1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What is humour?

« on: February 25, 2011, 03:04:20 PM »

I guess, but I would say that something is usually more funny(funnier? correct grammar?) the first time, or if unexpected.

2

The Lounge / Re: The Earth Is Round Idiots

« on: February 24, 2011, 05:25:57 PM »

I hate people like this. My uncle works at NASA so that means I know about everything. My dad was a sniper 20 years ago so that makes me the best shot ever. My brother is a pilot so I know everything about flying. My sister went to Iraq in 2003 so I know everything that goes on in this war. Does this bother anyone else? I hate idiots. Sorry for going off topic.

3

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Concealed Carry on Campus

« on: February 24, 2011, 03:27:31 PM »

You are indeed correct. Simple tasks become complicated, even general shouldering a weapon and aiming it. A good comparison is if you can find a way to give yourself an adrenaline rush then to hold your hand steady. It is not a simple task at all. There is no good substitute to simulate the real thing. However that's the point of training, is to try to figure out a good way to handle the situation and add muscle memory. If you practice reloading you weapon or fixing a jam on the weapon you will no longer need to think about doing. You will just do it when the time comes.

You misunderstand.  I'm not talking about feelings of panic or adrenaline (although that is a valid concern), I'm talking about the human element of armed confrontation.  Enemy action.  And that is exactly what distinguishes carrying a weapon on you during your day-to-day routine from bringing it to college for the express purpose of dealing with a specific threat.

I'm not understanding. You mean just day to day problems with carrying the gun?

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Concealed Carry on Campus

« on: February 23, 2011, 11:32:50 PM »

Is it no alcohol at all or are you aloud to have some like the legal limit for driving?

5

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Question for RE's Tides

« on: February 23, 2011, 11:31:10 PM »

i would think the center would be in the sun, just near the center of mass of the sun

suns and planet's gravity affect each other, the sun wobbles with the planet

Yes, in fact considering all the known planets,  the center at any given moment is within the sun

I miss Pluto.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question for atheists

« on: February 23, 2011, 09:37:56 PM »

I should also note that I never implied anything about the complexity of the universe proves that there is no god.

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question for atheists

« on: February 23, 2011, 09:14:47 PM »

Let me restate my comment. Hoppy states that he only sees plants and animals. Then he makes a comment about mud and not being able to watch evolution. He then comes to the conclusion that there must be an Intelligent Designer.

I corrected his error and was saying there are six kingdoms, not two like he mentions. Saying we came from mud is also a misunderstanding of Abiogenesis. Then he said he can't watch evolution. This is do to the fact that he doesn't understand the factors involved in evolution. Time being the first one coming to mind. Understand? His conclusion of there being an Intelligent Designer was due to a lack of knowledge. 

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question for atheists

« on: February 23, 2011, 08:56:05 PM »

 Come on people. The evidence is all around you. The earth and all the life here. Birds,trees, grass, fishes, animals, cats and dogs. Did these things form of their own making?
  
   If they did where are all the in between animals and plants, we should be able to see them (in betweens) if they are evolving.

   It takes less faith to believe in the creation of God. than to believe that millions or billions of years ago some mud and primordial soup started to live and breathe. Man is special, created in the image of God.

  

I was merely showing that Hoppy's lack of understanding of the Biological Classification System is not evidence of an "Intelligent Designer."

Like that picture states "Bread goes in toast comes out, you can't explain that."

Not to mention lack of understanding of Evolution and Abiogenesis as well.

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question for atheists

« on: February 23, 2011, 08:32:27 PM »

 Come on people. The evidence is all around you. The earth and all the life here. Birds,trees, grass, fishes, animals, cats and dogs. Did these things form of their own making?
  
   If they did where are all the in between animals and plants, we should be able to see them (in betweens) if they are evolving.

   It takes less faith to believe in the creation of God. than to believe that millions or billions of years ago some mud and primordial soup started to live and breathe. Man is special, created in the image of God.

  

Animals and Plants? We really have a winner here don't we. Ok, first you decide if something is alive or not. If it is then it's one of three things Bacteria, Archaea or Eukarya. If I remember right some people don't agree on what is a kingdom. In any sense though you have Bacteria, Archaea, Protista, Plantae, Fungi and Animalia.  So you have six, not two. It still doesn't end there though. Below Kingodm you have Phylum, then Class, then Order, then Family, then Genus and finally Species. However it is also argued that if something is alive then it is either one of two things, Prokaryota or Eukaryota. A Prokaryota is a bacteria and that archaebacteria is a sub kingdom of bacteria and not it its own Domain. A Eukaryota is one of five things. Protozoa, Chromista, Plantae, Fungi or Anamilia. 

10

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Concealed Carry on Campus

« on: February 23, 2011, 05:09:35 PM »

While I do support gun rights, their value is primarily in the deterrence of crime, not in the reaction to it.  Obviously, though, a lunatic school shooter isn't going to be deterred by the potential of armed students, so the only possible benefit to this is the idea that armed students can safely take down a crazed gunman.  Sounds great!  Let's just hope that the average college student has experience with weapons beyond what Halo and action movies teach.

Oh wait.

That's a bit misleading. I don't know anyone that owns a gun and has a conceal carry permit that actually carries it, but has only video game knowledge of guns. There are endless courses out there, and general tactics that are discussed. Not to mention range time and just basic handling of the gun. You can practice the handling of weapons, tactical weapons drawing and different firing positions all without loading the gun or leaving your living room. You are suggesting that people buy guns and carry them without any further research or knowledge of how they work or proper ways to handle them. 

I'm not just talking about the physical operation of a gun, but actually using it competently and safely in the middle of an emergency situation.  Plenty of cops and veterans who have been fired upon have talked about how it's entirely different to anything they've ever done in a classroom or firing range.  I'm not saying that training is useless, but it simply isn't a substitute for actual experience.

You are indeed correct. Simple tasks become complicated, even general shouldering a weapon and aiming it. A good comparison is if you can find a way to give yourself an adrenaline rush then to hold your hand steady. It is not a simple task at all. There is no good substitute to simulate the real thing. However that's the point of training, is to try to figure out a good way to handle the situation and add muscle memory. If you practice reloading you weapon or fixing a jam on the weapon you will no longer need to think about doing. You will just do it when the time comes.

11

Flat Earth Debate / Re: General Shapes proved by devices?

« on: February 23, 2011, 05:03:37 PM »

Wait how did NASA lie? can anyone link me to a good article that refutes this?
All they claimed was that a bacteria in Mono Lake had adapted to eat arsenic and replace phosphorus. The one thing I'm slightly disappointed about is the fact that this shows no evidence for the shadow biosphere, or in other words that life evolved two distinct times on earth

Wait what? If you find it please let me know as I was unaware of this and would like to learn about it.

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-12-critics-nasa-arsenic-bacteria.html


However, it's also important to note that NASA did not actually carry out this research.  They merely funded it and announced the results.

Ok that seems like a pretty convincing argument. I haven't read the paper, but wow, how could that have been overlooked? One thing though, is how do we know that it wasn't that the Arsenate backed DNA was destroyed in the water, and that phosphate backed DNA survived? as in two types were present. More importantly, why didn't they use mass spec?

I too am curious, if anyone finds out any more information on the subject please leave links for me. I would appreciate it. ^^

12

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Concealed Carry on Campus

« on: February 23, 2011, 01:49:30 PM »

While I do support gun rights, their value is primarily in the deterrence of crime, not in the reaction to it.  Obviously, though, a lunatic school shooter isn't going to be deterred by the potential of armed students, so the only possible benefit to this is the idea that armed students can safely take down a crazed gunman.  Sounds great!  Let's just hope that the average college student has experience with weapons beyond what Halo and action movies teach.

Oh wait.

That's a bit misleading. I don't know anyone that owns a gun and has a conceal carry permit that actually carries it, but has only video game knowledge of guns. There are endless courses out there, and general tactics that are discussed. Not to mention range time and just basic handling of the gun. You can practice the handling of weapons, tactical weapons drawing and different firing positions all without loading the gun or leaving your living room. You are suggesting that people buy guns and carry them without any further research or knowledge of how they work or proper ways to handle them. 

13

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question for atheists

« on: February 23, 2011, 01:38:44 PM »

What exactly are we discussing? We keep jumping from subject to subject without even remotely going into detail about anything. What is the discussion? Evolution? The Big Bang? Abiogenesis? The Bible? Life in the Universe? Intelligent life in the Universe? I am completely lost. Saying that life came from mud is not only a misleading state about abiogenesis, it is exactly what the bible states. That Adam was made from a handful of sand. That there is no evidence for evolution at all, when there is actually an entire fossil record that fills in the gaps, not to mention the still living, early mammal know as the Duck-billed Platypus. So tell me now, what are we discussing?

14

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The favorite movies of all time

« on: February 23, 2011, 01:19:21 PM »

Big Trouble in Little China is probably the best movie ever made.

I can't argue with that statement.

15

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Rainbows

« on: February 22, 2011, 11:50:27 PM »

I'm confused, why are we discussing rainbows?

16

Flat Earth Debate / Re: General Shapes proved by devices?

« on: February 22, 2011, 10:22:58 PM »

Wait how did NASA lie? can anyone link me to a good article that refutes this?
All they claimed was that a bacteria in Mono Lake had adapted to eat arsenic and replace phosphorus. The one thing I'm slightly disappointed about is the fact that this shows no evidence for the shadow biosphere, or in other words that life evolved two distinct times on earth

Wait what? If you find it please let me know as I was unaware of this and would like to learn about it.

Don't get too excited. Like a day after their "findings" were released people peer reviewed it and showed their study completely inconclusive and that there was no reason to get the conclusion that they did.

Oh ok, thank you for revealing that. I hate it when things get taken out of context. Like that 9/11 statement used by the conspiracy theory movie that took the control tower's statement out of context and tried to make it seem like something else.

17

Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Question for RE's Tides

« on: February 22, 2011, 10:01:08 PM »

The oceans are "resonant oscillators with periods of tens of hours"?

Sounds like a load of baloney to me.

Do you have any evidence to refute that claim or are you just dismissing it because you don't understand the implications?

I'll admit it sounds like an interesting theory and I would like to know more. Are there any other sources for information for this?

18

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Fighting back against the system

« on: February 22, 2011, 09:55:44 PM »

They had the right idea, non-violent protesting is very effective, look ah Gandhi. However the police would have had to revert to violence in order for it too work. Not to mention everyone would have to be smoking weed, as opposed to smoking flavored tobacco. That itself proves that those people were just trying to get a reaction from the cops and not prove a point. If everyone was sitting around smoking weed  they could say that it a much less likely chance to cause anger and violence then alcohol. However I award the people of that protest no points, the police department didn't do anything wrong, not even remotely. The people were acting out trying to get a rise from the police and got none. Showing that their protest was very ineffective, and after watching that video I have less respect for people protesting to make weed legal.

19

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What is humour?

« on: February 22, 2011, 09:43:07 PM »

I always thought it to be instinct. Kind of like sex, you don't need to be taught how to use your weapons of reproduction.

Then what is the reason for such an instinct? The sex-instinct is obviously necessary; not so much a humour-instinct.

My favourite description of the dramatic arts in general is that comedy raises the low to the high, and tragedy lowers the high to the low.

I like this description, although the former is not necessarily true: humour often has the opposite effect.

I have not researched it but I would compare it to someone screaming. It means they are afraid and it instantly makes you think there is a problem. However people laughing is the opposite. You assume that there is no danger around. It is not something I have researched or talked about with other people, but from my observation of people around me has lead me to believe this.

20

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Concealed Carry on Campus

« on: February 22, 2011, 09:39:46 PM »

I was told once that the increase of Laws and Police protect nothing. If the government needs in increase of these then there is a problem with the people making laws. However, when civilians uphold the law you will never need anything more. I regular person armed with the intent to want more for their community is the best thing to stop crime. When people think that cops coming and stopping them from shooting up a school they can identify their enemy. However, the minute they try something and a regular person stands up to stop them. They can't separate sheep from sheepdogs. Just like the Sheepdog concept. Understand? If you think more people having guns is bad then you should question where you live. I trust people around me and I would not be scared of a law allowing people to have weapons pretty much anywhere.

21

Flat Earth Debate / Re: General Shapes proved by devices?

« on: February 22, 2011, 09:30:30 PM »

Wait how did NASA lie? can anyone link me to a good article that refutes this?
All they claimed was that a bacteria in Mono Lake had adapted to eat arsenic and replace phosphorus. The one thing I'm slightly disappointed about is the fact that this shows no evidence for the shadow biosphere, or in other words that life evolved two distinct times on earth

Wait what? If you find it please let me know as I was unaware of this and would like to learn about it.

22

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What is humour?

« on: February 22, 2011, 06:56:26 PM »

I always thought it to be instinct. Kind of like sex, you don't need to be taught how to use your weapons of reproduction. That's how I conclude that we are animals just like any other. We are not special, we don't need to exist for the planet to exist. We are irevelant, our existence proves nothing. ^^

23

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Concealed Carry on Campus

« on: February 22, 2011, 06:50:08 PM »

It's more logical than you think. Usually a person who legally buys and carries a gun isn't crazy. Those are not acts associated with being crazy. The person who illegally purchases a gun, illegally carries a gun, and illegally shoots someone is probably more linked with being crazy than the first person. Not allowing guns in places does not fix any problem. That second person will still break the law regardless of the law. That's why the second person is doing illegal things. That was a little confusing but it makes sense.

24

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question for atheists

« on: February 22, 2011, 06:11:12 PM »

Thank you, that made allot more sense. You are all gentlemen and scholars, except Tom Bishop.

25

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question for atheists

« on: February 22, 2011, 05:18:14 PM »

I'm having problems understanding logic here. Someone help me out please.
Theist: God exists, he made everything.
Atheist : I have not seen evidence of a god, therefore I question your theory.
Theist: Ha! I have you now, you can't prove there isn't a God, I win.
Atheist : :/ what?

This is something I'm not understanding, why does the Atheist have to prove things but the Theist doesn't?

26

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question for atheists

« on: February 22, 2011, 05:09:46 PM »

Do any of you know what an Atheist is? It has nothing to do with the creation of the universe, it is not a religion, it is not even a belief. It is the lack of a belief. Just because someone is an Atheist, it does not mean they believe in the big bang, evolution or abiogenesis. All of those are in different categories. Just because you think one of those is true, it does not mean you think all of those things are true.

I believe what the OP may have been going for was "Oh, so you don't have evidence for your beliefs, then? So why do you exercise an amount of blind faith and choose believe in something without evidence? A belief in the unknown and unproven. Sounds like a religion to me."

Ahh Mr. Tom Bishop. Saying Atheism is a religion is proof of you lack of understanding of what either one of the two are. This has been brought up several times over and over and over throughout the internet. The only people that make such a claim are people who have nothing left to say, they have run out of ammunition to shoot with and your last hope is to bring it down to your level. 

27

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question for atheists

« on: February 22, 2011, 04:54:53 PM »

If an atheist were to argue against me, they would have to refute my claim and argue why a higher being or force couldn't have created the universe. The burden of proof is on them.

Straw man. Atheists do not claim that god couldn't exist. They claim god doesn't exist. There is a big difference.

Exactly, I fail to see how an Atheist would have to prove anything. He's not the one claiming a magical being that's never been seen or heard from before created everything 6,000 years ago. The flood alone didn't happen. Fresh water bodies of water would have been contaminated by salt water killing all fresh water animals. The never ending rain would have killed all saltwater animals even whales, as evidence has shown that whales can die of freshwater poisoning.

28

Flat Earth Debate / Re: General Shapes proved by devices?

« on: February 22, 2011, 04:48:46 PM »

I know something that can't be faked. Perhaps a walk through of a space shuttle. Then witnessing it's launch like I have witnessed several times. However I suppose using youtube videos, newspapers and interviews is not proof. Because even the Soviet Union sided with America with faking space exploration so they could make more money off of the people. Even if they wanted more money all they had to do was take it, and they would have received more profit from exploiting America to the people and seeing the colllapse of America's government. Then again I'm sure I'll see somewhere in reply to this that the Soviet Union was a conspiracy and the Cold War never happened.

29

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question for atheists

« on: February 22, 2011, 04:39:21 PM »

Are you still discussing this? Perhaps a thread called "problems against the big bang theory" would be a better title. You don't have to be an Atheist to agree with the Big Bang Theory. Just because you agree with the Big Bang Theory does not mean you are an Atheist. Understand? The beginning of the Universe has nothing to do with being an Atheist. You can argue about the beginning of the Universe all you want but if you find that the Big Bang Theory has too many problems, it still does not go against how an Atheist perceives the world around him. This isn't an argument. This is stupidity and a lack of understanding of definitions.

30

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The favorite movies of all time

« on: February 22, 2011, 12:30:55 AM »

Well that's the coolest spambot I have ever met.