Notices
Results 1 to 52 of 52

Thread: Does a forumer have to be scientifically inclined to post?

  1. #1 Does a forumer have to be scientifically inclined to post? 
    Forum Junior newnothing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    226
    I'm not a scientifically inclined person but do find certain science topic interesting. So does that mean I'm not welcomed in this forum? I know that this is a forum for Scientific Discussion and Debate, but are people like me welcomed here?


    ~ One’s ultimate perfection depends on the development of all the members of society ~ Kabbalah
    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2 Re: Does a forumer have to be scientifically inclined to pos 
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by newnothing
    I'm not a scientifically inclined person but do find certain science topic interesting. So does that mean I'm not welcomed in this forum? I know that this is a forum for Scientific Discussion and Debate, but are people like me welcomed here?
    You are most certainly welcomed here. Ask questions, join in. We all learn here.


    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    It probably depends on your agenda.

    If you are here to discuss and learn, then you'll most likely be welcome here with open arms.

    If you're here to convince people that religious mysticism has something meaningful to tell us about the universe, then you'll probably have a miserable time at best and be banned at worst.
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    what's a forumer ?
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    39
    You are perfectly welcome. Just be open to learning and discussion
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Junior newnothing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixG
    It probably depends on your agenda.

    If you are here to discuss and learn, then you'll most likely be welcome here with open arms.

    If you're here to convince people that religious mysticism has something meaningful to tell us about the universe, then you'll probably have a miserable time at best and be banned at worst.
    Haha! Don't worry, although I'm into Kabbalah it doesn't mean that I'm going to try and convert people into believing what I believe.
    ~ One’s ultimate perfection depends on the development of all the members of society ~ Kabbalah
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by newnothing
    Haha! Don't worry, although I'm into Kabbalah it doesn't mean that I'm going to try and convert people into believing what I believe.
    Well that's cool and all, though I have to wonder, if you've already decided what to believe, then why are you here?

    I'm certainly not trying to make you feel unwelcome. It has been my experience though that science and non-science don't mix well, hence my curiosity.
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    39
    Don't mind PhoenixG. He thinks you can't be religous and talk about science at the same time.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by brushman
    Don't mind PhoenixG. He thinks you can't be religous and talk about science at the same time.
    This is absolutely untrue. Ken Miller is just one example of a deeply religious man who is not only capable of speaking about science but is a staunch advocate for his field of expertise (biology).

    What I do think is that anyone demands empirical evidence Monday-through-Friday in the lab, but believes that belief without evidence is a virtue on Sunday has a personality disorder. Clearly such people exists and many of them are functional, but my hypocrisy detector goes a bit wonky whenever they start insisting that they value intellectual honesty and critical thinking.
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixG
    Quote Originally Posted by brushman
    Don't mind PhoenixG. He thinks you can't be religous and talk about science at the same time.
    What I do think is that anyone demands empirical evidence Monday-through-Friday in the lab, but believes that belief without evidence is a virtue on Sunday has a personality disorder. Clearly such people exists and many of them are functional, but my hypocrisy detector goes a bit wonky whenever they start insisting that they value intellectual honesty and critical thinking.
    And I think that a person who claims to believe only what he has empirical evidence for in one sentence, while spouting opinions he has no empirical evidence for in the next sentence is off the chart hypocritical, has no intellectual honesty, is incapable of critical thinking and has a personality disorder of immense proportions.
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by mitchellmckain
    And I think that a person who claims to believe only what he has empirical evidence for in one sentence, while spouting opinions he has no empirical evidence for in the next sentence is off the chart hypocritical, has no intellectual honesty, is incapable of incapable of critical thinking and has a personality disorder of immense proportions.
    You talk like you have credibility to burn or something, Mitch.

    Perhaps you'd care to explain how what you've said above is in any way applicable to what you quoted? Or are you just talking to hear the sound of your own voice again?
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by mitchellmckain

    And I think that a person who claims to believe only what he has empirical evidence for in one sentence, while spouting opinions he has no empirical evidence for in the next sentence is off the chart hypocritical, has no intellectual honesty, is incapable of incapable of critical thinking and has a personality disorder of immense proportions.
    It would do you service to point out those opinions that lack empirical evidence as they arise rather than just writing them off as such while continuing to believe in that which lacks evidence.

    Of course, there is a problem with that. Your responses can't be taken seriously if you believe in myths and superstitions.
    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by (Q)
    Of course, there is a problem with that. Your responses can't be taken seriously if you believe in myths and superstitions.
    Yes of course. You can never be wrong if those who disagree with you are by definition those that cannot be take seriously.
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by mitchellmckain
    Yes of course. You can never be wrong if those who disagree with you are by definition those that cannot be take seriously.
    I, for one, have no doubt that you can be taken seriously, Mitch. You just post in a way that makes it difficult to do so. I keep hoping you'll change.
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Junior newnothing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixG
    Quote Originally Posted by newnothing
    Haha! Don't worry, although I'm into Kabbalah it doesn't mean that I'm going to try and convert people into believing what I believe.
    Well that's cool and all, though I have to wonder, if you've already decided what to believe, then why are you here?

    I'm certainly not trying to make you feel unwelcome. It has been my experience though that science and non-science don't mix well, hence my curiosity.
    8) Don't worry I'm cool about it.

    Science and non-science can get along just fine if people don't mix them up. I'm not religious at all. U just need to keep feelings and physicality separate. Emotion & feelings is grouped under non-science, religious, spiritual whatever you may call it while physicality goes under science.
    ~ One’s ultimate perfection depends on the development of all the members of society ~ Kabbalah
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by newnothing
    Science and non-science can get along just fine if people don't mix them up.
    While I don't doubt that this is a possibility, I've yet to encounter a religious tradition that didn't make claims about the nature of the universe. If what you say is true and the physical world is the domain of science, then it seems quite uncouth of religion to tread where it does not belong.
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Junior newnothing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixG
    Quote Originally Posted by newnothing
    Science and non-science can get along just fine if people don't mix them up.
    While I don't doubt that this is a possibility, I've yet to encounter a religious tradition that didn't make claims about the nature of the universe. If what you say is true and the physical world is the domain of science, then it seems quite uncouth of religion to tread where it does not belong.
    I TOTALLY agree with you! :wink:
    ~ One’s ultimate perfection depends on the development of all the members of society ~ Kabbalah
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    323
    My point is that religion belongs back in the bronze age, where it came from.
    It's pre-science, it might well be pre-philosophy, and it sure as hell is pre-rational.




    ...looks like PhoenixG might be member #3???
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by mitchellmckain

    Yes of course. You can never be wrong if those who disagree with you are by definition those that cannot be take seriously.
    I don't so much disagree with your god fantasies and cherry picking as I do laugh at them. If you actually had a sound opinion within a set subject matter, I could at the very least respect your opinion and agree or disagree, such as the discussions we might have on physics. However, one cannot respect the fantasies of myth and superstition taken as fact, Mitch.

    You certainly wouldn't respect ones views on chasing leprechauns and the proverbial 'pot of gold' at the end of a rainbow, would you?
    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    No, Phoenix has at least a respect for the existence of both, unlike you and (Q), who feel the simple fact that religion exists an abomination on this planet.

    Buddhism at least makes much fewer and less serious claims than the other majors.
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathematician
    No, Phoenix has at least a respect for the existence of both, unlike you and (Q), who feel the simple fact that religion exists an abomination on this planet.

    Buddhism at least makes much fewer and less serious claims than the other majors.
    I appreciate the sentiment.

    Unfortunately, I'm not sure how correct it is. Per your point above, there are some religious traditions which I find to be better than others. Interestingly, some would argue though that those traditions aren't religions at all (like buddhism, in your example).

    This does not mean that I have any respect for religion whatsoever. But neither do I think that people should not have the right to be religious if that is what they choose. I think religion should be ridiculed the way that we ridicule those that insist that they have seen Elvis, have been abducted by aliens, or had a camping trip cut short by a visit from bigfoot. But that doesn't mean we should persecute those that believe such silly things.
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    But you don't feel that religion, in and of it self, should be eliminated from existence, do you? Stripped away from the minds and practices of mankind?
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathematician
    But you don't feel that religion, in and of it self, should be eliminated from existence, do you? Stripped away from the minds and practices of mankind?
    I believe that religion should have died a quiet, natural death a long time ago. The sooner it does, the better.

    That does not mean that I advocate persecution or any such thing now. You can't force people to give up their superstitions.
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    323
    People should give them up the more you educate them.

    Mitchianity is an exception, for some reason...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by C_Sensei
    People should give them up the more you educate them.
    I think this expectation needs to be tethered to reality. Someone can be extremely skilled in a trade, but that doesn't necessarily mean they have been educated. Hence why some people have advanced degrees in science, yet seem unable to reason their way out of a wet paper bag (see: Michael Behe, Francis Collins, etc).

    It would be nice to think that older people are more mature that younger people, that people who are better educated can reason better than those with less education, etc, but the reality is that this just isn't something you can count on.
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope mitchellmckain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Salt Lake City, UTAH, USA
    Posts
    3,112
    Quote Originally Posted by C_Sensei
    People should give them up the more you educate them.
    Yes and no, for education does not always accompany personal development. But when it does then people do indeed quite often give up their unfounded religious opinions (whether theist or atheist) and learn to see reality a little less clouded by the assumptions which they have now abandoned.

    Quote Originally Posted by C_Sensei
    Mitchianity is an exception, for some reason...
    There are many exceptions as numerous as there are people who have learned to think for themselves, both theist and atheist.
    See my physics of spaceflight simulator at http://www.relspace.astahost.com

    I now have a blog too: http://astahost.blogspot.com/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    (Q)
    (Q) is offline
    Forum Isotope (Q)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    2,650
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathematician
    No, Phoenix has at least a respect for the existence of both, unlike you and (Q), who feel the simple fact that religion exists an abomination on this planet.
    It appears that you're wrong, again. :wink:
    Religious Fundamentalist Club - Member #1.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    323
    While some atheists who never learned science can be called 'religious' in their devotion to it, lumping all atheists into the fanatic and unthinking types doesn't do anything for your credibility.

    A theist by definition still doesn't think for himself. Gods were posited from likely Neanderthals, let alone the first Homo Sapiens, so where is there thinking in listening to what authoritarians tell you? Where is the thinking if you just "feel" and/or "know" it's "right"?

    Even if you claim to get there on your own, if what you are following is someone else's fantasy, you are not thinking; you are following in his fantasy.

    If someone gives you proof, however...the thinking is up to you.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixG
    It probably depends on your agenda.

    If you are here to discuss and learn, then you'll most likely be welcome here with open arms.

    If you're here to convince people that religious mysticism has something meaningful to tell us about the universe, then you'll probably have a miserable time at best and be banned at worst.
    People like you make me puke.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixG
    Quote Originally Posted by brushman
    Don't mind PhoenixG. He thinks you can't be religous and talk about science at the same time.
    This is absolutely untrue. Ken Miller is just one example of a deeply religious man who is not only capable of speaking about science but is a staunch advocate for his field of expertise (biology).

    What I do think is that anyone demands empirical evidence Monday-through-Friday in the lab, but believes that belief without evidence is a virtue on Sunday has a personality disorder. Clearly such people exists and many of them are functional, but my hypocrisy detector goes a bit wonky whenever they start insisting that they value intellectual honesty and critical thinking.
    Of coures you have no proof God does not exist which makes you something oof a hypocrite.

    Post your proof or belt up.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    323
    Geez, learn some punctuation, and how to edit so you don't double post.

    Who makes you puke - PhoenixG, or the person quoted?

    Do you mean to say that people have no proof that god does not exist, or are you saying that there is no proof; god therefore does NOT exist ???

    And who are you asking to present proof?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by C_Sensei
    Geez, learn some punctuation, and how to edit so you don't double post.

    Who makes you puke - PhoenixG, or the person quoted?

    Do you mean to say that people have no proof that god does not exist, or are you saying that there is no proof; god therefore does NOT exist ???

    And who are you asking to present proof?

    PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him.

    As it happens you do too, but that is just coinicidence.

    I mean people who have no proof God doesn't exist demanding proof that he does.

    It is a matter of faith not science anyway IMO.

    Hope that has cleared it up for you


    Always puzzles me why people feel the need to declare thier religious status in their signniture. Especially when they don't believe in it anyway.
    Maybe you will be declaring you are not a Jonas Brothers fan too!!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Isotope
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Transient
    Posts
    2,914
    esbo, I make no claim on the existence of God, neither for nor against. Maybe he exists, maybe he doesn't, I don't know. Tell me, is there proof he exists? Is there reason to believe he exists? Why shouldn't I disregard him the same way you disregard the mighty Zeus?
    Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools, because they have to say something.
    -Plato

    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    WYSIWYG Moderator marnixR's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Cardiff, Wales
    Posts
    5,810
    i'm getting the impression that "General Discussion" is starting to act like an overflow car park for discussions on religion that are no longer admissible in the newly renamed "Scientific Study of Religion"

    which is a shame, really - at least i can ignore the Religion section if i feel like it, but the General Discussion used to be a fun part of the forum until the recent religious intrusions
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." (Philip K. Dick)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    I mean people who have no proof God doesn't exist demanding proof that he does.
    Well, that's because that's how it works. Someone makes a claim and then they are responsible for providing evidence for that claim when they are challenged.

    Religious people claim that god exists. I would like to see some evidence. Without evidence, there aren't any good reasons for accepting the claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    It is a matter of faith not science anyway IMO.
    And that's fine. I don't have a problem with religious people until one of two things happen:

    1) they vote or
    2) they claim that their religion gives them access to special or secret knowledge which contradicts science (this includes religious pleading couched as moral philosophy).
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    323
    Too true!

    And I find these threads, while started by the religious to let themselves at least feel comfortable in their zero-proof fantasy, are responded to scientifically by scientist members.

    1) no proof of your god exists
    2) many attributes about your god are disproven by science proof
    3) your bible is largely disproven by science fact

    pretty much leads us to conclude that your god doesn't exist anywhere other than in your mind.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcane_Mathematician
    esbo, I make no claim on the existence of God, neither for nor against. Maybe he exists, maybe he doesn't, I don't know. Tell me, is there proof he exists? Is there reason to believe he exists? Why shouldn't I disregard him the same way you disregard the mighty Zeus?
    You can do what you like, your choice, your consequences.
    Do the maths!!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixG
    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    I mean people who have no proof God doesn't exist demanding proof that he does.
    Well, that's because that's how it works. Someone makes a claim and then they are responsible for providing evidence for that claim when they are challenged.

    Religious people claim that god exists. I would like to see some evidence. Without evidence, there aren't any good reasons for accepting the claim.

    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    It is a matter of faith not science anyway IMO.
    And that's fine. I don't have a problem with religious people until one of two things happen:

    1) they vote or
    2) they claim that their religion gives them access to special or secret knowledge which contradicts science (this includes religious pleading couched as moral philosophy).
    And what claims would they be?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by C_Sensei
    Too true!

    And I find these threads, while started by the religious to let themselves at least feel comfortable in their zero-proof fantasy, are responded to scientifically by scientist members.

    1) no proof of your god exists
    2) many attributes about your god are disproven by science proof
    3) your bible is largely disproven by science fact

    pretty much leads us to conclude that your god doesn't exist anywhere other than in your mind.
    1 No proof he doesnt exist
    2 If he exists 'science' is irrelevant.
    3) see 2).
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    And what claims would they be?
    That god exists.
    That god is omnipotent.
    That god is omniscient.
    That god answers prayers.
    That god performs miracles.
    That god created the universe.
    That god created the earth.
    That god is male.
    That god has a white beard.
    That god has a covenant with humans.

    The list goes on and on and on. The people making these claims (judeo-christians) have the burden of proof for supporting them.

    Without evidence for any of these claims, there are no good reasons for accepting them. If you're going to argue that since we cannot prove that he doesn't exist, it's a good idea to assume that he does and behave accordingly, then you have to apply the same reasoning to every deity ever imagined (because you can't prove that they don't exist either). This course of action has some repercussions though.
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    323
    1) The universe started with the Big Bang - which didn't require a god.
    The Earth accreted from a protoplanetary disk, the same thing we see going on in different stages in different parts of our galaxy - which didn't require a god.
    Evolution has been proven to happen, from the simplest process of abiogenesis to the fullest evolution of the modern biota of Earth - which didn't require a god.

    2) & 3) Sun ignited in nuclear fusion before the earth was completed even accreting - direct contradiction of genesis account in the bible.
    Many many animals existed in time periods over three and a half BILLION years before the bible begins its accounting.
    Many physical/meteorological/geological/medical/psychological phenomena/disorders ascribed to 'god' in the bible are disproven entirely by modern science.

    http://www.landoverbaptist.org/news0...iencequiz.html

    = Your god is directly disproven.








    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Masters Degree samcdkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    640
    Well at least newnothing won't have any illusions about how welcome he will be here. I wonder what he thinks about this display of scientific discussion.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    330
    Quote Originally Posted by samcdkey
    Well at least newnothing won't have any illusions about how welcome he will be here. I wonder what he thinks about this display of scientific discussion.
    This is not an atheist forum.
    Most people believe in God the atheist should leavea as thry are not welcome.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by samcdkey
    Well at least newnothing won't have any illusions about how welcome he will be here. I wonder what he thinks about this display of scientific discussion.
    Huge difference between not liking someone and thinking their beliefs are irrational.

    Quote Originally Posted by esbo
    This is not an atheist forum.
    Correct, it's a science forum.
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    Forum Masters Degree samcdkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    640
    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixG

    Huge difference between not liking someone and thinking their beliefs are irrational.

    Correct, it's a science forum.
    Yeah you can tell just by reading this thread/
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Forum Senior PhoenixG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Posts
    336
    Quote Originally Posted by samcdkey
    Yeah you can tell just by reading this thread/
    Hehe.

    I don't presume to speak for everyone
    "PhoenixG makes me puke that why I quoted him." - esbo
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Junior newnothing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by samcdkey
    Well at least newnothing won't have any illusions about how welcome he will be here. I wonder what he thinks about this display of scientific discussion.
    actually i think this discussion has gone way out of topic. thats why i refrain from posting replies.
    ~ One’s ultimate perfection depends on the development of all the members of society ~ Kabbalah
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Forum Masters Degree samcdkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    640
    Quote Originally Posted by newnothing

    actually i think this discussion has gone way out of topic. thats why i refrain from posting replies.
    You're a sensible chap
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    San Diego CA USA
    Posts
    99
    Quote Originally Posted by samcdkey
    Quote Originally Posted by newnothing

    actually i think this discussion has gone way out of topic. thats why i refrain from posting replies.
    You're a sensible chap
    HEllo people I am new here too, I think many of your discussions become preety intense at times. Anyway I really enjoy it though.
    Imagination is a key to the foundation of thought that will forever stand.

    Miguel Reyes
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Junior newnothing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    226
    Welcome welcome!
    ~ One’s ultimate perfection depends on the development of all the members of society ~ Kabbalah
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    The Enchanter westwind's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    1,079
    I know all about TRAMADOL. Just as an aside. Are you actually taking Tramado yourself? I ask this because your name suggests to me you have overdosed.

    Tramodol is taken for intense pain. There is plenty of information dealing with this drug/chemical on the Internet.

    As nearly always I only Poste from personal experience. Yes, I have taken Tramadol.

    It is known to have caused the Death of some people who experience a violent re-action. ( one tablet dose--the first time).

    If that dose't frighten you then maybe this will. You dream of people talking to you with large spiders running in and out of their mouths.

    I've been there and seen the Spiders. westwind.
    Words words words, were it better I caught your tears, and washed my face in them, and felt their sting. - westwind
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    has lost interest seagypsy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Posts
    3,103
    Quote Originally Posted by newnothing View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by PhoenixG
    Quote Originally Posted by newnothing
    Haha! Don't worry, although I'm into Kabbalah it doesn't mean that I'm going to try and convert people into believing what I believe.
    Well that's cool and all, though I have to wonder, if you've already decided what to believe, then why are you here?

    I'm certainly not trying to make you feel unwelcome. It has been my experience though that science and non-science don't mix well, hence my curiosity.
    8) Don't worry I'm cool about it.

    Science and non-science can get along just fine if people don't mix them up. I'm not religious at all. U just need to keep feelings and physicality separate. Emotion & feelings is grouped under non-science, religious, spiritual whatever you may call it while physicality goes under science.

    skipping over the theist vs atheist battle.

    I just wanted to say that feelings and emotion are physical realities that can be measured. They are simply chemical reactions in the brain. Sometimes the results of physical anomalies in the brain. The sensations that we describe are simply the brain's responses to these things and so they can be measured. Feelings of love, happiness, rage are not some metaphysical spiritual thing that we cannot understand with science. We are quite capable of knowing what happens in the brain to cause them and how to artificially create the same circumstances within the brain to cause these feelings.

    Even non-scientists can do this. We call them drug addicts.


    edit: sheesh just realized this thread was from 3 years ago.
    Last edited by seagypsy; November 23rd, 2012 at 06:53 AM. Reason: just noticed it was necromanced. grrr
    Speaking badly about people after they are gone and jumping on the bash the band wagon must do very well for a low self-esteem.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •