61
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: There is no god.
« on: December 10, 2007, 10:07:17 PM »
Sure, redefining terms so that they bear no resemblance to the commonly accepted meaning is a great way to win an argument.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
62
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: There is no god.
« on: December 10, 2007, 07:43:05 PM »
Of course, Midnight, just the same as if you argue that the Moon is not made of cheese, your religion- your dogma- is made manifest. Of, if you argue that fairies are not real, or that there is not a teapot orbiting Jupiter, your dogmatic beliefs show themselves.
Really, you should think twice before using an argument that is easily defeated by a simple turn-around.
Really, you should think twice before using an argument that is easily defeated by a simple turn-around.
63
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: There is no god.
« on: December 10, 2007, 04:04:38 PM »Atheism is a religion just as Christianity is a religion. They both believe something based on unaffirmed idealism and will push it to anyone willing (or not) to listen.
Real atheist don't discuss either side. Get jobs. Really.
Atheism isn't a religion, I don't believe anything based on unaffirmed anything, I do discuss it, and I have a job. You fail.
64
The Lounge / Re: Favorite Operating System
« on: December 10, 2007, 09:58:08 AM »
Linux has more of a learning curve, Mac has more of an unlearning curve.
65
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you fear religion?
« on: December 06, 2007, 05:42:59 AM »Those verses are difficult to understand. Jesus is talking about "The Law and The Prophets." These are names the Jews had for sections of their scripture. Meaning the actual composed work of sacred texts the Jews had at the time. He had not come to change them. He did come to fulfill them, meaning the prophecies contained therein.
Almost the entire Judaic law is in prophetic reference to the coming of their Messiah. Christ, as their Messiah, fulfilled these prophecies, and by so doing, requires their practice no longer. Don't be confused, this doesn't mean He doesn't require the practice of all things He had revealed, only those of the Mosaic law.
"Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven."
Matthew 5:17
Fail.
66
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: There is no god.
« on: December 03, 2007, 12:40:17 PM »
Why does everyone take issue with Mythix's verbosity? Anyone who has difficulty understanding his posts needs to take a few English courses.
67
The Lounge / Re: PSAT Scores
« on: December 03, 2007, 12:34:15 AM »
You kids are young. I took the PSATs (and SAT, for that matter) before they changed the whole system, back when it was out of 1600 rather than 2400. I scored 1430 on the SAT, don' t remember my PSAT score but it was similar, I do remember I had a perfect score on the verbal section though (I got near perfect on the verbal SAT too, 770/800).
'Course I'm sure Engineer will come around and remind me of how young I am.
'Course I'm sure Engineer will come around and remind me of how young I am.
68
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Is the entire point of this forum to develope a flat earth model that...
« on: November 25, 2007, 11:03:43 AM »
The entire point of this forum is for the "FE'ers" to get shits and giggles from the stupidity of RE responses. There's nothing serious about it whatsoever. None of us actually believe in a flat Earth.
Am I just messing with y'all? You decide!
Am I just messing with y'all? You decide!
69
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: The Bible and Science
« on: November 23, 2007, 01:16:31 AM »
Sorry for the necropost, but I wanted to respond to some stuff here.
Yes, and many historical events are recorded in the Iliad, Gone With the Wind, etc. Doesn't lend credence to other specific events contained therein.
Except the Bible is drastically wrong about the dates for all of those, as well as the order. The sun is created at the same time as all the other stars, and not only is the Earth created before them, but plants are as well. All the heavens are created to light the Earth? Does that include stars, galaxies, etc, we can only see with a telescope? How about quasars and other stuff we can only see with a radio telescope? How about stuff we can't see at all?
Except a hundred thousand years ago (140,000 actually) is way before the Earth should have been around (and I don't care how you count the genealogies, different scholars obtain different dates, but there's no way you're getting a 140,000 years). Also, mitochondrial Eve is only the ancestor of all living humans. She's just the most recent common ancestor, and humans (or proto-humans) existed long before her. Mitochondrial Adam, by the way, would have lived 80,000 years later. Their existence is simply a dact of the way heredity works in any sexually reproducing species; in any such species, if you go back far enough, you will find two common ancestors from which all living members of the species are descended. There was also at some point one bacteria from whom the whole human race is descended.
Quote
Sort of, by how accurate and historical the bible is.
Many historical events are recorded in the bible (Fall of Jerusalem, Jewish exile in Babylon, Reign of King David etc.).
Yes, and many historical events are recorded in the Iliad, Gone With the Wind, etc. Doesn't lend credence to other specific events contained therein.
Quote
And lastly what I meant be "early history of the earth" is its formation and evolution over the past four and a half billion years as well as the Big Bang.
Except the Bible is drastically wrong about the dates for all of those, as well as the order. The sun is created at the same time as all the other stars, and not only is the Earth created before them, but plants are as well. All the heavens are created to light the Earth? Does that include stars, galaxies, etc, we can only see with a telescope? How about quasars and other stuff we can only see with a radio telescope? How about stuff we can't see at all?
Quote
Also scientists have discovered a "mitochondrial Eve" which most of humanity descendad from a hundred thousand or so years ago. Which gives evidence that atleast one of the Abrahamic Religions might be true (I'll study further).
Except a hundred thousand years ago (140,000 actually) is way before the Earth should have been around (and I don't care how you count the genealogies, different scholars obtain different dates, but there's no way you're getting a 140,000 years). Also, mitochondrial Eve is only the ancestor of all living humans. She's just the most recent common ancestor, and humans (or proto-humans) existed long before her. Mitochondrial Adam, by the way, would have lived 80,000 years later. Their existence is simply a dact of the way heredity works in any sexually reproducing species; in any such species, if you go back far enough, you will find two common ancestors from which all living members of the species are descended. There was also at some point one bacteria from whom the whole human race is descended.
70
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What if God was one of us?
« on: November 23, 2007, 12:42:35 AM »Gah... someone in my music technology class asked if I liked Nirvana. I emphatically replied that I did not, and at his request provided the clarification that I found their music simplistic. 'That's the point, man,' he said, 'They were trying to be simple!'
I replied: 'I can try to play bland, repetitive, unoriginal and uninspired music too, but the fact that it is intentionally so rather than a result of my lack of musical skill does not make it art.'
If everybody tried to sound like Steve Vai the music landscape would be boring.
I didn't say anybody should sound like Steve Vai, even one Steve Vai bores the hell out of me. It isn't necessary to be super complex, fast, and technical. Paul McCartney is one of the greatest songwriters who ever lived and his music is anything but complex. But there should be a little effort put into it, and I don't think Cobain really did. To my ears the songs are quite repetitive and bland; yes, they are aesthetically pleasing on a superficial level, but you get tired of them very easily because there's never anything new to find.
71
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: There is no god.
« on: November 21, 2007, 03:49:37 PM »
The fallacy lies in using your subjective experience to bolster an objective truth-claim. If we should be convinced by your experience, should we not also be convinced by the millions of followers from dissimilar and mutually contradictory religious traditions reporting just such experiences?
For that matter, should we not also be convinced by reports of alien abduction, ghosts, witchcraft, extrasensory perception, and the like?
The human mind is <i>extremely</i> fallible. Our subjective experience and memory are quite plastic; they are amenable to change.
Of course, I do not expect this to convince you of anything, nor do I intend to. We have no choice but to accept our subjective experience, for the most part, at face value. Of course if I know that I suffer from mental illness of some sort, I would be less likely simply to believe what my senses tell me; but if God did appear to me I would probably have no choice but to accept it. I would, of course, not expect my experience to sway others.
On the other hand, I am convinced that most of those who claim to 'speak with God' do not mean they literally commune with him in words; they are speaking of, in an unconsciously disingenuous fashion, mere thoughts and feelings that they interpret as coming from God based on their belief. Some will admit this if pressed; others have allowed their minds to delude them into reshaping the memory of those experiences into one of a verbal (though mental) conversation. Some few likely do actually experience such a conversation; but still, no credence is lent to the claim that this represents evidence of some external truth.
For that matter, should we not also be convinced by reports of alien abduction, ghosts, witchcraft, extrasensory perception, and the like?
The human mind is <i>extremely</i> fallible. Our subjective experience and memory are quite plastic; they are amenable to change.
Of course, I do not expect this to convince you of anything, nor do I intend to. We have no choice but to accept our subjective experience, for the most part, at face value. Of course if I know that I suffer from mental illness of some sort, I would be less likely simply to believe what my senses tell me; but if God did appear to me I would probably have no choice but to accept it. I would, of course, not expect my experience to sway others.
On the other hand, I am convinced that most of those who claim to 'speak with God' do not mean they literally commune with him in words; they are speaking of, in an unconsciously disingenuous fashion, mere thoughts and feelings that they interpret as coming from God based on their belief. Some will admit this if pressed; others have allowed their minds to delude them into reshaping the memory of those experiences into one of a verbal (though mental) conversation. Some few likely do actually experience such a conversation; but still, no credence is lent to the claim that this represents evidence of some external truth.
72
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Eisegesis and Religious Criticism
« on: November 21, 2007, 02:43:46 PM »
Nice plagiarism (though to be fair you did at least link to the plagiarized site). Eisegesis v. exegesis is a topic relevant to this section, but if you don't have an actual point I will lock this topic.
73
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: What has FE science given to the world?
« on: November 16, 2007, 07:14:31 PM »
What has FE science given to the world?
Well, if you want to credit the RE model with all advances made by RE-believing scientists, then we can credit most advances made before the first millennium C.E to FE.
Well, if you want to credit the RE model with all advances made by RE-believing scientists, then we can credit most advances made before the first millennium C.E to FE.
74
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you fear religion?
« on: November 15, 2007, 08:28:42 AM »
Sushi: I'd advise looking up the term 'order of magnitude'.
75
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Islamic jokes
« on: November 14, 2007, 08:15:12 PM »
In what sense could that possibly be considered funny?
76
Philosophy, Religion & Society / MOVED: Bishopanity
« on: November 14, 2007, 06:54:55 PM »
This topic has been moved to Complete Nonsense.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18045.0
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=18045.0
77
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: What if God was one of us?
« on: November 14, 2007, 06:53:29 PM »
Gah... someone in my music technology class asked if I liked Nirvana. I emphatically replied that I did not, and at his request provided the clarification that I found their music simplistic. 'That's the point, man,' he said, 'They were trying to be simple!'
I replied: 'I can try to play bland, repetitive, unoriginal and uninspired music too, but the fact that it is intentionally so rather than a result of my lack of musical skill does not make it art.'
I replied: 'I can try to play bland, repetitive, unoriginal and uninspired music too, but the fact that it is intentionally so rather than a result of my lack of musical skill does not make it art.'
78
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: UFO religions, the future world religions?
« on: November 14, 2007, 06:50:22 PM »UFOs suck. I have no interest in believing flying discs.Neither do I am simply saying that UFOs being an updated mythology might have more popularity in the future, ths is not necessarily a good things though.
Interestingly the structure of that statement seems to suggest you are contrasting UFOs as an updated mythology with traditional religion (i.e., yours) as an outdated mythology.
79
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you fear religion?
« on: November 14, 2007, 06:47:38 PM »I think you are dumb. It seems a reasonable assumption, if we're going to just start assuming things about one another. You don't know who I know, and I find it hard (but not impossible) to believe you've never met a homophobic atheist. You're as closed-minded as the radicals you hate.Wrong. I'm not arguing in favor of Christianity, I'm arguing that it's idiotic to blame any one group for shitty laws and ethics. I know atheists who hate homosexuals, and I know Christians who have no problem with them, myself included.
I call bullshit; I think you're bluffing. I think you don't actually know any atheists who hate homosexuals.
And yes, when those shitty laws and ethics follow from a core piece of that group's self-definition (in the case of Christianity, the Bible), it is perfectly reasonable to blame them on said group.
Assume what you like. Any theist who I have ever debated at length will tell you I am very far from closed-minded.
I say that you are bluffing based on my assumption that I know roughly an order of magnitude more atheists than you do, and of them only one is a homophobe, and he is certifiably insane.
80
The Lounge / Re: Demonoid.com
« on: November 13, 2007, 02:03:56 PM »
Eztv (eztv.nl) is excellent for TV shows- massive numbers of seeders, very reliable 200kB+ speeds. Demonoid did have some obscure software that I couldn't find anywhere else, but there have long been far better options for shows.
81
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you fear religion?
« on: November 13, 2007, 01:47:43 PM »Wrong. I'm not arguing in favor of Christianity, I'm arguing that it's idiotic to blame any one group for shitty laws and ethics. I know atheists who hate homosexuals, and I know Christians who have no problem with them, myself included.
I call bullshit; I think you're bluffing. I think you don't actually know any atheists who hate homosexuals.
And yes, when those shitty laws and ethics follow from a core piece of that group's self-definition (in the case of Christianity, the Bible), it is perfectly reasonable to blame them on said group.
82
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Are you 'on-line'?.............
« on: November 09, 2007, 11:48:39 AM »OK, so is this subject just too deep for ya'll to comprehend and understand? This has nothing to do with lizard men, so what the fuck is that all about?
No, the subject is quite deep, but your ideas on it are based on absolutely no knowledge.
83
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: There is no god.
« on: November 08, 2007, 09:21:09 PM »He'll never force you to believe, he'll only torture you for all of eternity if you choose not to. Thats free will for you.
#1, he won't torture you and #2 it's your decision that decides your fate, not his. He's not responsible for the decisions that you 'do' or 'do not' make......you're you, you're free......your choice.....
Some choice... choose among believing in thousands of religions, all with contradictory tenets, many of which also condemn those who do not believe, on no evidence whatsoever.
84
The Lounge / Re: Best Web Browser
« on: November 08, 2007, 06:38:19 PM »Opera. Why?
1) Well, it's the fastest. It just is.
2) It's also the safest. Cool, eh?
3) It has more features than Firefox + all its crappy add-ons.
More features than base FF install? Sure. Way more. But there are thousands of add-ons that are far from crappy, and they extend Firefox's features waaay beyond Opera's.
85
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: The debate forums have gotten better...
« on: November 06, 2007, 07:59:56 PM »
The forums really have gotten less frustrating of late, as a result I'm spending more time here, meaning useless topics will be locked more quickly and trolls banned more quickly, meaning the forum will be even less frustrating, meaning I'll spend even more time... it's a feedback loop of dysfunctionality!
86
Flat Earth Q&A / Re: Where The Func Is Dysfunction?
« on: November 06, 2007, 07:57:02 PM »
I've been pretty super-busy, I'm trying to make more time to fulfill my mod duties around here though.
I'm real flattered you missed me, anyway.
I'm real flattered you missed me, anyway.
87
Flat Earth Debate / Re: weather?
« on: November 06, 2007, 07:24:03 PM »QuoteThe curvature really isn't that obvious. What can be obvious at the ocean, on a moderately cloudy day, is you can clearly see the clouds curve over the breadth of the sky.
No, that is not seen. Stop making things up.
Stop talking out of your ass, Tom. It's rather brash of you to insist that one is 'making something up' when they merely relate an easily reproducible experience witnessed by uncountable numbers of people. I see this phenomenon all the time at the beach.
However, it is easily explicable under the FE model, if you will permit me talk out of MY ass for a space. FET as commonly understood holds that the sky is a curved dome of air; this is likely because the Ice Wall ringing the disc of the Earth is somewhat lower than the height of the atmosphere at the North Pole (the Earth's center). If we imagine a hypothetical Earth in a time before it was being acted on by a Universal Accelerator, the atmosphere might have been a cylinder rather than a dome extending upwards from the surface (though of course this would soon have drifted off into space). Once under the force of the Accelerator, any air near the Ice Wall but extending 'above' it would slough off, while the rest of the atmosphere would be held to the Earth by its inertial reaction, leaving a dome shape. The clouds merely conform to this shape.
88
Flat Earth Q&A / MOVED: what...is this?
« on: November 06, 2007, 07:14:57 PM »
This topic has been moved to Complete Nonsense.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17914.0
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17914.0
89
Philosophy, Religion & Society / MOVED: jews
« on: November 06, 2007, 07:14:33 PM »
This topic has been moved to Complete Nonsense.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17911.0
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17911.0
90
Philosophy, Religion & Society / MOVED: worshipping Mel
« on: November 06, 2007, 07:14:26 PM »
This topic has been moved to Complete Nonsense.
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17913.0
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=17913.0