agree that you are fully dressed regardless of your impending death by hypothermia, I mean it is your choice...

  567. GodisAwesome

    Dr. Randy,

    Heaven's no! I would never write about you in such a way. I don't even know you. I can't figure out why my post would have been flagged by the bot, but it's certainly not because I was in any way insulting to you.

  568. mik robins

    The Indians in S. America have a saying.first come the explorer,then come the church,then come government,then they rent us our land and turn us into servants and cheap labor.
    governments and church teach us to fear so they can justify their existence and offer people safety and make god responsible for all that goes bad.and turn people into saints and heroes when a person has killed enough for their cause.
    in short.

  569. GodisAwesome

    Dr. Randy,

    I have no problem referring to you as "Dr." even though I have no way of knowing who you are from the brief information discernible here. I meant no disrespect. I too have achieved graduate level education and I am also ordained, however I do not (personally) care for titles, and am particularly opposed to calling anyone "Reverend." Again, with no disrespect directed towards you, I revere no one but God. I just have a personal quirk (pet peeve) against the use of that title. It's not something I make a huge issue out of, or throw a fit over, but my preference is that people just refer to me by my given name.

    Of course I will bow to your preference when referring to you, but given the choice of "Randy, Ph.D," or "Rev." I choose the former.

  570. GodisAwesome

    Epicurus wrote:

    "2.you take this story that has been adopted from older mythology on faith. you just accept the stories told to you and written down years after the events supposedly took place."

    My answer to your assertion was in my original post. It's simply not convincing to me, in light of the size of 1st and 2nd century Christianity, planted in monotheistic Judaism, to suggest that the Christ story was mythical. Close examination of any of the supposed progenitors also makes such speculation so highly improbable as to be statistically impossible.

    To believe that, we must suppose that 1st century Jews, who knew the Osirus, Horus, etc. legends wouldn't be opposed to appropriating them, even though they a) would suffer tremendous persecution for their claims, b) had a history of extreme, even rabid separation and c) could get away with it in a culture saturated in these very legends.

    It's extremely significant that no such correlation was proposed until centuries later. If the stories are so similar, then people at the time would have rejected them for just such a reason. Many rejected, but there is not one contemporary source that suggests people thought believers had appropriated legends in the concoction of the story they were willing to die for.

    Historical revisionism is not proof.

  571. Charles B.

    GodisAwesome: I sent you an e-mail. But it's late in Korea. I'll check again in 10 minutes then it the sack.

  572. Charles B.

    Dr. Randy: The moderated post by GIA has cleared. He is a smarter man than I, so I will just let things be as they are.

    Peace to You.

    Good night.

  573. Randy

    Big weakness and tremors, have to go away now...

    Just punch yourselves in the head for me, would'ya?

    Thanks!

  574. Epicurus

    what’s the likelihood of a person predicting today the exact city in which the birth of a future leader would take place, well into the 21st century?

    Post Hoc Fallacy. there is no proof other than silly stories from the bible that the jesus character is born in bethlehem. in fact its a PERFECT post hoc fallacy. someone writes a prophecy then you just write that it happened. you have faith in the stories of the bible, not evidence or logic.

    "Further, what is the likelihood of predicting the precise manner of death that a new, unknown religious leader would experience, a thousand years from now – a manner of death presently unknown, and to remain unknown for hundreds of years? Yet, this is what David did in 1000 B.C."

    this is what you refer to,

    Around 1,000 B.C., King David prophesied: "Dogs have surrounded Me: A band of wicked men have encircled Me: They PIERCED My HANDS and My FEET. I can count all My bones. People stare and gloat over Me. They DIVIDE MY GARMENTS among them, and CAST LOTS upon My CLOTHING."--Psalm 22:16-18.

    how is this him talking about jesus first of all, and there has been debate over the actual translation of this passage, also its another example of post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. if you dont understand what that is i suggest looking it up, because that is all you are doing here.

    "If one were to conceive 50 specific prophecies about a person in the future, whom one would never meet, just what’s the likelihood that this person will fulfill all 50 of the predictions? How much less would this likelihood be if 25 of these predictions were about what other people would do to him, and were completely beyond his control?"

    i just cant believe you read the bible and FALL for this trickery. the old one was written WITH INSTRUCTIONS on how to basically CREATE a messiah. completely post hoc reasoning.

    now concerning Peter Stoner....sigh, i cant believe you would quote someone who has had their ideas torn apart since the 1970's...here is some simple reading

    C. P. Swanson, reviewing Science Speaks in The Quarterly Review of Biology, wrote: "...the author has fallen into the commonest error of using only these facts which bolster his hypothesis, and of discarding or controverting those which do not. For example, his discussion of the theory of evolution is not only misleading; it displays an abysmal ignorance of recent evolutionary studies."

    Also, various critics have taken issue with Stoner's interpretation of prophecy. Stoner's apologetic work did not receive critical attention until its inclusion in Josh McDowell's Evidence that Demands a Verdict. These criticisms against McDowell, Stoner and others include historical errors, claims regarding after-the-event authorship (POST HOC FALLACY) and/or tampering with Biblical prophecies, and disputed meanings of certain Biblical phrases.

    Others who disagree with specific claims made by Stoner include fellow Christians and secular historians: for instance, while Stoner says of Ezekiel's prophecy of the permanent destruction of Tyre "If Ezekiel had looked at Tyre in his day and had made these seven predictions in human wisdom, these estimates mean that there would have been only one chance in 75,000,000 of their all coming true. They all came true in the minutest detail", others claim that "the problem is that very little of this actually came to pass! In fact, it badly missed how history actually unfolded" and "The location of the city of Tyre is not in doubt, for it exists to this day on the same spot and is known as Sur." However, it could still be argued that the boundaries of the ancient mainland city may have fallen within areas of the modern city which have not been rebuilt to the present day.

    im sorry but all your arguments are based on faith in trusting the bible to be accurate.

    we can next discuss how the bible is credible and accurate and im sure that will take a nice long time also even though i will just point out all the accuracies in other religious books and show that some hits doesnt make a holy book.

  575. Epicurus

    "My answer to your assertion was in my original post. It’s simply not convincing to me, in light of the size of 1st and 2nd century Christianity, planted in monotheistic Judaism, to suggest that the Christ story was mythical. Close examination of any of the supposed progenitors also makes such speculation so highly improbable as to be statistically impossible."

    not at all. it makes it absolutely commonplace and normal for the people in that area and time to fully adopt any myth that came along. They were also well aware of the older similar myths as they refer to them, and also knowingly made the dates fit older religions so as to assimilate into the culture and take over.

    I cant find the quote because i cant remember where it is said and who said it but I suspect it is Paul (Saul) asking some pagans why it is so hard to believe in his messiah when the stories are so similar (ie. virgin birth)

  576. Randy

    "Ad hoc, ergo, proctor hoc!"

    Ok, going away now...

    Can all you christtians just do me a favor? Just punch yourselves right in the head. Really make it work; give yourselves a big black eye!

    I would appreciate it!

    Thanks!

    Dr. Randy

  577. satir

    @Epicurus
    "a man convinced agailnst his will is of the same opinion still"
    \
    "overwhelming physical evidence can do little in the face of an emotional response..."
    "thrash as one might against the fish hook of reality, it does no more good than thrashing in general..."

  578. GodisAwesome

    Dr. Randy,

    As I wrote, these are some of the reasons that I believe. I'm a little perplexed by the incivility of your last post, as you insist that others treat you with such respect, even referring to you as "Dr." I for one, have gladly complied and will continue to do so, but what can possibly explain your behavior? A swing and a miss at humor I hope.

    When I presented the mathematical material I was well aware of the critics and their largely unfounded criticisms of his work. That's the way science is done. Peers review the work and it is revised and improved as a result of the process.

    His original work has been far from invalidated by the review process, even the harshest of his legitimate critics cannot assert that it has without inserting, as Epicurus does, a huge and unhealthy dose of historical revisionism and a profound misunderstanding of Biblical hermeneutics.

    I'm sorry you remain unconvinced, as knowing Him and making Him known is the only ultimate purpose for life, of which I am aware.

    Epicurus, as someone with a legitimate background in philosophy, I have to say that you are only correct if your assumptions are, and they most demonstratively are not. Now I understand that you believe they are, but perhaps you should include some reading (if you haven't) outside of the narrow circle who already agree with your conclusions and presuppositions. Perhaps you have and were still unimpressed, but if you haven't F.F. Bruce, Norman Geisler, Deitrich Boenhoffer, Francis Schaeffer, are a few that could get you started. Forgive the misspellings, as I'm in a bit of a hurry - taking out my sweet wife (almost 30 years) on a big night on the town.

    I have been an educator, engineer, philosopher, preacher, and a man of science for almost 40 years. I have earned a graduate degree, traveled around the world twice and have spoken to audiences of thousands. The most profound thing I know is that Jesus loves you so much that He suffered the painful death of crucifixion on your behalf.

    Randy, on second thought, I'm sure it was humor because I just had a good laugh over it. Hope you're feeling better soon.

  579. Randy

    It was humor and not meant to be specifically onerous (sp?).

    Even though you want to destroy my species.

    I respect you, but I really wish you would just do me the favor of punching yourself in the head...

    Thanks!

  580. GodisAwesome

    Dr. Randy,

    I most assuredly want your species to thrive. I wish I could take you out to dinner. I'll bet you'd like me more than you might believe, and I'm sure I'd get along with you.

    Feel better soon.

  581. Epicurus

    you dont know that jesus loves us and died for us, again you have faith. and you didnt respond to a thing i said about yoru claims other than to again just assert that you just accept them as true.

    thats fine but dont pretend it is logic or evidence but just faith. you have taken the bible on faith without putting it to the same standard of evidence as you would any other so called holy book.

    my assumptions are absolutely correct as they have been the same thing twice in response to what you have been saying.

    you have done nothing but accepted post hoc fallacies. as a philosopher you should know this. at least admit it if anything.

    his original work HAS been invalidated. if his work was sound and convincing he would have been given a nobel prize. instead it was torn apart as just a waste of his time. look if i have in a book that the one true messiah would be born someplace and certain things will happen and this is VERY WELL KNOWN, then people could easily create that life or even make up parts of a persons life and just SAY those things happened to them

    plus who is Immanuel? and why dont the jews accept that the prophecies their own people made are accurate to jesus?

  582. GodisAwesome

    Epicurus,

    History demonstrates that a large percentage of 1st and 2nd century Jews did receive Jesus as Messiah. Immanuel simply means (literally) with us - Imman - God - El, or as translated in reverse for clarity in English, "God with us." This was what many called Yeshua (Jesus) and what many today still recognize as true concerning Him, so the answer to your question is Jesus.

    The problem with "making up things," in regards to the life of Christ is that the church was far too large by the middle of the third century to assume it only began to thrive after the eyewitnesses were dead. Such an assumption, however, would almost necessarily have to be made to discount many of the prophecies. I sincerely find virtually no support for the a-historical Jesus construct and the "Jesus Seminar" approach that discounts much of his life as fictional.

    That combined with the known martyrs, not the questionable ones, but the historically provable ones combines for compelling evidence of a robust church that began with evidence that would have been easily disproved if untrue.

    However, let me be clear: I have repeatedly written from the very first instance, that acceptance of Christ is by faith. I would not argue that with you. I may question your definition of faith. I'm not writing that I do, because I've interacted with you for such a short length of time, so I'll try an analogy that may explain my own.

    It takes faith to sit in a chair I've never sat in, particularly if it's some radical new design which I've never even seen. However, I can examine it closely, listen to others who claim to have sat successfully in it, get on the floor and look under the seat, and try to view it from every angle. Once I've done that, I can decide whether or not to actually sit, and therefore exercise my faith. The faith is not a blind faith. It has a basis in many experiences, and a preponderance of the evidence.

    Does this illustration encompass all that is (in many ways) the mystery of faith? No, but it does serve to illustrate the difference between blind faith and reasonable, even reasoned faith.

  583. GodisAwesome

    Epicurus wrote:

    "my assumptions are absolutely correct as they have been the same thing twice in response to what you have been saying."

    I only use this potentially embarrassing pull quote to illustrate that all of us have no inclination of devoting the space necessary for any meaningful discourse on such an important topic.

    I don't, for even a second, assume you think your assumptions are correct because you have repeated them twice. Nor do I assume you don't understand or appreciate the difference between "saying" something and writing something. I'm only using this to make a larger point.

    About the most any of us can hope to accomplish in a forum such as this is to point someone in what we feel is the right direction. I, for one, think they are more likely to at least check that out if I keep the sarcasm, ridicule, pejoratives and offensive behavior to a minimum.

    Since you accuse me of dishonesty I should respond, and my response is that you are simply incorrect about me. Perhaps it is my fault, as I have neither the time, nor the motivation to write a dissertation on this forum. If you are genuinely misunderstanding me, then I must (and do) accept responsibility for that. I'm afraid I am too thick to be much clearer in the time and space I alow myself for this activity.

  584. Epicurus

    when speaking on a forum board or on the internet in general typing and speaking and saying all go hand in hand. i could also say do you hear me, and it would basically mean do you see what im typing. also i used the word assumption there facetiously. i dont believe them to be assumptions but really assesments based upon the information you have provided.

    i have had to tell you everytime that all of your so called evidence or logic is post hoc reasoning. to say the prophecies are true is post hoc reasoning.

    "History demonstrates that a large percentage of 1st and 2nd century Jews did receive Jesus as Messiah."

    and history demonstrates that any rabbi certainly didnt, but only the common folk who once again believed anything they were told. what about the large groups of people all over the world that believe in their deities and gods? they all have books and stories and people who died for the faith.

    perhaps you should look at the double standard of evidence you are making for your myths and other cultures. have you even looked into any other religions to see if they are true? or are you just culturally influenced by the religion that is all around you? perhaps if you were born in iraq you would be muslim? or india you would be hindu?

    and no it doesnt take faith to sit in the chair...HOWEVER if i told you to sit in my invisible chair, that would be the same as faith in your god.

  585. Quimbys

    And to further elaborate on the chair analogy. Imagine that your life is the action, in slow motion, of being about to sit in that chair and the moment of your death is when you find out the chair is not there. It's a bit late to do anything at that point. All I know is that the few times that I have missed a chair either due to the mischief of others or by mishap, it has really pissed me off.

    It seems to me a Christian says that no matter what you have to believe the chair is there even when all evidence to the contrary is pointed out and they themselves have no evidence to support their faith. That all would be fine for me if they just went on their way and left the rest of us alone. Instead though I have felt that especially since the Reagan era, certain Christian elements have decided that the rest of us have to respect their faith in the non-existent chair, and support their delusions of the chairs strength, quality of build, ornateness, and beauty. If we do not, then we are somehow inferior, rude, or immoral. Creationism has taken it a step further in two ways. One by taking advantage of the average person's ignorance of science and Christianity in order to manufacture more fake legitimacy in the belief of the existence of the chair. Two by telling us that trusting science is similar to faith in the chair. It's just ridiculous. Then they have stepped it up further by organizing politically and forcing politician, whores that they are, to acknowledge the chair for support. It has all gone too far. THERE IS NO CHAIR. As citizens we have to promote education and get people to realize that science and theistic religions are two different ways of explanation. One is based on evidence and rationality. The other is based on faith and delusion. Personally I don't want people making decisions based on delusions if those decisions affect me. So, Christians, please just quietly go off and worship and leave the rest of us alone. That is one of the key principle upon which the US was founded and there no reason to change that now.

  586. Randy

    Just peeking in here, on my way to more coma...

    But, Quimbys wrote something that caught my eye and deserves special attention:

    "Personally I don’t want people making decisions based on delusions if those decisions affect me. So, Christians, please just quietly go off and worship and leave the rest of us alone. That is one of the key principle upon which the US was founded and there no reason to change that now."

    After reading that, I cheered like the Phillies' fans at our home park!

    I don't think they will go away, though, Quimby, so it may be up to you and Epicurus and Reb and all of you bright young things to drive them back the best you can... for your children's sake!

    Good luck, brother!

  587. Randy

    Oh, and earlier, I wrote a stupid thing:

    “Ad hoc, ergo, proctor hoc!”

    That makes little to no sense, what I meant was:

    "POST hoc, ergo, proctor hoc!"

    Sorry...

  588. GodisAwesome

    Epicurus,

    Anyone who thinks that the "common folk" just believed anything they were told has never studied any history of Judaism with anything remotely resembling fairness. Many of them were intransitive enough that they died in support of the purity of their thought, practice, and religious expression. But, even if that was not true, your statement is self contradictory.

    You would honestly have us believe that these "ignorant, common sheep," who will follow anything, chose to leave the generally accepted customs of Judaism to embrace not only a renegade splinter group, but one that was suffering intense persecution, even though (if you were correct) none of their religious leaders, whom they should have been ignorantly following if your bogus theory was correct, were following Christ. Surely even you can see how illogical that position is?

    We do not have clear numbers of a percentage of Rabbis converting to faith within the first several centuries, but if there were zero your theory fails even worse. If the leaders they followed for centuries were unanimous in their condemnation of the new sect what, pray tell, accounts for the conversion of their (supposedly) easily led and ignorant flocks?

    You very well may have thought these subjects through as if your eternity depends on it, but it certainly does not appear as if you have. My construct is at least consistent, whereas your own depends upon you as authoritative, and upon an almost wholesale denial of what we think we know of history.

  589. GodisAwesome

    Quimbys,

    Are you reading this thread, or just jumping in from time to time to make comments? Most, if not all, of your assertions have been intellectually enjoined, so, while the answers will continue to be debatable, it's simply untrue to assert that Christians "have no evidence to support their faith." You may find the evidence insufficient, or refuse to come to Christ under the provisions of His own requirements (by grace through faith), but to hundreds of millions of adherents there is certainly ample evidence.

    Maybe a primer would be helpful. Youtube is a pretty good launching point to get a basic layman's grasp of the atheism/Theism debate. Search for Dinesh D'souza, and James White as a good start. My apologies if you are already "up to speed." I am in no way denigrating your intelligence. It's hard to discern the level of information people have just from reading these short posts.

  590. Randy

    Well, it's four in the morning here and what the hell am I doing awake at this hour? At least my tremors are calm and I can type a bit, although my head is a little fuzzy.

    Still, even with a foggy, drug addled brain, I can out-think most of you christians! HA!

    Listen, GIA, (I hate that name godisawseome so I will call you GIA, if that's ok...), I keep hammering home the idea that you have aligned yourself with an evil mythology. That you are guilty before the whole human race of crimes against humanity, and yet you keep supporting this monsterous doctrine.

    Why?

    Why, when you have the blood of, say, Hypatia on your hands, would you continue to shill for this apocolyptic creature?

    It don't matter to me, mind you, I'll be dead soon, but do you really want to be a traitor to all of humanity? Do you want to doom my nieces and nephews to some new version of the Dark Ages?

    Why?

    Walk away from this evil and study and work and be a good person. This god you worship is evil and inspires evil.

    Nature has a better way.

  591. GodisAwesome

    "when speaking on a forum board or on the internet in general typing and speaking and saying all go hand in hand." (sic)

    Of course, and I agree, but I was making the larger point about ridiculously narrow parsing.

  592. GodisAwesome

    Dr. Randy,

    If you haven't already read it, I refer you to Dinesh D'Sousa's work, "What's So Great About Christianity?" While certainly such a powerful influence has been misappropriated by evil men from time to time (Hypatia being one example), Christianity and Christians, in the name of Christ, have built more hospitals, schools, universities and done more humanitarian work then all other would-be contending movements combined. Without the slightest possibility of informed opposition I state that Christianity has brought more help and relief for suffering mankind than any other movement, or non-movement.

    Before you counter with the crusades, et al, please refer to the D'Sousa book. I'm not inclined to defend the indefensible or to apologize for a mutant, non-representative group of outlaws who used the power of Christianity for nefarious purposes. I oppose them, not Christ or His indwelling presence in the lives of the clear majority of Christians.

  593. Randy

    I'm sorry, GIA, but if your religion cured a million children of cancer tomorrow, its crimes against humanity would still be NOT erased.

    You religion has done NO good. None. Zero good. Every christian on the face of the world, of every stripe, denomination and sect, is guilty before the entire human species.

    As I said earlier, the destruction of the Great Library at Alexandria, was a crime so great, no hospitals or charity can ever, EVER recitify.

    Oh, and the Nazis built a lot of hospitals, too... really good ones! They were doing the Lord's work, too...

  594. Randy

    Be a grown up, human being. Humanity needs you to be strong and self sufficient! Do not curl up in the lap of some ghostly parent and suck your thumb!

    I have been disabled most of my adult life, but I knew I had to be strong and build things, create things, provide for my family, and no god helped me to do that!

    I don't need that silliness! Don't be a child!

    America needs no more "happy zombies"-- we need strong men and women who can take control of their destinies and build things, create things. Math and science, my brother! That is all, (let me repeat...) that is ALL, that we need.

    Otherwise, you throw the whole country away... is that what you want?

  595. soluleplantfood

    people laugh the ha ha ha laugh cos its the harbell infection.. the lizards gizzard in your throat is choking you, to prevent ya from thinking outside the bubble, ha ha ha also makes the dna spiral.. heh inflates the dna, heh is the messeneger god of egypt. :)

  596. GodisAwesome

    Dr. Randy,

    I've already answered (and demonstrated) previously that there is not one shred of proof that Christians were responsible for destroying the library at Alexandria. Yet you remain preoccupied with this red herring.

    Your assertions, since not born out in fact, read like someone with a personal axe to grind. That is too bad, as you are apparently holding at (much more than) arms length, the only hope you have for an afterlife that is free of the physical pain you've endured in this one.

    You wrote: "America needs no more “happy zombies”– we need strong men and women who can take control of their destinies and build things, create things. Math and science, my brother! That is all, (let me repeat…) that is ALL, that we need."

    The positive influence of Christianity in the lives of the founders of this country is indisputable by all but the most rank historical revisionists. Science itself sprang from Christianity, and the desire to further comprehend the mind of God, His laws, and His majesty, by studying His creation.

    Ironically you champion our need for science, yet your posts (the two most recent) read like they are written by someone totally irrational. It is beneath you to engage in such gross misrepresentation in an attempt to further your agenda. When you cannot even accept what is manifestly obvious, you bring suspicion on the reasoning behind all of your arguments.

    One has only to check the names on 70% of all hospitals, the founding histories of 80% of private colleges, and a large number of public ones, etc. in this country alone to see how silly and unfounded your assertions are.

    You may freely (as you apparently have) choose to reject Christ and even be mad at God, but you can't also stick your fingers in your ears, like a child, and scream loudly while pretending you do so from a lack of evidence. You should especially avoid imputing your own childishness to your opponents.

    Even if you could best me rather handily (and these pejoratives aren't the way) your arms are far too short to box with God. I know someone is whispering to your conscience that it's too late for you, but it's not. He will still accept you and make you His own. I've witnessed a great many so-called atheists come to wonderful faith in Christ. He's accepting former atheists daily.

    I'm hoping it was just your meds talking, but even if not your not a bigger sinner than He is a Savior.

  597. GodisAwesome

    Sorry, that should have read, you're not a bigger. . .

  598. Randy

    Oh, I'm sorry! Carl Sagan said christians destroyed the Library of Alexandria. I have the book and the boxset, and Vlatko has "Cosmos" on this site... so...

    But, I guess you know better than he, you being so much more intelligent than Carl Sagan. I defer to your superior wisdom!

    So, what I am saying is... if Carl Sagan MIGHT be correct... then... you have a great crime on your hands...

    I'm just sayin'-- Carl Sagan.

    My irrationality comes from trying to be humorous, when I am cranky I can tell you to grow up and be a man! But, I try to be personable.

    And now, I think Reb needs to come in here and lay down some more quotes from our Founding Fathers about how horrible christianity truly is...

  599. Randy

    I never had any help from any parent, either biological or "spiritual". Everything I made for myself I forged out of sheer determination.

    I built a business that employs people and feeds children. I pay outrageous taxes but I would pay MORE to provide help and solace to the needy. I love my country. I just don't care for my countrymen, very much....

    I do not like humans, but I would walk through fire to save them. I am a complicated guy.

    My wife of 30 years is the most important thing in my life and when I finally kick, she will be well taken care of, (and I can NOT wait for that to happen!).

    I am a model person, actually. And no god was needed.

    I am a priest of many religions, but that was just a learning experience. Knowledge is power!

    How much money do you have in the bank? What have you built?

  600. GodisAwesome

    Yes it was Carl Sagan who was in error on this one. I cited the Sagan reference and pointed you to the actual evidence, and even to whom it was that he cited, in other words the genesis of the error, which he was just repeating.

    That being said, even if Sagan was right, I have no more blood on my hands than you do for the crimes of Ceausescu, or Chairman Mao, which is to say none. Many crimes have been done in the name of atheism which do not arise from the philosophy, just as many have in the name of Christianity.

    Surely you see the difference. In fact, the preoccupation with them looks a lot like a smokescreen, which is a ploy of those bereft of an argument. I repeat, it is beneath you.

  601. Achems Razor

    "Question the boldness, even the existence of God". Thomas Jefferson.

    "I believe in America where the the separation of church and state is absolute" John F. Kennedy.

  602. Randy

    Very nice, GIA, but I will refer to one of my earlier posts in this thread:

    "To all those that point to science as being as destructive as religion, I say, sure… yes… science is a human thing… it is often corrupted.

    Science is a tool, like a hammer. A hammer can be used to build a house, or it can be used to kill a man.

    But, science is a human thing— never claimed to be perfect or “divinely” inspired. It corrects itself, much like our US Constitution.

    What is religion’s excuse? Being as it is supposedly inspired by some imaginary diety?

    Religion is done. Evolution and nature has a better morality already built in. Study it, and be a good person."
    ---------------------

    Don't look for secular governments to bail you out. They have an excuse, you do not. Your christ should be better than Chairman Mao, but alas...

  603. GodisAwesome

    Dr. Randy,

    Regarding my personal financial condition. I worship a man who did not have a place to lay His head. I do not value net worth the way, perhaps, that you seem to. That being the case, I own (and/or co-own) seven businesses. How do you think I have time for all this blogging? Ha ha.

    Many of the truly richest people I have ever known, however, live in third world countries and have annual incomes of less than you or I make in an average day.

    Achem's Razor,

    Yes, Christians pool their resources to help alleviate suffering people throughout the world. We pay our own way to do medical missions in places where the nearest doctor is hundreds of miles away. We give to churches and relief organizations so that this kind of work can be done efficiently and effectively. No one who we employ to run those organizations should treat that money as if it is their own, neither should they take a vow of poverty, since such work is their full-time job. A small fraction (of those we entrust with our pooled resources) behave irresponsibly, perhaps even criminally, yet even under the worst of conditions Christians press forward and accomplish more for the good of mankind than all other groups combined. I don't think you understand that the "church" is a living body comprised of all of the individual Christians in it, so your question, "who’s money?" is nonsensical. We all consider it as pooled resources accomplishing a greater corporate good.

    So far as the taxation issue: I, for one, do not champion either position, but churches are far from the only charitable work (in the US) that enjoys the benefit of tax deductible status for donations. The economic argument is that taxing such donations amounts to a double taxation, by the way, which is why, unless they have incompetent legal counsel the Freedom From Religion Foundation enjoys the same tax breaks they wish to deny others.

    I hope this has further clarified my position, but whether sufficient or not, I choose not to keep bantering back and forth today. My arguments have not been engaged. Perhaps now they will be, but I'll let others pick up the baton, or I will let it lie. I have other things to do this weekend.

  604. GodisAwesome

    Okay Dr. Randy, I'm really done for the weekend but I just have to write one last thing:

    I think I finally get your tone. It's funny as hell (not the literal one, ha) and I apologize for imputing more incivility to you. I am wrong about you, but, of course, I still reject your arguments.

    Tone is so hard to catch in print, but I should have looked between the lines with more intensity.

    Cheers for the weekend.

  605. Randy

    Oh, and by the way, GIA! Even if I let you pass on you knowing more than Carl Sagan, (ahem!), what about the first premise of my thesis?

    "1) The institutionalized, rape, torture, oppression of women!"

    What is your god's problem with women? Sounds like it may be a serious psychological pathology, to me.

    It (your god) damned all women for all eternity because one woman talked to a snake? Really?

    How pathetic...

  606. Randy

    I'm just gonna keep going, because I really do not want your religion to destroy the human species. As I said, I will be dead soon, but my nieces and nephews should not be victims of your delusions.

    GIA, I say again, everything you do, every supposed "good" act you and your kind perform is still evil. You have aligned yourself with a demon, a monster... as I said before, Nazis saved many, many children and did many charitable things-- would you argue that they were not evil?

    Would you align yourself with Adolph, just because he was a "charitable" guy?

    You and all of your bretheren are destroying us, with smiles!

    As Shakespear wrote, "...that you can smile and smile and be a VILLIAN!"

    There are no good, or sane christians. Sorry.

    BUT, you can GET sane. Just walk away from that horror novel and be a stand-up human being!

  607. Randy

    Oh, and by the way, there is no "hell" or Satan. Jews have no idea what you people are talking about, and they started the whole damn thing, plus jesus/yeshua/esu was supposedly a jew, (although I do NOT believe that he existed at all...), so where did this "hell" or Satan come from, exactly?

    The word most commonly interpreted as "hell" in the new testament was actually "sheol" which means "the grave".

    In the Jewish tradition, the worst punishment for the wicked was to be left in your grave, "sheol" to... I don't know... just rot there, I guess.

    Sounds good to me.

    The Greeks had Tarturus, which was a fiery pit, but, you know, that's all pagan, so...

    And Satan, or "Sheitan" was an angel of the lord. An opposer, an obstacle to humanity's follies. Not evil at all.

    I refer you to Elane Pagels, "The Origins of Satan". She is an amazing woman, a pulitzer prize winning author and Doctor of religious studies at Princeton. I've met her a couple of times and I am kind of in love with her... damn restraining order!

    So, where did all of this tripe come from? Silly humans...

    Get over it, already.

  608. Randy

    I should have written, "Dr. Elane Pagels".... so sorry...

    She won her pulitzer for her interpretation of the "Gospel of Mary the Magdeline", another great read!

    She is SOOOO much smarter than me! When I met her I just burbled and blathered and made a fool of myself!

    Then I met her again at a luncheon and I burbled and blathered and blushed and she just shook her head and looked right past me. As she should have... *sigh*

    Anyways...

  609. Vlatko

    @GIA,

    I am really saddened when I see such an intelligent, educated, successful person who argues in favor of faith, particularly Christian faith.

    So basically you're saying you've come to realize that Christianity is the right way to go and Jesus is the real son of God. Probably you've also embraced "intelligent creation" dimension embedded in Christianity.

    Somewhere in your posts you've mentioned "Science itself sprang from Christianity, and the desire to further comprehend the mind of God, His laws, and His majesty, by studying His creation"

    This argument is also beneath you to engage in such gross misrepresentation in an attempt to further your agenda. Why? Because science was born long before any religion came into existence.

    The discovery of the first stone tool, the fire, the very primitive weapons are the very first products of science. Primitive proto-science but yet science. And from there everything sprang. Apply simple analogy and you'll see that even your religion was made possible by those first scientific achievements.

    Exponential development of the human intellect begun in those early human days and today we got to the point where we're flying spaceships, gazing in stars billions of light years away, building complex machines that would hopefully imitate the "Big Bang" and unravel the secrets of the universe itself , etc. Of course thanks to science.

    So your argument fails. Science in no way sprung from Christianity. It is very silly to think that way in fact. And I'm amazed why would well educated, intelligent person reason this way.

    This argument of yours can be looked upon from many other different angles. Let say you present this to some old wise, educated, religious Chinese guy. You'll be faced with tons of facts (both historically and archaeologically) that Buddhists were relatively advanced in science long before Christianity appeared.

    And again if you argue with some wise, educated, religious Indian he would say that Hindus were relatively advanced in science long before Jews (the creators of 3/4 of your holly book on which you base your religion) appeared and created their God.

    There you go... I mentioned some of the major religions that exist today. In relation to that I'm sure you're aware that there are 22 major religions and thousands of their variations. So we have many "believers" that are actually worshiping other Gods different from yours. What makes you think your guy is the right guy?

  610. Randy

    *bows to Vlatko*

    I would augment your argument, if you allow me, by paraphrasing, Chris Hutchins? (Not sure if he is the guy... but...).

    "Everyone is an atheist to someone. To a Hindu, a christian is an atheist. We, [atheists] just disbelieve one more god than anyone else..."

    Did I get that right? Can someone correct me on that? (Keep in mind, I must always be mindful of my MS causing cognition problems. I do not care about a deteriortating motor cortex, but I must always try to keep my cognition active!)

    Anyways... yes, Vlatko, applause with one feeble hand for your statements.

  611. Nada

    Dr. Randy - I just did a quick search on the quote and can't find the exact source however, it is mentioned several times on several different sites. Dawkins apparently says something along these lines:

    everyone is an atheist to someone else’s god. You are an atheist to Thor and Apollo and Zeus. You do not believe they exist (nor do you hate them.)

    I am an atheist to Thor and Apollo and Zeus as well, but I’m also an atheist to Jesus, Yahweh, or Allah, etc.

    So really we have more in common than you think. Why do you not believe in Zeus? If you do not believe in those gods, why is it so hard for you to understand that I don’t believe in your god?

    Makes sense to me but what do I know?

  612. Randy

    @Nada!

    Thank you. Please, you may just call me Randy, if you like. I really only hammer christians about that "Dr." stuff.

    Really, all of my freinds here, need only call me Randy.

    Actually, YOU may call me anything you like!

    *OUCH* another smack from my wife!

    LOL!

    (See, that whole exchange was creepy wasn't it? I am very sorry, Nada! I did not mean to come off as creepy... please forgive me, and you have all of my respect and admiration!)

  613. Nada

    @ Randy - LOL! Not creepy at all! No worries. :)

  614. Randy

    This what happened when I met Dr. Pagels...

    See what happens? Even men with genius level IQ's are brought low in the presence of women... even the suggestion of women-- as on the interwebs that you kids love these days!

    You kids with your iPods and your hula-hoops and your big pants... AHHH!

  615. Randy

    I was going over some stuff and doing some studying and I just wanted to point out this ridiculous blunder made by GIA:

    "It is in his monumental Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire that we first find the allegation made. Gibbon seems mainly concerned to clear the Arabs of the responsibility of destroying the library and allows his marked anti-Christian prejudice to cloud his better judgement. His excellent footnotes show he had exactly the same sources as we do but drew the wrong conclusions. The story has recently been popularised by Carl Sagan who includes it in Cosmos. He spices the story up with a role for the murdered philosopher Hypatia, even though there is no evidence connecting her to the library at all..."

    Wow. That is some revisionist history, right there! Christians love to change history right down to the text books in Texas that they are changing to make our Enlightened Founding Fathers seem more "christian"!

    You are NOT with the good guys! EVIL!

    Here's a thing. You may notice in many of my posts I use the term "islamo-christianty" sometimes, "judeo-islamo-christianity"...

    All the same. No difference. Anything done by Islam is done by christianity. Absolutely.

    Same books, same Old Testament, same apocolyptic tripe! I see absolutely no difference in the ramblings of these wierdo novels...

    And I have read them all, I know whereof I speak.

    So, if Islam destroyed the Library, (which it didn't!), then I STILL lay it at christ's feet!

  616. science, movin in circles 4 ages

    I'm not an atheist to any god, Dawkins is a fruit.

    It isn't hard for me to imagine, and even see evidence for, the consciousness that brings all into existence.

    I mean, quarks don't necissarily follow the laws of physics, yet they operate together to perform a higher function.

    At each level there is chaos, leading to structure, leading to a higher level of consciousness.

    I think there is consciousness from the subatomic level, to the cosmos.

    And there is no scientific evidence to refute this.

    In fact, evidence actually points at this conclusion.

    entanglement, teleportation, transmutation.

    An evolutionary biologist is a pickled mind compared to a quantum physicist.

    Anyone who studies the laws of physics and the emergent properties of biology together can see, things operate and function to an extent not possible without some sort of drive.
    What drives our Ribosomes? Golgi-Bodies? Bosons?

    As I see it, order/function follows an entities ability to work with other entities, and leads to the identification with a larger organism, greater than itself.
    Once this has transpired, the function is created, and a higher level of order is accomplished.

    A good example is energy itself, condensing into various quarks, individual quarks at first, then combining to form protons, neutrons etc. This combination has lead to all of the other combinations we can experience.

    Its easy to pretend that this example is mechanical, but it is not.
    energy/ quantum material, does not follow simple mechanical laws.

    If everything is complex and dynamic (formed with complex and dynamic entities) and yet we still have the eclectic natural structures, and mechanical experience, there must be something drawing it all together, call it electrostatic, strong force, weak force, etc... they are only descriptions of emergent properties we cant explain.

    Just go to your local bookstore, Evolutionary biologist like to pretend they can see back centuries, when really no one has ever experience more than one lifetime.

    I mean is stirring mud a better conclusion that atomic consciousness for the origins of life?

    Its not a classically religious point of view, but it does ask reverence for the divine natural beauty and wonder we experience.

    well I guess it is the same perspective as the pantheists, or animists. Basically all of the america's prior to contact with europoids.

    I mean
    einstiens e=mc^2
    plato's everything is divinity,
    and amerindians spirit moves through all things

    all mean the same thing, they are simply different perspectives and different intent.

    Plato -reverence
    Amerindians - reverence
    Einstien - egoic "name-making"

  617. Epicurus

    @GodisAwesome, the reason so many of the common folk converted was because of the message it preached and who it was preached for and at. the poor and down trodden. very few leaders embraced the cult of christianity and when they did it was only for public appeal. the public who was poor. which that religion preached to.

    and if you sit here and tell me the people in that area didnt have thousands of myths and many different god things you have clearly been lied to or once again only accepted evidence that fit your bias.

    you have a completely distorted view of history if you think the bible works with our archaeology. and the authority im going on is something called the null hypothesis.

  618. Epicurus

    i also wanted to point out to GIA that christians do good things in an attempt to spread their message or to get good in the eyes of their gods.

    when an atheist does good it is for the correct reasons. to better this world. not for any god or any reward. and not to spread any ideal or doctrine.

    as for the founding fathers....christians?? HA!

    Thomas Jefferson

    "In every country and every age, the priest has been hostile to liberty. He is always in alliance with the despot ... they have perverted the purest religion ever preached to man into mystery and jargon, unintelligible to all mankind, and therefore the safer engine for their purpose."
    - to Horatio Spafford, March 17, 1814

    "Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined, imprisoned; yet we have not advanced an inch towards uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half the world fools, and the other half hypocrites. To support roguery and error all over the earth."
    - "Notes on Virginia"

    "I have recently been examining all the known superstitions of the world, and do not find in our particular superstition (Christianity) one redeeming feature. They are all alike founded on fables and mythology."

    "We discover in the gospels a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstition, fanaticism and fabrication ."

    John Adams

    "The priesthood have, in all ancient nations, nearly monopolized learning. And ever since the Reformation, when or where has existed a Protestant or dissenting sect who would tolerate A FREE INQUIRY? The blackest billingsgate, the most ungentlemanly insolence, the most yahooish brutality, is patiently endured, countenanced, propagated, and applauded. But touch a solemn truth in collision with a dogma of a sect, though capable of the clearest proof, and you will find you have disturbed a nest, and the hornets will swarm about your eyes and hand, and fly into your face and eyes."
    - letter to John Taylor

    "God is an essence that we know nothing of. Until this awful blasphemy is got rid of, there will never be any liberal science in the world."

    "Have you considered that system of holy lies and pious frauds that has raged and triumphed for 1,500 years?"

    And we all know Thomas Paine

    "Of all the tyrannies that affect mankind, tyranny in religion is the worst."

    "Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half of the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we call it the word of a demon than the word of God. It is a history of wickedness that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind.

    "Take away from Genesis the belief that Moses was the author, on which only the strange belief that it is the word of God has stood, and there remains nothing of Genesis but an anonymous book of stories, fables, and traditionary or invented absurdities, or of downright lies."

    "I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish Church, by the Roman Church, by the Greek Church, by the Turkish Church, by the Protestant Church, nor by any Church that I know of. My own mind is my own Church. Each of those churches accuse the other of unbelief; and for my own part, I disbelieve them all."

    "The study of theology, as it stands in the Christian churches, is the study of nothing; it is founded on nothing; it rests on no principles; it proceeds by no authority; it has no data; it can demonstrate nothing; and it admits of no conclusion."

  619. Randy

    @Epicurus, (who is probably sick of my fawning by now...)

    Testify, my brother!

    Indeed, you have the Keys, my friend!

  620. eireannach666

    @Epicurus

    Just to add a couple,

    Thomas Edison
    "So far as religion of the day is concerned, it is a damned fake... Religion is all bunk."

    John Buchan
    "An atheist is a man who has no invisible means of support."

  621. Epicurus

    oh and Randy the quote earlier you may have been thinking of could be;

    Stephen Roberts - "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours"

    however Nada's does sound a little closer to yours.

    My favourite Christopher Hitchens quote is;

    "What can be asserted without proof can be dismissed without proof."

    Christopher Hitchens

  622. Randy

    Yes, Epicurus... "Hitchens"

    Even as I wrote it, (Hutchins?), I thought it was wrong.

    Thanks for the heads up!

    AND, thank you for the Roberts quote. That is indeed the one I was thinking of!

  623. science, movin in circles 4 ages

    ME
    "An atheist is a man who cant see past his nose, or outside of his head."

    There are no true atheists. Some deem nature, its laws, and its emergent properties to be divine itself. (me)

    Those who consider themselves atheists, more often than not, are too egoic to identify with their biological self.
    Our biological selves which are simply temporary forms of an everlasting energy.

    Some think there is nothing more than random chance, with no particular consciousness driving existence.

    Yet those same fools adhere to evolution, natural selection.
    The complex and dynamic interactions of a planet with and between its various emergent properties(organisms, chemical structures etc..).

    That, my friends, is a consciousness driving our existence.

    Check out system of a downs song titled SCIENCE.
    They really nail it on the head.

  624. Randy

    @science, movin in circles 4 ages (interesting screen name...)

    You wrote a bunch of things that really just talked about how mystical the Universe is, etc. That is fine, but your examples and conclusions were wrong.

    For example, your list:

    "Plato -reverence
    Amerindians – reverence
    Einstien – egoic “name-making”"

    Ok. Seems cool. Until you look "under the hood" a bit. Allow me my list of the same references:

    Plato - Great genius. Carl Sagan hated him as he denied the scientific method. So... I'm just sayin...

    Amerindians, (I can only guess you mean Meso-Americans, or Native/Aboriginal Americans?) Great scientists! Very in tune with the scientific method. Their mastery of botany, for example, allowed them to create corn which, when they found it, was a mean, undigestible, non-nutricious tiny bundle of grain. In a few hundred years they made it one of the staples to feed the world. Science.

    Einstien, holy genius, opened up the entire Universe to us. Another great scientist...

    So, really, what we have is one bad thinker, and two great scientific principles/poeple.

    I think science wins, yet again, so... maybe you should listen to us...

    I'm just sayin'-- Carl Sagan!

  625. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Reminds me of something Sagan said, which I just recently came across and thought to be so true,
    "Some geniuses being laughed at does not imply that all who are laughed at are geniuses. They laughed at Columbus, they laughed at Fulton, they laughed at the Wright Brothers. But they also laughed at Bozo the Clown.
    -Carl Sagan

    Ha! I like him more every time I see or read something about him.

  626. science, movin in circles 4 ages

    Plato -- universe in its entirety is divine in nature, cosmos, polis and psyche must be aligned in order for life to be sustained. Ultimately all is one.

    animism/amerindians (from south america to north america) -- universe in its entirety is divine in nature, cosmos, polis and psyche must be aligned in order for life to be sustained. Ultimately all is one. Spirit (energy which animates all existance) is in all things and creates all that everything is. In other words, the energy mass equivelance.

    Einstein, much later assists in exploiting this unoriginal concept to stop other greedy (disassociated from that which they are ultimately just one part of) people via weaponry.
    E=mc^2 is nothing more than the energy mass equivalence.
    Not only that, but the energy gained, from say transmutation/fusion, does nothing more than disprove his equation.

    his only importance is in his "genius" in coming up with the energy mass equivalence.
    Wait but he didn't. People revered this fact for thousands of years prior to his existence.

    Some cultures used to energy mass equivalence to indoctrinate their society with functionalism, and equilibrium with their environment.
    Other cultures, the ones which claim to be the originators of it, have used it to indoctrinate their society with a disassociation with all creation. The egoic and delusional self, not the biological self, but the conditioned self.

    About botany and whatever, whatever. The fact remains, they remained at equilibrium with their environment (didn't need to go steal other peoples resources) because their society was, well smarter (if you think living at equilibrium with your environment is functional).
    For instance their indoor lighting was done via quartz crystals, no combustion required, and these crystals were revered as sacred (worthy of reverence). It all is sacred (worthy of reverence, or protected from exploitation).

    Similarly, Plato "preached" the same concepts.
    Every great philosophically/scientifically advanced culture eventually arrives at this conclusion. And they instill a criteria for those who are permitted to acquire knowledge, because dumb people exploit it... does Einstien fit in here?

  627. Randy

    What a load of drivel.

    Here is all that is important. Scientific method; testing, measuring, observing, and peer review.

    That's it. If it can't be measured, it isn't worth more than a drunken discussion with friends.

    Mystisism is for f**ls and children.

    Which one are you?

  628. science, movin in circles 4 ages

    there is no mysticism, I don't know where that came from.
    Fact: we are all temporary forms of an everlasting energy.
    energy mass equivalence, conservation of energy, we all know these laws.

    Fact: in order for the sustainability of a species, they must live within the means of their environments ability to produce.
    we can see this with the various cultures, irish, dying out or moving due to famine, potatoes...

    lets see, quantum mechanics anyone...lol

    To discover without reverence is idiotic, and exploitative.
    You shouldn't be allowed to use the scientific method if this is your aim.
    Hence plato and aristotles relationship, and other cultures making knowledge proprietary.

  629. D-K

    @science 4 ages

    "I’m not an atheist to any god, Dawkins is a fruit"

    Then what is the belief structure of your choosing? You seem like a pantheist, yet with key differences that make you non-a-pantheist. Quite confusing.

    "It isn’t hard for me to imagine, and even see evidence for, the consciousness that brings all into existence"

    Well duh, if it was hard we wouldn't have 20+ major religions.. you have yet to provide solid reasoning as to the "why" of your assumptions.

    "I think there is consciousness from the subatomic level, to the cosmos.
    And there is no scientific evidence to refute this.
    In fact, evidence actually points at this conclusion.
    entanglement, teleportation, transmutation"

    The absence of scientific evidence refuting a claim does not prove, or even support, it's validity. I don't know what mechanic brought you to divine consciousness, but I have a tough time extrapolating from entanglement, teleportation and transmutation to consiousness. It seems you have chosen to equate unanswered (at this time) to unanswerable, thus unlogical, thus divine consciousness. That is not rational.

    "Anyone who studies the laws of physics and the emergent properties of biology together can see, things operate and function to an extent not possible without some sort of drive. What drives our Ribosomes? Golgi-Bodies? Bosons?"

    You cannot conclude in any factual way that "things operate and function to an extent not possible without some sort of drive". You use a very unique concoction of humility and arrogance to somehow tangle agnosticism to mysticism. Bravo sir, a feat not easily accomplished.

    "Its easy to pretend that this example is mechanical, but it is not. energy/ quantum material, does not follow simple mechanical laws"

    Are you saying they follow divine laws? Explain. Also, you seem to assume our naturalistic laws are correct, only to disprove them by making them contradict themselves. If they disprove themselves, they are not a foundation for a counterargument anymore. I'll simplefy; if our logic conercerning gravity and it's attributed properties is wrong, then we cannot argue a divine argument based on simple details we may have gotten wrong, or the fact that we have made an incomplete assessment of gravity's attributed properties.

    "If everything is complex and dynamic (formed with complex and dynamic entities) and yet we still have the eclectic natural structures, and mechanical experience, there must be something drawing it all together, call it electrostatic, strong force, weak force, etc… they are only descriptions of emergent properties we cant explain"

    Then why do you explain it with (divine) consciousness? Simple answer; because it answers without having to scrutinize the answer. Wait, sratch that, it answers whilst eliminating every possibility to scrutinize the answer and/or subject it to testing.

    I responded to your first post alone, as it seems to support your line of thought.

  630. Randy

    Science 4 circles going around-- whatever...

    What you are describing is not any quantum mechanics I ever heard about, but, like Richard Dawkins said in "The Enemies of Reason" (on this site).

    "People who think they understand Quantum Physics-- don't understand Quantum Physics."

    Deepak Chopra needs a spike shoved through his head for creating that "Secret" crap. It's a cult.

    There is no soul, no spirit, you and I are simple, nearly extinct, animals. No Universal consiousness, you and I mean absolutely nothing to the Universe.

    There are other animals that are ready to take over for us.

    I'm ok with that.

    Unless I am completely misunderstanding your posts, and for that I would apologize, but you seem to write like one of those hippies that try and rationalize a soul, or something... and that I can not abide.

    That, too, is a slippery slope into the Dark Ages.

  631. Randy

    I think Vlatko, once again, saved me from embarassing myself by deleting a rather harsh post...

    I can't count how many times he has done that for me!

    Thanks, Vlatko!

    To "science in circles and blah..." I will just say this, study math and get a good job with which you can support your family.

    It is ALL up to you, my friend, don't drop the ball with silliness like "The Secret" or cosmic consiousness...

    Math (engineering), apllied and practical science!

    All that is important...

  632. oliarguello

    @satir

    You were onto something there!

    But it goes both ways. Some atheists are quick to point that so many atrocities are to be blamed on religion and that some utopia of enlightenment and peace will come about when religion is obliterated ( I believe Dawkins takes this stance).

    Which of course is just as fundamentalist thinking as theist fundamentalism.

    For any who hasn't seen it, watch "The Problem with Atheism" here on TDF. Its a bit of a misleading title becasue the main point of the documentary is that both theism and atheism fill an ideological vacuum necessary for the human mind and that rigid fundamentalism has dire consequences.

    It also goes on to point out something that I have realized a while ago. That evil deeds arent derived from belief structures of any sort ,but that man innately has evil in him and rationalizes it in any way he can ( either by following an established ideology/belief structure or creating a new one).

    We all have a darkness within us and most of us try to keep it at bay with belief structures/ideologies/laws etc. On earth we try to live civilly and morally due to our social contract ( Satir...I saw the article post of some theist saying they would rob and steal and sleep with every woman they could if they didnt think there was a GOD...which is nonsense since those acts have consequences here on Earth as well). If you believe in an afterlife, then you do the same but fear the afterlife consequences more than the secular consequences.

    Either ways is flawed really since its doesn't address the root problem which is man. Laws are broken and social norms a perverted by people; as are commandments (laws) and dogmatic rules ( norms to be misinterpreted and perverted). Give a weak man a rule, and he will be tempted to break it.The leaders of both structures attract men who have powerlust and analyze the given structure and use it to increase the power/influence they have.

    In the end if something is not done out of love from the individual, or done for the prosperity of the populous, then the corruption begins and progresses with a snowball effect.

  633. lol

    "Well duh, if it was hard we wouldn’t have 20+ major religions.. you have yet to provide solid reasoning as to the “why” of your assumptions".

    It's not hard to see that our universe is a complex and dynamic system. It is not completely random. It learns from input, it adapts, it grows.

    This is plain to see on the cosmic scale, atomic/subatomic scale, as well as our every-day experience.

    Let me put it this way, "D-K"
    I'm sorry if this is a little over your head.
    You use gravity as an example
    I’ll simplefy; if our logic conercerning gravity and it’s attributed properties is wrong, then we cannot argue a divine argument based on simple details we may have gotten wrong, or the fact that we have made an incomplete assessment of gravity’s attributed properties.

    I hope you know that contemporary knowledge of gravity's cause is complete hogwash, scientists have made up invisible and untraceable, completely untestable and likely nonexistent particles "higgs bosons" which supposedly drive gravity as a net in space-time.

    Ok say they exist, how exactly has our gravity come to be the way it is today.
    Evolution, is gravity itself a complex and adaptive force?
    random chance? are there multiple universes in which the forces are different in each one.
    Or some kind of consciousness in the energy itself. The energy that when condensed enough suddenly has the emergent property of electrostatics, the weak force, the strong force, and then finally gravity. And this energy condenses itself naturally, another natural mystery.

    I laugh at those who state that what is scientific is that which is proven, or that which cannot be proven false is unscientific.
    You truly show your green-ness with those statements.
    What is scientific is that which has yet to be disproven, not otherwise.

    Hence europe spending millions on the hunt for a subatomic particle some athiest physicist dreamt up.

    I challenge anyone to attempt to fit the universe into a mechanical model, because as of right now, each mechanical model offered breaks down at any level other than our typical experience (cosmic/subatomic)

    Do some real research instead of listening to no-one other than those who make you feel secure in your beliefs.

    Cause they are your beliefs, you cling to dawkins like a jew to the torah. lol
    That is not scientific.

  634. lol

    spirit = energy
    spirit moves through all things
    e=mc^2

    same concept.

    Even children can understand this. Your conditioning has made you refute facts that are undeniable.

    I never said anything about anything supernatural.
    In fact I have been proclaiming reverence for all that is natural, which exhibits complex and adaptive behavior on many levels. Complexity and adaptation signal some kind of awareness. For to adapt, one must respond to stimuli.
    Some subatomic particles have even been shown to respond to indirect stimuli, (entanglement)
    etc...

    Like I have already said, cling to your evolutionary biologists pickled mind.
    Has dawkins even presented anything new? Or is he just doing a reach around for darwin?

  635. lol

    @ Randy
    Actually I have one up on you boy. I can and often do calc in my head.
    I have been self employed for over a year, are you a wage slave?
    And you think I should heed your message why? lol

  636. satir

    @lol
    gravity? I think we can agree that there are some small kinks and thats why gravity is still labeled a "theory" much the way evolution still is. but are you honestly saying that because there are still aspects of it that we dont yet fully understand that the entire concept is hogwash as you put it? how is it that we can use the theory to put man and gps satelites into space and even land on the moon.
    Electricity and electromagnetic theory are still labeled theories but we understand the principals well enough and they describe and predict that phenomena so well that you and I are discussing a book called the torah that no one can even remember who wrote it or why using just those very principals. If you think that we need to understand the peculliar nature of a higgs boson in order to understand that if you let go of a hammer it will fall on your foot... I can't even relate to your reasoning at all... are you saying scentific methods and peer review etc. are just another form of beleif? And it you are that interested in etreme gravity have you read John Moffat probaly the best regarded expert?
    please read the definitions of "mythology" and "theory" in any english dictionary and then come back for actual debate...

  637. D-K

    You make so many assumptions and base your opinion on them that I don't even know where to begin pointing them out.

    You assume much about me as well, somehow deciding that I "cling to an evolutionary biologists pickled mind"

    "Do some real research instead of listening to no-one other than those who make you feel secure in your beliefs"

    I don't have beliefs, there is nothing to feel secure about. I'm fine with not having the answer to certain questions, it's not a matter of life or death to me.

    "I hope you know that contemporary knowledge of gravity’s cause is complete hogwash, scientists have made up invisible and untraceable, completely untestable and likely nonexistent particles “higgs bosons” which supposedly drive gravity as a net in space-time"

    I know that it is quite incomplete, I know that several key questions still remain unanswered.

    "I laugh at those who state that what is scientific is that which is proven, or that which cannot be proven false is unscientific.
    You truly show your green-ness with those statements.
    What is scientific is that which has yet to be disproven, not otherwise"

    Excuse me? I haven't said that, are you projecting perhaps?

    "Cause they are your beliefs, you cling to dawkins like a jew to the torah. lol
    That is not scientific"

    ...

    Seriously, what are you basing this statement on? It's a bit disturbing how you seem to have figured me all out without knowing a thing about me.. It certainly does little to support credibility of what amounts to nothing more than your personal conjecture.

    "Your conditioning has made you refute facts that are undeniable"

    Are you f-ing kidding me? Are you? My conditioning?

    Sigh.. go annoy someone else. I'm done with you.

  638. satir

    and as for your challenge, well I beleive that the entire scientific and institutional education system give out varying levels of rewards to those people that are doing just that.
    my plumber is self employed too, but I certainly wouldn't go to him for qustions on aerodynamics, but I probaly would go to the "wage slave" professor at my local college...

  639. satir

    @lol
    I actually think you may have actually answered the qustion at the heading of this page. We laugh at creationists because they stubbornly cling to mythology. They then go through torturous, mental gymnastics to defend it. Including pointing out tirelessly the fact that because there is still .001% of their religious view that has not been proven to be totally baseless; and there is still .001% of things like quantum theories and such that has not yet been explained scientifcaly that they are somehow analogous.
    well, they are not.
    one is proven to be 99.99% wrong
    the other 99.99% right

  640. satir

    @oliarguello
    I would say to you that laws and punishments, expressed in modern politics are there as a check to large deviaitions from the social norm. we are social animals, look at other social animals and you can see that they mostly have external pressures that maintain social order (ie. you deviate, you become ostracized and then lose the protection of the herd and become the predators next meal) we dont have predators anymore, so whats to stop us from being entirely self centric to the harm of the rest of the "herd"? Well, to most of us it's not really an issue. We don't routinely the limits of social norm (except for maybe a few years in college etc.) the vast majority of us, regardless of the question of "faith" have a pretty similar socio-political view. Those that need to be kept in check are kept there there by fear, either the ancient fear of everlasting damnnation or the fear of being punished right here and now. It doesn't really matter which one or which combination of the 2 work in your case, just that they work. and society at large keeps on functioning and progressing...

  641. lol

    ok satir what mythology did i speak of, quote me, don't just babble.
    Ha, go ask your wage slave professor, personally, I have been up and down academic institutions and most professors I've met are talentless, hence their subjection to droning on about the same subject matter for the next generation. In hopes of someone in the next generation having actual skills.

    Who makes more money, last time I checked the stats, even the highest paying phd gets you less than a small business in the U.S.
    What 300k wow, i shit that out quarterly.
    Survival of the fittest baby, and those "inteligent" professors effectively deserve darwin awards... lol

    I wonder if Dawkins knows that he has effectively eliminated himself from the gene pool. He is the weakest link,
    at 55 and no kids, I guess he doesn't have such a great grasp of evolution as he thinks. Maybe he is just a die-hard atheist more than an evolutionary biologist.

    Personally I wouldn't ask some idiot professor about aerodynamics, I would ask someone who was the cutting edge in their field. Most professors know little more than basic knowledge, not having practical or applicable skills, hence their position as a lowly servant.

    So again satir, I challenge you directly, to state any mythology which I referenced.
    If you think the energy mass equivalence is mythology, you are delusional.
    If you think einstein was the originator of this, you are delusional.
    I have not been prove 99.9% wrong.

    I have made no false claims.
    All i have done is plug a hole left by science.
    Plugged it with the idea that the universe itself, the energy which brings all into existence (because it actually creates all existence) (this is fact as well, e=mc^2 try to dispute it) arrives at order, from chaos. This order leads the way to function, which leads to more chaos, then order, then function.

    This happening randomly is the scientific paradigm, and along with this perspective is the belief in alternate universes.

    Completely untestable, and un-discreditable, however many cling to this for fear of there actually being a being-ness greater than themselves. Hogwash I say. One universe I say.
    The universe is a being greater than myself, I say.

    And I'm man enough to admit that....lol

  642. Vlatko

    @lol = @science, movin in circles 4 ages

    1. Do not swap your nicknames. Stick to one.

    2. I think you're one hard core creationist. All those long angry comments of yours are just pointing to several conclusions that you actually support:

    *Darwin was a fool and the theory of evolution is plain wrong.
    *Almost all educational and scientific establishment is teaching wrong stuff.
    *Science doesn't have all the answers, plus some theories do not correlate so well thus the universe must be created by divine force. Spirit and great universal conscience have some part in running this universe.

    Am I right about you?

  643. satir

    @lol
    so you basicaly just hate science and scientists; organized learning and its rigors and scientific discipline? sorry, not sure what turned you against it but you sure are missing out on alot by dismissing it all as "hogwash".
    Professors are mindless drone idiots because they have chosen to teach the next generation? instead of focusing their minds on extracting maximum monetary profit from thier time here they are worthless idiots compared to those who dont?
    What am I supposed to be "answering"?
    Creationism is still creationism regardless if you are attributing it to an akashic field or to a grizzled god.

    How does the fact that Dawkins hasn't married make him an idiot? Is that also your opinion on the Pope or Paul Krugman as well?

    Just because you can use circular logic to convince yourself of something dosn't make you a logician.

  644. satir

    never mind that last post; "disussion" with someone who will flip-flop just to troll and will use circular logic and even total suspension of logic as a debate "technique" is clearly not here for actual discussion...

  645. Nada

    Actually, Dawkins is married and he has a daughter.

  646. eireannach666

    @satir
    "one is proven to be 99.99% wrongthe other 99.99% right"
    I like the way you put that.

    @science, movin in circles 4 ages
    I dont totally dismiss QT/M but I do dismiss any type of god or creator or link there of to consiousness.
    Universal consiousness implies that the universe itself is consious which kind of puts off a stinch of creationism. An expanding universe does not dictate awareness but just that its expanding. Plain an simple. We are nothing but an evolutionary mutatation .
    From a post on another thread which applies here " both anti-matter and matter are created equally. Then anti-matter and matter existed perfectly equal since the beginning So anti-matter and matter would have crossed paths regardless,given time , leaving alot left not to cross paths in the universe (stars , planets and later all living things (people too) We are not supposed to be but are because of a natural but inevitable little meeting of matters. " Still this doesnt explain a creator , but just an event or chance meeting by matters that just so happened to make us.

    I have to agree with Randy when he said ," There is no soul, no spirit, you and I are simple, nearly extinct, animals. No Universal consiousness, you and I mean absolutely nothing to the Universe.There are other animals that are ready to take over for us."

    Secondly QT/M are a two edged sword , That is why we dont really get it yet. For instance, 1. The state of a particle is not only given by its position/ momentum but also/and "wavefunction." Given the state of a particle does not allow for an accurate prediction of measurements . It gives you a set of probabilities for the possible outcomes of measurements . Possible outcomes!
    QM also dictates that 2. “Quantum mechanics shows that electrons in an atom can only possess specific quantities of energy.” Specific quantities! And when you get into orbitals and molecular bonding , each one still has its specific shape around the nucleus. Mechanics of any kind has a set of rules in which all participants go by.Like Ive said before , Im no expert but patterns are patterns . Sounds mechanical to me. Maybe you would like to call it "Quantum Guessing " or "Quantum on Average "To quote myself" Just calculating probabilities .Not really explaining anything . Im not sold yet , but still digging openmindedly.
    (of course we didnt even get into string theory or the multi-dimension craziness )

    @lol
    Oh , by the way , money doesnt make the man , and it doesnt make a person more or less intelligent by having it or the lack there of. A person of intelligence makes himself what he is. Not saying you dont or that you are not a smart person , but dont think that how or how much you make , makes you. It might not be there forever. Would that make you less intelligent if you lost your pillow? I would think not. Or if you started making more would you all the sudden gain 50 IQ points? Retorical questions of course. Just saying dont be so arrogant , it makes your argument less effective.

  647. eireannach666

    @Vlatko
    "myself"@lol = @science, movin in circles 4 ages"

    Ha! Had I have known I wouldn't have wasted my words on him.

  648. lol

    Whats sad is there has been no counter argument, only "no I cant believe that... Carbon chauvinism."

    I understand why people are so quick to reject the notion of a being greater than themselves. I mean most religious fanatics have been illogical for centuries.

    But there is a divine order to our universe, that is indisputable. Feel cold and alone and sleep in the fetal position if thats your take.

    Not me, I find it pleasing to know my being-ness
    (the energy which composes me, my biological self, because I never said anything about a supernatural energy)
    does 100% factually transcend my experience in this form, and live on through other forms.

    Again, not one supernatural belief.
    Please, if I am delusional, let me know. Because I've seen conservation of energy/mass, I've seen death and birth. I've seen the double slit experiment. I have green houses (complex and dynamic system)

  649. lol

    I guess if there were any other scientists on this board they would offer feedback.

    Each scientist I know probes and tests ideas. Doesn't just accept/reject them from a documentary, or class.

    Thats why professors are tools.
    Its was easy to set up a lab, set up greenhouses, set up place to star gaze.

    Ask any professor about the effeceincy of photovoltaic cells, energy required for method of production vs. energy produced.

    I guarantee I would know more about it. Not because of google or a text book, but because of side projects driven by innate curiosities. Remember someone else wrote that text, professors just read the cookbook someone else wrote for them.

  650. eireannach666

    @lol
    ""Whats sad is there has been no counter argument"

    Which one of your "points" are you refering to?

  651. eireannach666

    @lol photovoltaic cells? What in the world does photovoltaic cells have to do with the dawning of life in the universe? I could care less if you can make a better pair of sunglasses or a better electric vehicle charging station. We used those for our satellites in the 50's and it still isnt cost efficient.

    Ahh, hippies everywhere .

  652. lol

    1. A universal being exists, energy, and has various different forms. We experience them as atoms, compounds, molecules, and our very selves.

    2. This energy is very functional, our daily experiences are functions built upon the functionality of smaller functions.

    3. This functionality could be random, and taken to the extreme our laws of physics are random and different in each universe.
    However, this theory is improbable, and untestable.

    4. Our universe is not stagnant. It is not mechanical.
    The mechanical view is the view of the simpleton.
    By oversimplifying things you ignore variables, which often cause new emergent properties when taken to their asymtopes.

    etc.. I'm just repeating myself here.

  653. lol

    Actually, maybe if your weren't over the hill, you would know of more contemporary projects.

  654. Randy B

    Let me ask this question for any that care to consider it. When you were born, you were...you. But, as we can surely agree, that body is not any longer there. Even the brain has had every cell replaced. And if not, please inform me. None the less the "you" that was a little child in body, is gone. So what is it that makes you....you? Also there is considerable research and documentation on out of body experiences where people (even blind people!) give detailed accounts and descriptions though they are in a coma or like condition.
    I will just wait and read the responses.
    Peace all,
    ps. Cause and effect. Maybe the wrong terms, but everything has a cause. What caused the universe to come into existence in the first place? Seems only consciousness can have an idea or thought or action that does not need a cause. Just my thoughts. Elaborate as you will.

  655. eireannach666

    @lol
    Yeah , you called it dude. Repeating a bunch of hippie mumbo jumbo. Middle age? Please.

    Do you realize that all the alternate energy sorces combined , could never substain our enormously growing population ?

    You should take all that to woodstock.

    Your just saying randoms on radom topics. Pick one Mr. Idependent Contractor? Ill be your huckleberry.
    Pick one of your points an tell me why it is so. Present your facts and not your belief or emotions.

    For example: You say ,"Our universe is not stagnant. It is not mechanical.The mechanical view is the view of the simpleton.By oversimplifying things you ignore variables, which often cause new emergent properties when taken to their asymtopes."

    How so? What do you have to back this up?Maybe you are over thinking and allowing yours and others imaginations run away with you? Maybe QT/M is just another way of trying prove ,one way or the other , something about creationism? Tell me , oh one of things all quantum . Inquiring minds want to know.

    But dont bring your nieve solar panals are new age , junk back. New age, ha. Hippies man .

  656. satir

    @eireannach666
    it's really useless, these creationists in new age clothing will just resort to the usual circular logic, head in the sand approach. some how the fact that .001% is still unexplainable is a proof of a god instead of an opening to explore.
    maybe he has a future calling to start a new-age movement of Ra/sun-god worship...

  657. eireannach666

    @Randy C

    What are you asking? Are you saying that conscience is given? Or are you saying that an "outer body experience is more than just a hallucination based on a lack of blood flow and O2 to the brain triggering random thoughts to become as a dream , in which seem real?

  658. Achems Razor

    @ lol:

    I just read your threads, am trying to figure out what is you are talking about? You sound like you believe in creationism.

    You are also throwing some quantum physics in, the trouble is you are jumping around all over the place, can you put it all in a nutshell with
    as few words as possible? concise and precise please, so it makes sense.

  659. Epicurus

    there is no point in responding to lol since he isnt really saying anything grounded in facts or actual science. but i will respond simply to his little list up there.

    your very first point (we call a premise) is absolutely wrong, ergo everything else you said is just silly. energy is not a universal "being" you are playing semantics here. pure equivocation. you dont know what "energy" means and you dont know what "being" means.

    every post you have left has shown it is clear you lack proper education and are most likely lying about your profession. give it up...and asking for someone with a background in science is just silly...how would you feel about psychology? how about evolutionary psychology? or anthropology? or are you going to ask for a theoretical or quantum physicist knowing you wont get one and can continue sounding like that fraud Deepak Chopra?

    Randy B, that you is a collection of your memories and experiences. if someone gets amnesia they are not "them" they are a new them. each moment you become a new "you". however you said,

    "Cause and effect. Maybe the wrong terms, but everything has a cause. What caused the universe to come into existence in the first place? Seems only consciousness can have an idea or thought or action that does not need a cause. "

    consciousness cannot have an idea or thought without an action. consciousness cannot exist without a brain. the brain needs to react to external stimuli and reply with stored data.

    if your logic is that everything needs a cause then god would need a cause.

    however i shall quote a famous finding by michio kaku;

    Physicist Michio Kaku directly addresses the cosmological argument (which you are referring to) in his book Hyperspace, saying that it is easily dismissed by the law of conservation of energy and the laws governing molecular physics. He gives an example— "gas molecules may bounce against the walls of a container without requiring anything or anyone to get them moving." According to Kaku, these molecules could move forever, without beginning or end. So, there is no need for a First Mover to explain the origins of motion.

  660. Lol

    Summation

    systems science.

    Research it yourself. Santa fe institute is a great place to start

  661. Randy

    I'm terribly sorry, but lol's writing style still reads like go2mark...

    Vlatko, can you confirm or deny this? Because, I am getting that same creept feeling from his posts, that I got from go2mark...

    A silly little boy, really... that's what I am getting from him...

  662. Randy

    Sorry, should have written, "I am getting that same CREEPY feeling from his posts..."

  663. satir

    @ Lol
    Summation? Of what?
    What in the world do you think they are researching at the Santa Fe Institute?
    Well it is pretty much as opposite to an Intelligent Design or creationist theory as possible. I can't even fathom how you can deduce an external higher being from AI research, swarm theory or complex adaptive systems theory. If you can honestly be taking the reseach there and in the same breath calling Darwin, Einstein and Dawkins "hogwash" then you really are living in a unique world of selective beliefism.

  664. Lol

    Srry kid.

    Energy is,
    and it composes everything.

    Why that's simply the energy mass equivalence.

    Shall I go one or should I just mail you some reading material?? Lol

    Physicist Michio Kaku is a great scientist, but you must be taking him out of context.
    There is no way the gas molecules would remain constant, there is no perfect system, with perfectly elastic collisions, and an absence of transfer of energy.

    It is you, poor child, who may need to head back to the lab to re-record some data.
    Or maybe you should stop clinging to ideas you don't understand, and then propogate them as if you did.

    I am in no way pro-religion, but a society should not be indoctrinated to believe the individual is greater than the whole. If our cells behaved as such, we would not function as we do.

    Similarly, humans would have never advanced with out collaboration.

    It is fact that you are composed of primarily CHO, if you don't understand read a book, cut off some skin cells, do some kind of learning.

    C H and O are all made of mass, mass is composed of energy, still don't understand? Well I can't be your instructor, though it definitely builds my ego.

    @mental masterbators. Your totally right. I liked your post.

    To restate : I speak of nothing supernatural, in fact it's all nature.
    Essentially panthiest yes, I do BELIEVE that we, humans, should revere our connection with all other entities.

    That "connection" I've already stated numerous times.

    Ultimately structure leads to function leads to higher structure and function.

    A simple example:
    you must have certain molecular and anatomical structure in order to function.
    Your ability to function leads into your ability to function with other functional people.
    The ability of people to form a community leads to the functionality if a society/community.

    That should be simple enough.

    What drives us to form larger structures with and among eachother?

    Well one could argue ( speculation!) that it is in our best interest to merge our identities together and reach greater functionality. In other words our conscious decision to do so.
    The news commonly gives examples of people who decide to not be functional.

    Societal cancer...

    What drives that which forms us, as the larger structure.

  665. Randy

    Eoicurus wrote quoting the great phisicist, Michio Kakul a really great replacement for Carl Sagan...
    -----------------
    "Physicist Michio Kaku directly addresses the cosmological argument (which you are referring to) in his book Hyperspace, saying that it is easily dismissed by the law of conservation of energy and the laws governing molecular physics. He gives an example— “gas molecules may bounce against the walls of a container without requiring anything or anyone to get them moving.” According to Kaku, these molecules could move forever, without beginning or end. So, there is no need for a First Mover to explain the origins of motion..."

    ------------

    And this is something that we, (myself and my super-intellect friends), have been discussing for hundreds of posts. There is no need for a creator or any intelligence in the Universe...

    It just works like it is... simple and direct... why would you want to muddy up the waters?

  666. Randy

    @lol

    You said, "sorry kid..." to someone, I hope it wasn't me, because I am 57 years old. If you are NOT older than that, and I can NOT imagine that you are older than 14, then you need to respect your elders, son!

    And I am pretty sure that I can buy and sell you... get a job!

  667. lol

    @ satir, well complexity science.
    What exactly is your field? Having no knowledge of complexity science obviously.

    Try "Evolutionary Dynamics"

    Exploring the interplay of selection accident neutrality and function.
    non-linear dynamics section is particularly interesting.

  668. Randy B

    No one has answered my questions. I am heart broke.
    To His Highness, the Reverend Dr. Randy....I would like all your money!! If I could take it, steal, somehow relieve you if it, would that be anything you would consider..not nice?

  669. satir

    @lol
    can you quote one thing E. O. Wilson ever wrote then?

  670. Randy

    @Randy B. who wrote:

    "No one has answered my questions. I am heart broke.
    To His Highness, the Reverend Dr. Randy….I would like all your money!! If I could take it, steal, somehow relieve you if it, would that be anything you would consider..not nice?"

    Sweetheart, I am such a good con man, that I could take every penny you ever owned and make you thank me for it!

    Plus your mama would LOVE me!

    Don't mess with me, honey!

    What was your question?

  671. lol

    Lol, actually I'm not for sale. Thanks though. Well, I am certainly not 57, but when interacting with people who seem to have no knowledge of the new direction science has been heading has definitely ruffled my ego quite a bit. lol

    I think systems science is going to discredit many of the hypothetical explanations many contemporary scientists propagate.

    I also think (keyword there) that believing we are greater or more intelligent etc... than the natural world is "blasphemy" lol. Because we are not, we are but tiny specs of energy in a temporary form.

    We are just learning how to unravel the complexity we see around us. All we are and use is a manifestation of an entity much more powerful and dynamic than ourselves.

    we cant control the laws of physics, we cant explain them. We don't know if they change over centuries, we don't know if we are in a little box with a bunch of holes poked in it.

    Ultimately we are always restricted by our sensory organs, we cannot escape that. We can just measure to a satisfactory degree, but its never a true measurement.

    What we can do is not take what we learn for granted.
    Not head down scientific dead ends to remain at odds with other ideas.

    Oh no, i changed my Screen name once. My writing style... well i'm truly rambling, but my grammar isn't off by too much.

    Religious texts are not entirely hocus pocus, and pretending that they are is setting yourself up for ignorance of often beneficial concepts.

    For instance desire leads to suffering.

    I posted this in the past, and I think it is effective.

    the boy who cried wolf, we've all heard the story. What was your reaction?

    wolves are wives-tales?
    we should worship the wolves, as they are dangerous?
    don't lie?

    I'm sure you can see which is the atheists position, the theists position, and the scientists position.

  672. satir

    @randy
    what? that a universal conscience is responsible for our existance? thats not really an argument but a new age cop out, ie. read anything by the pseudo-scientist Ervin Laszlo for more on this.

  673. Randy

    @lol

    I have read and re-read your posts... you are high on something.

    Sober up and accept reality? go2mark?

    You really seem to write like that creepy little dude...

  674. lol

    "many moons mean nothing when you spend them hiding from ideas"

    Oh the ant man, yes actually he is referenced in the book I recommended for you.

    If natural selection is driven purely by competition, as Dawkins suggestests, then there wouldn't be species which act so collectively, and often the individual has no drive to reproduce.
    (wow big hole in dawkins theory, no wonder respected institutions slam him in their text books)

  675. lol

    classical argument of the "know-nothing".

    "Are you high" please.
    I have yet to hear a counter argument, other than someone rejecting the energy mass equivalence. lol

  676. satir

    ant man? I know of no serious scientist that would refer to his very earliest work so glibbly.
    please read Dawkins and the others, not just those who reference them before trying to discuss him seriously

  677. Randy

    @lol

    Sweetheart, you've never read a textbook in your life!

    Sober up, honey!

    I'm like, 200 times smarter than you, get over yourself!

    What were your SAT scores?

  678. lol

    lol. Same, non-argument. "I'm smarter," ok so whats your argument again? you don't have one. Youve been school by someone less than half your age, and it hurts your ego...
    Sorry, but old ideas die, thats just life, move one. There a nice field of flowers right at the bottom of the hill, its calling your name. lol

  679. eireannach666

    @Randy

    lol IS go2mark, man. "Oh no, i changed my Screen name once. My writing style… well i’m truly rambling, but my grammar isn’t off by too much."

    You called it Randy.

    Its like a bad movie promo. I can see it now:

    " go2mark is back , but this time its no laughing matter, because this summers action , thriller , go2mark, is lol." Rated g for gay.

  680. lol

    I don't waste my time reading someone who has no validity to anyone other than strict athiests.
    There is a reason nothing he theorizes is taught anywhere.
    In fact, people are educated in his misunderstandings...lol
    maybe its time for satir to update his library

  681. lol

    "A third window"
    another really great perspective

  682. Randy

    Azazel, (we must whisper His name...) has visited you, and I know you, lol, go2mark, land-of-the lost, etc...

    Azazel, (we must whisper His name...) will visit you soon, and He is the Dark Demon of Malice and Revenge.

    HAHAHAH! You are doomed! I simply want you to drown in misery... I am drawing Cards...

    So there is that...

  683. lol

    LOL, again, I never mentioned anything supernatural.
    I don't worship the wolf, but I don't deny his existence either.

    I know not to lie.

    Let me put it into perspective a little bit.

    Native american ceremonies are typically community meditation gatherings.

    "God" is referred to as "ancestor" "Grandfather" or "creator" that which we all are, that which unites all, the cycle we all must return to.
    All my relations.
    All entities.

    It was never supernatural, but it was always sacred.

  684. eireannach666

    lol

    tell me , what holes do you speak of in evolution / natural selection , other than the two you have , out of which comes endless amounts of poo?

    Break it down for us , so that it makes sense. Unlike your last posts.

    Why change your name and act like you are someone else anyways ? Just curious. Are you insecure or do you have a psychiatric issue? You need trazadone.

  685. lol

    As already stated, dawkins model is flawed. Hence it not being propagated other to stir up controversy.

    "If natural selection is driven purely by competition, as Dawkins suggestests, then there wouldn’t be species which act so collectively, and often the individual has no drive to reproduce.
    (wow big hole in dawkins theory, no wonder respected institutions slam him in their text books)"

    i love the name of the theory, Natural selection.

    Selection for perpetuation by nature.

    I don't argue with natural selection at all, but dawkins is still a crackpot who should spend more time researching and less time trying to make a name for himself.

  686. Randy

    Tiny man. You can get that from any movie about native Americans. I am married to a native Anerican, so...

    Perhaps I should summon Abadon, or Puzuzu, of course Baphomet is always good for carnage, but He exacts a strong price...

    Anyways, you are not smart and really quite "borked" by my spells. I see your parents and your house... really sad...

    When Abadon, the Sacred Voice in the Whirlwind, comes for you... just lie down...

  687. lol

    and actually my original screen name was science moving in circles 4 ages.

    Wow way to show your scientific method...lol

  688. satir

    what are you "putting into perspective"? why can't you actually put together an entire thought? why would you just dismiss a prominent scientist without admitedly even reading what he has to say and still call your self a "scientist" mind boggling...

  689. Randy

    I am speaking the Charm of Making... and drawing the Cards...

    Run, Mark... run and hide... try and get away!

  690. Randy

    Oh like science makes any sense to you!

    I may as well use my crazy summoning spells on you...

    RUN MARK!

  691. eireannach666

    @lol
    Dude please dont comment on the Native Americans , you have no idea of their rich scientific background or rituals. You insult them with your stereotypical views of their culture . Ive been with one for 11yrs. That is insulting to me and mine.

  692. lol

    Wow, prove to me and the world your inferior genes, Guess what it just takes one of my seeds to knock you right out of the gene pool. There is a reason NATURE makes some genes dominant over others.

    Wow Dawkins didn't mention this did he...
    Why, was he haunted by the fact that his genes will never see another millenia?
    Was he ashamed of naturally having inferior genes to even the lowliest of black slaves??

    well probably, suck on that kids...lol

    I mean it is survival of the fittest right, that which has the highest reproductive success, and whos genes are not inferior to their mate.

    OOO so its more complex than simply natural selection....

    Hmmm is dawkins a geneticist??
    so should we give him a pedestal, or are we giving anyone who agrees there is no mystic space-man a platform..

    I don't think there is a mystic space-man, but there is nature, and it is naturally selecting the dominant species. Just look at pop statistics and cry, look at birth rates and cry. why don't ya retreat to your miserable inferior corner.
    Peace.

  693. satir

    now I realy have seen it all, a 20 something telling a scientist whom they've never read that they should do more research

  694. Randy

    You've never denied that you were go2mark, so, I assume that I am correct and you are the little creep that made fun of my MS.

    Well, I would gladly give up my life to make you suffer, so...

    I send you all the Dark Angels I can summon, no matter how damaging they may be to me...

    Perhaps I will get out my "Necronomicon" or my "Encyclopedia of Black Magic" and really get Medieval on your a**!

    Silly little boy. Horror is coming for you...

  695. lol

    Well I apologize for insulting you, but I know what we practice. I know what my Lakota ancestors practiced, I know what the chumas practiced.

    I don't believe for one second that you have ever even met a native, other than a mexica (aztec for the un-educated) if you were truly offended.

    I have a pretty strong grasp of "The ancient future"

    Do you...
    Obviously not, else you would be tooting the same horn as I.

  696. lol

    Yeah I haven't read Dawkins, but I've seen him speak.
    And every time I have seen him speak he has been made to look like a fool.
    It isn't hard, if your premise has ground, to withstand criticism.
    He cant, so I conclude he has as much valuable knowledge as Randy, who is getting off on just typing jibberish

  697. Randy

    Oh, the idiocy. You really must tell me what your SAT scores were.

    Silly little boy. Horror is coming for you!

    You are small and weak, you know nothing.

    Horror is coming for you!

  698. jt

    Mark and Lol,

    U's two are like "chalk and cheese"

    I put this to both of u:

    How about "hard scientific fact" and perhaps some form of (properly not the right expression)and an element of "super-natural" pr mind over matter situation?

  699. eireannach666

    I think mark/lol is trying to find a way to put his christian beliefs together with science but cant because it will never be. Its like a moose trying to hump a turtle . There can be no 'Murtle". Maybe mark is confused now and is on the fence just waiting to join the dark side.

    Mark , do you want to hit " the bong of truth"? You can never return , once you get a dose of reality.
    Come out of the bronze age and join the 21 century.

  700. satir

    what in the world are you talking about? dominant species? if we geneticaly decended from blacks and they only make up @ 10% of the earths population then how are they dominant? if you decended from american indians and they make up less that 1% of us how are they dominant? how could you have ever seen Dawkins speak when you sound like a fundamentalist christian mid-west american?
    how many more inanities can you you string together before you over imbibe pabst blue ribbon??
    these and many more questions answered soon...

  701. Randy

    @jt

    Any person that is too lazy to spell "you" and use "u" instead...

    ... is really not worthy of comment.

    I have MS, what is your excuse?

  702. Randy

    Well, children, this has been fun! But, I really must go.

    I will pray to Dark Gods that Mark suffers, but seriously...

    Keep up the good fight my big-brained brothers and sisters!

  703. eireannach666

    @lol
    You are such a faker , Ive been on Navajo and Hopie reservations more times than I can even count.
    My old lady is Navajo/Choctaw. Ive been to the gathering of the nations , Ive participated in numerous ceremonies , sweat lodges , smudge , etc . Shes a dancer just like her mother. Heck the 16yr old we have speaks choctaw.

    You are such a foney.

  704. satir

    @jt
    I have had chalk cheese, it is generaly known as Gruyère
    what are you saying? mind-over-matter like the placebo effect is an evidence of a supreme being? as opposed to being mind-over-bodily-functions

  705. eireannach666

    Well , Im out mark. Have to go get my stick stab on. Have fun with Rosey Palm and her five sisters .

    Ill make sure I put in a " good word " for you with the Native community out here.

    Horns !

  706. Lol

    Your just a liar. I know, and it is well documented that palefaces are not permitted certain knowledge, experiences, and abilities. If you've been welcomed into the lodge you are still excluded from much. It's sad, but necessary. Just look at what happened when a paleface figured out the energy mass equivalence.

  707. Charles B.

    Dr. Randy and Mr. Razor and Vlatko:

    I'm having some health issues. It could be serious. I don't think I'll post much from now on. I'd ask you guys to pray for me, but hey! I don't think it would do much good.

  708. Randy

    @Chucky B.!

    What health issues? What?

    I am very concerned for you! You seemed so healthy, with your mountain hikes and--- what not...

    Please, elaborate!

  709. Joe_nyc

    Charles, I hope it's not too serious. Be well.

  710. capricious

    Still holding positive thoughts Charles. Hope you're able to recover and rejoin us soon.

  711. Charles B.

    I've had chest pains starting last night and all day today. I still have them now. I had a few last week too, but I'm not sure exactly why. I didn't have any trouble at all while climbing the mountain up behind our house much of Saturday. I had a great time!

    Nonetheless, I'm quite fat, I'm sorry to say. Rolls and rolls in fact, but I don't have any other symptoms of a heart attack other than the chest pain. I had some blood tests done today, by a "chest" doctor that I"m actually hoping is a "heart" doctor, but I'm not sure what they can tell from blood test other than perhaps I have too much cholesterol. The doctor listened to my heart, but didn't do any other tests. He said, "Don't worry" but I know enough about Koreans to know that doesn't mean a thing! Rather it could mean, "I think it's serious." I have a tightness right in the middle of my chest, but don't feel out of breath or overly tired. I wonder if my boy hurt me when he jumped on me, as he's quite rough, but we'll see. He jumps on my chest and middle regularly, and I hardly even notice other than to tell him to not be so "violent". He's 3.

    Both my mom and dad have some heart trouble, but dad's 83 and mom's 76. I'm 40. I have too much to live for and too much to do. I've repented of "gluttony" as it's true, I over eat quite a bit, so we'll see what the tests come back as and if the pain subsides. It's not a sharp pain, but rather a dull long-lasting pain. I'm not so scared about death as much as I don't want my babies to be "fatherless" nor my wife to be a widow because of my poor eating habits.

    God is merciful, but we still need to be responsible for making our own good health decisions as well, as the body is the temple of the Holy Spirit, and overeating is just as bad as any other sin in some cases. I call it the "church sin" as church potlucks and the such are some places a weekly thing . . . and boy can the Christians I know enjoy their "fellowship meetings" with fried chicken, mashed potatoes and gravy, pies, etc. Yum yum! But here in Korea is other stuff, but I suspect my wife is going to put me on a save-your-life veggie diet. If I loose the weight, then it will be worth it to see my kids grow up with their dad beside them. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't worried.

    I went to see the doctor during school hours but got back for my later classes, and some of the kids wanted to postpone their essay speeches because I was "sick" and I thought, "Now THAT won't fly!" I was hoping to keep some privacy about the doctor's visit, but high school students see all and know all. At least I still have my sense of humor. :-)

    I need to try and sleep if I can.

    Charles B.

  712. D-K

    Hah!

    Man, am I glad I jumped out of this one. Assumptions rule arrogant men, as they cannot except voids in their logic, they dismiss them as commonly accepted knowledge.

    You, lol, have been using circular logic to strengthen each of your points by the preceeding one, yet the first one still remains without foundation.

    You built your castle on a swamp and you'll be saddened when it sinks. Also, being a mix of pantheist/ID seems quite odd, I'm not sure if you know the definitions of those terms, but you'd probably wanna choose either one or the other.

    Also, you HAVE been promoting supernatural concepts, the fact that you cannot logically deduce such, only shows -what was it..? ah, yes- your "green-ness"

    Have fun in your slanted, sinking castle, for you are definitely king of the swamp castle.

  713. Achems Razor

    @ Charles B:

    Am very sorry to hear of your medical malaise, am not a doctor but what you describe as your symptoms could be as simple as costochondritis, pulling and inflamed inter or outer intercostal muscles, ie: rib cage,
    or maybe pleurisy. Hope you get well soon!

  714. Randy

    Achems is right, but with your weight problems it is important to be careful as your heart is struggling to breathe.

    A competent doctor can tell from a blood test if you've had a heart attack. There would be enzymes in your blood that could indicate heart problems.

    Charles. C'mon! Weight problems usually indicate a serious mental issue at well. Unless you have some thyroidal or other glandular problem, then being fat is usually an indicator of repressed rage.

    What are you mad at? God?

  715. Achems Razor

    @ lol:

    Have noticed you call most kids, before I start, am myself not exactly young. Am old enough,
    "to never pass a bathroom",
    "Never deny a hard-on"
    "Never trust a fart"

    You are still bouncing all over the place with your blogs, you are saying in retrospect that the Universe (including the Earth) and its constants are fine tuned for life and humanity:

    I say that the Universe (including the Earth) and its constants are "NOT"-fine tuned for life and humanity: instead life and humanity, through "EVOLUTION", are fined tuned to the Universe (especially the Earth" as it is!

  716. Randy

    Good point, there, Achems!

    Well put!

  717. D-K

    @ Lol

    To continue on Achems path, i'd like to add that it's because of our ability to "adapt, learn and grow" which is the premise of consciousness to begin with anyway (like lol said him/herself).

    Although these traits are commonly attributed to factual conscience, such as ourselves, lol's gone ahead and equated the universe with a large brain/mass of energy from which consciousness derives. Moreso, he claims it is undisputable fact, and while that's quite laughable, it makes his presence and behaviour in this particular comment section, fit so aptly to the title of this doc.

    Good times..

  718. Achems Razor

    @ Randy:

    Thank you, much appreciated!

  719. Randy

    In the End,

    Um... that was very silly.

    Math and Science!

    Care for nothing else, or you doom humanity.

    I am so happy to be leaving you people soon...

  720. eireannach666

    @Achems
    "Have noticed you call most kids, before I start, am myself not exactly young. Am old enough,“to never pass a bathroom”,“Never deny a hard-on”“Never trust a fart”

    Ha! That is awsome , man. Reminds me of something.
    Most overrated thing is a piece of tail. The most underrated thing is a good dump.

    @lol/mark

    I for one am not anything like you. I dont need to lie. I love my family and you have the nerve to call me a paleface. You have a racist attitude and it seems that you are just upset because this cracker jack mick has experienced more of your culture than yourself , claiming to be Lakota. (which you probably just are part native, mabe your pinky toe. )
    Belive it or not , most other cultures like to share it when you are in good favor with their family. Its called respect and honor , By the way you talk , you obviously have neither. Not for you or others. And that is why you get none in return. Not to mention the fact that you have no clue as to what you are saying , about anything youve said , thus far.
    Vlatko seemed to have summed you up pretty well. " I think you’re one hard core creationist"
    Thats why it is hard for you to see through the distorted views youve been taught. Yet you try to throw in miscellaneous bits of some science , which does very well show your true colors as a creationist at heart. Go study up on evoloution and some newton. Maybe a little Dawkins would do you some good as well , since you have not read anything hes done , instead of bashing the man without any knowledge of what he is about.

    "The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity. The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference." - Richard Dawkins

  721. Randy

    I throw the horns at my Gaelic Brother for his post!

    HORNS!

    Keep it strong, my brother!

  722. Randy

    Oh, and I'm just sayin... Carl Sagin!

    Oh, I'm just talkin', Richard Dawkins!

  723. Randy

    Oh, and I'm just itchin... for Christopher Hitchens!

    Maybe some of my other higher-quality genius friends can come up with some more of these...

    It's fun! (Isn't it? Maybe not...)

  724. Nada

    Just woke up from a looooong nap to Randy making me laugh again. Whew! You guys aren't the only ones with health issues, unfortunately. This is why I've watched so many of these documentaries, it's almost embarrassing, LOL. That's what almost 5 months of recovery will do to you.

  725. Epicurus

    again lol your premise is flawed. you said

    If natural selection is driven purely by competition, as Dawkins suggestests, then there wouldn’t be species which act so collectively, and often the individual has no drive to reproduce.

    well you created a nice straw man but Dawkins is not so simplistic to think natural selection is driven purely by competition...just to think someone with the credentials of Dawkins would think that way shows your ignorance in science.

    i am fully confident you have no clue what you are talking about and cant understand for the life of me why people are responding to your pointless inane red herrings.

    you keep saying you dont make any supernatural claims yet you make the claim that there is some intelligence behind the universe and that energy is some type of being.

    even your grade school bastardization of Einsteins elequent theory E=mc2 is just insulting.

    Einstein was the first scientist to propose the E = mc2 formula and the first to interpret mass–energy equivalence as a fundamental principle that follows from the relativistic symmetries of space and time. by doing so he enabled a whole mountain of information that without it we wouldnt have half the items in our houses.

    nothing that plato or the native americans ever did could compare to E=mc2 and the elegance of that equation. you are so off your rocker its scary.

    and lets go back to Dawkins, you already FALSELY stated that he wasnt passing on his genes (as if that has ANYTHING to do with his theories or position)since he does have a daughter. you have also tried to claim he isnt very bright. well lets highlight some of the mans qualifications, then you can show me a scientist who comes even close....

    ------------------------------------------------------------

    Dawkins was awarded a Doctor of Science by the University of Oxford in 1989. He holds honorary doctorates in science from the University of Huddersfield, University of Westminster, Durham University, the University of Hull, and the University of Antwerp, and honorary doctorates from the University of Aberdeen, Open University, the Vrije Universiteit Brussel, and the University of Valencia. He also holds honorary doctorates of letters from the University of St Andrews and the Australian National University (HonLittD, 1996), and was elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature in 1997 and the Royal Society in 2001. He is one of the patrons of the Oxford University Scientific Society.

    In 1987, Dawkins received a Royal Society of Literature award and a Los Angeles Times Literary Prize for his book, The Blind Watchmaker. In the same year, he received a Sci. Tech Prize for Best Television Documentary Science Programme of the Year, for the BBC Horizon episode The Blind Watchmaker.

    His other awards have included the Zoological Society of London Silver Medal (1989), Finlay innovation award (1990), the Michael Faraday Award (1990), the Nakayama Prize (1994), the American Humanist Association's Humanist of the Year Award (1996), the fifth International Cosmos Prize (1997), the Kistler Prize (2001), the Medal of the Presidency of the Italian Republic (2001), the Bicentennial Kelvin Medal of The Royal Philosophical Society of Glasgow (2002) and the Nierenberg Prize for Science in the Public Interest (2009).

    Dawkins topped Prospect magazine's 2004 list of the top 100 public British intellectuals, as decided by the readers, receiving twice as many votes as the runner-up. He has been short-listed as a candidate in their 2008 follow-up poll. In 2005, the Hamburg-based Alfred Toepfer Foundation awarded him its Shakespeare Prize in recognition of his "concise and accessible presentation of scientific knowledge". He won the Lewis Thomas Prize for Writing about Science for 2006 and the Galaxy British Book Awards Author of the Year Award for 2007. In the same year, he was listed by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world in 2007, and was awarded the Deschner Award, named after German anti-clerical author Karlheinz Deschner.

    Since 2003, the Atheist Alliance International has awarded a prize during its annual conference, honouring an outstanding atheist whose work has done most to raise public awareness of atheism during that year. It is known as the Richard Dawkins Award, in honour of Dawkins' own work.

    -------------------------------------------------------------

    do you want a list of research he has published and peer reviewed? could you go over ANYTHING he has said (please quote him) and show me where he is wrong. and if he is wrong you can publish your findings and show him up.

  726. Randy

    Hi Nada!

    Now, what are your health problems? I am getting really concerned for everyone here... what the hell!

    I thought I was the only gimp on this site!

  727. Mok

    I feel fine...

  728. WTC7

    @ Charles B,

    Hang on there man, we can't afford for you to get sick -:). I'm sure it's nothing serious and you get well soon.

    My best.

  729. D-K

    @Epicurus

    "i am fully confident you have no clue what you are talking about and cant understand for the life of me why people are responding to your pointless inane red herrings"

    Now, now.. be fair, you responded to him the most.

    I can't help the fact that it's so amusing to deconstruct illogical ramblings and disarming them with factual knowledge. Him attacking Dawkins is a simple mechanic designed to devaluate a man, thus his research, thus strengthen lol's/gia's/science4ages own points.

    When logic fails, there's always getting personal.. I guess..

  730. Randy

    Yeah, and when I called him on the mystisim thing... he says, "I never mentioned anything mystical..." but then he talks about the "Spirit" of the Universe...

    Uh...

    Again, I say, mystisism is for f**ls or children...

    Which one are you?

    (this augments Epicurus' post above, but he probably dosen't need my augmentation... it's just that... you know...

    I'm just talkin'... Richard Dawkins!)

  731. Randy

    And D-K?

    It's not about being fair... life has never been fair...

    It's about being smart and self-reliant. If you ain't well...

    I'm just sayin'... when life and Empires are in the balance, you need to hurt some feelings, sometimes.

    (I'm still worried about Nada, however...)

  732. D-K

    Rationalizing stuff helps.. Or just being a flat-out sociopath will give you the means to distance yourself from the "us" mentality, which quite sadly, is grounded in (outdated) notions of morality.

    You know that I care not for silly human feelings, I care for progress, evolution and effeciency. I am he who is least of all scared to break some eggs, you know this of me.

    I hear you on self-reliance, more truthful words have seldom been spoken. We must do away with mysticism, religion and our outdated, and ridiculously emotionally invested, morality system and redesign social structures to benefit man himself, not man's righteousness or dignity.

    I so loathe irrationality..

  733. oliarguello

    Since the flow of conversation has flowed towards consciousness I will chime in. I will take a Socratic approach and make my points with questions; I will attempt to make it short and sweet.

    Even though “consciousness” is an umbrella term, I think we can agree that human consciousness can be defined as being self aware and having executive control of the mind.

    That being said do animals have a consciousness or are they just mindless creatures responding to stimuli?

    If we say they are just simply a bag made of skin with a bunch of chemicals responding to stimuli , why cant we say the same about ourselves? Afterall any thought or reaction we make is based on a prior stimulus. But one might argue that we are social creatures and are aware of ourselves and environment. Well there are many creatures that are social as well and communicate through various mediums ( sound, chemically, movements etc) and learn about their environment. Where do we draw the line; gorillas, dolphins, birds, insects, bacteria, amoeba, a rock, computer, internet? Do we again base it on the criteria of human consciousness? Are we then to say anything outside of our form of social behavior or communication isn’t real consciousness just some varying degree of true consciousness based on anthropomorphizing creatures? Wouldn’t that say that only humans have a true consciousness?

    If we are the only beings in existence with true consciousness, at what point was it developed? Wasn’t there, at some point, a lesser degree of consciousness, and therefore some humans were ( are?) more conscious than others? Wouldn’t this type of conscious evolution further suggest that we will achieve a greater consciousness than we have now? If so, wasn’t/isn’t our consciousness limited to the physiological structure of our brains? In order to gain a “greater” consciousness wouldn’t we have to physically change? I believe evolution dictates that we will.

    I would suggest that there are different types of consciousness, not just varying degrees of it since “varying degree of consciousness” is anthropomorphizing ( I know I haven’t done a great job of dismissing “degrees” but I am trying to keep this short). If we gain a greater type of consciousness, by definition it would be different. Our physical brains would need to be different, and this would suggest that different structures would be required to carry this type of consciousness. Wouldn’t this also suggest that a different type of consciousness resides in creatures with different structures? Already we have seen that in computers the power of a microchip increases with the more transistors and wires you fit, but its limiting and the future of microchips will have “nanowires, graphene, quantum particles and biological mole¬cules could all spawn new gen¬erations of chips that are more powerful than today’s best” (Scientific American 2009). Who knows maybe in the future our brains will evolve from neurons, action potentials, and neurotransmitters to something more akin to fiber optics and light ( I know a bit silly but you get the point).

    As for Universal Consciousness/GOD/whatever you want to call it, one would have to show that it is a structure that communicates within said structure ( Supersymmetric String Theory?), and just because it doesn't walk, talk, or look like us doesn't mean the consciousness doesn't exist, but simply that its different.

  734. eireannach666

    @DK
    Got to break a few eggs to make an omlet , as they say.

    @Randy
    "I’m just talkin’… Richard Dawkins"

    Ha!
    You're burnt up, man.
    And I think its time, Eienstein.
    While you're talking , Stephen Hawking.

    See what you started now.

    @oliarguello

    All living things have consciences. Yes , I believe depending on the brain. But we dont even use our brains to its fulles extent , yet. So we wouldn't have to evolve physically to gain a higher plain of consciences , only mentally , which there are documented cases of this."The boy with the amazing brain" here on TDF is one. Just too few and far between at this time for the GP to notice. Remember , evoloution doesn't just become noticeable over a few years or even decades on the larger members of life. Virus' change regularly every year, and sometimes even case to case, look at the flu, for instance. (As Epicurus pointed out earlier.)

  735. oliarguello

    @eireannach666

    Ah excellent point! We do only use part of our brains. Well to be more specific, we use all of it but only use a percentage at any given time.

    But structure is vitally important to function. Women do tend to have a more dense corpus callosum which leads to being better at multi-tasking, musicians have a larger frontal region of the corpus callosum , and 11% larger in ambidextrous people. People with larger Broca and Wernicke areas understand and learn languages easier ( larger in children, thats why they can learn new languages easier). Then there are those few people who vividly remember every detail of their life ( a form of anxious OCD or autism I believe which manifests as overactive or unbalanced excitatory/inhibitory networks).

    It is true that through meditation one can reach a different planes of consciousness. If you ever meditated deeply for hours and have ever taken shrooms, you could see the similarities ( no im not a hippie...LOL). In fact if I remember correctly, I believe shrooms affect the release of GABAA-A neurotransmitters ( a neural inhibitor) and induce alpha waves....which is the dream state your try to achieve through deep meditation.

    My point being that mental changes affect physiological structures and vice versa. I know most people think the mind is abstract and intangible, but even with the slightest thought there are changes/events going on in the brain. That is why I think a different forms of consciousness will arise as the brain evolves. Like I said in the past there were people who were "more conscious" than others, and I think we agree, that evidently, that's true today as well.

    And thanks for the heads up on the doc here on TDF. I will definitely check out "The boy with the amazing brain"! :)

  736. eireannach666

    @Randy
    "TheIt’s not about being fair… life has never been fair…" 100% True , brotha.

    Fair? Is it in town already? A fair is a place with games and rides. Thats what I was always told when I used to say it isnt fair.
    Then I was taught just to suck it up , learn from it , practice more , study more and drive on.

  737. dan 26

    science is yet to young to understand

  738. dan 26

    but we are moving forward

  739. Randy B

    Sir Randy, Notable Doctor, my last question was not a threat or a con to take your money, it was a question of whether it is a moral act or not.
    This is a cut and paste for my other questions.
    Let me ask this question for any that care to consider it. When you were born, you were…you. But, as we can surely agree, that body is not any longer there. Even the brain has had every cell replaced. And if not, please inform me. None the less the “you” that was a little child in body, is gone. So what is it that makes you….you? Also there is considerable research and documentation on out of body experiences where people (even blind people!) give detailed accounts and descriptions though they are in a coma or like condition.
    I will just wait and read the responses.
    Peace all,
    ps. Cause and effect. Maybe the wrong terms, but everything has a cause. What caused the universe to come into existence in the first place? Seems only consciousness can have an idea or thought or action that does not need a cause. Just my thoughts. Elaborate as you will.

  740. Randy

    @Randy B.

    Yes, I was harsh with you and I appologize, it's just hard to read these baboon words while listening to Vivaldi and watching slide shows of Vincent Van Gogh's work...

    I read and re-read your post. You seem to want us both to go to some "soul" area, and that I just can not abide.

    I have written extensively on the subject, even here on this site... there simply is no soul, spirit, or blah blah...

    Listen, I mentioned con-men, Grifters, Gypsies. You know what they are? They are people who know and see through the world and then trick the rest of the sheep into believing illusionary or faulty information.

    That is immoral, and I stopped doing it for money. But, take, Deepak Chopra? Or anyone who tries to tell you life is good? Con-man. I know. I can see through all of that.

    Here is a great quote from a fun movie:

    "Life is PAIN, highness, anyone who tells you different, is trying to sell you something!"

  741. Randy

    Also, magicians, have created religion...

    Cheaters, tricksters, con-men, illusionists, doing tricks and effects and dupes and marks believe it is "GOD"...

    Yawn...

  742. Randy B

    Mr B, I agree with ALOT of what you say. But I am glad we can differ. I fear any world where we could not. Whether it would be run by religious leaders or aethiest. I don't want want either.
    You mention, though, the immorality of con men. And not limiting it to that small area, what is it that would establish that morality? No, I am not doctored philosopher, physicist, or biologist. Not a preacher or doctor of theology either. But it does seem that there is something that universally tells us without law or decree or commandment, that taking what is your is not right. Yet alot of aethist dictators wanted to do just that! Even Marx who to my understanding was not even able to dictate his ideas, wanted to take what was not his and he was a aethist.
    I don't think that the US was ever founded on those principles! And again, noting my credintials, or lack of, evolution seems to state that my survival rate is much improved if I take what is yours! You may die hungry, but I will propogate with fat little babies. Survival of the fittist. But I still contend that we have a "conscience" that tells us NOT to take from others. And I will always ascribe to that. But I will also always give to those that are in need. Just don't force me to.
    And yes, I segway a bit, but I will go back to the question of why is the universe even here in the first place and what caused it? My belief is that whatever anyones answer it will be only thier belief. Ergo, we are "believers" in things we cannot know the answers to.
    Glad we have this forum, as I learn alot.
    Cheers and may all that ail be well soon. I too, have my own "demons".

  743. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Have you had a chance to read thos equations on the "toe of god" experiments , up for review , yet?
    What did you think?

    And by the way , if one thinks life isnt about pain and the ability to overcome pain then they have'nt LIVED life at all. (@Randy B)

  744. Randy

    Who the hell is Mr B.? Who the hell are talking to?

    And try to use paragraph breaks!

    And , NO, that is NOT what Evolution teaches. Study further!

  745. eireannach666

    @oliarguello
    It is true that through meditation one can reach a different planes of consciousness."

    Well , I will say maybe , because if you isolate yourself and are deprived of light , food , water , communication with others , etc , then you start getting into fatigue and hallucination. However , if you are able to take yourself into a focused state of mind , where you can do 25,000 decimals of pi(3.14x) in your head then you are one up , as far as using that part of the brain.

    Oh, and shrooms , try alot , alot of LSD , that will get you some angles. Catch my drift?

  746. eireannach666

    @RB
    "evolution seems to state that my survival rate is much improved if I take what is yours! You may die hungry, but I will propogate with fat little babies. Survival of the fittist. "

    No ,No , No. Have you not seen the more evolved animals hunt in packs and share their food etc? You take of your prey , and only the weakest , (unless fat boy is slippin') to insure the survival of both you and their species . The best breed and the weak die. Not Ill take your money . How about trying , Lets make money together. Have you not observed nature much?

  747. eireannach666

    @Randy
    "toeCheaters, tricksters, con-men, illusionists, doing tricks and effects and dupes and marks believe it is “GOD”"

    Slide of hand and cold reading. Manipulation at work. Ancient lawyers, politicians and religion at work. Even today. Ahh. Idiocracy at its finest.

    I feel you though. And Im 28 yrs your junior. People just need to wake up. Study.

  748. eireannach666

    @Randy
    "Cheaters, tricksters, con-men, illusionists, doing tricks and effects and dupes and marks believe it is “GOD”"

    Slide of hand and cold reading. Manipulation at work. Ancient lawyers, politicians and religion at work. Even today. Ahh. Idiocracy at its finest.

    I feel you though. And Im 28 yrs your junior. People just need to wake up. Study.

    Im rootin .. Isaic Newton.
    You started it

    Its must be time , Eienstien..

    You like those dont you?

  749. eireannach666

    @Vlatko

    Are you doing some pretty big changes on here?

    I cant get to " recently added " or " recently commented".

    Just wondering. I saw a few of your posts recently that mentioned this. Just curious.
    I.T. works as it will , I know.

  750. Epicurus

    @Randy B. i had already answered your question earlier. i shall copy paste it again here.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------

    Randy B, that you is a collection of your memories and experiences. if someone gets amnesia they are not “them” they are a new them. each moment you become a new “you”. however you said,

    “Cause and effect. Maybe the wrong terms, but everything has a cause. What caused the universe to come into existence in the first place? Seems only consciousness can have an idea or thought or action that does not need a cause. ”

    consciousness cannot have an idea or thought without an action. consciousness cannot exist without a brain. the brain needs to react to external stimuli and reply with stored data.

    if your logic is that everything needs a cause then god would need a cause.

    however i shall quote a famous finding by michio kaku;

    Physicist Michio Kaku directly addresses the cosmological argument (which you are referring to) in his book Hyperspace, saying that it is easily dismissed by the law of conservation of energy and the laws governing molecular physics. He gives an example— “gas molecules may bounce against the walls of a container without requiring anything or anyone to get them moving.” According to Kaku, these molecules could move forever, without beginning or end. So, there is no need for a First Mover to explain the origins of motion.

  751. Randy B

    Mr B...Big Brain, Bodacious, Bad ass, ....whew, you guys get your panties in a twist for such little things! If a child, or mentally deficient say things that seem like lunacy, I DO NOT get upset with them. I only get upset with those that I feel have the mental agility to understand. And I do believe you don't think of us "religee's" as much more than morons. So..why do you get so upset?? Me think thee do protest too much. And as to more evolved animals...are not humans the most evolved?? Ahh, maybe gangs preying on the weak is evolution in action. Now I know.
    And again, now answer as to why the universe is even here and how.
    And Bebagoth and Cloratron the Evil, will get you all!! So becareful!!

  752. Randy

    Let me take you, to Michio Kaku!

    Ha! Fun!

  753. eireannach666

    @Randy
    So you didnt look at those equations yet?

    Nevermind.

    Just sayin , Carl Sagan.

    @Epicurus

    "if your logic is that everything needs a cause then god would need a cause." and "toethese molecules could move forever, without beginning or end. So, there is no need for a First Mover to explain the origins of motion."

    Give me a link or reference , because I have never really gave him a glance. Respectfully, put me on . If it has any validity. And if it does then why , from your side?

    For real. peAce.

  754. Randy

    What Epicurus is saying with his quote and what I have been saying for an exhausting amount of time is this:

    Here is the Universe! It's right here! I am pointing at it!

    It is simple and it works all by itself. Why do you need to make it more complicated with your silliness?

    If you make up stories to help you sleep at night, that is fine... FOR YOU!

    Religion divides us, science unites us. That was Darwin's real message.

  755. Randy B

    This may not get on, guess I am now being "moderated"
    But will still try.

    "He gives an example— “gas molecules may bounce against the walls of a container without requiring anything or anyone to get them moving.” According to Kaku, these molecules could move forever, without beginning or end. So, there is no need for a First Mover to explain the origins of motion."

    Where did the container come from? and the gas molecules? This just don't seem to be a great arguement. And again, I remind you....I DO NOT have any doctorates. And may I add, I also ask "religee's" to justify there beliefs. And boy, let me tell you, they can come up with just as bad of arguements. Or maybe I just don't understand either extreme.

    I just think we need some standard. And I think Christ did the best job of setting that standard. We are to love and care for others. Help them, make them better people, make a better world. And no matter what, aethist, Christian, pipefitter, biologist, all....and that would not make for a bad place to live.

    I was on here to learn, ask questions, of all you and of myself as well. I just think that you do not like that viewpoint.

    Again, be well all that are ill.

  756. Randy

    My Gaelic Brother,

    I have looked at the equations, and I really haven't agreed with the conclusions, yet...

    Patience... it takes study...

  757. Randy

    @Epicurus

    "cost-effective" excellent term! Very good!

    @Randy B.

    NO SOUP FOR YOU!

  758. Randy B

    This was a previous comment for Dr. Randy and eireannach666

    "Mr B…Big Brain, Bodacious, Bad ass, ….whew, you guys get your panties in a twist for such little things! If a child, or mentally deficient say things that seem like lunacy, I DO NOT get upset with them. I only get upset with those that I feel have the mental agility to understand. And I do believe you don’t think of us “religee’s” as much more than morons. So..why do you get so upset?? Me think thee do protest too much.
    And as to more evolved animals…are not humans the most evolved?? Ahh, maybe gangs preying on the weak is evolution in action. Now I know.
    And again, now answer as to why the universe is even here and how.
    And Bebagoth and Cloratron the Evil, will get you all!! So becareful!!

    And to Epicurus, thank you. No , I guess I missed the first post. But I appreciate the time you take. And without the derisive comments.

    Peace all, and I wish us ALL a better world. But that truly is a delusion I think. Wish we could all "evolve" to the point of making life as wonderful as I believe it could be.

  759. Randy

    @Epicurus

    Isn't Dr. Kaku, amazing?

    I love his work, a very worthy successor for Carl Sagan, (or Stephen Hawking when that sad day comes...).

    Whenever he has a show on the Science Channel I am riveted!

  760. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Me either. Its going to take me alot to conceed my mathematical proofs to a bunch of mathematical maybes or mathematical probablies.

    Not that Ive left that bar yet. Just saying.

    Its a good look on the unknown.

    While we are talking , Stephan Hawking. LOL.

    But seriously , I dont see being sold. Just openly listning. But , Its shootin , towards Newton.

    And , you are not the only person in constant grief here. Ever been capped in the leg or belly? Now that will make you think and adapt. Not to mention make pain obsolete . However , I have to give my condolences to you , because your monster is still there. But remember , brotha , you have alot to give. Make it count to others , as it has to me , my friend.
    See , I never mentioned my military experience .

    But , you know , I dont have to convince you. Its the people that dont want to see life , their life , as it really is and are too ungrateful to make it better . Or too nieve to to see the facts. Too stubborn to listen and learn.

    Keep on , keeping on. Bong of truth.
    Slainte , brotha.

  761. eireannach666

    @Epicurus/@Randy
    You know we are all on the same team , but once again ,

    "Give me a link or reference , because I have never really gave him a glance. Respectfully, put me on . If it has any validity. And if it does then why , from your side"

    Not questioning , just looking for mor info.

    I respect both of yous guys.

  762. Randy

    I just got these new headphones, they are those Bose sound eliminating, powered, jobs? (We also call them "cans" or "cups")

    Holy, Batman! The sound clarity! The base, the mid-range, the resonance! The "air" around the instruments!

    Sorry, I am just staying awake long after my bedtime to play with them... Listening to some magnificent music...

    Oh, and I am trying to debug my primary comupter after having been attacked with some virus... uh...

    I have twelve computers that I use for work, if they get hurt by some islamo-christian who doesn't like what I say...

    I WILL visit you, or have someone visit you... and all manner of things in your life will be sad...

  763. eireannach666

    Gurb é a bheidh san fhianaise a thabharfar an fhírinne, an fhírinne iomlán agus an fhírinne amháin;
    and equals= "that the evidence to be given shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

    No not a quote but real shyte, evidence i means everything.

  764. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Hey , whatcha beatin there?

  765. Randy

    @eireannach666

    I did not understand that question...

    I am not "beatin'" anything. I am listening to music, watching slide-shows of some of the Dutch Masters, and de-bugging a computer.

    Also, monitoring this site, obviously...

    What are you asking me? Is it a joke? I don't get it.

  766. eireannach666

    Well , I was just looking forward to Epicurus or my brotha , Randizzle to put me on something I had never looked at ( Dr. Kaku,) sorry guys. Ill go read my own , and then come back with a vengence. Love yas gees.

  767. Randy

    Don't get offended, I was asking you to explain, if you do, I will answer you.

    "Beatin'" did you mean music? What music I was listening to? I said earlier, Vivaldi, but also Beethoven, Bach and the masters of the romantic period...

    Also, some John Williams with the Boston Pops, (very good stuff!)

  768. makin it hard

    oh man i am a devote believer in God, but this doc rocked.

    they sure are making it hard to believe in God and have people take you seriously.

  769. eireannach666

    @Randy

    No , brotha , I was asking " What are you listening to? Since ya got some new " beats" . Sorry I used ebonics.

    Ha, Ha, remember Im from Oakland.

    Remember , ebonics ? Dude , I was , unfortunately . made to see it, but fortunately saw the ignorance in it.

    Sorry. You should see and hear some of my "peeps" from here. Str8 atheists. My lil bro and all of us . It would make you happy . We've developed.

  770. eireannach666

    @Randy /Epicurus

    Please give me anything on Dr. Kaku, that I dont know. This is not my strong point.

    I also would like you guys to throw in your point of view , as you give me the reference . I need a cig now.
    I think our comments are lagging behind eachother. But , Slainte.

  771. eireannach666

    @Randy

    And , WTF , are you listening to , dinggle berry? lol , Just kidding. Im on some sublime. And some devil driver.

  772. eireannach666

    Quote Dr Fritz and "While your talking" Stephen Hawging. ( sound like a heavy weight bout , no ) but ,

    Here are some of the questions cosmology seeks to answer (As elsewhere in this lecture, I borrow heavily from astrophysicist Hugh Ross' excellent books The Fingerprint of Godand The Creator and the Cosmos.):Is the universe finite or infinite in extent and content? Is it eternal or does it have a beginning? Was it created? If not, how did it get here? If so, how was this creation accomplished and what can we learn about the agent and events of creation? Who or what governs the laws and constants of physics? Are such laws the product of chance or have they been designed? How do they relate to the support and development of life? Is there any knowable existence beyond the known dimensions of the universe? Is the universe running down irreversibly or will it bounce back?

    Now , who has , or as I say , who wants the answers ? Everything of Maths is fine.

  773. eireannach666

    "Stephan Hawkings"

    Quote , not mine , by the way. Just sayin" Carl Sagan"

  774. eireannach666

    While we are talking,.. Stephen Hawging

  775. Epicurus

    i did add some links in my other post up there for you eireannach

    and here is his website

    mkaku . org/

  776. Randy

    @Epicurus

    Yes, I assumed he saw those links that you provided, that's why I was so confused...

  777. eireannach666

    @Randy / Epicurus

    Thanks . Remember our comments lag.
    Epicurus /Randy

    I didnt take your links for granted.

    @Ra
    t gave me 25 helpings/ and a smigion , of humble pie. Thank you Epicurus , you did help.

    @Randy

    I was just asking , for the fact , Ii know you , Achems , Epicurus , Ep_log / HM / Randy
    You have alot of knowledge to ," not waste ",
    Im the sponge , to all- things reality. Even though Im new and somewhat old, doesnt mean that Ill " Tro' Itway",

  778. eireannach666

    Fux it

  779. Randy

    @My Gaelic Brother who wrote:

    "I was just asking , for the fact , Ii know you , Achems , Epicurus , Ep_log / HM / Randy
    You have alot of knowledge to ,” not waste “,
    Im the sponge , to all- things reality. Even though Im new and somewhat old, doesnt mean that Ill ” Tro’ Itway”,"

    What is this? Is this a language that I am supposed to understand? What is going on with you?

    I know you are having problems, but I just can't understand you.

    I want to help you, but you seem to be typing with your forehead!

    Are you mixing medications?

  780. Hardy

    It seems your Gaelic Brother had a drunk-on-the-internet incident!

    I normally let it out on social-networking-sites, ranting about politics or how crappy/awesome the night was, but eh, whatever floats your boat :-)

  781. GodisAwesome

    Wow, I see I can take a loooong weekend and everyone is no less in a tizzy when I check back in.

    Let me address God being THE un-caused Cause. The Bible God is the Author of all that is. As the Author He is, therefore, outside of the narrative. The characters in a book need a cause, but the Author is outside of the narrative of their lives, interactions, back stories, etc. The author writes all of that and is independent from it, although the single determining factor for all of it.

    While the Author may (must) indeed have a cause, the characters in the book could never, in their limited understanding, fathom that they are characters in the Author's mind.

    Another illustration (and all illustrations pertaining to God break down somewhere) is that God is the owner of an aquarium in which we swim. We can no more fully comprehend Him than the fish on our aquariums have a full appreciation for our nature, back story, or lives in general, outside of what matters directly to them.

    Scripture refers to God in just such terms (Author). Now I'm sure that this characterization will be lampooned as nonsense, and on this blog I can even count on it being caricatured and mis-stated so someone can argue against a straw man version of it, but I always like to provide accurate information for the scores of people who are reading along (without posting) who just really want to know.

    I think some of them can see through the vain attempts to discount God, and even want to know if He is Who He says He is. I can assure you that He is, not merely from the evidence, but also not in spite of it. A step of reasonable faith is rewarded with true knowledge, real peace, and ultimate purpose.

  782. Randy

    GIA,

    "If the bible proves that god exists, then comic books prove that Superman exists..."

    It's just a novel, GIA, you need to get your arms around that.

    Scroll up. I'm busy, I can't wet nurse you, right now...

  783. Randy

    OK.

    I found the source of my problems with my computers.

    It was a Scientologist, actually, and not an islamo-christian, at all.

    They are as tricky as the camel-herders... well, I know who he is, and where he is...

    I have to go to war.

    *Randy glares menacingly at the internet mob*

  784. Achems Razor

    @ GIA:

    There is "all there is", but it ain't no man made God, Gods, in any man made Bible, Bibles.

    Man made religion does not walk the walk, nor talk the talk, of the Universe.

    We will never have true knowledge. real peace, and ultimate purpose.
    All we can achieve is "Eustress",

    Every Human has a hole in him, that forever is trying to fill.

    As Feynman said, "The Earth , and us humans, are just to small in accordance of the vastness of the Universe to fully comprehend everything"

    And as Carl Sagan said, "All us Humans are like the water vapor on a glass, one swipe and we are gone"!

  785. Randy

    Oh, and by the camel-herders, of course I do NOT mean to besmirch the great Semetic peoples.

    Just the religious ones that wrote the bible.

    When you take religion away, all humans get infinitely more intelligent and kinder.

  786. GodisAwesome

    Dr. Randy,

    You are free (duh) to assert that any number of things which I've experienced and know to be true are, in fact, not true, however your assertions do not alter reality for me in any material way. My faith has been rewarded with experiential knowledge that has proven rather durable.

    In your example (Superman) we have an obviously fictional character, based in a fictional city, and far more importantly, not a single eyewitness, either contemporary or otherwise.

    Christianity, on the other hand, had tens of millions of followers within three centuries of its founding, was based on material facts, in evidence, which if proven to be untrue would have ransacked its very genesis and bankrupted the whole enterprise. It is historical fact that within the period of time which was in the lifetime of the eyewitnesses, Christianity was heavily persecuted, and Christians reviled and even martyred for something that, if untrue, many knew to be a provable lie.

    If they were willing to die for what they knew was a lie, then they are unlike any other humans, of any culture, that has ever lived. They were singularly unique enough to deserve much more study, at the very least, and certainly not a comical dismissal and comparison with Superman.

    My goodness. Have enough respect for your own position to present something that also respects the intellectual vigor of those you oppose.

    Having an actual master's degree with an emphasis in comparative religions, I came to realize the unique testimony and place of Christianity in the pantheon of would be pretenders to the throne of spiritual truth.

    All of the so-called precursors which are pointed to by scoffers have serious academic and philosophical short-comings and theoretical flaws, some of which I've pointed to in earlier posts.

    This conversation is boring me, because your usual response is something like, "Oh yeah, well so's your old man."

    Me thinks thou protest too much. Repent and receive His forgiveness, purpose, meaning, fulfillment, and life.

    It's not always the case, but at least this time, a person with an experience was not at the mercy of those with arguments.

    At some point, when everything's been answered at least once, and sometimes several times, it's time to just call it a day.

    I believe you are telling the truth as you see it. Apparently you are spiritually blind. That means we can see the same facts, but the prism through which you view them keeps you from recognizing their meaning.

    Ironically, most spiritually blind people are most blind to their own condition. They think the spiritually perceptive are the delusional ones.

    If that's the case, a re-iteration of the facts won't help you. For some reason you never took a step over into faith, and until you do you'll never have true peace.

    I want that for you, and suffering my own physical limitations in this life, I know it is your only hope (as it is everyone's) for the next. He will accept you even now. You should make a decision to trust Him. I will continue to pray to that end.

  787. Randy

    There are no eyewitnesses to jesus, either.

    The Gospels were written 40 to 70 years after his supposed death. No one lived that long at the time.

    Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John, were all dead by the time those books were written...

    So...

    And, there are ten of millions of followers for Superman, too.

    So what is your point?

  788. D-K

    @Gia:

    Your attempts are in vain. Randy is incapable of taking a leap of faith, and so are many, many people. Let's go with your term for a second, spiritually perceptive.

    Anything spiritual is by definition immaterial, you CANNOT see it. You ASSUME that it's there, without having actually seen it. You don't experience spirituality/god in the traditional way, namely by the human senses. You cannot feel, smell, hear, see or taste god (beyond symbolism).

    Therefore, you ASSUME his existance and his potence, without having actually experienced it. Spiritual experience can only (and must always) be supported by faith. Faith is irrational and illogical in nature and as such, cannot be adopted by anyone who bases his frame of reference on FACT rather than ASSUMPTION.

    The grand divider between the two remains factual data v.s spiritual experience, and they are simply mutually exclusive.

    You are only delusional if you consider your ponderings and assumptions fact, you cannot validate religious persuasions through traditional science.

    Spiritual people such as yourself, belong to the spiritual catagory, of which gypsy's, fortunetellers, astrologists and many other supposed con-professions are a part. One cannot validate/qualify/quantify true spirituality, thus it as a term akin to silly putty.. It can be shaped and molded to fit over anything insubstantiated to give it meaning. New-age medicine, holistic rituals, satanism, vampirism, various cults/sects and so on.

    Without unbiased (non-religious) compelling evidence supporting the assertion most religions make, you belong to a group with too many negative connotations to be taken on word. You'll have to do better than word, and since you cannot, your attempts are in vain, even if a little amusing.

  789. D-K

    Also, a lot of the evidence concerning Jesus/God is spiritual/religious evidence. You cannot find evidence in the bible compelling FOR your cause, but neither can you find evidence against it.

    Spiritual evidence is not the same as factual evidence. Actually, i'd argue that spiritual evidence isn't evidence at all, it is self-perpetuating propoganda. While I'm not saying there is or isn't a God, religion is a means to take money and free will from the stupid and to make the unqeustioning man a docile creature.

    Religion is in place to take advantage of people who are prone to spiritual convictions.

    There may or may not be a God, but religion has nothing to do with him/her/it or the "pleasing" of him/her/it.

  790. Achems Razor

    @ GIA:

    Even though, all religions are man made.

    There are also tens of millions of followers in other religions.
    The arrogance of discounting other religions as viable, even more viable, than your man made Christianity. Serves as the ultimate in contemptuous arrogance!

  791. Randy

    @D-K who wrote:

    "Your attempts are in vain. Randy is incapable of taking a leap of faith..."

    I understood what you were driving at there, but I would just add this:

    I actually have taken HUNDREDS of leaps of faith, and I have all the broken bones to prove it.

    As Gertrude Stein said about Pittsburg, "There is no THERE, there..."

    I am just trying to instruct some kids before I go...

  792. Epicurus

    if the bible is proof of christianity then the quran is proof of islam. the quran has MORE historical accuracies in it as well as being more internally consistent. the bible is rife full of contradictions and historical inaccuracies.

    if we are talking validity of holy book you should be a muslim if anything.

    why dont YOU take a step into faith in Muhammad then you can be a muslim and your faith can just assure you that you are right and safe.

    Faith = want, or hope. faith is the great cop out. it teaches us to believe we have an answer and to stop looking. it is belief in that without evidence or sometimes even in spite of evidence to the contrary.

    how about you have faith that the universe was made 5 mins ago by a demon with all of our memories in place?

  793. GodisAwesome

    Dr. Randy,

    Your information is, to be charitable, debatable. Regardless of when the gospels were written, even if they were hundreds of years after the fact, there is a failure, outside of the historical Jesus hypothesis, to account for the known history (from outside sources) of the church in the 1st, 2nd and 3rd centuries. You are guilty of the same fallacy as Dan Barker, and Bart Erhman if you think this history is not a considerable opponent to your world-view. Like both men you also seem unable to account for it.

    It may also do you some good to peruse a copy of "Redating the New Testament," by John A.T. Robinson.

    Three of the four gospels are definitely from the perspective of eyewitnesses, and the fourth shows excellent internal and external promise that it may also be, but I repeat, my arguments are not based on an inerrant Bible, or on the dating of the New Testament. You just happen to probably be wrong there as well.

    Achem,

    I discount the others just as I discount those people who believe the earth is flat. It is not arrogance, but experience and knowledge that leads me to my conclusion. I am, as a man of science, always open to the possibility that an alternative explanation may come along which disproves the former, but I'm not holding my breath. I will continue to live and operate under the demonstrated (and revealed) truth that I live on a spherical planet.

    D-K,

    Don't be too quick to count Randy out. I've seen lots of atheists (self pronounced) come to faith and peace with God. I've also debated many of them in formal debates throughout the world, and you are simply mistaken. Many times, those who came in support of their particular champion and world-view remain afterward to confess their doubt and receive Christ.

    I am not a liar, and would have nothing to gain by giving Randy false hope. God will receive Him. For that matter my whole presence here makes suspect the argument of those who believe Christians are only out to fool the masses for some personal gain. What exactly would I gain from any of you? A notch in my belt? Some cosmic approval? From Whom?

    As I've written; the seven lines of evidence I've presented, which have not been disproved, but asserted to be wrong, are merely the tip of a massive ice berg of reasons I continue to find my faith durable in the face of rhetorical and dogmatic opposition.

    Randy,

    Did your mom or dad ever go outside around dusk and holler, "Randy! Come home!"? You have a heavenly Father Who is doing that now. He's not mad. It saddens Him that you've turned away, but He's taking back prodigals daily.

  794. WTC7

    @ D-K

    Hi D-K,

    I agree with most of the things you said to GIA above. There is only one thing where I would beg to differ. It's the question of spirituality and the use of the word. Don't take me wrong, I am an ardent atheist, in the sense that I see all organized religions as stupefying fairy tales.

    But I think of spirituality as of something different, as a personal quest which doesn't necessarily have anything to do with organized forms of religion. I would suggest that is a much broader notion from unconditional belief in whatever BS someone is trying to feed you with. In religion you follow the pre-designed path to connection with an imagined maker, in spirituality you are free to explore your energetic link with everything that surrounds you, however, there is no dogmatic prescription on how to do it. Of course, that only in case you are prone to believing there is such a link in the first place :-). I do...

    Greetings

  795. D-K

    @Gia:

    I wasn't counting Randy out, au contraire, I was praising him (forgive the term, I like irony) in my own way. I loathe irrationality.

    To base your personal worldview on an assumption/leap of faith, is to let the fundamentals of my life be dictated by an act of irrationality. You'll find me to be quite a logical creature, and as such, I am as incapable as he is to judge based on faith. The upsides to your way of life are irrelevant, as the foundation isn't sound enough for me to base my worldview, frame of reference, lifestyle and live-authority on.

    Religon is like a single one of those floaty-mats in a kid's swimming pool.. if it's not strong (logical) enough to stand on firmly, i'm not gonna risk getting wet. I would be irrational for me to just assume the mat will hold my weight, so my common sense tells me to refrain from jumping on, no matter how much fun it may look like.

    @Epicurus:

    That's (what you said) what I was implying with:

    "Also, a lot of the evidence concerning Jesus/God is spiritual/religious evidence. You cannot find evidence in the bible compelling FOR your cause, but neither can you find evidence against it"

  796. GodisAwesome

    WTC7,

    How smart is it, in your quest, to totally ignore the hundreds of millions of fellow humans who believe they have found the key to the very link you seek to explore?

    The main problem with those who have no tolerance for so-called organized religion, is that they often end up making a disorganized mess of life's most important issues. I'm always inclined to ask, "Are you as haphazard about every area of your life, or is it only your religion you prefer to be disorganized?"

    If you believe the World Trade Center bombing involves a government cover-up and conspiracy, as I suppose your screen name implies, then don't kid yourself; you are not a rational thinker.

    I'm glad to see that a few loons agree with the atheists as it's usually my side that shoulders more than a few non-thinkers.

    My apologies if I drew too much of an inference from the screen name.

  797. D-K

    @WTC7:

    You said: "But I think of spirituality as a personal quest which doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with organized forms of religion. in spirituality you are free to explore your energetic link with everything that surrounds you, however, there is no dogmatic prescription on how to do it. Of course, that only in case you are prone to believing there is such a link in the first place :-). I do

    Are you sure you're an atheist? Your comment would seem like you're more of a dualist pantheist.

    I said: "Anything spiritual is by definition immaterial, you CANNOT see it. You ASSUME that it’s there, without having actually seen it.

    Spiritual experience can only (and must always) be supported by faith. Faith is irrational and illogical in nature and as such, cannot be adopted by anyone who bases his frame of reference on FACT rather than ASSUMPTION"

    I don't see where we disagree, could you quote that which seems contradictory to you?

    Oh wait, it might be a sematical issue.. replace the word "faith" in my comment with "belief". With faith I refer to believing without proof, rather than faith; christianity.

  798. D-K

    @GIA: "I’m glad to see that a few loons agree with the atheists as it’s usually my side that shoulders more than a few non-thinkers"

    Who are the loons?

    Also, who are the atheists?

  799. GodisAwesome

    Yes, I was incorrect. WTC7 is writing more like a pantheist.

  800. D-K

    Then still, who are the loons/non-thinkers?

  801. GodisAwesome

    Often-times they are well-intentioned Christians. This time "they" were a pantheist. "Loon" is just a colloquialism that doesn't seem to bother the moderator "bot" on this particular blog.

  802. GodisAwesome

    In WTC7's defense (who obviously needs no help from me) the term "atheist" has been co-opted by pantheists and agnostics who don't want to appear to be lukewarm in their hatred for the true and living God.

    Once my previous post gets out of moderation I am done with this particular thread so pile on while you can boys and girls.

  803. D-K

    Ah, in that case the i'll just write the plural off as simple little slip-up.

    We all make mistakes.. ;)

    Say GIA, have you ever considered what properties you (subconsciously) attributed to God, and then scrutinized why you did so? The thing that confounds me most about most religions, is that the majority of religious people act in his stead, or from his will. The strange thing about that is, is that when describing God and his properties/mannerisms, people will often say something extremely vague, resulting in them not knowing what they actually believe, and other times they will get very specific, and will then have to rationalize/answer why and how they attributed these traits to god in the first place (hint: there is no reasonable answer to that).

  804. D-K

    Oh no you didn't!

    Sigh.. victimizing yourself..? really?

    okbyebyethen

  805. WTC7

    @ D-K

    I didn't say we disagree, au contraire, I specifically emphasized at the beginning of my post that I agreed with all you said to GIA, except that you used the words 'spiritualism' and 'religion' interchangeably implying they are one and the same concept. There I put forth my personal perspective in which the distinction between the two exists.

    I concur that 'anything spiritual is immaterial by definition, and consequently invisible', don't know how did you get to the conclusion that I would have disagreed with that. I was obviously not clear in what I said.

    To assume that I may be a dualist pantheist on the basis of what I said is certainly your prerogative, but I am not. There is no 'cage' in which I would agree to be placed whatever my opinions may sound like to others. I draw my conclusion about connection with our surroundings from the simple fact that our bodies are made of the same materials as everything else; we are part of the nature and the fact that our brains have evolved to the current stage doesn't change that.

    So, basically, I hope there's no disagreement :-).

    @ GodisAwesome

    It would be a wast of time to get into a discussion about anything with you, but I'll just say that whoever these "hundreds of millions of fellow humans who believe they have found the key to the very link you seek to explore" - you are certainly not one of them.

  806. D-K

    @WTC7:

    I see, the mix-up happened as I though it did when I said: "Oh wait, it might be a semantical issue.. replace the word “faith” in my comment with “belief”. With faith I refer to believing without proof, rather than faith; christianity"

    I realize, naturally, that spirituality does not equal religious persuasion, although one does need to be spiritually pre-disposed to be able to be religious.

    There is in fact no disagreement, a simple semantical misunderstanding.

  807. WTC7

    @ D-K

    "although one does need to be spiritually pre-disposed to be able to be religious" - absolutely agree there.

    Very glad we resolved this misunderstanding, since, from what I read from you so far, I did come to appreciate what you have to say.

  808. GodisAwesome

    D-K wrote:

    "Say GIA, have you ever considered what properties you (subconsciously) attributed to God, and then scrutinized why you did so? The thing that confounds me most about most religions, is that the majority of religious people act in his stead, or from his will. The strange thing about that is, is that when describing God and his properties/mannerisms, people will often say something extremely vague, resulting in them not knowing what they actually believe, and other times they will get very specific, and will then have to rationalize/answer why and how they attributed these traits to god in the first place (hint: there is no reasonable answer to that)."

    To which I answer: Yes, as a matter of fact I have spent a great portion of my life devoted to discovering the mind of God, exploring His personality and discerning His will. I am a theologian, and a man of science. That's what we do.

    I largely agree with you on this one. My contention, however, is that the problem lies within the realm of our finite minds trying to wrap themselves around an infinite God. It is at least to some degree arrogant of any of us, His creatures, to think we can reduce Him down to enumerated qualities. He is God. We are, by clumsy literary comparison, cockroaches. Of course in this analogy I am referring only to the brightest among our human tribe.

    I'm sure I can include you among the cockroaches, while I may personally be an even lower life form, again when compared (clumsily) to God.

  809. D-K

    But without ever (being able of) knowing god, how can one live according to his will? If god acts on a certain divine motivation, that we simply cannot fathom/comprehend, how are we to be inspired by him?

    How can you live your life in his honor, or how he would have you live it, if you are unable to understand how or why he wants you to live? This is where religion comes in, but religion itself is not divine. You actually live your life through the mannerisms as propogated by a religion without even knowing the intent of god, and place your behaviour and frame of reference into something that isn't divine in nature?

    Does this not seem like shaky footing?

  810. GodisAwesome

    Yes and no. I can know what God has seen fit to reveal about Himself and live as best I can accordingly. Religions of all types are an incomplete and somewhat faulty way of responding to God, but they are superior in every way to not responding.

    A dear saint disagreed with something in a Charles H. Spurgeon sermon and took the liberty of letting him know it in no uncertain terms. "How then madam, do you deal with the issue at hand?" "That's not for me to say," she replied, "I just know your way can't be correct." "Then with respect madam, I much prefer the way I deal with it to the way you don't."

    My longer reply has still not passed moderation, which is why I took the time to respond again.

    I respect each blogger and the rights of each one to post. Please know that everything I write is with great respect and concern.

  811. Randy

    Look at D-K blasting out with his gynormous brain! You go, my brother!

    Anyone who wants to know the origin of all religion, needs to go on that YouTube thing you kids are all crazy about these days, and check out:

    Ricky Jay, "Cups and Balls", A.K.A "The History Lesson"

    It's all a trick, you are being conned.

    And @GIA,

    Just when I am supposed to turn BACK to this christ of yours? I was there... he was evil... I wised up... ok...

    Now, I am 57 and half dead. How much longer 'til I am supposed to get weak and turn to this mythology for "strength"?

  812. GodisAwesome

    Randy,

    That is up to you. I understand you are just venting though. Someone Who doesn't exist cannot even be evil. I also see that you are actually implying that the very concept is evil, and I do understand. I just don't believe we have either the perspective, or the intellect to make such a call.

    Yours may be an Abrahamic test. Why not choose to pass it, even at this supposedly late stage, rather than fail it?

    If there is any part of you that is mad at Christ and really believes He is personally evil though, then you can't logically have it both ways. He's either evil or mythological, but not both. Perhaps He is neither evil nor mythological, but He cannot possibly be both.

    I write this in acknowledgment of your position. I personally know Him to be perfect in all ways. I may die and discover that I was somehow colossally deluded, but I will not know that will I? On the other hand. . . . I know you are already familiar with Paschal's wager. It has been my experience many times, however, that the closer one comes to approaching eternity the more open he/she is to just such a wager.

    Even unbelief is just another sin to repent of on your way to accepting Him. It does not have to be a deal breaker.

    How unfortunate for both you and Ricky Jay, whom I have enjoyed for many years as a brilliant entertainer and magical historian. He is toying with something here, however, that is far too important to be wrong about.

  813. GodisAwesome

    Just watched the Ricky Jay video. He is so talented. I guess I drew an inference that was not there, so I mistakenly took him to some task but my comments were wholly unwarranted. I plainer words, I was wrong.

  814. Randy

    Oi! (pronounced OY! and it has a strong magical background, that word...).

    GIA,

    I am familiar with Paschal's wager and that made sense to me, ONCE, a long time ago. When I was young and silly.

    What? Are you afraid of disapointing your mom and dad, or something? You are your own man. Grow up, be strong and build things.

  815. D-K

    "Yes and no. I can know what God has seen fit to reveal about Himself and live as best I can accordingly. Religions of all types are an incomplete and somewhat faulty way of responding to God, but they are superior in every way to not responding"

    But what he reveals about himself differs per religion, so you must choose a religion to "respond" to this god. On what basis do you choose a religion? You cannot know a single thing about god without taking any religious position, which means that a religious frame of reference is forced on to you and you lose all clarity/objectivity in any "observations" or reasoning concerning his existance/properties.

    You claim he will embrace Randy with open arms, as if he were his mother calling him to come home, and you base this assumption on god being christian god (correct me if i'm wrong).

    As a man of science, surely you recognize the error in your logic here?

  816. GodisAwesome

    Dr. Randy,

    I plead with you to be converted. Labeling something as silly or foolish can be nothing more than a pathetic attempt to dismiss the consequences of failing to consider it.

    I am obviously as well-versed in this subject as you are, yet come to a well-reasoned, yet opposite conclusion. I am also of your era (though not your error), so it has nothing to do with age. I am at least as well educated. (Admittedly an assumption)

    I am not implying, or assuming that you do not have what (for you are) valid reasons. I'm just pleading, with death literally staring you in the face, don't be wrong.

    I beg you to reconsider, as Paul pleaded before King Agrippa.

    I have built a great many things. I am strong as man counts strength by worldly wisdom and accomplishments, but it is all wood, hay, and stubble compared to the unsearchable and unfathomable richness of knowing Christ.

  817. D-K

    Pascal's Wager does not account for a scientific mind, it plays in to the emotional investmest in the concept of an afterlife and/or a soul. Neither of which can (at this time)be factualized. I judge, reason and act on fact and logic. Especially when approaching subjects with such profound implications.

    With me, truth lies with undeniable fact, the rest is philosophy/theory/theology, and while worthy of pondering on, not substantial enough to form my life around.

    You have chosen the path of faith, I have chosen that of logic and reason.

  818. GodisAwesome

    D-K,

    If there was a God, then, of necessity He would fit only His own set of criteria and attributes and not fit those that are exclusive of Him, regardless of whether some religion thought that He did, or did not. As I made very clear in a previous post, I believe that a great deal of existential evidence, both legal/historical and scientific, supports the hypothesis that the God of the Christian Bible is the One true and living God.

    I am convinced that my position is that of the rationalist and that the opposing position is, therefore by extension, irrational and illogical.

    My sincere prayer is that men and women not wait until it is eternally too late to discover the truth on this matter of such urgency.

  819. Randy

    You are destroying the world with your childish fantasies and delusions.

    That is unforgivable.

    You are destroying everything enlightened men and women have been trying to achieve in the last 200 years, (just for example).

    For what?

  820. Randy

    @NADA!

    I'm so sorry to hear about that... but I am so glad you have someone to help you!

    I've been very worried about you...

  821. Achems Razor

    @ Nada:

    I am sorry to hear that also, glad you are feeling Better!

  822. Epicurus

    lol i like how GIA keeps saying he has LEGAL evidence. and HISTORICAL evidence for a god...

    there is not a single bit of historical or "legal" evidence to support any god.

    there is no scientific evidence for this god thing.

    could you list some of these specific legal and historic pieces of evidence.

    do you wonder why the bible is not used for a credible source of history when doing research?

  823. Randy

    @Epicurus who wrote:

    "do you wonder why the bible is not used for a credible source of history when doing research?"

    That's not entirely true, Epicurus, (respectfully!), there are many archeologists out there that START with the bible, and then look for evidence to prove it...

    They will always find evidence to prove their theory. ALWAYS.

    Do you know the dynamic I am speaking of? When you begin with an assumption and force conclusions to prove it?

    Carl Sagan spoke of it alot.

  824. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Ha! You called it. I started taking new meds yesterday and they had me all messed up,man. Im not going to take them anymore. I need to inform the doc of this.I barely remember last night.

    Apologies for my rambling.I didnt think they would get me like that.I dont even remember falling asleep.

  825. D-K

    "I am convinced that my position is that of the rationalist and that the opposing position is, therefore by extension, irrational and illogical"

    I'm not an "opposing side" I'm questioning your logic as the scientist you claim to be. I've pointed out what I think are errors in your logic, you have yet to have reason to assume I am illogical/irrational. You cannot claim faith, validated by assumptions, AND superior logic in the same breath.

    I question all matters objectively, unbiased by any imposed frame of reference, I see clearly. You have adopted the mindset of a specific religion, and judge from there. You have made leaps of faith and thus you are in no position to judge rationality.

  826. Randy

    @eireannach666

    Yes, sir! I was worried. You seemed so lucid and then you devolved into incoherence!

    Thank you for checking in and letting me know.

    Understand, though, if any of your meds are opioids or morpha based you can not just STOP without serious physical effects. You must slowly wean yourself off of them.

    Under a doctor's supervision is best...

  827. eireannach666

    @Randy

    They gave me a new sleep aid ,that doesnt mix well with my other meds. I was ok for a while but then I noticed I was typing all messed up and then you said something to me about it so I was just like fux it. I reread everything today and felt kind of retarded. I dont really have to take them , so Ill just not take them and when next month comes , inform my doc.

  828. Randy

    Also, anti-depressants? Very bad stuff, but if you are on them, once again, you can't just STOP!

    It can cause horrible brain chemical changes, and psychosis...

    Be very careful with them!

  829. eireannach666

    Klonopin and sleep aids = bad.

  830. eireannach666

    I wouldnt quit my Klonopin , Im better with it , plus if I dont have them my body gets sick and I get highly irritable.Nobody I know likes me w/o my little blue friends.

  831. Randy

    @eireannach666

    Yes. Do not mix medications. Even OTC anti-histamines with booze or any other drug is a recipe for bad things to happen.

    And you know I am a big advocate of booze! You just can't mix it with other drugs...

    Just listen to some Vivaldi...

  832. eireannach666

    I took a benedryl (?) as well because I was around cats all day.Probably shouldnt have , but didnt think about it.

    I do drink on my klonopin sometimes but not as much as I would when not taking them. Im used to them and I dont abuse them.

  833. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Antonio Vivaldi!My little one like him.(plays the viola now for 3 yrs.Also the violin and flute)I like classical piano but string is cool with me too.

  834. Randy

    Listen, my gaelic brother!

    Your brain can get used to ONE drug and can cope, but if you mix it with others... you'll short curcuit it!

    Klonopin is a very serious drug. You can not mix it with anything. If you like it then stick with it, that's fine, but you can't have it all.

    Everybody needs something to get them through the day, I understand that, but be moderate.

  835. eireannach666

    @Randy

    I know ,you're right.Its just really hard not to drink.Its always around me and in my mind.Plus,I love my whiskey.I shouldnt drink on them,but its kind of a bad habit.

    Whiskey , your the devil.You're leading me astray.Over hills and mountains and to an early grave.You're sweeter,stronger,decenter,more spunkier than tea.Oh whiskey your me darlin ,drunk or sobor.

  836. GodisAwesome

    Epicurus,

    You appear to not understand the definition of legal/historical proof. It is proof of a different kind than scientific. Using scientific proof one cannot prove things of an historical nature. For example, one cannot prove the previous existence, exploits, or historicity of most figures in history utilizing only the scientific method.

    I have already enumerated much of the data which supports my hypothesis. It is among my first several posts on this thread.

    As for the archaeology:

    "I know of no finding in archaeology that’s properly confirmed which is in opposition to the Scriptures. The Bible is the most accurate history textbook the world has ever seen." - Dr Clifford Wilson, formerly director of the Australian Institute of Archaeology

    "It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical description has often led to amazing discoveries." - Dr. Nelson Glueck, Rivers in the Desert, (New York: Farrar, Strous and Cudahy, 1959), 136.

    "The reader may rest assured that nothing has been found [by archaeologists] to disturb a reasonable faith, and nothing has been discovered which can disprove a single theological doctrine. We no longer trouble ourselves with attempts to 'harmonize' religion and science, or to 'prove' the Bible. The Bible can stand for itself." - Dr. William F. Albright, eminent archeologist who confirmed the authenticity of the Dead Sea Scrolls following their discovery

    "The excessive skepticism of many liberal theologians stems not from a careful evaluation of the available data, but from an enormous predisposition against the supernatural." - Professor Millar Burrows (Professor of Archaeology at Yale University), What Mean These Stones?, Meridian Books, New York, NY, 1956, p. 176.

    Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of facts trustworthy; he is possessed of the true historic sense...In short this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians." - Sir William Ramsey (archaeologist), The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament

    Though some of these quotes are from the past century, by archaeological standards they are certainly not out of date.

    Your unproven assertions notwithstanding there is ample legal/historical and scientific evidence. As I've indicated, none of it constitutes concrete proof. God does require faith. You will be lost and pay the eternal consequences for your own sin if you continue to insist that your way is superior to His.

  837. Randy

    @GIA

    Again, I say... "OI!"

    Faith is another name for idiocy. You need to grow up!

    What are you afraid of if you let go of god?

    What will happen? Will the sun fall from the sky?

    FOX News is your enemy, but I am NOT a Liberal.

  838. GodisAwesome

    Who brought up FOX news, or accused you of being a liberal? And why should I care? Oh well. The post I was concerned about seems to have cleared moderation. I am signing off permanently from this thread.

  839. Randy

    @GIA

    "“The excessive skepticism of many liberal theologians stems not from a careful evaluation of the available data, but from an enormous predisposition against the supernatural.” – Professor Millar Burrows (Professor of Archaeology at Yale University), What Mean These Stones?, Meridian Books, New York, NY, 1956, p. 176."

    Um...

    I assumed as you quoted a man who hates liberals, you thought I was one. And as a liberal hater, I assumed you were a Glen Beck fan...

    I mean... do you not even read your own posts? Do you not even read the quotes you copy from the internet?

    Do you know who wrote them? Who their mothers were? Where they came from?

    No you read a newspaper? Do you watch any news?

    Study, study, study, do homework for the rest of your life!

    Do better!

  840. GodisAwesome

    I just cannot resist this one. Of course I read my quotes. I even have the books they came from. To be theologically liberal is not synonymous with political liberalism. It is now glaringly obvious which of us is operating on bull and which knows this subject matter. Thanks for the help and the clarification.

  841. Randy

    Uh oh... he's angry now...

  842. Randy

    "Gorillas can READ Nietzsche, they just don't understand it..."

    What movie is that from?

  843. GodisAwesome

    I have no idea. But no I'm not angry. I was sincere. I do hope you will truly find the Christ of Scripture and depend upon Him not only for your eternity but also your present.

    This time I am truly signing out. Maybe I'll catch you on another thread.

    And I mis-typed. I do not have every book I quoted from, but I do have the Millar Burrows'. Don't want to leave a misrepresentation.

  844. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Glen Beck swears up and down that he talks to god. Hes a whacko.

    John Stewart and Stephen Colbert did a pretty funny segment on him , in which Glen Beck was being refered to as "Glod". People like him are a plague to society.

    Oh, and it was " A Fish Called Wanda" .

  845. Randy

    I had to jump in here and say to my gaelic brother:

    Excellent!

    I thought one of my Brit friends would get that, but you were the first! Wonderful.

  846. eireannach666

    @Gia
    I was reading over your quotes , and was wondering , How is that evidence ? Evidence is defined as To indicate clearly; exemplify or prove. Plainly visible; to be seen. Got any of that kind of evidence? Ill convert if you can show me real evidence and not hear say.

    “I know of no finding in archaeology that’s properly confirmed which is in opposition to the Scriptures. The Bible is the most accurate history textbook the world has ever seen.

    The bronze aged called for you and they want their superstition back .
    Nature and Nature's laws lay hid in night: God said, Let Newton be! and all was light.- Alexander Pope

  847. eireannach666

    “I know of no finding in archaeology that’s properly confirmed which is in opposition to the Scriptures. The Bible is the most accurate history textbook the world has ever seen."

    Forgot the other quotation mark on the last post. Dont want anybody thinking Im as crazy as the guy who said this trash. Most accurate, please. This is the book that says that Moses parted the red sea with his magic wand , that snakes talk and bushes of fire , that Noha built a boat so big that 2 of every single animal ( and his family plus food and water to feed every living thing on the boat)could fit. Etc, etc,etc.And it goes on and on for thousands of pages.
    Come on people really?

    Also, how many times do you think this book was re-written and doctored? What about the Nostic gospels ?

    How come the muslims are wrong ? Or the buddhists? They have your kind of evidence too.

  848. Randy B

    Hmmm, wonder why my posts are in moderation???

  849. puluncoboy

    Wow what a boring documentary.

  850. Randy

    It's easy to love folly, in a child...

  851. Randy

    The Tetragrammaton, do we understand what that is?

    I do.

    "Yea, I know thee, and I know what thou hast wrought!"

    (I bet Reb knows what that means...)

  852. Hardy

    @godisawesome:

    I'm sorry, just getting back into this debate after a few days of vacation, but to your 'there are millions of people that believe in christianity (jesus was the divine son of god), therefore it is true' argument:

    There are an incredible amount of people who believe in Astrology. And I mean 'base-their-descisions-in-life-on-it' believe.

    And it has been disproven by science (hundreds of statistical experiments that verify the falseness of Astrology).

    Yet still people believe in it!

    See any paralells there?

  853. Hardy

    We really need an edit function...

    Basically, what I'm saying is that any metaphysical and transcendent explanation will be believed by people against all odds. It satisfies a basic need inside human beings (The questions of purpose and origin), regardless if it is true or not.

    In essence, just because something is accepted as true by the masses doesn't mean anything. ESPECIALLY not, if this 'truth' is part of a metaphysical explanation, since human beings are unbelievably gullible in that part. I seems to be our weak-spot.

    We are rational beings in all aspects, but suddenly, when we're talking 'invisible, all powerful entities' we become irrational.

  854. Randy

    *Randy throws the HORNS at Hardy*

  855. D-K

    @Hardy!

    Gah! That is what i've been saying!

    It always struck me as a little suspicious how conditioned religee's come to debates with half-arguments, faulty/flaky interpretations of "evidence" and run along in tangents once logic gets thrown in their faces.. yet non-religious people of varying culture, age and upbringing come to the same logical conclusions, without "divine guidance" or some holy book containing the supposed infallible word of god himself.

    In comparison, I'm but a wee lad compared to all of you, yet these supposed "religious scientists" (think i've met 2 on this site now) can't even refute my basic logic.

    Just re-read the thing, he (gia) contradicts himself on a few occasions too, it's ridiculous. We need a new challenger.

  856. Hardy

    It's too bad, really. I bet many here could pretend to defend their side of the argument and do better jobs.

    Just noticed now that GIA actually decided to leave this discussion. I will still hope for a reply.

  857. makin it hard

    who thinks that Randy is a douche?

  858. D-K

    I was hoping for a reply as well, but I don't think it's happening.

    I'm also quite curious where that supposed post-mod comment of his is, he spoke of it regularly, yet i've seen nothing that wasn't already here (and refuted).

  859. Randy

    @makin it hard, who wrote:

    "who thinks that Randy is a douche?"

    I DO! Let's take him out back and beat the cr*p out of him!

  860. oliarguello

    HA! I think I am one of those "religious scientists" ( but not a creationist, especially not how this documentary depicts them) and made some comments but I think I got drowned out by ( and people decided to attack) the easy targets which are Charles B and GIA.

    I agree with most of the rebuttals against Charles B since he considers anything outside his conditioning as false and demonic ( both scientific and theological). Anything that he believes, that doesn't make sense, he uses faith and biblical scripture as "proof" and ignores anything that disproves his paradigm. He seems like a good guy,...humble and all that... but his fears imprison his mind and his progress.

    GIA: i think makes a handful of good points . Specifically I agree that some ideas between modern science and ancient beliefs are interchangeable and describe the same thing. I think ancient people were just describing phenomena with metaphor and terms they could understand...I mean you seriously cant expect an ancient person to use terms such as those in quantum physics or equations such as E=MC^2. But he too clings to biblical scriptures and faith when he cant prove something. Even though the ideas might be interchangeable, science definitely describes the mechanisms far better ( but maybe not the purpose of said phenomena).

    I think some of whats in the Bible, Qur'an, Torah, Upanishads, is true ( especially the teachings of how to live an enlightened and righteous life) but there is so much contradiction and nonsense that you cant take all in as absolute truth. In fact a lot of it is misinterpreted and taken out of social and cultural context.

  861. D-K

    @Oliarguello:

    Don't believe we've met, although i've seen some of your comments float around, I have yet to see one asserting a specific claim for me to be able to logically refute.

  862. Randy

    @D-K

    Oliarguello is a "god apologist". He wants to have it both ways: science and god. But, alas, you can't have that.

    And, Oli, there is no religion that was ever created, ever on the face of this earth, that taught people how to be good, or righteous. Ever.

    Nature has a better way.

  863. D-K

    Ah, wait.. it's coming back to me now. Charles called you a "fake christian", did he not?

    What is the key principle that leads you to believe that god's existance is a fact?

  864. D-K

    I also never understood that term.. "god apologist"..

    rolls off the tongue easier than say, "Presuppositional apologist" though..

    You seem to have to scoop on everybody here, Randy.

  865. satir

    it is truly awesome that an idea can be so difficult to give up that in basicaly 1 generation we have gone from a god that "formed a fully formed adam, in his own image, out of earth and breathed life into him" 6000 years ago. to a god that "set in motion the big bang, and then divinely used the process of evolution to arrive at man"
    I guess so long as there is a margin of the unexplainable some will try to attribute god-like magical powers to it...
    the human brain, so powerful but so easily manipulated by each other

  866. D-K

    #correction; the scoop..

  867. D-K

    @satir

    Well put.

    Sums up one of the arguments I was making perfectly.

  868. Randy

    @D-K

    Yeah, satir's got it goin' on-- just like you.

    You and he and the other rational intellectuals on this site are like a cool drink of water on a hot day, for me.

  869. oliarguello

    @D-K

    Well nice to meet ya. I have seen your posts here and there as well. I think you have commented on some of mine( like 300 posts ago LOL), but I know its rather difficult to keep track of who said what especially in this doc’s incredibly involved forum.

    The reason I “want it both ways” ( as Randy says) with science and GOD is because I have first hand experience with the divine realm. I have posted on here before about my experience with a curandera ( just search that on this forum to see my experience) which in a nutshell is this lady who is a medium for a sort of spirit on a mission. I have been skeptical of what was going on there for years and have tried to debunk it with all the tricks I have educated myself with that supposed mediums and psychics use. Event after event has lead me to eventually completely believe, although I am open to any real suggestions that would debunk whats going on ( claiming you can do/have done the same and it was all a trick really doesn’t help… at least tell me the tricks you used keeping in mind the procedures of the curandera I mentioned….and cold reading doesn’t apply..looking at you Randy B. ;) ).

    And I don’t believe in magic. Since I have an educational and professional background in science I believe there are mechanisms that would explain whats going on ( which I have also posted on here). I have said before two truths can not contradict each other, if they are both true then they compliment each other. While hard science cant be refuted , that leads to the divine realm to be refuted, which like I said I have not been able to debunk and have experienced many reasons to believe.

    So based on what I know , what I have experienced, and what I continue to learn, I try to seek the mechanisms behind the truth that leads to the accord of two seemingly conflicting ideas. But that is not to say I believe in every dogmatic utterance, on the contrary I know a lot of it is simply not true.

    The reason Charles B. calls me a false Christian is because I say that I follow Jesus’s teachings but I say that the Bible isn’t the word of GOD. Anyone who has looked into the history, development, and politics behind the Bible would know that, let alone the massive contradictions. He calls me demonic and the curandera demonic for no good reason aside from “ an unshakable feeling” even after I tell him its based on Jesus and GOD…which is ironic because he praises Finger of GOD documentary here on TDF which depicts Christian healers, but that doc is ridiculously easily debunked.

    As for “GOD Apologist” ….yes I do think GOD exists but not in the traditional sense ( I don’t believe it’s a guy sitting in the corner of the Universe somewhere, or outside of it). But I think religions are institutions that corrupt, brainwash, are hypocritical, seek money, and grossly misinterpret the basic ideas of their own theology to feed the ego. I have read and studied many religions and philosophical doctrines and have seen time and time again that the truly enlightened know that being good and righteous comes from self improvement, a brave type of honesty( to yourself and others), the virtue of seeking perfection ( but never attaining it for its impossible), attaining as much knowledge as possible while seeking wisdom, following the golden rule, attempting to have those around you prosper with no reciprocation or external admiration ( in fact its best to do it in secrecy), and enjoying life with all its pains, pitfalls, loves, hates, happiness, ecstasies, accomplishments, failures all the while seeking no external validation. And I attempt to live this kind of life because suffering is inevitable, but if you endure or overcome pain bliss is inevitable.

    I also believe those who are steadfast in dismissing certain things will never be able to experience certain things. Words, as evident by this forum, will not change anyones mind that is already closed, but real life practice and experience can.

  870. oliarguello

    @Satir

    As an intellectual I did go from a religious person to an atheist when I was a teenager and into my college education.

    But I kept my mind open and it lead me to what I have experienced and learned. I must admit I hung onto my atheism for the longest time in the face of what I was seeing/experiencing trying to debunk it because it didnt make sense and I was sure there was some trickery going on.

    But I think I am doing the opposite of attributing "god-like magical powers" to a "margin of the unexplainable ". I have witnessed "god-like magical powers" and I am trying to reconcile the "margin of unexplainable" through current scientific knowledge.

    This is not to convince anyone, because its pretty obvious my words wont change anyone's mind. I am simply stating what I have experienced and throwing out my ideas to hopefully spark conversation that will show me something I havent thought of or dont know about.

  871. D-K

    You seem reasonable. 2 questions, though.

    "As for “GOD Apologist” ….yes I do think GOD exists but not in the traditional sense ( I don’t believe it’s a guy sitting in the corner of the Universe somewhere, or outside of it). But I think religions..."

    You don't answer the question here, you say what you think he's not and then migrate towards religion. I'm interested to know what you think GOD actually is.

    "truly enlightened"

    What kind of titles did these men/woman have? In other words, what type of thinker do you consider a truly enlightened person?

  872. oliarguello

    @satir

    I like that chart you linked. You are right in that its difficult to defend a canon as truth when there is obvious metaphors, mythology, and contradictions. Especially when you have a fundamentalist who bases their "truth" from fear. Hence why I reject a lot of it when its totally undeniably proven wrong.

    Objectively, the Bible for example, doesnt make sense to say Heaven is in the sky/clouds or that the entire world flooded. Someone who claims to believe that I doubt truly believes that, instead the fear of dismissing any part of the Bible kicks in( since its supposedly infallible) because of anxiety towards damnation and going to hell. They, in a nanosecond, respond with their emotions. Thats why you see any fundamentalist start to get incredibly angry, start name calling, default to their text, when a debate questioning something with empirical proof goes against a belief.

  873. Randy

    OK. Again, Oli...

    There is NO divine in this woman. It is a trick a con.

    I read some tarot cards for fun this past weekend for family and friends of family, (many of them strangers, to me). I told them all up front that it was a magic trick.

    They were all astounded at the details I could "divine". And they insisted I had psychic powers, even as I told them I was conning them...

    People are really easy to read. There is nothing mysterious about people. Boring, most of them.

    People would rather believe a comfortable lie, than a hard truth. Hard truth is: no magic, no mystism, no gods... you are on your own, and on your way out-- act accordingly.

  874. Randy

    Oh and I could even make amazing predictions of the future!

    I told this one woman that she should not go into to work on Tuesday, that it was going to be a very bad day for her!

    Well, she called me Wednsday to say that she fell and broke her arm at work! And, of course, asked me to do more readings for her...

    Well, that wasn't supernatural. She had been partying all weekend, I saw. Most people who party all weekend have a cr*ppy day at work. She would be hung-over, hypo-glycemic, clumsy...

    You know? Easy.

  875. oliarguello

    @Randy

    I see where you are going with those ideas. I have known about sizing people up ( an older man likely has a dead relative, a woman in her twenties likely has trouble with men, people have issues with money etc) and then progressing into cold readings based on verbal and non verbal communication. And I know card readings and horoscopes tell vague, usually universal plights and describe universal characteristics.

    I know those trick already. Like I said I have read about a lot of the tricks and tried to apply them.Because I am not talking about seeing a fat guy and saying " you have diabetes" , more like when the doctors told my mom she had ovarian cancer and the curandera told her to tell the doctors to test for the stomach because they are incorrect and its stomach cancer, which turned out to be true.

    I will just give you a couple examples that I noted before on this forum that you can explain to me. I believe you have done those type of things you are claiming, but they simply dont apply to what I have witnessed.

    But first like i said before on other posts...please keep in mind the curandera does not ask you anything, doesnt not await for any affirmations, you walk in palms up and she hovers her hands around you and mentions SPECIFIC details about your life and health issues in the span of a minute or two.

    A female friend of mine in her twenties was told:
    1)That she was very concerned about her brother to the point of depression because hes schizophrenic and shes afraid she might turn out to be as well. But not to worry becasue hr current mind fog is attributed to anxiety from school, a stressful job, and lack of sleep.

    2)Not to give up on her alcoholic dad because his relapse is due to his troubled marriage.

    Or another male friend who was 27 about start his surgical residency was told to go ahead with a LASIK surgery because he will need prestine vision for his field as a surgeon. He wsnt wearing any scrubs or anything like that at the session.

    And you definitely have not explained how 90% of people with cancer are either cured or lived prolonged lives, cured from AIDS with proof from doctors results, advanced leprosy cured, etc all without any medicine.

    Also keep in mind that these are just a handful of examples of what I constantly see( albeit a lot of minor stuff too) and she sees about 400 people a week every other week so you dont think its statistically insignificant with like 5 people or something.

    @D-K

    I will get back to you. Wont have time to write anything up right now.

  876. D-K

    Fair enough.

  877. puluncoboy

    boring documentary

  878. oliarguello

    @D-K

    Ok I got a little time to answer your question. I didn’t mean to sidestep the “GOD” question, I just didn’t want to go into any grand detail of what I think unless someone was interested.

    I believe GOD is everything; all energy and its various states of vibration (radiation, visible light, electrons, atoms, matter, etc), all forces, all dimensions, and all universes. I don’t think “GOD” created anything only transmutated from the super substance ( I don’t remember the exact term) prior to the big bang to the various physics epochs and ages/eras following the big bang. I believe this even explains many of the theological paradoxes I have come across (omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence but since this forum is atheist heavy I wont go into that) in conjunction with various scientific laws and theories I have come across( laws of thermodynamics, quantum theories, time, and cognitive science)but the real significant question between atheists and theists is: Is the universe totally nihilistic and it is what is, or does it have a consciousness?

    I posted on here about the nature of consciousness and that I believe there are different types of consciousness; different to our own. But in order for something to resemble any kind of consciousness there must be a way that a structure communicates within itself ( like our brain does), well I believe supersymmetric string theory postulates that the universe can.

    But does it meet the other criteria of consciousness; is it also self aware? That I do not know and so far I have a supposed encounter at a church in TJ and I have to rely on faith on that one, but I am not entirely convinced since its very speculative. The only way I consolidate a form of self awareness of a universal consciousness is that with a comparative mechanism: we can communicate with other creatures of different types of consciousness through physical manipulations with our will being our input and their expected response being the output( pets can be trained, animals can be fenced off, chemicals we use can attract/repel/kill insects and microorganisms, emotional bonding, etc and there are also some sound manipulations) and perhaps there are clues all around us of a “universal self awareness” communicating with us through various mediums. It’s a weak idea admittedly for universal self awareness that I have only begun to meditate on which is why i can only say I dont know if the universe is self aware.

    As for the enlightened inquiry I admire cognitive enlightment like that of Hawking, Einstein, Descartes, Socrates and to a degree, for their insight, Tolstoy, A.W. Tozer , and George Orwell. But I feel “truly enlightened” people are the wise and spiritually enlightened like Jesus, Yogananda, Siddhartha Gautma, and to a degree Gandhi who are able to live a harmonious lives and have great insights.

  879. satir

    Religious belief; a criminal waste of the most highly developed of brains

  880. K.T

    Too many big red letters and messages repeated, but that is acceptable thinking this was probably all made by a single person with minimum funds.
    The message was clear and though I would debate on some of the scientific points it was on a level where a scientific debate could be had.
    About the creationists I did not really laught, since that would be rude, but am very very sad. So much lost potential.
    There is a saying in my country that would sound like this in English: Being ignorant is better than being half-educated. I think it matches this creationism well.
    Bravo to this nice educated fellow who made the doc.

  881. Epicurus

    @Godisawesome, you said;

    “I know of no finding in archaeology that’s properly confirmed which is in opposition to the Scriptures. The Bible is the most accurate history textbook the world has ever seen.” – Dr Clifford Wilson, formerly director of the Australian Institute of Archaeology

    This is simply a quote by a religious person trying to reaffirm their belief. actually it doesnt indicate any evidence that shows the bible is true. just says nothing found is in opposition to certain things scripture says. however when the scriptures say things like there was a global flood we can be certain this didnt happen and would be impossible.

    “It may be stated categorically that no archaeological discovery has ever controverted a Biblical reference. Scores of archaeological findings have been made which confirm in clear outline or exact detail historical statements in the Bible. And, by the same token, proper evaluation of Biblical description has often led to amazing discoveries.” – Dr. Nelson Glueck, Rivers in the Desert, (New York: Farrar, Strous and Cudahy, 1959), 136.

    another quote that doesnt confirm any finds that confirm the credibility of the bible. just states that nothing found contradicts places in the bible, and sometimes going on descriptions of places in the bible that they found there really were places there. I would like to point out the same is true for the Quran and the Gita's. Not to mention many fiction books written today contain actual places. none of that confirms any god or miracles or any supernatural events.

    “The reader may rest assured that nothing has been found [by archaeologists] to disturb a reasonable faith, and nothing has been discovered which can disprove a single theological doctrine. We no longer trouble ourselves with attempts to ‘harmonize’ religion and science, or to ‘prove’ the Bible. The Bible can stand for itself.” – Dr. William F. Albright, eminent archeologist who confirmed the authenticity of the Dead Sea Scrolls following their discovery

    another religious person just saying that nothing has been found to show the bible is false. again the same can be said for any holy book. just because this person thinks their religion can exist with science doesnt mean they are right. in fact a literal reading of genesis is not only wrong but actually silly. and again i will bring up noahs ark.

    “The excessive skepticism of many liberal theologians stems not from a careful evaluation of the available data, but from an enormous predisposition against the supernatural.” – Professor Millar Burrows (Professor of Archaeology at Yale University), What Mean These Stones?, Meridian Books, New York, NY, 1956, p. 176.

    The excessive acceptance of many christians stems not from a careful evaluation of the available data AND logic, but from an enormous predisposition TOWARDS the supernatural. - ME

    Luke is a historian of the first rank; not merely are his statements of facts trustworthy; he is possessed of the true historic sense…In short this author should be placed along with the very greatest of historians.” – Sir William Ramsey (archaeologist), The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament

    Luke 23:44 And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.

    It is strange that there is no record of this extraordinary event outside of the gospels.

    Your unproven assertions notwithstanding there is ample legal/historical and scientific evidence. As I’ve indicated, none of it constitutes concrete proof. God does require faith. You will be lost and pay the eternal consequences for your own sin if you continue to insist that your way is superior to His.

    you will be lost and pay the eternal consequences if the muslims are correct. and if the buddhists are correct i dont think your path will lead you to Nirvana. why dont you have FAITH in them.

    you are a product of your culture. if you lived in afghanistan you would be muslim, if you grew up in india you would be Hindu. you have merely accepted your societies universal delusion.

    nothing you have said was evidence or proof of ANY kind.

  882. K.T

    And there I was thinking to go live in the USA to be able to work with top scientists in the country closest to the future... Having found out about creationism I'll rather stay here in my country where religion is just philosophy and personal choice and has no power over politics. Long live the internet.

  883. Epicurean_Logic

    Well said my Epicurean brother. Also Godisawesome started off as a Jehovan and quickly moved to christian. Reading the O.T. will do that to you.

    Personally i try and hold back on the religous but any time i hear Jahweh i go all Reb on their arses.

  884. makin it hard

    hmmm at Epicurus,

    first off good on you for making a christian see that there are other forms of reality to consider.

    i also like the bit about cultural ties leading to ones own conception of reality, but what about the good ol canadian boy who was raised catholic and now is balls deep in the study of ancient Hindu scripture?

    I agree that one should not ignorantly assail others with their own philosophy, especially religious, that is certain. But why do so many people connect with such a beautiful and powerful deity, nameless as He/She is.

    Perhaps when Sagan 2.0 is resurrected we will see science come to greet these ancient mystery schools and unite science and spirituality. As Yogananda says, Kriya yoga is the science of spirituality, perhaps it is... and perhaps someday we will find a spirituality in science, what the bleep do we know seems to be grasping for such.

  885. makin it hard

    @oliguarello,

    right on man, i am searching on this same path to unite with the All, to be able to know IN FAITH the true mystery and magic of God in creation.

    -to be clear though, i do believe the universe is solely capable of manifestation without the need of God, but hell Occam's razor is not a theory to base ones whole life on, no? And the joys of meditation never run dry, so even if it is a paranoid mental delusion, its hella better than random philosophical arguments....

  886. makin it hard

    @oliguarello,

    right on man, i am searching on this same path to unite with the All, to be able to know IN FAITH the true mystery and magic of God in creation.

    -to be clear though, i do believe the universe is solely capable of manifestation without the need of God, but hell Occam’s razor is a sh*tty a** theory to base ones whole life on, no? And the joys of meditation never run dry, so even if it is a paranoid mental delusion, its hella better than random philosophical arguments….

  887. oliarguello

    @makin it hard

    Ah interesting you used the phrase "unite with the ALL". So you know a lot of what I am talking about. And I certainly agree that the universe does not need a GOD creator, at least not how the majority of religions anthropomorphisize him/it.

    And I agree with you and Epicurus ( and others on here have mentioned the phenomena before) about being a product, religious or lawful or otherwise, based on where you were born. Which I dont necessarily see anything wrong with that, in fact its necessary for the social contract in which one lives in ( country, city, state, household).

    That being said, the main issue I have with religious fundamentalism ( or any ideological belief system)in these regards is that they use fear to imprison a persons mind. This fear propagates itself further by clinging to beliefs, the fear of questioning religious dogma, the fear of exploring other ideas, the fear of people who think differently, and all these fears lead to a negative type of passion that eventually turns to hate and totally skews the way a person thinks about anything.

    There is a paradox between clinging to words and clinging to ideas. When one clings to words the idea can be lost, but people can not communicate an idea without words. In fact Allah, Dios, GOD, Yahweh, etc are all talking about the same idea but those individual words carry certain connotations, and thus the division and the limitation of the idea.On the flip side, I have known many of my college class mates, even in the science classes, who memorize and regurgitate words/equations and have NO CLUE as to what any of that is trying to teach, sure they pass the class but they dont get the A becasue they dont apply the ideas to more difficult questions. Now imagine getting a C in life for that kind of limited way of... taking in and spewing out ideas without thinking deeply and gaining the higher meaning....like you said meditation/reflection can go a loooooong way and never runs dry.

  888. D-K

    We need a new batch of christians up in here, or muslims.. might be a nice change of pace.

  889. eireannach666

    @anyone trying to mix the reality of science with the plague of god

    Trying to mix science and god is as hard as it is to teach your grandfather or father how to play X-Box.Its never going to happen.You'll spend more time yelling and ranting to make it work than actually making it work.Its like trying to breed a dog and a cat.they don't mix and don't like eachother.

    Got to run. Everything is all bad right now.

    peAce and Horns to my "darkside" brethren.

    @Randy
    Hold it down as you guys do until I can return.Slainte.

  890. D-K

    @Oliarguello:

    So basically, you're an agnostic pantheist with christian aspirations? The whole thing confounds me a little as christianity is a belief structure in which one conforms to certain rituals to please a god with definable human traits. Yet the way you describe it (god), these character traits would not apply, or even be relevant.

    Christianity and pantheism are not mutually exclusive by definition, but they're not exactly compatible either. By adopting a religion, you have pre-disposed your search for answers concerning this consciousness you speak of, with notions/religious fact concerning his properties/nature.

    It's strange, you take a bold leap concerning God being anything and everything, without having evidence to back that up, confirming that you are in fact a believer, just to take an agnostic approach concerning the nature of god pantheistic qualities. You disbelief popular belief about god, but belief in him nonetheless (in your own way)

    Jesus has nothing to do with anything you think about god, your belief in jesus is merely to support your investment in christianity, which I can't justify when factoring in your stance on the god matter.

    Why are you even a christian? It's the weekly wine, isn't it?

  891. oliarguello

    @D-K

    Excellent questions! I will do my best to answer them. But I think it is necessary to give the preface that I, obviously , dont know everything. That which I do know; I dont know if its absolute truth. I am on a journey seeking the truth, may the chips fall where they may. I think I must also re-iterate that I was raised in a religious household, became an atheist before, and my journey has lead me to where I am now. So I am not afraid of questioning, investigating, revisiting, and abandoning what i once thought was true.

    ****So basically, you’re an agnostic pantheist with christian aspirations? The whole thing confounds me a little as christianity is a belief structure in which one conforms to certain rituals to please a god with definable human traits. Yet the way you describe it (god), these character traits would not apply, or even be relevant.******

    I guess I am all of those things and then some since I try to learn as much as I can ( religions, philosophy doctrines,political doctrines, various scientific fields, etc), filter out things for the truth, and reconcile said truths.

    I dont really believe in rituals in that they have some sort of magical power, instead that some rituals are necessary in that they serve some psychological preparation. Most professional athletes can attest to that, not that a baseball player with a ritual of tying the left shoe first is going to be guaranteed a home run, but that it helps that batter get into his game face mode. So I see prayer for instance as a way of meditating and trying to get to a mental place where you feel your spirituality and then gain insight ( versus most people who pray and think some miracle will just happen).

    If GOD is what I think he/it is, it certainly doesnt need me to perform rituals to satisfy it, or build gold or marble statues or churches,....anything a human does to "satisfy" such a deity seems petty.

    Instead I think one of our main purposes is for self improvement for not only harmony with others but for transcendence. Which is what I believe Jesus did. I believe he was the epitome of what a man could be in terms of human perfection. Thats why I subscribe to parts of Christianity and I think most of the Bible muddies up his teachings. In fact early Christians didnt even have a Bible, instead the Bible was a project managed by a pagan turned Christian , as a consolidation of texts that were around and religions that were around.

    So I definitely believe Jesus was an enlightened being and a great teacher. I believe many of the things said about Jesus were true (for many reasons) but was he the son of GOD?....The way i see it that's a play on semantics. DO I think he was GOD incarnate? No that doesn't make sense, not only to me, but logically or even within the Christian doctrine.

    ****Christianity and pantheism are not mutually exclusive by definition, but they’re not exactly compatible either. By adopting a religion, you have pre-disposed your search for answers concerning this consciousness you speak of, with notions/religious fact concerning his properties/nature.****

    That is only true if you believe a religion is 100% true and infallible, which I dont think is true at all. As stated in my previous answer I open myself up to all ways of thinking and seek the truth and discard the lies ( although the "truth and lies" can be revisited with new knowledge or insight).

    ***It’s strange, you take a bold leap concerning God being anything and everything, without having evidence to back that up, confirming that you are in fact a believer, just to take an agnostic approach concerning the nature of god pantheistic qualities. You disbelief popular belief about god, but belief in him nonetheless (in your own way)****

    That is true. But I must say that I know the divine realm is real based on my experiences of what most people would call the supernatural. I mostly disbelief the popular views of GOD becasue they are contradictory or becasue the nature of the descriptions are limiting and dont explain paradoxes within a doctrine ( funny how clergy will explain the paradoxes away by saying its blasphemy to try to understand GOD or question anything, just have faith, or that he just works in mysterious ways).

    ***Jesus has nothing to do with anything you think about god, your belief in Jesus is merely to support your investment in Christianity, which I can’t justify when factoring in your stance on the god matter.

    Why are you even a christian? It’s the weekly wine, isn’t it?***

    I believe my previous answers about who/what Jesus was and my love/admiration for him satisfies this inquiry. Admittedly I put Jesus above all other people I admire, especially since his teachings and what is said about him covers less than ~5 years ( birth, some mention of childhood, and ~3 years teaching), but one can also see that its amazing what was said about him, what he did do and taught in less than half a decade.

  892. Epicurus

    you believe in the stories told about a man. its really easy to paint someone in a nice light if you write the stories almost 100 years after they die. then you get a whole organization to ensure this person is seen positively.

    why not look into buddhism if you are so enamored with the character the bible portrays in jesus. it is a much more positive and logic based belief system

  893. D-K

    @Epicurus:

    The guy says a lot of stuff that has been said in these threads.

    The geo-sociological aspect, conditioning, inherent judging of skepticism and logic/rationality..

    The genetic fallacy bit hurts my head though

  894. D-K

    @Epi

    My last comment was concerning the link you provided, which was interesting as usual.

    thanks

  895. oliarguello

    @Epicurus

    ***you believe in the stories told about a man. its really easy to paint someone in a nice light if you write the stories almost 100 years after they die. then you get a whole organization to ensure this person is seen positively.

    why not look into buddhism if you are so enamored with the character the bible portrays in Jesus. it is a much more positive and logic based belief system***

    I am not sure who you targeted that at, but it sounds like it might be towards myself, especially since it directly follows my post.

    And its true the history makers are written by the winners. But I have looked into the legitimacy of the Gospels in contrast with what Indian, Chinese, Jewish, Roman, and Greek texts have said about Jesus. They affirm his popularity and teachings and his teaching styles.

    I actually do study buddhism. When I said I study other religions and other philosophical doctrines that included Buddhism. In fact it was a sort of a relief in what I meditated about Jesus and science was mentioned in Buddhism. Buddhism re-affirmed the cause and effects I was contemplating ( spiritual enlightenment and performing of miracles)and furthermore supports my pantheistic view of GOD. I think Jesus was a Supreme Buddha.

  896. D-K

    "Instead I think one of our main purposes is for self improvement for not only harmony with others but for transcendence. Which is what I believe Jesus did"

    Does this mean that you don't believe in a soul? Or the afterlife? You seem to reason from "the self", a concept I'm sure you're familiar with, but this is directly opposed to christian belief. It also goes directly againts Jesus' entire (supposed) philosophy, of attaining harmony and an existance without sin to gain your soul a ticket to eternal bliss. This philosophy trivializes "the self", a concept you appear to value (rightfully so). So by living like the interpretation of the man you idealize or according to his teachings, you actually negate his teachings.

    How do you explain this?

    Buddha, does indeed seem more like your cup of tea as he reasons from the self and harmonizes current existance with current reality, resetting the process with death. He is about self-improvement for the benefit of this life and those in it, rather than the motivation being to conform to a certain cloudy clubhouse's rules for admittance.

    Logically, all that jesus taught is trivial in the face of logic and fact, yet everything Buddha teaches is relevant and fits very neatly in you personal convictions.

    If you strip jesus of his divinity, he's just a guy with community spirit. Think about that.

  897. Epicurus

    @Oliarguello, you said: But I have looked into the legitimacy of the Gospels in contrast with what Indian, Chinese, Jewish, Roman, and Greek texts have said about Jesus. They affirm his popularity and teachings and his teaching styles.

    could you provide these external sources?

    I only hope you dont bring up the known fraudulent instances. Also even if there was mention of a smart guy in the middle east that wouldnt make him anything greater than say Epicurus, or Democritus, Epictetus or Diogenes...

  898. oliarguello

    @D-K

    I actually do believe in a soul and afterlife. What I meant by transcendence is spiritual transcendence. I think Hell, Purgatory, Heaven ( and the varying degrees of such)are not physical places but planes of existence based on the "evolution or de-evolution" , if you will, of your soul.

    By saying "It also goes directly againts Jesus’ entire (supposed) philosophy, of attaining harmony and an existence without sin to gain your soul a ticket to eternal bliss." Do you mean going into heaven through him for he has paid for your sins? Maybe you can ( or someone can) point to a scripture that says that in the Gospels. From memory I only remember things outside the Gospels in Bible mentioning you can only go to Heaven because of Jesus, in which case its jsut dogma. In the Gospels I remember reading that you have to become like Jesus to get into heaven(In which you would have to define Heaven and like I said i dont believe it to be a corner of the universe somewhere but a form of existence).Which to me means you have to aspire to be like Jesus; aka to "know him", or "believe in him" as it says in the Gospels, to reach the higher level of consciousness/spirituality, plane of existence.

    And when I read that he will sit on the right hand of the father, I think that means he is on the plane of existence just outside of the ALL prior to uniting with the ALL. Afterall...if he was GOD incarnate how can he sit on the right hand of himself? Or pray to himself in the third person prior to his crucifixion and during it? I think his final sacrifice, even with all the power and knowledge that he had, was a form of servitude that "evolved" his soul exponentially since he supposedly knew it was coming and could have avoided it but knew it was necessary.

    I have stated why I go against so much popular belief that goes into the Bible. One of the greatest eye openers for me was The Kingdom of GOD is Within you by Leo Tolstoy. I really thought I was a bit crazy thinking the way I did when I meditated deeply and came upon some epiphanies, but when I read that book it was nice to see someone else who is revered has thought up the same things before me. He points out a lot of the contradictions such as Jesus teaching growth of spirit ( better to pray in a closet by yourself than to make a big show of it)versus people doing all these pointless rituals in churches and preaching like a madman while committing tons of sins ( Haggard anyone?)...or another great one is that the GOD of the OT can not be the NT GOD Jesus was talking about.....or that the Jesus who walked on Earth and told to love all even your enemies, can not be the vindictive genocide evoking person that the book of Revelation talks about in the second coming.

    Even if you strip away his divinity he was a bit more than just some guy ;) But some of the biggest questions are that of his virgin birth and resurrection. I dont have any answers for those ( even though Yogananda believe Jesus did resurrect)my understanding of miracles so far is just that of healing and walking on water. Even though i do believe ( which is admittedly just faith and illogical) , I have no idea yet on the mechanisms to make a virgin birth or a resurrection possible. If my understanding come to me that its not possible , even in a mystical sense, then I will re-evaluate my beliefs accordingly. But as of yet I have not given it enough thought or research.

    I guess my "weklky wine" does lie with virgin birth and resurrection. I will see where that path leads me as I seek truth.

  899. oliarguello

    @Epicurus

    Is the questionable texts that of Josephus? There are a few uotes and translations..I ignored the potentially christian embellished transcribed version and adhere to the Jewish translation taken from an arabic text citation.

    As for the others off the top of my head: The Talmud, Lucian,Suetonius (sp?),Julian the apostate, Bahisva(sp?) Maha Purana.

    Even though I think Jesus was more than just some smart guy, one naturally admires those who he aligns his philosophy , virtues, and characteristics with.

    As for Epicurus some of his practical philosophy falls apart rather quickly ( for instance his famous quote about GOD..apply it to parenthood and letting a child learn a life lesson, and you see how it falls apart)., Diogens had some great insight but he was kind of a clown ( albeit on purpose for satire, I actually think he would have been fun to hang out with he reminds me of Stephen Colbert or John Stewart). Democritus was very smart and very observant, but man he seemed like a pompous ass. i dont know anything of Epictetus

    @D-K and Epicurus.

    I very much appreciate the questions! Some are actually things I never thought about or were phrased in a way that made me evaluate things a bit.

    We can continue, but I think we are getting into the divinity aspect of all this too much, which is fun and interesting and all, but of course is based on faith. Since you side with Epicurus(the philosopher) I think you would agree its pointless arguing something you would consider metaphysical and what I have known to be real ;)

  900. D-K

    Fair enough.

    Thanks for answering the questions.

  901. Epicurus

    @Oli, as far as epicurus' famous quote goes. you just compared gods abilities to that of a parent. if any parent had half the power god is claimed to have their child would live a much more pleasant life.

    the Maha Purana text was inserted during british rule and is a complete fabrication.

    The Tacitus report is not very positive. if jesus did the things the bible claims, there is no way Tacitus would have called them superstitious. all it mentions is there were christians and they followed someone who was crucified. that doesnt lend any credence to his divinity. it really does the opposite. ESPECIALLY not mentioning the resurrection. which certainly would have been talked about all over the land.

    Julian was 300+ years after Jesus.

    Suetonius writes; “Because the Jews at Rome caused constant disturbances at the instigation of Chrestus [Christ], he [Claudius] expelled them from the city [Rome]....however this would mean Jesus was instigating riots at least 50 years after his death as Suetonius' life was 69-140 A.D.

    Lucian was also very harsh and also existed about 200 years after christ so is not any first hand account but also only knows of this through the stories passed around.

    the writings in the Talmud were from 6th century AD and do not admit of jesus divinity but only that he was being tried for committing sorcery. which just means he or his followers claimed to have performed magic of some kind.

    also keep in mind the virgin births and resurrection stories were common myths back then....

  902. Ruth

    Hi, Randy! how are you dong now? are you feeling better?

  903. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Oh and up there where it looked like I just mixed a bunch of letters , that was Gaelic. But my rambleings were still under the "influence".

  904. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Where you at? Dont make me ponder, brotha. Are you alright?
    Slainte.

  905. eireannach666

    Well , moving on,

    @Epicurus and Oli ,
    I think the buddhist were probably jesux 's base , but I will sugest, if you like a different view ,( buddhism as Epicurus stated , ) Or what I seem to take note of , Tao/ Dhaoism. Very wisdomish( for lack of a better word) . Is not all means of morals a common law, in which we should all be conscience of as standard for living amoungst others ? Religion makes things unbarable to those which already know the principles and morals of life. We all know what is good , s o why do we have to have a god to explain ethnics?

  906. eireannach666

    Who wants to give me a fact of science that proves creation ? Not asking for biblical quotes , just a debate of proof.PHYSICAL proof. Please , no prophetical mumbo jumbo. Or biblical quotes. Just facts and maths. On your godly terms.

    Just facts and maths.

    OK, go.

  907. eireannach666

    Well , I guess , "Only parts of the corpse have been removed."

    Where is that from?

    @DK
    Because I respect your opinion "You don't develop courage by being happy in your relationships everyday. You develop it by surviving difficult times and challenging adversity.”-  Epicurus

  908. eireannach666

    @oli

    Ok , Ill start with it ,
    Newton's Laws- 3 very basic laws. Maths in which , explain observations.When a force acting on an object is zero, the object'momentum never changes . No acceleration or velocity change there.

    Total force acting on anything is equal to the X of the objects (M) mass/ acceleration.Net force = mass pi * acceleration. All force ends up in a reaction. Which is equal in contracting , of course , and is a reverse of the push of the applied force. If a force is alone or by itself, then you have to think about rationing momentum- the momentum of any object changes as a supporting and opposing way to the object at hand.

    Newton ,

    Newton's First Law states that an object will remain at rest or in uniform motion in a straight line unless acted upon by an external force. It may be seen as a statement about inertia, that objects will remain in their state of motion unless a force acts to change the motion. Any change in motion involves an acceleration, and then Newton's Second Law applies; in fact, the First Law is just a special case of the Second Law for which the net external force is zero.

    Second law as applies,
    Law enables us to compare the results of the same force exerted on objects of different mass.

    Next, as applies All forces in the universe occur in equal but oppositely directed pairs. There are no isolated forces; for every external force that acts on an object there is a force of equal magnitude but opposite direction which acts back on the object which exerted that external force. In the case of internal forces, a force on one part of a system will be countered by a reaction force on another part of the system so that an isolated system cannot by any means exert a net force on the system as a whole. A system cannot "bootstrap" itself into motion with purely internal forces - to achieve a net force and an acceleration, it must interact with an object external to itself.

    See also. hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/newt.html

    Look up

  909. eireannach666

    We as are anything , the cosmos , plants , stars , planets etc.. , just another object. Meaning all mass are just objects

    Go figue that.
    (Math "mass"ive" humor.

  910. Achems Razor

    @ eireannach666:

    Enjoying your posts! Where is our (CEO) @ Randy, Now, I am worried!

    Your last post, "Meaning all mass are just objects" true, but the objects are energy first, that forms matter. So you can say everything, RE: objects, are energy.

  911. D-K

    Eireannach:

    He steps to the water and plunges in..?

    Ahh.. Epicurus.. such a wise man..

  912. oliarguello

    @eireannach666

    Yes I agree that Jesus did have Buddhist (I actually think Jesus was a Supreme Buddha) Hindi, Taoist is a possibility too,influence and was raised Jewish.

    There is speculation that he traveled the east during "the lost years" which would account for his teachings, knowledge, wisdom, etc. The bible makes a few mentions of his childhood ( in which he is very adept in philosophy and Jewish scriptures)up till 12 years old and then just all of a sudden shows up to get baptized at 30 with just one line explaining away 18 years by saying " he grew in stature and wisdom".

    Its funny when you ask fundamentalist about the lost years, all they say is we shouldn't know or it doesn't matter. WOW....Jesus formative teen and young adult years don't matter? Yet his birth and childhood are very very very important to mention.

  913. oliarguello

    @@eireannach666

    Thanks for the Physics lesson, but I am not sure why you directed that at me. I am aware of Newtons laws of motions that formulate the mechanisms for classical mechanics.Maybe I asked something I forgot about or did I say something incorrect?

    @ Achems Razor

    You beat me to it!..LOL. I was going to post that matter is really just energy so in fact everything is energy. But I will go a step further and say underlying everything is vibration ;) Although the only force not totally accountable in terms of vibration is gravity, but there are some theories out there (gravitons, LQG, etc).

  914. oliarguello

    @eireannach666

    I need some clarification. What did you mean by " science to prove creation"? Doesnt science already do that? Did you mean creationism? As in the Earth being 6,000 years old, GOD created Man as he is now, he created all animals and plants as it is now?

    If thats what you meant, you wont get a creationist answer out of me, thats for sure. If you want my view of creation search for the phrase "super substance" on here. I take a more pantheistic view of GOD that reconciles my beliefs with science. Some of it is speculative and does require faith, but so does the physicists who claim eventually we will know what happened prior 1 millionth of a second prior to the big bang. I still think the main question about GOD is not about creation, but whether the GOD has a consciousness , which that same post inquires about.

  915. Justin M

    Anti-theism is from the devil..lol I keep trying to tell myself there is something good to be gained by being alive during earths "dark ages". I've yet to figure. I take some comfort knowing that future scientist will see videos like this and realize not all ancients were mentally retarted. We need to continue trying to enlighten the masses but more importantly we must prepare to fight them. The bodies of millions have shown us the measure of they're resolve. It's time we show ours.

  916. D-K

    @Justin M:

    And my axe..?

    You should be careful in uttering that which makes you seem like a fundamentalist, it devaluates your point, and that of the group you claim to belong to.

    Enlightenment is not about active processes, it's about awareness and personal contemplation, enlightenment does not belong to the masses. it belongs to the individual.

  917. oliarguello

    @D-K

    Nice. very nice. That in itself is an enlightened statement.

    @Justin M

    If you need further clarification I think Kant's book "What is Enlightenment" will help and this quote from said book summarizes his thesis.

    "Enlightenment is man's release from his self-incurred tutelage. Tutelage is man's inability to make use of his understanding without direction from another. Self-incurred is this tutelage when its cause lies not in lack of reason but in lack of resolution and courage to use it without direction from another. Sapere aude! "Have courage to use your own reason!

    Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why so great a portion of mankind, after nature has long since discharged them from external direction (naturaliter maiorennes), nevertheless remains under lifelong tutelage, and why it is so easy for others to set themselves up as their guardians. It is so easy not to be of age. If I have a book which understands for me, a pastor who has a conscience for me, a physician who decides my diet, and so forth, I need not trouble myself. I need not think, if I can only pay - others will easily undertake the irksome work for me"

  918. Randy B

    I most definitely enjoy this blog. I do still believe in God, and like others here, I DO have a lot of problems with "religion" and the leaders of such. But whatever you may call it, I still have a sense of awe and majesty at all that is....from that first nano-second of the beginning of the universe to the human brain that can write all these words I read. What God is...I don't really know, and yes, by faith, I do believe there is a God.
    But you have made me aware of things, think more deeply, learn lots. I wish I could sit around a campfire for several nights. Not just to talk about what is talked about here, but to know the people that write them all. I think I would like and enjoy you all. Christian, aetheist, scientist, philosopher, whatever and whoever you all are.
    I tip my hat to you all.

  919. Charles B.

    Dr. Randy: How have you been doing? I hope you are well. Seriously.

    Anyway, no, I don't I think I really have any repressed "rage" but I do overeat. My dad says that like any temptation, you need God's help to overcome your besetting "sin" and eating too much is characteristic for nearly my whole family on my dad's side. But, he's 83 and still relatively healthy, so if I cut the "fat" (literally), I hope to also have a long healthy life.

    I didn't know they could tell so much from a blood tests. My tests came back normal (or withing acceptable limits) on all things including my cholesterol level, but he said I had too much fat in my liver and it was working below acceptable levels.

    I'm trying to avoid the pork chops. Dang, that's hard here in Korea! Not pork chops, per se, but they sure do love pork! I sighed deeply when at lunch today they had white rice, boiled pork with all the fat a drippin' and Kim Chee (two kinds), and some soup. I had the soup with raw onions and some dried fish. It was actually good, but I sure was "lusting" after all that pork my co-teachers were chopsticking down! I even had one tell me that the fat is boiled out and not to worry about it. I didn't believe her. They never tire of telling me to "Eat rice!" but I don't even like white rice. It's just nearly 100% carbs without any nutrients at all. Yeah, sure . . . Like I need that! My wife cooks a mix of black and white rice. More healthful for you, I think.

    Anyway, I'm feeling better, eating better, and I think the chest pain was caused from a cracked sternum when my boy jumped on me (a running jump no less), and I just didn't realize how badly he hurt me. I usually just say, "Son! That hurts, now stop that!" I haven't had chest pains at all for the last two days.

    Notwithstanding, I'm taking the time to spend more time with the family and less on-line unless it's something my wife also wants to see. She likes 48 Hours Mystery. I miss you guys (a little), but I just have to keep my priorities strait.

    Peace,

    Charles B.

  920. Achems Razor

    @ Charles B:

    Glad you are okay, You say you are to fat? It is not "fats or protein" like meats, chicken, fish, bacon, cheese, butter, eggs, that are getting you fat!

    What is getting you fat is (carbs)!!, sugars, high fructose corn syrup, that seems to be in a lot of foods.

    If you can cut all forms of sugar, all forms of carbs, except some proper vege's, your weight will drop dramatically. Your blood work will improve, your fatty liver will improve.

    I say this from first hand experience, I have dropped 40 lbs. in 2 months, my blood work is superb.

    Went on "Atkins diet", Google it if you want more info.

    Wish you the best.

  921. Achems Razor

    @ oliarguello:

    Vibrations?, since you brought it up, will go further down the rabbit hole.
    Could be, our reality is but one vibration unit/level of infinite levels, infinite universes, in the vast sea of Q. energy, and probabilities.
    Some parallel universes as close as a Planck-length away. RE: string theory.

    Gravity could be leaking from a close "super universe" to ours, why our Gravity is such a weak force.

    When I say stuff like this, it seems to piss off a lot of Empirical, Tabula-Rasa...Scientists?? Really do not care! just digging the rabbit hole!...(LOL)

  922. D-K

    M theory sounds like fun, I'll say that.

  923. Randy

    Thank you everyone for your concern! What great people!

    Um, I have been out of town, working (hard!) to procure new lines of income. Some success and my company has been busy, but it is exhausting to me... so I have had little energy left over for any other pursuits.

    I have been monitoring some of the comments and I must say:

    Hi, Ruth!

    Charles B. Sounds like a good plan! Fatty liver disease can be as bad as a scirrotic (alcoholic) liver, so be careful of the fat. But, remember, "gluttony" was a "sin" created by the Catholics, it's not in the bible.

    Gluttony is bad for your body, not your soul... but, yes, lots of fiber, fruits, veggies, lean protiens, a little excercise goes a long way, spend more time with family, you'll be fine.

    Hello, to all my super-intellect friends, (you know who you are!)

  924. Charles B.

    Dr. Randy: Oh, really? I guess you are right. I cannot think of any mention of "gluttony" in the Bible. Good call, Dr. Randy!

  925. oliarguello

    @ Randy B. Charles B.

    If I remember correctly Proverbs mentions that if you have honey eat only enough to satiate your hunger. If you eat too much you will vomit.

    And I cant remember where in the Bible ( somewhere in the Old Testament I believe), but there is a passage that gives advice which states; the man who drinks too much will become poor and only have rags as clothes, the man who overeats all the time will always have stomach health issues ( might be Proverbs as well).

  926. eirecannach666

    @oliarguello

    I meant scientifical evidence proving the existence of a god or Ill even settle for some kind of proof that jesux was anything more than just a guy who taught good morals.

    Yes thanks for the correction, "creationism."

    I would just like someone to bring some actual physical evidence , visual evidence is acceptable as well. If you can see something or if there is a way to mathematically prove something , then it kind of helps with its credibility.

  927. eirecannach666

    @Achems

    Ha! Yeah I was really bored the other day. I figured if I gave a quick brief on some Newton , it might get someone talking about it. Oh well.

  928. Randy

    @oliarguello

    You seem to have confused me with Randy B. Don't do that again.

    I went to medical school, AND to seminary schools... so...

  929. eirecannach666

    @oliarguello

    "I take a more pantheistic view of GOD that reconciles my beliefs with science. "

    Whats the difference between that and ID or believing in divine creation?

    Seems to me that any and all who think science and god can be together as one have a deep well of religious intent inside. Just because one doesnt go to church or worship doesnt make them any less a creationist Simply by saying they believe there is a deity connection with the universe and its phenomena is implying an ID/Creationist concept.

  930. eirecannach666

    @Achems
    "the objects are energy first, that forms matter. So you can say everything, RE: objects, are energy."

    Nice. You a right. This is why I keep throwing things out there. For a response like that. Thanks for the add on to the point.

    *bows to Achems.

  931. eirecannach666

    1. Jesus walks over to a crowd that is about to stone a prostitute, he stops the crowd and says to them all “let he who is without sin, cast the first stone” at that a woman in the back tosses a stone. Jesus looks over the crowd at the woman then yells ” Sometimes you really pi$$ me off , mom!”

    2. and Jesus said unto his 12 apostles as he was being nailed to the cross.
    ‘Don’t touch my fuxin Easter eggs. I’ll be back on Monday!’

    oops. I needed to doctor these.

  932. Scorpgal

    Heaven help you if you lose your place in this video! 32 parts and 5 hours long? It's cute to repeat things once in a while, but they probably doubled the length of this video just by repeating things so many times. The sound quality is awful, too. They need to do a better job of editing this video and cleaning up the sound, because this issue is definitely worth learning about.

    I always thought that Creationism and Intelligent Design REPLACED science with religious teachings - I had no idea that they actually made up such comically wrong scientific facts! Sure, I expected them to drastically reduce the age of the earth to conform to the bible, and to argue against evolution, but to actually say that the earth has a perfectly circular orbit around the sun? Does it really undermine any religion to teach that the earth's orbit is elliptical? And to say that water will shield you from X-rays? I doubt that even the most devout parents would want their children to believe that it's okay to be around X-rays as long as you're wet!

    People need to see that there's more than just bible studies going on here. I really hope they edit and polish this video so that more people will watch it.

  933. Randy B

    Yes, don't get us mixed up!! What an insult!!

  934. Charles B.

    Oli: You're right. I think we have an innate sense of "sin" much of the time and gluttony is just one of the easiest to justify, whether or not is's specifically spelled-out as sin in the Bible or not. If fall under "lack of self-control" which is self-control a "fruit of the Spirit" in Galations chapter five. You are bright. I'll give you that. :-)

  935. Andrei

    the problem here is that these "creationist" are just religion obsessed people who have no idea what their talking about. personally i don't even think they know why they believe in God its like they are brain washed. i believe in God but not like them, i managed to combine the creation and the evolution theories and created my own opinion about how the world was created. first u have to understand that 2000 years ago the people still thought the earth is flat so it would be impossible for them to understand that there exist atoms and other stuffs beyond there comprehension. that's why i dont believe every thing that is in the Bible, and because it was written by humans and the Vatican hides things from the past. but never mind that the idea is that the people in this videos are stupid and haven't done any research before contradicting the EVO. theory soo dont think that if u ask a preacher (at least in my country) those questions they would say the same thing that the people from this video said, they would probably laugh at them to :P, i think those guys are just stupid americans who ask no questions and are blind ty for the vid. and creationist adepts next time u say u dont believe in their God say that u believe in God but not in the same way, or just wonder why u dont believe, but dont say because its bogus just think for a while :P tyvm for the vid again nice stuff in it:D

  936. Randy

    @Charles B.

    Don't listen to Olivegarden, whatever his name is... he is never right.

    @Achems

    Do NOT do the Atkin's diet! It is very bad for you! You can lose weight by killing yourself, too, is that what you want?

    I went to med school, I know this stuff, Atkins was a quack.

    Fiber! Lots of fiber! Excercise, fiber, lean protiens, (fish, poultry), fruits veggies...

    Did I mention Fiber?

  937. Epicurean_Logic

    Or alternatively try the Epicurean diet. Lots of sex preferably with a partner. Plenty of ,chase me round the bedroom and a little spank me/slap me. lol

    @Randy. you sneaky cold reading magician. If yesterdays fiasco was a coincidence then i want your dating advice even more?

  938. Achems Razor

    @ Randy:

    With due respect! But I can't agree with you always. (LOL)

    Dr. Atkin's was a quack?? that is old school stuff! there are millions of people on this diet at any given time, and according to my knowledge no one has died on it. Not even Dr. Atkins, the founder. He lived in optimum health well into his eighties, when he slipped on a New York city icy side walk, and either had an extradural or epidural heamatoma, and died.

    On this diet you eliminate all the bad carb's, all sugars, the killer "high fructose corn syrup" that is in a lot of foods as sweetener.

    Instead you focus on good proteins, good fats, like omega three, extra virgin olive oil, and low gylcemic veg's. lots of veg'

    And the beauty of it you can eat as much as you want and still loose weight! And like I said, know of this first hand!

    Also, exercise is not an option!

    Peace!

  939. Achems Razor

    @ Epicurean_Logic:

    Good diet... have tried that done that! That is why am so healthy, when younger used to drink like a fish, smoke like a chimney, and f**k like a mink!...(LOL)

  940. Epicurean_Logic

    lol@Achems Razor. Now that sound like a diet i could follow.

    Did you understand what i was saying to Randy yesterday? It was so weird.

  941. Achems Razor

    @ Epic_Logic:

    What, about women? or something else? inform.

  942. Epicurean_Logic

    Sorry to keep banging on about it. In short,

    I copy and pasted Randys Hawkins story ( posted 1 month earlier) on my secret dating profile (lol@me) and less than 1 minute later he re-posted it! It is on the masters of the universe Hawkins doc.

    Weird coincidence?? or is there some other answer.

  943. Epicurean_Logic

    Also, just to make things stranger ArchbishopRandy is being really cryptic and every time i post on this, my comments get moderated (5 half paragraph posts) and my internet disconnects in different way as to how it usually does.

    WTF@Achems Razor.

  944. Randy

    @Achems

    Hey, I have MS and I still manage to hobble my skinny-ass around the block every day! Excersise!

    Listen, weight gain and loss is simple. If more is going in than is going OUT, then you will blow up like a balloon.

    Fiber! It actually cleans your blood and reduces tri-glycerides, (which, in fact, Atkins body was ruined with when the autopsy was performed!).

    And your brain needs complex carbohydrates. Needs it. Your brain uses complex carbs for fuel. Omega 3's are very important, (in fact, your brain is practically MADE of omega 3 fatty acids...) but you can't deny your brain its essential sugars.

    "A good body with a dull mind is as cheap as life itself..."

  945. Epicurean_Logic

    @Randy. Please put me out of my misery, so to speak. What is your take on this.

    @our US cousins. Come on Eng-er-land.

  946. Achems Razor

    Epic_Logic:

    Have noticed double posting Randy's Hawking's story. I do not know the answer? maybe because it is a good story?

    Moderated 5 times? No slight to Vlatko, but am sorry, this moderation system belongs in Victorian age, you know, covering up piano legs and such. (LOL)

    Randy mysterious? well of course! that is why he is admired!

    Don't know why your internet is acting up, could be virus, could be a number of things, windows is famous for that. I presume you have windows?
    I myself run Linux, ubuntu, studio.

    You should ask @ Vlatko, about why so many blogs moderated.

  947. Epicurean_Logic

    I am not being clear. Randy posted 1 month ago. I posted on another private site yesterday. Randy re-posts here on TDF one minute later.

    Please let this pass moderation.

  948. Epicurean_Logic

    I have to go out now. I am boring myself to death. Let alone you guys. Later.

  949. Vlatko

    I'm on a trip and without Internet for the past five days. When I come home I'll be buried in comments that are waiting moderation. Hang on guys, I'm typing this from some lazy Internet Cafe.

  950. Achems Razor

    @ Epic_Logic:

    Okay, now I dig! that does strike me as a mystery, ghost in the machine? (LOL)
    Since your other site was private, has to be coincidence, no other way around it.

    Unless someone has your IP...address that shouldn't have it, which I doubt!

  951. Randy

    @Chris

    So... what are you saying?

    Calrify your point.

    Try to crystalize it in just a few words.

    I read and re-read your post and you seem to be all over the place... clarify.

  952. Epicurus

    @Chris, even if you places the flood as a melting ice age, the story about Noah would be nonsense, the story about an ark also silly, collecting animals would also be silly. it still would be wrong.

    there was never a global flood even during ice ages or during the melting. it never created a world wide flood.

    if there was the oceans would be desalinated and all salt water marine life would have died out.

    there is nothing scholarly about creationism because it is myth and not science. what meaningful intelligent discussion can be had with someone who claims a magic man made all life? where do you go from there?

    claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

  953. WTC7

    I would also love to see something knowledgeable and scholarly on this subject. Hopefully that would put the discussion on the topic on a higher level, though I don't think much can change compared to the current one...

  954. WTC7

    @ Epicurus,

    What's wrong with you tonight, your English doesn't seem to be great at this instance?

    But, tell me, what "evidence" do we have for Big Bang?

  955. Randy

    @WTC7

    Red Shift.

  956. Achems Razor

    Me-thinks, that @ Chris: is trying to make a case for either, creationism, or intelligent design.

    Am I right Chris!

  957. oliarguello

    @WTC7

    And background radiation

  958. WTC7

    @ Randy,

    Yes, of course, the cosmic background radiation is an effect of something that happened some 13.7 billions years ago. But we have an effect here, do we really know what happened at the time when it happened, that was my point. I don't want to argue about this particular point with you (& you shouldn't either, as even scientists are looking for better theories than that of the BB), that was a question for Epicurus.

  959. oliarguello

    @ Randy
    **Don’t listen to Olivegarden, whatever his name is… he is never right.**

    Lol @ olivegarden

    But I concede, you are right and I am wrong.
    But wait! Since I am never right that would mean you are...

    @eirecannach666
    Thos jokes were actually pretty funny LOL!

    ** Whats the difference between that ( pantheistic view: GOD=Universe) and ID or believing in divine creation?**

    Not only does creationism imply a creator outside of the universe, but ID and divine creation is backwards to the way I think. I think everything in the universe/dimensions are bound by certain laws ( the ones we know and don’t know of) and everything exists, progresses, changes because of those laws. While ID and creationists think because everything is the way it is currently, someone consciously manipulates said laws to create what is here today ( a deity moves that those gases to make that planet, blows that wind, moves these amino acids, etc to make a human). Sort of like…I think GOD is the MIND AND BRAIN, while creationist think hes just the frontal lobe that somehow created the rest of the brain, somehow has a mind of its own, and controls it all.

    But I see the confusion let me give and more concrete example…….For instance a creationist and someone who believes in ID thinks its highly improbable that our genetic code to exist the way it does, therefore someone had to consciously put the forces together to put amino acids together to create a genome. While its true that it is improbable, that does not mean our genome came into being by chance. Genetic material is not regulated by luck, its regulated by principles of chemistry, physics, microbiology etc ( I believe this doc points this out as well). The cascade of events of the big bang ( and the innumerous events following it ) inevitably lead to a genome to exist on this planet. Just like if you knew every variable in the universe since the big bang, you would know exactly what number would come up if I were to roll a handful of dice..its all about the scope of a cause, all its factors( not just the physical, but the mental ones as well), and the inevitable effects.

    The only question that remains for me is the consciousness of the Universe I proposed. A mechanism by which the universe can “communicate” is theoretically possible ( supersymmetric string theory), but the question of self awareness remains. If you think that’s nonsense…well then you can say the same about the human brain. You can see it just as neurons, neurotransmitters, and action potentials reacting to stimuli; and memory, instinct, will, and thoughts are just consequences of the brain reacting to various situations.

    ** Seems to me that any and all who think science and god can be together as one have a deep well of religious intent inside. Just because one doesnt go to church or worship doesnt make them any less a creationist Simply by saying they believe there is a deity connection with the universe and its phenomena is implying an ID/Creationist concept.**

    I think you cling onto the connotations of certain idioms as oppose to trying to understand what I am saying. Which is understandable, when a new concept is introduced one tries to reconcile it with past knowledge ( I do the same). But I never claimed I wasn’t religious, in fact I said some of my beliefs and theories require faith since I cant prove Universal self awareness or communication, but I believe it to be true based on what I have experienced. Just like physicists cant entirely prove super string theory but they believe its true based on math and what they have observed from experiments….so far so good for them ( with some exceptions).

    ** I meant scientifical evidence proving the existence of a god or Ill even settle for some kind of proof that jesux was anything more than just a guy who taught good morals.**

    What exactly would you consider scientific evidence? A face on a tortilla? A few scriptures saying this guy did that? No right? I mean short of building a time machine and going to see for yourself what could possibly satisfy you?

    How about proof that healing is possible the way Jesus did it? If so you are welcome to come to Santa Ana, Ca to see. Although you may not have to wait for that, I am looking into seeing if the healer will let me make a website to post what goes on. And if I can, I hope to get medical proof ( and there has been some), not just hearsay of testimonies. And no I don’t think its magic, since it its real I have theories on how it works (a sort of innate HVPGS voltage conduction to stimulate DNA translation for instance).

  960. Randy

    @WTC7

    I never typed anything about background radiation. You need to read more carefully.

  961. oliarguello

    mental fart...replace amino acids with nucleotides.

  962. Randy

    @Olivegarden, whatever...

    There is no god, we are an accident.

    Get your arms around that.

  963. oliarguello

    @Randy

    Hawkeye(MASH): I dont believe in atheism.

    lol

  964. Randy B

    I don't believe His Royal Highness, the majestic, Sir Doctor Randy even exists. Because if he DID exist, he would be God. And as God does not exist, His Emminence, the Righteous Randy is only an imaninary figment of all our imagination. No ones but he has scoped the entire universe and all time, to be able to come up with his absolutism. And that would make him God.
    You are NOT god, randy.....Get your brain around that.

  965. Randy

    @Randy B.

    Indeed.

  966. Epicurus

    @WTC7

    how many different pieces of evidence do you want?

    Large-scale homogeneity
    Hubble diagram
    Abundances of light elements
    Existence of the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation
    Fluctuations in the CMBR
    Large-scale structure of the universe
    Age of stars
    Evolution of galaxies
    Time dilation in supernova brightness curves
    Tolman tests
    Sunyaev-Zel'dovich effect
    Integrated Sachs-Wolfe effect
    Dark Matter
    Dark Energy
    Consistency

    if you need an explanation of any of these maybe it would be safe to say you are not educated enough to even debate this.

  967. Randy

    @Epicurus

    Bravo! Incredible!

    "Fluctuations in the CMBR"

    You are the man!

  968. Randy

    I'm watching "Dracula", the Frank Langella, John Badham version... O' Holy Batman, when I was a kid I wanted to be Dracula...

    I was the original goth!

    Sorry, carry on...

  969. Randy

    @Epicurus,

    I've said this before, in other posts, but, again, you show my shortcomings.

    You have a laser point mind, and I am all... Irish... and poetic...

    As I have posted before, this is why I am having trouble with my Master's thesis in Biology... World History and Classical Literature, I can ace with my writing style...

    But, Evolutionary Biology? Advanced Physics? I'm too poetic... You just nail it, every time!

    I call you the Intellectual Quizinart. Live with that.

  970. Randy

    I can't sleep. All of you must suffer...

    @Epicurus,

    I have been reading over your posts, and I see that you seem to be bending toward Bhuddism. I tried that path...

    Someone, I forget her name, reminded me recently that Prince Siddartha left his wife and child to horrible depravity, for "enlightenment".

    To hell with him! I do NOT forgive any man not supporting his wife and child! For any reason!

    Sorry, I get angry about that... All religions are horrible... Sorry, carry on...

  971. eireannach666

    @oli
    I wish I could have stopped you after your first few sentences. Your ideas are ,by far,not new to me.
    Im not saying you are religious. However you throw a god concept in with your thoughs on the way the universe works .Implying that god is anything at all , is still a creation theory. There is no god. The universe runs on its own , natural , mathematical way. Even if M-Theory were to be a proven fact , it still wouldn't be gods doing. It would be a natural process that just makes things more interesting. There is no place , zero , zilch , not one , in science for god. If you say god anything , then you are suggesting there is a supreme enity. Sorry you had to go on for three paragraphs about it but there is no god. Physical , spiritual , or mental. Just nature at its finest. We and all things, are nothing more than an accidental meeting of matters.

  972. Randy

    I'm writing a novel that incorprates M-theory... I don't particularly like M-theory (Membrane, or 'brane theory), but it is fun to write about.

    The equations just don't work for me.

    But, it works for my novel. Which, none of you will ever read. That's private.

  973. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Any comments on the " toe of god" research up for review yet?

    Anyone else?

  974. Randy

    @eireannach666

    Actually, I am having problems getting all the data from the Hadron-Super Collider. So far, the conclusions seem sketchy, but as I do not have access to the full equations...

    I'm sorry, my gaelic brother... I can't help you with "the toe of god".

    I will say this... they seem to have discovered the Bosen Particle... maybe...

  975. eireannach666

    @oli
    "What exactly would you consider scientific evidence? A face on a tortilla? A few scriptures saying this guy did that? No right? I mean short of building a time machine and going to see for yourself what could possibly satisfy you?"

    Scientific evidence , you know, scientific method. Observation, hypothesis , experimentation, conclusion that validates the idea/ hypothesis , or not. Real evidence. Wait , there is none is there. Shucks , I prayed all night for it , but its not here. Maybe I was doing it wrong. Guess the World Cup tickets arent going to show either.

    Heck , show me one person who can raise dead people , walk on water , or cure a fatal illness with his super, hippy, newage, magical, healing powers. That would be great. People like that dont exist but in fiction books. All the evidence Ive ever seen points in the no-god direction. Are you a hippy? Starting to seem that way. Im sorry if my idea of evidence is something of fact and not something that has a "trillion:one" shot of being possible . And thats a conservative estimate on the odds.

    Oh , and we dont need a time machine to prove the big bang , evolution , or anyother one of our great understandings.

  976. Randy

    Here's a fun fact:

    There is no documentary evidence, biblical or otherwise, for god restoring a severed limb.

    So, psychosomatic ailments are easy to heal, but the real stuff... the lost limbs or eyes...

    Hmmm... Grow me a limb, Lord, and then I will believe in you!

  977. D-K

    @Epicurus:

    I don't quite agree with the inclusion of dark matter and dark energy as viable forms of evidence.

    "Evolution of galaxies"

    Do you mean glatactic formation/deformation or alteration?

  978. D-K

    That's supposed to be 'galactic', obviously.

  979. oliarguello

    @eireannach666

    the following is what I went through chronologically and changing my hypothesis accordingly. There are more events that happened butI will stick to some the health claims.

    Claim: A person claiming to be able to heal the sick in Santa Ana, CA without surgery or medicine.

    Hypothesis 1: Minor self healing ailments are "treated" that dont have anything to do with the healer.

    Observations: People with cancer, AIDS, advanced leprosy, are cured and wheelchair bound people walking without contemporary medical intervention.

    Hypothesis 2: Its a trick and people are lying to help recruit other people and to keep them coming.

    Observations : There is some clinical proof of before and after conditions documenting proving SOME of the claims (AIDS patient and cancer patients). Also, my mothers cancer diagnosis by medical doctors is misdiagnosed as ovarian cancer, the healer diagnoses is it as stomach cancer and further medical testing confirms it is stomach cancer. I personally go through the process and have some minor chronic ailments alleviated.

    Hypothesis 3: Since no medicine or surgery is involved, and some major medical miracles are proven to be cured, there msut be a mechanism in which such things happen.

    Theory: HVPGS voltage has been shown to stimulate DNA translation; electrodermal phenomena from the skin due to emotions has been proven ( stress, anxiety, etc). It is my hypothesis that electrodermal phenomena can induce HVPGS like voltages at target areas to stimulate DNA translation into protein synthesis or degeneration from apoptosis.

  980. oliarguello

    @eireannach666

    The point of the "time machine" metaphor was that you wont believe something unconventional until you see it for yourself. Which I dont blame you. Prior to seeing the healer I was an atheist.

    At some point you have to take it upon faith to believe what you believe. Those great understandings you mentioned are in the end theories, the data is concrete but the interpretations of what drive the data are beliefs. There are not proofs of anything, jsut theories based on empirical evidence. Just like I have a theory based on empirical evidence ( what I have observed vs the clinical results i have scrutinized).

    P.S. In case I have to make it clearer the Big Bang and Evolution by natural selection are theories. There is a lot of evidence to support the theories( the theories are afterall based on evidence), but different interpretation of the same data, or in conjunction with evidence outside those theories, lead to alternate theories.

    My point being is you have to keep an open mind. If anyone in any field thinks they have it all down pat , then there is no progress and you are stuck. Imagine if they decided not investigate or question ANYTHING 200 years ago.

    P.P.S. Hippy? Hmmm. Thats a relative term no? Especially the way you interpret the word ( based on a way of thinking vs physical attributes). I would suggest you are a hippie as well and that we in fact all have a little bit of hippie in all of us. If you were to ask a meathead,wouldnt he say you are a hippie for looking at documentaries online? ;)

  981. Achems Razor

    @ oliarguello:

    Ha, Ha, Well, good for you! we are all "Hippies".

    Without any slight to my friends, but am tired of this hippie garbage.
    Oh, please do not say I am a hippie! dread the thought of being classed as a hippie! just because said new thoughts, or not in agreement with everything that is said, have to be careful what you say or. He's a f...n hippie!!

    Just a parody folks. Nothing personal, (LOL)

  982. oliarguello

    @Achems Razor

    LOL. Yeah the "hippie garbage" can be a tiresome debate and its definitely a dead horse being beaten. Its obvious nobody is going to change anyones mind here. But its occasionally useful and fun.

    Even though I wont directly call you a hippie I will call Stephen Hawking, Einstein, Newton, Galileo, Epicurus, Socrates, Plato, Steve Jobs, Jesus, Buddha, hippies ;)and DEFINITELY Diogens and Gandhi( not only mentally but they physically embodied the epitome of hippie). I was going to call some political leaders hippies but I couldnt think of any, once in office they are all the same ( except maybe Mandela and JFK?)

  983. Achems Razor

    Of course you can call me a hippie!

    But my definition of a hippie is someone who has empathy towards his fellow man, towards animals, and not to f..k up our planet anymore than it is. Now am going to hug a f...n tree! (LOL)

    Hippie dome forever!! Yeh!!

  984. eireannach666

    @Oli

    Ever think that those illnesses supposedly cured by hippie healers would have been cured by the immune system over time if the person just took care of themselves ? I bet they would have. A positive mind state and willpower along with exercise and a healthy diet can do amazing things. Ill bet all those factors came into play but peoples need to buff up a " healer" or "god" as the source of cure is so strong that they will throw aside all logic. I guess we will never agree on that one. I dont buy it. I say its bogus. The mind and body have natural ways of dealing with illness and pain. Some peoples are stronger than others. Just look at the "healer/god " win:lose ratio. Proof enough for me. Those people are just playing the law of averages.

    "healer/god If you were to ask a meathead,wouldnt he say you are a hippie for looking at documentaries online?"

    No , not me. You can look at me and know better than that. lol Im by all means nowhere near that category . In fact , Id bet half the people on here wouldn't even approuch me with so much as a hello or handshake , if passing by. Unless we were in the same room together and were involved in some kid of open dialog , I doubt they would even think I was half science, math, history or book savy at all. Thats what is cool about the internet.

    However , I do see what you were trying to get at. Im open minded to new ideas but realistic when it comes to "miricles" because they arent real. Also , if a person jacked up on bull shark testosterone cant really say anything. They are so dense that they can barely spell hippie. Hipee? I was just kidding about the hippie anyways. Although the majority of the "healer cultists" are indeed hippies. Just messing with you. Lighten up the topic a bit. No disrespect intended.

    @Achems
    That doesnt make you a hippie my friend .A person who opposes and rejects standards and customs of society and advancement. Especially one who advocates extreme liberalism in sociopolitical attitudes and lifestyles , is a hippie. Having empathy towards your fellow man, towards animals, and not to messing up our planet anymore than it is , is just just and wise. Codes in which we all should start living by. I feel the same as you on that one.

  985. eireannach666

    Oli

    Agree to disagree.

  986. eireannach666

    Oh and 1 to 1 U.S. vs. England final.

    Too bad we couldnt get you limeys back for the mess you made in our back yard. Just kidding you fog breathers.

  987. Achems Razor

    @ eireannach666:

    I know what you are saying! and agree.

  988. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Did you check out that link to the 30 + page paper they sent in for review I posted for you?

    @Randy / Achems
    So if they indeed have discovered the Bosen particle ,then we would be able to explain where mass came from in the universe and the difference between photon, and W and Z bosons (mass vs. massless and electromagnetic force vs. weak force )? What would this mean , really? How does this effect us in the universe. If we can explain where mass came from then where did the mass making bosen come from etc , etc?

    Care to elaborate on this any? I am still trying to figure all the whole "bosonic-composites" deal and why exactly they are not true bosens as the Bose-Einstein statistics would state. If they are either elementary, or composite, (protons and mesons) Then why call the so called bas*&^% particles ("bosonic-composites") bosens at all?

    Science rules. Every step leads to another marathon of questions. Every step squeezes god further out of view. Unfortunately the religees will still deny facts and hold on to blind faith and superstition. What a shame. I bet this will really pi** off the religious world powers that be. I cant wait to see the review results.

    *Evil grin* Rubbing hands*

  989. Achems Razor

    @ eire666:

    The neutral B-mesons are like women, can't make up there mind (LOL) but when they do, have an eventual preponderance of 1% matter over ant-matter when they decay to muons according to there tilt, or spin. called CP-(charge-parity) violation.

    Apparently new particle, new physics, in the making for neutral B-mesons

    Brings to mind Nassim Haramein, at the resonance project foundation, discussing Quantum spin.

  990. Randy

    @Epicurus

    Yes, I agree, certainly, but really, all religions are just bad for us.

    Science and evolution teach us everything we need to know, is all's I'm sayin'.

    @My Gaelic brother,

    I just don't know. Right now, they have all the data locked down. I can't get any access to it, even with my credentials, so...

    Here's something interesting:

    Today I was in my backyard playing with my walking staff, (I have it rigged with wires so I can make it dance, an old trick... makes my nieces and nephews laugh...)

    Well, I was practicing making the staff hover and dance in the air, and my neighbor, (a GROWN woman!), saw me and SCREAMED and ran into her house...

    Really? Enough already!

  991. Randy

    By, "enough already..." you all know I meant, enough of the superstition... you got that, right?

    I mean, the "Dancing Cane" trick is really old. I bought it from the back of a comic book when I was 12...

    Anyways, the end of the story is, I had to go to her house and show her that I was not practicing black magic, (which all my neighbors think anyway... ah well...).

    I swear, I'm gonna get burned at the stake by these people eventually...

    *sigh*

  992. Randy

    @My Gaelic brother who wrote:

    "Did you check out that link to the 30 + page paper they sent in for review I posted for you?"

    Yes, I read it, but it seems to be a critical review... I need the hard data.

    So, I have petitioned the Hadron Super Collider folks, and they will give me the data, eventually.

    But, I am a patient man. Science is a slow, methodical process.

    I am fine with that.

  993. Randy

    Here's an interesting thing:

    (Listen I can't sleep because of the pain, so you just have to absorb my typing... JUST DO IT!)

    There was a religious cult in the Appalchias, (um... Kentucky, I belive), that claimed to be christian, yet they worhsipped Satan, because jesus said, "He is the Prince of this world" according to the gospels.

    Hmmm... really? I think the cult is extinct now, but I have spoken to them...

    Similar to the "Sin Eaters" or the "Snake Handlers"...

    Um... science!

    Although, there was lots of interesting co-relevance to the Gnostic Gospels in their idealogy... Beautiful country.

    Anyways....

  994. Randy

    Sorry, it was Tennessee (sp?), smoky mountain territory...

  995. D-K

    @Epi:

    What I'm saying is that Dark Matter/Energy shouldn't be included as viable evidence for the big bang as the nature of this (anti)matter is unknown, and there is a not a single particle observed, nor can the effects be observed as gravity isn't fully explained.

    DM/E mechanics might as well be effective properties of gravity/gravitons/gravitulions or whatever name is currently popular, that get parted from gravity in our limited understanding.

    I personally think, that without having explained gravity, the nature of the cosmos will remain a mystery. Not just the origin, but the very nature of it. It has been the driving force of the BB, galaxy evolution, countless other unexplained phenomena.

    I'm hoping for a breakthrough in white and black hole studies to reveal extra properties of gravity, I think we underestimate this force, but I digress.

    In short; DM/E is what is missing, since you can't quantify/qualify what is missing (in this case), you cannot attribute functions to it, therefore it cannot explain, it can only solve. DM/E is a solution, not an explanation.

    Great Scott, would you look at me ramble..

  996. eireannach666

    @Randy "Yes, I read it, but it seems to be a critical review… I need the hard data."

    Man that link was hard enough for me to read. I wouldn't even know where to start if I had full access to their hard stuff. I mean , I might have more luck with it than I think I will , but wow, you know? Im kind of anxious to see what the review turns out. Heck , it might come back as nothing , but I doubt it. Only time will tell.

    "I swear, I’m gonna get burned at the stake by these people eventually."

    Dude , I got people out here that wont even talk , look , or sit next to me due to my tats and street clothing. (Things I wear out and about. Certain shirts etc., but I get to see thousands of pro-jesux shirts and logos everywhere I go. ) I get asked all the time if I worship the devil. In which I reply that Im atheist and get an almost exact copy reaction to being a devil worshiper. Ha! 90% of them dont know the difference. Such intolerence and ignorance . (Well I gues one does breed the other.) Yet I have to tolerate their backwards beliefs and way of life. Even at work. Shame , shame, shame, indeed.
    WWJD- what would judas do?

    @Achems

    Thanks , man. I think that makes some sense. Sometimes I need the physics for dummies version with some stuff. People write books , etc , and just over-complicate the simplest things. Then when you figure out what they are saying , you just want to scream at them, " Why the f*&^ didnt you just f^%$&*' say that to begin with a**wipe!"

  997. Randy

    Epicurus,

    I love the concept of dark matter and energy, (it's even part of my novel...), but I kind of lean towards the rebel scientists that have been saying Newtonian mechanics may not apply everywhere in the universe.

    (That gravity varies throughout space/time, etc...)

    If that was the case, then there would be no need for dark matter...

    But, I still really love the idea of dark matter... I want it to be the real deal.

    In my novel, the dark matter is giant, galaxy sized space squids... so... kind of H.P. Lovecraft/Cuthulian mythos stuff...

    Anyways...

  998. eireannach666

    @Epicurus

    "try to explain in here something as complicated as this when it is already done so eloquently by someone better learned than me."
    I have to agree with you there.

    Even though I was not involved in the dark matter/energy in the BBT conversation , I did enjoy looking over your provided link/s .
    ( Did I post this already?Hmm.If I did then,my bad.)

    @Randy

    Your like the mad scientist in the basement at 3am cooking up the batch of religex juice to introduce to the world population. Yeah , I could see that. With your white coat an safty goggles on. Fro-ed out hair from lack of sleep, contact with others for days or shower .Ha! Like Dr. Herbert West ( Speaking on one of my favorites Mr. H. P. Lovecraft.) I think it was "Herbert West, Reanimator".

  999. eireannach666

    Or maybe more like "Artist of the Beautiful" Where Hawthorne wrote of Owen Warland. The clock-maker trying to come up with a perpetual motion machine, and the people in his town all see him as a nut and a little crazy. Kind of like that neighbor of yours , no?

  1000. Randy

    @eireannach666, who wrote:

    "Your like the mad scientist in the basement at 3am cooking up the batch of religex juice to introduce to the world population. Yeah , I could see that. With your white coat an safty goggles on. Fro-ed out hair from lack of sleep..."

    HAHA! You are not too far off, my friend! Except that I have only worn black clothes since I was 16... I have that Einstien thing where I just have the same clothes, same color, same style, etc... (Black suits...)

    So that, like him, I don't have to expend any mental energy on what to wear. A frivilous entertainment, frankly...

  1001. eireannach666

    I'm the same. 98% of all I own is black . Except I only have 2 suits, ha! My types of work don maintain the suit and tie dress code. I only wear mine on special occasions such as funerals. Which is funny because I wear black sunglasses eveyday all day, and sometimes at night if there are a bunch of bright a** lights where Im at. No Im not goth, Im death metal. I do security sometimes at a goth club my little bros promote for though.

  1002. Randy

    Hmmm... very interesting. I love all music, but metal and very dark classical, (Bach, Wagner, Beethoven... Black Sabbath...) is the very stuff that inspires me.

    (Although, Vivaldi! Another little Italian man like Dio... sigh... um, that sounded gay, but it really is just admiration... you got that, right?)

    But, listen, you are staying away from the mixing meds, right?

    No mixing meds!

  1003. eireannach666

    Cant forget the black combat boots. Never leave home without 'em.

  1004. Randy

    Ha! Yes. I have these beautiful, black python skin, "Tony Nacona" boots that I bought for like, 500 bucks in 1980--blah, blah-- I bought them because I knew they would last for life.

    They are elegant and awesome, but the heels are like two and a half inches tall... alas... with my MS, I would simply fall off of them like the physical mess I am...

    So, I wear black sneaks, or dress shoes, now. Age.

    Listen we are treating Vlatko's blog like our own personal chat room, here! I don't think he would appreciate that...

  1005. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Ha! Yeah, I told the doc about how the new sleep-aid effected me and he took me of and just upped the dosage of the one I already had. Much better.

    I like classical as well , all you named as a matter of fact. Jazz is cool. The blues. I Ilike everything but country and opera. I like western though. You know Cash , Haggard etc. It reminds me of old Irish songs. Im into punk like Sublime , The Pouges (Ireland) The Ramones , Social Distortion etc , Some older rock , like Sabbath etc , but am a metal head to heart. Im not talkin 80's bu** rock but like Slayer , Deicide , Vital Remains , Sepultura (from Brazil) , Testement etc. Ilike some industrial as well, Skinny Puppy , S.I.T.D. (from Germany. I got to drink with them when I di security for their show. Those Krauts wouldn't go on without their beer , Ha!)

    Alot of times it differs depending on who Im with not everyone likes metal, so tI try to be respectful) mood and how much Ive drank. Most of the time it death metal.

    So anywho , How about Reggae like Marley. Love Marley , man.

    "Don't gain the world and lose your soul, wisdom is better than silver or gold. 'Tell the children the truth'” -Marley

  1006. Randy

    @eireannach666

    "Alot of times it differs depending on who Im with not everyone likes metal, so tI try to be respectful..."

    Yes. That is very true. And, it is a very Irish trait, being respectful of guests!

    I find Van Morison is always a crowd pleaser!

    I love all the music you mentioned, but the country stuff, reminds me too much of my youth in North Carolina... EVIL!

    Although, I do love and respect Dolly Parton... (she's an amzing woman and a good writer! A little too christian, but... seriously smart...)

  1007. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Ahh , Van Morison. That is something I dont have in the collection . I like Van Morison. Another Irishman to love.

    I will write a reminder to myself to add that. Been a while since Ive heard that name.

    What is it with people ? I was discussing evolution basics with some people at a BBQ the other day , (whom I didnt really know ,some religious christian , the others not ) and not even five minutes in someone said that they would like evolution , but dont because they didnt come from any kind of ape, and and wont even fathom the idea. ( Remind you I walked in on the conversation of origins while getting a beer and listened to some misguided views on it and decided to be social for once to enlighten them on the facts.) Of course the christian wont even listen and gets defensive , wanting to drop the conversation. (After getting everyone to chill and bite their lip for a second .) I explained the common ancestor deal and still he wouldn't give it a second thought. WTF? I had to ask " Whats so bad about having a common ancestor ?" I got no explanation. Just F that Im not an ape etc. Had to drop it but this bothered me. Made me think that had I have said we are related to a cute little white bunny rabbit first , I would have gotten a different response. Can someone tell me what is so bad about being related to one of the smartest species on earth? Ive heard that more than once and quite a few times. This guy said he wasnt religious. Then why the delusion ? Just a mor**, maybe? I dont really think he was uneducated. He is a CPA , if I remember correctly. So he had to have some knowledge on the topic from school. Just arguing for the sake of, perhaps? It bothered me that I never got a reasonable answer as to why out of him. I swear, people, man.

  1008. Randy

    Yes. It is strange how people get offended to be called an ape, when, in actuality, apes are really more noble than most humans.

    But, really, it should be very self evident. I mean... look at yourself, for crimeny sakes!

    And as for the common ancestor-- these nay-sayers are people who never took anatomy classes.

    And as for the CPA? Um... I have really been seeing alot of not very bright people graduating college lately...

    Try interviewing them for a job! Wow!

  1009. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Good point. Thats what I say . Look at us! Look at them. Heck I dont know if they are more human or us more ape. I guess more ape since we are the latter but still. There is nothing wrong with being what you are. Whats wrong is denying the fact that you are and going along with the “nay-sayers ” , as you say, (Ill say the ignorant and stubborn and also the superstitious and religious ) believing you are something your not just because of some weird idea that we are ,in some way, not animals but divine or in a special class of being. We are just a step up on the evolutionary chain, Its only a matter of time before we are passed up.

    At least our predecessors will be smart enough to know where they came from and acknowledge their link to us and the apes. I hope so anyways. ( Could you imagine ,” I didnt come from no F’ing human, Eww !Gross! No way.” Ha!) Unless , of course , we are all wiped out by some freak disaster, (by man or nature.) in which bacteria , and viruses , etc will be our replacements. Or whatevers left if anything. That would be kind of cool if our planet had to restart from scratch with just a few surviving bacteria and re-evolve back to us then repeat , and repeat . (Except that we wouldn’t be there to see it. )Ok i am rambling. Got caught up with the mental visualization in my head. Would make for a good movie, though.

  1010. Randy

    Oh, we were both spelling his name wrongly. It's Van Morrison, (with two R's).

    And yes, another great Irish writer.

    "Moondance", "Into the Mystic"? etc... Yeah. Always a crowd pleaser.

  1011. eireannach666

    I got moderated twice even after , I thought I fixed it. Oh well.

    Why is it so hard to find work when you are an ex-con (non-violent) that is more than qualified for a job , even after 7yrs have passed? To get beet out of a job by the most under qualified , wannabe ghetto , uperclass , suburban kid , with no degree, is very , very demoralizing to a person. Ahh! Makes me want to go apesh**. Pop-culture has made it acceptible to act and talk with ignorance but not acceptible to make mistakes and redeem oneself. What the F is going on. Almost forces a man back into a lifestyle , he swore to leave behind , just to eat. I should move to another country.

  1012. Randy

    @My Gaelic brother,

    Well, we have talked about this before. The thing is this: you have to have that piece of paper, that lambskin, that gets you in the door. Then, your personality and innate inteligence, (which you have), gets you the rest of the way.

    But, yes, I have said before, you almost have to go to another country to live the American dream, these days.

    When I retire, I want to expatriate to Germany, or Canada, or Sweden, (although my wife hates the cold...).

    Maybe Spain, or Italy. My wife's mother is from Spain, and I am learning Spanish.

    Yo en espouse es magnificente (?) Is "magnificente" a word?

  1013. Randy

    Oi! I'm trying to learn Japanese, too... it's all too much for my poor old brain...

    Wacarrymas! (I know I spelled that wrongly, but that is Japanese for "I understand")

    But, I love the romance languages, Spanish, Italian, etc...

    The Scandinavian? No way. Can't do it. German I can play with... but, that's about it.

    Anyways...

  1014. eireannach666

    Seems like a degree doesnt mean a thing when you have a felony. Even if the degree came afterwards.

    I love German. I would love to live there. Yes ,Scandanavian is abeast of a language . My friend from Sweden says she will teach me but I dont know if I want to or not. Its really difficult . Germanic languages like ours are easiest for Americans. I tried my luck at Japanese , but only manage to learn a few numbers and a couple sentences . I know quite a bit of Spanish , though. Comes in really handy here in the states.

  1015. D-K

    @Epic

    I actually wrestled through it before posting, maybe I missed something though, I'll re-read.

    Note that i'm not claiming whether or not DM/C is accurate or even existant/inexistant, i'm simply expressing my doubts concerning their inclusion as evidence for something else, when they're understood so little. I'd say that it's hard to use something as evidence when that something is a mystery itself, 's all i'm saying.

  1016. eireannach666

    @Randy
    The only words I know of close to magnificent is "espléndida" or splendid in english and "espectacular" or spectacular in english.

    If my spelling is correct.

  1017. Randy

    @eireannach666

    Thank you. That is very helpful. Esplendida. I like that.

    I guess living in California, Spanish is pretty essential!

    But, you know, Hispanics are the largest growing minority in America, so knowing fluent Spanish can help you get a good job, too.

    Also, Hindi, as we have discussed before; but lordy, Hindi is another really hard language!

  1018. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Yeah, I dont even know where to start on some Hindi. I would like to meet a chic that speaks it though. I learn most of what I know in linguistics from the women Ive dated and actually learning on the streets. Everyday application is the best trainer or teacher , or life if you will.

  1019. Randy

    @eireannach666

    "I would like to meet a chic that speaks it though. I learn most of what I know in linguistics from the women Ive dated and actually learning on the streets..."

    Ha! Yes, that is the best way to learn something, from a woman you are dating!

    Seriously, though, I'm all over "knowledge of the streets", very important, but you still need that piece of paper, man.

    Everything I know is mostly self taught... but I knew from a young age, that I would need to go to college just to get that damn piece of paper.

    I learned more from having drinks with my professors AFTER school than from lessons, or tests, in class.

  1020. Just Answers

    The subjects in question in this doc was way too easy to pounce on, they didnt have a clue what the were talking about obviously! A high school student could have disproved everything they were saying, way too easy for scientist to shoot them down. But one thing that stands out is that life did start from some higher being. Francis Crick the discoverer of DNA wrote that he became convinced that every form of life on earth - all flora and fauna, the entire ecosystem - had been created not by God, but by an alien race of incomprehensibly vast intelligence and powers, a race that might also have created this universe itself, and others. The dead sea scrolls and the sumerian tablets all tell of visitors from outside our world came with great knowledge who contributed to the some of worlds greatest structures ever built. Primitive people didnt create such structures, great knowledge did. The same accounts appear in different parts of the world. This would explain not only in the bible of genesis (hebrew text) and earlier writings about the sons of the gods interbreeding with the daughters of man, and the results were the nephilium..offspring much larger in stature and very intelligent. There are many ancient depictions of intelligent life that came here thousands of years ago. They all could not be CRAZY! where there is smoke there is fire! This was a very good doc making these idiots look just like that, IDIOTS....

  1021. Randy

    @Hardy, who wrote:

    "Meh, I’ll stick with Thor..."

    Yes. Thor is a GREAT god! I loved studying Thorian legends!

    Loki and all that... (still, an apocolyptic religion, plus all the white-supremacy that surrounds it... but still! Great comic books!)

    Awesome stuff. I have many encyclopedias devoted to the Germanic/Scandinavian mythoses, (sp?)

  1022. Chris

    @Randy, et al,

    Sorry for the long delay in my response. The point of my post is as follows:
    1. Thunderf00t makes an accurate rebuttal to some particular selected Christian YouTube videos.
    2. To draw a conclusion that those videos fairly represent accurate Christian scholarship and apologetics is disingenuous and misleading.

    Therefore, Thunderf00t only fights battles he knows he can win. He only takes on uneducated inexperienced idiots and fools.

    @Achems: My comments were not intended to make a case for intelligent design. They were only examples to demonstrate that Thunderf00t's conclusions are not justified since they are based solely upon the poor arguments presented by his inept opponents.

    You cannot claim to be a great undefeated fighter if you only beat up babies. Thuderf00t only succeeds in demonstrating that he can make a "fool" out of a "fool". To applaud his efforts only lowers the bar. This was NOT a good addition to TDF.

  1023. Achems Razor

    @ Chris:

    Makes sense, but if I read you correctly, if everyone were to up the bar, so the opponents are equal to a world class fight, would it not be hard to determine a winner! If at all impossible, back to the old adage. You can't argue religion or politics!

  1024. eireannach666

    @Randy
    Dont get me wrong , man, I totally agree with you.You are right about having that paper. I got my degree 4yrs ago , however , I have yet to land a gig that pays anything in that field. Like I said before , I make waaay more money as an ASE diesel mechanic . Im talking 10k more a year , too. I feel like college , for me , was merely a very fun pit-stop in life. I learned alot , F*#$ed alot and drank alot. I would do it again. This time I would Major in something else.

    But yeah , I learned alot from just being around people and being forced to adjust to many different environments. Some great and some extremely horrible. I learned most of my Spanish from a girl but the rest got picked up in d.o.c. Amoungst other useful knowledge. I spent alot of time in books. Great way to free your mind when you are not physically . (Enough talking on that bad memory. F*** d.o.c , by the way, stright in the mouth with a two edged claymore.) I always try and tak every situation good or bad and bring something positive back from it.

    Anyways as I was trying to say , I think I just made a huge mistake on choosing my Major. At the time the economy was still doing well, but by the time I was ready to get into the field , it turned for the worse. Oh well, life goes on. I am thinking about trying to go for some kind of engineering , maybe. Next year. I got a fat raise in pay this week and if all goes well , the rest of this year , I am going back to school. Only time will tell. Its not set in stone yet.

  1025. Epicurus

    @Chris, thunderf00ts medium here was youtube and he was using the most subscribed to christians on youtube.

    what makes you think he would only debate or take on retards? (could you point out ONE god creationist who makes ONE valid point for their position?) im sure thunderf00t would debate anyone that accepted.

  1026. DiannaK

    i really liked this little home-made series... creationists ought to be embarassed - but for reasons i have yet to understand, they aren't, and that always bugs me.

  1027. eireannach666

    @DiannaK

    Ha! You said it.

  1028. Chris

    @ Randy

    On 06/12/2010, you stated, "There is no documentary evidence, biblical or otherwise, for god restoring a severed limb.... Grow me a limb, Lord, and then I will believe in you!"

    The bible records that Jesus restored a severed ear. Does that mean that you now believe?

  1029. Randy

    Apparently, the non-existent jesus character, stuck a recently severed ear onto a man's head, (but not in all the "gospels"... inconsitancies).

    I could do that too.

    Blood is extremely cohesive, (glue like).

    What I want is an amuptated arm or leg... to grow back!

    Got anything else?

  1030. Chris

    @ Achems: It's not a matter of opponents being equally matched in every way - they never will be. It's a matter of each side being qualified to fairly represent their argument. The Christians that Thunderf00t attacks are hardly qualified to make a cup of tea. And Thunderf00t is not qualified to face a knowledgeable and experienced Christian scholar, and he knows it.

    The reason some people say that politics and religion can't be discussed or argued is not the fault of logic and reason. It's because most people are not logical or reasonable. In fact, they refuse to be.

  1031. Chris

    @ Randy

    The bible records that Jesus healed the man's ear that had been struck off with a sword. Not glued back -- healed. It would seem that your conditions for belief has become a bit of a moving target.
    Re your "non-existent Jesus" remark. Are you saying that Jesus did not exist? There is plenty of verifiable contemporary non-christian writings that record the existence of Jesus. You would do better arguing 'who' he was rather than whether he existed.

  1032. Randy

    @Chris

    Oh, holy batman... blah blah blah

    Yes, Chris. Your little superstitions, your bedtime stories, that get you and your little family through the day, are absolutely truth...

    I am going to be dead soon, I don't care, destroy the world.

    But I'm telling you, I have forgotten more than you will ever know.

    I have actual results of my intellect. Homes, libraries, feeding families and children with my company.

    Results are all that matter. Everything else is fantasy...

  1033. Chris

    @ Randy

    I'm truly sorry to hear that! Please accept my sincere condolences. I'll only add that it would be a mistake to judge God by the missteps, errors and crimes of organized traditional religion. The Revelation of John warns that religion will be severely judged because of its misrepresentation of God. Respectfully, I'll say no more.

  1034. Epicurus

    since my post is in moderation i will try again

    @Chris, thunderf00ts medium here was youtube and he was using the most subscribed to christians on youtube. whether you think they are bright or not, they are the "voice", like it or not.

    what makes you think he would only debate or take on these people? (could you point out ONE good creationist who makes ONE valid point for their position?) im sure thunderf00t would debate anyone that accepted.

    also if the bible is proof for the divinity of christ then then bhagavad gitas are proof of hinduism, and quran of islam....oh and lord of the rings of middle earth.

    and i dont know who you think would be worth debating (to me, debating a creationist is like debating someone who believes storks bring babies.) but Thunderf00t has a whole debate with Ray Comfort and also a meeting with Richard Dawkins in which they dont agree 100% at some points.

    this series was not meant to do anything than show how silly these types of people can be.

  1035. Randy

    Epicurus,

    Remember when I called your posts, "A little bit too snarky..."

    HAHA! Now who's calling the kettle black!

    Yeah, I mean, in the face of ignorance it is very hard to keep one's patience...

    Tear 'em up, my friend!

  1036. eireannach666

    @Chris

    "The bible records that Jesus healed the man’s ear that had been struck off with a sword. Not glued back — healed."

    Again religion comes up with a highly impossible scenario to buff up its poster child. I mean , really? Just picked it up off the ground and stuck it back on , huh? That just as make-believe as the snake talking and the splitting of the sea with a magic walking stick. It never happened. Ever think that maybe jesux just stopped the bleeding of a cut ear and over time it got stretched into a severed ear? Exageration over time is common practice in folklore. The jesux story resembles others. Johnny Appleseed being a good one. I love me some apples.

    "You would do better arguing ‘who’ he was rather than whether he existed."

    And just who was he and how do you know this.

  1037. Chris

    To all, it would be helpful if you actually read the posts, comments and replies before responding.

    @ Epicurus: Once again, your vitriolic agenda has gotten the better of you:

    1. "thunderf00ts medium here was youtube and he was using the most subscribed to christians on youtube. whether you think they are bright or not, they are the “voice”, like it or not."

    And because the readerships of the National Enquirer or Reader's Digest far exceeds that of Scientific American, does that elevate the level of their scholarly authority on the subject of UFOs and Atlantis? FAIL

    2. "could you point out ONE good creationist who makes ONE valid point for their position?"

    Myself. Here is only one example supporting (not proving) a designed universe: Given that the current estimates of the diameter of the universe exceed our visual horizon by more than a factor of 10 (making the universe more than 100 billion light years wide), the flatness and horizon problems in the Standard Model require an initial preciseness that is unlikely, unnatural and statistically impossible, even accounting for inflation theory.

    The proposed solution is a "multiverse" creating infinite numbers of universes in order to make our type of a universe an eventuality is highly speculative and flawed, mainly because it requires the existence of actual infinities, which is an impossible, fairy-tail notion. Think about it: if the multiverse possessed the property of actual infinities, this property would have been manifested in our universe in some way however small. But it does not. I'm sure you understand the difference between "potential infinities" and "actual infinities."

    Therefore, since the concept of a multiverse is untenable, we are left with only two options regarding our own universe: Either we were lucky beyond belief, reason or logic, or it was the result of a designer.

    By the way, whether or not you agree with the above point, I have presented it as a reasonable, scientifically-supported, evidence-based, logical position. You said you had never had a creationist present you with one valid point. Here ya go!

    3. "also if the bible is proof for the divinity of christ then then bhagavad gitas are proof of hinduism, and quran of islam….oh and lord of the rings of middle earth."

    (Sigh...) The bible is not proof for the divinity of Christ, at least not in the way of pulling Christ out of a hat in order to satisfy your idle curiosity. The bible is proof of the divinity of Christ to those to whom God has revealed Himself. For example, you may have read many cookbooks and yet still starve. Yet someone who does not even know how to cook, and yet eats the simplest food, will understand far more than you. As the bible says, the Gospel is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to those who believe, it is the Power of God. As for you, yourself, the bible will never be able to prove the divinity of Christ, but that has nothing to do with the bible.

    4. "Thunderf00t has a whole debate with Ray Comfort and also a meeting with Richard Dawkins in which they dont agree 100% at some points."

    Hmm. Yes, I watch those conversations. Thunderf00t made quite the fool of himself. He was easily out-matched and out-witted, even by someone to whom he wished to be aligned. It was embarrassing to watch. I recommend anyone to watch them if you have ever wondered how far down a foot could be inserted in the mouth.

    5. "this series was not meant to do anything than show how silly these types of people can be."

    And that was part of my original point, as well. However, the joyful glee you feel in watching thunderf00t's sorry spectral of tossing uninformed, inexperienced, and uneducated believers to the lions of his dull intellect only furthers my point that thunderf00t's videos do not represent a true contest.

    His videos are mental junk food for like-minded atheists and only demonstrate that thunderf00t can pick on babies.

  1038. Vlatko

    All right @Chris according to you "since the concept of a multiverse is untenable, we are left with only two options regarding our own universe: Either we were lucky beyond belief, reason or logic, or it was the result of a designer". Also you say the Standard model is obsolete.

    So I have a question: If there was/is designer what is the model of our universe then? How the universe was/is designed?

    Also you say that "the Bible bible is proof of the divinity of Christ to those to whom God has revealed Himself.". By reading this I must conclude that God revealed Himself to you. So I was wondering how it looks like when God reveals to you?

  1039. Vlatko

    You should first read your 30 seconds Google search @Chris. There are only 8 Non Christian sources that just mention Jesus Christ. The very important word here is "mention". There are just couple of lines in those sources dedicated to Jesus, and some of them are so vague... not even mentioning him by his name.

    I suppose this is enough historical written data for you to conclude the existence of a man who claimed to be the real Son of God.

    So why was the Son of God only just poorly mentioned in several non-religious books with few paragraphs combined. It turns out you have only few paragraphs (for some we can't be sure they refer to Jesus) in secular literature in the following few centuries AC. Funny ha!

    I'm not saying Jesus never existed, he just got proportional attention for his work in the non-religious books in those times. And than he was terribly misused by his followers afterwards.

  1040. Achems Razor

    @ Chris:

    Again we are going down to infinities, yes infinity is impossible in our 3 and 4 dimensional linear reality.

    Everything is based on time again. But Einstein said space and time are illusion, as does QM, very easy to Google. And before the lynching squad gets ready, this is from the fathers of QM, not Deepak, and his minions.

    Since you are gravitating towards (CA) and I know that is your forte, would like to see someone, explore the cosmological argument with you!

  1041. Chris

    Vlatko weighs in. I'm honored.

    I didn't say the Standard Model is obsolete. Far from it, generally, I'm a supporter of the Standard Model. However, the Standard Model is far from complete (as any honest cosmologist will admit).

    But the multiverse is NOT a part of the Standard Model. It is a fix proposed to solve the fine-tuning problem. Personally, I see the Standard Model as more of a problem to atheists because it points to a solution/origin that must be outside of our universe, but CANNOT be an physically-based infinite. More than this is impossible to determine with evidence.

    Hmm. What does it look like when God reveals Himself? To understand the answer to this question requires an understanding of our human existence.

    Man is made in three parts according to Paul's Thessalonians: A physical body with 6 senses to interact with the physical world, the mind or soul to interact intellectually (Soul comes from the Greek 'psu-khê' which is the origin of words like Psychology), and a spirit to interact spiritually.

    The Bible says, "God is Spirit and those who worship Him must worship Him in spirit and reality."

    Therefore, you are not going to clearly "see" God with your physical eyes. And you are not going to apprehend God with your mind. These are the wrong organs. People have tried it for thousands of years and it does not work. You may as well attempt to determine 'color' with your nose. You must use your spirit.

    Anticipating your next question: "How do you know you have contacted God with your spirit?", I ask how do you know you have seen the color red? And how do you explain 'red' to a person born blind? You either see or you do not. If you do not, no amount of explanation will suffice. If you do see, no explanation is needed.

    I suggest you (or anyone) see if you can contact God on your own. Feel free to complain to Him about everything I have written. My own complaint regarding His tendency to hide Himself was, "If you are real, bring me into that reality.

    In my answers, I have endeavored to respect your intelligence. Therefore I would not trouble you with the burden of believing fairy tales like a 6k year old earth, or other such nonsense that keeps thinking educated people from coming to God. Just forget what religion has taught you can seek on your own level.

  1042. Chris

    @ Vlatko

    "I’m not saying Jesus never existed, he just got proportional attention for his work in the non-religious books in those times. And than he was terribly misused by his followers afterward."

    The purpose of my post was that some were claiming that the historical Jesus was fictitious, and that the only mentions of Him were from the Bible. My point was simply to prove that claim to be false. It is unreasonable to expect me to answer all attacks in one post. And I agree that He has been terribly misused by His followers.

  1043. Randy

    @Chris who wrote:

    "Hmm. What does it look like when God reveals Himself? To understand the answer to this question requires an understanding of our human existence..."

    Hmmm... what does it look like, Chris? It looks like a huge pile of Oxytocin rushing into your brain, that's what it looks like.

    Please, do not quote the bible at us, it has no revelance.

    Brain chemicals!

  1044. D-K

    Hey hey!

    Seems we have an actual debate going on, how exciting!
    I'm off to my nightshift, and once I arrive at work, i'll be joining in on this little shindig.

  1045. D-K

    I'd also like to add before I leave for work, that while Thuderfoot refutes the "easy" arguments, it's these arguments that the majority of "creationists" base their faith on.

    Most people don't care to scrutinize their thoughts, and thunderfoot "teaches" the masses. He is a positive force.

  1046. Chris

    Sorry, D-K. Can't play any longer. Client broke their website and needs me to sweep up the mess. (sigh... It never ends, but I suppose I get paid either way, eh?).

    I don't see much point in much more. As I stated to someone a few months ago, "Nothing stated on this site will ever change the minds of believers or disbelievers. The only thing that occurs is already entrenched positions become more so."

    Gotta run. Peace, love and ice cream for all.

  1047. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    It baffles me... actually leaves me dumbfounded that the same people who devote their entire life living by a book written by man ( please spare me the "word/hand" of God explanations - if you believe that man is capable of sin to further himself or to achieve status, power or glory - then you should understand this request ) - know so little concerning the history of their religion which they confuse with a science...
    Almost as amusing are the evo's who seem to think that because science is proven in so many areas - that is just cause for those theists to abolish God in their life.

    Do you think people are really manipulated or forced into what they believe? Nobody can truly be manipulated into anything unless they want to be... I see so many references from evo's saying all religious people were " brainwashed" into their faith... Well I guess from about the age of 2 I was "brainwashed" into believing Santa Claus was real... But somehow I figured it out on my own he was not. Do you really believe those with faith don't want to live as they do or something?! Why bother trying to dis-way them towards anything they don't WANT to believe.... Did your Grade 9 science teacher FORCE evolution on you??? Were you manipulated into what you know to be true??? No you decided for yourself....

    And as for the religious who LOVE to jump onto the forums bashing any documentary that doesn't say " The earth is 6000 years old and God is responsible for everything we know of and don't", wake -up. Don't watch it then. Don't comment on it. You don't see atheists going around block by block knocking on doors telling people their god doesn't exist do you? I don't care that your bible tells you to spread the "word" and turn me on to Jesus... Your bibles also tells me those who eats seafood will go to hell. Leviticus 11:9-12 NCV. Right above the part that literalists have tuned into the hate- on for homosexuality.

    Point being... Neither side should bother to bash each other or go to such extremes in some effort to convince the other that what they believe is WRONG. Both views and beliefs are available. Why should you care as an individual what some other random has chosen to put their belief's in.... why not discuss the documentary at hand instead of turning it into some redundant war of words. I have yet to see anyone change another's belief system on here because they left some ignorant comment.

    It reminds me of kids on a playground who won't let another play within the group because of ethnicity...Yeah it's that bad.

  1048. Randy

    jesus built my hotrod (awesome song)!

    No. It's much more critical than you think. We must, (MUST) oppose these religions for the sake of our future.

    Just recently, (and I do not have the exact info, I am doing 12 things at once here, so I am not going to google it, someone else can), a GW Bush appointed head of the Department of the Interior was asked by a reporter:

    "What is your plan to save our parks?"

    He responded,

    "Well, we just don't know when jesus is coming back, but I think it is soon, so... we won't need to worry about that..."

    Matter of public record. Terrifying.

  1049. D-K

    @Jesusbuilt...

    I personally, wouldn't have a problem with religion if it were a personal and individualist concept. However, religious groups influence parties of government, and as such affect the lives of atheists or non-believers.

    Unification seems rather unlikely, segregation or elimination both seem more probable.

  1050. Epicurus

    Myself. Here is only one example supporting (not proving) a designed universe: Given that the current estimates of the diameter of the universe exceed our visual horizon by more than a factor of 10 (making the universe more than 100 billion light years wide), the flatness and horizon problems in the Standard Model require an initial preciseness that is unlikely, unnatural and statistically impossible, even accounting for inflation theory.

    my first response is, message thunderf00t. if you REALLY want to debate with him message him on youtube.

    now on to your claims. the thing that stands out to me is claiming that it is statistically impossible, yet claiming that a being that has existed for eternity and makes everything and will judge us and does miracles is perfectly normal...speaking of fail.

    oh and about what you claimed I failed at....like i said his medium was youtube, he was responding to youtubers. no one said this is the end all of creationists.

    look, here you say:

    The proposed solution is a “multiverse” creating infinite numbers of universes in order to make our type of a universe an eventuality is highly speculative and flawed, mainly because it requires the existence of actual infinities, which is an impossible, fairy-tail notion.

    however, again i should point out you have no problem believing in the bible and the christian god.....*facepalm*

    By the way, whether or not you agree with the above point, I have presented it as a reasonable, scientifically-supported, evidence-based, logical position. You said you had never had a creationist present you with one valid point. Here ya go!

    ABSOLUTELY NOT. it was more sad apologetics from people who are desperately clinging to an iron age mythology that no one would care that you practiced if it wasnt for your incessant need to interfere with the rest of the worlds life.

    (Sigh…) The bible is not proof for the divinity of Christ, at least not in the way of pulling Christ out of a hat in order to satisfy your idle curiosity. The bible is proof of the divinity of Christ to those to whom God has revealed Himself. For example, you may have read many cookbooks and yet still starve. Yet someone who does not even know how to cook, and yet eats the simplest food, will understand far more than you. As the bible says, the Gospel is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to those who believe, it is the Power of God. As for you, yourself, the bible will never be able to prove the divinity of Christ, but that has nothing to do with the bible.

    your all knowing all powerful god has the ability RIGHT NOW to prove himself to me and save me from an eternity in hell...but he doesnt. he wrote a book that is only meant for those that believe already...wow...okay my argument goes same for the quran and bhagavad gita. prove me wrong.

    Hmm. Yes, I watch those conversations. Thunderf00t made quite the fool of himself. He was easily out-matched and out-witted, even by someone to whom he wished to be aligned. It was embarrassing to watch. I recommend anyone to watch them if you have ever wondered how far down a foot could be inserted in the mouth.

    are you kidding me. first thing you should have said is ray comfort is just another example of a poorly educated creationist and then you should have admitted that thunderf00t made him look like a bumbling child. this is like talking to someone who thinks George Bush was insightful....

    please set up a debate with thunderf00t, Donexodus2, or cdk007. if you want im sure i could set it up.

  1051. D-K

    "it was more sad apologetics from people who are desperately clinging to an iron age mythology that no one would care that you practiced if it wasnt for your incessant need to interfere with the rest of the worlds life"

    Yes.

    Yes indeed.

  1052. Randy

    “it was more sad apologetics from people who are desperately clinging to an iron age mythology that no one would care that you practiced if it wasnt for your incessant need to interfere with the rest of the worlds life”

    Yes. Yes indeed!

  1053. eireannach666

    @JBMHR

    Pretty well said. You made some valid points there. It is a persons choice. What if they were not really given an opportunity to really weigh them all? What if evertime they ask why , they just get told that they will forever be in burning anguish if the question? To believe out of fear for what might happen , as opposed to belief with evidence , is the difference between taching and brainwashing.

    Unerstand that I do agree with most of what you say. However, I will say that when it comes down to it, I just like to see another persons perspective. Not everyones but mosts. Well , until they start bible thumping scriptures at me. That is not proof of anything but the persons ability to distinguish/choose a "observable verifiable"fact over a "made to scare and promise, invisible" fiction.

    They do so because thats all they have. And they dont want to think that they have been lied to by everyone they love since day one. Of course no one likes to be wrong but it happens. You feel silly afterwards but you learn. (Some do, anyways .) Like when you realize there is no Santa or tooth-fairy.People for some reason have to have a cop out for bad things and a reassurance for the good things. They have no proof , because it simply doesnt exist. ( Im speaking in general here. Not everyone is like that , but a good majority are.)

    Belive iit or not, it is brainwashing to take a child and show them only one side of the coin so much that they think thats all there is. Then they spend their growing years not questiong and defending a lie. Kind of like racists do with their kids. They tell their kids that all else is bad and they grow up treating others according to what was poured into their head all their lives. Some grow up to see the truth, but its like a 50 to 1 that they dont. They socialize only with people with similar beliefs. Eat , sleep, and interact solely on an imbeded superstitious thought. Its a shame. Trust me, Ive seen it first hand. Maybe you have as well.

    Im not trying to convince , just trying to get them to look into it more and think out of the religious box. God worked ok to explain the unknown 6000yrs ago. Now that we can explain things better , there is no need to continue on a faulty road of god. It only gets in the way of progress.

    Also , alot of times there will be a great discussion going on and then out of nowhere , here comes someone with the god theory , attempting to miv science and god. Without any solid evidence to back up what they say. I find it intresting and somewhat entertaing to see just how far one will go to defend something that doesnt exist. And then they try to talk science but run away when someone asks them to speak on their non-biblical references or elaborate .

    Nobody know it all. Even quantum physicists dont fully know or understand quantum. Nor do I.
    I do know the facts. They say we are star stuff. No more than a chance meeting of matters , that met and mutated over and over , due to the preasures around it to survive. And here we are , as well as everthing else , past , present , and future.

    If you dont poke holes , you cant sink ships.

    You said "won’t let another play within the group because of ethnicity,"

    I disagree . People shouldnt come to the football game with a baseball uniform on. You will be laughed at, made fun of, and maybe even kicked about. Point being this doc was about just that. Why do people laugh at creationists? Because they say stuff like ,“The bible records that Jesus healed the man’s ear that had been struck off with a sword. Not glued back — healed.” and "Your lack of research is showing. A 30-second Google search turned up this site containing a list of contemporary non-Christian, etc."

    Like googling jesux is research or that the bible is nothing more than an insane, cultist-chain-letter. .

  1054. Randy

    @My gaelic brother, who wrote:

    "Belive iit or not, it is brainwashing to take a child and show them only one side of the coin so much that they think thats all there is. Then they spend their growing years not questiong and defending a lie. Kind of like racists do with their kids..."

    Yes. But, as I have said before, I was brought up in christian and racial intolerance and I was able to see through it... with math and science!

    It illuminated me. Liberated me. I felt I could do anything with knowledge and...

    Well, I acheived becasue of it, despite my horrific background.

  1055. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Yes , but you fall in a smaller minority. The majority never even question what they have been taught. I too was brought up in the church. Catholic and Babtist. However , it was easy for me to sway away around 11yrs old. Heck my father has adegree in theology and has his own church. He also goes to all the prisons here , once a month to "testify". We wouldn't even talk if it weren't for the fact that we dont discuss the matter. Wish I could say the same for the majority of the rest of family.

  1056. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @ Randy

    First off let me tip my hat to you as I have read many of your comments and posts on many different docs on this site....I do realize you are quite intelligent and you seem to put thought behind your words. I appreciate that.
    No, we do not need to oppose religion. I understand the evangelical movement that is occurring and the repercussions that having the separation between church and state obliterated would entail. Believe me when I say I find it a terrifying concept as well.... But to be fair - how do you think religion has been treated in the last 100 years or so? I respect Dawkins in a incredible way, am a Darwinist 100% and I am a Big Banger but I am not an ignorant one. Even Darwin himself recognized the repercussion his theory would have against religion.
    I do however see Dawkins inability to accept religion as something that is a personal choice, and isn't so different from you or I choosing evolution as what we know and accept as the truth. Dawkins does blatantly want religion to go away. He comes across as being from the " I want children to make the choice" tribe, but he reminds me of a man on a mission at times. Just because Dawkins can explain Dawinism completely to a priest or a creationist doesn't change what they know and believe to be the truth. Ya know that look he gets when he's debating it and the creationist's only reply goes right back to the start? It's his disbelief in that he wasn't able to make someone go " WOW - You are right Richard - thanks!!!" It isn't ignorance or naivety on their part either... It's ignorance on his and sometimes ours as well. Trust me - I read some of the incredible insipid comments left on this site and I just shake my head - I want to comment on the obscurities and disillusionment of many including those who seem to regard themselves as experts on many subjects... But I don't - I think it baffles me because I cannot comprehend what it's like to not believe in the big bang or evolution. Einstein had no difficulty separating science and religion. Neither would the God that is written of in the bible. I hope you understand my point in this - it's not meant to offend.

    Do you really think religion didn't or hasn't always played a major role in the political arena since it's inception? Seriously... Does it really seem so obtuse that the zealots are trying to bring it back to the forefront???? Your country was founded on it and those who shaped it were more than likely 10x the believers than what the definition of a religious man would be by today's standards.
    I am an atheist as well, but I don't fear religion or believe it will overtake the world or our economy or my ability to think for myself. It never has before - actually the world was much more religion based 2000 years ago and we got through it didn't we... Yeah they crusaded and oppressed and we all know our history, ( except maybe them) but the movement and their power is not what it was, nor do I believe it will be again.

    But I think we scientific folk tend to fuel their fire and religion has been on the receiving end of the stick for a while now... Yeah it's making waves again but seriously, look at the changes in society that have overtaken the blanket that was draped in our laws as a throwback to religion... Homosexuality, slavery, abortion - how about divorce??!! Think of all that society forced into change... We have nothing to worry about and they know it. Let them have their creationism or whatever they want to believe... It won't change the truths that are there, and they won't abolish our science classes or Darwinism or the big-bang... There's too many people out there like you to be the opposition. Have some faith in that.

  1057. Randy

    @jesus built... etc. who wrote:

    "Do you really think religion didn't or hasn't always played a major role in the political arena since it's inception? Seriously... Does it really seem so obtuse that the zealots are trying to bring it back to the forefront???? Your country was founded on it and those who shaped it were more than likely 10x the believers than what the definition of a religious man would be by today's standards..."

    Yes. Slavery played a very important role in civilization for long time, too.

    But, it's not good any more, like religion.

    And NO, my country was not in any way founded on religion! It was taken by religious monsters, but our Founders tried to FREE us of religious tyranny.

    They all had a lacadasical attitude toward the stuff, please. read their diaries...

  1058. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @eireannach666

    Very well discussed and I see all of your points.

    I do have two quick replies to a few of your comments....

    "I disagree . People shouldnt come to the football game with a baseball uniform on. You will be laughed at, made fun of, and maybe even kicked about."

    Why?? This is bigotry in it's truest form and NO I am not calling YOU a bigot - so let's be calm.... I just think people ( especially myself) can wear whatever I want without fear of being singled out.... Mind you - if I open my yap and start telling you that football sucks while I am wearing my baseball jersey then I agree - have at it.

    If you dont poke holes , you cant sink ships.

    Look, I understand that religion and creationism is full of holes and incredibly ridiculous ideas and theories... You know that too. But who asked you to sink the ship? Does the ship really need to be sunk? Why? Because you are scared of one ship in a sea full of them? Buddhism doesn't share our views of evolution. Should we go inform these monks who have lived that way for a lot longer than Darwinism has been around? Point being it's no different from the thumpers jumping all over us for what we think and trying to sink our ship. I take it that your opinions haven't been changed in your latest conflict within tonight's posts have they? Didn't think so.

    Please read my reply to Randy, and thank you both for your comments.

  1059. eireannach666

    @JBMHR

    This is true and a common misconception made by many.

    Check out some of Jeffersons writing for starters. He was very out-spoken on that issue.

    He says," I have examined all the known superstitions of the Word, and I do not find in our particular superstition of Christianity one redeeming feature.  They are all alike, founded on fables and mythology.  Millions of innocent men, women and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burnt, tortured, fined and imprisoned.  What has been the effect of this coercion?  To make one half the world fools and the other half hypocrites; to support roguery and error all over the world ...    The clergy converted the simple teachings of Jesus into an engine for enslaving mankind ... to filch wealth and power to themselves.  [They], in fact, constitute the real Anti-Christ. For here (The new born Republic.) we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate error so long as reason is free to combat it.- Thomas Jefferson

  1060. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @ Randy -

    I think you missed my point....

    No, your country was not founded by religious zealots...But they were religious. They were god fearing and were probably creationist too. I hope you can agree that their believes did play a role in what they knew to be right from wrong.... Biased at the least. Not to say they didn't do a fine job.

    Slavery was not good. It was abolished. But a lot of people didn't think it needed to be and were against it. Why, I think they even brought the bible into their defense of it.
    In the end it didn't pan out.

  1061. Randy

    No. You missed my point... entirely.

    Religion is a cancerous, vestigial organ (do you know what the means?), and it must be removed.

    But, you know... just listen to "Ministry" and play with yourself until you hit the grave...

    I'll be working...

  1062. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    Do I sound ignorant in this? Do I sound like I need to be shown Jefferson's writings? I would rather read Paine on any given day my friends. You have missed what I am saying..... Read " The Religious Life of Thomas Jefferson". Then tell me he shared the same atheistic views as you. You have contradicted yourself. You look at Jefferson as a hero yet you bash those who share his believe in God. Do you believe in God now too? He did. He didn't believe in Christianity's use of it for empowerment or the conflict and wrongdoings of it.

    You have completely ignored what I was saying.

  1063. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    Good Debate Randy.

    Wow - you ended that with some real intelligence. You are quite ignorant to say the least. Go read another book in your library. Maybe a self-help one since you can't take anyone's views but your own even if they share the same ones as you. It's those like you - (the coccyx's of the science community) that make the religious look well mannered. Sucks when someone shoves it back in your face - but nice deflection to avoid a topic you can't partake in due to your intelligence. Go look up "coccyx" on Wikipedia now.

  1064. eireannach666

    @JBMHR

    First let me start by saying I enjoyed reading you posts , thus far. It is rare that someone comes with their guns loaded. Very well thought out and stated.

    You said,
    "if I open my yap and start telling you that football sucks while I am wearing my baseball jersey then I agree – have at it."
    Exactly.
    I should have maybe been a bit more specific. Sometimes its hard to fully grasp anothers thoughts when they are merely written without emphasis. What I meant was that one should not walk into a situation , knowing what kind of surroundings they put themselves in , without at least being open minded and without being ready to back up what they say with some verifiable evidence supporting their ideas.

    " But who asked you to sink the ship? Does the ship really need to be sunk? Why? "
    Nobody has to ask. A person who would bring religion to a science conversation is asking for some holes , if they argue theism over science. I have no problem if someone is religious. Its more of a problem with using hear-say as proof or blind-faith as justification.

    " I take it that your opinions haven’t been changed in your latest conflict within tonight’s posts have they?"
    Well of course not. However, I have yet to see any new evidence brought to light either. Im always open for new evidence. But as we al know it doesnt exist. Thats why I ask from the religees to at least come with the right equipment to join the game. Hence the football analogy .

  1065. Randy

    Let me see... you are desperately in love with your father... secretly... you seek his approval, but he just doesn't seem to understand you...

    You want to remove yourself from your upbringing and that dogma that you will "go to hell" but you are just too afraid!

    (because he is probably supporting you!)

    So you try to straddle the fence like "Olivegarden... whatever his name is..."

    I see you... I understand you, I know exactly who you are.

  1066. Randy

    My last post was directed at, 'jesus built..."

  1067. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @eireannach666
    Well thank you - you seem to think before you speak and I do appreciate the open-mindedness. As I said before I am not religious by any means and if that's where people find their solace then so be it.
    It is very difficult to judge ones attitudes here , but I can see you are willing to see both sides - even when you believe what you know to be true. I am not a fan of creationism and I cannot fathom how people could ignore what science has to offer regardless of believing in God or not.

    It's the bashing of personal belief's that I really shake my head at... They do it - we do it - it happens on every single doc on here - sad really... it just closes the door on any chance for discussing things which in the oddest of ways would probably lead the opposing to maybe actually take a look.
    I've known religious people to all of a sudden - up and go agnostic or to walk away from their belief in a higher power with no reason other than that was what they came to.
    I also know a biker who one day figured out he was gay and found God all at the same day. Went from leather and skulls to knit sweaters and a rosary. Go figure. But it didn't happen because anybody else told them what they were doing was the wrong thing at the time or what they believed in was untrue. It was by choice.

    But anyway - thank you for the discussion and I really do mean that. You did make me look at a few things and think a bit - which is exactly what I come on this site to do.
    Have a good one!

  1068. eireannach666

    @JBMHR

    Ok so you are familiar with Paine or Jefferson. Im not going to get into how religious the founders of this country were , as we will obviously have to agree to disagree on that.Still the fact remains that this country was designed around the seperation of religion and government. ( Why do you think they came here? It wasnt for the boat ride.) That has been severely lossed overtime and now religion has such a foot-hold on the world , that it has continuously stood in the way of progress , while justifying themselves with the contempt of a nonexistant and irrelevant god and fear of hell. Not very long after the Constitutiion was written . In fact very quickly as in the rest of the world before it.

    Not to mention as soon as we do put their feelings to the side for the sake of science and progress , they sue the f*&^ out of everyone. They also are a majority here , so everything up for vote will be ridden with religious cancer and therefore the outcome effected by it. All religion is evil. All of it. We dont need it to be moral. If you do , than you shouldnt be.

  1069. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Ha!Ha! Olivegarden. Nice. That dude is always good for a laugh.

  1070. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    Haha - and just so I don't confuse anyone..... I've never been to church or practiced religion at any point on my life - not even Sunday school. But I am not ignorant of it.

    @ 666
    I bid you a good night and maybe another day I will jump into another discussion - I just read your last post and I agree!!! But fearing religion will only empower it.... thank for the conversation.

    @ Randy
    I guess my last reply to you is too much for the moderators... I didn't even swear in it but hopefully it makes it on here... it's a work in progress I think lol. Kinda like you.

  1071. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @ Randy ( sad, sad, randy)

    So you want me to knock ya on your a then… ok here goes.

    So let me guess Randy? Poor little repressed christian boy? Mom never let ya out of her sight huh? Dad give you the belt when you tore the head off your little sis’ barbie.

    Jump ahead to 13, no one liked you – no friends at school and you were probably bullied? – but dear Auntie Marion give you that copy of “Space and Our Universe” and you took a liking to it. Matter of fact Randy was good at this!!! You could put your hand up in science class the fastest and answer anything asked of you. You were like everyone’s ” smart” little cousin that never shut up huh? You developed this complex – ya know that bully one that you keep to yourself, that’s why you like to be sooooo “smart” on here huh? You’re only confidence lies within your smarts. – how you always interject into people’s conversations with your “educated opinion” that people ALWAYS want to hear right? You probably hate a lot of things don’t ya friend-o? Nothing makes ya happy and you’ve got that negative chip that you want to shake off but ya just can’t seem to ditch that negativity towards EVERYTHING that makes anyone else happy right?

    Do you cry in the shower Rand-O? Still taking the effex-or like the Dr. told you to? Sunday dinner at mom’s? Crappy little sedan for a car and that general feeling that you think people like ya but you know they don’t. The ‘office loser” right.

    But at least you can come on here every night and write comments till you feel “real” huh?

    Wow. you look the fool. Go read some of your futile attempts at ridding yourself of insecurity and don’t post to me anymore. It’s humiliating for me to drop to your level in this but you are owed this.
    Have a good day man!

  1072. eireannach666

    Just to clarify, I do not fear religion. I loathe and despise every fiber.

  1073. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @ Randy ( sad, sad, randy)

    So you want me to knock ya on your a then… ok here goes.

    So let me guess Randy? Poor little repressed christian boy? Mom never let ya out of her sight huh? Dad give you the belt when you tore the head off your little sis’ barbie.

    Jump ahead to 13, no one liked you – no friends at school and you were probably bullied? – but dear Auntie Marion give you that copy of “Space and Our Universe” and you took a liking to it. Matter of fact Randy was good at this!!! You could put your hand up in science class the fastest and answer anything asked of you. You were like everyone’s ” smart” little cousin that never shut up huh? You developed this complex – ya know that bully one that you keep to yourself, that’s why you like to be sooooo “smart” on here huh? You’re only confidence lies within your smarts. – how you always interject into people’s conversations with your “educated opinion” that people ALWAYS want to hear right? You probably hate a lot of things don’t ya friend-o? Nothing makes ya happy and you’ve got that negative chip that you want to shake off but ya just can’t seem to ditch that negativity towards EVERYTHING that makes anyone else happy right?

    Do you cry in the shower Rand-O? Still taking the effex-or like the Dr. told you to? Sunday dinner at mom’s? little sedan for a car and that general feeling that you think people like ya but you know they don’t. The ‘office loser” right.

    But at least you can come on here every night and write comments till you feel “real” huh?

    Wow. you look the fool. Go read some of your futile attempts at ridding yourself of insecurity and don’t post to me anymore. It’s humiliating for me to drop to your level in this but you are owed this.
    Have a good day man!

  1074. Randy

    @My gaelic brother...

    Well, that's the only sensible way to go through life, I think...

  1075. Randy

    #Jesus built...

    No I have no idea who my father was. I left my drunken, drug addled mother as soon as I could and had my first apartment when I was 18.

    I had step fathers, of course, and they did abuse me horribly, but I survived it because I have a superior mind and will. (That is documented...)

    She's dead now.

    And, I am an only child.

    I went to med school, law school, and got PhD's just on hard work.

    But! It is my birthday today! I'm 57! So, thank you!

    I thought you were leaving...

  1076. Randy

    OH, and by the way, I have been married to a magnificent woman for 30 years.

  1077. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Yes siree. Just because religion gives someone peace of mind doesnt make it a good thing. Heroin has the same effect and is just as addictive. And Im sure a serial killer feels the same after slaughtering a family in their sleep since you cant have slaughter without laughter.

  1078. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Well , shyte! Happy B-day man. I know thats a cliche thing to say but Cheers to many more.

    Tell your old lady I said to not forget those 57 a** kickings you are due , for me. And one to grow on for good measure.

  1079. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @ Randy -

    I just cannot help myself I guess.... It's too easy when you just keep replying. Happy Birthday Big Guy!!! But in all fairness you started this and ya know it. you seem to think I am all for religion and that I have some sort of attachment to God or it... Sorry buddy - you'll have to find another angle - better than the "go play with yourself and listen to ministry" one. But wow, what a story!!! Oh and sad too - keep your laundry to yourself. This isn't a dating site and for 57 you don't seem to socially adept.
    Good for you that you went to school and that your are an intellect. Med school and Law with PhD's. Oh and an extreme knowledge in EVERYTHING else right.

    My sincere apologies to anyone who has had to read through these sad posts between Rand-O and myself... Not my intention at all for posting on here - but I am not meek when it comes to a jer k off like him who can't keep up with a debate and instead looks for the easy way out of insulting the opposing party and then plays the victim. Poor you Randy. I feel really bad now, but oh yeah... I didn't pick an argument with you right? Guess you had me confused with all those other intellects you try and pick on for amusement. I needs conversations with people like you like I need a kick in the nuts. It's redundant. Good night Friend-O and enjoy your B-Day!

  1080. Randy

    Thank you, my brother!

    Yes, she won't forget to punish me... (but I like that)

    Just kidding!

    (maybe not...)

  1081. Randy

    @jesus built something...

    Do not call me "Rand-O" that is dissrespectful of my accomplishments.

    Call me Dr. or Reverend Randy. I earned it.

  1082. eireannach666

    @Randy
    For all the advances in medicine, there is still no cure for the common birthday. - John Glenn

    I love that. I dont even remember mine until my old lady asks me what I want or what we are doing.

    After 25 ,when your car insurance gos down - there is nothing until 62 , social security.
    ( Thats if you youngsters work hard for a living and pay uncle sam) Hopefully you will have retirement saved and put to the side.)

  1083. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @ rand-"O"
    aka DR. Randy... Officer Randy... Super Randy... The Immaculate Randy... The Chosen One - Randy
    Incredible. Are you into Dr.Phil or something creepy like that? You seem to maybe feel a need to hmmmmmm, present yourself in high-regard huh? I wonder... Dr.? nah, Lawyer? uh uh ....maybe a night security guard in a library ??? That's what you strike me as..... Yeah ...LOTS of Doctors get out of the med profession and head into law - then go back to for the PhD !!! let me guess you paid for it all from your PT job at the supermarket bagging groceries right? Seems likely... But then again what the heck do I know Dr. Randy? Alas. I actually do have a job and I really do work so I am going to hit the hay... You can leave another comment pally I'll let you have the last one ok?... I think I'm gonna call it a night . You take care and keep that nose stuck in the air. You're gonna go far Rand-O!!!

  1084. Randy

    If you are used to living on 50,000 US a year, (just for example, I am accustomed to living on much more!), then you must have 500,000 dollars in assets, by the time you retire, considering that you will live ten years longer.

    Well, I had that untill the market crash... and building this house...

    So, I am working hard on re-building my retirement funds...

    (not counting my off-shore accounts...ALEGEDLY!)

    Haha! Just kidding, court of law!

  1085. eireannach666

    @Randy

    Thats what I tell mine everytime.

    Q. "What do you want?" A. to her"My B-day spankings "
    Q" Where do you want to go?" A to her "The bedroom."

    Her response. "Laughter." Mine. "Come on , its my B-day"

    i just hope that the 30th time I ask it will actually happen when I ask so nicely.Shed never fall for that. Yet I still try.

    In the end a woman will let you get your way but on their terms , so as not to accept defeat. Gotta love 'em.

  1086. Randy

    @jesus had a cold... whatever...

    No, I do OWN a library. But my job is as a database analysist for... well... for people...

    I have all of the credit reports for... most of the country, on my computers...

    HAHAHA! That was a joke... all fantasy. Not provable in a court of law!

  1087. eireannach666

    Ill be happy to have SS and some med-coverage if I make it. Doesnt look promising the way the world econmy is going.

  1088. Randy

    Seriously, I am not engaged in any illegal activity, I wouldn't do that.

    I do have credit reports, but as soon as I am done with them, the hard drives are extracted, smashed with a hammer, and thrown away...

    I am not ever going to hurt you...

    Unless, you come after me. Well then... Then it is "crazy squirrel monkey time"!!!!

    (oh, and btw, I see someone tapping at my firewalls, *wags finger*)

  1089. Hardy

    @Randy: Seriously, my respects for your the story of your life and what you made of it.

  1090. Achems Razor

    @ Randy:

    "Happy birthday" to our (CEO) from me also!

  1091. Randy

    Thank you, humbly... both of my freinds...

  1092. Epicurus

    my birthday was sunday on the 13th.

    happy birthday Randy.

    and JBMH, you have degraded to a very sophomoric level. it was so quick but very drastic.

    and for the record, the founders of the USA were deists.

    i tend to lean towards 666 and randy's position that religion is no longer beneficial to us and actually causing more harm then good.

    religion was a beneficial adaptation. there are social solidarity theories, which view religion as having evolved to enhance cooperation and cohesion within groups. Group membership in turn provides benefits which can enhance an individual's chances for survival and reproduction.

    Stephen Gould cites religion as an example of an exaptation or spandrel, but he does not himself select a definite trait which he thinks was actually acted on by natural selection. He does, however, bring up Freud's suggestion that our large brains, which evolved for other reasons, led to consciousness. The beginning of consciousness forced humans to deal with the concept of personal mortality. Religion may have been one solution to this problem.

    Other researchers have proposed specific psychological processes which may have been co-opted for religion. Pierre Lienard and Pascal Boyer suggest that humans have evolved a "hazard-precaution system" which allows us to detect potential threats in the environment and attempt to respond appropriately.

    google "evolutionary psychology agent detection"

    Justin L. Barrett proposes a similar situation. He suggests that one of the fundamental mental modules in the brain is the Hyperactive Agency Detection Device (HADD), another potential system for identifying danger. This HADD may confer a survival benefit even if it is over-sensitive: it is better to avoid an imaginary predator than be killed by a real one. This would tend to encourage belief in ghosts and spirits.

    these all show reasons why religion would be advantagous for us. however like a baby with a security blanket or pacifier...eventually it must give it up because it is no longer helping but hindering. no matter how warm and happy it makes them "FEEL"...there is a whole world and who knows how many future generations. we cant just concern ourselves with delusion or allowing billions of people to delude themselves if that delusion makes them ignorant of the here and now.

  1093. Randy

    Happy Birthday, Epicurus!

    And, thank you for your wishes, and your wisdom.

  1094. Achems Razor

    @ Epicurus:

    Happy belated birthday! Also.

  1095. oliarguello

    @ Randy

    LOL you brought my name up again huh?

    Sounds like you projected a bit there with "knowing you " ( geared towards JBMHR). With that whole bit of:

    "Let me see... you are desperately in love with your father... secretly... you seek his approval, but he just doesn't seem to understand you...

    You want to remove yourself from your upbringing and that dogma that you will "go to hell" but you are just too afraid!

    (because he is probably supporting you!)"

    Sounds like you know from first hand experiences? ;)

    As for the part that I am on the fence? Hmmm no. I have been on both sides of the fence. I had a stint as a devout unquestioning believer in my childhood, an atheist in my teens and early 20's, and now I know both science and spirituality to be true and try to reconcile the two. Did you forget all of this and just make allegations based on biased selective memory? Or just use the old addage of "tainted blood" in that if you have one drop/belief then you are tainted and are automatically 100% inferior race/religious.

  1096. Randy

    @oliarguello

    "I know both science and spirituality to be true and try to reconcile the two. Did you forget all of this and just make allegations based on biased selective memory?"

    Yeah. That would be the definition of trying to be on both sides of the fence.

    You have no home. Charles B. rejects you and so do I.

    And I am not racists, my beloved wife is Mexican/Spanish. I love the great Spanish Speaking peoples of the world.

  1097. oliarguello

    @eireannach666

    LOL@ I am good for a laugh.

    Its fine if you think what I believe and know seems silly to you. It goes both ways.

    I was actually watching a new doc on here called "Is Everything we know about the Universe wrong" and laughed my ass off when they described the nature of dark matter/energy/flow as this invisible stuff that has no direct effect on matter, is invisible and undetectable , cant be observed directly, yet its everywhere and has an incredible effect on the universe....but it MUST exist because an equation says so....hmmmm sound familiar?

    How does song go....Mm 'cause I gotta have faith-a-faith-a-faith

    and yeah yeah yeah.....we will eventually be able to study, research, think and we will find answers to our observations(faith-a-faith-a-faith)

    that should make ya chuckle a bit too huh?;)

  1098. Randy

    Yes, You see? If you scratch these "apologists" hard enough you turn up a christian, everytime.

    They get backed into a corner and shout:

    *I MUST HAVE A SOUL!!!"

    And then they plug their ears and squinch shut their eyes and stamp their feet and sing, "la-la-la, I'm not listening!"

    It's so silly.

  1099. oliarguello

    @Randy

    You and Charles B. put up the fence not me ;)I agree with a few of the things you and he say about various topics, but again its not a one-or-the other view for me. Did you learn that black and white view point from The George W. Bush school of logic ( you are either with us or with the terrorists)?

    I wasnt calling you a racist when I used that blood analogy. I was pointing out the fact that you can seem to comprehend that someone who believes in science and also has a few spiritual beliefs, is actually capable of having both points of view simultaneously. You automatically group someone to the other side of your wall/fence that you deem worthy of putting up to make your life more black and white.

    Its all fine if thats how you wish to live your life. Just pointing it out since you seem try to put labels on people based on YOUR point of view and not that of another persons ( aka you are right and they are automatically wrong).Like the other poster mentioned.... you have a really hard time being empathetic.

  1100. oliarguello

    @Randy

    oh and happy birthday.

  1101. Randy

    @oliarguello

    Thank you, sir!

    You just need a little more life experience and a little more study, and you will see the simpicity of life, and it will amaze you!

    You have a good mind, I can see that.

    Watch more science docs on this site.

  1102. oliarguello

    @Randy

    Thanks.

    That may be true. I have changed my mind in the past.

    I actually might follow your footsteps in one regard and that would be to get a few more degrees. A degree in physics and a theological degree.

    I use to hate physics in college , only because it was a requirement for my Bachelors and just needed to get it done and over with. But after years of reading some articles and seeing documentaries, I want to understand all the theoretical physics at more in depth mathematical level.

    As for the theological degree....well I am not sure how they give those out. If its based on regurgitation I will be fine. If its based on a lot of essays...I might fail out since they definitely wont agree with what I will have to say . LOL

  1103. D-K

    @Randy: Happy b-day, sir.

    Oliarguello: The fence is in place to keep faith faith-based and science fact-based. I have no problem with you reconciling the 2 on a personal comtemplation level, but on a grand scale, it wouldn't be beneficial to either form of the "search for truth"

    I'm sure you realize that the key principles for science and the fundaments for religion are like night and day, right? Rationalizing faith invalidates faith and employing faith or belief in science invalidates science. Reconciling the two is fine on a philosophical level, but practiccaly, it'd be a nightmare.

    @JesusBuilt..: Making something personal, and trading in rational thought for name-calling and mocking does little to defend your rationality. Furthermore, when you said: "Go figure. But it didn’t happen because anybody else told them what they were doing was the wrong thing at the time or what they believed in was untrue. It was by choice"

    You failed to appreciate the concept of lingering logic, that's when certain phrasing of propositions lead to self-realizations. Debate is not meant to persaude the other side of me being right, on the contrairy, I tend to let people speak their mind, and point out wherever there is a flaw in logic. I will not condemn anyone for believing, as long as they know believing is irrational, and they are at peace with themselves for it. Defending philosophical ponderings with such tenacity leads to fundamentalism, and we get stuck out debating inprovable concepts and resort to pidgeonholing and namecalling.

    People tend to take lingering logic in on their own time, for instance, Pascal's Wager. Honestly, a ridiculous proposition, but it lead me to question inherent self-evident logic within the bible, securing faith based on equating "probable" chance with fact. My debate with 'IlovemyselfmorethanI' and then later the debate with 'God is awesome' sketches this out nicely.

    Logic is the key to co-existance (wink at epicurus) as belief is something to be defended and experienced on a personal level, yet celebrated and heralded on a massive scale. Logic is a conclusion most people will come to if their equations are absent of faith, seeing as logic isn't based on spiritual experience but rather the verifiable, it makes more "sense" to this unwilling to take a chance on the truth.

    Lastly, I'll react to this statement of yours: "Do you think people are really manipulated or forced into what they believe? Nobody can truly be manipulated into anything unless they want to be… I see so many references from evo’s saying all religious people were ” brainwashed” into their faith.."

    Brainwashed is a wrong term, conjuring up negative connotations, indoctrination is far more accurate. Small children form a frame of reference based on given knowledge and the observable. The child cannot ask critical questions as it bases those questions on the logic implemented. Quick example; if you install windows on your computer, your computer will function on windows, it will reason according to windows logic and it will have a hard time performing functions inherent to other operating systems.

    Maybe a shaky example, but a thourough psycho-analasys, if possible though time/bandwithconsuming, wouldn't be cost-effective. I'm sure you can relate my example and apply it to what it portrays.

    Children question logic on the foundation that their personal logic is built upon. Is it built on notions of probable supernaturalism? then the supernatural is probable, if personal logic is based on the observable and verifiable, then anything of immaterial nature is intensely scrutinized. Such is the nature of logic.

  1104. D-K

    Correction:

    "Logic is the key to co-existance (wink at epicurus) as belief is something to be defended and experienced on a personal level,"

    scratch "defended"... don't know how that got in there.

  1105. oliarguello

    @D-K

    Oh yes I definitely believe the fundamentals of a majority of religious beliefs are false. When I do try to reconcile I take the side of science ; a personal belief CAN NOT take the place of an observable, tested, reviewed , validated, retested fact. But a fact can explain some non tested observances ( hypothesis), but I doubt in my lifetime I can ever create a an experiment to test a "GOD is self aware" hypothesis that can produce empirical evidence ( i know someone will ask why even believe in GOD then?....because of my "supernatural" experiences...which I believe in but still trying to debunk).

    I have noticed the creationists on this video do the opposite. They take a non tested observance and dream up a fact ( create a fact? oxymoron) to propose a theory. I will NEVER get over the ice shield theory...WOW!

  1106. Randy

    Thank you, D-K!

  1107. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    Now I see why Randy comes on here!!!! This is where his "friends are !!!!! Obviously just as ignorant as Randy BTW... You all make the assumption that I back religion for some reason - which shows me you did not read the posts prior to poor Randy crying his eyes out like a 11 year old boy when he could not address a valid point. Randy was the one who turned to insults - and it's pathetic that he feels the need to boast about his achievements on here - I don't believe a word of it but you all seem to share a wolf-pack mentality regarding each other and when you get backed into a corner you try and belittle people's intelligence.I have read posts by ALL of you on this site. It's pattern behavior at its finest. Yes, your country was founded in all the ways you point out - by men who believed in God. Write it anyway you want. Ironic how you turn to this argument yet love to resort to use people believing in God to insult their intellect. I don't believe in God at the least. Yet because I can understand where religion would fits into the world you think I am riding the fence as Randy resorted to as a reply. None of you would survive true debate - you all bring your personalities to the table. Oh yeah I'm an astronaut. And an olympian, and I make 1,265,000 a year - I have 6 degrees. I hung around Oxford.... Sound believable? Yeah just like Randy - the guy who never leaves this site. But wow - all that educated and he's trying to save for his retirement. Maybe someday I'll make another appearance around here - hopeful Rand-O with stay out of the topic. For some reason he always needs to poke his nose into it.

  1108. D-K

    "Now I see why Randy comes on here!!!! This is where his “friends are !!!!! Obviously just as ignorant as Randy BTW… You all make the assumption that I back religion for some reason"

    Could you specify who you're adressing/referring to by "you all"? I have a sneaking suspicion you adress me as well, even though your comment does not apply to anything i've said.

    If you did not include me in "you all" disregard this comment.

  1109. Chris

    @ et al,

    Well, well, haven't all the children been busy while the adults worked. There is no way I can, or have inclination to, answer all the complaints and whining that has been posted regarding my posts.

    The following will have to suffice as my reply:

    1.) To many of the comments regarding religion, I agree. In fact, (get ready for it...) I believe religion to be the MOST evil thing on the face of the earth. Here is the reason:

    1.A.) The question of whether there is a God or not is the most important question to exist.

    1.A.a.) If there is no God, then we need to know that we are alone and have our lives in our own hands. If no God, then we should put away foolish fables, grow up and face the world as adults. We will never understand the nature of reality if we console our fears with fairy tales.

    1.A.a.) If there is a God, we at least need to know that and to know Him so we can live our lives in a manner that is in accordance with His plan and wishes. It would be the same as my children learning to obey my voice. If they do, they will prosper and grow up properly. If they refuse to obey, they will have much trouble and be the cause of much trouble, not only to themselves but to the rest of the family. Again, if there is a God, and we refuse to believe it, we will not only fail to understand the nature of reality, but may find ourselves as transgressors speaking against God who truly exists.

    1.B) Religion is evil because:

    1.B.a.) It portrays itself as representing God, and may even bring a person part-way to God, but fails to accurately represent God, even falsely portraying God as something that He is not. In other words, failure to bring a person fully to God is the same as not bringing a person at all. It does no good to bring a person most of the way to the lifeboat but prevent them from getting in.

    1.B.b.) It interprets God's speaking poorly or even falsely. Many people have been turned away from God because of an inaccurate translation of key text. For example: Wrong - "And the earth was empty and void, and darkness covered the face of the deep." Right - But the earth became an empty wasteland and darkness covered the face of the deep." The first translation means that the earth was created dark, empty and desolate. The second means that, after a much earlier and longer period of time, the earth suffered a great cataclysm resulting in darkness and destruction. The second translation is more aligned with other scriptural references and ancient traditions. Similarly with translations that support a 6k year old earth. Rather, the bible supports an earth that is truly ancient. The young earth concept is not found in scripture and has led many to discount the bible as inaccurate.

    1.C.) The abuses of religion have caused many to conclude that the supposed superior morality of religion CANNOT reflect the loving God it preaches, therefore how can such a God exist who would allow such things, and espousing a natural basis of morality.

    1.D.) The nonsensical scientific pronouncements of religion regarding the natural world make it a laughing stock to thinking, learned people.

    2.) Because religion is dismissed as fables and myths, God is also dismissed as a part of the religious system.

    2.a.) People then look for other ways to explain the origins of all things.

    2.b.) People feel betrayed by a system they may have grown up with, or depended upon, only to find it to be false and ridiculous.

    Conclusion: Yes, I see your points quite clearly. And you are correct in many of them. However, you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You are cutting off your nose to spite your face.

    Tossing out religion is a good step because it clears the ground to understanding. But tossing out God leaves you with a science-only understanding, which by the way, keeps bringing you back to a DESIGNER.

    Face it! Science will not be able to get past the fact that there are NO actual infinities in the physical universe. Actual infinities are mathematical inventions used to solve rarefied problems on chalkboards but DO NOT EXIST in the real universe. Actual infinities are a REQUIREMENT for ANY explanation of physical reality without transcendent design. Without actual infinities, science will FOREVER be asking, "And what came before that?" This one FACT should be enough to give you pause.

    So, make all the jokes and insults you wish. Dismiss it all. Live as you wish to live. But at least be honest enough to admit that much of science glosses over the hard/difficult/impossible parts of your god-less universe. It is as religious as is religion.

    I don't know all the answers and no one does. I encourage anyone to continue to explore and discover with no censorship. But I will call you out on the false gods of both religion and science whom you dogmatically preach, hiding the truth both from yourself and everyone foolish enough to give you heed.

    The fool says in his heart, "There is no God."

  1110. Randy

    I work from home, I am surrounded by computer systems and as I have employees, I can take a day off any time I want.

    And if they don't comply with my wishes... I make them cry.

    @Jesus went a sailing...

    Anytime you want I will have your whole family over and we can share truths. I know where you live, do you know where I live.

  1111. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @ D-K
    No not directed at you per say - just at those who disregard others beliefs when they do not intertwine with their own - and resort to name calling or insults to justify their own insecurities about having someone disagree with them.

  1112. Vlatko

    So @Chris you're not affiliated with any of the existing religions but you do still believe in God, the Bible and hold on to Science in the same time. Agreed?

    Let discard infinities and assume there aren't any in the physical universe. According to you that means there must be a creator, right? How did you derive this? And by which analogy you think the God from your Bible is the actual creator?

  1113. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @ randy
    Do I care where you live? Haha - see you make the assumption I am from a repressed christian background or something - I see where you are going with this. Sorry pally - Mom was united, Dad was a catholic - no one went to church or felt a need to... You're the one with the repressed issue's friend-o. And ok - tell me where I live Big-shot. Hell I'll tell you - I live in Edmonton, AB. - That's in Canada. But you knew all that too huh. Geez - you remind me of a kid with a headset for his XBox. Online yelling at people and making threats. Wow. 57 yrs. old you said? You my friend - live in a box. Seriously randy - I'll say good riddance to you now because you are no better than a little kid.

  1114. Randy

    Well, jesus had a hangnail... I can send people to you...

    I mean, I am considering, as you are so mean to a dying man... maybe you need some punishment.

    Is all's I'm sayin'

    HAHAHA, just kidding, doesn't hold up in a court of law!

    I went to law school, you know...

  1115. Chris

    @Vlatko

    Agreed.

    For your first question: Since there are no actual infinities in the physical reality of the universe, the origin of the physical universe must lie outside of the universe. The proposed multiverse concept cannot be that origin for the same reason, that the multiverse requires actual infinities for its existence.

    Therefore, the origin of the universe must be transcendent. Meaning that it stands apart from the universe and is not physical. If it were physical, it would be a part of the universe.

    The origin must be powerful enough to be the origin of the universe. Meaning, that it must be greater than the universe, powerful enough to master and direct all the energy and forces necessary to create the universe.

    The origin of the universe must be able to have created all the levels of complexity on every scale of physical reality, and have those complexities have lasted for 13.7 billion years. For example, Unless the cosmological constant is balanced upon far more than a razor's edge of accuracy, the universe would not exist at the present time.

    But even with all this, something is missing. The above are all necessary conditions but are not sufficient conditions because intentionality is missing. Therefore, the origin of the universe must have the Will to have done this at all. Without Will, the power to create the universe could not have been acted upon. And having a "will" is an attribute only ascribed to persons.

    Now add all these things up: What exists outside of, and apart from, the universe, is not physical, has the power to create the universe, and the will to do it?

    Is it not an all-powerful and transcendent person a description of what we could call God? This is the basis of the cosmological argument.

    I'm not trying to prove the bible at this time, (the CA is used in Islamic apologetics, as well) but the God described in the bible (not religion) is consistent with the above argument.

  1116. Achems Razor

    @ Chris:

    What you are implying is a supreme consciousness, with the CA.
    does the supreme consciousness transcend infinities, and if so, where did the supreme consciousness come from? There has to be a source. Did it come from nothing?

  1117. Epicurus

    since there are no actual infinities in reality you have created an alternate reality that exists outside of reality and before time and contains a thinking powerful being that intentionally created all this and us.

    wow chris. for a smart guy you fall short.

    also your claim that the origin would have to be more complex is false. there is no reason to assume that.

    you believe in something that exists before time, outside of space and north of the north pole.

  1118. Chris

    @ Epicurus

    Your counter makes little sense.

    First, I didn't say that the origin would have to be more complex. I said that it would have to be more powerful. FAIL

    Second, To say that something exists outside of space and time is the whole point of this discussion. "Time" and "Space" are aspects of the physical universe. It seems to be a bit disingenuous to object to a "person" existing outside of Time and Space but not have a problem with something like a "multiverse" existing in the same way. FAIL

    If you are going to interject yourself into a conversation, please try to keep up. Additionally, your apparent lack of manners clearly exposes a problem with your upbringing.

    Shame on your parents!

  1119. Chris

    @Achems

    "What you are implying is a supreme consciousness, with the CA."

    Yes, I am. I call it God. You can call it the Flying Spaghetti Monster if that makes you feel better.

    "Does the supreme consciousness transcend infinities, and if so, where did the supreme consciousness come from? There has to be a source. Did it come from nothing?"

    The terms "infinities" and "come from" and "source" all imply the concept of "location." Location implies "physicality" which has to to with an identifiable set of coordinates within the physical universe.

    Clearly, there are no answers available to your questions that align with your concept of reality. If we experience Time one frame at a time, it is because we exist within SpaceTime. To exist outside of SpaceTime would mean that causality and the progression of events would have to exist on a different basis.

    Most of the CA does not tell you what God is, but rather what He is not. He is not of this world. He is not of this universe. He exists apart from physicality. He has no source that is identifiable within our understanding.

    Does it help at all to contemplate the existence a divine being if He is divorced from traditional religion concepts and baggage?

    Or: Is the idea easier to swallow that we are the creation of an extra-terrestrial super race that exists on a higher dimensional plane of reality, and that, long ago, deposited us on the earth as seeds of life from a place far away, sometimes directing and guiding our development, occasionally showing us how to build pyramids and requiring our worship as gods, and then ascending back to the sky where they came?

    Both require that a vastly more powerful and superior intelligence from far away was our origin. Label it "God" and you are preaching iron-age foolishness. Label it "aliens from the 5th dimension" and suddenly, "Gee! It could be a real possibility."

    Just a thought.

  1120. D-K

    @Chris: "powerful enough to master and direct all the energy and forces necessary to create the universe"

    This and some of your previous statements imply that god is actively interfering/controlling our reality, and has been since he has created it. He also has been around before creation of space/time, which would make him an infinite concept, agreed?

    You also stated how he created the forces that created our universe, which in turn created us, correct? If he (merely) created the forces that created our reality, what would lead you to conclude that he is still actively controlling our reality?

    If he is not, this would remove the certainty of the argument for him being infinite, which is the actual necessity for him having created the forces that created us.

    Last thing, you mentioned you have experienced/contacted him, and elaborated in the color example. What is required, in your view, to contact god?

  1121. Epicurus

    @chris. when you end each paragraph with fail you show your maturity. please for your own sake stop doing that.

    okay i stand corrected. you didnt say more complex. you said; "The origin must be powerful enough to be the origin of the universe. Meaning, that it must be greater than the universe"

    okay sorry you are right it MUST BE GREATER. (especially in order for your premises to hold up...)

    Second, To say that something exists outside of space and time is the whole point of this discussion. “Time” and “Space” are aspects of the physical universe. It seems to be a bit disingenuous to object to a “person” existing outside of Time and Space but not have a problem with something like a “multiverse” existing in the same way. FAIL

    what i am saying is that anything you attribute outside of space and time is just your assumption based on all these weird premises you are making up.

    anything i have asserted are things we already know to exist. you are attributing magical beings. i will say like most atheists that i honestly dont know what our universe is expanding in, or what happened before the cosmic expansion began but i wont posit any magical being.

    now after all your nonsense you tell ME not to interject and you shame my parents...if only the pot could see its self now.

    i feel no need to try and insult you or try to make you mad or engage in a trolling war.

    ....fail?....ugh, grow up.

  1122. Chris

    @D-K

    I'm going to copy/paste your post to another document, shut off my computer and go spend time with my children. I'll answer your questions at another time. You can look for my reply in the next day or so.

    However, on the face of it, it appears that the wording of your questions is designed to trip me up on some fine and convoluted point of logic. But I'm up to the challenge and will indulge you. I will only state at this time that you have not accurately framed my previous statements. Restating my comments and position incorrectly, and then attacking the misstated position is not a sound tactic in logic, but it does play well politically.

    Good night all

  1123. Achems Razor

    @ Chris:

    Yes, I do know how we exist in linear time with all our successions of now's. Since we have had discourse on all of this for close to one year.

    (LOL) yes, it is easier for me to swallow that we are the products of an extra-terrestrial Race from, not the fifth, but the 11th dimension, than all this convoluted God stuff, sorry!

  1124. D-K

    I'm not trying to trick or trap you, I find your position interesting so I'm examining where I feel you should elaborate. I do not dismiss your thoughts, I clearly ask for them, there is no reason to be defensive (unless you question my motives).

    I'll be awaiting your reply to see where I misstated you.

  1125. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @ D-K

    I read over your reply to my post and I agree with your views completely... or rather - the logic of them.

    What you are failing to observe is no matter what philosophy and or psychology teaches us regarding human behavior or conscience - it is only the rationalization of it.

    "You failed to appreciate the concept of lingering logic, that’s when certain phrasing of propositions lead to self-realizations."
    So in other words - when someone continually hears input - they somewhat absorb it sub-consciously. Valid point - but do they shut off their own personal input during this ? As in - they just stop thinking for themselves totally? I disagree. Maybe I misunderstood what you were saying in this - sorry if I didn't comprehend what you were saying there. ;)

    "I tend to let people speak their mind, and point out wherever there is a flaw in logic. I will not condemn anyone for believing, as long as they know believing is irrational, and they are at peace with themselves for it."

    Logic is a philosophical study - what you may determine to be logical, another may not... What you consider to be irrational, others may believe to be truth. How do you think anyone who doesn't study philosophy regards the statement of " believing is irrational"?

    "seeing as logic isn’t based on spiritual experience but rather the verifiable, it makes more “sense” to this unwilling to take a chance on the truth."

    Fair enough - but your point is made from inductive reasoning. Your own inductive reasoning.
    What do you say to those who believe they HAVE had a religious experience and find logic in that?
    You have to stop yourself from deriving answers based solely on YOUR belief's and what you see as logic and truth. Until you do this you are truly only examining one side of this.

    "The child cannot ask critical questions as it bases those questions on the logic implemented. Quick example; if you install windows on your computer, your computer will function on windows, it will reason according to windows logic and it will have a hard time performing functions inherent to other operating systems."

    I do understand the example. But a Windows system will run more than just it's OS. It has the ability to do more if the information is written and the software provided.

    Children question logic on the foundation that their personal logic is built upon. Is it built on notions of probable supernaturalism? then the supernatural is probable, if personal logic is based on the observable and verifiable, then anything of immaterial nature is intensely scrutinized. Such is the nature of logic.

    I agree with you - but most adults let alone children do not understand or base there belief system on this. They simply know what they know. I understand where you are coming from and your first reply to this would be " but it doesn't matter whether they are aware of how their logic is built" But it does. People will believe what they want to believe and base it on what they learn, examine and know of.

    The most valid point I have on this goes back to the religious zealot who suddenly comes to the realization that their God does not exist. Just like Santa. Just like the boogie-man which is great example because I do not know of many parent who sit in their children s room telling them about the monster in the closet. It is something that a child forms in his/her mind based on fear. Without a continual input that shapes it.But as that child grows and learn rational thought and truth from his/her own experience they dismiss or go on believing. Much like religion.

    My apologies if this all reads poorly... I tend to write clearer when I just write rather than scrutinize...sometimes my phrasing clouds my idea...

  1126. eireannach666

    @oli
    I didnt intend for you to assume that when I said "good for a laugh," that I was insulting you intelligence , but rather I was only really talking about how you make such a great point and in the same paragraph , blow it by trying to have it both ways. You cant have your science cake and wash it down with god water. Of course this is how it appears to me, whatever you floats your boat, man.

    I will say you do tend to throw god into most of the things you say. Which would be ok if the person you were addressing belived in god. But when you adress an atheist and say that god is why this and god did or does that , than of course you will trigger a humorous and possibly negative reaction.

    I apologize for not elaborating earlier. Ive actually had a rew good and positive go arounds with you. I have nothing against you personally. In fact I can tolerate your ideas on god alot more than most. Of course that is your humorous side that just cracks me up. I think you have alot of good scientific habits but I feel you hold yourself back by hanging on to god. . I just have a problem with the constant god answeer and explanations when discussing science. You are ok in my book.

    Now , you said." they described the nature of dark matter/energy/flow" and "goodbut it MUST exist because an equation says so….hmmmm sound familiar?"

    First off, yes quantum is not written in stone yet but we are extremely close to figuring it out. Look at the stuff going on in the Fermilab collider. And thats just what has been released. Besides now you got me chuckling again. I mean even physicists dont really get it yet but the evidence there all points in pretty much the same direction. I use pretty much loosely. Then you have the other option , god , in which there is absolutely no evidence . Both require faith and as you may aready know, I dont do faith. In QT or in god. I am not 100% sold on alot of QT but I like where it came from , where it is today and we will see where it goes. There are alot of understandings in QM/T we just have a ways to go yet to be able to officialize alot of it..

    We will never be able to officialize it all, because as Epi_Logicc has stated before,( Im stealing this because I think he said it best and the simplest.) "When we answer the big questions ,10 more pop up." Which to me is what its all about.

  1127. eireannach666

    @Chris

    Your comment seem thought out pretty well, but I have just a couple questions for you and a couple comments.

    You say,"science will FOREVER be asking,“And what came before that?” and "false gods of both religion and science whom you dogmatically preach," and "The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.”

    1. Of course they will. That is the basis for all science, to question , research , test , review and explain .
    That is why you have all the luxuries, beauty and knowledge science created. Not a designer or god. Unless you mean a designer , as in Newton designed a gyroscope or something to that effect.

    2.False gods of science? Preach? Please elaborate on that. That seems to me to be an oxymoron. Im being serious not sarcastic. Elaborate.

    3."The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” I say to you that you should rethink that , as I and many others in the world would say the same about the ones who say god is real.

    Further more, you are just thumping ID and whether you want to admit it or not, its a creationist theory. All god existing ideas are creationist ideas. I could pretend my a** is made of roses and call it a rose bush but that wouldn't make it a rose bush. Call it what you want but still , it is what it is. I just dont get how someone who obviously has some intelligence , can really still use god as an answer to the unknown . Like I said before, whatever floats your boat,

  1128. Randy

    (I posted this elsewhere but realized it would be more appropriate here as this where the excahnge happened...)

    Oh and, “Olivgarden”?

    The reason I was so angry with you, is that I was helping Charles B. (who I actually like, despite his christian dogma! I know the good guys from the bad guys, I’ve been around the rodeo a few times…), and trying to make him feel better about himself, and you cr*pped all over it.

    Guilt is another BIG cause of weight gain. I was trying to HELP him. I’m a doctor.

    So, I was really angry at you!

    And if you don’t remember the exchange, scroll up.

  1129. eireannach666

    Man , I ve been repeating myself alot lately. Seems like everytime I say something in one place the same applies and is restated in another.

  1130. Randy

    Yeah, I know right?

    It's exhausting.

    How many time have I typed out... "evolution is a fact... Darwin had a theory about it... we see evolution happening all around us, everyday, blah blah..."

    People just don't do any research before they open their mouths, (or type)...

    But I get you, dude!

  1131. Hardy

    'what i am saying is that anything you attribute outside of space and time is just your assumption based on all these weird premises you are making up.'

    While reading this discussion with Chris, this is my main problem with his argument. Yes, it may be in itself logical, but the premise is so arbitrarily chosen that it renders the logic that follows pointless.

  1132. Randy

    Plus, it's not "space and time" it's space/time, all one word.

    That's Einstien.

    Don't be simp.

    Hi, Hardy!

  1133. D-K

    @Jesusbuiltmyhotrodsuchacraftymexican:

    "What you are failing to observe is no matter what philosophy and or psychology teaches us regarding human behavior or conscience – it is only the rationalization of it."

    I don't see where I claim anything that would oppose this statement, as I agree with it.

    "but do they shut off their own personal input during this ? As in – they just stop thinking for themselves totally? I disagree. Maybe I misunderstood what you were saying in this – sorry if I didn’t comprehend what you were saying there. ;)"

    Critical thinkers and rationalists alike have the ability to adopt external logic momentarily, and judge according to it (in contrast with own inherent logic). Rationalizing is nothing but verifying by relative comparison, for people who're able to think outside the box this ability is what makes such subjects as supernaturalism worthy of discussion.

    Men of faith will often try to reconcile external teachings with their own logic, and discard information that seems incompatible with their "train of thought". These people are called believers, they're the only ones with the incentive to adopt unchanging realizations/epiphanies. I am an agnostic realist, I hold no allegiance, I have no fixed starting point and as scuh, I'm able to preserve objectivity, whihc in turn is needed to appreciate external logic. Like it or not, those that believe found their worldview on inherent irrationality, as the act of believing (taking a leap of faith) is inherently irrational. Seeing as logic and irrationality don't mix, and believers often have an emotional and spiritual investment in what they believe, and as such opposing logic is discarded.

    "Logic is a philosophical study – what you may determine to be logical, another may not… What you consider to be irrational, others may believe to be truth. How do you think anyone who doesn’t study philosophy regards the statement of ” believing is irrational”?"

    Good point, one that forces me to explain my personal position. My logic is based on factual data, and factual data alone, in this case, it's a case of definitions. Believing is to take as fact, that which cannot be proven. It's the act of jumping over a hole in logic, in order to appreciate pre-formed notions of "the bigger picture" It is my personal "defect" that I discard notions of the bigger picture until empirically or otherwise logically evidenced. I believe that in science and logic, the means outweigh the end, as logic and science is about understanding, rather than knowing.

    "Fair enough – but your point is made from inductive reasoning. Your own inductive reasoning.
    What do you say to those who believe they HAVE had a religious experience and find logic in that?
    You have to stop yourself from deriving answers based solely on YOUR belief’s and what you see as logic and truth. Until you do this you are truly only examining one side of this"

    I hold no beliefs, no allegiance, no pre-formed notions, seems unlikely, but i'll explain if you want me to. Finding logic in spiritual experience is (at this point) an oxymo ron, as the spiritual exists within a realm beyond logic. Spirituality is an emotional process, logical reasoning is cognitive (or mathematical), emotion is illogical, thus spirituality is illogical. It serves an individualist purpose, but nothing beyond that, logic on the other hand, has common purpose/goals.

    "I do understand the example. But a Windows system will run more than just it’s OS. It has the ability to do more if the information is written and the software provided."

    You misunderstood, the system itself can run anything, but logic does not derive from the system, it derives from the software (windows). The system can adopt any OS, but once an OS is implemented, any application/reasoning must be alligned with windows code/inherent logic, in order for it to work/make sense.

    For that last statement, i'd just alter one thing: "People will believe IF* they want to believe and base it on what they learn, examine and know of"

    Lately i've been examining fear and it's effect on people decision-making, but i've been having a tough time classifying it.. emotional or instinctive, it can't be both, but it also can't be just one.. the concept of fear is a logical fallacy, and as such I cannot understand it at this time, so i'll refrain from delving in on your last statement.

  1134. D-K

    @D-K

    Ugh, proof-read you lazy sob. Besides the glaring grammatical errors, this little semantical doozy might conjure up some problems, so I'll pre-emptively hammer it out.

    "I believe that in science and logic, the means outweigh the end, as logic and science is about understanding, rather than knowing."

    is supposed to say:

    "I think .... "

    Believing, while contextually different here, still could give rise to unnecessary debate over non-believers believing things.

    I really should proof-read.. the grammatical errors or otherwise lingual ineptitude don't resemble the amount of thought that went into my views.. This is what you get for discussing on multiple sites in multiple languages on multiple subjects, my attention to detail obviously dilutes to resemble the grammatical capacity of a piece of lumber in the end.

    Other than that, my comment is fine :D

  1135. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @ D-K

    Very well thought out and stated. I appreciate the reply!!!
    I am not saying you are wrong in any way shape or form - I agree with your statements minus 2.

    "I don’t see where I claim anything that would oppose this statement, as I agree with it."

    This is YOUR truth. This is YOUR believe and therefore this is where YOUR logic and believe in "truth" is derived from. It's not that you claim any statement - it that you state your truths and arguments from them. People who do believe in God or the Bible do not see their contradiction to logic in their faith.

    "I hold no beliefs, no allegiance, no pre-formed notions, seems unlikely, but i’ll explain if you want me to."

    I don't really see how this is true. You believe in science and logical thinking. You have stated that spirituality is illogical. You think with philosophical reasoning. All I'm saying is we are ALL influenced by how we think.

    For that last statement, i’d just alter one thing: “People will believe IF* they want to believe and base it on what they learn, examine and know of”
    Well said.

    You misunderstood, the system itself can run anything, but logic does not derive from the system, it derives from the software (windows). The system can adopt any OS, but once an OS is implemented, any application/reasoning must be alligned with windows code/inherent logic, in order for it to work/make sense.

    I do understand this but I think you are using to make the statement that once someone is ingrained with religion - there's no other form or logic for them but that which is based in those believes or uses that "code". I disagree. Religion is not 100% programing. Let's say the religious use notepad to do all their documenting... We use Office. I understand your point. Maybe someday they'll use Office and never open notepad again. Anyone got a krack for that?

    All your comments are intelligent and I have no qualms about stating you are obviously a very broad thinker and know what you are talking about. Thanks for the response.

  1136. Jesus Built My Hotrod

    @ D-K
    Hahahaha I just noticed the JBMHRsuchacraftymexican!!!! Hilarious!!!lmao

  1137. Chris

    @D-K

    Okay, I'm back. It seems that you are saying that if God (being infinite in nature, existing outside of and apart from the finite universe) created the finite universe, how can He participate in the activity of the finite universe without He Himself becoming a part of the finite universe, which would be contrary to His infinite nature? Please correct me if I'm have not framed your position correctly.

  1138. Chris

    @eireannach666

    You seem to be have unwavering faith in the process of science. I assure you it is unfounded. The industry of science is highly politicized and very closed minded. There are any number of promising theories deserving of exploration and funding, yet remain buried or discarded because their authors fear losing tenure or being dismissed for failing to fall lockstep with only the most orthodox views. If you only knew.

    As for the rest of your comments, I don't see a logical point, reasonable question or defensible argument in any of it. It seems to be more on the level of grade school playground taunting rather than reasoned discussion.

  1139. Nada

    I tried to post this yesterday but for some reason, I couldn't.

    Happy birthday Randy!

    Happy belated birthday Epicurus!

  1140. Randy

    Thank you, NADA!

    How are you feeling?

  1141. eireannach666

    @Chris
    You seem to want to argue more than read. I was pretty much agreeing with alot of you points except the 3 I mentioned. Which you did not even attempt to reply to . Instead you resorted to attacking me personally. That is grade school , not me asking for you to explain your ridiculous statement about your "gods of science ."

    Trust me man, you think you got this quantum thing figured out but again I assure you that you dont.

    As for your god theory , it is about as possible as me living to be a thousand. There is no mental , spiritual , or physical god. Stop trying to have it both ways. You can be bisexual but you cant swing both ways between science and god .

    I dont really feel the need to even debate anything with you since you are a so quick to undermine others and disrespect when people dont see it your way.

    You dont have to respond. I can see we wont get along since your attitude is to shoot first ask questions later. Plus I hate hippies. Leave it to a hippie to bring god and spirituality into science. ID sux.

  1142. Epicurus

    @chris,

    "You seem to be have unwavering faith in the process of science. I assure you it is unfounded. The industry of science is highly politicized and very closed minded. There are any number of promising theories deserving of exploration and funding, yet remain buried or discarded because their authors fear losing tenure or being dismissed for failing to fall lockstep with only the most orthodox views. If you only knew."

    prove it. provide a few examples.

  1143. eireannach666

    @Randy

    "Yeah, I know right?It’s exhausting.How many time have I typed out… “evolution is a fact… Darwin had a theory about it… we see evolution happening all around us, everyday, blah blah…”

    Yes! People familiarize themselves with one theory and start jumping on board without all the facts being weighed and calculated.

    I stand by the facts and weigh probabilities until tested. I want to be clear though, god is not a probability, only a dream.

  1144. eireannach666

    @Epi_Log / McGarvey

    How about that U.S. FB my friends? Oi Oi Oi!

    Ha! Algeria seriously Epi? You guys are lucky you didnt have to see the Celtic FB club in this round.

    But the CFBC will be another story.

    U.S.A , U.S.A , U.S.A !

    Sports bring out the "umph" in me. Like Mcgavrey said ," Youve discovered my religion."
    Metaphoricly speaking.

  1145. Achems Razor

    @ Chris:

    Was waiting for response to @ Epicurus: non forthcoming?? Then you must be referring to USA. In Toronto 30 to 50 papers are published every day, just on astronomy only!

    Google..."Toronto astrophysicists pretty much figured out origins of universe-the globe and mail"

    Click the first or second link for full story.

    No big bang! it is called the big wheeze!!.

  1146. D-K

    @Chris

    "if God (being infinite in nature, existing outside of and apart from the finite universe) created the finite universe, how can He participate in the activity of the finite universe without He Himself becoming a part of the finite universe"

    Almost, what I meant was:

    if God (being infinite in nature, existing outside of and apart from the finite universe) created the finite universe, Why would you assume he still (or has ever) actively participates inside this universe/our reality?

    You say he created the forces that created a reality, that does not automatically signify that he is, or ever was, actively engaged in shaping it, he merely created the forces necessary for shaping our reality, not our reality itself, yet you claim he still interferes with out reality. I ask you, on what basis do you believe this to be true.

  1147. oliarguello

    @Randy

    Oops! I apologize if I "crapped" all over your help towards Charles B. by abruptly changing the flow of the conversation. My nerdlike response by shooting up my proverbial hand in class drove me to show gluttony was in the bible. Ooops! But the quotes didnt mention you were going to hell if one overeats, it just says one will vomit and those who overeat have health problems...so I dont believe guilt was introduced. If it does produce guilt...i apologize that was not my intent and really didnt think it would cause any guilt.

    I respect that you would give him advice in spite of some of the more heated debates between the two of you. I think thats great!

    @eireannach666

    You seem pretty cool in my book too :) We obviously dont see eye to eye in a few things, but I think most of us who hang around here have good minds and tough skins! Once in a while we all let emotions get the best of us, but I think for the most part people here mean no real harm ( with the exception of some people who get incredibly emotional when they cant debate and resort to name calling with no point)and cite some great questions, fallacies, and expertise.

    I try not to take any offense since I dont take myself too seriously but at the same time I take seeking the truth as a serious matter.May seem like an oxymoron but its like Gandhi said "Whatever you do will be insignificant, but its very important that you do it!"

  1148. Chris

    @D-K

    "Almost, what I meant was: if God (being infinite in nature, existing outside of and apart from the finite universe) created the finite universe, Why would you assume he still (or has ever) actively participates inside this universe/our reality?"

    I don't recall making this assumption in my above posts. Perhaps you could point it out to me?

    "You say he created the forces that created a reality, that does not automatically signify that he is, or ever was, actively engaged in shaping it, he merely created the forces necessary for shaping our reality, not our reality itself, yet you claim he still interferes with out reality. I ask you, on what basis do you believe this to be true."

    Again, I don't see in my posts a statement that resembles what you have written. I never used statements like, "...still interferes with our reality."

    It feels as that you are trying to put words in my mouth. It appears that you are trying to make me say something like, "God created the initial forces of reality, and sent them spinning off into the void to make our universe, and then stepped back to see what would come of it all." This is very much a 'deist' philosophy as apposed to a 'theist' view. Again, I don't understand what point you are trying to make.

    Here you say, "You say he created the forces that created a reality, that does not automatically signify that he is, or ever was, actively engaged in shaping it, he merely created the forces necessary for shaping our reality, not our reality itself, yet you claim he still interferes with out reality."

    Again, I don't recall saying this.

    The central point of the discussion was whether there is a God or not. My argument is that, by the evidence provided by history, geology, astronomy, cosmology and other sciences, by the conclusions provided by logic, by the sense of the Bible, not to mention my own human experiences, I conclude that the universe cannot account for its own existence and requires an explanation with conditions best met by a personal designer. The other side feels that the evidence points to a reality that came about by naturally explained causes and requires no designer for its existence.

    Can you reframe your position within the above context? Much appreciated.

  1149. D-K

    @Chris: Sure.

    "“powerful enough to master and direct all the energy and forces necessary to create the universe”

    Keyword; direct. The notion of him directing/controlling the forces beyond simply having created them, is a claim you have yet to justify. It implies that he constantly shapes our reality and thus interferes with it.

    "If there is a God, we at least need to know that and to know Him so we can live our lives in a manner that is in accordance with His plan and wishes"

    Which, coupled with your last statement, would imply that God is shaping our reality, and wishes for us to live according to his plan (without being capable of understanding his nature or his plan). I see no basis for this way of thinking/assuming besides religious conviction, and as you concluded yourself, religion is not the key to understanding god and his nature/will, which makes it peculiar, would you not agree?

    "The central point of the discussion was whether there is a God or not"

    Indeed, but by specifying his nature, you leave yourself open to people questioning how you got your answers. I don't care if you are wrong, right or delusional, I value logic. You claim to deduce that there is a god, rather than simply believe it, so I am merely interested in the logic that went into that, not your personal investment. I'm not attacking you.

  1150. Chris

    @Epicurus

    You really are proving my point here. Yes, I have read the information at the suppressed science site, but Just look at your reaction. You are in hysterics! Look at how aggressively you dismiss it out of hand. You deride. You criticize. You put down.

    Don't you see? You show yourself to be in support of the rigid scientific establishment that suppresses alternate theories and research. You prove the point! You are in support of only the most orthodox and accepted view. All these other ideas are nonsense to you based solely on the most shallow understanding! And I can assure you that their authors are older, more experienced and better educated than you seem to be.

    Fool! Of course I do not support all the theories posted at that site. No one does. But I support that they are deserving of exploration unhindered and uncensored by the establishment. Unless alternate ideas are allowed a safe and protected nursery to incubate, you end up with situations like Galileo and Copernicus.

    Here's a historical fact: The Ptolemaic earth-centered model of the solar system with its epicycles produced more accurate predictions of planetary positions than did the sun-centered model proposed by Copernicus, and yet Copernicus's theory was closer to the truth. I'm a supporter of the Standard Model, but what if it is wrong? What if it is able to produce results that resemble observations, but for the wrong reasons? We need alternate theories and research. And we need them without children like you making snide comments on the sidelines.

    Additionally, you further demonstrate your bias by your comments regarding the second site. You state, "we all know the bush administration was against global warming and were doing anything they could to quiet it. but that didnt seem to work did it?"

    The REASON that, eventually, it didn't work was the failure of the Bush philosophy politically to propagate past the end of his presidency. But WHILE HE WAS IN OFFICE, it was a rousing success. While he was in power, he was able to ignore opposing views and suppress information contrary to his agenda.

    Whether religious power or political power, whether they are left or right, conservative or progressive makes no difference because those who are in power have the power to suppress the truth if they do not like it. Safeguards must be built into a system that routinely suppresses that to which it disagrees.

    In both examples, the competing models of the solar system and competing models of global warming, the prevailing theories had the support of the power structure and money.

    You have made it pretty clear, that if you had the power, I'm sure you would try to suppress my expressing my views, too, because you do not agree with me. There have been several regimes in the past 80 years that thought as you seem to think, and that are now in the dustbin of history.

  1151. Chris

    @D-K

    Hmm. I stated previously that I thought you were trying to trip me up on a convoluted tortured point in logic or vernacular, and it seems I was correct. I have little patience for this sort of thing, these days, because it is so similar to talking to my daughter as she attempts to get out of her chores.

    Very well. Your point regarding my use of the word "direct" is counter to the use of logic. First year debate students frequently mistake Logic for Debate. You can still be an outstanding debater with very flawed logic. You are pulling far more out of my statement than was intended or is demonstrated by its plain meaning taken as a whole. You are changing the wording of my statement in order to make a rather tortured and convoluted point.

    In my statement, the words "master" and "direct" are prior to the word "create". "Master and direct" modify "energy and forces" which then are used to create the universe. Further, considering the wording order, it would have to be concluded that "energy and forces" are attributes of the "powerful-enough" creator in this context. It addresses nothing about what He does to the universe after creation. Your rebuttal fails on this defense.

    Finally, I am entitled to express my opinion without having to pass it by my lawyer first. You stated that you value logic. If that is the case, you will remember that the purpose of logic is to clarify understanding. This type of word-twisting and meaningless debate only cloud reason and understanding. Logic is not mathematics. There are very few "since this is true, ergo that is also true" moments. While there are some truths that can be derived through the use of logic, logic itself exists only in the human mind and for the benefit of the human understanding. It has no substance outside of that framework.

    Any truths you are able to establish through logic must be seen through that lens. God cannot be proved to exist through Logic, but you can demonstrate through logic that all other choices are illogical.

    Finally, until and unless the physical reality of infinite regress and the existence of actual infinities can be proven or demonstrated, there are no alternatives to a universe that was not created.

  1152. Achems Razor

    @ Chris:

    Suppression of new science? Well Yeh! Your quote..."You end up in situations like Galileo and Copernicus"...unquote.

    Who do you think suppressed Galileo and Copernicus? if not religion itself, the church, the wonderful inquisition, at least if any suppression, the scientific community did not, and does not, resort to burning at the stake!

  1153. Epicurean_Logic

    @Achems. Very true.

    @Chris. you say,

    'God cannot be proved to exist through Logic, but you can demonstrate through logic that all other choices are illogical.'

    What you are talking about is a proof by exaustion (i.e. exausting all other possibilities and deducing that the remaining option must be true). Its not so cut and dry as you claim for the simple reason that exausting a few scientific possibilities in no way constitutes the complete set of all possibilities.

    We are a speck of dust observing the universe. It would be complete arrogance to say that we are anywhere near to having an exaustive list of all possibilities.

  1154. Achems Razor

    @ Chris:

    I do realize that this argument is to prove existence of a God.Gods.
    It seems by your blogs you really do not believe in man made religions. why do you go to church? It is to cover all your options?
    In case there is a force, of which we are made in its image?

    Our tiny, tiny, dust mote of a planet actually disappears, hardly even a pixel in comparison of scale to the rest of the cosmos. Completely inconsequential.

    You are coming across more of a deist. than anything else.
    In our limited understanding of the cosmos, it is human understanding to give the unknown a name. therefore has to be a God.

    There are no Gods, all there is science, there is nothing else but consciousness. This whole argument should be what is consciousness?

    And consciousness will be proven by science, not any man made Gods, or religions or even by supernatural intervention. All that does is hold back the progress of science.

    QM. revolution/evolution is a-coming!

  1155. Chris

    @ Epicurean_Logic and Achems Razor

    Well said. I think the quote is,

    "When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains,
    however improbable, must be the truth."
    -- Sherlock Holmes

    Proof by Exhaustion of All Other Possibilities! I like it! Any why is this not a reasonable logical conclusion given that the universe is observed to be isotropic and homogenous by the deepest sky surveys available? In every direction, we observe the same stuff and the same amount of stuff.

    Because the universe is the same everywhere and in every direction, we will not discover a new law of physics or observe a new chemical element in a far quarter of the universe that would not also be discovered or observed in our own neck of the woods. Logic here is logic there.

    Now, Achems, to your point of labeling the unknown "God" simply by default. How about first making it a bit more palatable to you by adopting more of a deist view than theist. Sweep away all the religious traditions and fables. Just consider a being that is greater than you, that exists outside of our reality of physicality, and, because of that, has an existence that we have a difficult, if not impossible, time of visualizing.

    Think Flatlanders trying to understand 3 dimensions. Or how about the concept that we are all computer simulations running on someone's computer? Indulge me to quote Paul: "we see through a glass darkly." And, "it is not yet clear what we shall be." And, "it has not yet entered into the mind of Man what God has prepared..." We simply are not going to be able to set God up the table to dissect. The only thing we can do is eliminate other possibilities and see only the broadest outlines. Regarding God, you are never going to be able to use logic or reason to get to an "Ah ha!" moment with all questions answered regarding God. Jesus Himself said that no outward sign would be given to establish His identity as God.

    I truly believe that organized traditional religions have poisoned the intellectual well for reasoned unbiased discussions regarding the nature of God by making pronouncements that are ridiculous, simple and unrealistic. You will simply have to get past it.

    I think there is much truth to be found in the Sherlock Holmes quote. When the impossibility of infinite regress and absolute infinities are acknowledged, all naturalistic theories of the origin of the universe lose their foundation.

    We are left with an Origin of the Universe that exists outside of, and independent of the physical universe, needs no origin or cause other than itself, had the capacity to create the Universe and the Will to do it or not do it. The attribute of having a Will is attributed only to persons, not things or forces.

    What else is there?

    The CA does not start from a belief in God and then offer logical arguments to support that premise. It starts with the blank slate of logic and asks how the universe came to be. The Kalam CA argues that 1. the universe is not eternal, 2. that it had to have had a beginning and 3. that the cause of the beginning was a person. Then by logic, it demonstrates each point. The Kalam CA did not originate with Christian thinkers, but among the classical Greeks. It found its full force in the 16th century Arabic world. Kalam is an Arabic word. Achems, you need to give the CA more credit. You don't have to like it, but should address it from a more logical and considered position.

    Gotta go. I'll check back for your reply. Child needs changing, dishes need washing, code needs coding and the day is far spent. I spend too much time on this site as it is. A two year old has been tugging at my arm and grabbing things off my desk while I try to type so I hope this makes some sense.

  1156. Epicurean_Logic

    @Chris. The reason that a proof by exaustion is not valid is that you have to exaust ALL other possibilities! We only have a few other possibilities for a description of how and why the universe exists.

    In our limited range of thought,(we are a speck of dust) the options offered as solutions to this question are but a few. i.e. God did it, Big bang, Q.M, parallel universes, etc. Here, the etc could and probably is hiding a lot of other possibilities that are much to complicated for the present human mind.

    In short this type of proof requires firstly that ALL the possibilities are identified (therein lies the problem) and then the exaustive disproof of all but one of these.

    We can then safely conclude that the remaining choice is true.

  1157. D-K

    @Chris:

    Never mind, it's not in my nature to do this, but I will not continue our discussion.

  1158. Epicurus

    the things on the first site HAVE BEEN tested and peer reviewed. not just laughed at and ignored. and like i said, we are aware there is political motivation to suppress science but that doesnt mean the science doesnt get done and out there.

    you are not making any sense.

    you are creating a ridiculous strawman that you actually believe to be true.

    and i havent made it clear i would not allow you your voice. i love people like you arguing that science is wrong. what better way for the people lacking a religious bias to have more and more evidence. we just keep doing more and more tests, whether you choose to ignore the results or make up excuses like they are lies that is your problem.

    once again, you believe in your magical man outside the universe watching over everyone. that is completely logical.